Dreadnought

Gentlemen,

There has been a very volitile issue as of late concerning dive penetrations into the sunken WWII warships of both Axis and Allied nations. Apparently these foreign divers are not respecting these wargraves for thousands of WWII sailors both Axia and Allies.

I have read quite alot of stories/allegations and ofcourse the "bravado" some divers give themselves for photographing the interior spaces of some of these warships that are known and marked War graves. Some of these images portay human remains (skulls/bones, uniforms etc.) and the like. I cannot imagine the horror their families must feel by seeing these images on the internet knowing that someone knowingly desecrated these wargrave sites that have rested on the bottom for the last 60+ years. Many of the these images still remain unfortunately.

I am surely not in agreement with anyone disturbing a war grave no matter the reasoning behind it. IMO it is blatant disrespect for those who served and died defending their countries without regard to which side they were on.

Myself, I am fascinated with warships,wrecks of all kinds and so forth as I know many of you are that come to the Naval Forces forum on the WAB.

I feel that after reading about such things that it should be posted here on the WAB in hopes of supporting those efforts to keep these war graves a sacred place.

Since we seem to be popular among the posting sites I feel that we should atleast start a thread to address this and for all to see that visit and those that join and add to our little slice of worldly communication and discussion.

Attached is a Bill from the House of Lords discussing these problems with two primary subjects namely HMS Repulse and HMS Prince of Wales. These two are not the only ones this is happening to, there are several more to come.




House of LordsWednesday, 6 December 2006.
The House met at three o’clock (Prayers having been read earlier at the Judicial Sitting by the Lord Bishop of Chelmsford): the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Shipping: Naval Wrecks

Lord Faulkner of Worcester asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What steps they are taking to protect the wrecks of HMS “Prince of Wales” and HMS “Repulse” from the activities of foreign nationals undertaking penetration dives and disturbing the human remains which lie there.

Baroness Crawley: My Lords, the wrecks of HMS “Prince of Wales” and HMS “Repulse”, which lie in international waters off the coast of Malaysia, are designated as protected places under the United Kingdom’s Protection of Military Remains Act 1986. However, the Act applies only to British citizens and British flagged vessels. Her Majesty’s Government therefore continue to work closely with regional Governments, diving groups and others to prevent inappropriate activity on the wreck sites by foreign nationals.

Lord Faulkner of Worcester: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. These two ships were sunk 65 years ago this week and the wrecks are the final resting place of 840 officers and men. Is my noble friend aware of the activities of foreign-owned diving companies, such as Rec ‘N’ Tec and White Manta, which have promoted themselves by placing pictures of human remains on their websites and, in one case, producing for sale a DVD of a full penetration dive on HMS “Repulse” carried out by a US citizen? Does my noble friend agree that the survivors and the relatives of the deceased deserve rather better than that?

Baroness Crawley: Yes, my Lords, I agree absolutely. I have seen stills from the DVD and they are extremely distressing and must be extremely painful for the families and the survivors. The British Government, via the British High Commission in Malaysia, have asked the company to remove the video from its website. It has done so and apologised for the distress caused. The Ministry has also madeits concerns known to a number of Malaysian government agencies and to the navies of the region, and of course the Royal Navy itself makes several trips to the site.

Lord Astor of Hever: My Lords, we on these Benches welcome anything that the Government can do to protect these war grave sites. Those tragic
sinkings taught us the importance of air cover. In the light of that, can the noble Baroness confirm that there will be no further delays to the new carriers?

Baroness Crawley: A good try, my Lords, but it is slightly outwith the brief in front of me. I will, with all due respect to the noble Lord, write to him on his question.

Lord Howarth of Newport: My Lords, what plans do the Government have for more proactive management of historic wreck sites so that they are physically assessed by people with relevant expertise and management plans are drawn up which would be sensitive to them both as war graves, if that is what they are, and as archaeological sites?

Baroness Crawley: My Lords, we are signatories to several international conventions, most notably the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and have therefore signed up to the responsibilities under them. We have also begun to designate sites. I was astonished to learn in my brief that there are 15,000 naval and merchant wrecks from the two world wars. Not all of those will be designated, but the most significant wrecks are being designated as protected sites or controlled sites, with all the management that that involves.

Lord Addington: My Lords, can the Ministerassure us that international bodies such as the Commonwealth will be made aware of the situation? An international approach is probably what is required; indeed, that is what the Minister has suggested in her earlier answers.

Baroness Crawley: My Lords, there is good communication between those responsible in the Commonwealth War Graves Commission and those responsible for the shipwrecks which have become maritime graves.

Lord Bridges: My Lords, the noble Baroness has not referred to the interests of the New Zealand Government in the “Prince of Wales” and the “Repulse”. There is a very active interest in New Zealand in the fates of the ships and of the bodies of those who were drowned. Are the Government, as I trust they are, in close contact with the Government of New Zealand and listening sympathetically to their interests?

Yes, my Lords. I will write to the noble Lord about the detail of our contact, but, as I understand it, we are in contact with the regional Governments, the Australian Navy and the New Zealand agencies.

Baroness Fookes: My Lords, will the Minister consider contacting the various dive centres which operate in that area? Most SCUBA divers—recreational divers, of which I am one—would operate from such sites.



6 Dec 2006 : Column 1153


Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for her intervention. The diving companies in the region are contacted and we are in close co-operation with them. But in the end, however many international or national laws we sign up to, we need to educate the diving companies and the individual divers. We are therefore in constant contact with them.

Baroness Sharples: My Lords, can the noble Baroness explain why if the American Government can protect their wrecks, we cannot?

Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I would say that we do protect our wrecks with the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986. Although it has limitations in applying only to British nationals and to British vessels, we certainly use it as fully as we can.

Lord Roper: My Lords, have the Government made a formal approach to the Malaysian and Singaporean Governments to ask them to co-operate informally in restricting activities from their ports?

Baroness Crawley: Yes, my Lords; we are in constant contact with the Governments through the High Commissions. However, after our short debate today, I will certainly ensure that we once again underline our concerns with both Governments.

Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts: My Lords, does the Minister agree that in addition to the dreadful personal tragedies referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Faulkner of Worcester, this is a site of particular historical significance? It proved once and for all that capital ships—as my noble friend Lord Astor made clear in his “outwith” question—could no longer operate without adequate air defences. As such, it is the place where the course of naval warfare changed for ever.

Baroness Crawley: Absolutely, my Lords; that was a very significant event on 10 December 1941. Naval historians consider it a turning point in history.

__________________
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

Dreadnought

This is one of the images showing a diver returning to the surface with a plate belonging to the HMS Repulse. The second are the remains of a sailor from the HMS Repulse. These are a few of the images that have been turning up on the internet.

Attached Images

	repulse plates.jpg (2.0 KB, 26 views)
	repulse bones.jpg (2.6 KB, 27 views)

pdf27

Some years ago a Japanese salvage company started making plans to salvage both PoW and Repulse for scrap metal (mainly non-ferrous metals and armour plate IIRC). These plans were eventually cancelled after the RN made it VERY clear that the salvage operation would not be allowed to go ahead.

PoW and Repulse aren't the only war graves we have trouble with - despite being in UK territorial waters, there have been repeated issues with divers (illegally) diving on Royal Oak as well...

__________________
Rule 1: Never trust a Frenchman
Rule 2: Treat all members of the press as French