Tuesday, October 15, 2024

Sexual Assault in the US Coast Guard

A Five-Decade Retrospective on Coast Guard SASH Reform

To better understand the history of sexual assault in the Coast Guard, I’ve spent the past couple of months creating a chronology. Using publicly available information from newspapers, an obituary, the Congressional Record, Good Order and Discipline Reports, Congressional testimony, and social media, I’ve created a 200-page document with 300 references and I’m still compiling information. My goal is for Coast Guard leaders and Congress to use this document to set a new course for the service.

Women were first admitted into the Coast Guard in 1976, and at the 1979 US Coast Guard Academy graduation, then-Secretary of Transportation Brock Adams made reference to the LCWB (Last Class With B__). Myrna Rottman, a USCGA faculty member, sent Adams a letter critiquing him for his speech. Per her obituary, Rottman then filed suit in the US District Court of Connecticut against the Academy's Superintendent and Commandant and the US Secretary of Transportation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As shared in her obituary, the case resulted in the USCGA being required to offer mandatory sex discrimination training to all cadets and faculty. By including all of this information in her obituary, Rottman made sure that no one forgot her advocacy efforts and what triggered them.

According to newspaper reports, there were at least two rapes at the US Coast Guard Academy in the 1980s. One involved a foreign cadet who raped a female student in the fall of 1984. Per Academy officials, he was “quickly deported”. The second rape was referenced in a sex discrimination hearing wherein a witness testified that the female student was raped and then got an abortion paid for by the government. The 1980s ended with the Coast Guard chartering a study group to examine issues facing women in the Coast Guard.

The 1990s started with the release of the Women in the Coast Guard Study. Some individuals who participated in the study shared that women who filed formal grievances did not get promoted. Others shared that victims would be breaking the “code of silence” if they complained about sexual harassment or sexual assault.

Two years later, in 1992, the Culture and Climate Assessment of the US Coast Guard Academy was released. According to the study, 85% of the women at the school reported being sexually harassed.

Cadet Caitin Stopper Maro left the US Coast Guard Academy in February 2005 after accusing another cadet of sexual assault. Maro spoke with Congress in 2006 and then testified about the problems at the school in December 2023. The individual accused in the Stopper Maro case was not prosecuted.

School officials were notified of a rape in October 2005. The survivor was taken to civilian hospital and a rape kit was conducted. The individual accused of this rape was not prosecuted.

School officials prosecuted Webster Smith in the spring of 2006 and he was convicted of indecent assault. He was the first student at the US Coast Guard Academy to be court-martialed, and questions have been repeatedly raised about why earlier cases didn’t go to trial.

In the fall of 2006, Admiral Papp chartered a Coast Guard Academy study, Congress asked the GAO to study the progress made at the Coast Guard Academy in response to sexual harassment claims. Congress also directed the Coast Guard to develop policies on sexual harassment and violence at the school.

The next decade started with a mandated Congressional report. Per the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010, signed into law on October 15, 2010, the service was required to provide yearly updates to Congress on sexual assault. Admiral Papp launched a service-wide “Campaign to Eliminate Sexual Assault from Our Coast Guard” on March 26, 2013. Papp testified at a Senate hearing in June 2013 stating that “(w)e will insist that all of our Shipmates live by our Core Values. And let me be clear, there are no bystanders in the Coast Guard. Respect for our Shipmates demands that each of us have the courage to take immediate action…”

Admiral Zukunft started Operation Fouled Anchor in September 2014 and for the next five years the service investigated past crimes dating back to the 1980s. Zukunft told CNN that he had intended for the service to brief Congress on the investigation, but those briefings didn’t occur until CNN reported on OFA in June 2023.

It’s hard to condense fifty years into a brief essay, so my plan is to share the final chronology with Coast Guard leaders and Congress. I’m a Coast Guard veteran who wants her service to be successful, and a successful service is one that knows its history. My journey to collect and compile the history was supported by survivors and advocates, and I’m grateful for their support. Semper Paratus.

The opinions expressed herein are the author's and not necessarily those of The Maritime Executive.

Bulker Struggles to Stay Off the Rocks Near Dutch Harbor

Pan Viva's trackline, Oct. 11-12 (Pole Star)

The U.S. Coast Guard has begun evacuating personnel from the distressed bulker Pan Viva, which is fully functional but still at risk of potential grounding near Dutch Harbor.

On Saturday, a large winter storm (mid-latitude cyclone) swept over the Aleutians, bringing winds of 60 knots and waves of up to 30 feet. Severe weather is a regular occurrence in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea in the colder months.

Late last month, the Korean-owned bulker Pan Viva got under way on a voyage from from Dandong to the U.S. West Coast. The vessel was in ballast and drawing just 7.5 meters, with more hull area above the waterline and more windage.

On October 11, as Pan Viva was nearing Unimak Pass in severe wind and seas, the vessel began to deviate from her eastward course. She reduced speed to 2-4 knots on an irregular heading, then reversed course and made an erratic track towards the north side of Unalaska, ending up in Unalaska Bay on Saturday morning (top, courtesy Pole Star).

The vessel dropped anchor at a position about one to two miles offshore, and the crew informed the Coast Guard that they were having difficulty maintaining position - even though the anchor was deployed and engine fully functional. Conditions on scene included winds of up to 58 knots and waves of 26-29 feet.

By the afternoon, the developing situation was serious enough that the Coast Guard decided to evacuate four crewmembers - two cadets and two galley staff - as a precautionary step. Additionally, a harbor tug and a Coast Guard cutter were assigned to wait on standby in case Pan Viva needed assistance.

Beyond the safety of the crew, Pan Viva is carrying an estimated 300,000 gallons of fuel oil, and a grounding would create a serious pollution risk.

Severe northerly winds from the storm will continue through Monday, according to the National Weather Service. Until then, Unalaska's mayor suggested to local KUCB, the best thing to do is to "hope the anchor holds." According to the Coast Guard, Pan Viva was still maintaining position as of Sunday.

China Protests Taiwanese Leader's Remarks With Mass Naval Drill

On Monday, the Chinese military launched a massive one-day drill off the coast of Taiwan, demonstrating its displeasure with recent remarks by Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te.

According to the Taiwan Ministry of Defense, 17 Chinese PLA Navy warships and 17 China Coast Guard vessels approached Taiwan, with some operating close in to the island's shores. In addition, the PLA Navy carrier Liaoning was operating to the east of Taiwan, conducting aircraft launch and recovery operations.

The PLA's movements were a response to a speech that Taiwan's President Lai made last Thursday. "On this land, democracy and freedom are growing and thriving. The People's Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan," said Lai in an annual keynote address. "I will . . . uphold the commitment to resist annexation or encroachment upon our sovereignty."

China claims the island of Taiwan as its own, and the administration of Chinese president Xi Jinping has pledged to reunify it with the mainland - potentially by force.

Li Xi, a spokesperson for the PLA's Eastern Theater Command, made clear that the Chinese exercise was aimed squarely at Taiwan.

"Always on high alert, troops of the theater command keep strengthening combat readiness with arduous training, and will foil the 'Taiwan independence' separatist attempts," Li said in a statement.

China's Ministry of Commerce added pressure of its own, threatening trade restrictions. The ministry announced Saturday that it is "studying further measures based on the conclusions of the investigation into trade barriers from Taiwan."

Divers Raise the White Ensign Over Wreck of WWII Destroyer HMS Exmouth

White ensign raised over wreckage of HMS Exmouth — Courtesy Royal Navy

The iconic Royal Navy flag will now fly on the wreckage of a World War II warship at its resting place on the seafloor after it was surveyed by divers for the first time.

The White Ensign, which has been flown on Royal Navy ships for centuries, has been placed on the wreck HMS Exmouth after more than 80 years, part of a plan to honor the lives of 190 crew lost with the ship.

The Exmouth was an E-class destroyer launched in 1934. The warship spent her early years in the Mediterranean carrying out operations connected with the Italian invasion of Abyssinia (today Ethiopia) and the Spanish Civil War. Her main tasks were enforcing the arms blockade imposed by Britain and France on both sides of the conflict.

At the start of WWII in September 1939, Exmouth found herself at the forefront. She was assigned escort duties accompanying major warships such as flagship HMS Hood on sorties or on convoy duties in home waters.

Five months into the war, the destroyer met her fate while escorting the steamer Cyprian Prince, ferrying supplies from Aberdeen to the Royal Navy’s wartime base at Scapa Flow in Orkney. The warship was targeted by the German submarine U-22, which launched a torpedo that struck her starboard bow and caused one of the forward ammunition magazines to explode. Historical accounts show that Exmouth sank within two minutes, with the loss of all 190 members of her crew. Only 18 bodies were later recovered ashore.

In 2001, divers on a private expedition discovered the wreck of Exmouth off the Scottish coast. Due to its depth and isolated location, the wreck has rarely been visited by underwater explorers.

The Royal Navy is now moving to ensure the wreck stays preserved and remembered, part of a wider project to preserve naval heritage and keep wartime sacrifices in the public memory. Divers plunged more than 50 meters into the depths of the North Sea some 20 miles off Wick, Scotland to conduct a comprehensive survey of the remains of the warship. Using the dive boat MV Clasina, the team sought to record Exmouth’s remains in detail while observing a strict ‘look, do not touch’ rule, since the wreck is a protected war grave.

The divers found that the bow of the wreck is almost non-existent, with only a single anchor and cable remaining. The engine room area is also heavily damaged, which was likely caused by the second explosion. The stern sits intact and upright, albeit at a right angle to the rest of the ship.

During the survey of the wreck, no artifacts were recovered, but a White Ensign was ‘raised’ over the Exmouth for the first time in more than 80 years.

“The Ensign just ‘fluttered’ there as if it was flying in the breeze,” said Lieutenant Commander Jen Smith. “I paused to pay my respects and it occurred to me that the last time a White Ensign would have been there was in January 1940; and that Ensign would never have been hauled down – it would have been in place as the ship sank. That was a really moving moment for me.”

Greece Embarks on its Inaugural Antarctic Expedition

This fall, Greece will participate in a mission to Antarctica for the first time ever. The expedition is a joint study tour to the South Pole with Bulgarian researchers, and it was finalized last week during an international polar conference held in the Bulgarian resort town of Aheloy. The researchers will be aboard the Bulgarian military research vessel St. Cyril and Methodius.

“This is a big step for us because it is the first Greece will send its scientists,” said Simeon Konstantinidis, President of the NGO Hellenic Polar Zones Society. Konstantinidis attended the conference in Bulgaria, which was held under the auspices of the EU programs EUPolarNet-2 and POLARIN.

Konstantinidis also added that his organization is also planning to build a weather station in Antarctica, possibly from next year.

Meanwhile, the 27 member countries that form the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), are holding an annual meeting this week in Hobart, Australia. Expectations are high with members expected to agree on approving the proposed four marine protected areas (MPAs) in Southern Ocean. Previous attempts have failed, leaving the fragile ecosystem open to human-linked environmental stressors such as whaling and overfishing.

However, progress was made at a July symposium in South Korea, where CCAMLR members advanced efforts to develop a marine protected area (MPA) along the western Antarctic peninsula. This became the first time in years that all CCAMLR members showed a willingness to adopt additional protections in Antarctica.

CCAMLR operates through consensus, meaning decisions must be unanimous. Since 2016, China and Russia have opposed plans to develop new Antarctic MPAs despite the majority of members supporting it.

It remains to be seen if CCAMLR will reach consensus on the four proposed MPAs this year. These include Weddell Sea Phase 1 MPA, East Antarctic MPA, Antarctic Peninsula MPA and Weddell Sea Phase 2 MPA. Along the existing Ross Sea region MPA, the four proposed areas would protect 26 percent of the Southern Sea and nearly 3 percent of the global ocean.

Lloyd's: A Geopolitical Conflict Could Cost Global Trade $50 Trillion

Shipping interests have grown used to serious geopolitical disruption over the past few years, from the invasion of Ukraine and Russian attacks on shipping to the Houthi blockade on Red Sea traffic. The possibility of large-scale conflict is baked into industry assumptions at this point, but without a firm metric for the cost. Insurer Lloyd's has put a number on the maximum potential impact of a hypothetical geopolitical conflict, and it is unfathomably large.

In the latest edition of Lloyd's systemic risk series, the insurer focused on a hypothetical regional conflict causing widespread disruption to global trade patterns. Since about 80 percent of the world's imports and exports are at sea at any given moment, the disruption of global shipping lanes would be among the greatest economic threats from an escalating regional-scale confrontation.

Lloyd's considered a scenario very much like the invasion of Ukraine or a hypothetical Chinese takeover of Taiwan: a superpower invades a major economy, disrupting global trade patterns and supply chains. The invasion strategy includes an internet blackout, cyberattacks on infrastructure, and a physical blockade of trade in and out of the country. Beyond strikes on military targets, the invading force hits power generation, transport and communications.

Meanwhile, another superpower and its allies respond to the invasion and provide support to the smaller country, creating an escalating conflict and a tit-for-tat sanctions regime. Opposing forces square off in the affected region, and the invading force declares a naval blockade of the nearby shipping lanes. Vessel operators have to reroute around the area of conflict, and trade volumes are affected by sanctions and transport difficulties.

The disagreement eventually devolves into military action between the two sides, shutting down nearby shipping lanes and other alternative routes. This affects supply chains for raw materials, foodstuffs, microchips and equipment, causing shortages and driving up inflation around the world.

"Industries dependent on critical materials such as semiconductors and rare minerals – healthcare (medical devices), technology, automotive and many more – would likely face chronic shortages and delays," Lloyd's concluded. "The cascading effects of global trade disruptions, combined with escalating sanctions and closed shipping lines, is likely to drive inflation or food shortages in some states."

Lloyd's estimates that the five-year economic loss from this scenario would be somewhere between $8 and $50 trillion, equating to a global GDP loss of about one to seven percent. The most likely level of loss would be about $15 trillion; Lloyd's predicts that the probability of the most extreme $50 trillion scenario is about half of one percentage point.

Given its preeminent role in the global economy, China would be the nation most affected in all cases because it is deeply interconnected with trade, Lloyd's suggests. Europe and the Asia Pacific would suffer significant economic losses as well; North America would be substantially less affected on a dollar basis, sustaining only $5 trillion in losses over five years in the worst case scenario (10 percent of the global impact).

Russian Ballistic Missile Strike Damages Two Ships at Port of Odesa

Damage from a previous Russian strike aboard the Paresa, September 2024 (Ukrainian Ministry of Development)

On Monday, another Russian missile attack hit the Black Sea port of Odesa, damaging two merchant ships, including one that had already been hit in an earlier attack. The strike brings the tally of foreign vessels that have been damaged in the last few weeks to a total of four ships.

"Russian terrorists attacked Odesa with a ballistic missile. One person was killed and eight wounded," said Oleh Kiper, the head of the Odesa Regional Military Administration. "The victims are in the hospital, and two of them are in serious condition."

Two civilian vessels were damaged in the latest attack - the Belize-flagged bulker NS Moon and the Palau-flagged Optima. Just last week, Optima was damaged in a previous Russian ballistic missile strike.

Kiper reported that there was also damage to port infrastructure, including a grain storage facility. Images and video from the scene show additional damage to a port administrative building, including blown-out windows.

Insurers have warned that the new, intensified wave of Russian attacks on Ukraine's grain trade are likely to raise war risk rates again. An excessive increase in rates could make Ukraine's seaborne food exports uneconomical, and the risk of business disruption and seafarer safety from Russian attacks could also deter vessel operators from serving the route.

Kiper has previously warned that the Odesa port region - which includes multiple nearby port complexes - is too large to successfully defend against Russian ballistic missile strikes.

The Russian military recently gained access to Iran's deep inventory of ballistic missiles, giving it flexibility to strike a broader range of civilian and military targets. The government in Tehran has agreed to export Fath-360 (BM-120) missiles for Russian use in the war on Ukraine, and the U.S. government has confirmed that the Iranian military is shipping these short-range munitions to Russia via sea and air. On Monday, the EU sanctioned seven organizations - including Iran Air, Saha Airlines and Mahan Air - for transporting ballistic missiles to Russia. Newly-installed Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian denies any weapons transfers have taken place since he took over leadership in August.

Two LPG Carriers Catch Fire at Chittagong During STS Transfer

On Sunday, a major fire broke out aboard two LPG carriers during an allegedly illegal ship-to-ship transfer off Bangladesh.

The LPG carrier Captain Nikolas was moored off Kutubdia, Chattogram over the weekend to offload its cargo to a lighterage vessel, the B-LPG Sophia. At about 0045 hours Sunday morning, a fire broke out aboard both vessels during cargo transfer operations. The Bangladesh Coast Guard and Bangladeshi Navy responded to the scene with a total of seven vessels, and they brought the fire aboard both vessels under control.

31 crewmembers jumped over the side from both vessels to escape the flames, and all were pulled from the water. No significant injuries were reported.

According to New Age Bangladesh, the Captain Nikolas escaped the fire relatively unscathed, but the Sophia sustained significant damage.

The LPG Operators Association of Bangladesh (LOAB) claims that the origin of the cargo aboard Captain Nikolas was misdeclared, and that it actually came from Iran, a sanctioned supplier. Captain Nikolas' AIS record shows a weeklong gap in mid-September, just before she departed the Persian Gulf, according to data provided by Pole Star.

CPA Secretary Mohd Omar Faruk told The Business Standard that the vessel was searched and no evidence of an illicit cargo was found. The papers aboard showed that the Captain Nikolas took on the LPG in Dubai or Oman, Faruk said.

The Chittagong Port Authority has set up a committee to determine the cause of the fire, with a rapid one-week timetable for completing the investigation, according to New Age.

Captain Nikolas is a 50,000 dwt LPG carrier built in 1992 and flagged in the Cook Islands. It was detained in Hunen, China in January for two issues with fire protection in the cargo deck area, among other fire safety issues - and was cited for the same problem again when it returned to Hunen in March.

The incidents aboard Captain Nikolas and B-LPG Sophia were the third and fourth major vessel fires off Bangladesh within two weeks. A blaze broke out aboard the tanker Banglar Shourabh on October 4, killing one crewmember, and a fire aboard the tanker Banglar Jyoti (video below) killed three on September 30.

THE SAGA CONTINUES

Philadelphia Police Seek Burglars Who Boarded SS United States

SS United States, October 2024 (Allan Jordan / TME)

Several items are suspected to have been stolen from the famed ocean liner SS United States just days before it departs the Philadelphia pier where it has been docked for nearly 30 years to start a new chapter as an artificial reef.

The Philadelphia Police Department said it is searching for suspects who were caught on camera trespassing and burglarizing the historic ship on October 2. The suspects are said to have gained access to its berth at Pier 82, Christopher Columbus Boulevard, and managed to steal several items.

Though the police have released a video of the burglary incident and are looking for the suspects, they have not managed to establish what was stolen. “The suspects gain access to the SS United States without permission. Approximately three hours later, the suspects were seen exiting the SS United States with several items, without permission,” said the Philadelphia Police Department.

While it is evident from the video that the suspects walked out with items, what is clear is that they are likely to be of less value, considering the famed liner has long since been stripped of all valuable items including artifacts.

A collection of photographs are for instance under the custodian of the Mariners Museum, while the ship’s bell is kept in the clock tower on the campus of Christopher Newport University in Newport News, Virginia. Many other items including a large collection of dining room furniture and other memorabilia have been auctioned to various collectors.

The trespassing and burglarizing of SS United States happened just days before the liner departs Philadelphia to Florida where it is set to become an artificial reef. This follows the reaching of a settlement between the SS United States Conservancy and Penn Warehousing & Distribution, the company that controls the Philadelphia pier where the ocean liner has sat for nearly 30 years.

Conceived by one of America’s foremost naval architects, William Francis Gibbs, SS United States was built in the early 1950s as an Atlantic liner. On her maiden voyage in 1952, she shattered the Atlantic speed record and 72 years later remains the fastest passenger liner to have ever crossed the Atlantic.

She operated for just 17 years before the end of U.S. government subsidies, a decision to fly U.S. military and government officials, and the growth of the commercial airlines ended the ship’s career. The U.S. government ultimately took ownership and began seeking a buyer before selling the ship in 1980. Many plans to reuse the ship were proposed, but none came to fruition.

"Legal Finish" in Maritime Security is Too Often Lacking a Legal Start

Image courtesy USCG

Published Oct 14, 2024 8:53 PM by CIMSEC

[By Dr. Ian Ralby]

“Legal Finish” is a term that has become commonplace in maritime security circles around the world. It refers to the process of putting a maritime law enforcement action through a legal mechanism – whether a prosecution, administrative proceeding or other adjudication – that formally assesses offenses under national law and where appropriate, penalizes perpetrators. Legal finish has rightly been identified as crucial because merely disrupting illicit activities does little to deter future criminal conduct; only enforcing legal consequences changes the risk-reward calculus for nefarious actors. The problem, however, is that with all the focus on the legal finish, many states, international organizations, and “capacity building” partners have forgotten the legal start.

Maritime law enforcement is not a linear process, it is a cycle that starts and ends with the law. Recognizing its recursive nature is essential to establishing clear, consistent, and effective law enforcement and security operations.

To begin with, the law is the framework by which the maritime domain is assessed. Armed with the legal framework, maritime watchstanders can monitor and surveil the maritime domain, looking for any anomalies. Once they find those anomalies, however, a rigorous analytical process is needed to ensure that information is turned into understanding –about both what is happening on the water and what can be done about it. That analytical process, therefore, relies heavily on understanding the law. The key questions are:

Is the anomaly desirable or undesirable? (Not all anomalies are undesirable).
If it is undesirable, is it legal or illegal? (Not all undesirable matters have been addressed by the law).
If it is illegal, is it actionable or not? (Does the state have the authority and jurisdiction to do something about it?)
If it is actionable, is it achievable or not? (Does the state have the right physical capacity and capability to interdict the matter?)
Even if it is undesirable, illegal, actionable, and achievable, would interdicting the matter be wise? (Is it worth the fuel, is it worth the risk, could there be geopolitical blowback, etc.?)

If the answer to any of these questions is “no,” then there should still be consideration of one additional question: “Is there anything else that could be done?” Watching the situation further, notifying other agencies, issuing a notice to mariners, or contacting neighboring states are all on the long list of other things that might be worth doing, short of pursuing an interdiction.

If the analysis suggests that an on-the-water operation might be warranted, then the analysts must have access to some sort of mechanism for sharing information with the proper decision-makers. Whether it is operative within an agency or across agencies, that cooperative mechanism must be repeatable (so there is consistency in how things happen), documentable (so there is a chance to learn from both successes and mistakes), and structured in such a manner that adequate information gets to the appropriate decision makers efficiently.

Once decision-makers have information about an anomaly that is undesirable, illegal, actionable, achievable, and worth pursuing, it is up to them to decide whether to conduct an operation. If they choose to do so, the operation must be planned and executed in a manner consistent with the law. That requires not only a clear understanding of the authorities that the respective agencies have for law enforcement, and the limitation of enforcement jurisdiction in the maritime domain, but also a sufficient grasp of all the elements of an offense to be able to identify and document those elements at sea. The collection and preservation of evidence in the maritime space is crucial, especially since revisiting a “crime scene” at sea is rarely, if ever possible. Thus, understanding the law at the operational stage – both in the sense of what the law enforcement officers do and concerning what they notice and record – is vital to legal finish. But that understanding is usually in the hands of completely different people than those responsible for the legal finish.

Importantly, arrests of people do not happen at sea. While it is possible to arrest a vessel, the suspects themselves are detained at sea and brought back to shore. Only once on shore are they handed over to land-based authorities who, on reviewing whatever evidence has been collected, then conduct an arrest or initiate an administrative proceeding. An arrest would then trigger the start of a prosecution, adjudication, and, if successful, penalization of the case. An administrative proceeding would similarly assess some sort of penalty. In either case – both considered to be “legal finish” – the personnel responsible are almost always different than the ones involved in every prior step of the process. All too often, however, most of the support, training, capacity building, attention, and funding has gone to this final stage, while the role of the law and legal advisors has been ignored in all the others.

Legal advisors are rarely, if ever, part of the process of monitoring and surveilling the maritime domain, analyzing anomalies, sharing information, planning operations, or even executing operations. They are sometimes – but rarely – consulted regarding evidence collection and preservation. Usually, the first time lawyers are brought into the maritime security cycle is for the legal finish, and it is left to them to kick-save any legal mistake or oversight that has been made at any previous point in the cycle. There is only so much, however, that can be fixed at the end of the process. Additionally, there may have been operational options that would have been more impactful if legal consultations had occurred earlier. Maritime law is strange and it affords some rights and opportunities that are sometimes hard to believe. Operators may miss out on more effective operations due to a lack of legal input at that stage.

Because maritime law enforcement is a cycle rather than a linear process, it does not end if one of the steps breaks down or even if all of them are successful through to prosecution. The final step is to revisit the starting point – the law – to ensure that it is fit for purpose. Law has two main functions: to constrain bad action and to enable good. If the law does not address an undesirable activity occurring in the maritime domain, it should be expanded or amended. If that law is not creating space for “good,” economically productive, and desirable activities, it should also be amended. While maritime law enforcement focuses on “the bad,” governing the maritime domain requires recognizing a balance between the two. Only stamping out the bad is not possible; there must be ample opportunities for good, lawful activities as well – especially when they are vital to a state’s economic security.

To be most effective, therefore, in both promoting good activities and stopping bad ones, the law must be seen as a tool or an asset for law enforcement – much the way a ship, radar system, or even a weapon would be seen. To be as impactful as possible, the law must be calibrated for the security operating environment. But even perfect law will be virtually worthless unless those who understand it and know how to use it are involved from the start of the maritime security cycle. Relegating the law to the legal finish phase betrays a lack of appreciation for the centrality of the law to the entire cycle, and sets up the state for failure.

Legal finish is incredibly important. But so is the legal start. If operational lawyers are not recognized as playing a vital role in all the phases leading up to the handover to land-based authorities, the prospects of both effective operations and successful legal finish are being undermined. So, for all the good attention that has been paid to prosecutors and judges, as well as to the work of coast guard and navy lawyers in support of those prosecutions or administrative proceedings, much more must be done to back up and start integrating sound legal advice throughout the maritime security cycle. While this can be a challenge, as operational cultures tend to not be welcoming to legal advisors, it is not about disrupting missions and operations with annoying legal points. It is about enhancing missions and operations by safeguarding the likelihood of their success. As simple as it sounds, we must not lose sight of the reality that legal finish needs a legal start.

Dr. Ian Ralby is a recognized expert in maritime and resource security. He has worked in more than 95 countries around the world, often assisting them with developing their maritime domain awareness capacity. He holds a JD from William & Mary and a PhD from the University of Cambridge.

This article appears courtesy of CIMSEC and may be found in its original form here.