Wairarapa Times-Age WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1942. CRITICS AND THE PACIFIC WAR

Wairarapa Times-Age, 16 September 1942, Page 2

Wairarapa Times-Age WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1942. CRITICS AND THE PACIFIC WAR

g.OME recent American and British criticisms of the conduct of the war in the South-Western Pacific, particularly since the development of the latest Japanese thrust through the Owen Stanley Range towards Port Moresby, have been so alarmist in tone that they might almost be called defeatist. For instance extracts were cabled yesterday from an article in which the “Chicago Tribune” accused the Australian forces in New Guinea of showing signs of caving in and added that:—

The whole -deadly pattern of disaster in Malaya seems in the way of being repeated unless prompt and decisive action is taken. The broad position is that in the South-Western Pacific, and also over other and very much wider areas of that ocean, great and complex operations of war are developing to a very great extent in strictly guarded secrecy. In these circumstances it is difficult to weigh the merit or value of particular criticisms, but it is likely that the same circumstances would make it difficult for the critics to justify and establish many of the contentions that are now being advanced in the United States and. in Britain with regard to the direction of the South-West Pacific campaign.

Some of the severest strictures that are being put forward in this category rest rather obviously on a weak and doubtful basis. For instance, a late message from New York, received yesterday, quoted the “Daily News”, of that city as stating that the Japanese advances in New Guinea are largely due to the lack of a unified command in the South-West Pacific and to the division of authority between General MacArthur and Vice-Admiral. Ghormley. On the other hand, in an earlier cablegram, Senator Johnson, a member of the Military Affairs Committee of the United States Senate, was reported as stating that the committee had full confidence in General MacArthur’s ability to meet the Japanese threat to Port Moresby and as emphasising that General MacArthur and Vice-Admiral Ghormley worked in close harmony. It was added that Senator Johnson

denied Press suggestions that there was any friction between the divided commands and said the present was not the time for needless criticism or to make changes.

Against the more alarmist views that have been expressed on the subject of,the Japanese thrust towards Port Moresby there is to be set, too, the statement that American war correspondents in Australia see in the present Japanese drive “a real menace to Port Moresby only if it is connected with a seaborne movement.”

In the present state of information it no doubt would be absurd to dogmatise about possible war developments in the islands beyond Australia and New Zealand and elsewhere in the Pacific. It is not unreasonable to suppose, however, that the Allies have by this time made fairly substantial headway in plans and preparations calculated to defeat the enemy’s total aggression. It certainly is conceivable that action in areas far distant may influence decisively the course of events in New Guinea and in many other places as well. It is established clearly enough that the Japanese are formidable antagonists and, amongst other things, they have proved themselves adept, courageous and enterprising in jungle fighting. Whether, however, they are any longer in a position to exercise an effective and powerful initiative in the Pacific is at least open to question.