Norwegian WWII History
Volume 1
1999
Dear friends!
This week I will continue the history on Norway's war. I have decided to end the story on Norway's war before I start writing about other things. In this way you do not have to keep on reading "back" on what I have written before.
Norway had early in the Thirties stated should ever a war start again she wanted to be neutral. As a consequence of this she declared herself neutral as soon as France and Britain declared war on Germany on September 1, 1939.
Trough out the Autumn of 1939 and the Winter of 1940 there were many incidents along the Norwegian coast line, ships from both Germany and Britain violated Norwegian water. Even aero planes from both countries violated our, Norwegian, air space.
This week I will give you the most known story of violation of Norwegian waters that happened before Norway was invaded by Germany on April 9 1940.
THE ALTMARK AFFAIR
The
Altmark in Jæssingfjord February 1940
Norwegians taking killed German sailors to the nearest church
Jøssingfjord
Jøssingfjord Exhibition about the Altmark incident
Panxerschiff Admiral Graf von Spee
Altmark had been supply ship for the German battleship Admiral Graf von Spee.
On December 20, 1939 Kaptän zur See Langsdorff of Admiral Graf von Spree sank
Graf von Spree and committed suicide outside Montevideo. Ever since the start
of WWII Admiral Graf von Spree had been anusance to the British supremacy in
The South Atlantic. The story of Admiral Graf von Spree and her struggle to
survive British pursuit and vengeance for sinking many British naval and
merchant ships is well known. The story of the supply ship Altmark is less
known I presume. As Admiral Graf von Spree sailed for Montevideo for repair
Altmark stayed out at the open sea. As Kapitän zur See Langsdorff sank his
ship Altmark had to start the long and dangerous travel back to Germany.
Altmark did not have any guns or other ways of protection against attacks, so
she had to stay out of sight for the Royal Navy that were hunting her down.
By remarkable ways, she sail North of Iceland, Altmark ended in Norwegian
waters, near the island of Frøya in the county of Sør-Trøndelag, in February
1940. Altmark had British prisoners of war onboard as she entered into
Norwegian waters. As she entered Norwegian waters all ammunition she had
onboard were hidden, she did not want to violate Norwegian neutrality, she
also hid the British POWs. During her long trip, from Frøya to Bergen a trip
of about 600 km, along the Norwegian coast she was visited by Norwegian
authorities many times. The Captain of Altmark, Kapitän Heinrich Dau stated
she was a vessel belonging to the government Germany and as such should be
allowed free sailing through Norwegian waters.
Vessels belonging to any government or warships were according to the Laws of
the Sea not subject to foreign inspection when sailing in neutral waters. This
was a law the British had put into these laws long before WWI, around 1905 I
think. (Correct me if I am wrong.)
As Altmark came to Bergen Norwegian authorities once again wanted to inspect
her, but no inspection took place. Altmark was accompanied by Norwegian
naval-vessels, two motor torpedo boats, along the Norwegian coast from Bergen
and south towards Kristiansand. (A trip of about 700 km.) During the whole
voyage British war ships followed. On February 16, 1940 Altmark entered
Jøssingfjorden, The Fjord of Jøssing, now she was escorted by the guard boat "Firern"
and the motor torpedo boats "Kjell" and "Skarv" all belonging to The Royal
Norwegian Navy.
As Altmark came into Jøssingfjord the British vessels set out to take her. The
Norwegian vessel said they would open fire unless the British ships did not
leave Norwegian Waters. The British on their side said they had no intention
to leave without entering Altmark. Shortrly after the entered Altmark. Captain
Vian, on The Royal Navy's Cossak said he would enter Altmark and defend his
right to do so whatever the Norwegians wanted to do. While doing this the
Norwegians contacted the Norwegian Admiralty, but were told to do nothing in
fare of getting into a situation with the British. After WWII one of the
captains, Comander of the Torpedo Boats, said he could have sunk Cossak with a
torpedo without loss of any Norwegian lives, but were not allowed to shoot by
the Admiralty. He wanted to sink Cossak to stat Norwegian neutrality, but was
not given authority to do so. He was told to leave Cossak alone both by The
Defence Ministry and the Admiralty.
HMS Cossack
Cossak left Norwegian waters on February 17. In Jøssingfjorden Altmark laid
with her stern towards land and broken rudder. During the British attack seven
German sailors died, one was wounded and one missing in action.
Captain P.L. Vian entered Altmark and freed the British seamen. Cossak took
all British POWs with her and left Norwegian waters. She came home in glory
and Churchill got his picture in the press. He praised the British sae men for
their bravery.
The Altmark affair arose much interest in the international media. Norwegian
media were sorry for Cossak's violation of Norway's neutrality. British media
were of cause saying that Britian was in her right to enter Altmark because
she had British sae men onboard, and because Altmark had used Norwegian waters
to avoid British pursuit and to get to German waters. British media claimed
German Warship could not use Norwegian waters as a safe corridor from Germany
to Murmansk in Soviet Union. (In the North of Russia, on to Kola peninsula.)
French media said Altmark had violated Norwegian Neutrality by sailing along
the Norwegian territorial waters and should have been interned.
German media said there had been a outrageous assault upon a peaceful merchant
vessel which had asked for protection in Norwegian waters. Germany said
further that Norway had not given Altmark sufficient protection.
None but Norges Handels- og Sjøfratstidene, Norway's Trade- and Maritime News
Paper, looked at the Altmark affaire in relation to an incident during The
French-German war of 1870/71 when a French vessel came into British waters
with German Prisoner's of War onboard. The Consul of the German Federation in
Leith, British port, demanded the release of the POW's, but Britain refused
saying that release of POW's is not among the duties of a neutral country
during wartime.
On February 17, 09.30 the German Embassador handed the Foreign Ministry of
Norway a sharp annotation saying Norway had not given Altmark sufficient
protection.
On the same day Prime Minister Nygaardsvold, who was acting Foreign Minister,
called the British Embassador in Norway to a meeting saying Norway felt
violated by the incident. Norway protested to Britain, and demanded that
British naval ships in the future respected Norwegian neutral waters. Norway
further demanded the German seamen should be given back to Norway, Norway also
demanded compensation and reparation for the British violation of Norway
neutrality.
The same day Foreign Minister Lord Halifax met with Embassador Colban, Norway,
who gave Lord Halifax a Norwegian annotation protesting the British violation.
Lord Halifax on his side said it was an act of technical neutrality violation.
----------------
Comment
(This was the first and last time the expression technical neutrality
violation had ever been used. Looking into the Laws at Sae which were signed
at Hague in 1905 the expression "technical neutrality violation" is no where
to be found. Norway signed the Laws of the Sae in 1907.)
----------------
After the Altmark affair neither Britain nor Germany were doubting that Norway
neither could nor were willing to protect her neutrality.
On February 19, the Altmark affair were debated in the Foreign Affair's
Committee, part of the Norwegian Storting (Parliament). There are no minutes
from that meeting. In his statement for Storting on February 19, Foreign
Minister Koht informed the Storting of what had happen. His statement is equal
to that Minister Chamberlain gave and that of Lord Stanhope gave in House of
Lords.
An answer on Norway's annotation to Britain came on March 15. Norway did not
answer.
Norwegian media were very negativ towards the British violation of Norway
neutrality. Following you will find what one news paper, Aftenposten - a
conservative paper, wrote on February 19, 1940:
quote
The praeludium to the episode in Jøssingfjorden is not quite clair. But we
know this much Britain have - seen from international law - committed a gross
and very presumptuous violation of Norwegian neutrality. ... The fac that
Altmark had British POW's onboard did not deprive her the right to sail in
Norwegian waters on her way to Germany. Even if Norwegian authorities knew
Altmark had POW's onboard would this not violate Norway's neutrality, and
Norway had no right to deny her passage or stop her.
unquote
President of the Storting, I.C. Hambro, relative of the British, Jewish London
based Hambro's Bank, said: "The British ships behaviour in Jøssingfjorden is the most flagrant violation
of a neutral country's territory that have taken place in this war, and Norway
has great difficulties in understanding the violation arrogant and aggressive
violation of a small country's sovereignty of a country with long tradition as
a friend of England"
After the Altmark-affair Daladier, French Prime Minister, suggest that Britain
should immediately occupy Norwegian waters. The occupation should be carried
out even if the Norwegian Government refused. By occupying Norway, according
to Daladier, Sweden, which also was neutral, would get strength to withstand
German pressure and stop the sale of iron ore to Germany. By occupying
Norwegian coastline Britain would be within flying distance from the Swedish
iron pits and this would probably force Sweden to allow march through to
Finland. (Finland being at war with Soviet Union you know, and France wanted
to "help" Finland. What France and Britain really wanted was to be allowed to
pass through Norway and Sweden. They would blow up the Swedish iron pits on
their way from Narvik to Finland. Please look into a map/encyclopaedia to see
the distance from Narvik to Finland. It is pretty long trip during winter
time.)
The British were not too keen in that proposal, and they had lost a great deal
of prestige in Norway through their attack on Altmark. They were afraid Norway
would not allow a transport from Narvik. An other cause that preventing an
occupation by Britain at the end of February was that Finland capitulated for
Finland before France and Britain could agree on how to handle a campaign in
Scandinavia.
COMMENTS
The commanding officer on the torpedo-boat that said after WWII, he was not a
member of Nasjonal Samling, he could have torpedoed Cossak said he wanted to
confirm Norway's neutrality by torpedoing Cossak. He asked for permission from
the Admirality and The defence Ministry. If he wanted to defend Norway's
neutrality he should have torpedoed Cossak as soon as she refused to ack as
told. Neutrality in wartime can not be protected by asking for permission to
defend a country's boarders.
Had Norway protected her neutrality in Jøssingfjorden the outcome of the war
might have been different for Norway. Germany needed both Sweden and Norway
neutral, iron ore were transported from Narvik to Germany during wintertime.
Ice in the Baltic Sea. Had Norway been strong in protecting her neutrality we
might have stayed that way, even if both France and Britain wanted to move the
war zone away from the French boarders.
Heil og Sæl
Home to Web-page