Hitler’s Pre-Emptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940 by Henrik Lunde (the reader ebook .TXT) 📕

air raid alarm and blackout in Oslo at 0015 hours. The government had not requested that the two service chiefs attend their meeting and this had serious consequences. The cabinet ministers were told that something was happening in the Oslofjord but that the situation was unclear. All doubts were removed at 0150 hours when the 2nd Naval District reported that German warships had entered the restricted area around Bergen.

Prime Minister Nygaardsvold made a telephone call to the palace and talked to King Haakon VII. The king’s reaction to the news that the country was at war was, “Against whom?”, a fitting expression of the confusion and uncertainty that had prevailed for the past 24 hours. The Norwegians decided to ask Great Britain for assistance. Foreign Minister Koht made a wakeup call to the British Ambassador, Sir Cecil Dormer. Koht met with Dormer at 0220 hours and Dormer sent a query to London at 0236 hours: “MOST IMMEDIATE. Norwegian Government stresses the need for strong and quick assistance before Germans establish firm footing on Norwegian soil. Please reply by 6 p.m. whether strong assistance can be (immediately) forthcoming.”3 The British answer, which promised their full assistance “forthwith,” was received at 1255 hours. This message gave the Norwegians, who did not know the confused state of affairs in Great Britain, unrealistically high expectations.

Irrational Mobilization Decision

The government finally decided to mobilize, and Defense Minister Ljungberg passed this order to General Kristian Laake. When questioned by Laake, Ljungberg confirmed that the order dealt with the forces that the military had recommended for mobilization on April 5: the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Field Brigades. This decision would have serious consequences.

Ljungberg (1884–1967) was a career army officer who started his service in 1906. He was a colonel commanding an infantry regiment when he received his appointment as Defense Minister on December 22, 1939. He was not the government’s first choice. The prime minister favored General Fleischer but it was considered unwise to move him from his sensitive assignment in North Norway. Most of the cabinet favored Colonel Ruge but the defense minister he would replace, Fredrik Monsen, was adamantly opposed and threatened to withdraw his resignation. Ruge was viewed by some as stubborn and difficult to work with and many officers in the army had a negative view of him because of his involvement in the 1933 military reorganization.4

The army staff was confused about the orders received from Minister Ljungberg. The order called for only a partial mobilization of units in southern Norway. The order did not include the 5th Division in Trøndelag or the 6th Division in North Norway. Full mobilization called for the activation of 66 infantry battalions, at least on paper. The procedures for full mobilization called for notification by all available means, including radio. In a partial mobilization, on the other hand, the 18 infantry battalions (plus artillery, cavalry, engineers, and support units) in the four divisions in South Norway would be notified about the call-up by mail.

Those who wrote the procedures felt that a partial mobilization would be in response to a growing threat. Full mobilization, on the other hand, was a response to an immediate crisis or attack. The reserves, outside the six field brigades, were not trained and, in many cases, did not have the required equipment. All decision makers knew that this state of affairs would take several years to rectify. The distinction between full mobilization and the mobilization of only six field brigades had become blurred. Many, who felt that full mobilization, as originally envisioned, was impractical, viewed mobilization of six field brigades and supporting units as full mobilization.

General Laake decided to wait until Ljungberg determined the method of notification before sending out mobilization orders. Colonel Rasmus Hatledal, the chief of the general staff, protested to no avail. Valuable time was wasted in this absurd argument. Ljungberg eventually arrived at army headquarters and Hatledal pressed him for an order for full mobilization, but Ljungberg decided to leave the order for partial mobilization in force until he could discuss the issue with the cabinet.

The delivery of the German ultimatum delayed this discussion. There are those who claim that Ljungberg assumed that the mobilization of the four field brigades would be handled as an immediate action and others claim that he was the victim of the government’s failure to pay attention to the many military warnings about the possibility of a surprise attack.5 His decision is not justified by either of these two explanations and it is hard to believe that Ljungberg, having just come from the command of a regiment, did not know the difference in procedures for partial and full mobilization. The decision was made to mobilize by mail, giving a date of April 12.

Hatledal protested and pointed out that mobilization had to be announced over the radio since it was too late to mobilize via the postal system. Laake, who apparently still did not believe that an invasion was in progress, did not support him. The order for mobilization by letter remained in force.

Colonel Hatledal, on his own responsibility, moved the first day of mobilization from 12 to 11 April, increased the number of troops called to the colors from 24,000 to 38,000, and included the 5th Division in Trøndelag. There were also many units in North Norway that required mobilization despite the fact that the 6th Division was on a partial war footing. Hatledal did not dare take the final and most important step, sending the mobilization order by radio. Such action would probably result in his relief and a countermand of his order, resulting in even more confusion.

It is certainly true that full mobilization included individuals who were not trained and who lacked some of the required equipment. However, to justify the decision to mobilize by mail by claiming that full mobilization was an unrealistic option that would lead to more chaos demonstrates the rigidity that characterized the Norwegian military and civilian leadership in 1940. Hatledal was not arguing for full mobilization,