Navies join forces to tackle mines

Navies join forces to tackle mines 16 May 2013 Coordination problems remain as joint efforts gather pace to keep waterways safe MANAMA — As the interest in mine warfare floats to the top of navy agendas around the world, effective coordination remains one of the biggest challenges facing budget-conscious nations who now need to work together to stop the threat of mines blocking crucial waterways for trade. Speaking on board the USS Ponce on Tuesday during the International Mine Countermeasures Exercise (IMCMEX) 13, a two-week maritime cooperation exercise involving 41 countries, Commander Glen Allen of US Navy Taskforce 52, said IMCMEX demonstrated an international coalition coming together to fight what could be a very significant problem “which could exceed the resources of any individual nation”, he said. “Mine warfare is often one of those areas that is neglected particularly in terms of resource investment in the navies but is absolutely necessary for a balanced navy”. A Riverine Command boat (RCB) and USS Ponce take part in the International Mine Countermeasures Exercise. Any navy must have some capability to deal with the threat of mines, and ensure the free flow of commercial trade, Allen said. “(Mines) don’t care who goes over them and will cause damage to ships and loss of life. And they’re relatively cheap — a few hundred dollars to make can cause a million dollars worth of damage to a ship. “Terrorists could use an inexpensive weapon like a mine to counter a very modern navy”. “There’s something provocative about someone telling you can’t go into an area. There’s willingness to do something collectively and to share resources in an intensive enivronment”. The US navy now only has one carrier in the Gulf, the Eisenhower, for the first time since early 2010, following budget cuts last year which meant a second carrier was not replaced. Royal Navy captain Andrew Elvin, deputy commander of Taskforce 52 and captain of UK mine warfare, said there was always an interest in mine warfare as it competed with other priorities and projects. “(Interest) will go in cycles as each country looks at own budgets and capability. You could argue in future naval activities will have to be collaborative, as people are downsizing and looking at how they can collaborate.. budget drives everything. Everyone’s been constrained”. However, while the need for cooperation was there, coordination of these nations remained one of the biggest challenges this exercise was trying to perfect, Elvin said. Nato countries had agreed on standard operating procedures and terminology, and this exercise was about passing these common practices along to other non-Nato countries, to ensure everyone was working off the same page in the event of a real-life scenario, he said. “We’re trying to enable capability outside of Nato. Regions here don’t have experience operating as Nato countries do, we’re trying to help them understand the advantages of working together”. Allen said nine countries in the region were known to stockpile mines, but Elvin said this did not necessarily mean the area was more at risk than anywhere else. “Lots of countries stockpile mines. There’s nothing illegal … I don’t think it’s a specific heightened threat here…but anywhere that holds weapons is of concern, and military forces need to be able to respond if a country tries to use them”. Any country that went through destabilisation had the potential to lose central control of its weapons, be it tanks, aircraft or mines, Elvin said. “Some of those may fall into terroist hands. (But) I’m not saying that will be the case in Syria”. US Navy senior chief petty officer Jeremy Farr, on the mine countermeasure ship USS Sentry, said deterrence had to be multi-national given the scale of the threat, and the large geographical area. Mines were a very practical and effective weapon to use in the Gulf given the amount of traffic and narrow shipping routes, he said. “It’s a good means to control commerce, affect multi-states and influence other nations. We have multiple nations in this area that if mines were detected it would affect their availablility to access goods, their economy and therefore their stability. The UAE is one of those economic centres and has a huge influence in the area so to have their help is a very big thing. But ultimately it benefits them. They have obvious interest in securing waterways because they’re such a hub”. A US Navy personnel during the exercise. Royal Australian Navy commander Doug Griffiths said this was the first opportunity many countries involved had had to integrate, and communication was always going to be a challenge. “Like any exercise we walk before we run. “If you had 40 countries that had never worked together, working out how to communicate and the flow of information… it would be very, very difficult, and would delay the operation. This (exercise) helps to develop those relationships and communication processes so if we had to do this for real it wouldn’t be the first time. “We don’t all have the same standard operation procedures, so we’re working out who can do what and who can communicate with who, and what we can bring to the fight. None of this comes easy”. Royal Navy lieutenant commander Andrew Mills pointed out time would be of the essence. If, for example, the Suez Canal was blocked, the United Kingdom would run out of petrol in seven days, he said. A communication mix-up on Monday between the Royal Navy and the US navy, which led to media being on two RCB in the Arabian Gulf for three hours in search of their lodgings on the FRA Cardigan Bay, demonstrated the need for this practice, and the types of lessons learned about the importance of having one chain of command, he said. Commander Stefan Rings, in charge of the coordination centre for the exercise, said the exercise was important to improve the visibility of mine warfare forces. “We’re presenting the ability … that we’re capable in all areas to counter mines professionally. The interest for (mine counterwarfare) needs to be there — it’s like if you had no fires for a long time you might think there’s no need for a fire department. A lot of mining not taken here in the last few decades, so we need some visiblility and to show capability”. Commanding Officer of the USS Sentry John Benfield said interest in mine warfare had ebbed and flowed since it was first used in World War I. Despite mines not causing damage in the area since the First Gulf War in 1991, people knew it was still a possibility, he said. “That’s why so many countries have come together. (If mines were deployed) the action may be aimed at one specific nation but it affects everybody.He agreed the biggest hurdle to an international exercise was communications, and command and control, given every country used different frequencies, message platforms, and had different codephrases and terminology. “But there’s almost a daily improvement when we do these exercises. People get more comfortable, and get to know each other so it gets easier and we build on that every time”. Commanding Officer Jon Rodgers, captain of the USS Ponce, the US Navy’s first designated Afloat Forward Staging Base, said the ship was permanently deployed in the Gulf in response to a request from the US Central Command for a permanent presence, due to the specific threat of mines in this region. “Our presence is an assurance to our friends in this region that should mining happen they can rely on the US to remove that threat”. Iran conducted its own anti-mining exercise in the Sea of Oman on May 7, and when asked about the countermeasures exercise, Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast warned against any “provocations” in the Gulf. Rodgers also refused to say Iran was the intended target, adding the US and Iran ships saw each other every day and were very professional towards each other. “But I bet you we have taken more pticures of each other than there are on facebook or social media … as long as we’re just pointing cameras at each other it’s a good day”. The exercise, hosted by the US Navy’s 5 th Fleet, includes mine countermeasures such as hunting and explosive ordnance disposal training, unmanned aerial and underwater vehicle operations, as well as maritime security operations such as escorting commercial ships, and maritime infrastructure protection, including ports or offshore terminals crucial for oil and gas exporters in the Gulf. Taylor Scott International