COMPLEX TASK

Wairarapa Times-Age, 21 May 1942, Page 4

COMPLEX TASK

CO-ORDINATION OF WAR STRATEGY

SIR S. CRIPPS WINDS UP

DEBATE.

SOME ASSURANCES TO HOUSE OF COMMONS. (British Official Wireless.) (Received This Day. 12.15 p.m.) RUGBY, May 20. Winding up the war debate in the House of Commons, S,ir Stafford Cripps said the co-ordination of military, naval and air activities in a war waged from the Arctic Ocean to Australia and through th© Atlantic and Pacific areas was a task of the greatest complexity. He stressed the extreme difficulty of moving troops ever immense distances under rapidly-changing circumstances. Whereas the Germans and Italians had rapid interior lines of communication, we had to move round the perimeter. Similarly the Japanese, while they retained temporary control of the Pacific, enjoyed interior lines of sea communication throughout the Pacific area, enabling them rapidly to concentrate forces wherever they wished to strike. Sir S. Cripps said he agreed with the view that in these circumstances it was indeed surprising that worse results had not ensued. He did not think either the House or the country realised the enormous degree of attack from which Malta suffered and the enormous amount of aircraft Britain had to get to Malta to counter it. During April, the Germans made 5,000 sorties and more bombs were dropped on the island during that period than on Britain during any month in the worst period of the blitz. Regarding Britain’s attitude towards Australia, he' said that from an operational point of view, Australia had fallen into the sphere of American help, but that did not mean that, from a supply point of view, Australia was left to the mercies—no doubt tender mercies—of America. “It is quite certain that we shall do our utmost, balancing their needs against the urgent needs of other theatres of war.” Sir S. Cripps said. Australia, he added, would have every sympathy and help Britain could possibly give her in these difficult times.

Regarding suggestions for an inquiry into the Singapore disaster, Sir S. Cripps said the Government had decided that such an investigation would not be in the best interests of an effective prosecution of the war. Firstly, no inquiry could be conducted among those who had fallen into Japanese hands. Secondly, at a moment so critical for the existence of India, it would be madness to plunge General Sir A. Wavell, formerly Commander-in-Chief in Singapore, into the details of an inquiry which might be particularly concerned with his competence as Commander-in-Chief.

Sir Cripps also reiterated that the policy of assisting Russia continues. Dealing with .the bombing of Germany, he said this was, in the British Government’s view, of material assistance to Russian resistance and the best way in which we could give that assistance until such time as w.e were able to make a carefully-planned attack on the Continent of Europe, “which we intend to do.” The House could be satisfied that this bombing of Germany “is not a question of first principle, but is part of our strategy, interlinked with the whole strategy in all theatres of war.” MUST BE STOPPED MR HORE BELISHA’S CRITICISM. ALLEGATIONS OF DEFECTIVE DIRECTION. (Received This Day, 1.0 p.m.) LONDON, May 20. Mr L. Hore-Belisha in the war debate in the House of Commons, said: “The first requirement is to realise that we are not fighting the Germans alone but a formidable Axis combination. We must meet its unified strategy with a 'unified strategy of our own. There should be a Ministry of Defence. We have reached a stage where the Chiefs of Staff are guided and directed by a political Minister. This change was made before the disaster in Norway and you cannot divorce the almost unbroken sequence of strategical disasters from this mixture of political, strategical and military elements in the war directing machine. Who told General Wavell to stop at Benghazi? Who decided to send an army to Greece without adequate air support? We are told it had the concurrence of the Chiefs of Staff, but concurrence is very different from advice. We have reached an extraordinary pass when, in a war debate, we have neither the benefit of the Service Ministers, nor the presence of the Minister of Defence. While Stormoviks are shattering German defences and 2,000 Stukas are roaring over the Russian positions at Kerch, there is no such weapon as a dive-bomber in the British Army. The Japanese passed swiftly through Malaya with a dive-bomber designed specially for Army use. Java was taken by modern tactics, not superiority of arms. General Alexander,_ in Burma has conducted a retreat without cover. Is this to be tolerated after nearly three years of war? It must be stopped.”