[GK3]

Goose, I have learned to respect your detailed and extensive knowledge on matters like this.  But I am not quite sure what you are saying.  When you observe that cheating is still easy, it sounds like you are endorsing the general thrust of the NYT article.  But you begin by making a well informed critique of the NYT article.  It sounds like the NYT article was written by someone with less knowledge and understanding than you have, but the ultimate conclusion is the same?  Sanctions don't work very well because maritime cheating is so easy?

I was reacting to two things. The NYT seemed to be saying that the cheating was possible due to new technology that affects the ship's GPS. That isn't the case and gives the public a very false impression about GPS spoofing. My second point was that false AIS indications are nothing new and are pretty well understood. This technology was quite commonly used by Nigerian oil pirates even 10 years ago. It is an issue but we have experience countering it.

Sanctions in this case are not working as well as they might because of policy errors, not technical challenges. The US has the ability to follow the majority of the cargo that is being "sanitized". The worst problem is that we have not partnered well enough with the nations where many of these ships are registered. We need their cooperation to board these ships and impound them if they are misrepresenting their cargo. The second problem is that we have under-resourced our ability to patrol the sea lanes. We have successfully (at least in the main) beat these two problems previously but we cannot assume sanctions will work without significant effort on our part. Maritime cheating isn't that easy if anybody is paying attention and plans to act on what they see. Right now, we are not. The rest of the west does have some capability to help, but without us leading diplomatically and  "militarily" it can't happen.

Well said!

[GK3]

Goose, I have learned to respect your detailed and extensive knowledge on matters like this.  But I am not quite sure what you are saying.  When you observe that cheating is still easy, it sounds like you are endorsing the general thrust of the NYT article.  But you begin by making a well informed critique of the NYT article.  It sounds like the NYT article was written by someone with less knowledge and understanding than you have, but the ultimate conclusion is the same?  Sanctions don't work very well because maritime cheating is so easy?

I was reacting to two things. The NYT seemed to be saying that the cheating was possible due to new technology that affects the ship's GPS. That isn't the case and gives the public a very false impression about GPS spoofing. My second point was that false AIS indications are nothing new and are pretty well understood. This technology was quite commonly used by Nigerian oil pirates even 10 years ago. It is an issue but we have experience countering it.

Sanctions in this case are not working as well as they might because of policy errors, not technical challenges. The US has the ability to follow the majority of the cargo that is being "sanitized". The worst problem is that we have not partnered well enough with the nations where many of these ships are registered. We need their cooperation to board these ships and impound them if they are misrepresenting their cargo. The second problem is that we have under-resourced our ability to patrol the sea lanes. We have successfully (at least in the main) beat these two problems previously but we cannot assume sanctions will work without significant effort on our part. Maritime cheating isn't that easy if anybody is paying attention and plans to act on what they see. Right now, we are not. The rest of the west does have some capability to help, but without us leading diplomatically and  "militarily" it can't happen.

Well said!