Hitler’s Pre-Emptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940 Henrik Lunde (general ebook reader txt) 📖

Hovland writes that on October 5, 1948 Sundlo was sentenced to life in prison at hard labor for failing to make the necessary dispositions and preparations to meet the expected German attack on Narvik, and for surrendering his troops to the enemy. It is true that Sundlo was sentenced to life in prison at hard labor in 1948, but the statement leaves the wrong impression with respect to why this sentenced was imposed. A military court of inquiry after the war cleared Sundlo of the charge of treason and did not reprimand him for surrendering the town.26 With respect to Narvik, the court found Sundlo guilty of “negligence and incompetence.” Sundlo was stripped of his commission and sentenced to life in prison for his actions as a province official during the war and his effort to secure Norwegian volunteers for the German army on the eastern front.

In General Fleischer’s biography, Hovland refers to Colonel Sundlo as a “rotten apple.” He denounces Sundlo’s failure to follow orders and states that Sundlo was the direct reason why very weak German forces managed to capture Narvik through a bluff. He writes that Colonel Sundlo must bear the responsibility for the serious consequences the loss of Narvik had for the country and Norwegian and Allied forces.

Colonel Sundlo and his staff made inexcusable mistakes. He neglected to alert the engineer company and the 75mm railroad gun unit, or include them in two important meetings. The commander of the antiaircraft battery was not invited to the last commanders meeting at Sundlo’s headquarters. Major Omdal failed to include these three units on his itinerary when he drove around alerting commanders shortly before 0400 hours. Elvegårdsmoen was not alerted. Finally, there were no efforts made to notify and seek the cooperation of the civilian authorities in town.

There were serious leadership problems in Narvik on April 8 and 9, especially in the 1/13th Infantry. The blame for the poor performance of this battalion cannot be placed on the soldiers. They would undoubtedly have performed as well as those in other battalions in the 6th Division if they had competent leadership. The leadership of both their officers and NCOs failed at virtually every level. There are examples of orders not carried out, breakdowns in the chain of command, troops not kept informed, a glaring lack of initiative, indecisiveness, failures to follow directives, and lack of plain common sense in the absence of orders. The remnants of the 1/13th Infantry battalion continued to turn in a poor performance after its withdrawal from Narvik.

Most of these failures can be traced to inadequate training, very limited periods of active duty in the 1930s, leaders well past what is considered an acceptable age for the rigorous physical and mental demands of combat at battalion and company level, and of course, to total lack of combat experience. Most units facing the shock of combat for the first time have problems, but strong leadership and extensive training can minimize these.

A conclusion repeated by several authors is that Colonel Sundlo failed to take the proper “military precautions” before the “expected German occupation of Narvik.” The “military precautions” he failed to take are not spelled out. No military officer in North Norway expected a German attack before receipt of the British message around 2000 hours, and that message came with a note from the highest military authorities that it was not believable. On his own authority, Sundlo ordered the machinegun company and mortar platoon at Elvegårdsmoen into Narvik and reinforced the Nordal Bridge guard detail. He did not intend to move the other two rifle companies into Narvik but when the order came, he implemented it as quickly as possible.

The charge that Colonel Sundlo failed in his duties and surrendered his troops to the enemy applies to many Norwegian military officers on that eventful night or the weeks that followed. Admiral Smith-Johanssen, for example, surrendered Norway’s main naval base at Horten, including all ships in the harbor, to a much smaller German force than that confronting Sundlo. Colonel Østbye in Bergen, when confronting a somewhat similar situation that would have caused a large number of civilian casualties, wisely chose not to take up the fight in the city, but withdrew his forces to defensive positions on its outskirts.

Carl Joachim Hambro, the leader of the conservative party and the Storting, tried to have Sundlo removed from his post because of his political views long before the German attack. The campaign for his removal even led to a police investigation, which concluded that Sundlo had not done anything wrong.

The intrigues within the 6th Division for Sundlo’s removal and the activities of the conservative party leadership toward the same end may not have taken place in isolation from each other. The Allies posed the most serious threat to Narvik and no one seriously considered Germany capable of launching operations in North Norway. It is curious that individuals like Hambro and Fleischer considered it risky to have an officer with pro-German political views as the military commander in Narvik when all indications from 1939 on pointed to a British/French expedition being prepared against that city.

Colonel Sundlo could not mount a successful defense of Narvik with the forces located there and under the conditions that prevailed on 8 and 9 April. Combat in Narvik would not have changed the outcome of the German invasion, but would have caused a large number of civilian casualties. It would have been wiser to use these forces in the manner envisaged by the plans from an earlier generation.27 Those who claim otherwise forget that General Dietl had enormous firepower and additional forces at his disposal. The failure to leave adequate forces at Elvegårdsmoen to destroy that depot if it could not be defended had more serious consequences for future operations than the loss of the town. Colonel Otto Jersing Munthe-Kaas, who was a battalion commander in the 6th Division and later the Norwegian Military Attaché to the U.S., wrote:28

The campaign in Narvik