THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES TUESDAY, February 20, 1940. THE ALTMARCK INCIDENT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24227, 20 February 1940, Page 8

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES TUESDAY, February 20, 1940. THE ALTMARCK INCIDENT

Strong reasons make strong actions, runs the saying. Apt illustration of its truth is contained in the arbitrary treatment meted out to the German auxiliary raider Altmarck, when she was waylaid and boarded in neutral Norwegian waters by a British destroyer and deprived of a large number of British merchant seamen captured by the Admiral Graf Spec in the course of her activities. The aftermath, in words, at least promises to be interesting, even while it will afford no satisfaction whatever to Germany in the familiar role of injured party. The German newspaper press, whipped by its propagandist controllers, may work itself into a fine frenzy of anger over this latest manifestation of strength, vigilance and vigorous independence of action on the part of the Royal Navy. Its ragings will be recognised clearly enough as being inspired less by reason than by a sense of frustration. The information available of the Altmarck episode, and of the spirited part played in it by the destroyer Cossack, may not yet be complete, but it is adequate for the formation of a reasonably clear judgment of the facts at issue. The German vessel, homeward bound after escaping the fate that overtook her parent raider in the South Atlantic, was using the neutral waters of Norway to avoid contact with the British patrols which were searching for her. She was armed, and she carried, in close confinement, between 300 and 400 prisoners taken from British merchantmen by the Graf Spee. The first fact to emerge is thus that the Altmarck was herself guilty of a breach of international law. The •second fact, if the extraordinary Norwegian version of the affair is to be accepted, is that the Altmarck evaded proper search in a neutral port by concealing the truth concerning her naval classification and the nature of her complement. It is a question whether she had any recognisable status in the waters in which she took refuge, or whether she had any defensible reason for being there in the particular circumstances of her voyage. The merits of the German protests against what occurred must depend in part on those premises. f

Then there is to be considered the attitude of the Norwegian authorities themselves, as established by the conduct of the commander of the gunboat which participated in the proceedings and of the port officials who conducted the so-called search. of the Altmarck at Bergen. None of these knew, according to report, that the Altmarck was armed or that she carried British prisoners. The tale does not ring true. Carelessness there may have been in the making of the “ search,” and lack of judgment in the later conduct of the Norwegian gunboat commander, who resented British interference and declined to facilitate a more thorough search. But the whole story suggests very strongly- deliberate evasion by Norway of her legal responsibilities, presumably because of a wish not to provoke German anger and, perhaps, precipitate reprisals, by performing the strict offices of a neutral. The Danish press, it will be noted, stresses the deliberateness of the British action in taking the affair out of Norway’s hands, and asks where neutrals stand now. 0 That is a question which they might more properly answer themselves. The Norwegian Minister in London has been requested, in sharp terms, to provide an explanation of the circumstances leading to the present situation. He has been informed that in the British Government’s judgment the Norwegian Government had failed in its duty as a

neutral and that the Altmarck, “ in view of the case against her,” ought to be interned. The onus has thus" been shifted, sternly and with promptitude, to the quarter where it certainly seems to belong. Upon this action on the part of the Foreign Office the Sunday Dispatch has supplied kn entirely suitable comment. “If a Government cannot keep its waters neutral,” it has said, “ and if it affords shelter to enemy ships of war, Britain must and will act in defence of her own rights. It is a stem, vigorous and necessary decision that neutx*als must no longer humour and placate the Nazis at our expense.” That is the crux of the matter. Germany, since this war began, has herself shown scant respect for international law in any of its applications. Britain, on the contrary, will continue to respect it and the rights of neutrals, where such respect is reciprocated, and where her own vital interests are not endangered by negligence or vacillation on the part of small Powers hesitant to offend a strong and threatening neighbour. The view expressed by Admiral Sir Roger Keyes, that Norway should be grateful that the Cossack enabled her to avoid the “ shocking stigma ” of condemning British seamen to imprisonment in Germany owing to “ the incredible laxity ” of her officials at Bergen, might indeed be expected to carry some weight in shaping the final pronouncement of the Norwegian Government on the unsavoury affair in Josing Sound. Germany need anticipate neither sympathy nor respect for her absurd protests against the “ methods ofthe maritime robber.” British people everywhere will have been thrilled by the Cossack’s exploit and by the manner of its performance, in close grips with the enemy, and they will applaud the Admiralty’s “ refreshing acceptance of responsibility ” in ordering the Cossack unhesitatingly to undertake what must be described as a most wholesome and salutary task.