REPLIES

Evening Star, Issue 23562, 29 April 1940, Page 7

REPLIES

(British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, April 27. Commenting on von Ribbentrop’s statement, authoritative circles in London said that there was no truth in his assertion that the Allies’ plan is to dismember the German nation. The Prime Minister has already described this allegation as a malicious mis-statement. Concerning the so-called British plans to invade Scandinavia, von Ribbentrop bases hia charges on alleged statements by Mr Churchill and others. The facts are as follows :■—

First, it is true that the British and French Governments, as they have already declared openly, were determined to stop German abuse of Norwegian territorial waters. Hence the decision to lay the minefields. Secondly; the Allied Governments sought permission to send help to Finland via Norway and Sweden. When this was refused, they did not proceed with the plan. Thirdly, the Norwegian Government, ■far from deciding to’enter the war on the side of the Allies, as von Ribbentrop alleges,, refused consistently to agree even to the passage of troops to Finland, ,

Fourthly, if troops had been ready for landing in Norway, as von Ribbentrop alleges, there would have been no delay in coming to the assistance of Norway. The delay that did occur was due to the necessity of assembling a force.

Fifthly, had the laying of minefields been merely a preparation for a landing, as is alleged, the Allies would not have announced it. They did so purely out of regard for neutral interests, which Germany has sp shamefully disregarded. Sixthly, the German expedition, as has subsequently been admitted on the German wireless, sailed many days before the minefields were laid. ,

Seventhly, it is notorious that the German, landing in Norway was made possible by the activities of German secret agents. It is impudent to suggest that British agents had been preparing for a British landing. Eighthly, the British Government is anxious that neutrals should take steps to protect themselves from German aggression. But it is patently untrue to say that the Allies seek to extend the war. The view of the neutrals is indicated by the fact that none mobilised in fear of Allied aggression. There is no doubt that the extension of the war to Scandinavia was due to the deliberate action of the German Government. This it now seeks to justify on the basis of alleged documents of which it had no cognisance when it committed the aggression. It is also interesting to note the absence in von Ribbentrop’s speech of any attempt to justify.the German aggression in Denmark. Denmark, in short, does not appear to him to be worthy of any mention at all. Despite the statement made by von Ribbentrop in his speech, it is officially denied that any brigadier or his staff has been captured during the operations in Norway,

SUCCESSION OF LIES

i MBBENTROPS FANTASTIC STORY FOLLOWING A SHABBY GERMAN TRADITION (British Official Wireless.) . . Press Association—By TelegrapH—Oopyngiit RUGBY, April 28. (Received April 29, at 9.55 a.m.) The Sunday Press reaction, to von Ribbentrop’s speech is one of amazement at the extent and degree to which he not only departs from the truth, hut with complete abandonment recites utter falsehoods in bis account of events leading to the German invasion of Norway. The ‘Sunday Times’ writes: “The neutral world will approach with natural scepticism von Ribbentrop’s fantastic attempts to demonstrate that Germany invaded Norway only in order ia forestall a previously prepared invasion by Britain. He says that on April 8, when Britain announced that it was mining certain Norwegian waters. British forces were already being transported through the North Sea. The question naturally presents itself—why, then, did they not get to Norway with or before the Germans? The answer, according to von Ribbentrop, is that in the meantime part of the British troop transports were attacked and destroyed by the German air force. The fact is, as announced last week by the British authorities, that from the first to the last not one single British transport has been successfully attacked. Von Ribbentrop has invented the ’ destruction of non-existent transport because in no other way could be explain their non-existence." Following the invasion of Denmark and Norway on April 9 by German forces the Allies prepared a counter-stroke, but it was nearly a week before they could begin landing men in Norway. They were only able to do so then because early in March they had collected an expeditionary force for Finland. “ Following one of the shabbiest German traditions von Ribbentrop tries to -impute the guilt to his victim, Norway, on the strength of the alleged capture of documents. This, it will be remembered, was exactly what Ger-

many "tried to do against Belgium in the last war. Nobody but her own credulous people and partisans were convinced then, or will be now. In both cases the innocent country has been scrupulously neutral. In both cases Germany has profited by its brutality to overrun and snatch, and in both she had the incredible meanness to bring a lying charge against her victims." In this connection the Swedish radio announced on Sunday morning that the Norwegian news agency had published a protest against this allegation of von Ribbentrop—that Britain had negotiated with Norway for the acquisition iof military bases in Norway. Since the outbreak of war, it was asserted, Norway had made every endeavour to observe strict neutrality, and when Germany offered to help Norway against alleged aggression from. Britain the King and his Government and people } refused, as acceptance would have been with Norway's neutrality. N • protest states therefore she urprised that Germany should .to find an excuse for her own u^itsssion. DEFINITE PROOF OF NAZI INTENTIONS STATEMENT BY NORWEGIAN MINISTER STOCKHOLM, April 28. (Received April 29, at 1.30 p.m.) M. Hambro, in an interview, said: " We have irrefutable proof that the Germans' had prepared detailed plans for the invasion months ago. We would be in a better position to-day if Britain had had embarkation parties ready and if the Allied intelligence service men, who were aware of the German preparations, had warned us previously. Our legation in Berlin had proof of the sailing of German parties a week -before the invasion. Members of the legation knew for some weeks that German troops were embarking at various German ports, but they did not believe that the troops were intended for Norway. The fact that the Allies did not inform Norway of the Germans' intentions shows that they regarded Norway as absolutely neutral and not prepared to be an ally." IN SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPE 18 WHITE PAPER BEING CIRCULATED? BUDAPEST, April 27. (Received April 28, at 11.30 p.m.) German aeroplanes are en route to the Governments of South-eastern Europe with a communication from the i Nazi Government, believed to be the White Paper., j