BRITAIN’S RAID ON THE ALTMARK. The story’s all over the Sunday papers about the British Navy’s dramatic rescue of 326 prisoners from the German prison ship Altmark. It’s a wildly popular act in Britain, causing much public jubilation. But it’s controversial elsewhere in Europe, because the British had to invade Norwegian territorial waters to do it. The Altmark, described uncharitably by Raymond Daniell in Sunday’s New York Times as “a floating Nazi concentration camp,” was anchored just off Norway's Josing Fjord after being inspected by Norwegian officials at Bergen. She was boarded on Friday night by sailors from the British destroyer Cossack who “flung grappling irons aboard the German vessel in the darkness...and swarmed over the side of the ship with pistols and rifles blazing,” according to the Associated Press.
Most outraged of all, of course, are the Germans, who are yelling warnings of “immeasurable consequences” directed at Britain and the neutrals as well. Feeling the heat from Berlin, Norway has filed an official protest against the British incursion as a “gross violation” of Norwegian sovereign rights. Incredibly, according to Andreas Backer in the Chicago Tribune, the Norwegians also demand that Britain give the rescued prisoners back. But an article in Monday’s New York Herald Tribune says the British aren’t much concerned. The Chamberlain government believes, in the words of Lord Halifax, that Norway “failed in their duty as a neutral” by (1) not discovering the British prisoners when the ship was inspected, and (2) pretending that the Altmark was a German merchantman instead of interning her as a prison ship. Britain is demanding, and justifiably so, that Norway intern the Altmark now.
Some scholars might consider the Altmark affair an occasion for debating the finer points of international law, and would be prone to find a British violation. But how can Chamberlain and Co. stand by idly while the neutrals kowtow to Hitler’s withering disregard of that same international law? Does anyone really think the Norwegians honestly weren’t aware the Altmark carried hundreds of prisoners? If the Allies are forbidden from taking actions like this in response to the flagrant Nazi disregard for the rights of neutrals, then just what else are they to do? File a lawsuit against Hitler in a maritime court?
MORE BAD NEWS FROM FINLAND. The Russian offensive on the Karelian Isthmus is close to three weeks old, and every day now seems to bring more news of Soviet advances. The Associated Press reports Monday on Red Army claims to have cut off the Finnish fort of Koivisto, the western anchor of the Mannerheim Line. Apparently Stalin’s troops have taken the towns of Maksalahti and Johannes on the Maritime Railway, which puts them on the western coast of the Gulf of Finland -- a Russian goal throughout the offensive. The Soviets have also reached the railway station at Somme, about six miles south of Finland’s second largest city, Viipuri (Viborg).
And no response from the U.S. government -- not since the Senate’s vote last week to extend a $30 million loan to the Finns for purchase of non-military aid. Sunday’s Washington Post reprinted an editorial cartoon from the Richmond Times-Dispatch which sums up Congress’s response nicely. In it, a Finnish man hangs for dear life from the limb of a tree as a Russian bear is about to devour him. The man yells out, “Help! Somebody loan me a gun! Quick!” And, standing in the foreground, a congressman extends a helping hand and says...”Have a sandwich!”
THE BRITISH AND GERMAN VISIONS OF PEACE. Anybody who entertains the idea that Secretary Welles’ mission to Europe has a chance of restoring peace between the Allies and Germany should read a pair of side-by-side articles in the news analysis section of Sunday’s New York Times. The first one, by London correspondent Raymond Daniell, summarizes the British view of what an acceptable peace in Europe would be. The second, by Berlin correspondent Otto D. Tolischus, lists the German conditions for restoration of peace. Here are those two (slightly differing) views --
The Allies. “There are two basic demands on which the British and French are agreed as prerequisites for peace. The first is that the Germans themselves, either with or without outside help, must establish a government whose word the Allies will be able to trust. That means the end of the present Nazi regime. The second is that the Germans must demonstrate that they have learned aggression does not pay, by withdrawing their troops from Poland and Czecho-Slovakia and making restitution to those victims of their aggression.”
Germany. “(1) Complete elimination of British influence from the European continent by the destruction of British military and naval power...(2) Organization of a ‘New Europe’ under the decisive influence of Germans as the greatest people on the continent...(3) World-wide extension of this system until there shall be destruction of the ‘plutocracies’ and ‘international Jewish capitalism’...(4) Extension of the ‘Lebensraum’ [living room] of the German ‘master race’ in proportion to that now possessed by other conquering ‘races,’ such as the British, the French, the Americans and the Japanese.”
Will someone kindly explain just how these two positions are to be reconciled?
Saturday, February 20, 2016
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Sunday, February 18, 1940
RUSSIANS ON THE MOVE IN FINLAND. Reports from Finland vary in detail this week-end, but everybody seems to agree that the Red Army’s blistering attacks on Finland’s Mannerheim Line are bearing fruit. One Associated Press dispatch says the Soviets claim to have taken two Finnish railroad towns, Leipaesuo and Kaemaerae, located north and northeast of Summa. Red troops are said to have captured twenty-two more “defensive fortifications” over the last two days, bringing the total to 175 of such positions occupied since the Russian offensive began seventeen days ago. A.P. writer Thomas F. Hawkins, in a separate dispatch, says the offensive includes 500 Soviet planes in support of the land attack, and that the Finns acknowledge the drive has “made a dent in the main Finnish fortifications.” The fighting continues about twenty miles southeast of Viipuri (Viborg), the Finns’ second largest city and the apparent goal of the Russian attack.
Harold Denny reports from Helsinki in Saturday’s New York Times that Summa itself appears to have fallen in the “desperate and costly fighting,” but calls it “an unimportant little hamlet on tbe Viborg-Leningrad highway” and of little military importance. More serious, he says, is the Russian penetration east of Summa. Also, Red forces are trying to silence the Finnish shore batteries at Koivisto which have up until now effectively cut down Russian troops trying to advance over the open ice of the Gulf of Finland. While the Soviets have not yet got into the structure of the Mannerheim Line itself, they’re keeping up the offensive with an incredible disregard for their losses – “The Russian dead are heaped four feet high in front of their positions,” the Times says.
Two days earlier, Mr. Denny recorded an oral communique delivered by a spokesman of the Finnish General Staff -- “In spite of the fact that the Russians are falling tens of thousands, they always have more men to put in. That is why we need help. We need more men, more guns, more airplanes. Thus far Finland has been able to hold on, but we rely on other civilized nations to do their utmost to relieve us in this situation.”
THANKS A LOT, SWEDEN. The answer from the brave Swedish government seems to be -- “Who, us?” According to Ralph W. Barnes’ account in Saturday’s New York Herald Tribune, Sweden has flatly rejected Finland’s urgent requests for military aid, and to allow the Allies to send troops and war supplies to the Finns over Swedish territory. The announcements from Stockholm have “caused astonishment and some dismay in London, where it is now the prevailing view that foreign assistance for the Finns in the form of men and war materials must be expanded greatly and speedily if they are not to be overcome by the inexhaustible Soviet hordes.” On the other hand, the Swedes have agreed to allow volunteer fighters from Allied countries to travel across their country en route to the Finnish front.
That’s better than Norway, which according to a Saturday New York Times dispatch “is showing signs of timidity, even about allowing unarmed, ununiformed, unenlisted recruits to pass through its northern port of Narvik.” The Times cable notes the Finns have not made any specific appeal to the Allies for aid, and offers a sour-grapes argument that such an appeal “would probably invite attack from Germany as well as Russia before any such appeal could bear fruit.” On the other hand, one presumes that the Allies fit in the category of “civilized nations” to which the Finnish government has appealed for help of all kinds.
AN ARMISTICE -- VICTORY FOR GERMANY? Secretary Welles’ mission to Europe has raised hopes among neutrals that the U.S. might broker an “early armistice” between Germany and the Allies, followed by lengthy peace negotiations. But Livingston Hartley asserts in a Washington Post column Saturday that an armistice in the current circumstances would be a terrible idea --
“If an armistice were declared now, the German government could claim to have won the war. Surface factors, such as the possession of most of Poland and the maintenance of the frontier in the west, would support this claim....An early armistice might hence have a very damaging effect upon Allied morale. After years of retreat before the Nazi menace in an effort to preserve peace, the British and the French people are now keyed up to the task of terminating this menace by war. In these circumstances, a halt in the fighting, followed by lengthy negotiations, might cause such a deterioration in their fighting spirit that they could not resume the struggle if Germany refused an equitable settlement....The Allies have other compelling reasons to refuse an armistice at this time. To relinquish the blockade even temporarily would allow Germany to enhance her capacity to continue the war. A breathing space would permit her to improve the organization of war material supplies from Russia and the Balkans.”
This is not to say that Mr. Hartley thinks the Welles mission is a dangerous idea. He believes it might postpone an outbreak of total war this spring and spare neutral countries which would be endangered in that event – “The Allies are unlikely to initiate such a war in the west because they believe that time is on their side. And the German government might find difficulty in justifying a dangerous and costly offensive to its own people while even the slightest prospect of peace by negotiation were in view.” The Roosevelt administration’s current strategy is thus useful not for a quick peace, but for postponement.
NO SIGN OF NAZI INVASION IN BELGIUM. An article in Friday’s Chicago Tribune by Larry Rue says things are pretty quiet on the Belgian and Dutch border with Germany. The correspondent took a motor tour “to see if there were any indications along the route that Germany was concentrating troops or otherwise preparing an offensive against the Netherlands or Belgium. The answer is no.” Mr. Rue does admit, however, that he didn’t see it all – “The trip required five days, twice the amount of time expected, [in part] because of...detours that had to be made over secondary roads, because many main highways had been secretly closed.”
Still, he asserts, “the frontier villagers in touch with Germans are less frightened than the people in the interior.” He found this true in Belgium, Holland, and Luxemburg alike. Near the Belgian border at Aachen, Germany, “I observed normal civilian activity. This is presumed to indicate the Germans contemplate no attack. Along the frontier at Luxemburg German fortifications appeared to be for defensive purposes.”
Good news for the Low Countries -- if it’s true.
Harold Denny reports from Helsinki in Saturday’s New York Times that Summa itself appears to have fallen in the “desperate and costly fighting,” but calls it “an unimportant little hamlet on tbe Viborg-Leningrad highway” and of little military importance. More serious, he says, is the Russian penetration east of Summa. Also, Red forces are trying to silence the Finnish shore batteries at Koivisto which have up until now effectively cut down Russian troops trying to advance over the open ice of the Gulf of Finland. While the Soviets have not yet got into the structure of the Mannerheim Line itself, they’re keeping up the offensive with an incredible disregard for their losses – “The Russian dead are heaped four feet high in front of their positions,” the Times says.
Two days earlier, Mr. Denny recorded an oral communique delivered by a spokesman of the Finnish General Staff -- “In spite of the fact that the Russians are falling tens of thousands, they always have more men to put in. That is why we need help. We need more men, more guns, more airplanes. Thus far Finland has been able to hold on, but we rely on other civilized nations to do their utmost to relieve us in this situation.”
THANKS A LOT, SWEDEN. The answer from the brave Swedish government seems to be -- “Who, us?” According to Ralph W. Barnes’ account in Saturday’s New York Herald Tribune, Sweden has flatly rejected Finland’s urgent requests for military aid, and to allow the Allies to send troops and war supplies to the Finns over Swedish territory. The announcements from Stockholm have “caused astonishment and some dismay in London, where it is now the prevailing view that foreign assistance for the Finns in the form of men and war materials must be expanded greatly and speedily if they are not to be overcome by the inexhaustible Soviet hordes.” On the other hand, the Swedes have agreed to allow volunteer fighters from Allied countries to travel across their country en route to the Finnish front.
That’s better than Norway, which according to a Saturday New York Times dispatch “is showing signs of timidity, even about allowing unarmed, ununiformed, unenlisted recruits to pass through its northern port of Narvik.” The Times cable notes the Finns have not made any specific appeal to the Allies for aid, and offers a sour-grapes argument that such an appeal “would probably invite attack from Germany as well as Russia before any such appeal could bear fruit.” On the other hand, one presumes that the Allies fit in the category of “civilized nations” to which the Finnish government has appealed for help of all kinds.
AN ARMISTICE -- VICTORY FOR GERMANY? Secretary Welles’ mission to Europe has raised hopes among neutrals that the U.S. might broker an “early armistice” between Germany and the Allies, followed by lengthy peace negotiations. But Livingston Hartley asserts in a Washington Post column Saturday that an armistice in the current circumstances would be a terrible idea --
“If an armistice were declared now, the German government could claim to have won the war. Surface factors, such as the possession of most of Poland and the maintenance of the frontier in the west, would support this claim....An early armistice might hence have a very damaging effect upon Allied morale. After years of retreat before the Nazi menace in an effort to preserve peace, the British and the French people are now keyed up to the task of terminating this menace by war. In these circumstances, a halt in the fighting, followed by lengthy negotiations, might cause such a deterioration in their fighting spirit that they could not resume the struggle if Germany refused an equitable settlement....The Allies have other compelling reasons to refuse an armistice at this time. To relinquish the blockade even temporarily would allow Germany to enhance her capacity to continue the war. A breathing space would permit her to improve the organization of war material supplies from Russia and the Balkans.”
This is not to say that Mr. Hartley thinks the Welles mission is a dangerous idea. He believes it might postpone an outbreak of total war this spring and spare neutral countries which would be endangered in that event – “The Allies are unlikely to initiate such a war in the west because they believe that time is on their side. And the German government might find difficulty in justifying a dangerous and costly offensive to its own people while even the slightest prospect of peace by negotiation were in view.” The Roosevelt administration’s current strategy is thus useful not for a quick peace, but for postponement.
NO SIGN OF NAZI INVASION IN BELGIUM. An article in Friday’s Chicago Tribune by Larry Rue says things are pretty quiet on the Belgian and Dutch border with Germany. The correspondent took a motor tour “to see if there were any indications along the route that Germany was concentrating troops or otherwise preparing an offensive against the Netherlands or Belgium. The answer is no.” Mr. Rue does admit, however, that he didn’t see it all – “The trip required five days, twice the amount of time expected, [in part] because of...detours that had to be made over secondary roads, because many main highways had been secretly closed.”
Still, he asserts, “the frontier villagers in touch with Germans are less frightened than the people in the interior.” He found this true in Belgium, Holland, and Luxemburg alike. Near the Belgian border at Aachen, Germany, “I observed normal civilian activity. This is presumed to indicate the Germans contemplate no attack. Along the frontier at Luxemburg German fortifications appeared to be for defensive purposes.”
Good news for the Low Countries -- if it’s true.
Monday, February 15, 2016
Thursday, February 15, 1940
RUSSIAN BREAKTHROUGH NEAR IN FINLAND? The New York Times seems on the verge of panicking over the Finnish war. Wednesday’s banner headline says the Finns have been “pressed back” along the Mannerheim Line. And Harold Denny’s story describes the Finnish Army along the Line as “fighting with its back to the wall to prevent a break-through that would lay the heart of the country open to the Russians.” He writes that Finnish sources now fear that despite their earlier victories, all might be lost soon due to a terrible thirteen-day pounding from the Red Army. The Soviets flung 300,000 shells at the Finns in one twenty-four-hour period, eclipsing even numbers from the Battles of Verdun and the Somme in the World War.
But the Chicago Tribune and New York Herald Tribune sound more optimistic in Wednesday’s front-page reports. Donald Day claims in the Tribune that the Finns have recaptured most of the “strategic forts” along the Line that the Russians claimed to have taken earlier this week. Mr. Day quotes the official Finnish communique -- “The Mannerheim Line still holds.” The Herald Tribune says the same thing, and makes the hair-raising claim as well that Stalin has lost between 30,000 and 50,000 men in four days of fighting.
But the Finns have made another plea for international help, more urgent than ever. By coincidence, the U.S. Senate approved Tuesday by a vote of 49-27 a bill to extend the Finns $20,000,000 in new export credits -- as long as they don’t use those credits to buy weapons of war. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this. One supposes that if the Russians do smash the Mannerheim Line, the outgunned Finnish defenders will at least be able to swat at the Reds with loaves of bread, purchased through the generosity of Congress.
But the Chicago Tribune and New York Herald Tribune sound more optimistic in Wednesday’s front-page reports. Donald Day claims in the Tribune that the Finns have recaptured most of the “strategic forts” along the Line that the Russians claimed to have taken earlier this week. Mr. Day quotes the official Finnish communique -- “The Mannerheim Line still holds.” The Herald Tribune says the same thing, and makes the hair-raising claim as well that Stalin has lost between 30,000 and 50,000 men in four days of fighting.
But the Finns have made another plea for international help, more urgent than ever. By coincidence, the U.S. Senate approved Tuesday by a vote of 49-27 a bill to extend the Finns $20,000,000 in new export credits -- as long as they don’t use those credits to buy weapons of war. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this. One supposes that if the Russians do smash the Mannerheim Line, the outgunned Finnish defenders will at least be able to swat at the Reds with loaves of bread, purchased through the generosity of Congress.
ANOTHER PREDICTION -- “WHAT THE GERMANS WILL DO.” The editors of the New Republic look into their crystal ball this week, and forecast what will happen on the Western Front this spring --
“[W]e prophesy that the Germans will neither attack the Maginot Line this spring nor risk a flanking movement through the Low Countries or Switzerland. They will make all sorts of threats and feints, in order to keep the greatest possible number of Frenchmen shivering in the front lines. But unless the situation becomes desperate, they will make no real assault. Not even Hitler is willing to sacrifice as many human lives as that would cost. The effort to separate France from Great Britain, which has so far met with no success, will be hopefully continued...It takes no prophet to announce that there will be a German offensive against England. Hitler himself has promised one – by land, by sea, by air – and this is the sort of promise he is likely to keep. The air offensive will probably be directed against British docks and navy yards. The sea offensive may take the form of a greatly intensified submarine warfare against the British navy, with the hope of whittling it down or keeping it in harbor. As to the land offensive, it may be an empty threat – but even the threat of landing German troops in the British Isles is enough to keep many army divisions at home.”
But the editors assert that the East, not the West, will be the “chief theatre of German activity” in the days ahead. While the Nazis might invade Rumania or provoke a crisis with Hungary, they also face a number of big tasks. “By conquering Poland they have taken an enormous problem on their hands....How can they force this starving and sullen country to produce foodstuffs for export to Germany?” The Reich’s engineers and planners must work mightily to improve their country’s lines of communication with the east, in order to get Russian iron ore and Rumanian oil. In summary, the war could continue for a long time in a manner similar to what has happened so far.
WAR LIKELY IN THE BALKANS? An Associated Press correspondent, Edward Kennedy, sounds the alarm in a Tuesday dispatch on two events which are said to have “heightened the strong belief that a new war front will be opened in the Caucasus or the Balkans this spring.”
They are the arrival of 30,000 Australian and New Zealand troops at Suez, and reports of increased military activity in four Balkan nations. Specifically as to the latter, Mr. Kennedy says that Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, and Yugoslavia have called up men for “spring training” in the miliary and Rumania has instituted plans to swell her army 1,600,000 men by March 1. The A.P. now estimates the number of Anglo-French troops standing by in the Near East at 570,000 men, with another 700,000 Frenchmen said to be on the way. Just a few days ago, French officials dismissed an estimate of 400,000 French troops in Syria as “ridiculous.”
A map on one of the Chicago Tribune’s inside pages on Tuesday explains developments in the Near East succinctly. It puts Allied troop strength at 300,000 French soldiers in Syria, 40,000 British troops in Palestine and 200,000 more in Egypt (plus the 30,000 Anzac troops just arrived), and 350,000 men under arms in Turkey. The Tribune also mentions the Russian threat to Iran and Afghanistan, and Soviet fortification of the Caucasian border with Turkey.
PEACE LIKELY IN THE BALKANS? But an article in the current issue of Newsweek describes the recent Belgrade conference as a “comparative success” and asserts that, contrary to all the predictions lately, it’s probable that Rumania, Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey will be able to stay out of the war --
“Germany would rather get the now vital Balkan supplies peacefully. Russian aggression in the Balkans would probably bring direct conflict with Italy, at least rivalry with Germany, and possibly war with the Allies on two fronts -- Finland and the Balkans. And the Black Sea is a vulnerable Soviet flank. The Allies have an alliance with Turkey, although it does not operate against Russia. Their Near East force is not yet ready and anyway couldn’t undertake an offensive without Turkish help. Hence they would prefer for the immediate future to resort to economic action in the Balkans..to curtail the flow of supplies to the Reich.”
Newsweek acknowledges that none of the Balkan states have the military capability to resist outside invasion, but “if they can keep their own enmities in check, they can make invasion highly expensive for big powers already engaged on other fronts. Hence, the peninsula can probably can stay out of war just as long as none of the little group – including Bulgaria...and the Danubian neighbor Hungary -- lets itself be used as a tool by one of the belligerents.”
And, of course, as long as the Nazi appetite for Rumanian oil doesn’t exceed the willingness of the Anglo-French to allow the Rumanians to export it.
CRAZY WEATHER (III). The United Press reports Wednesday that Europeans are “in the paralyzing grip of the bitterest cold in more than 100 years.” The British and Germans alike have suffered, while the Finns have seen temperatures dip to lows not recorded since 1875. More than 10,000 people in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have suffered from severe frost-bite. The Dutch weather bureau has recorded its lowest temperature reading ever, at minus 11.2 degrees Fahrenheit. River traffic on the Rhine has been stopped since Jan. 11. Denmark and Sweden are reeling from the double-blows of extreme cold and fuel shortages.
And to top it off, the Baltic Sea is freezing over, according to the U.P. That hasn’t happened in six centuries.
There’s been as of yet no comment on this from the American Institute of Physics, which on Nov. 4 was told at their New York symposium that the world is getting rapidly warmer.
“[W]e prophesy that the Germans will neither attack the Maginot Line this spring nor risk a flanking movement through the Low Countries or Switzerland. They will make all sorts of threats and feints, in order to keep the greatest possible number of Frenchmen shivering in the front lines. But unless the situation becomes desperate, they will make no real assault. Not even Hitler is willing to sacrifice as many human lives as that would cost. The effort to separate France from Great Britain, which has so far met with no success, will be hopefully continued...It takes no prophet to announce that there will be a German offensive against England. Hitler himself has promised one – by land, by sea, by air – and this is the sort of promise he is likely to keep. The air offensive will probably be directed against British docks and navy yards. The sea offensive may take the form of a greatly intensified submarine warfare against the British navy, with the hope of whittling it down or keeping it in harbor. As to the land offensive, it may be an empty threat – but even the threat of landing German troops in the British Isles is enough to keep many army divisions at home.”
But the editors assert that the East, not the West, will be the “chief theatre of German activity” in the days ahead. While the Nazis might invade Rumania or provoke a crisis with Hungary, they also face a number of big tasks. “By conquering Poland they have taken an enormous problem on their hands....How can they force this starving and sullen country to produce foodstuffs for export to Germany?” The Reich’s engineers and planners must work mightily to improve their country’s lines of communication with the east, in order to get Russian iron ore and Rumanian oil. In summary, the war could continue for a long time in a manner similar to what has happened so far.
WAR LIKELY IN THE BALKANS? An Associated Press correspondent, Edward Kennedy, sounds the alarm in a Tuesday dispatch on two events which are said to have “heightened the strong belief that a new war front will be opened in the Caucasus or the Balkans this spring.”
They are the arrival of 30,000 Australian and New Zealand troops at Suez, and reports of increased military activity in four Balkan nations. Specifically as to the latter, Mr. Kennedy says that Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, and Yugoslavia have called up men for “spring training” in the miliary and Rumania has instituted plans to swell her army 1,600,000 men by March 1. The A.P. now estimates the number of Anglo-French troops standing by in the Near East at 570,000 men, with another 700,000 Frenchmen said to be on the way. Just a few days ago, French officials dismissed an estimate of 400,000 French troops in Syria as “ridiculous.”
A map on one of the Chicago Tribune’s inside pages on Tuesday explains developments in the Near East succinctly. It puts Allied troop strength at 300,000 French soldiers in Syria, 40,000 British troops in Palestine and 200,000 more in Egypt (plus the 30,000 Anzac troops just arrived), and 350,000 men under arms in Turkey. The Tribune also mentions the Russian threat to Iran and Afghanistan, and Soviet fortification of the Caucasian border with Turkey.
PEACE LIKELY IN THE BALKANS? But an article in the current issue of Newsweek describes the recent Belgrade conference as a “comparative success” and asserts that, contrary to all the predictions lately, it’s probable that Rumania, Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey will be able to stay out of the war --
“Germany would rather get the now vital Balkan supplies peacefully. Russian aggression in the Balkans would probably bring direct conflict with Italy, at least rivalry with Germany, and possibly war with the Allies on two fronts -- Finland and the Balkans. And the Black Sea is a vulnerable Soviet flank. The Allies have an alliance with Turkey, although it does not operate against Russia. Their Near East force is not yet ready and anyway couldn’t undertake an offensive without Turkish help. Hence they would prefer for the immediate future to resort to economic action in the Balkans..to curtail the flow of supplies to the Reich.”
Newsweek acknowledges that none of the Balkan states have the military capability to resist outside invasion, but “if they can keep their own enmities in check, they can make invasion highly expensive for big powers already engaged on other fronts. Hence, the peninsula can probably can stay out of war just as long as none of the little group – including Bulgaria...and the Danubian neighbor Hungary -- lets itself be used as a tool by one of the belligerents.”
And, of course, as long as the Nazi appetite for Rumanian oil doesn’t exceed the willingness of the Anglo-French to allow the Rumanians to export it.
CRAZY WEATHER (III). The United Press reports Wednesday that Europeans are “in the paralyzing grip of the bitterest cold in more than 100 years.” The British and Germans alike have suffered, while the Finns have seen temperatures dip to lows not recorded since 1875. More than 10,000 people in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have suffered from severe frost-bite. The Dutch weather bureau has recorded its lowest temperature reading ever, at minus 11.2 degrees Fahrenheit. River traffic on the Rhine has been stopped since Jan. 11. Denmark and Sweden are reeling from the double-blows of extreme cold and fuel shortages.
And to top it off, the Baltic Sea is freezing over, according to the U.P. That hasn’t happened in six centuries.
There’s been as of yet no comment on this from the American Institute of Physics, which on Nov. 4 was told at their New York symposium that the world is getting rapidly warmer.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)