FROM MAY 10 TO JUNE 10
AMERICA AND THE WAR
Unlimited Emergency. —On May 27 the President of the United States proclaimed that in view of the imminence of war “an unlimited national emergency confronts the country, which requires that its military, naval, air, and civilian defenses be put on the basis of readiness to repel any and all acts of aggression directed toward any part of the Western Hemisphere.” By legislation which has remained in effect since the last World War, the President in such emergency is granted immensely increased control over the national life, including power to regulate hours of labor, eliminate internal strife, suppress subversive activities, assume possession or management of transportation facilities, and exert a very general control of credit and financial operations.
The President himself made first announcement of the proclamation in a radio address to the nation which dealt chiefly with the international situation and the problems of defense. The chief points of his address were (1) that the United States will “actively resist, wherever necessary, and with all our resources, every attempt by Hitler to extend his Nazi domination to the Western Hemisphere, or to threaten it.. . ”; (2) from the point of view of strict naval and military necessity we shall give every possible aid to Britain and to all who, with Britain, are resisting Hitlerism or its equivalent with force of arms. He pointed out that the present rate of destruction of British shipping was three times as much as present British shipping production and twice that of Britain and America combined. For this the only answer was to speed up our great shipping program and to help cut down losses on the high seas.
In relation to earlier remarks of the President on increased aid for Britain in the Atlantic sea lanes, Admiral Eric Raeder of Germany reiterated the President’s statement that “convoying means shooting,” and added that American support of the convoy system would be a “plain act of war.”
Iceland Breaks Danish Ties. —According to reports from Copenhagen, Iceland in May cut the final ties by which since 1918 the two states, otherwise independent, were linked under the common sovereignty of the Danish King. According to the action of the ancient Icelandic Althing, or Parliament, this bond is now severed, and a regency has been set up until a republican government can be formally established. As a guard against possible German seizure Iceland has been garrisoned by British and Canadian forces, reported to number up to 80,000.
Capture of “Zamzam.” —About 140 Americans were on board the 8,299-ton Egyptian steamer Zamzam, which in mid- April was sunk by a German raider between Pernambuco and Capetown, while en route from New York to Alexandria. The 202 passengers and 110 crew of the Zamzam were landed at a French Biscayan port. According to German statements, the sinking was carried out in strict accord with international law, after proof of contraband cargo and provision for the safety of those on board. The contraband in the cargo consisted chiefly of 2,322 tons of oil and a variety of manufactured goods, aside from 24 units of the British-American ambulance corps. Reports from Spain at the end of May indicated that all the American passengers had been released, except 21 American ambulance drivers, who were held at Biarritz, Spain, pending a decision from Berlin. Two Americans were wounded when the Zamzam was shelled by the raider, indicating that the seizure of the quasi-neutral vessel was not without some use of force.
Ship Seizures. —Early in June the President signed the ship seizure bill which gave him complete power to take over the 80 or more French, Belgian, Italian, and German merchant vessels then in the custody of the Coast Guard and put them into active service in the carrying trade between America and the nonaggressor powers. Another measure before Congress would give the President additional power to control the movement of cargoes and rates of all ships registered or doing business in American ports. American vessels were put on former British routes in the Pacific, and it was believed that some of the seized ships would carry supplies for the Mediterranean war. In answer to the President’s opening of the Red Sea danger area, Germany on May 14 declared the whole northern end of that sea, excluding the territorial waters of Saudi Arabia, a zone of military operations, in which shipping would be open especially to attack from the air.
Ban on Axis Air Lines. —Indications in June were that, as a result largely of pressure from the United States, German, Italian, and French controlled airlines still operating in Latin America would be eliminated by the end of the summer or taken under American control. In Brazil arrangements were under way for purchase of the German Condor syndicate with capital secured from the United States. In Peru, Lufthansa operations were stopped in April by government seizure of its two planes, and in Ecuador the Sedta line was given notice that gasoline supplies would by cut off by the International Petroleum Company, a subsidiary of the Canadian branch of New Jersey Standard Oil. According to Hemisphere (May 16), Pan American Airways is expected to fill the gaps in Latin American air service, with some government pressure to insure its extension into this field.
MEDITERRANEAN AND NEAR EAST
Struggle for Syria. —The conquest of Crete in May made it clear that control of the French mandate of Syria would play a vital part in the British struggle to maintain control of the Arabian oil fields, Egypt, and the Suez. During May there could be no doubt that Nazi aircraft were utilizing Syrian air bases, and that Nazi agents were pouring into the country in increasing numbers. From May 14 on the R.A.F. made repeated raids on Syrian air fields, and on May 16 the British declared a new danger zone along the Syrian coast. On May 20 the French authorities ordered all British consuls out of the territory. Actual invasion of Syria by British and Free French forces began on June 8 and made rapid progress, while from Vichy Marshal Petain in a message to the Syrian High Commissioner General Henri Dentz called on French forces to fight to the end to protect the integrity of the empire. Meantime the Axis powers, in the prospect of an open break in Franco-British relations, were apparently unwilling or unable to move immediately to support the French forces of defense. British naval forces off the coast were reported adequate to prevent a German reinforcement through the Eastern Mediterranean.
Iraq Yields to British. —Whatever the subsequent turn of events in the Levant, the British at the end of May had re-established a favorable régime in Iraq, where on April 4 the pro-German leader Rashid Ali el Gailani had deposed the regent Abdul Illah and started an anti- British campaign. Rashid Ali fled to Iran, and an armistice with a citizens’ committee of Bagdad was announced by the British on June 1. By its terms Iraqi troops were to return to their peace-time stations, British prisoners were to be released, and Germans and Italians were to be interned. A new cabinet was approved by the Regent Abdul Illah, who had re-entered his country in the wake of British troops. British forces also regained control of the Mosul oil fields and pipe line to Haifa.
Turco-German Trade Talks. —Although there appeared some possibility of Turkish co-operation in resisting a German invasion of Syria, German negotiators at Ankara sought busily by trade deals and other pressure to swing the Turks over into the pro-Axis lines. In addition to minor trade accords negotiated during the past year, Ambassador von Papen was reported in June to have proposed a new trade agreement, providing for exchange of German railway equipment, machinery, and possibly armaments for Turkish copper, tanning materials, and foodstuffs. With other markets cut off by Axis air control of the Aegean, Turkey would appear almost forced into acceptance.
Division of Spoils. —Further juggling of Yugoslav territory conquered by Germany was indicated by the announcement on May 18 that Croatia, in which a semi-independent regime was set up after the conquest, was to become a satellite kingdom under the rule of Aimone, Duke of Spoleto, of the Italian House of Savoy. Aimone is a younger brother of the Duke of Aosta, Italian Viceroy of Ethiopia, whose surrender in May marked the end of Italian resistance in East Africa. The Croatian delegation which offered the crown to Aimone was headed by the anti- Serbian leader Ante Pavelic and was received in Rome by King Victor Emmanuel, who a week before in Albania had escaped four or five shots fired at his car by a young Greek fanatic. Further agreements between the Germans and Italians at Rome turned over to Italy the Dalmatian coast and most of the islands of the eastern Adriatic, with a population of 900,000. Montenegro, incorporated with Yugoslavia after the World War, was to be an Italian controlled principality under Michael, 32-year-old grandson of King Nicholas Petrovitch, the pre-World War ruler.
FRANCE AND THE WAR
Franco-German Collaboration. — Speaking in a broadcast from Vichy on May 23 after his return from a conference with the Reichführer at Berchtesgaden, Admiral Francois Darlan made it clear that Germany and the Vichy Government were approaching a bargain on closer collaboration, though he gave only the vaguest indication as to what the terms of that bargain might be. He declared that Germany had not called for surrender of the French Fleet, or for a declaration of war on England, or for relinquishment of French sovereignty in any colonial possession. Yet it was difficult to reconcile this statement with Nazi activities in Syria, and the services rendered by French industry in production of munitions and weapons for the Axis war. Secretary Eden in a speech on May 20 declared that the Rhone was being used for the passage of German motor torpedo craft to the Mediterranean, and that at least 20 firms in unoccupied France were engaged in the manufacture of aircraft, tanks, and munitions for Germany. Dissention among French leaders as to the extent of French support of the Axis was evident following General Weygand’s return to Vichy for conferences in early June. When the General went back to Africa on June 7 he was reported to have resumed control of the French African possessions on the following terms: (1) that any encroachment on these possessions, either by Britain or the Axis, was to be resisted to the end; (2) that no military action was to be taken against the Free French forces to recover territory now in their hands; and (3) that the turn of events in Syria was to be considered as in no way connected with the defense of the French African Empire.
Challenge to Vichy. —In answer to Vichy protests regarding the American seizure of French ships, Secretary of State Hull declared frankly to Ambassador Henry-Haye that the Franco-German collaboration negotiations were apparently putting France definitely into the German camp, and he called for clear reassurances that future Franco-German relations would be kept strictly within the terms of the armistice. These reassurances as subsequently given were not altogether convincing. The French Ambassador pointed out that by the terms of the armistice “all the air fields and all the installations in any French territory will be placed under German and Italian control.” If this clause were to be applied not only in Syria but in French West African and transatlantic possessions, it would evidently be dangerous to leave such possessions under French rule. In a subsequent statement on June 5 regarding Franco-American relations, Secretary Hull made it clear that continued export of foodstuffs to France and other amicable intercourse would depend on avoidance by the Vichy Government of a course which would make France “in part the instrument of aggression against many other peoples and nations ... to say nothing of its ultimate effects on the liberties, the true interests, and the welfare of the people of France.”
FAR EAST
Pressure on Dutch Indies. —In reply to what Japan described as a “final” note to the Netherlands Indies calling for increased exports to Japan of oil, tin, rubber, and other commodities, the Batavia authorities on June 6 presented a 10-page reply. It was stated that the reply “steered a middle course,” offering normal trade relations, with exports to Japan based on the average volume for the past five years, and with the stipulations that British and American needs should take precedence, and that no exports should reach Germany. Though the head of the Japanese delegation, Kenkichi Yoshizawa, spoke of this reply as “disappointing” and “unsatisfactory” he did not at once break off negotiations. The Tokyo press had already attributed the Dutch resistance chiefly to the hostile influence of the United States and Britain, and to the illusion that the Axis powers could be defeated in the war. On May 30 Foreign Minister Matsuoko reiterated Japan’s fidelity to the Axis as the cornerstone of its foreign relations, and added that if Japan’s “peaceful policy” in the South Seas became impossible, she might be forced to adopt other courses. Captain Hiraide, the naval spokesman, also declared that economic pressure, quite apart from European War developments, might “compel Japan to rise up in arms in self defense.”
Japan Seeks No Peace Pact. —While Tokyo statesmen were thus confirming Axis ties and threatening war in the South Seas, it was reported from Washington in early June that Ambassador Nomura had for several weeks been suggesting a nonaggression pact between the United States and Japan similar to the recent agreement between Japan and the Soviet Republic, the argument being that the United States would be wise to give Japan a free hand in the Far East before entering into the conflict in the Atlantic. To this proposal the State Department’s response was described by Tokyo as “excessively formal and stilted,” its general tenor being that such an agreement would have dubious value for two reasons:
(1) The responsibility of the leaders of the Japanese Government is subject to grave doubt and their ability to carry out agreements questionable.
(2) Time after time, since the outbreak of the “China incident” almost four years ago, Japanese leaders individually and the Japanese Government officially have reiterated promises to respect the Open Door in China and to assure “equal opportunity for all,” but these promises have never been kept.
Aid for China. —According to announcements at the close of May, American supply of materials to China to the value of nearly $100,000,000 had been arranged for under the terms of the Lease- lend Act, and initial shipments had already arrived, including trucks, munitions, and factory equipment, which would continue to reach China to the extent made possible by the limited facilities of the Burma Road. In addition to this material aid, Secretary Hull in a letter to Foreign Minister Quo Tai-chi on May 31 gave definite written promise that, when peace was re-established, in China, the United States Government would “move rapidly, by processes of orderly negotiation and agreement, toward relinquishment” of all extraterritorial rights now held in China. The occasion taken for the promise was the departure of the Foreign Minister from San Francisco for his new post at Chungking.
Oil for Japan. —In an article in the May Amerasia the policy of continued American oil exports to Japan is violently attacked. According to the article, while the total exports to Japan during the first two months of 1941 decreased nearly 50 per cent, the export of gasoline and lubricating oil alone totalled 1,077,000 barrels as against 330,000 barrels for the same period in 1940. Furthermore,
This enormous trade in oil is going on unchecked, while the American Government engages in discussions with British, Dutch, and Australian officials as to joint measures for the defense of Southeast Asia against Japan; Philippine defenses are increased; American-made bombers are sent to reinforce the British garrison at Singapore; and the Secretary of the Navy warns of the danger of an “expansion of hostilities by Japan into a region which is one of the sources of critical war materials for both Great Britain and ourselves.”
In the view of the writer, while the excuse for this trade has been that stoppage might precipitate a Japanese attack on the Dutch Indies, in reality the appeasement policy has enabled Japan
not only to strengthen her position in China but also to advance into Indo-China and Thailand, so that she is now in better position to launch an attack on the Dutch East Indies and Malaya. . . . Far from causing Japanese leaders to abandon their expansion program in Southeastern Asia, the continued sale of large quantities of American oil to Japan encourages it.