The Southland Times MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1940. Another German Fairy Tale

Southland Times, Issue 24112, 29 April 1940, Page 6

The Southland Times MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1940. Another German Fairy Tale

THE METHODS of Herr von Ribbentrop are now so well known that no great stir is likely to be caused by his latest experiment in imaginative diplomacy. His allegation that the Allies had planned to occupy Norway has been refuted easily by the British authorities. Even without this official denial, the clumsy inventions of the Nazi Foreign Minister would have impressed only the most credulous persons. No unusual insight is required for an understanding of the events that preceded the invasion of Norway. There is abundant proof that the Nazis made careful plans for what was to be a lightning campaign. Only after elaborate and secret preparations could they have been ready to act as quickly as they did on April 9. Transports and supply ships must have been on their way to Narvik long before the Royal Navy began to lay mines off the Norwegian coast. Moreover, the Nazis did not strike haphazardly. They swooped upon the best harbours and nearly all the aerodromes; and when the ultimatum was presented to Professor Koht in Oslo certain Norwegians in key positions had already performed acts of treachery. Such conspiracies are not arranged in a few hours. The British reply to Herr von Ribbentrop explains that if the Allies were on the eve of a descent upon Norway there would have been no delay in the sending of transports. Actually, no such delay should have occurred, for an expeditionary force had been made ready some weeks previously, when it was proposed to send help to Finland, and it seems strange that these forces were dispersed while there were so many signs of an increasing German pressure on Scandinavia. But it is now beyond doubt that Britain was not ready to send immediate aid, and in those early days of the campaign the Germans were able to establish themselves in strong positions. Perhaps it is unfortunate, from the viewpoint of the British Government, that the answer to a German fantasy had to emphasize a lack of preparedness at a time when every hour was precious. One further point concerns the allegation that complete details of the Allied “conspiracy” were found in the possession of a high British Army officer, supposed to have been captured by the Nazis. The Ministry of Information has denied that any such officer has been taken prisoner in Norway. It could have gone further and asked why a plan of this kind — assuming its existence —would be in the hands of an officer long after the opportunity had passed for putting it into effect. Is it remotely possible that staff officers carry political documents where they could be seized by the enemy? The whole story is bristling with improbabilities. But its basic weakness is the resemblance it bears to the tactics of the Nazis themselves: The world has learned that when the German propagandists begin to cry out against the use of bombs and poison gas, or of some new “intolerable provocation,” they are hinting at the nature of their next act of terrorism. Herr von Ribbentrop now accuses Britain of planning a deed which he and his colleagues have already committed. The accomplished fact is evidence which sane men will prefer to the wild stories of a politician whose record looks soiled and shabby even among the infamies of the Nazi regime.