Wairarapa Times-Age TUESDAY, MAY 13, 1941. FRANCE, SPAIN AND THE NAZIS.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 13 May 1941, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age TUESDAY, MAY 13, 1941. FRANCE, SPAIN AND THE NAZIS.

AT a direct view, and for what it is worth, the report of a Loudon “Times” correspondent on the French frontier regarding concessions made, or about to be made, by France and Spain to the Nazis, opens up serious prospects. The story told is, in brief, Unit General Franco has yielded to pressure and consented Io German troops being marched across Spain to attack Gibraltar ami that in France, meantime, Admiral Darlan, acting with the infamous Laval, is doing his utmost to induce or compel Marshal Petain to grant Germany the use of French railway lines Io Spain, and also “aerodromes but nothing else” in Syria. An attempt to promote an agreement on these lines obviously is an act of treason to France, as well as Io the cause of world freedom and democracy. Those concerned are endeavouring to popularise I heir bast' 'policy of co-operation with the enemy by raising' illusory hopes of territorial concessions to France in a Nazi new European order. No moderately intelligent Frenchman can be unaware that in the event of a Nazi victory, the status assigned to France would be that of a slave nation. That manifest truth may count for less meantime, however, than the question of what part the French Empire is Io play in the event of a final betrayal of Ihe French homeland like that now envisaged. If the correspondent who has been quoted is accurately, informed, both France and Spain must now be classed as pawns of the Axis, but it is not yet certain that the French north and west African colonies are bound to share that -ignominious fate, and even in Syria, if Hie right lead is given, something may yet be done to stem Axis penetration. Ever since the armistice was signed. Laval and others of his kidney have been doing their utmost to place their country completely at the mercy of the Nazis. Admiral Darlan, though he is not in the Laval class, is known to be no friend of Britain and her fellow democracies. The course of events demonstrates, however, that there are in France strong elements of opposition to I lie policy of ignominious surrender —elements which have made the most of the fact that the Gormans have no easy or ready means of gaining control over the French African Empire, with its military, naval and air forces. Tn an article written some weeks ago, the former Director of the French Ministry of Information, Dr Andre Morize, observed that repeatedly, “when information from unreliable sources has led us Io fear the worst,” Alarslial Petain has contended with simple vigour that no naval nor air base would be ceded to the enemy, that North Africa would remain intact and French, that no German army would obtain passage through unoccupied France. . . . Petain, either through the exercise of his will or because he has prepared in North Africa a trump card, has not, on that ground, yielded so much as an inch. We are in the fourth week in March; not one battleship, not one plane, not one base, not one right of way has been accorded Germany. This, doubtless, is neither a great victory for the present, nor any guaranty for the future: it is at all events a comfort (for the present) . . . Precisely how far the position here set out has deteriorated since the end of .March should appear speedily. Assuming, however, that it has deteriorated seriously, it remains to lie seen, how the possible trump card of North Africa is to be played. That the Germans should be granted an open road to I he Western Mediterranean and an opportunity to attack Gibraltar (if that is the course events are destined to take) is bad enough. It would be vastly.worse, however, if French North and West Africa, with the French naval and air forces, were also handed over to the Nazis and it is at least possible that these territories and the forces holding them may instead throw in their lot with Free France and the democracies. Amongst those who are in a position to speak and act for France in. Africa, General Weygand appears to enjoy an unquestioned dominance. Not long ago, General Weygand declared that he would remain loyal to Marshal Petain, but that declaration followed on a solemn pledge by the aged marshal that French forces would not be used against former allies; that the French ports in unoccupied territory would not be given over to the enemy; that the French colonial empire would remain neutral. It may soon have to be determined what General Weygand’s attitude will be if -.Marshal Petain is induced or compelled by the joint pressure of the Nazis and of French traitors to violate these pledges. A Continental authority wrote on this subject recently:— General Weygand is actually the main hope of all those who in Northern Africa are in favour of a policy of resistance against aggression. Should Marshal Petain change his policy under foreign influences, a new situation would arise and General Weygand would then regain his liberty of action. He alone will be able to co-ordinate and organise an eventual French action in Northern Africa and to impose his course upon his subordinates ... It may be supposed that General Weygand will oppose himself to any German action, if he is supported by a strong current of public opinion in Northern Africa, by the conviction that Britain will win with or without American help, and by the assurance of British or American material support- in sufficient quantities, should he apply for it. Should these hopes be realised —whether they are likely to be realised or not admittedly is at present an open question—there will be a great deal to set against any advantage the Nazis may gain by extending complete control over mainland France and Spain.