Evening star., 1940-05-05
Nazis' Legal Case
AGAINST Britain and
Norway Called Weak
Five Grounds Cited
For Bosine Demurrer
To Their Charges

The fuH-dress parade with which
Herr Won Ribbentapp, the German
Minister OF Foreign Affairs, pre-
sented his supposedly astonishing
revelation Of British plans for mill
tary activities in Norway, is in itself
a suspicious circumstance in rela-
ton to the authenticity and validity
of the materials that Herr Won Rib
bentrop wished to present to the
public.
But admitting, for the sake Of
argument. that the documents were
genuine and that the statements
given therein are to be taken at
their face value, it nevertheless
remains true that the German gov
ernment has presented an exceed
ingly weak case for it's charge as
against the British government, and
an even weaker case for its charge
as against the Norwegian govern
ment. A similar type of allegation
presented in a legal prosecution
could properly be met with what
lawyers call demurrer.
A demurrer to the German
charges could be safely based upon
any one Of five different grounds.
First, the charge comes too late
and Is rested on evidence that is
claimed by the Germans to have
been obtained at too recent a date
to furnish any excuse for Germanys
action at the time she took it. The
German claim is that Germany was
really justified in invading Norway
because the British were attempting
to do the same thing But this was
not the ground given by the German
of11cial wireless, DNB, at the time
the invasion of Norway was COM
menced. At that time the invasion
was defended on the ground that
1t was a necessary step for the pro-
lection of Norway from hostile Brit
1sh attack. Now that the Norwegians
have resisted the German attack
and have welcomed the support of
British expeditionary troops the
motivation of the latest German
statement is so obvious that its
character as wishful afterthought
must be obvious to everybody.
Useful As Military Base.
Second, the papers published fur
nlsh no excuse whatsoever for the
invasion of Denmark. There has
not been the faintest suggestion
even on the German wireless that
Denmark was guilty of eny viola
tion Of her duties as a neutral. The
heartless action of the German
government in invading Denmark
reveals the true character of the
entire move which led to the ex-
tension of the war to the Scandi-
nav1an countries. Denmark was
ruthlessly invaded because of the
military usefulness of the positions
in Denmark with reference to the
attack on Norway. There was prob
ably also a subsidiary motive aris-
ing from the hope of plunder in
the larders and warehouses of Dem
mark. but the main motive was
sdoubtless simply to use Denmark as
a. bridge for the extension of the
northern war. s.rsa
The attitude of the German gov
ernment toward Denmark shows be-
yond a doubt how fully the Ger
mans have accepted the doctrine
that military requirements will JUS
tify any action whatsoever, however
destructive it may be of the inter-
ests of truly neutral states. Since
this doctrine Is actually entertained
~ the German government as
shown by the case of Denmark, it is
reasonable to suppose that the same
motives and reasons actually were
at the bottom of the ultimate move
ment into Norway. The invasion of
Norway was not to protect Norway,
but to protect Germany. It was not
to forestan British plot to extend
the northern war, but it was an
affirmative attempt by Germany to
extend the war to the northern
countries because of hope for
military advantages.
A third ground for demurrer to
the German charges lies in the
fact that the orders given to Bril-
ish officers, as represented by the
German publication of the mate
rials, were merely preliminary and
contingent. They were not i'm
mediately effective orders, nor did It
appear that they were to be car
ried out without further decisions
from higher authorities. Now this
sort of planning on the part of the
British military authorities, If it
took place at all. furnishes no JUS
tif1cation for Germany's act in in
vading Norway on a large scale in
violation of the wishes of the Nor
wegian government and its people.
The German troop movement was
an elaborate affair and must have
required much preparation and
many preliminary orders. It must
necessarily have been preceded by
many such orders and tentative di-
rections as are now attributed to
the British as of a recent date.
British Plan Only Tentative.
1t is not impossible that prelimin-
Ary and tentative orders correspond
Ing to the ones now placed to the
charge Of the British military au-
thorities were issued by the Ger
mans for their own operations as
long ago as last September. It is
natural that military leaders should
gauge various possibilities and lay
down some tentative action to be
followed in the case of certain
eventualities. But according to the
German charges themselves, the
British never crossed the line Of
Norwegian neutrality with refer
ence to the matters referred to in
the published documents. It was
purely a tentative plan whose actual
execution was contingent upon cir
cumstances and upon the making Of
further decisions. The English ac-
ton was hardly more than an ap-
praisal Of possibilities. The Ger
man action must have reached the
stage OF fully formed plan, def
1nitely designed to be executed and