Rattanakosin Public Broadcasting Service: Joinville Incident

[Alex]

The Joinville Island Incident - Documentary

Madder Cliffs of Joinville Island​

Disclaimer: The following documentary was used with the original documentation, logs and recordings from the incident. The RPBS received this through anonymous sources.

Introduction:

"Last year, in December of 1996, the dispute over the White Continent heated up following disagreements that arose regarding its ownership. The Republic of Argentina dispatched one of their unarmed icebreakers in an attempt to build a scientific station, however that scientific mission was intercepted by a group of warships belonging to the Swedish Royal Navy. Much has been talked about regarding the incident. Leaving aside the political background and the discussions that occurred within the Global Assembly, we present you here the facts that happened on that sad day in the first half of that December."

An Arktika-class Nuclear Icebreaker, the Same Class of Ships as the ARA Almirante Storni​

"In December 1996, the unarmed icebreaker ARA Almirante Storni departed from the port of Ushuaia and headed for Joinville Island in the Antarctic with logistical and scientific personnel on board and with the objective of establishing a science station in Antarctica. It took the ships and their crews roughly ten hours to reach Antarctic waters. Their journey within Antarctic waters was estimated to last for many days. The crew of the icebreaker, approaching the waters near the island, requested for a maritime patrol aircraft to provide them with additional coverage to aid with their navigation through the waters filled with icebergs.

The maritime patrol aircraft was unarmed when it would detect a septet of Swedish ships. It would establish contact with the closest of the ships to the ARA Almirante Storni. The following is what was exchanged between the aircraft and the ship."

An Orion P-3B, Similar to the One Operated by the Argentine in the Incident​

Argentine Maritime Patrol Aircraft: "Unidentified vessels, you are operating unauthorized on Argentine antarctic waters, please identify and state your business."

Swedish Frigate: "Unidentified vessel, unidentified vessel, this is warship Snö of the Swedish Royal Navy. You are entering Swedish territorial waters, please divert your course immediately and state your intentions.”

Silence.

Swedish Frigate: “Unidentified aircraft, unidentified aircraft, this is warship Snö of the Swedish Royal Navy. You are operating in close proximity to Swedish airspace and you must divert your course now. Our vessel is operating a high powered radar system which may unintentionally and adversely effect your on-board systems. Please identify.”

Argentine Maritime Patrol Aircraft: "HSwMS Snô, you are violating Argentine territorial waters. You are ordered to change course and leave the area immediately. I repeat, you are ordered to change course and leave the area immediately."

No response.

Argentine Maritime Patrol Aircraft: “HSwMS Snö, HSwMS Snö, this is an Argentine naval patrol aircraft operating on Argentine airspace, you are trespassing in Argentine waters. The Kingdom of Sweden has no authority here. The Republic of Argentina does not recognize the illegit and unfounded claim over Antarctic territory and immediately orders you to leave the area. I repeat, you are not authorized to operate on Argentine Antarctic waters. Any threat or endangering of the unarmed Argentine vessels operating in the area will be seen as an act of war. Change your courses to avoid unnecessary conflict and leave the area."

An Oslo-class Frigate, the Same Class of Ships as the HSwMS Snö​

"As this exchange occurred, the Argentine icebreaker maintained a steady, clear course, which was easy to predict to any military-trained sailors and posed no danger to regular traffic in the area. ARA Almirante Storni, informed of the movements of the Swedish frigates and its messages, would have been ordered to continue its planned route as it was now well inside what was considered the coastal waters of the Argentine Antarctic territory. All personnel on board would be ordered to have their swim vests and protective gear ready, while escape routes and lifeboats were reviewed in the case the Swedish attempted to attack the unarmed ship. The crew on the bridge would have recorded all radio communications and navigational information and their cameras would have been recording and live streaming all of its filming to the naval base in Ushuaia, where the situation was being monitored.

Hoping that the Swedish would have returned from whence they came, the icebreaker would have reached its designated position and it would begin preparations for the unloading of its equipment and crews on the southern island of the Joinville group to begin logistical and research work. But the Swedish did not return from whence they came, instead the Swedish frigate HSwMS Snö was directly moving in and coming to a halt in front of the Argentine ship. Once noticing this, the icebreaker would directly contact the Swedish ship:

Argentine Icebreaker: “Swedish vessel, Swedish vessel. Unarmed icebreaker ARA Almirante Storni of the Argentine Navy. You are endangering safe navigation standards by positioning aggressively into our course. We will not alter any direction and order you to immediately get out of our trajectory and leave Argentine Antarctic waters. You are trespassing on Argentine waters. The Republic of Argentina does not recognize any Swedish claim in the area, whatsoever. Obstructing and endangering an Argentine vessel on Argentine waters will be considered an act of war against the Republic of Argentina and Sweden will be made accountable for it. Over."

"At this moment, the icebreaker would slow its pace, but maintained its course unchanged. Personnel on board would have begun to take precautions anticipating a possible collision considering Sweden's aggressive maneuvering. At this point, everything was being recorded and relayed to the Argentine Orion patrol aircraft in the sky and the icebreaker's HQ base. Without much more room for alternatives, if the Swedish ship did not move, the Argentine icebreaker would be cut off by it and a collision would ensue. Once again the Argentine ship called for the Swedish to move away from the blocking course to avoid a collision, yet, the Swedish warship did not budge. The Argentine ship slowed down to try and gain time for the Swedish to see the dangerous position they were putting themselves in but with the ultimate refusal of the Swedish frigate to move from the icebreaker's course and as we would know it, the collision was inevitable."

HSwMS Snö​

“The Argentine icebreaker, which did not alter its course at any moment and which followed a predictable linear path, would have now had no more time to evade the Swedish frigate which had intentionally crossed its line of navigation in utter disregard of all nautical and navigational procedures. The collision resulted in the immediate sinking of the Swedish Oslo-class frigate. But despite the ARA Almirante Storni being heavily damaged from the collision, the crew decided to release lifeboats to assist stranded military sailors and coordinates were relayed to Buenos Aies which in turn facilitated all data to the British who were mounting a rescue mission.

The ARA Almirante Storni would be on half, with every man in their survival suits and swim vests and the repair crew of the ship attempted to get a close look at the damages the icebreaker suffered on its bow. It was unsafe to navigate such treacherous waters without first assuring that the damages suffered from the collision were not fatal to the vessel. Nevertheless, the captain would have ordered to release the lifeboat capsules and hope for the current to move them towards the place where Swedish sailors were still to be seen, between the patches of oil and debris. More than that, he could not do.

Much has been speculated about the Joinville Incident but one fact was known: the Swedish warship attempted to block the advance of an icebreaker and refused to change its course and for that, it paid the ultimate price. Despite the talks within the Global Assembly and a new resolution having been past, many would say that this story is far from over and may have simply been the beginning."

 

[Jamie]

Since seeing the documentary, a spokesperson for the Royal Yachting Association in the United Kingdom has responded publicly that based on the documentary itself, the Argentine Icebreaker was actually in the wrong in relation to nautical and navigation procedures and that they should have moved Starboard side to avoid contact under the Rules of the Road at Sea. It was also noted that after questioning the British Government, they had confirmed they have not been contacted to give their account of the Search and Rescue Operation which retain recordings to show the direction in that HSwMS Sno was hit which would identify that Argentina had not followed navigational procedure. The RYA would publicly release an image used to describe how navigational procedure works to those ages 12+

 

[Naio90]

The argentine Recreational Nautical Association would briefly comment on the statements of the british RYA spokesmen on its portal, that following "rules of the road", the argentine give-way vessel signaled its intention and mantained a predictable course, noting that it also reduced its speed in an attemp to maneuver to reduce the risk of collision, which would not have ensued if the swedish frigate would not have broken the "rules of the road" (should not have stopped). It would specially noted that the 24,000 GT heavy icebreaker was difficult to maneuver in antarctic waters filled of icebergs and hazards, in opposition to the agile small swedish frigate.

On the other hand, the swedish frigate, the "stand-on" vessel, had the responsibility to acknowledge the intentioned actions of the give-way vessel, which it did not. It also failed to mantain its current course and speed, as it completely halted on the heading-course of the icebreaker, putting itself in a hazardous position.


The source would also be copied:

"Under the Rules, there is no "right-of-way" like there is on a street. For most situations, Boats are called one of the following.

• Give-Way Vessel - If you are the Give-Way vessel, you must act as if the "stand-on" vessel has the right to keep going the way it is going. It is your responsibility to signal your intentions to the stand-on vessel, and it is your responsibility to maneuver your boat around the other in a safe manner. Also known as a "Burdened" vessel, as it has the burden of.

• Stand-On Vessel - If you are the Stand-On vessel, it is your responsibility to acknowledge the intended actions of the give-way vessel. You must also maintain your current course and speed until the give-way vessel passes, or you enter a dangerous situation."

 

[Jamie]

The Spokesperson responded directly to the Argentine Association: "I would like to directly address the response from the Argentina Nautical Association and under the Rules of the Road based on the findings we have seen by the British Government after their consultation with us and other agencies. During these recordings which saw brave divers from the Royal Navy embark on the vessel, it was highlighted during the investigation in the way that the cockpit was activated that the port and starboard lights were both turned on along with the Masthead Lights and the cone was up. All of this indicated that the vessel was underway. The direction in which it was hit is from its port side. If this is not intention enough, then I'm curious to what else would be.

A boat coming from your starboard (right) is the “Stand On” vessel and you should make a clear move to starboard and pass behind the other boat. Where a vessel is coming from your port (left) side then it is the “Give Way” vessel and should make the appropriate move. Providing the Argentine Navy teaches such, then the crew should have been maintaining a look out through all means and turned to the Starboard side as the Argentine Vessel was the Give-Way Vessel.. unless intentionally avoiding doing so. However, we do appreciate that you will retain an unintentional bias due to your countries involvement in the matter which is why I won't be commenting on the matter as there are plenty of other organisations that will be able to make that judgement for themselves but we are more than happy to share our findings with another neutral party. It was our morale obligation to respond to a documentary which is very one sided, but we will leave it there for the public to make their decision."

Naio90

 

[Naio90]

The Association would reply indicating that the AIS and visual recordings clearly show that the swedish warship was stationary at the moment of impact, and not underway as they claim. If the claims from the british spokesmen are true, then this would put the british position in clear doubt regarding the legitimacy of their information, or the tampering of the evidence.

These recordings and witnesses confirm that:

"As previously stated the Swedish frigates would have positioned themselves directly in the direction of travel of the ARA Almirante Storn..."