HOLLAND MOBILIZES -- AN ATTACK NEAR? The Dutch have sounded the alarm several times in the last few months about the possibility of a German attack. In the past this appeared to be unfounded. But Ben A. Thirkield writes in Wednesday’s Washington Post that there were strong indications Tuesday night “that the Netherlands will be the next neutral victim of aggression -- and that the time was almost at hand.” The Associated Press reports that two German columns are heading from Bremen and Dusseldorf toward the Dutch border. The New York Times says that all military leaves have been cancelled, with no exceptions, and that international telephone calls were suspended at 10 p.m. local time Tuesday night. N.B.C. quotes the Dutch radio as withholding a weather report Tuesday “due to conditions that are known to you.”
An update -- radio reports this morning say the Dutch press is trying to quiet reaction to these measures, saying the elaborate steps are “just a test” of the nation’s defenses. One Dutch newspaper said the international sensation over the defense measures was “not justified.”
I’ve been worried for over a month about Holland being next on Hitler’s list. My own predictions -- expect a German lightning attack against the Netherlands soon, perhaps any day. The Nazis will then build air bases in Holland and Norway for an eventual all-out bomber assault on Britain. France, Belgium, and Sweden will remain untouched, at least for now. And German propaganda about war in the Balkans and the Mediterranean is nothing more than a bluff.
BIG TENSIONS AMONG GERMANS, TOO. Sigrid Schultz of the Chicago Tribune reports from Berlin in Wednesday’s editions that there's a strong sense something’s about to happen --
“Tension in Berlin today has been even more striking than it was on the eve of the German invasion of Denmark and Norway. For some unaccountable reason, citizens told foreign correspondents and one another that ‘things are bound to happen soon.’ Officials avoided such statements but pointed to ‘the reports of increased British and French activities in the Mediterranean and in southeastern Europe.’”
Miss Schultz adds that “wherever one turned one heard of men between the ages of 30 and 50 who have been called to the colors on 24 hours’ notice....The public knows Germany has at least 5,000,000 soldiers on duty and that many of the men recently called are skilled workers needed in business and factories.”
CAN CHAMBERLAIN SURVIVE? Radio news reports this morning also make Prime Minister Chamberlain’s situation sound increasingly precarious -- and increasingly similar to what happened to former French Premier Daladier in March. As in Daladier’s case, Chamberlain has won a vote of confidence in Parliament, reportedly by a 281-200 vote. But just as happened with Daladier, the government’s victory is marred by a high number of abstentions -- 130 in today’s vote, including forty members of Chamberlain’s own party. And there are suggestions now that Chamberlain could follow Daladier’s example and resign. Opposition members of the House of Commons are said to be claiming a victory, yelling “Go! Resign” at Chamberlain as he left the House.
So far, Chamberlain has agreed to one concrete move -- making Winston Churchill a supreme coordinator, giving guidance and direction to the chiefs of staffs as the head of a “military coordination committee.” But it’s the only concession the Prime Minister has made to his critics, and almost surely there will be more changes before this blows over.
A WAR HERO LEADS THE CRITICISM. According to Edward Angly’s story in Wednesday’s New York Herald Tribune, one factor souring Chamberlain’s political fortunes was a stunning address to Parliament by a fellow Conservative and World War hero, Admiral of the Fleet Sir Roger Keyes. The Admiral scored the “shocking...ineptitude” of Britain’s Norway operations, and the failure of the British Admiralty to quickly seize Trondheim Fjord with a naval attack and to support British troops driving toward the city. He had offered to lead warships up the Fjord himself, he said, but was told the army had the situation in hand.
That speech, made by no less than a close friend of Churchill, contracted starkly with Chamberlain’s own rambling defense of the Norway campaign yesterday, which reportedly angered his adversaries and embarrassed his friends in the House of Commons. Raymond Daniell writes in Wednesday’s New York Times that the Prime Minister “appeared tired, nervous, and discouraged, and his apolgia did not go down with the members of his own or the Opposition side of the House.”
THE PRIME MINISTER’S “DEFENSE.” It’s easy to see why. Chamberlain’s penchant for understatement never served him worse than it did in his Wednesday speech. Unbelievably, he refused to admit that what happened in Norway was a defeat. He asked the Commons to avoid reaching a “hasty” judgement on the success of the campaign, since after all British troops are still fighting above the Arctic Circle. “It is quite obvious that the Germans have made certain gains,” he said weakly. “It is equally clear they have paid a heavy price for them. It is too early to say on which side the balance is finally inclined because the campaign is not yet finished.” Just incredible.
BRITISH PAPERS BLAST CHAMBERLAIN. The Prime Minister’s speech went down horribly in Britain’s press, writes Frank R. Kelly in Wednesday’s New York Herald Tribune. Mr. Kelly’s article offers some examples of editorial reaction, as does the New York Times. They aren’t pretty --
The Times -- “Assuredly we shall not win this war with less than the whole capacity of leadership possessed by all parties together.”
Daily Mail (Conservative) -- “The country will not find optimism an adequate substitute for solid results. One of Mr. Chamberlain’s weaknesses is that he tends to mistake wishes for realities....It is useless to sum up the Norwegian campaign on a profit and loss account of men in the field. Hitler’s losses have been heavy, but it was the price he was prepared to pay for Norway.”
Daily Herald (Labourite) -- “The Prime Minister has spoken, and the nation stands amazed. No syllable of apology graces his position. Not a dent appears in the bright armor of his self-conceit...His indecision imperils our cause. His complacency is a dangerous drug. He possesses the qualities which, measured against the ruthless dynamism of our opponents, might well snatch defeat even from the jaws of victory....Chamberlain’s stock – low enough when the debate began – has fallen right through the floor.”
News Chronicle (Liberal) -- “The government must go, and the sooner it goes the better for the safety of the realm. We cannot afford to keep it a day longer.”
Daily Mirror -- “How much longer will the House of Commons are able to endure such statements as that made by the Prime Minister? What is the good of closing ranks behind leaders who are always too late?”
ROOSEVELT AND THE WAR. With new war tensions engulfing Europe, the question of whether President Roosevelt is willing to risk involving America in the war becomes more relevant by the hour. A new book published in magazine form, American White Paper by Stewart Alsop and Peter Kintner, attempts to describe just what the administration’s real position is on this most sensitive of issues. Mr. Alsop and Mr. Kintner find that the President strongly supports the Allied cause, and although wishing to keep the U.S. at peace, might be willing to commit naval craft and warplanes (though not a land army) to fight for Britain and France.
A pessimistic editorial in this week’s New Republic, however, says that even though all of this might be true, it’s increasingly irrelevant to what’s actually happening --
“Large as is the influence of Mr. Roosevelt, and great as are the powers of the President, no man could precipitate this country into war if it did not want to go. The really important speculation is whether public opinion will be influenced in the same direction and to the same extent as the President. The second comment is more grim: the question is academic. The Allies are obtaining from us about all of the help they can use for the present, and in spite of it Hitler is taking every trick. Later, if the war continues, they might want American credits, American pilots and American warships (especially if Mussolini comes in) -- but the war may not continue beyond next autumn unless they make a better showing. Perhaps the real question we have to face today is what to do if Hitler wins.”
No comments:
Post a Comment