BRITAIN’S HANDICAP

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 137, 10 May 1940, Page 8

BRITAIN’S HANDICAP

LACK OF AIR PARITY MR CHURCHILL’S DEFENCE (United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) ' ■ /A", \ LONDON, May 8. Government cheers and Opposition counter-cheers greeted the result of the division in the House of Commons on the Government’s war policy'and in particular on its conduct ox ~ the operations in Norway-. Replying for the Government at the end of this moment> ous debate, Mr Churchill first emphasised that the disadvantage of Britain in not having the .initiative was the failure in the last five years to maintain air parity with Germany. It was no use thinking 1 about this war in terms of the last 'war. -1-He power of the air had greatly affected the movements oi fleets and armies. “We must, not exaggerate this new factor, hut neithei must be refuse to recognise it,” he said.

Replying to specific questions raised in the debate, Mr Churchill said cutting the German communications with Oslo continuously by surface ships was too costly a plan to adopt. On . the question of Trondheim, Mr Churchill said there was no dispute that Britain was bound to go to the aid of the Norwegians. The forts at the entrance presented no serious difficulty, but the fact that a targe number of valuable ships would have to be continuously exposed for many hours to close bombing attacks meant that grave losses would probably be sustained. Nevertheless, the Navy was perfectly ready to carry the troops in. The plan was abandoned because such good success was made by two landings that it seemed as easy to capture Trondheim by this method. TRONDHEIM PLAN. “AVe have been asked why we did not enter Bergen and Trondheim in the first few hours,”'Mr Churchill continued. If the troops were not to be landed the only object in entering the fiords would have been the destruction of destroyers which the Fleet Air Arm largely accomplished. Indisputably it was our duty to help the Norwegians, for which purpose the capture of Trondheim was the best way. My thoughts had always been fixed on Narvik where there seemed to lie a path leading to some decisive achievement, but when the German outrage occurred Trondheim was undoubtedly the place for aiding the Norwegians. The joint staffs prepared a. plan for two diversionary landings at Namsos and Andalsnes and for a direct ing in Trondheim Fiord. ‘‘With regard to the Navy carrying in the troops to Trondheim the Admiralty never withdrew the offer or considered the operation navally imprac ticable, but the muitary authorities entertained grave doubts auout the possibility of landing in the face of air superiority. Therefore the chief's of staffs advised that it was; easier to convert the diversionary landings into the main attack.

“I take the fullestj responsibility together with the v other Ministers . for accepting the unanimous view from our expert advisers.” . - ' “In this war we have frequently been asked why we don’t take the initiative,” said Mr Churchill.. “The reason is the failure' to regain and maintain air parity with Germany. Numerical deficiency in the air had condemned and would condemn us. for some time to much; difficulty, suffering and danger which we must endure until more favourable conditions are r established.” .. .. Mr Churchill added that the immense enemy air strength made the attempt to dominate the Skaggerak with surface craft too costly to be adopted. Important forces would v be necessary to maintain a steady.-, surface patrol. The losses which could, be inflicted from the air would undoubtedly very soon have constituted a naval disaster. “We therefore adopted the submarine blockade following the opinion pf naval authorities,” he added. “This has been a costly success for Germany. From 7000 to 8000 Germans have been drowned.” HIGH GERMAN LOSSES. Mr Churchill added that thousands of corpses had been washed up at the entrance to Oslo Fiord. “What is the loss of 7000 to 80(K) men to the totalitarian States?” he asked. “What does that matter to a government such as we are fighting? Losses are not announced, criticism is not allowed, and if there had been a cry or whimper it would probably have been dealt with by a brutal blow.”

Air Churchill added that the reason why no big ships were sent to Narvik on the first day with the dostroyers was that the only one available was a

battle-cruiser. “lie have only two battle-cruisers,” he said, “and we felt it would do the greatest damage to the Fleet’s balance if we lost one. When the Warspite entered the fiord the Admiralty was greatly relieved to find no minefields or destroyers lurking, in a narrow angle ready to fire a bouquet of torpedoes. If the Warspite had been sunk we would have been told it was madness to 6end one of our most valuable ships into narrow, congested waters.' “If you dare, and the forfeit is claimed, it, is murder of your sailors. If prudence withholds you,’ you are craven, cowardly, inept and timid, j AVITHDRAAVAL JUSTIFIED. No one had the light to suggest that the Navy withdrew from the undertaking, or that politicians overruled the Admiralty, Mr Churchill continued. He thought the expert advisers were right at the time. But the situation rapidly, became worse and the G-erman thrust north of Oslo developed to enormous strength. It was therefore necessary to withdraw the troops or loavo thorn to be destroyed by overwhelming forces. He did not believe there would have been the slightest chance of ultimate success in the struggle between a German army based on Oslo and a British on Trondheim. The decision to abandon the attack had saved Britain from a most disastrous entanglement. Mr Churchill added :. “I cannot recede at all from the statement I made which lias been.much criticised, that the invasion of Norway by Hitler lias been a cardinal political and strategical error.” After dealing with German exaggerations of British naval losses, Mr Churchill claimed that, although Hitler’s overrunning ol the vast regions of Norway had had an astonishing and unwelcome effect, the advantages rested substantially with Britain. “Let pre-war feuds die,” he con- . -eluded. “Let personal, quarrels be I forgotten... Let party interests be ignored. Let all energies be harnessed. Let all the ability and force of the nation be hurled into the struggle;- At no time in the last war were we in greater peril than wc . arc now.” . .

; BATTLE OVER LAKE.

BOMBERS IN ACTION. GALLANT R.A.E. SQUADRON. (British Official Wireless.) Received May 9. 2.5 p.m. RUGBY, May 8. Sir Samuel Hoare’s reference in the House of Commons to the exploits of British airmen in Norway contained details gleaned from his own personal talks with the pilots themselves. Sir Samuel said during the last fortnight a fighter squadron of Gladiators was sent to Scandinavia and only one frozen lake -was found by reconnaissance parties suitable for a landing place. The surface was swept clear of snow and the necessary stores, petrol and munitions provided. As soon as it was ready 18 pilots in the squadron flew their aircraft from the deck of an aircraft-carrier a distance of 180 miles in a snowstorm, landing on the lake at 10 p.m. The first German bombers appeared at 5.15 next morning and a battle continued until 8 p.m. The German High Command concentrated on the lake and something like 80 bombers were over the lake continuously for 15 hours. The greater part of the British machines after this gallant battle were put out of action on the ground, but not one was brought down in the air. The King has been pleased to confer a number of decorations on this very gallant squadron.