Could non-lethal systems be used to prevent an incident like the USS Cole attack in Yemen?

The USS Cole [incident] is often cited to justify the need of more machine guns on the deck of a man-of-war. While a better response capability against asymmetric and irregular opponents is certainly required, in reality, killing a suspect or sinking a boat is the easiest part of the job. Discriminating between a threat or an innocent individual or boat, which just was in the wrong spot at the wrong moment, is the real challenge. We should also remember that the security of a ship sitting in a foreign port is [the] responsibility of the host country and it is just unlikely that [a] U.S. warship could freely fire warning shots to anybody passing below near her when in port. In this case, less threatening means to discriminate (such as acoustic or visual) would [be] much more feasible. A floating barrier with entangler lines fitted to lightweight buoys, easily deployable and recoverable, can also represent an acceptable solution. This solution also grants effectiveness because the line marks a well visible borderline: Trying to overcome it would trigger immediate reaction. The NATO Underwater Research Center[NURC] in La Spezia, Italy, and both the U.K. Royal Navy and the Royal Australian Navy have all carried out interesting trials on stationary entanglement lines.

Can we equip visit, board, search, and seizure teams to do their jobs better?

Boarding teams must be a part of the parent vessel’s tactical network. This implies being capable [of exchanging] data, voice, text, and video with the parent vessel. Just to give a quick abstract, these requirements include the recognized surface picture (i.e., who is where), border and restricted no-go waters, orders and messages, and to transmit data collected on the spot, be they the vessel’s cargo manifest, containers’ serial numbers, documents of the crew, biometrics [pictures, facial recognition, fingerprints, iris scanner], and so on. Therefore, specific portable C4I [communication, command, control, computer, and intelligence] equipment would be required. Another element of paramount importance, though often overlooked, is the availability of adequate RHIBs [rigid-hull inflatable boats] to transport, insert, and retrieve the boarding team. Traditional lifeboats, originally designed mostly for rescue and/or liaison duties, are often ill-fitted for the job. Faster and more capable boats are required, often 10 to 11 meters long, often fitted with some supporting armament and good communications, so as to be a communication node between the boarding party and the parent vessel or other coalition assets. The ship herself must have the capability to quickly launch and recover the boats under way under unfavorable weather conditions. Stern ramps or stabilized cranes are common components of many new naval designs, as boarding is quickly coming back to be a relevant component of the naval warfare syllabus.

What are the new technologies to watch for boardings and NLW?

There are many technological areas where significant progress is expected in the near future. As far as the NLW are concerned, these include mostly the realm of directed energy (both laser and high-power electromagnetic pulses). The technologies for enabling better boarding operations include small boat launching and recovery, portable identity data collection devices, portable communication, and wireless, self-forming ad-hoc mesh-networking, all with inherent robust cryptography and signal stability.

This interview was first published in Defense: Spring 2012 Edition.