Germans fight for Graf Spee

[August]

http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2010/02/war_trophy.html

"A long forgotten Nazi War Trophy is now causing an international kerfuffle. You may remember the story of the Battle of La Plate River. Where the British Navy finally cornered the German heavy cruiser ADMIRAL GRAF SPEE into a tight box.

Well, according to El Capitán over at Donde El Viento Nos LLeve, on Feb 10th 2006, an enterprising Uruguayan salvaged its bronze Nazi Eagle Stern Scutcheon (the only known surviving piece of its kind).

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_lqQWWzCmogs/SwM1AgtOuPI/AAAAAAAADv8/GbGnJHY6lvQ/s400/GS.jpg
Eagle as salvaged

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_lqQWWzCmogs/SwM1YNGPO4I/AAAAAAAADws/lxWhcRlsz84/s400/GSF00.jpg
Eagle restored and on display
Image Source of the above two pictures are courtesy of El Capitán

It seems that this bronze relic has caught the eye of the German Government. In an official diplomatic Démarche, the German Ambassador to Uruguay, lodged a protest to the Uruguayan Foreign Ministry. In it, the German Government claims its ownership and demands that it may not be sold. Furthermore, it holds The Uruguayan Government as its fiduciary repository until physical transfer to Germany is effected."

[GoldenRivet]

Germany has full rights to the artifact IMHO

[August]

Germany has full rights to the artifact IMHO

According to the article:

...Which prompted the salvager to lodge a suit alleging that:
(A) The German Government back in 1940 sold the rights to salvage the Graf Spee to an Uruguayan citizen,
(B) That subsequently the ship was considered abandoned, and
(C) That by virtue of lying within Uruguayan waters it is open for salvage by any Uruguayan citizen.

If true Germany has no more right to the artifact than you or I do.

[Tribesman]

Germany has full rights to the artifact IMHO
No, its uniquness doesn't confer them the right, the rights belong to the consortium(part of which is German) who spent 8 years salvaging the wreck.

[Dan D]

Ah, my favourite topic:

“The ownership of sunken warships”

Here is the case for Germany:

Let’s take a look at the intentions of the commander of the Bismarck.
Believe it or not, the German Captain had made up his mind before he sunk the ship. The damaged ship in the foreign harbour meant a diplomatic crisis for a couple of days. So he had plenty of time to ask for legal advice by German lawyers and diplomats before he sunk the ship.

With regard to C):

He drove the Bismarck into “International Waters”; back then it was “International Waters”. It was later (post-war), that Uruguay has widened its coastal waters unilateral.

With regard to B):

The Captain did not “abandon” the ship, quite the opposite; his intention was to destroy the ship so that nobody else could make use of it. The commander’s intention (his horizon) at the moment when he leaves the ship is decisive , whether he “abandoned” the ship according to international law.



With regard to A): Would be interesting to see the documents proving that the German had Government sold the salvation rights. We don’t know the details, so far.
I do remember a different trial which was decided by the High Court of Singapore. The trial was about a German U-boat which was sunk in the coastal waters of Singapore containing a valuable freight (a couple of tons of mercury). The salvation company was not able to prove its claim that it owns the salvation rights.

And D): The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: http://www.itlos.org/
is situated in Hamburg, that is in Germany. Tsss.

[OneToughHerring]

If true Germany has no more right to the artifact than you or I do.

Certainly more then you.

[Tribesman]

He drove the Bismarck into “International Waters”; back then it was “International Waters”. It was later (post-war), that Uruguay has widened its coastal waters unilateral.

Was it though?
Wouldn't Uraguay have maintained the Spanish claim on terrirtorial waters after independance?
Didn't Spain claim 6 nautical miles at that time?

[Dan D]

Was it though?
Wouldn't Uraguay have maintained the Spanish claim on terrirtorial waters after independance?
Didn't Spain claim 6 nautical miles at that time?

According to la perfide Albion the seven seas are British coastal waters: "Rule Britannia!".
Oh, and it is Graf Spee and not Bismarck.

[Snestorm]

No, its uniquness doesn't confer them the right, the rights belong to the consortium(part of which is German) who spent 8 years salvaging the wreck.

Damn! This time we agree.

Germany surrendered herself and ALL her warships and u-boats.
Every one of them became property of her former enemies, to do with as they saw fit.
See: Operation Deadlight.
See: Fate of KM Prinz Eugen.

[ThePinkSubmarine]

I'm going to have to agree with the German government. HOWEVER - I'm not sure they are responsible enough to have it. I have become more disgusted over the years by the attitude that, WWII happened, but should not be remembered. I mean...a parking lot above the Fuhrer bunker?

If it were in the United States - it'd be a registered nat'l landmark - and stuff like that would simply not be allowed!

[Schroeder]

@PinkSubmarine

That is not to forget those things.;)
There are plenty of memorials here.
It is meant to prevent those places to become pilgrimage sites for Neo Nazis.
We are bombed with documentaries about WWII and the Nazis on TV every day and a lot of sites are still there as memorials (like the concentration camps). Maybe our governments went a bit over the top in denazifying (sp?) but it is not to forget that those things happened. Actually I don't know any other country that is as critical with it's own past as Germany.

The eagle of the Graf Spee would surely end up in a museum for public display.

[Tribesman]

Germany surrendered herself and ALL her warships and u-boats.
Every one of them became property of her former enemies, to do with as they saw fit.

The problem there though is the claim that the rights had already been sold, which would mean that at the time of surrender it wasn't German.

If it were in the United States - it'd be a registered nat'l landmark
If it was in the US (or anywhere for that matter) and they decided it was a hazard to navigation they would do the same.
If the wreck was of sufficient historical value they would do the same as Uraguay planned and put it up as a museum piece like they have with the artifacts already salvaged

[Skybird]

"Germans fight for Graf Spee."

Hm.

Most Germans, including me, are not even aware of this story going on. Nor do we Germans care. The Eagle'S nest they pulled out of the ocean some time ago just looked like some random piece of rotten iron rubble. If others clean the ocean of it and we must not do it ourselves, I only can say "Thank You!".

Rememberance comes from understanding in the heart, and knowing the knowledge about history. The first is wisdom, the latter is intellectual learning. And no sightseeing and no role-playing replaces that, or even can supplement that. This obsession of some people for monuments and places and artifacts I never understood. nor can I react with anything different but alienation when seeing in other nations the yearly celebration of some military event by replaying it with actors on the meadows, and when being asked, the audience often says somthing in referance to "learning about history". you learn nothing about reasons for ancient wars and drives behind past tyrannies from watching modern grownups replaying old battles. It's is just a spectacle and a fairground attraction. So is this hunting for the Graf Spee.

Let her rest where she is and be thankful for not needing to live in the time of her sinking. what is to be larned about history, will not be learned by looking at clumps of rotten metal.

[Letum]

Damn! This time we agree.

Germany surrendered herself and ALL her warships and u-boats.
Every one of them became property of her former enemies, to do with as they saw fit.

If shipwrecks count as warships, then the French may well have the largest navy in the world.

[August]

Hm.

You picked your ignore list so abide by it and take your opinions elsewhere.

[Tribesman]

You picked your ignore list so abide by it and take your opinions elsewhere.
Give him a chance, there must be some angle he can explore on this issue. After all it is part of his heritage and culture which he is always going on about.
So if you look at the first picture in the topic, that fella on the barge has a beard.... muslims have beards....this has to be another example of muslims stealing europes cultural heritage as part of a global conspiracy. The fact that the article says otherwise is just a demonstration of how far this conspiracy has spread.

[NeonSamurai]

You picked your ignore list so abide by it and take your opinions elsewhere.

Members can post their opinions anytime they like to any thread they like. Skybird has as much right to post in your threads, as you do to post in his.

[August]

Members can post their opinions anytime they like to any thread they like. Skybird has as much right to post in your threads, as you do to post in his.

Yeah so?

[Skybird]

I replied to a topic. I did not reply to August.

And different to some of your comments in "my" threads, August, that I noted when somebody quoted you, I did not even try a cheap stab at you.

[AVGWarhawk]

First of all, cool artifact! Second, nice workmanship in that piece! Third, in good conscience as the founder of said artifact I would turn it over to Germany. It is afterall part of the Germany history. All be a dark time but still German history. But it is not me who has found this piece of history. I would certainly hate to see it get destroyed as it is certainly a museum piece. But like anything else, whoever shows up with the right amount of cash gets the prize. :03:

[August]

I replied to a topic. I did not reply to August.

And different to some of your comments in "my" threads, August, that I noted when somebody quoted you, I did not even try a cheap stab at you.

That's because i'm not ignoring you Skybird, and you have on more than one occasion demanded that people on your ignore list do not post in your threads so take a hike.

[Tribesman]

I replied to a topic. I did not reply to August.


Yet the reply posted seems to have little to do with the topic at all.
There was some nonsense about re-enactments , some more nonsense about artifacts being useless, an attack on archaelogy and some crap about museums being a waste of time.
I will leave others to take apart his nonsense about war memorials.

I do find the ...So is this hunting for the Graf Spee.

...bit funny though.
It must have been quite a hunt trying to find something that they knew exactly where it was and had known exactly where it was since it first settled in the shallow water there. I can't wait for them to start hunting for the location of the Arizona and the Utah.

[CaptainHaplo]

Ya know - this would have made alot more interesting of a discussion if people weren't sniping back and forth at each other...

Back to the original topic. Legally speaking Germany does have a claim to the piece. Here is the reasoning. When the Graf Spee put in, she entered a NEUTRAL port and was given sanctuary as well as a time frame in which she was required to exit port. She was scuttled in international waters as recognized at the time (which would be considered valid today due to "grandfathering" in law), and thus was NOT part of any afterwar agreement regarding military units. Just as other european countries have claim to their ships and their cargo that sink in international waters (which drives "treasure hunters" nuts), Germany has full rights to lay claim to anything raised from the Graf Spee. Had she been sunk instead of scuttled, she would be eligible for being declared a war memorial - meaning no diving or salvage could take place. Such was not the case, so it is legal to salvage her - yet the salvagers must still show that Germany has no claim. This is where the supposed salvage rights being sold comes in. The IE was actually raised in 2006 - yet 3+ years later there is no documentation that shows Germany ever signed away her claim. Nor is there any reason Germany would have done so.

[August]

I swear that the freaking lawyers are going to be the death of our species.

[Tribesman]

She was scuttled in international waters as recognized at the time
Different countries had different claims as to what constituted territorial waters. That means there were different recognitions.
which would be considered valid today due to "grandfathering" in law
Grandfathering law would at the time give Uraguay the 6 mile limit Spain had claimed, not the 3 mile limit Germany or Britain would have recognised.
Since the wreck is 4 miles out thats territorial waters.
Germany has full rights to lay claim to anything raised from the Graf Spee.
Not if the rights were sold.
Had she been sunk instead of scuttled, she would be eligible for being declared a war memorial - meaning no diving or salvage could take place.
No, there may be restrictions on diving and salvage though.
Take the President Coolidge as an example, one of the most popular wreck dives in the world. Look at the Utah, the ships bell at the memorial is salvaged from the wreck and recently one of the survivors of the sinking was intered in the wreck itself.
The IE was actually raised in 2006 - yet 3+ years later there is no documentation that shows Germany ever signed away her claim. Nor is there any reason Germany would have done so.

To deal with reasons for selling the rights first.
Germany could not have salvaged the wreck and was in no position to do anything to prevent the allies from doing so.
Britain had already been working on the wreck and the USN also visited it.
Selling the wreck to a uraguayan interest would stop that.


Though the real issue sems to be the attempt by Uraguay to secure for itself entirely another older wreck. It is that attempt which led to the blocking of the Graf Spee operation and the German partners in that operatrion going to their own government for intervention.


I swear that the freaking lawyers are going to be the death of our species.

Its the new form of evolution, survival of the slickest.

[Jimbuna]

Unless Germany has signed over or sold the rights then surely the wreck remains the property of Germany.

I should imagine the position would have been more cut and dried if she had been classified as a war grave.

[AVGWarhawk]

Good point Jim. I know the spoils go to the victors but desecrating ships of the fallen enemy is not the way to go.

[Jimbuna]

Good point Jim. I know the spoils go to the victors but desecrating ships of the fallen enemy is not the way to go.

Sadly, it hasn't stopped some divers from taking 'trophies' from some submarines, both allied and axis :nope:

[FIREWALL]

Good point Jim. I know the spoils go to the victors but desecrating ships of the fallen enemy is not the way to go.

Sadly, it hasn't stopped some divers from taking 'trophies' from some submarines, both allied and axis :nope:

Where did you guys read into it that it was a war grave ?

Wasn't it scuttled to escape capture ?

Far stretch to being a war grave.

[Jimbuna]

Unless Germany has signed over or sold the rights then surely the wreck remains the property of Germany.

I should imagine the position would have been more cut and dried if she had been classified as a war grave.

Where did you guys read into it that it was a war grave ?

Wasn't it scuttled to escape capture ?

Far stretch to being a war grave.

I don't believe I stated she was "if she had been". :hmmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

Ah good point! She may not after all be a war grave. However, I still stand the piece goes back to Germany. But alas, it will go to the highest bidder.