WAR STRATEGY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 1 August 1942, Page 3

WAR STRATEGY

AND ANGLO=AMERICAN LEADERSHIP NEW YORK PAPER’S SHARP CRITICISM. ADVOCACY OF UNITED COMMAND NEW YORK, July 30. The “New York Times,” in an editorial ■commenting' on the problem of the second front, uncommonly sharply, criticises the strategic leadership of Mr Roosevelt and Mr Churchill. “It is becoming increasingly clear that Messrs Churchill and Roosevelt have tried too much to plan and direct the war strategy themselves, which is a grave mistake for several reasons,” it says. “Both are primarily civilian leaders. Furthermore, they are overburdened with routine duties, while effective major strategy must be a full-time job. At present Mr Roosevelt must decide the strategic questions on which he cannot possibly have time properly to inform himself. Admiral Leahy’s appointment has not changed this situation, because what is needed is not another adviser but rather a commander who is entitled to make all but the very crucial decisions under his own responsibility. “As the result of the present British and American system we should expect, instead of a bold, foresighted, comprehensive strategy, an illprepared, haphazard, fragmentary, improvised strategy, and there is reason to believe that this is precisely the kind of strategy the United Nations have. . “Granted that Mr Churchill and Mr Roosevelt face formidable difficulties ' which are beyond their control, but the fact remains that the United Nations have failed hitherto to provide an example of the daring unorthodox strategy which resulted in the conquest of Crete. Partly due to lack of planning and preparation, we are losing the Battle of the Atlantic, which is closely connected with the chances of opening a second front. “The problems for establishing the second front are immense, but they cannot be solved satisfactorily till Britain and America get full-time strategists directed by a unified command —first within each nation, and then for the United Nations.” CHURCHILL SILENT REQUIREMENTS OF MILITARY SECRECY. STATEMENT BY SIR STAFFORD CRIPPS. (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, July 30/ At the next series of sittings the House of Commons will debate colonial affairs. Adjournment for the recess will be moved on the third sitting day. Sir Stafford Cripps stated today that Mr Churchill’s view was that he could not make any useful statement on the war situation at present. What might develop before the motion for adjournment was moved it was impossible to say. If the Government considered that there was any urgent necessity to do so, the House could be recalled. Nor did the Government believe that there was justification for another secret session just now. Whatever the Government’s military intentions might be, it was impossible to state them even in secret session. This was a matter of such gravity and such risks to so many that it was impossible to commit it to 615 separate people.