WHY FINLAND GAVE IN

Grey River Argus, 14 March 1940, Page 7

WHY FINLAND GAVE IN

MINISTER’S SPEECH No Help Available (Received March 14, 1.45 a.m.) LONDON, March 13. M. Tanner, Finnish Foreign Minister broadcast a speech to the Finnish people. He stated that the Finnish troops would withdraw four point three-five miles daily. Finland had agreed to accept the Soviet terms, he said, because of a lack (Of weapons, and because she had no faith in the promises of others. Finland’s defence had been astonishing and beyond expectations, but the fight was uneven from the beginning. The home front had actted magnificently. The people’s morale was worthy of high praise. Some of the men were always in the firing line. Reinforcements had been lacking. (Received March 14, 1.45 a.m.) LONDON, March 13. M. Tanner in his broadcast speech, said the dispatch of allied troops to Finland by sea would be over-hazard-ous. The only possible route was through Sweden and Norway, who refused to let any troops pass. This refusal had proved an unconquerable obstacle. Thus Finland was ■ left alone to face an enemy of superior numbers. He said: “The surrender is not our fault, but the fault of our being deserted by our fellow democracies. It was wisest to make peace while dur defences remained unbroken, though severely injured. Our nation is surrendering important industrial and agricultural territories. This has created new responsibilities, and had made a new building programme even more necessary. We have risen from ruin before this. We have plenty of land left. A united front is needed just as much in. peace time as in wartime. There is a foundation for a new dawn for our nation.”

WAR STOPS

Treaty Signed HELSINKI ANNOUNCEMENT. (Received March 14, 12.42 a.m.) LONDON, March 13. At Helsinki, it has officially been announced that the Russo-Finnish peace treaty has been signed. All war-like operations ceased at 11 o’clock this morning.

I The Finnish Cabinet and Parlia|ment have ratified the Peace Treaty. ' The Finnish public remains still I uninformed as to the armistice. I M. Tanner, Foreign Minister, is to , broadcast to the nation at noon. SOVIET PRESS CLAIM. NO AGGRESSIVE INTENTION. -(Received March 14, 12.36 p.m.) LONDON, March 13. The Moscow “Pravda” says: “The Pravda” says: “The safety of Leningrad and of the Soviet Northern frontiers, has been secured. The Soviet people and the working class throughout the world have received the news of the treaty with satisfaction. The conditions entirely correspond with M. Molotov’s demands of November 29 last. Then the only Soviet purpose was to strengthen the security of Russia, which has no other intentions but peace. The Soviet has never wanted to infringe the independence of any of its neighbours. ENEMY JUBILATION. (Received March 13, 9.15 p.m.) LONDON, March 13. A Berlin message states that the German official spokesman did not conceal his jubilation over the RussoFinnish peace, which he described as an honourable one, and as a diplomatic and a military setback of the first magnitude for the Allies. CONSIDERED AN ALLIED SETBACK. (Received March 14, 12.36 a.m.) LONDON, March 13. Although a partisan strain runs through the most of it, and although the Russian and German sources express great jubilation, with the usua 1 well-disciplined unanimity, the European comment of the Russo-Finnish peace terms varies greatly. SWEDISH RELIEF. WILL IT BE LASTING? (Received March 13, 9.15 p.m.) LONDON, March 13. The news of the Moscow settlement has been joyfully received in Stockholm’s theatres and cabarets. The implications of Russia’s right of access to Sweden and to Norway, across Finland, are not yet appreciated by the Swedish people. SWEDISH PRESS VIEWS. FINLAND ISOLATED. (Received March 14, 12.40 a.m.) LONDON, March 13. The Stockholm “Dagens Nyheter” says: “Finland has been forced into peace because she could not count on effective help from outside. The “Svenska Dagbladet” says: “Perhaps these peace terms will do more damage than all of Stalin’s bombs. Finland has; escaped further horrors of war, but what a price she has to pay, after so many victories and after so much dearlyshed blood?” The “Svenska Dagbladet,” further asks whether the security in future has been sacrificed for this peace of the present. Italian View TREATY LOCALISES THE WAR. (Received March 13, 9.55 p.m.) LONDON, March 13. Official circles in Rome have greeted the peace agreement concluded at Moscow with the greatest satisfaction. The treaty is regarded as checking the extension of the conflict after the .Allies had made an offer of increased aid to Finland.

Blow to the Allies AMERICAN OPINION. FUTURE OF WAR RE-CAST, (Received March 13, 7.5 pm. ) NEW YORK, March 12. The “New York Times” Washington correspondent says: The first reaction here to the Russian-Finnish peace is a belief that the entire Scandinavian area will now be neutralised, thereby 're-casting the future of events in the 'European war. While it is felt that 'Finland has been spared the horrors of war, there is uncertainty concerning the effects on the Allies of the settlement, and there is a tendency, in diplomatic quarters, to regard the peace as a diplomatic blow to Britain and France. NEW YORK PRESS COMMENT. NO CALL FOR BRICKBATS. (Received March 13, 9.15 p.m.) NEW YORK, March 13. The “New York Times” and the “New York Herald-Tribune” print almost identical, leading articles on the peace treaty at Moscow. They diplore the fate of Finland as being a blow to the Allied prestige. They, nevertheles, emphasise that the settlement is not likely to affect the Allies’ military situation. „ The “New York Times” points out that if the creation of a Scandinavian front had been vital to the Allies, they would have acted earlier. It adds: “America is not justified in criticising the Allies or Sweden.” The “Herald-Tribune” says: "Allied support for Finland must always have been a very risky venture. The Allied High Command, whatever the popular desire may have been, is well rid of the puzzling military problem in Finland. Americans have no right to cast stones at the United States Congress for its hesitation to assume the slightest risk.” DANISH DOUBTS. A SAD PEACE. LONDON, March 13. ' A Copenhagen message states: People here queued up in front of the newspaper offices early this morning silently and sullenly. They agreed that the Moscow settlement was a sad peace. The paper, “Politiken,” says: ‘This peace will bring a pain far beyond Finland’s frontiers.” MENACE TO SCANDINAVIA. (Received March 14, 12.40 a.m.) COPENHAGEN, March 13. The Berlingske Tidende” says: “The message of peace will hardly be received by a single Scandinavian without pain and a feeling of hu- ! miliation. The general impression iis that this peace will weaken rmlland terribly, and will, simultaneously alter the position of the whole cl Scandinavia. Finland has to bear her sufferings, but sufferings also will come to Nordic countries, which yesterday became weaker and poorer.” BRITISH PRESS COMMENT (Received March 14, 1.10 a.m.) LONDON, March 13. “The Times” in a leading article, says: “Finland herself must be the first to judge as to whether the conditions of the treaty are compatible with her freedom and security. . The Finns have magnificently satisfied one condition under which the British and French would have helped them, namely, the will and the power to help themselves. The only other condition was that of co-operation from Scandinavia. This was not forthcoming.” The “Daily Mail” says: “Berlin forecasts the important Finnish nickel concessions going to Russia, which will be a big success for Herr Hiler; but another report declares that the nickel mines will be worked by British, remaining inside of Finland, although the mines will be affected pending the Russo-Finnish trade pact. The “Yorkshire Observer” says: “By accepting the peace terms, the gallant Finns will save the Allies Il cm having to throw valuable men and materials into an action which might have brought them into direct conflict with Russia.” U.S.A. ATTITUDE (Received March 14, 1.36 a.m.) NEW YORK, March 13. The United Press Washington correspondent says: The loan administrator, Mr Jesse Jones has announced that the twenty million dollar Finnish loan is continuable for rehabiliatation refugee work. Mr Hoover has not commented on the destination of the relief connections. The status of other pro-Finn activities of America is doubtful, including the tour of Maaki and Nurmi the athletes. Friends of Soviet IN AUSTRALIA. DEFEND ONSLAUGHT ON FINLAND. SYDNEY, March 13. The Russian attack on Finland was defended, and Soviet policy was praised, by officials of the Australian Railways Union, at the Australian Council of the Union. Referring to the invasion of Finland, the Federal president of the Union, Mr. T. Moroney, said that the proximity of the Finnish border to the Soviet Union’s largest centre of industrial activity, constituted a constant threat to the security of the Soviet Union, particularly in the light of the anti-Soviet political outlook of Finland’s rulers, and their readiness to collaborate with other Powers in intrigues against the Soviet.