Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

REPLY TO FRENCH MINISTER

Baudouin’s Complaints BRITISH VIEWPOINT STATED (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, August 23. The French Foreign Minister, M. Baudotiin, in a broadcast, spoke of definite proposals made front the Vichy Government to the British Government on August 2 regarding food supplies. It can be authoritatively stated that no such proposals on this subject have teached the British Government from Vichy since the departure of the Frer.cn Embassy from London. M. Baudotiin complained against the British Government that supplies from French overseas possessions cannot reach France, but the only guarantee he was able to produce against misappropriation by the Nazi authorities of any food supplies which were permitted to reach France was the promise of the Nazi Government. No independent Frenchman could take sticli promises seriously.

M. Baudouin’s ingenuous faith in them betrays once again the extent to which the Vichy Government m compelled to act as the mouthpiece ot Berlin. It will be recalled that as recently us this week M. Petain m reported to have told a correspondent of the “New York Times”: “I do not pretend that this Government is free. The Germans hold the rope and twist it whenever they consider that Jhe agreement is not being carried out. M. Baudotiin showed resentment or Mr. Churchill’s plain account of the effect of the French defection on the plans for the defence of British ami French Somaliland, necessitating the withdrawal from British Somaliland, but he displayed deliberate blindness to the facts, which can only be explained by a wish to placate the Italian Government.

His argument that the French garrison of 5000 troops at Jibuti would have been insufficient reinforcement to prevent an Italian advance in that area totally ignores the wider considerations of Allied strategy in the Middle East.

Mr. Churchill pointed out that prior to (lie French collapse a decision had been taken by the Allied Commanders to maintain their positions in Somaliland. Their plans provided for immediate reinforcement by a brigade in case of need. In addition, further reinforcements could have come from Syria.

’ In view of the French defection, not merely in Jibuti, but also in Syria, Tunis, and French North Africa. British troops con’d not be spared from Egpyt or Palestine to reinforce (lie small Somaliland garrison.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19400826.2.83

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 284, 26 August 1940, Page 8

Word Count
376

REPLY TO FRENCH MINISTER Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 284, 26 August 1940, Page 8

REPLY TO FRENCH MINISTER Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 284, 26 August 1940, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert