WAR IN EUROPE

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20051, 25 September 1939, Page 8

WAR IN EUROPE

DIVIDING POLAND SET-BACK TO ALLIES SURPRISE RUSSIAN MOVE TRIBUTE TO' DEFENDERS DETERMINED RESISTANCE (Eloc. Tel. Copyright-—-United Pross Assn ) (British Official Wireless.) Reed. 1.15 p.m. RUGBY, Sept. 24 At the end o( the third week of the war two questions are uppermo t in the public mind and the Sunday papers make a feature of both. Surprise at the Russian move in Poland has given place to speculation as to its effect on the situation. Mr. J. L. Garvin writing in the Observer, largely devotes himself to the consideration of this and arrives at the conclusion that so far the “fourth partition’’ of Poland worked very much to Russian advantage. He points out that Russia advanced to a line north-south, which, on the average; is 150 miles from the former frontier.

Mr. Garvin adds that thus between the Baltic States and the middle of the Carpathians the Russians hold all the Strategic political points famous in old and later wars as commanding rivers, roads, railways and disputed racial areas. In addition the desired Carpathian oilfields are lost to Herr Hitler, who is left with the task of incorporating madly in his mixed empire sonie 30,000,000 Slavs who cannot be subdued in soul. In the long run they will give him and his system moral wounds. Although Moscow may give supplies to Germany they will not be to the degree of Nazi expectation. The Soviet is working for herself and is likely to follow the advice of the Russian statesman, Gortscacoff, “not. to labour on behalf of the King of Prussia.” Back of Early Incident

Remembering the epic stories ot mass fighting which occurred in the first few weeks of the last war, many people comment on the lack of reported movement and incident in the opening of the present campaign. “Scrutator,” writing in the Sunday Times, opportunely devotes his article to elucidation of the Allied war policy. He frankly admits that the rapid collapse of Poland is a great disappointment and suggests that had Russia not intervened and had the Poles been able to hold on for another month, as there seemed every prospect of their being able to do, the Polish Army might well have been able to turn the notorious Polish, mud to good account against afi immobilised German mechanical army. Ih a tribute’ to the Polish Army, “Scrutator” says: “Whoever is to blame for the Polish collapse, it certainly was not the. common soldier. The resistance at Warsaw and elsewhere shows of what splendid military material he is made.” Command of the Sea Turning to tlie British and French policy, “Scrutator” says: “The foundation of victory is our complete command' of the sea. Germany has made no secret of her fears. She wants a short war and is anxious not to be drawn into a long military struggle. “Her present problem is the reverse of 1914. Then she had to force lines ib, order to win. Now she hopes to win. merely by defensive action in her own area and forcing us to attack.” “Scrutator” suggests that the Siegfried Line, although not so strong or favourably placed as the Maginot Line, is far stronger than any German fortified position in the last war and points out that it can only be breached as ;i. result of long and careful preliminary work. Any policy of mass frontal attack would be exactly what Germany would wish and would be unlikely to lead to victory quickly or slowly. “Victory in war consists not in inflicting loss on an enemy or even in tlie ratio of losses inflicted and received, but in convincing the enemy that lie cannot possibly win,” states “Scrutator."