NORWAY SEES WAR IF HER NEUTRALITY IS NOT RESPECTED (4/7/40)

Microfiche-New York Times archives, McHenry Library, U.C. Santa Cruz | 4/7/40 | Hugh Byas, Harold Callender, Edwin L. James, Frank L. Kluckhohn, Ferdinand Kuhn Jr.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Free Republic University, Department of History presents World War II Plus 70 Years: Seminar and Discussion Forum
First session: September 1, 2009. Last date to add: September 2, 2015.
Reading assignment: New York Times articles delivered daily to students on the 70th anniversary of original publication date. (Previously posted articles can be found by searching on keyword “realtime” Or view Homer’s posting history .)
To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by freepmail. Those on the Realtime +/- 70 Years ping list are automatically enrolled. Course description, prerequisites and tuition information is available at the bottom of Homer’s profile.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Selections from West Point Atlas for the Second World War
Evolution of Plan Yellow, October 1939-January 1940
The Far East and the Pacific, 1941 – The Imperial Powers, 1 September 1939

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Winston S. Churchill, The Gathering Storm

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Winston S. Churchill, The Gathering Storm

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Norway Sees War If Her Neutrality is Not Respected – 2-3
Manchukuo Orders Conscription in 1941; Soldiers Will Be Placed in Japanese Army – 3
27,000 Transit Men Facing Rigid Tests – 4
The International Situation – 4
Bomber Makes First ‘All Blind’ Flight, 300 Miles From Long Island to Virginia – 5
Richer Ore Makes Narvik Vital Pirt – 7
U.S. Envoy to Paris Off For Europe on Clipper – 8

News of the Week in Review
The Blockade of Germany and Six Leaks the Allies Seek to Halt (map) – 9
Bolder Blockade – 10-11
Twenty News Questions – 11
Allies Forge Blockade as Chief War Weapon – 12-13
Germany’s Oil Supply a Vital Factor in War – 14-16
Answers to Twenty News Questions – 17

The New York Times Book Review
“The French Yellow Book,” Diplomatic Documents – 18-19

The New York Times Magazine
The Watch on the Fjords – 20-23

[abb]

http://www.onwar.com/chrono/1940/apr40/f07apr40.htm

German fleet sails for Norway
Sunday, April 7, 1940 www.onwar.com

In the North Sea... The German warships begin to leave their home ports for the invasion of Norway. The British have detected the concentration of shipping in Kiel but because they have no previous information to compare this with they fail to appreciate the significance. Some of the German units are sighted and attacked by British aircraft, however. The whole of the German surface fleet is committed to this operation, sailing at different times in six groups. They plan to land at Narvik, Trondheim, Bergen, Kristiansand, Oslo and a small detachment at Egersund. The battle cruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sail with the Narvik group but are to go on to operate against shipping in the Arctic. A large part of the U-boat fleet is also involved in the campaign but they achieve very little, partly because they use torpedoes with magnetic exploders which do not function properly in high latitudes. (This error is discovered during the campaign and is later rectified.) The ships carry units of three divisions for the assault. Three more are earmarked for a second wave. Only one, 3rd Mountain Division, is regarded by the Germans as being of best quality. They have air support from 500 transport planes, over 300 bombers and 100 fighters. For this air support to be effective it will be necessary quickly to take airfields in northern Denmark and Norway itself. This difficult task will be achieved. Meanwhile, British units are preparing to sail for their own mining operations. In the evening the main forces of the Home Fleet sail.

[abb]

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andrew.etherington/month/thismonth/07.htm

April 7th, 1940

NORWEGIAN CAMPAIGN.

GERMANY: German warships begin to leave their home ports for the invasion of Norway. The British have detected the concentration of shipping in Kiel but because they have no previous information to compare this with they fail to appreciate the significance. Some of the German units are sighted and attacked by RAF aircraft, however. The whole of the German surface fleet is committed to this operation, sailing at different times in six groups. They plan to land at Narvik, Trondheim, Bergen, Kristiansand, Oslo and a small detachment at Egersund.

Heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper and 14 destroyers leave Bremen at 0510 hours bound for Trondheim and Narvik, escorted by battle cruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sail with the Narvik group but are to go on to operate against shipping in the Arctic. In the evening, heavy cruisers Blucher and Lutzow and light cruiser Emden with eight minesweepers, two armed whaling ships and three torpedo boats sail with their troops for Oslo. Around midnight, light cruisers Koln and Konigsberg, a gunnery training ship, a storeship and eight torpedo boats leave Wilhelmshaven bound for Bergen. A large part of the U-boat fleet is also involved in the campaign but they achieve very little, partly because they use torpedoes with magnetic exploders which do not function properly in high latitudes. (This error is discovered during the campaign and is later rectified.) The ships carry units of three divisions for the assault. Three more are earmarked for a second wave. Only one, 3rd Mountain Division, is regarded by the Germans as being of best quality. They have air support from 500 transport planes, over 300 bombers and 100 fighters. For this air support to be effective it will be necessary quickly to take airfields in northern Denmark and Norway itself. This difficult task will be achieved.

Meanwhile, British units are preparing to sail for their own mining operations. In the evening the main forces of the Home Fleet sail. (Andy Etherington and Jack McKillop)

NORWAY: During the night of the 7th/8th, the British lay three minefields in Norwegian waters and Norway protests British minelaying operations off the Norwegian coast. (Jack McKillop)

GERMANY: Two Army officers - Brigadier General Kurt Himer, chief of staff of the 31st Corps, and Lieut. Colonel Hartwig Pohlman, operations officer of Falkenhorst’s Gruppe XXI are sent to Copenhagen and Oslo respectively, as secret Plenipotentiaries of the Wehrmacht to advise and assist the German ambassadors. They travel in civilian clothes, their uniforms being forwarded separately as diplomatic baggage.

UNITED KINGDOM: The prototype Blackburn B-20 crashes into the sea off Gourock Head on the Clyde in Scotland during high speed trials due to aileron flutter. Three crew escape by parachute but Flt. Lt. Bailey (Blackburn’s chief test pilot) is killed.

The British Norwegian invasion fleet sails from Scapa Flow in the Orkney Islands. Escort is provided by units of the Home Fleet including the battleships HMS Rodney and Valiant, the battle cruiser HMS Repulse, four cruisers and 14 destroyers which sail from Scapa Flow and Rosyth.

Accompanying them is a French cruiser and two destroyers. Two more British cruisers and nine destroyers leave other duties and sail for Norwegian waters. (Andy Etherington and Jack McKillop)

PANAMA CANAL ZONE:USNDestroyer J. Fred Talbott (DD-247) departs the Canal Zone to rendezvous at sea with Japanese steamship SS Arimasan Maru to provide medical assistance to a passenger on board the Japanese steamship.

[abb]

http://worldwar2daybyday.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Day 220 April 7, 1940
At 1.25 PM, RAF Hudson reconnaissance plane of 220 Squadron reports a German cruiser and 6 destroyers (part of Marine Gruppe 1) heading North. 12 Blenheims and 24 Wellingtons bombers are called in and bomb the ships unsuccessfully. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Hudson

The British response is a disaster. The Admiralty assumes German surface raiders are breaking out into the Atlantic (ignoring the possibility of coastal landings in Norway) and prepares to engage the German fleet in the open sea. Royal Navy’s Home Fleet (battleships Rodney & Valiant, battlecruiser Repulse, 2 cruisers & 10 destroyers) delays leaving Scapa Flow until 9.15 PM and misses the chance to intercept the troop-laden German warships. In addition, 1st Cruiser Squadron at Rosyth disembarks troops to engage in the ‘sea battle’, losing the opportunity for rapid landings in response to the German invasion.

British submarines HMS Shark & HMS Seawolf leave Harwich naval base to patrol off Dutch coast and HMS Clyde & HMS Thistle depart Scapa Flow to patrol the coast of Norway. http://www.uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/3426.html

[canuck_conservative]

Weren’t the British planning to invade Norway themselves and Germany basically beat them to it (by only a few days)?

[Grut]

Weren’t the British planning to invade Norway themselves and Germany basically beat them to it (by only a few days)?

Yes. The Brit counter-invasion at Narvik used what forces they'd already assembled for their own Norwegian campaign. The British reason for invading was to deny the Germans Swedish iron (shipped via Norway) and to achieve complete domination of the North Sea. The Germans invaded to forestall the British move.

[PzLdr]

Yet, at Nurenburg, Raeder was not permitted to allude to the British plans as part of his defense to the count of “Plotting to Wage Agressive Warfare” regarding Norway.

[BroJoeK]

"The British reason for invading was to deny the Germans Swedish iron (shipped via Norway) and to achieve complete domination of the North Sea."

The Brits already had "domination of the North Sea."
So why would Hitler challenge them there?

NOT for the iron ore at Narvik!
As the article on page 7 above makes totally clear, the Germans didn't need Narvik -- not in April 1940, after Sweden's Baltic Sea ice had melted.
They could easily have received all the Swedish iron ore they wanted, with just a few million Reich Marks investment in new transportation equipment for the Sweden's route to its southeastern port of Lulea. Why invade if you can much more cheaply buy what you need?

So, mere Swedish iron was not the reason Hitler invaded Norway. Longer term strategic considerations certainly were the reasons. These included German bomber and submarine bases in Norway necessary to destroy allied Atlantic shipping.

Remember this: Hitler's decision to invade Norway came immediately after the Altmark incident, in mid-February. But the Brits did not decide to send their own forces until late March.

The result was, because of their better planning, the German invasion was highly successful, while the bumbling British, well, bumbled the job.

[Grut]

You may well be right, I’m basically just echoing what I’ve read. But I’ve never read that the Germans actually wanted Norway; my sources all say they just didn’t want the Brits to have it.

[rdl6989]

You may well be right, I’m basically just echoing what I’ve read. But I’ve never read that the Germans actually wanted Norway; my sources all say they just didn’t want the Brits to have it.

That's what I've always heard as well.

[BroJoeK]

"But I’ve never read that the Germans actually wanted Norway; my sources all say they just didn’t want the Brits to have it."

It's a matter of interpretation -- your sources are not wrong, in this sence: in December 1939, Hitler told his Admiral Raeder and Norwegian Vidkun Quisling that Germany would not invade Norway as long as Britain respected Norway's neutrality.

However:

"In October 1939, the chief of the German Kriegsmarine, Grand Admiral Erich Raeder, discussed with Adolf Hitler the danger posed by the risk of having potential British bases in Norway and the possibility of Germany seizing these bases before the United Kingdom could.

"The navy argued that possession of Norway would allow control of the nearby seas and serve as a staging base for future submarine operations against the UK"

"...Convinced of the threat posed by the Allies to the iron ore supply, Hitler ordered the German high command (OKW) to begin preliminary planning for an invasion of Norway on 14 December 1939. The preliminary plan was named Studie Nord and only called for one army division.

"Between 14 January and 19, the Kriegsmarine developed an expanded version of this plan."

All of this is considered "low level planning" and it did not become "urgent" until the Altmark incident in mid-February convinced Hitler the Brits would not leave Norway untouched.
My argument is, the Altmark incident was not the "reason" but only the pretext for Hitler's reaction.
The real strategic reasons were those expressed by Raeder back in October 1939.

Indeed, the Brits also had plans, especially to help the Finns, but when the Russo Finish war ended on March 13, the Chamberlain government was not willing to consider invading Norway against its will.

By the end of March that changed, and the Brits also cobbled together a Norway operation. But the Germans were already far ahead, and after months of methodical planning, outmaneuvered and defeated the last-minute British effort.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

The gaps in the French record are maddening: they all but destroy its value for future historians.

This line from Ferdinand Kuhn's review of the French Yellow Book (#18-19) caught my eye. I recall your posting of excerpts from that document in the past. What do you think of Kuhn's assertion?

[Mikey_1962]

Poor bastards, Norway didn't realize that the Germans would invade two days later ending the “Phony War”.

Has anybody else noticed that in all these war actions the Times always says “The Nazis attack” or “Hitler invades”.

Never do they say “Germany invades” or “Germany attacks”.

Politically correct even back then...

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Has anybody else noticed that in all these war actions the Times always says “The Nazis attack” or “Hitler invades”.

Never do they say “Germany invades” or “Germany attacks”.

You piqued my interest so I went back and looked at headlines from last year. Back in September the word "Germany" or "German" made into print fairly frequently. On September 1, for example, the headline was "German Army Attacks." I think they may have been looking for the punchy word to sell papers or maybe saving space. "Nazis" takes fewer inches than "Germany" when the letters are really big. "Reich" is another favorite.

[CougarGA7]

I would say that is somewhat of a fair assessment. There are some facts in the historical record in general that are a bit maddening. The French Yellow Book does nothing to really allow the reader to assess the failings of the French leadership. I would not be the least bit surprised if entries that would have been telling of the French command and control structure were either deleted or intentionally left out.

However, I cannot say that the Yellow Book is completely worthless. There are nuggets of insight inside them that give you some perspective of at least how the French mindset worked leading up to the declaration of war in 1939. The British Blue Book falls under the same category. There are aspects in which it is lacking but it still is a useful source of information. In some respects they fill in the gaps for the other.

Now what I would LOVE to find, but cannot, is the Polish Green Book. This book apparently existed and was issued by the Polish Government in exile at the end of 1939 or beginning of 1940, but I cannot find a thread of evidence on whether or not there is still a copy of it or even excerpts from it in existence today. That might be very interesting.

[henkster]

But Weizsacker was allowed to use the Secret Protocol to the Non Aggression Pact in his defense. And Donitz was able to use American unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan as his defense.