MR CHAMBERLAIN’S STATEMENT OF INTERIM CHARACTER

Wairarapa Times-Age, 3 May 1940, Page 6

MR CHAMBERLAIN’S STATEMENT OF INTERIM CHARACTER

NAZI PREPARATIONS

‘■lt was evident that some act of aggression was in contemplation, but these forces were equally available for attack upon Finland. Sweden. Norway, Holland or this country, and it Was impossible to tell beforehand where the blow would fall. Even if we had known that Denmark and Norway were to be the victims we could not have prevented what happened without the co-operation of those countries. But in the belief that their neutrality would save them, they took no precautions and they gave us no warning, of an attack, which, indeed, they never suspected.'’ Having mentioned the “curious chance” by which the date of April 8 chosen by the British for minor operations of mine-laying across the long communeation trench of the Norwegian territorial waters, along which Germany could obtain supplies of iron ore, should have coincided almost exactly with that chosen by the Nazi Government for their long-prepared invasion of Norway, the Premier proceeded to review the opening of the naval phase of tile Norwegian campaign. of which the details are already known. Later, he said: “In view of the obscurity of the situation in Central Norway and the importance of securing Narvik first, the Allied military forces which had been promptly assembled sailed direct to the Narvik area, arriving there on April 15. In Iho meantime the very successful naval attack on April 13 completely destroyed the enemy's naval, forces at that port and made it unnecessary to utilise for the capture of Narvik all the forces originally earmarked for that operation.”

A. PARALLEL DRAWN This brought the Premier to a description of the operations north and south of Trondheim and the decision to withdraw from the south already reported. Mr Chamberlain drew a parallel between this highly successful operation at Andalsnes, accomplished without loss, and "the action of Sir John Moore at Corunna, which, though accompanied by heavy loss of life including that of the commander, has taken its place among classic examples of British military skill.”

The rest of the statement was intended as a justification of his claim that the balance of advantage in Norway still lay with the Allies, for if they had not achieved their objective neither had the Nazis achieved theirs, while the- German' losses were far greater. Mr Chamberlain said that while the Norwegian enterprise must not be permitted to become a mere sideshow, it must be viewed in the perspective of the wider strategical considerations of Allies confronted in the West with a powerful foe. ready and able to strike blindly and ruthlessly in any direction. "I have no doubt,” remarked the Premier, “that the Germans expected a walkover in Norway as in Denmark. That expectation has been frustrated by the courage of the Norwegian people and by the effort of the Allies.” THE OPENING MOVES MAIN BATTLE FLEET GOES OUT.

DEBATE DEFERRED IN HOUSE OF COMMONS.

('Received This Day. 1.5 p.m.) ■ LONDON. May 2. In the course of his statement. Mr Chamberlain said: "We were informed on April 7 that a large German naval force was moving along the west coast of Norway. That evening the 'Main Battle Fleet and Second Cruiser Squadron sailed in the hope of engaging the enemy.” After outlining the other objectives and operations in Southern Norway. Mr Chamberlain added: . "Our troops fought with gallantry and determination and inflicted heavy losses on the enemy. Nevertheless the enemy occupied aerodromes and prevented the operation of our fighters. The local German air superiority precluded the landing of the necessary artillery and I tanks to withstand an enemy drive from the south. The Germans, c'lisre-1

Further Statement and Debate Next Week SURVEY OF DEVELOPMENTS TO DATE BALANCE OF ADVANTAGE WIT! I ALLIES (British Official Wireless.) (Received This Day, 11.20 a.m.) RUGBY, May 2. The Prime Minister (Mr Chamberlain) described his statement in the House of Commons on the Norwegian campaign as of an interim character and held out the hope that he would be able to say a good deal more early next week. ‘He anticipated that the House would desire to have a debate afterwards. This debate has now been fixed for Tuesday. The main interest in the statement attached to the announcement of a skilful withdrawal of the British troops from south of Trondheim. Mr Chamberlain prefaced the story cf the North-Western Expeditionary Force landings in Norway by recalling the preparation of forces for Finland and of other forces to go to the assistance of Norway and Sweden in the event of an invasion cf those countries by Germany if they had acquiesced in the passage of troops to Finland. “ft did not escape our attention that in such a case Trondheim and other western ports of Norway, as well as aerodromes like that at Stavanger might well be the subject of attack by the Germans,’’ Mr Chamberlain continued, “and accordingly, further forces again were made ready to occupy these places.’’ (A break occurs here in the message as it was received.) “About a month ago, however, it was decided that certain small forces should be kept in readiness to occupy Norwegian western ports at short notice in case of an act of aggression by Germany against South Norway. It should be noted again that any action contemplated on Norwegian soil was conditional upon a prior violation of Norwegian neutrality by Germany. It has been asked how it was that in spite of these preparations Germany was able to forestall us. The answer is simple —it was by long-planned and carefully elaborated treachery against an unsuspecting and almost unarmed people. We had been aware for many months that the Germans were accumulating transports and troops in Baltic ports and that these troops were constantly being practised in embarkation and disembarkation.

garding loss of life, were always able to send reinforcements at a much greater rate than we. German losses on land, sea and in the air were much greater than ours.

I After Mr Chamberlain sa.t down, Mr ■ C. R. Attlee (Opposition Leader) and S. A. Sinclair (Liberal Loader) announced that they would not cumI meat or ask questions; today.