SECOND FRONT

Wairarapa Times-Age, 10 September 1943, Page 4

SECOND FRONT

OUTSPOKEN DEMAND MADE BY VISITING RUSSIAN. ADDRESSING TRADE UNION CONGRESS. (Bv Telegraph—Press Association— Copyright) (Received This Day, 12.10 p.m.) LONDON, September 9. An astonishingly frank demand foi the opening of a second front was made by a Russian Trade Union leade±, Nicolai Schvernik, when he addressed the Trade Union Congress. Schvermk’s outspokenness surprised delegates, because they considered that, in view of his position, he was stating the Soviet Government’s case. “Nobody' can dispute that it is only the absence of a second front in Europe which saved Hitler in 1942 from defeat,” said Schvernik. “Hitler, only because he was not troubled from the rear, was able to transfer 30 picked divisions to the Eastern front to save him from disaster. Without a second front, victory is impossible. The Russians value highly the Allied operations in North Africa, Sicily and Italy, and also the valiant Air Force’s bombardment of Germany, but the Russians do not regard these as a second front, which they consider must deliver giant blows against Germany, not her vassals. Stalin has given a clear definition of a second front —one which, in the west, should divert 60 German divisions and some of her allies.” Reporting to the congress on the Anglo-Soviet Trade Union Committee, Sir W. Citrine said: “Caustic criticism, and sometimes gross misrepresentation and abuse of myself and members of the committee, have appeared in sections of the British and foreign Press. It is just as well to have it firmly understood that on international affairs we are unlikely to be diverted from what we believe right by abuse and misrepresentation, no matter whence it comes. The Anglo-Soviet Committee reached a large measure of agreement, but was unable to agree on the question of a second front and on a Soviet proposal to widen the committee to include all organisations fighting Hitler. The enlargement of the committee would have meant the creation of a new International, which might be a good thing, but this is the wrong way to go about it.” “We felt we were not competent to decide on highly technical military operations on the information before us,” said Sir W. Citrine. “Sometimes it seemed to rrie that the Russians completely under-estimated the significance of what was happening in Italy and the totality of the Allied war effort. The Russian definition of a second front implies the withdrawal of sixty divisions—l,soo,ooo men—from the Eastern front. We would be invoking disaster if we attacked with under 1,500,000 men. We told the Russians that there was nobody among them competent to advise Britain on tins matter. No country has had such experience of landing troops from the sea as we have had. We went as far as we could and said We believed in a second front and hoped it would occur soon. We cannot allow a committee founded for trade union purposes to get into a real discussion which might easily lead to serious divergencies between our peoples and governments.” The Trade Union Council passed a resolution favouring a further invasion of the European continent at every point where the Allies can strike with good prospects of military success. “If Germany is struck now, the war may be over in 1943.”—This comment was made to a British United Press Moscow correspondent by a leading Moscow editor, who added: “Italy’s downfall, plus the great Soviet victories. makes a second front more timely and easier.”