British Press Have More To Say On War Book

Chronicle (Levin), 5 January 1949, Page 5

British Press Have More To Say On War Book

LONDON, Jan. 4. General EisenhoWer 's 'boolc ' ' Orusade ai Europe" whicli received some unravourable publicity in Britain several aeeks in advance, of its publication here and which, in the interim, has been the subject of a vigorous controversy I >etween supporters and critics of General Eisenliower 's leadersliip, has now ap- I peared on the bookstalls in London and , is extensively reviewed by tlie British P ress Supporters of General Eisenliower are led by Lieutenant-General Bir Frederick Morgan who was Deputy 'hief of Btaff to tlie Supreme 'Comnander during the whole of the Eurcpeun eampaign. Sir Frederick, writing '.n The Observer, says " Crusade in Europe " is a great book by a great ] uian and devotes most of his review to de'fhitdifi'g " Geireval IVisenhoiver 's* ' 'd'eci••ions in which he admits he concurred I it tlie time and which, he says, he sees uo reason to revise now. On the other hand, Brigadier J. G Bmyth, Y.C., who reviews the book for the Daily Graphie, while he coneedes General Eisenliower 's exceptional quali-> ties of leadership and organising abillty, comments upon his criticisin of Air. CliurchilPs war strategy and reservations. He appears to entertain towards some British war leaders, notably Field IMarshal Alan Brooke, Field Marshal IMontgomery and Air Marshal Tedder. Brigadier Bmyth agrees with the military correspondent of the Bunday Times who first attacked ' ' Crusade in Europe," that , General Eisenliower would have done better had he been relieved of the day to d&y comnrand of the armies in %ie field. 1 .Relations witli Russia Break. : David> Raymond, in Reynolds News, finds General Eisenhower Js referenees to Anglo-American and Russo-Ameriean relations the most interesting aspect of the book. General Eisenhower rnakes it plain, he says, that Marshal Stalin blamed Mr. Churchill for the AngloAmeriean failure to start a second front in 1942 and that the deterioration in Anglo-Russian relations set in from that date. On the other hand, at this time the Russian attitude towards he Americans was quite dilferent and their relations continued to be good until 1945. General Eisenhower does not explain -what went wrong at that stage but liints that the Americau use of the atom bomb in Japan was the real eause. General Eisenhower makes it plain, Mr. Raymond p'oints out, that he himself knew nothing of the progress made with the atom bomb and j that wlien he was told one was going to be used, he opposed it. "The well known war correspondent, Mf. Christopher Buclcley, who reviews "Crusade in Europe" for the Daily Telegraph, says it is a book which the layman can read without fear of being ; overwhelmed by technical detail. He describes the book as being eminently fair to British war leaders and points out that General Eisenhower does not attempt to deny responsibility for his own errors of judgment. He points out that although General Eisenhower eriticises some of Mr. Churchill 's ideas, he displays particular respeet ,and all'ection .in all his referenees to him. The Times,;. which devotes its" first , leading article to the book, agrees with this judgment. U Crusade i^ Europe, " it says, may not rank for style or technical exposition with some*of the more outstanding narratives of military eommanders, but it tells its story soundly and truthfully and gives full value to Britain ?s part in winning the war. The Manchester Guardian says that for every British reader wounded by General Eisenhower 's referenees to British leaders and British policy a *thousand others will be strengthened in- , their admiration of th® author. *Q *