Allies Mine Norwegian Waters

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLVIII, Issue 21624, 9 April 1940, Page 7

Allies Mine Norwegian Waters

Answer To Nazi Violation Of Law

Effort To Close “Supply Chute”

United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received April 8, 8.55 p.m.) LONDON, April 8. A BRITISH AND FRENCH BROADCAST early to-day revealed that the Allied Governments have given notice to Norway that they reserve the right to take such measures as they think necessary to hinder and prevent Germany obtaining resources or facilities in Norway. The Allies resolved to deny the enemy the use of territorial waters for the carriage of contraband. They have given notice that three areas in Norwegian waters have been rendered dangerous for navigation by mines and vessels entering the areas do so at their own peril.

To avoid the possibility of Norwegian or other vessels inadvertently entering these areas they would be patrolled by British naval vessels for 48 hours after the laying of the first mine. The Allies would never follow the German example of brutal violence. The mine-laying would not interfere with the free access of Norwegian ships to their own ports.

The broadcast stated that if the successful prosecution of the war required the Allies to take such measures, world opinion would not be slow to realise the necessity and purpose of their action.

The Allied broadcast decision to lay mines in Norwegian waters stated th-t the German campaign against merchant shipping of al! nations had been intensified and pursued with even greater brutality than before. The number of neutrals destroyed by Germany now exceeded 150 and neutral ll.es lost were nearly 1000. The attacks were carried out in almost every case in defiance of the recognised rules of war, fr< quenily with the greatest barbarity -nd on many occasions without the slightest justification. Germany had already announced that she was entitled to destroy any neutral bound for a British port, including contraband h-rbours, but there had been repeated cases of vessels being destroyed between two neutral ports when they had no intention of touching at any British port. It was obvious that tie German Government was engaged in an indiscriminate campaign of destruction throughout waters in which their it notified mines were laid or in which submarines were able to operate. Although the greatest losses had fallen on neutrals, Allied vessels also had suffered. A new development in the policy of destruction was the bombing of British and peutral trawlers and fishing-boats and nachinegunning the crews. The innocent character of fishing-boats was hitherto universally recognised but that vid not prevented Germany from committing nearly 200 attacks aimed at sinking them and murdering the crews. Even lig .- .ps and their crews had been ruthlessly attacked with bombs. It was a fact deserving of constant emphasis that the German attacks were deliberately aimed at the destruction of neutral lives and property and it was abundantly clear that the purpose was pure terrorism. On the other hand the Allies had not destroyed a single neutral ship or taken a single neutral ife. They had not only saved Innocent victims of German outrages but had rescued from drowning Ger—n aim i and submarine crews who were guilty of these inhumanities. Germany was flagrantly violating neutral rights In ordr.r io damage Allied countries while insisting on the strictest observance of the rules of neutrality whenever such observance provided some advantage to herself. International law always

recognised the right of a belligerent to take appropriate action when an enemy systematically resorted to illegal practices. Such action even though unlawful in ordinary circumstances beer a lawful In view of the o’ber b” ,|, "’re"t’s violating of the law. The Allied Governments, therefore, were entitled to take such action as they deemed proper in the present circumstances. A 1- ••■y proportion ot the losses had fallen on the Norwegian mercantile marine, yet hile Germany was repeatedly sinking Norwegian shinning murdering Norwegian seamen, she continued to demand from the Norwegian Government the fullest u - of territorial waters for her own commerce. Norway even felt obliged to provi.'i an armed escort in these waters for German ships, although she was unable to take effective action against Ger" an brutality on the high seas. Whatever might be the actual policy which the German threats and pressure compelled Norway to follow, the Allies no longer could afford to acquiesce in the present state of affairs whereby Geri any obtained resources vital to her prosecution of f a war and obtained from Norv.ay facilities placing the Allies at a dangerous disadvantage. Britain and France had already given notice to the Norwegian Government that .hey reserved the right tn take such measures as they thought necessary to hinder and prevent Germany from obtaining resourc oc r ~ i .’. in Norway.

The three minefields are roughly:— (1) In the vicinity of Bodo commanding the entrance to Vest Fjord and Narvik.

(2) Off Bud which is south of Krigtiansund. (3) Off Stadtland Island at the entrance to Nord Fjord. The French Government announces that a note was sent to Norway similar to the terms of the British Note. A message from Oslo states that the news concerning the minefields caused great excitement throughout the country. Dr. Koht (Foreign Minister) conferred with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Affairs Committee. Parliament has been summoned.