THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES Tuesday, April 14, 1942. A "SECOND FRONT"

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24890, 14 April 1942, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES Tuesday, April 14, 1942. A "SECOND FRONT"

In a recent broadcast Lord Beaverbrook described the Soviet resistance of the Nazi armies as the hope of humanity. That view of the resolute stand of the Prussians, which has engaged the greater part of the German war machine in an unending conflict in adverse conditions, may be allowed. The toll of lives taken by the Russians, the effect upon the German soldiers and the German people of this sanguinary campaign, have made the war on the Eastern Front the most important, and certainly the most encouraging for us, of the winter months. But any student of the war zones does not need to be reminded that the front against Hitler in Russia is not alone of grim consequence at the present time. Talk of the need for opening a “ second front ” tends to ignore the fact that Great Britain, the nations of the commonwealth and their Allies, are already carrying onerous responsibilities both on land and sea that have to be maintained. These make, perhaps, no direct contribution to Russia’s struggle with the Axis, except in permitting the manufacture and delivery of equipment without which the Russians could not have marshalled their resources of man-power to such purpose. But every blow struck at the Axis, in any part of the world, is a blow for the final victory against the sinister forces of the aggressors. Russian impatience at the fact that nowhere else is a battle being waged against Hitler of the magnitude and intensity of that within the Soviet borders is intelligible. The Russians are, by the choice of the German Fuhrer — their erstwhile friend while Great Britain was already prosecuting the war for freedom—carrying the hardest and most exacting role today. The demands of M. Litvinov, Soviet Ambassador in Washington, that Great Britain, with United States aid, should open up other fronts for carrying the war against Germany may probably be accepted as representing the official Soviet attitude. Russia has sworn not only to hold Hitler’s armies, but to destroy them. The goal of the Russians is Berlin. And at a time when a spring offensive is being developed against them the Russians would be immeasurably assisted by large-scale diversions of German strength from the Eastern Front. The question alone for the democratic Allies to consider is the practicability of meeting the Soviet appeal. There are grave problems implicit in any European adventure while their shipping is in short supply and fully taxed, and while the flow of arms and material from the democratic arsenals is still subject to priority rule —in blunt words, to rationing. If a diversion is created with the specific object of relieving the pressure on Russia it must be a diversion in great strength, not merely a distraction. The men are available, but only the Governments of the Allies know whether other requirements could be fully, met. The Canadian commander in Great Britain, General McNaughton, last month summarised the position realistically when, admitting that wars are not won by “ sitting on defensive positions,” he added: “The proper time to strike will come. It is no good using troops prematurely, and no blow must be struck casually.” He might have added, for the benefit of many ardent advocates of the second front, that strictly military considerations, not sentiment or political fervour, must decide the time for striking.