Read Online Hitler’s Pre-Emptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940 by Henrik O. Lunde - Free Book Online Page B
Book: Hitler’s Pre-Emptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940 by Henrik O. Lunde
Read Free Book Online
Authors: Henrik O. Lunde
Tags: Bisac Code 1: HIS027100
Ads: Link
reaction. It was hoped that Allied troops in Narvik would be able to move against the iron ore mines in Sweden and be in position to help that country against a German attack. The plan also called for mining the Luleå harbor with aerial deployed mines.
There can be no doubt that the sympathies of Sweden and Norway were with the Allies; nevertheless, it was over-optimistic to hope that they would not resist an attack. A more pragmatic approach would have been to assume that Sweden, in the face of Allied landings in Narvik, their advance on the iron ore district, and the mining of Luleå, would have acquiesced to German assistance if they thought it necessary. The subsequent Allied operations in North Norway demonstrated clearly that they would have been incapable of reaching the Swedish iron ore districts if faced with Norwegian and Swedish resistance, so Sweden may not even have needed to call on Hitler’s help.
The propaganda value to the German leaders of an Allied attack on two small neutrals was obvious. The Allies may well have lost the moral high ground they had secured after the German aggressions against Czechoslovakia and Poland. Even Churchill’s eloquence may not have been able to overcome the negative effects among neutrals.
It is difficult to understand why such intelligent and experienced policy-makers and military planners could have been so confident of Norwegian and Swedish support for their proposed gross infringement of neutrality. One possible explanation is that the Allies were so captivated by the perceived advantages of widening the war that they glossed over any serious objections.
In order to disrupt river traffic, the Supreme War Council also agreed to drop mines in the Rhine River and its canals at the same time, in an operation code named Royal Marine.
By including an attack directly against Germany as part of the plan, the Allies likely hoped to deflect some of the anticipated criticism that their first offensive operation of the war was carried out against a neutral country rather than the aggressor.
The French War Committee objected to Operation Royal Marine on April 3. Daladier, who was now Minister of Defense, argued that Royal Marine would lead to German reprisals against French industries. He pointed out that the fighter aircraft of the French Air Force would need three months before they were ready to protect French industries against German air attacks.
An irritated Chamberlain dispatched Churchill to Paris to try to convince the French to carry out both operations. In the meantime, however, those operations were put on hold. Churchill met Daladier on April 5. He was not particularly interested in Royal Marine and did not press Daladier to change his mind as Chamberlain had hoped. Churchill told Chamberlain and Halifax that the French arguments against Royal Marine were well grounded, but that the mining of Norwegian waters should proceed. Both the prime minister and his foreign secretary appear to have reached that decision even before Churchill’s return. The British War Cabinet decided to carry out Operation Wilfred in the early morning hours of April 8. Halifax favored proceeding with Wilfred since he feared that not doing so could cause the Reynaud government to fall. He realized that Reynaud’s resolute offensive spirit was largely motivated by a desire to avoid the fate of Daladier. The delay in launching the Allied operation from April 5 to April 8 had a huge effect on events in Norway.
The decision to proceed with the operations in Norway caused a feeling of relief and optimism among the people of London and Paris. The optimistic mood is reflected in Chamberlain’s speech to a gathering of conservative politicians and supporters on April 5. He pointed out to the audience that Hitler, in not going on the offensive over the past seven months, had failed to exploit his initial military superiority. He continued:
Whatever may be the reason—whether it was that Hitler
There can be no doubt that the sympathies of Sweden and Norway were with the Allies; nevertheless, it was over-optimistic to hope that they would not resist an attack. A more pragmatic approach would have been to assume that Sweden, in the face of Allied landings in Narvik, their advance on the iron ore district, and the mining of Luleå, would have acquiesced to German assistance if they thought it necessary. The subsequent Allied operations in North Norway demonstrated clearly that they would have been incapable of reaching the Swedish iron ore districts if faced with Norwegian and Swedish resistance, so Sweden may not even have needed to call on Hitler’s help.
The propaganda value to the German leaders of an Allied attack on two small neutrals was obvious. The Allies may well have lost the moral high ground they had secured after the German aggressions against Czechoslovakia and Poland. Even Churchill’s eloquence may not have been able to overcome the negative effects among neutrals.
It is difficult to understand why such intelligent and experienced policy-makers and military planners could have been so confident of Norwegian and Swedish support for their proposed gross infringement of neutrality. One possible explanation is that the Allies were so captivated by the perceived advantages of widening the war that they glossed over any serious objections.
In order to disrupt river traffic, the Supreme War Council also agreed to drop mines in the Rhine River and its canals at the same time, in an operation code named Royal Marine.
By including an attack directly against Germany as part of the plan, the Allies likely hoped to deflect some of the anticipated criticism that their first offensive operation of the war was carried out against a neutral country rather than the aggressor.
The French War Committee objected to Operation Royal Marine on April 3. Daladier, who was now Minister of Defense, argued that Royal Marine would lead to German reprisals against French industries. He pointed out that the fighter aircraft of the French Air Force would need three months before they were ready to protect French industries against German air attacks.
An irritated Chamberlain dispatched Churchill to Paris to try to convince the French to carry out both operations. In the meantime, however, those operations were put on hold. Churchill met Daladier on April 5. He was not particularly interested in Royal Marine and did not press Daladier to change his mind as Chamberlain had hoped. Churchill told Chamberlain and Halifax that the French arguments against Royal Marine were well grounded, but that the mining of Norwegian waters should proceed. Both the prime minister and his foreign secretary appear to have reached that decision even before Churchill’s return. The British War Cabinet decided to carry out Operation Wilfred in the early morning hours of April 8. Halifax favored proceeding with Wilfred since he feared that not doing so could cause the Reynaud government to fall. He realized that Reynaud’s resolute offensive spirit was largely motivated by a desire to avoid the fate of Daladier. The delay in launching the Allied operation from April 5 to April 8 had a huge effect on events in Norway.
The decision to proceed with the operations in Norway caused a feeling of relief and optimism among the people of London and Paris. The optimistic mood is reflected in Chamberlain’s speech to a gathering of conservative politicians and supporters on April 5. He pointed out to the audience that Hitler, in not going on the offensive over the past seven months, had failed to exploit his initial military superiority. He continued:
Whatever may be the reason—whether it was that Hitler
Similar Books
