India presses US after navy kills fisherman off UAE

dell · Post by **dell** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:05 pm

Not too long ago, there were a few fishermen killed off the coast of India by an Italian ship. It appears this is the second time in the last year that Indian fishermen have been killed at sea. Its hard to get into all the details of what happened because we dont have all the facts yet, but I am beginning to wonder if the fisherman are trained on maritime rules/laws ?

Link to article is pasted below

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18867113

oasis138 · Post by **oasis138** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:52 pm

dell;465833Not too long ago, there were a few fishermen killed off the coast of India by an Italian ship. It appears this is the second time in the last year that Indian fishermen have been killed at sea. Its hard to get into all the details of what happened because we dont have all the facts yet, but I am beginning to wonder if the fisherman are trained on maritime rules/laws ?

Link to article is pasted below

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18867113

US forces policy is shoot first ask questions later.

As for the Indian who died RIP. (nothing will happen and the case will go away in due course)

Desi · Post by **Desi** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:22 pm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-07-17/dubai-boat-shooting/56268250/1
[QUOTE]The account differs from that provided by the Navy, which said it resorted to lethal force Monday only after issuing a series of warnings.

One Indian was killed in the incident, and three of his countrymen were seriously wounded. The shooting underscored how quickly naval encounters can escalate in the increasingly tense waters of the Gulf.

The shooting happened Monday afternoon when a boat rapidly approached the refueling ship USNS Rappahannock about 10 miles off Dubai's Jebel Ali port, according to the Navy.
The Navy said the boat's crew disregarded warnings from the U.S. vessel, and only then did gunners fire on it with a .50-caliber machine gun.

A description of the incident posted online by the U.S. military indicates that a security team aboard the Rappahannock began issuing warnings as the boat headed toward it from about 900 yards away. Gunners opened fire when the boat closed in to about 100 yards, according to the account.

The white-hulled, dark-bottomed boat appeared to be a civilian vessel powered by three outboard motors. It had no obvious military markings. The skiff was 50 feet long and carried no communications gear, according to the U.S. military description.

Similar boats are used for fishing in the region, though Iran's Revolutionary Guard also employs relatively small, fast-moving craft in the Gulf.

Indian consular officials have met with the wounded. Indian Ambassador M.K. Lokesh told the Associated Press on Tuesday that one of the survivors reported that the men were returning from fishing when they encountered the American ship.

"He says there was no warning" before the shooting occurred, Lokesh said, though he noted that authorities are still working to determine what happened. "We are waiting for the investigation to be complete."

Imissindia · Post by **Imissindia** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:27 pm

oasis138;465894US forces policy is shoot first ask questions later.

As for the Indian who died RIP. (nothing will happen and the case will go away in due course)

The best we can hope for is some compensation- maybe an expression of "regret" (US forces hardly ever apologise).
Of course the incident took place in the UAE so it is up to that govt to take action.

What needs to be done is to have clear rules regarding such issues to avoid such misunderstandings. Do naval warships have the right to blockade an area around them as a prohibited zone, even in international waters or foreign ports? If so, what is the appropriate method of communicating/ demonstrating this to other vessels? How would a small fishing boat know which vessel to avoid and when? If we had a clear rule that prohibited a vessel from approaching within a predetermined distance from larger ships, then some of these misunderstandings could be avoided. I personally think that if a ship is so worried about approaching craft while it is docked, it should post some smaller boats to block off the area and to protect itself.

In this particular case, why couldn't the ship have fired in the air first and then close to the approaching vessel in an attempt to scare it rather than directly opening fire on to the vessel? Of course, the Americans are used to excessive force and a scant regard for human life (of other, lesser mortals).

Desi · Post by **Desi** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:35 pm

This news release if from DoD website.
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=117141
[QUOTE]
[h=3]USNS Rappahannock Fires After Vessel Ignores Warnings[/h]American Forces Press Service
U.S. NAVY 5th FLEET AREA OF OPERATIONS, July 16, 2012 – A security team aboard the USNS Rappahannock today fired on a small motor vessel after it disregarded warnings and rapidly approached the ship near Jebel Ali, United Arab Emirates, according to a U.S. Naval Forces Central Command news release issued today.

In accordance with Navy force protection procedures, the sailors aboard the Rappahannock, a refueling ship, used a series of nonlethal, preplanned responses to warn the vessel before resorting to lethal force, the release said.

The Rappahannock’s crew repeatedly attempted to warn the vessel's operators to turn away from their deliberate approach, the release said.

When those efforts failed to deter the approaching vessel, the security team on the Rappahannock fired rounds from a .50-caliber machine gun, according to the release.

The incident is under investigation, the release said.

R2MyOldWorld · Post by **R2MyOldWorld** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:43 pm

Imissindia;465913
What needs to be done is to have clear rules regarding such issues to avoid such misunderstandings. Do naval warships have the right to blockade an area around them as a prohibited zone, even in international waters or foreign ports? If so, what is the appropriate method of communicating/ demonstrating this to other vessels? How would a small fishing boat know which vessel to avoid and when? If we had a clear rule that prohibited a vessel from approaching within a predetermined distance from larger ships, then some of these misunderstandings could be avoided. I personally think that if a ship is so worried about approaching craft while it is docked, it should post some smaller boats to block off the area and to protect itself.

No, we don't need all that (I mean it means nothing even if you had all those rules. I am sure there are clear rules even now). What we need is for a country and its leadership to have some spine (one government delivers the terrorists in captivity to their brothers in Afganistan while other government treats blowing up of trains and hotels as kids lighting up firecrackers for Diwali). It can not even make small countries like SL, Bangladesh and Pakistan respect itself, let alone mighty USA. But when we have educated population who think terrorists activities happen even in mighty USA, so whats a big deal if it happens in India. Well they forget how different countries deal with terrorism (Yes, here I am referring to your comments about terrorism and India in another thread, though two are different issues, I am pointing out the attitude of the government and people).

Desi · Post by **Desi** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:45 pm

Imissindia;465913
In this particular case, why couldn't the ship have fired in the air first and then close to the approaching vessel in an attempt to scare it rather than directly opening fire on to the vessel? Of course, the Americans are used to excessive force and a scant regard for human life (of other, lesser mortals).

Are you aware how USS Cole was attacked.

So if this killing is attributed to scant disregard for life and excessive force by USA what would you attribute the Italian killing of two fisherman to?

Imissindia · Post by **Imissindia** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:50 pm

R2MyOldWorld;465938No, we don't need all that (I mean it means nothing even if you had all those rules. I am sure there are clear rules even now). What we need is for a country and its leadership to have some spine. It can not even make small countries like SL, Bangladesh and Pakistan respect India, let alone mighty USA. But when we have educated population who think terrorists activities happen even in mighty USA, so whats a big deal if it happens in India. Well they forget how different countries deal with terrorism (Yes, here I am referring to your comments about terrorism and India in another thread).

You are confusing two issues. India has acted tough when such things happened in or near our waters as you saw with the recent detention of Italian military personnel.
In this case, the incident happened on a foreign vessel, in a foreign land. What do you expect India to do? The first thing is to complete an investigation. The US didn't pick on this particular boat because it thought that Indian leadership is "weak". The US has expressed "regret":

U.S. ambassador to India Nancy Powell telephoned Indian Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai to convey her regret for the loss of life, the Indian foreign ministry said. A statement by the U.S. embassy in New Delhi conveyed condolences to the families of the crew of the vessel.

Some people misunderstand terrorism. No nation has been able to stop it. Look at UK vs, IRA- for 2 decades there were bomings almost every week. Look at Israel, look at France, just as few examples.

Imissindia · Post by **Imissindia** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:54 pm

Desi;465939Are you aware how USS Cole was attacked.

So if this killing is attributed to scant disregard for life and excessive force by USA what would you attribute the Italian killing of two fisherman to?

Why don't you respond to my entire post rather than picking that one sentence? The Italians were equally guilty of scant regard for human life.
Finally, if the US forces are so fearful then they can choose to avoid that region- they cannot simply open fire on anyone they suspect due to their paranoia. The Iranian government correctly observed today that the presence of foreign forces in that region is regrettable and leads to such incidents:

"We have announced time and again that the presence of foreign forces can be a threat to regional security," Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said during a news conference broadcast on state television.

"Certainly regional countries with the help of one another can provide security in the best possible way. If they join hands, with their defensive capabilities, they don't need the presence of foreign forces. Anywhere where you see insecurity we have always seen the hand of foreign forces there."

dbs · Post by **dbs** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:09 am

oasis138;465894US forces policy is shoot first ask questions later.

As for the Indian who died RIP. (nothing will happen and the case will go away in due course)

At least Pakistan got a few million in return for handing over the murderer alive. MMS will probably get a smile in return.