England Expects ... you to look the other way
ON April 11, French commandos went in with guns blazing and captured a gang of pirates who days earlier had hijacked a luxury cruise ship, the Ponant, and held the crew for ransom. This was the French solution to a crime wave that has threatened international shipping off Somalia; those of us who have been on the business end of a pirate’s gun can only applaud their action.
The British government on the other hand, to the incredulity of many in the maritime industry, has taken a curiously pathetic approach to piracy. While the French were flying six of the captured pirates to Paris to face trial, the British Foreign Office issued a directive to the once vaunted Royal Navy not to detain any pirates, because doing so could violate their human rights. British warships patrolling the pirate-infested waters off Somalia were advised that captured pirates could claim asylum in Britain and that those who were returned to Somalia faced beheading for murder or a hand chopped off for theft under Islamic law.
And then, the brutal kicker:
The British attitude has come a long way since the days when pirates were chained to pilings at Wapping and left there until the tidal water of the Thames ebbed and flowed over the bodies three times. So much for Britannia ruling the waves.Ouch. Can't say this wasn't deserved.
19 comments:
Oh deary deary me. You just won't fucking listen, will you?
Its interesting to see that Abu M has taken a firm stand against the human rights of prisoners and pro corporal punishment.. By Norwegian Law, we couldnt extradite Osama Bin Laden to the US if we captured him in Afghanistan and we are quite proud of it. (Osama, if youre reading this, turn yourself in to us!) I guess we are talking a cultural and political divide here.
And for a US to wist back to the good old days of public drowning is more than a wee bit insensitive, eh? Over here we kind of have abandoned that line of thought, simulated drownings and real ones for that sake are best left to you lot these days, arent they? The US public seems to enjoy it too.
Well, the post above seems a bit over the top, but then so does the article. In fact, it's outright misleading when it states that: "the British Foreign Office issued a directive to the once vaunted Royal Navy not to detain any pirates, because doing so could violate their human rights." The violation wouldn't come from capturing them, but rather from returning them to Somalia (presumably after they've served out a sentence at Her Majesty's prisons). And that's a different, and more complicated kettle of fish. Surely AM - a staunch voice against the use of torture by Western forces - isn't advocating the abandonment of the ban on refoulement?
By all means, blow them out of the water if it's a combat situation, but once they're in custody, they're entitled to not be mistreated, or sent back to somewhere where they will be. And now you've got former pirates seeking asylum - the same voices in the UK seeking to recapture the glory days of the Royal Navy would howl at the Home Office at that prospect.
MK
Who thinks Timothy McVeigh should have been given the torture treatment in order to identify any possible collaborators? Who thinks Timothy McVeigh should have been tried by a semi-secret military tribunal (hey, at least we get to see the faces of the judges. . . though I think black hooded judges would be a nice surreal touch for the even-more-surreal proceedings.
Basic question: why hasn't Khalid Sheik Mohammed (who we do have in custody, unlike OBL) been put on trial in the U.S. in a regular court of law? Not because of a lack of evidence, right? Farcical.
Of course, the real big piracy today isn't off the Somalia coast, or even off Java, but in the regions surrounding the oilfields of western Iraq, southern Iraq, and Kurdish Iraq. Yeah, I bet a lot of people in Iraq can sympathize with victims of pirates, right?
Just sic some ninjas on them. Man do those ninjas hate pirates...
The British show great restraint with pirates and their population of Islamic residents both foreign born and citizen alike. Yet the gloves come off for the "bog wogs" in the 6 counties of Ireland.
The interrogations at the Castlereagh detention facility made Abu Ghraib look like kindergarten.
The streets of London are jammed packed to protest the United States, Gitmo, and Iraq but they didn't give a shit about the torture in their own backyards. I guess the Brits only protest and respond to the sufferings of the brown people. And it's nice to see the brown people slowly destroying Britain from within.
fnord
"By Norwegian Law, we couldnt extradite Osama Bin Laden to the US if we captured him in Afghanistan and we are quite proud of it."
I am unimpressed. Ever heard of the Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Rome, 4.11.1950 ? So Norway isn`t unique in that respect at all, far from it.
Just a fact, no intention on my part to comment on the merits of thing here and now. Oh, and before the Europhobes start snarling - it is a brainchild of the Council of Europe, not the EU.
"Its interesting to see that Abu M has taken a firm stand against the human rights of prisoners and pro corporal punishment."
Has he ? Sounds like irony to me. Well, AM has lived in Britain too long I dare say. Hence the irony. He`ll start drinking warm beer next. What can we do?
How about getting on of these Leajets and "renditioning" him to some bleak place in the "Grand Nord" where a reeducation camp could infuse some scandinavian earnestness into him ?
Genn`lemen, your votes please.
Abu Muqawama drinks only arak, whiskey, and Guinness. Londonstani will testify to this fact.
By Norwegian Law, we couldnt extradite Osama Bin Laden to the US if we captured him in Afghanistan and we are quite proud of it.
Nope, but in the 'stan they could "inadvertently" leave him in the custody of their partners the Latvian contingent, and they would have him sold him down the river to Gitmo by tea time. And also be quite proud of it.
I guess Captain Kidd was a human rights victim.
I feel sorry for him now that I am mentally liberated by Post-Modern thought. Thanks fnord.
I agree with MK. Britain's behavior is Machiavellan, not pathetic, and certainly not an example of a soft, lilly-livered country upholding the rights of the accused.
The other stupid thing here is that Captain Kidd was originally funded by the Navy to take out other pirates. He was a countergang; but he drifted.
The lesson should be obvious.
I think the best question to ask is what the Royal Navy is doing to pirates that they don't detain for trial? Are they just cutting them loose to go on raping and pillaging, or do they turn them over to the appropriate Somali authorities? If they just hand them over to whatever Somali authorities are at hand, what happens? Do they just get patted on the head and sent back out for more piracy with a new boat, or are they suitably punished?
If the Royal navy is just setting those folks loose, or are handing them over to their sponsor for more piratical operations, then we have a problem. Since piracy has surged the past few years is going unchecked, we navies of the world need to step up and do that part of their jobs. Policing the coast of Africa isn't only the province of France, Great Britain, and the United States, after all.
BTW, why exactly are these cruises going down to Somalia anyway? Don't those folks know its dangerous?
Chris
http://www.historicus.us
That's great, fnord. Okay, tag you're it. Norway gets to patrol the high seas and protect all ships against pirates. Good luck with that.
I'm curious reading this, perhaps some pirates are more like the privateers of old? Perhaps Britain is more concerned with not causing a diplomatic incident with the countries giving tacit approval to the pirates than with any possible human rights issues?
Yes, this does have a distinct odour of nonsense about it - the sort of story put about without checking by second-rate journalists in order to give their readers a chance to harrumph about the Labour government, Europe, the Human Rights Act, the tragic loss of empire and the general weakness and limp-wristedness of Young People Today.
As has already been explained to you more than once, there's no evidence that the FCO issued such a directive, and it would in any case have been wrong to do so: pirates can legally be arrested by any navy on the high seas (ie outside territorial waters) and of course that's not a breach of their human rights. Returning them to Somalia would be a breach of the Human Rights Act, but that's a different issue. The French haven't returned their captives either.
The Royal Navy certainly showed no qualms about arresting people-smugglers on the high seas off the Yemeni coast recently; no human rights issues there, clearly.
Pirates were not, of course, chained to pilings and left to drown. They were hanged.
And the author of this piece has supposedly written a book about piracy! How embarrassing for him. And also for AM, for taking this seriously...
fnord
I am not sure if you are serious or just baiting in your second paragraph.
Do you really think the American public is lusting after some good ole fashioned torture? The debate about torture'esque' methods that I have heard going on is centered around a technique's efficacy and the utility of depriving a few individuals of their basic rights to potentially save many hundreds or thousands from a violent death.
If you think that is an easy, black and white decision our points of view may have an impassable chasm between them.
I was baiting. But its a baiting you will hear a lot of in various Euro-corners, as I think the fallout proves. I dont know if you read US right wing blogs, the pro-torture argument is just so weird to me. Im with MK and the gunboat diplomat if I am to be serious and adult, tho.
Thanks for pointing out the law, fabius, I am not that skilled.
fnord:
You re welcome, of course. However, I think you cd have found that legal bit out for yrself as it is not exactly out of the way expert legal knowledge.
But you ve let your scandinavian patriotism and your righteous indignation about the dastardly torture-loving yanks get the upper hand, haven t you ?
I ve often thought that patriotic emotion and moral indignation are about as conducive to one`s reasoning on complex issues as a bottle of scotch to one`s driving. QUED.
fnord
I do not read right wing blogs as they frustrate me even more than left wing blogs. I do however see the need for the rarefied use of physical coercion, and the conditions that justify such measures to be exactly defined matters of policy. I would certainly not want to see such measures being approved for anything but truly dire situations. Any sanctioned use of such techniques will result in unintended abuse, but without officially sanctioning them you will just push such measures into the black where I would argue that the chance for such methods being over used will be greater. I cannot expect a representative of our government to uphold the sanctity of a single person's rights when the cost for doing so is the very likely killing and maiming of many innocent people. That is why I believe there must be a legitimate means to proceed with such morally repugnant methods when warranted.
That of course assumes that there is a time when such measures are warranted. I think that in a hopefully highly unlikely "Jack Bauer scenario" where you have someone that almost certainly has information that could prevent the death of many scores of innocents, physical coercion is warranted if other methods prove inadequate.
There has never been a movement in the government to the best of my knowledge to make such practices general procedure. Situations like Abu Ghraib were and should always remain entirely illegal.
And fabious, at the risk of discounting my red state cred, I would point out that you do not have to be a European to appreciate a beer served at its proper temperature. As American craft brewers have matched the Euro brew centers in quality and far exceeded them in variety of styles and brewers to choose from, we have had a constantly growing portion of the population that demonstrates a developed appreciation for a good brew.
Post a Comment