Warbird Information Exchange

Solomon Star
01/07

WARPLANE remains controversially removed from Ballalae Island then held in a Ports Authority shed in Honiara have been quietly shipped to Australia.

The four World War Two Japanese planes were removed from Ballalae in the Shortland Islands but trouble then erupted. Ninamo Otuana, who claims registered title over the island, said he was pursuing the matter in court. He said he had sought an injunction to stop the planes being shipped overseas from Honiara. Mr Otuana alleged a small group of high profile people benefited from the deal under the name of the FAMOA trust board However, a Solomon Islands Ports Authority source confirmed the warplanes were shipped to Australia last month in two containers.

Ballalae was the site of a big Japanese airbase during World War Two. Hundreds of British prisoners of war were used by the Japanese to build the Ballalae runway and then massacred there.After the war the island was said to contain one of the largest collections of Japanese World War Two planes still intact.

The latest removal stirred anger amongst people who said the continuing removal of planes from Ballalae is stealing the area’s heritage. It was also taking tourism benefits away from future generations of Solomon Islanders.The then Opposition - now the Sikua Government - also voiced concern about the deal and whether it benefited the country. However, the plane removal is believed to have had support within the Sogavare Government An Australian by the name of Craig Turner is the person reported to have been spearheading the project to get the war relics overseas.

In 2003 Mr Turner was said to have been appointed senior advisor and director of the project by the then Tourism Minister, Alex Bartlett. As part of his remuneration package, he was said to have been granted an exclusive licence to remove 11 World War Two aircraft from Ballalae.
He was said to have been required among other tasks to assist with the development of a satellite museum at Ballalae and to train Solomon Islanders in conservation techniques.

A reliable source said Mr Turner said he had been director of an aircraft salvage museum. But the source said there was no evidence that this place existed.The source said that the appropriateness of granting an exclusive license to export items of national heritage to an advisor as part of his salary should be questioned. The source said the planes and plane parts removed from Ballalae have been used in aircraft restoration overseas. This has generated millions of dollars for the overseas restorers when the planes are bought and exhibited.

Obviously a brother of Justin.
Surely the important issue here is saving these wrecks! before they disappear back into the ground?
The island of Ballalae was nick named "the island of death" by the American millitary during WWII because of the disease's, namly scrub typhus, killing off alot of the guys posted there. Is this all gone now? so tourism is flourishing? Yeh right!
I take my hat off to "Turner" for recovering these wrecks and giving them a chance at returning to there former glory! Especially from such a remote island.
Why is it relevant for "Turner" to have a"aircraft salvage museum"? Does it matter? Who makes these statements? He is recovering wrecks, I for one do not care if he is a shoe maker!!!!
I have said my bit, now lets go FLY!
Metalman....

_________________
Lets keep old metal flying

I'm sorry, but since when did aircraft built, flown, and fought by American and Japanese pilots constitute "heritage" of a South Pacific island that's been around for much longer than those aircraft? Maybe part of the history of the island is the battles fought there, but it is certainly not part of their heritage.

Having your people die because of other people fighting a war over your land strikes me as a reasonable presumption of someone's heritage. At least the Statue of Liberty was a gift, rather than abandoned junk, unwanted by the owners, until 60+ years later.

The artefacts that were abandoned there and are now of interests are the kind of scenario that a) many people here argue against vis-a-vis the USN, and b) are a very viable scenario for most legal systems to stop removal.

If you are interested in some insights from (in this case, PNG) rather than just projecting our own world view and wants overseas, see:

http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... hp?t=19468

I don't know what's 'right' here, but I am interested in finding out why people have the views they do.

Just a different point of view.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

When??,

in the 1940's when the American and Japanese pilots flew in combat above the island and these wrecks gathered their heritage value.

Their heritage "rights" are not as the owners or operators at the time, but as the nation that inherited and holds the battleground, the wrecks are part of their heritage. that doesnt negate or Japanese or US heritage links, but it should be acknowledged.

Regardless of the tourism, there is a place for appropriate preservation of some wrecks in these Pacific Islands to preserve the heritage at the actual battlegrounds where it happened.

This recovery project seems to be a very successful outcome of a local museum being set up to preserve selected wrecks, with a large number being recovered hopefully future restoration and display.

While I strongly support recovery and restoration of many of the remaining viable wrecks, I also however support selected wrecks being preserved locally in the battlegrounds- the unfortunate issue is that many wont be preserved, but instead be slowly scrapped for beer money or allowed to rot away to dust.

The Solomons' example is yet to deliver the successful outcome of a local museum, but it appears to have good intent and hopefully will be proven to be successful.

Regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

"This has generated millions of dollars for overseas restorers when the planes are bought and exhibited."

Yeah, right. What a crock. Don't know of any major restoration that's proven to be a "money maker" Not when you consider how labor intensive restoring/rebuilding/reproducing most of these things are.

Sounds like sour grapes to me...

Let'em rot, I say!

_________________
"They can teach MONKEYS to fly better than that"

http://www.heritageflight.org
http://www.bravo369.org

Very interesting stuff. I can't wait to see pictures of what was all recovered. I remember seeing the news video that showed a little bit of the airplanes, but I'd really like to see an inventory of the planes removed and maybe some pictures.

Cheers,

David

Not at all, though you must be a mate of "Turners" ?



The SWPA not being your strong point I see. I was wondering if you could enlighten us as to when the Americans were stationed there in WW2 ?

www.cofepow.org.uk/pages/asia_ballale3.htm

A Japanese interpreter HIGAKI of No. 5 Compound RABAUL gave evidence about a party of 600 British Artillerymen from Singapore who left there by ship during Oct '42 arriving RABAUL 6 Nov '42. One man died on the voyage. The party staged at KOKOPO (RABAUL) for about one week. 82 men were left here as too weak to continue their journey. This party was later put under the care of HIGAKI as he could speak English. These men, apart from 3 reasonably fit men left as cook and medical orderlies, were suffering from beriberi, malaria and other sicknesses. On 18 March '43 the numbers were down to 48 - HIGAKI took over at this stage. On Japanese surrender 18 men survived. HIGAKI states that the men told him that after a stay of one week at KOKOPO the 517 fit men were put on a ship and departed for an unknown destination. He was unable, despite repeated inquiries, to find out anything about their fate.

www.cofepow.org.uk/pages/stories_rewarding_research.htm

The 517 were taken by another hell ship on the two day journey to the small island of Ballale which is approximately 4 miles in diameter to build an air strip. In time, probably on completion of the air strip and the news being received by the Japanese that the Allies were closing in, orders were given that "PRISONERS OF WAR WERE TO BE DISPOSED OF BY WHATEVER MEANS WAS AVAILABLE".

Accordingly, on 5 March 1943, those who were still alive (some having died of illness and others as a result of Allied bombing as the Japanese had not allowed the prisoners to dig trenches to take cover) were massacred in cold blood and not one of those taken to Ballale survived.

In 1946 the remains of 438 of these British servicemen were recovered on Ballale and were finally interred in graves in the Bomana Commonwealth War Cemetery at Port Moresby where they are tended by the Australian War Graves Commission.




Better still, lets reflect on the context of why the airfield is there....

http://www.cofepow.org.uk/pages/asia_ba ... rs_600.htm

Mark, I consider this to be history of the island, not heritage.

The definition of heritage -



These wrecks arrived on the island not because of who was there, but because what was going on nor did any of the inhabitants participate directly in the fighting with those aircraft. These wrecks also are not the basis of their society or were a source of pride for them. In fact, it would be very hard to prove that these people really did care about the wrecks until someone came around to remove them. In fact, how many of these wrecks were completely unkown until a foreigner came to locate them. If it was part of their heritage, there would be more evidence of attempts to preserve it, not just let it continue rotting.

There is a line that has to be drawn between what is heritage and what is history. WWII on Ballale is part of these people's history and it is correct to have that history preserved. As the article states, the person recovering the aircraft is supposed to setup a museum on the island for the purpose of helping them preserve that history. But to call the wrecks part of their heritage is a bit specious.

cap,

I wont argue with you on that interpretation of heritage, and agree it is their history then, it doesnt then change my views on appropriate local preservation occuring.

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

And I agree with you that some local preservation should occur. I just don't agree with the people quoted in the article who claim that the removal of the wrecks for preservation and the order by FMOA and the government that there must be a local museum established and some of the wrecks is somehow "stealing the heritage" of the islanders when in fact it's an attempt to keep the history around to tell the story to future generations.

Cap,

I previously decided not to argue the difference between history and heritage as it doesnt affect the Solomon's recoveries legally in any way, however history and heritage are directly linked.

Unfortunately my decision not to debate the issue has been referred to elsewhere as evidence that I consider these objects "not" to be heritage of the islands, which is not my position so I know feel obliged to set the record straight.

One can define heritage in a narrow way in regard to one's own ancestry, and therefore only claim heritage, traditions etc from your own bloodline and its own experiences, ie back through local generations and immigration from overseas, and in that case it might be argued that WW2 and these aircraft are not someones heritage unless they themselves, or their ancestors were directly involved, ie the cultural "inheritance", that is the basis of heritage - born from the history of those ancestors.

However societies extend a shared heritage to all citizens, regardless of individual linkages, however ethnic or racial "heritage" may not be uniformly shared, and instead owned primarily through the ancestral inheritance.

While individuals, or even a whole society may not claim "ancestral" involvement to an historical object, Nations "inherit" the heritage of objects or places within their borders.

Does the history and artifact objects of the native American Indian form part of the Heritage of your Nation and the American people, regardless of the fact most of your population is not decended from those tribes, or in any way related to those who fought in the indian wars?

Do the abandoned relics of lost cultures in Asia, Africa, Europe or South America not form the heritage of the nations they sit in and are inherited by?

WW2 was a major point in these islands history, regardless of the level of the populations involvement at the time, that history is now part of the island's history and the history of its people, and their nation.

The wrecks are historical objects relating to that history, and are part of the heritage of the battlegrounds, and are therefore "inherited" by the local people and the Nation they live in.

It is fairly simple, History creates historical objects, and links those objects unarguably to the heritage of a place or location.

The people associated with that location are connected to the object and its history either through direct involvement or inheritance, either creates Heritage.


http://books.google.com/books?id=f0UFikLzOJ0C&pg=PT144&lpg=PT144&dq=history+heritage+definition+mcmanamon&source=web&ots=zVnrV3rC7a&sig=kVY31oGQnSc-Do2qg5AF0uZ4Op0#PPT144,M1

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

The PNG governments view:

It is an historical artifact that reminds us of our people and those from foreign lands struggled, suffered and died here.

The PNG governments view:

It is an historical artifact that reminds us of our people and those from foreign lands struggled, suffered and died here.

The PNG governments view:

It is an historical artifact that reminds us of our people and those from foreign lands struggled, suffered and died here.