Ahoy - Mac's Web Log

(See "Rescue of 300 British POW's From Altmark")

Hi there,

Interesting article! However, the prisoners aboard the Altmark were not POWs. In terms of international law and the Geneva conventions the prisoners were interned civilians.

The more disgraceful were the actions taken by the Norwegian government at the time.

Keep up the good work !

Best regards,

Glenn Murray
Oslo, Norway

Glenn,

Thank you for your comment, its an interesting point, all those aboard Altmark, were captured British Merchant Navy personnel, if they had arrived in Germany, no doubt they would have ended up in a Prisoner of War Stalag such as Milag Nord, for Merchant Navy personnel, as did many others who were captured by German Armed Merchant Raiders in WW2. Were they in your view termed Interned Civilians, because Norway was supposedly a neutral country?

But that is a moot point given the German occupation.

Regards,
Mackenzie Gregory.

My interest in the Altmark case is how the Norwegian government handled the events at the time and how lie has been piled upon lie in the years since. The three major points used by Norway to paint a picture favourable to herself are:

1. Norwegian authorities did not know that the Altmark carried prisoners. No? Admiral Carsten Tank-Nilsen knew. (Source: The book "Sleipner", published by the Navy's Historical Association.) Admiral Tank-Nilsen denied the Altmark passage through Bergen Fortress, but was overruled by CiC Admiral Henry Disen.
2. The  legal status of the prisoners. After the war it has been argued that even if Norwegian authorities had known the Altmark carried POWs the ship would still have had the right to free passage. Compare the Altmark affair with how the Norwegians handled the arrival of the "City of Flint"; This is why the question of POW vs. interned civilian is important.
3. The legal status of the Altmark. International law at the time recognised warships and civilian ships. The Germans tried to obscure this by claiming that the Altmark was a "Reichdienstschiff". To Norwegians this is the ultimate excuse for the way the affair was handled by the authorities.

Playing around with the statuses here yields a few interesting thoughts. Say; what if the Altmark was a civilian ship (or rather not a warship) as Korvettenkapitän Heinrich Dau claimed and the Norwegians accepted. Now, what is the name for prisoners being taken, kept by civilians, and brought to another country? Kidnapping. It is a criminal offence.

The International Committee of the Red Cross defines a POW as "a member of a country's armed forces captured by enemy forces". Clearly, the prisoners on the Altmark were not, and with reference to the "City of Flint" affair the handling of the Altmark incident was, in my opinion, a shame.

Surprisingly, the most accurate source I have found for the Altmark affair is a book called: "Unentdeckt über die Meere - die Fart der Altmark". Published in Berlin, 1941. The author was none less than Heinrich Dau himself. Reading this book I realised that on the first day in Norwegian waters Heinrich Dau was convinced that Norwegian authorities had struck a deal to deliver him to the British. However, later that night the Altmark was passing through Bergen Fortress under the protection of the Navy and the British were convinced the Norwegians would escort the Altmark to the gates of Nazi-Germany. Small wonder we were at war a few weeks later.

Regards,
Glenn

back to letters index