CRITICAL COMMENT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 132, 4 May 1940, Page 7

CRITICAL COMMENT.

AiAIERICA SYMPATHETIC. QUESTIONS ASKED. LONDON, May 3. In New York the Times and HeraldTribune show a very real appreciation of the difficulties of the Allies. The New. York Times says that the withdrawal is a blow to Allied prestige and a serious setback to. Allied strategy, but it points out that the Allied forces were confronted with an almost impossible obstacle, and the decision to rush forces to Norway at all was to their lasting credit. The Tribune says: “A good deal remains to the Allies. They have succeeded in holding the Germans, who have gained only a partial victory. The Germans’ hold over the countries will be an uneasy one, and they still have to expend energy that may be more useful to' them elsewhere.” The Paris correspondent of the London Times says that undoubtedly Air Chamberlain’s statement lias unpleasantly shocked French opinion. Scaremongers and defeatists are bound to seek profit from the admitted setback, but this is relatively unimportant. What matters is a growing impatience at the consistent success of the long series of brutal Nazi initiatives. SCOPE FOR INQUIRY. The Daily Alail says: “For the first time the public begins to understand the truth about Norway. Certainly there has been a gross underestimate of the enemy’s ruthless power and enormous resources.” The News-Chronicle says: “The nation will reflect deeply on the situation, which calls in question nothing less than the whole conduct of the war. Politically we have suffered a major defea.t.” The Times says: “Apart from the evacuation which the Admiralty organised, several aspects of the Norwegian campaign demand inquiry. “Firstly: It has been long accepted that combined naval and military operations against a well-armed enemy are virtually impracticable unless very full support is available from the Air Force and anti-aircraft guns. “Secondly: Despite the knowledge that the Germans were rehearsing embarkations, we dispersed the force that had been assembled for Finland. “Thirdly : .Was time lost between the landing of naval detachments and troops ? “Finally: AVas the well calculated boldness of the Navy which was magnificently fruitful at" Narvik given equal opportunities elsewhere?” s : NEUTRAL if EARS. . The Daily Herald, in a leader, says satisfaction was the keynote of Air Chamberlain’s speech, and similarly of speech after speech by Ministers since tne outbreak of the war. but the Prime Alinister’s satisfaction will not soften the shock wi+h which the British public heard the news of the withdrawal. The Swedish Foreign Office spokesman predicted that the withdrawal would have a terrific psychological effect on Swedish opinion. Authorised Berlin commentators declared: “Air Chamberlain has not told the full story. AVc only laugh when be declares the British withdrew without the loss of one.” The spokesman asserted: “AA r e expect the Allies to complete the abandonment of Norway soon.!’ A Zurich message says Mr Chamberlain’s speech has again strengthened mistrust in Switzerland of British capacity for decisive military and diplomatic action. This mistrust diminished after the recent British naval successes. “You British are always too slow” is a typical comment.