BRITISH GENERALSHIP.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIX, Issue 228, 24 September 1918, Page 4

BRITISH GENERALSHIP.

If to-day's report turns out to be correct, that in addition to the 25,000 Turks captured in Palestine. 40,000 are surrounded, Sir Edmund Allenby'e euccces will T>c one of the great annihilating victories of history. There has been nothing in the history of the British Army to equal such a victory as is here forecasted, in the swift and complete destruction of co large a force, but one hopes that this will not stand as a British record when the war ie over; one looks to see thie wonderful feat of arms repeated on a much larger wale on the Western front. When it can be said of a German army or » group of armies, as is said to-day of the Turks in Palestine, that it hae ceased to exist, then Uie aid of the war will bo near. There will be this highly important difference, that whereas the collapse uf the Turkish defence in Palestine leaves U6 still a very long way from the heart of the enemy, a similar collapse on the Western front would speedily be followed by an advance to vital spots in the German organisation. This magnificent victory, planned with such consummate skill, and carried out with such wonderful energy and enterprise by the various units, should remove any lingering doubts as to the ability of the British to produce great 1 leaders in this war. It must •be admitted that for a long time British gcneralphKp was under a cloud. For two years our 'work on the main front was largely defensive, and the enemy could point to great offensive successes on every front. In the two most important attacks we did I make in the West serious mistakes were I made, and there was a disposition to J dwell more on these than on the generalI ship that had brought the Array safely ; through the Mons retreat, and directed the superb resistance of the thin line at Ypres. When we were able to attack in Rtrencth in 1916, the Army was green. i and had to buy its experience dearly. IFn 1917, when it had become a finely ! welded and tempered instrument of war, i directed" by staffs who had learned their I business in a hard school, events in Russia and the failure of the French offensive prevented British generals from making the most of their opportunities, i Meanwhile, in other theatres we had ! had failures that for a time serioiislv I damaged our military prestico. We j attacked Oallipoli. and eventually had to withdraw: we went to the help of SerI bia, and had to retreat: we made a dash I for Tiagflad, and were involved in disasi tor. In the Inst two cases the oomi ronndors of the expeditions were not tn jb!nmp: as a matter of fnrt General j Ton-nshcnd ha-1 shown brilliant ability in the operation? lidding up to the canture of Knt. ni>rt was opposed to the .'irlvanec" on Rsgiind with srnntv forces .a< liis disposal. ' Tn tlie case of the GaT!ipoli enterprise, however, there was n clear case of bad acneralship in the failure- tn .-nisli the attack ftt Suvla Ray. jivV,.l, t>.i-r,H out. tn I,<. flic most ex--11 mi-T v blinder wo mml" during the wnr. R:i* tli" Hverflffp mini i.- imiire.-isiM by tlir> bread facts of failure or enm'ss. and the j fnHv» wpr'- that in coneral enterprises We had met -with failure.

The reputation that British general- | ship thus acquired is reflected in a lead- I ing article in an American paper in the | opening days of Sir Douglas Haig's offensive. "Although not alwa"ys wisely led, the British troops, which are carrying the chief burden of the present attack, t have shown themselves of supreme j quality." If the writer had stopped to . think he would have realised that the I words "although not always wisely led" j might be applied to any army in this war. The reason he applied them to the British was that he was thinking ot Neuve Chappclle, Ixros and Suvla Bay. It must be admitted, of course, that British generalship has been seriously handicapped during the war by the fact that i before the war generals and staffs had had nothing like the practice in handling large bodies of men that Continental soldiers had, and by the necessity for | expanding the small pre-war army to a j size out of all proportion to the. supply ! of trained officers. Our problem was , similar to that facing both sides in the ] American Civil War. and it is worth ! noting that all the generals who became ! famous in that war had been professional soldiers l*>forc the war began. We hud to learn the business of handling great | armies, whereas our opponents had bern I studying and practising the business for ' years, and were as much at home in moving an army corps as our men were in moving a brigade. That we have learnt it recent events on the Western front show. On the fronts in Asia, where conditions have been more favourable to open warfare. British generals have won some of the most brilliantly planned and . executed spectacular victories of the war. ' Sir Stanley Maude's advance on Bagilad j will be studied as long as war is studied, I for the boldness and skill of its conception and the rapidity of its execution. General Marshal, who succeeded Sir Slam I ley Maude, lias shown himself a very able ' soldier. On his record to December last ' alone Sir Edmund Allenby would have gone down to history as one of our ablest ! commanders, but he has greatly increased I his reputation by this astonishing victory in which two Turkish armies have been destroyed at one blow. As a cavalry ' leader he may rank with some of the I great men of the past, for it is on his I wonderful use of his cavalry that he has j mainly depended for his sweeping victories. This is one branch of war in which we are plainly ahead of the Germans; indeed, the cavalry honours in this war swim to be divided between us j and the Russians. The French, it is only I fair to say, have had few opportunities. I The biggest cavalry Etroke of the war was | attempted by the Germans, when they ! used 40.000 horsemen, liberally supplied with guns, in a movement to crush the Russians on the Kaltic front during the retreat of 1915; they failed, and it has; been said that if British cavalry had had j the same opportunity they would have ' succeeded. We have made many mistakes of generalship in this war, but the ' man who continually complains of British | "muddlng through" can lx , effectively i silenced by the mention of Messines, Vimy Ridge, the offensive of this August, Mesopotamia and Palestine, and such interesting facts as that it was a British general who invented the creeping bar- I rage, and that the tank, the most formidable new weapon of the war, was invented and developed in England.