THREAT TO PORT MORESBY

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23743, 15 September 1942, Page 5

THREAT TO PORT MORESBY

COMMENT ON ENEMY SUCCESSES U.S. PAPER CRITICISES AUSTRALIANS (Special Australian Corresp., N.Z.P.A.) SYDNEY. Sept. 14. American war correspondents sending cablegrams from Australia see in the present Japanese drive ‘a real menace to Port Moresby only if it is connected with a seaborne movement, but some American papers express different views in leading articles. The isolationist “Chicago Tribune, in a leading article headed, “Crisis in New Guinea,” severely criticises the Australian forces for permitting the Japanese to cross the Owen Stanley range. The “Chicago Tribune”, says: Just when American success in the Solomons gave promise of a turning point in the war in that area, the Australian forces to whom the defence in this case was entrusted 1 show signs of caving in. The whole deadly pattern of disaster in Malaya seems in a fair way of being repeated unless (( prompt and decisive action is taken. The “Chicago Tribune" adds that the Australian withdrawals are not in the language of victory. The Port Moresby campaigning has been the Australians’ own show, and they went there with every advantage. What General Mac Arthur may have to do is to rush an American force over 400 miles of water to New Guinea. Australian Troops Praised The military correspondent of the New York “Herald Tribune,” Major Fielding Eliot, states: “The Australian soldier has the physical, moral, and mental characteristics necessary for commando fighting. It is fortunate that the United Nations have a ready-made supply of such human material for amphibious troops at hand in the southwest Pacific. . . . ... “A recent leading article in the Melbourne ‘Herald,’ gave as Australia s ideal ‘Every soldier, every digger, a commando.’. This is the sort of spirit and thinking that lead to victory. “No better possible use could be found for the Australian soldier than the task of cleaning the Japanese from the island strongholds in the Pacific, As one who saw Australian troops in action the writer can testify that their qualities are .exactly those demanded for amphibious warfare which makes special demands on all who participate, from the highest commanders downwards. With proper training and equipment, they will prove worthy comrades in arms for the American marines. “In addition, the Australian Army is actually present in the theatre of operations, whereas every American marine must be transported over 7000 miles of water and then maintained at a considerable expenditure of precious tonnage. All who have seen the Australians in action bear testimony to the high character of their individual fighting qualities, resourcefulness, adaptability, and quickness to 'learn, - and to their offensive sipirit. “As General Monash remarked, for the Australian soldier war is a game, and he plays for his side with enthusiasm. The marines have made a good beginning in the distant Pacific waters. They could ask for no better fighting partners than the Australians in the heavier tasks lying ahead,” The “New York Times” saysf "The entire course of the Pacific war may depend on the outcome of the present New Guinea fighting." It adds: "The Japanese may withdraw their Chinese garrisons for an attempt to win Australia, or they may have decided merely to strengthen their hold on the south-west Pacific against a possible Allied counter-attack while they strike at India or Siberia.” Confidence in General Mac Arthur Commenting on Japan’s New Guinea thrust, Senator Johnson, a member of the United States Senate Military Affairs Committee, said the committee had full confidence in General MacArthur’s ability to meet the, .Japanese: threat to Fort Moresby, He emphasised that General Mac Arthur and Rear-Ad; miral Ghormley worked In close harmony, and he denied a press suggestion that there was any friction between the divided commands. The present was not a time for needless criticism or making changes, British comment appears to be mainly concerned with the fresh evidence of sorry under-estimation of Japanese power, and of continued lack of appreciation of the enemy’s tactics and determination. “Scrutator,” in the “Sunday Times.” says the Allies would make a poor exchange if they lost Port Moresby to win Guadalcanal” The Japanese are an active and most embarrassing enemy who, in spite of defeats at sea, remain capable of doing critical injury.” ' A commentator in the “Observer” says: -“Allied local successes In the south Pacific are not sufficient to alter materially the next phase of .Japanese plans.” He describes Allied strategy as "proceeding in a series of fits and jerks in response to enemy moves,” and believes the Japanese push towards Australia is part of the enemy’s general design to uncover the heavy defences of India and Honolulu by forcing the diversion of reinforcements to the secondary front of Australia,