- Join the France 24 community here
- Log in
Latest update: 10/05/2011
- France - immigration - Libya - NATO - refugees
Navy denies French warship left African migrants to die
The French navy and NATO have denied allegations in the UK’s Guardian newspaper that the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier (pictured) fatally ignored distress calls from a migrant boat in the Mediterranean.
By FRANCE 24 (text)
The French Navy rebuffed Monday a report in the UK’s Guardian newspaper that the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle let 72 migrants starve in the Mediterranean.
"If the sailors had seen a boat in distress, they would have obviously helped it," French navy spokesman Thierry Burkhard said Monday.
According to the article published on Sunday, the aircraft carrier ignored the African migrants' calls for help, causing the deaths of 61 aboard the tragedy-struck ship.
One survivor, Abu Kurke, interviewed by the British daily declared that around March 29 or 30, the migrants’ boat floated near an aircraft carrier that could not have missed their presence.
“Extensive inquiries” identified that the carrier was “likely to have been the French ship Charles de Gaulle,” the Guardian wrote, without offering further details .
However, France's Burkhard stated, “The Charles de Gaulle was never in contact with the boat, because it was never located in that area."
A NATO spokeswoman, Carmen Romero, also dismissed allegations that a NATO military ship had been in contact with the refugees. “A single aircraft carrier was under NATO command at that time, the Italian ship Garibaldi, and it was more than 100 nautical miles away,” she said. “Therefore, any statement that a NATO aircraft carrier spotted then ignored the distressed vessel is false.”
The Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier operates under the command of the French navy. Only its jets, once called into mission, come under the command of NATO.
Drifting for 16 days
"We'd finished the oil, we'd finished the food and water, we'd finished everything," said Abu Kurke, the 24-year-old Eritrean who survived the ordeal. The man described a nightmarish voyage on a ship that was allowed to drift at sea for 16 days.
According to the Guardian’s account, the ship sailed off from Tripoli on March 25 with 72 passengers, including women and children, aboard. The boat was to transport the African migrants to the Italian island of Lampedusa.
Shortly after setting sail the captain realised the ship was leaking fuel. The crew used a satellite phone to call a catholic priest in Rome before the batteries ran out. The priest alerted Italian authorities of the ship’s problem.
Then came the alleged encounter with the NATO aircraft carrier that filled the distressed passengers with hope, then horror. Abu Kurke said the ship drifted for ten days, the refugees succumbing to thirst and hunger one by one.
"We saved one bottle of water for the two babies, and kept feeding them even after their parents had passed," Kurke told the Guardian, "but after two days, the babies died too, because they were so small."
On April 10, the vessel finally landed on a beach in eastern Libya, near the city of Misrata. Security forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi detained the survivors and held them captive for four days before releasing them, according to the Guardian. Only nine of them survived the detention.





























Comments (6)
If such an incident occurred
If such an incident occurred it was severe dereliction of duty by the naval commander. Play on words by the French Navy and NATO ("the CDG is not a NATO carrier", "the only NATO carrier in the area is the Itn. Garibaldi") leads nowhere: you cannot expect a migrant to know the difference between a NATO vessel and a vessel operating with NATO, or between a carrier and a "porte-engins" of which there are a number in the area.
Only a thorough inquest in the logs of all naval vessels in the area and a technical debriefing of the survivors would bring more light. Ignoring this very serious allegation would be counter-productive for all involved.
Protecting civilians means
Protecting civilians means that they keep them from getting shot by Gaddafi's troops, it does NOT mean that they have to take these people to Europe and fee them and housing them for the rest of their lives. What happened was a tragic for sure, but if you people want to blame somebody then blame your rotten governments in your own countries, don't blame the Europeans for your own mess. Furthermore, it was the libyans that begging for the Europeans to help and they still begging for more help now, so don't forget that!!! Enough is enough, Europe can not be the caretaker for you people no more; it's time you have to take care of yourself.
abandoned refugees
"French Navy confirms ignoring refugee ship!" Now that story would be some real information & news.
"It is getting clearer that
"It is getting clearer that France, the U.S and NATO are not in Libya to protect civilian, but for gradual annexation of the territory and the Oil resources."
Huh? The US was extremely reluctant to even get involved in this affair, an affair that was spearheaded by the French and the British! The moment that Libya's major air defense system had been destroyed, the US relinquished control of the campaign to the Europeans.
impossible choice
this story is quite horrible, i've got the feeling and i hope that french authorities would'nt have let such kind of tragedy happened knowing the details of their situation,nevertheless it should be uneasy to both lead bombing campaign and rescued people from this NATO aircraft carrier...
Where is the U.N Mandate to protect Civilians
Where is the U.N mandate to protect civilians in Libya? This is the first real test of sincerity of purpose for the West and their operations in Libya. It is a woeful performance. It is getting clearer that France, the U.S and NATO are not in Libya to protect civilian, but for gradual annexation of the territory and the Oil resources.
Post new comment