£30m worth of drugs seized by Royal Navy in Middle East operation
HMS Lancaster stalked a drug-runner's boat in the Arabian Sea for more than 24 hours after the illegal operations were spotted by the warship's drones.
It deployed its Wildcat helicopter to oversee the operation involving a boarding team from 42 Commando which seized 80 packages of narcotics.
A Royal Navy spokesman said the haul was made up of 1,000kg of heroin, 660kg of hashish and 6kg of amphetamine, worth an estimated £30 million on UK streets.
He said: 'It's the second bust in three months for the British warship, which is based in Bahrain and is attached to a New Zealand-led international task force spread across the Indian Ocean hunting down illegal activity.
'And it's the second time the Royal Navy's new Peregrine drones – mini-helicopters that conduct reconnaissance sorties for hours on end and feed live information back to Lancaster's operations room – have played a vital part in the success.'
Chris Chew, Lancaster's commanding officer, said: 'This is another example of where Lancaster has delivered at range, in isolation, utilising her own organic assets.
'Whether they come in the form of her Wildcat, our uncrewed air system Peregrine, embarked intelligence team or her Royal Marine boarding team, they delivered on operations in support of the Combined Maritime Forces and New Zealand-led Combined Task Force 150.'
Luke Pollard, the Armed Forces minister, said: 'I congratulate the crew of HMS Lancaster on this significant seizure, which is keeping dangerous and illegal drugs off our streets.
'This operation highlights the unique role our Royal Navy contributes, working to disrupt criminal operations around the world, keeping us secure at home and strong abroad.'
In March, the Royal Navy used drones for the first time in a drug bust when HMS Lancaster intercepted smugglers in the Indian Ocean who were trying to move 3.7 tons of heroin, hashish and crystal meth.
Royal Marines on board HMS Lancaster located the drug smugglers after Peregrine remote-controlled mini-helicopters were launched from the flight deck.
The drones are so-called because they aim to mimic the tactics of peregrine falcons, which scan for their prey at altitude.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
13 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The Royal Navy needs to develop a completely new idea of what a warship is
For many decades, the Royal Navy's thinking and therefore its shipbuilding has remained unchanged. We have had capital ships: aircraft carriers, helicopter carriers and amphibious platforms. We've also had frigates and destroyers (the backbone) to hunt submarines and provide area air defence – but more often than not to look like a warship and do warship type influence operations. Then there were an array of smaller ships for charting and patrolling the oceans and hunting both mines and maritime crooks such as fish thieves. Finally there are two types of nuclear powered submarines: attack boats and the strategic deterrent. But when you look at what we want from our navy now and the resources that are available to do it, no matter how much of a traditionalist you are, it is impossible to see how this model is sustainable. For navies to function across the huge range of tasks they need to undertake they need both balance and mass. The current Royal Navy has good balance from diplomacy to fighting but is woefully short on mass. You don't need to be a maritime historian to know how that ends when the shooting starts. I will leave the Royal Fleet Auxiliary out of it for this article as I've written about them recently. Focusing on surface vessels, there are three broad types of ships that we now need to consider adding to the traditional mix outlined above. Actually, we don't need to consider it, we need to do it. These are ships taken up from trade, medium sized low- or un-crewed vessels and autonomous small craft and weapons. Ships taken up from trade include vessels like HMS Stirling Castle (mine warfare), RFA Proteus and HMS Scott (surveillance) and HMS Protector (ice patrol). These are ships built to a commercial specification that the Navy then leases or buys for use on operations. They are not fighting ships; their lack of self-defence systems, watertight integrity and machinery plants do not permit it, but that doesn't mean they don't have tremendous utility. It's a truism of navies that they spend more of their time setting the conditions to avoid fighting than actually fighting – this is where these ships sit. And given how hard it is to fund and sustain the high end stuff, we need to get better at buying and running them. Autonomous vessels can be split into two: those that are large enough to operate on their own and those that need support from a mother ship. I'm going to focus on the former although one only needs a cursory knowledge of this subject to know that for both, the rate at which we are progressing in this field, and the rate at which we need to, are wildly different. As is so often the case, enter the US and their recently announced Modular Attack Surface Craft (MASC) programme. This is a fascinating programme that is set to move from concept to prototype to delivery in less than two years, the kind of pace that would make traditional ship manufacturers weep. It is still some way short of Ukraine's ability to build new systems but it's fast for a peacetime programme. The three models have been outlined with how many containers they can carry seemingly determining their size. The largest will take 'four or more' ISO containers, the middle one takes two of the same and the smallest, one half-size container. Endurance for the larger one is around the 60 day mark 'without crew intervention'. Here I have a query because in a ship roughly 60m long and with a 3m draft, unless you're going everywhere at two knots, then this is a stretch but I'll leave it for now. The larger two also have optional crewing options. In the real world they'll probably have people aboard a lot of the time, as security guards if nothing else, but the people will tend to get off once the risk level goes up. What these low- or un-crewed MASC ships will be used for is less clear at this stage, but from the work the US is doing on containerised weapons systems, and the way one of the models has its drive train configured, it looks as though they will be focussed on anti-air capabilities (traditionally conducted by destroyers) and anti-submarine (frigate). On this subject, I do find myself disagreeing with doctrine purists who always want to see ships being built in response to a carefully crafted master strategy. In reality, the things you are going to want your ships to do haven't changed at either the soft or hard power end of the continuum for a long time. Diplomacy, disaster relief, freedom of navigation, littoral operations, strike, anti-submarine and air operations remain constant no matter how potential adversaries develop methods to try to deny them. This is the eternal cat and mouse of weapons development with the only certainty being that if you wait too long for the perfect kit, or because your system is slow, or because you don't have any cash, you will fall behind. In other words, just build them, the rest will follow. From a UK perspective there are at least four uses for ships like this that are blindingly obvious. There will be others. Missile defence is one and would work equally well in far blue water or around the UK. It would be far better to have a dozen of these ships with containerised SM-6 interceptors (this has been trialled by the US) than hugely expensive systems ashore that can only do one job – or just one or two exquisite destroyers with large crews in 15 or 20 years' time. The containerised data links and ability to transmit a radar picture to these vessels exist now. If we insist on full-fat destroyers with 100+ missile tubes they will cost billions apiece and we will never have enough. We should instead conceive our destroyers as flotilla leaders for MASC-type vessels with containerised weapons to bulk up our firepower. Likewise with anti-submarine warfare (ASW) in the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap and beyond, low- or un-crewed ships with containerised kit could be vital. Anyone who has spent a life at sea gets nervous when tech companies start talking about deploying small short-range systems from mother ships for ASW because it is so often conducted in conditions where just walking around the ship is a challenge, much less deploying and recovering smaller craft. These larger MASC vessels avoid that problem. Another solution would be to deploy one-shot small systems: we already do this with sonobuoys. If it's cheap and numerous enough, this will work. A flotilla of medium autonomous ships with an exquisite Type 26 frigate somewhere in the vicinity running the show starts sounding a lot like balance and mass. A single Type 26, no matter how lovely, does not. And there are companies like Ocean Infinity who have already built medium sized autonomous ships. Defence should allocate resources to allow the Royal Navy to buy them now. Caveats do come to mind on unmanned ships: enemies will probably be much more willing to attack or sink them than manned ones, or even board and seize them. Certainly the bigger types need to be optionally crewed. It will probably often be worthwhile to have a highly skilled maintenance troubleshooter or two aboard, or an experienced bridge watchstander for crowded waters. But they won't always be needed, and there will certainly be no need for the large numbers of semi-skilled maintainers, sensor and weapon operators, cooks, administrators etc that make up most of today's warship crews. There is also of course the risk that unmanned ships might be hacked – though this is also becoming a risk with manned systems. Very little of this discussion is new: the Strategic Defence Review refers to much of it and Naval plans talk about uncrewed sloops (the Type 92) but that's the point – they're being discussed. We need to take a leaf out of the US playbook and just buy it. The Royal Navy has some excellent kit and people but is so short on both that its deterrent effect has been eroded. This is a quick and relatively cheap way out of this hole. Let's see if the US, whose macro fleet issues are similar – albeit much scaled up – can do any better.
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Speaker Mike Johnson visits occupied West Bank to support Israeli settlers
Mike Johnson became the highest ranked US official to visit the occupied West Bank on Monday, the Republican House speaker drawing measures of praise and condemnation for his trip in support of Israeli settlements amid a worsening starvation crisis in Gaza. The excursion followed Johnson's arrival in Israel on Sunday on an unannounced visit with other Republican lawmakers, and his meeting with Israeli defense minister Israel Katz and foreign minister Gideon Saar. Johnson's visit to the West Bank is the highest profile by a senior US political figure since then secretary of state Mike Pompeo went to Psogat in November 2020 during the final months of Donald Trump's first presidency. It is a private trip hosted by a pro-Israel advocacy group, an Axios report said, and not an official congressional delegation. The outlet said Johnson traveled with fellow Republican representatives Michael McCaul, Nathaniel Moran and Michael Cloud of Texas, and Claudia Tenney of New York. Johnson told Israeli settlers on Monday that Israel was the 'rightful owner' of the contested Palestinian territory, according to a report published on the pro-Palestinian website Common Dreams, and separately, Marc Zell, the chair of Republicans Overseas Israel. Common Dreams quoted Johnson as saying that 'the mountains of Judea and Samaria are the rightful property of the Jewish people' and that the territory was at 'the front line of the state of Israel, and must remain an integral part of it'. 'Even if the world thinks otherwise, we stand with you,' he reportedly added, an apparent reference to recent proclamations by France and the UK that they would recognize a Palestinian state if Israel did not commit to a ceasefire in Gaza. His visit was immediately condemned by the Palestinian foreign ministry, which issued a statement calling Israel's annexation of the West Bank a 'blatant violation of international law'. Johnson's stance in support of the settlers, it said, 'undermines Arab and American efforts to stop the war and [the] cycle of violence, while flagrantly contradicting the declared US position on settlements and settler violence'. According to a post on X by Zell, Johnson also said the US should use the 250th anniversary of its independence next year 'to remind the American people of its Judeo-Christian foundations that were formed here in the land of Israel'. Johnson's trip comes as pressure builds on Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the growing hunger crisis in Gaza, which some critics have called a genocide orchestrated by Israel. It also comes shortly after a Palestinian American from Florida was killed in the West Bank by Israeli settlers while visiting family. The Trump-appointed ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, called the killing a 'terrorist attack'. Johnson is expected to meet Netanyahu before returning to the US on Sunday.
The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Gaza latest: Netanyahu to push for ‘full conquest' as 600 Israeli ex-officials urge Trump to help end war
Benjamin Netanyahu will push for expanding Israel's offensive in Gaza during a meeting of his security cabinet on Tuesday, local media reported. 'The die is cast – we're going for full conquest,' CNN quoted senior officials close to the Israeli prime minister as telling Ynet. 'If the Chief of Staff doesn't agree – he should resign.' Netanyahu's office was also quoted by local broadcaster N12 as saying: 'The decision has been made – we're going to occupy Gaza.' The Jerusalem Post similarly quoted a source in the leader's office as confirming plans for a full occupation. In a video message, Netanyahu said Israel was 'committing to free Gaza from the tyranny of these terrorists'. This came after indirect ceasefire talks with Hamas collapsed. The talks were centred on a US -backed proposal for a 60-day truce that would have allowed aid into Gaza and facilitated a partial hostage-prisoner exchange. Meanwhile, nearly 600 retired Israeli security officials, including former Mossad and Shin Bet chiefs, urged Donald Trump to pressure Israel to end the war, arguing that Hamas no longer posed a strategic threat and warning the hostages 'can't wait'. Netanyahu signals 'full conquest' of Gaza as civilian toll rises Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu will push for expanding Israel's offensive in Gaza during a security cabinet meeting on Tuesday, local media reported. 'We must continue to stand together and fight together to achieve all our war objectives: the defeat of the enemy, the release of our hostages, and the assurance that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel,' he said. 'The die is cast – we're going for full conquest,' CNN quoted senior officials close to the Israeli prime minister as telling Ynet. 'If the Chief of Staff doesn't agree – he should resign.' Israel's continuing assault on Gaza killed at least 40 Palestinians on Monday, including 10 people who were reportedly seeking aid, according to local medics. Another five people died of starvation. Maroosha Muzaffar5 August 2025 04:45
