By Torbjørn Eggen.
Heil og Sæl!
Before the migrations began well over a thousand and a half years ago, Northern and Central Europe were inhabited by various Germanic tribes. Here in Norway, we refer to them collectively as ‘Nordboerne.’ The Celts lived furthest to the west, while in Central Europe, there were the Visigoths, Cimbri, Teutons, and other Germanic tribes. In what is now South and Central Russia, the Ostrogoths resided.
These tribes were all mutual relatives. Our present-day Scandinavians and Germans are direct descendants of these ancient Norsemen.
Since the migrations, which are believed to have started with the Huns’ invasion of Europe in 375 AD, the Germanic peoples have continuously battled against the Asian invasions in Europe. This struggle has persisted over the following thousand and a half years, with the frontlines constantly shifting.
During this time, the Germanic peoples in Central Europe were divided into numerous small kingdoms. Despite countless attempts since the early Middle Ages to unite these fragmented realms and create a cohesive Germanic Central Europe, such collective efforts have rarely succeeded—only occasionally and partially, and often for brief periods.
Scandinavia faced a similar challenge. The endeavor to forge a united Scandinavian front to the east has never borne fruit. Throughout the migrations, the Asians managed to displace the Scandinavians and Finns from the region around the four large lakes east of the Gulf of Finland. Subsequently, they took away Bjarmland and the Kola Peninsula from us Norwegians. Under Peter the Great, they extended their influence into Finland, and during the Napoleonic Wars, they even claimed the entire country. By the late 19th century until 1918, they held sway up to the bottom of the Finnish wedge, located 34 km east of Skibotn in Lyngenfjorden, Troms.
The thousand-year-old Germanic idea—to unite all the Germanic peoples of Central Europe around the grand concept of stemming the tide of Asian danger—has finally been realized under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the genius leader of the Germans. With their victorious war against the semi-Asian, Bolshevik barbarian state in Eastern Europe, the Germans are now erecting a barrier to further Asian advancement westward.
Here in Scandinavia, a small circle of people has always recognized this danger. They have fought for the Scandinavian countries to stand together whenever the Asian threat from the east loomed. Despite opposition from Marxists, liberals, and Jewish groups, these champions of Germanic unity in Norway have tirelessly advocated for a political rapprochement between the Germanic peoples in Central Europe and the Northern Germanic peoples. Their goal is to ensure that all Germanic peoples can unite in the face of common danger.
The Norwegians who, during and after the World War, fully embraced this perspective have rallied under the brilliant leadership of Vidkun Quisling. They are united in a political organization called "Nasjonal Samling". Since his days as a young lieutenant, Quisling has maintained the foreign policy view that all Germanic peoples must stand united against the Eastern threat.
In his renowned series of articles published in Tidens Tegn in 1930, which was later compiled into a book titled Russia and We, Quisling explained the connivance of the Bolsheviks directly opposite Western Europe. His revelation in the Storting in 1932 regarding the treacherous activities of our own Bolsheviks resonated throughout the Nordic region and far beyond its borders. Since then, he has tirelessly fought against the divisive politics of our domestic Marxists and liberals, partly influenced from abroad, and their erosion of Nordic racial values.
However, our Norwegian politicians had sunk too deeply to heed the “writing on the wall.” The treasonous policy persisted under our last glorious Marxist government, leading us into a war against the German Reich. As a result, our country was conquered, and today we remain a defeated nation, occupied by German troops.
During the war fought here, not once did a German soldier forget that the battle was against a kindred nation. The manner in which the Germans conducted themselves during the war and continue to treat us during the occupation has no parallel in history when it comes to chivalrous treatment of the vanquished.
But if, after this lost war, Norway is to be able to regain its freedom and independence at all, and is to succeed in being given an independent and honorable position in the ranks of the Germanic peoples within a united Europe, it is clear that the Germans - after what is happened - must demand to deal with the people who claim the view in foreign policy that we in the Nasjonal Samling have always fought for. Since the Nasjonal Samling’s social ideology aligns closely with National Socialism, the Great German Empire, under current conditions, will cooperate exclusively with the Nasjonal Samling’s leader and his men. We are facing the most serious choice that we have had to make a decision about in our entire history. The question is whether we want to participate in rebuilding Norway, whether we want to participate in the work to regain Norway's freedom, independence and greatness.
On the same day that German troops first set foot on Norwegian soil, April 9 last year, Vidkun Quisling formed a government in Norway. The reason for his formation of a government on 9 April has been little understood by the Norwegian people.
I will therefore try to give an account of these conditions.
I am not going to go into more detail about the anti-defence policy which has been pursued in this country all the time since 1905 and which was also not changed after the war broke out in September 1939.
Nor am I going to go into detail about the long series of non-neutral actions that were committed during the last years before the outbreak of war by the country's leading men at the time, - or go into what the reason may have been for the Norwegian army at the outbreak of war had not been mobilized, that mines had not been laid in front of the entrance to our coastal fortresses, and that the crew of these fortresses was so few that many of the batteries were not even manned.
Among the many non-neutral actions committed by Nygaardsvold's government in the time before 9 April, I will mention only two events where the most elementary rules of international law were violated, and by which it became inevitable that the country was dragged into the war .
The first of these events was the episode in the Jøssingfjord in February 1940 when the British warship "Cossac" entered Norwegian territorial waters and just below land, sent a boat with armed British crew aboard the German Navy's boat "Altmark", boarded the ship and fired down quite a few Germans on deck.
Quite a number of our compatriots were, strangely enough, happy at the time about the event. But the situation was that, according to international law, Norway - like all other neutral countries - was obliged to defend its neutrality. That is we were obliged to use all our means of power, large and small, to prevent such an action taking place in Norwegian maritime territory. What happened instead? Yes, that two Norwegian warships, instead of shelling the English warship that violated our neutrality, guided the "Cossac" on its way into the Jøssingfjord, which was after all neutral Norwegian waters.
And no obstacles were put in the way of the operations against "Altmark". Yes, it even went so far that one of the Norwegian officers, the older of the two Norwegian ship commanders, joined the English boat which was put on the water and manned with a detachment of armed British marines to take care of the German crew on "Altmark". The Norwegian naval officer accompanied the boat to "Altmark's" ship's side, entered "Altmark" and stood as a witness to British naval officers shooting down Germans within Norwegian maritime territory.
Those who have the slightest understanding of international law must know that with the mere act of the Norwegian navy at the time, we had broken our neutrality, taken sides and were involved in the war.
The other event that I would like to mention is the British mine laying in Norwegian territorial waters at the beginning of April last year, which was also allowed to take place without the Norwegian Navy intervening.
We had provoked the Germans through a long series of non-neutral actions over the years before the war broke out at the beginning of September 1939 - and also in the time from the outbreak of the war until we ourselves joined.
But the two examples which I have mentioned are basically perfectly adequate illustrations of the whole situation.
The Norwegian government had breached the international rules on neutrality by not opposing the British breach of neutrality. In accordance with international legal rules, the German Empire thereby acquired the right to occupy Norwegian territory and prevent further actions of a similar nature from the British side.
Then came the 9th of April. At 4 o'clock in the morning, a call was made to Foreign Minister Koht, who was informed that German troops were planning to land in Oslo, Kristiansand, Bergen, Trondheim and Narvik. The Foreign Minister was informed that the action was prompted by the British violations of neutrality and by the fact that a British landing fleet was on its way to Norway. He was informed that the Germans - i.a. also in our country's interest - believed that the British should come first. The Germans certainly expected that when the Norwegian army was not mobilized, despite the fact that the rulers must have long known to what extent the country was in the danger zone, and when furthermore the rulers in Norway had done nothing in the face of the various violations of British neutrality, there would rather not be treated equally towards the Germans.
Instead of immediately entering into negotiations with the Germans to find the most convenient solution for all parties, the government decided to immediately leave Oslo. Mobilization orders were issued and it was decided that armed resistance would be offered against the German occupation.
For any Norwegian with the slightest knowledge of the poor state in which the Norwegian defense found itself at that moment, it had to be crystal clear that an armed resistance was absolutely hopeless. It was thus a foregone conclusion that the war would be lost, and that the human lives and values that would be lost during a war were, to that extent, completely wasted.
It was against these conditions that Vidkun Quisling formed his government on 9 April. But before the government was formed, he had been informed that the Quisling government would be recognized de jure by the German state.
That is The Nygaardsvold government would from the moment the Germans set foot on Norwegian soil be regarded as a rebel government against the Norwegian people's will for peace. It would further be regarded as a rebel government against the will of the Norwegian people for neutrality in the war between Greater Germany and the British Empire.
But this relationship would have a number of consequences with regard to Norway's constitutional position, which requires some knowledge of history and international law in order to be understood.
When the German Empire was in contact with a "de jude" recognized Norwegian government from the moment German soldiers set foot on Norwegian soil, the German Empire would have no claim to war damage compensation from the Norwegian people.
A number of people, without the necessary overview of the historical and international legal consequences of their actions, launched an action to have the Quisling government removed. They stated as a reason, equally vis-à-vis Quisling and likewise vis-à-vis the Germans in Norway, that they should thereby achieve a halt to the war in Norway. It later turned out not to be successful. But Quisling decided, when this was pointed out, to step back so that it would not at least be said that he had stood in the way of a peaceful settlement.
Then we got the Administrative Council.
But the war took its course. 2,000 Norwegian boys lost their lives. Some of them had only received 5 sharp cartridges for their rifle. With this equipment, they were to defend the fatherland against the world's strongest and best-equipped army during a campaign.
Values worth millions of kroner were destroyed in this war. A number of our towns were burnt down.
Now Norway is at war, and the victor has ravaged the country.
Fantastic amounts - many times larger than our entire previous banknote stock - are used per year to cover the occupying power's expenses. And the victor has - according to the international rules for war and peace - the right to impose on us the war damage compensation that he himself decides. He can take over - if he wants - as war damage compensation our entire merchant fleet, which before the outbreak of war was almost 5 million gross registered tonnes. - All our claims abroad can be taken away from us. According to the so-called international law - according to the law of war, the country can be brought to the beggar's pole.
We have reached the same position as we were in 1814. The entire 18th century was a period of great progress for our country. In that century we had built up a merchant navy consisting of thousands of schooners, barques, brigs and other vessels, which sailed over all the seas of the world and brought honor to the name of the country, and which brought wealth to the thousands of homes. But in 1807 we were drawn into a great power war on Napoleon's side against England. During the war with England 1807-1814 we lost our entire merchant fleet in war damages. All our claims abroad were seized by England and were never replaced. From being one of the richest countries in the world in relation to our population, we were within a few years completely ruined and had to start all over again in 1814 with a bankrupt estate to build on.
The same is, in a way, what is happening today. If the German people only want to follow the law of war, they can - as I have mentioned before - after the lost campaign impose on us as war damage reparations practically whatever they want. They can - as I said - let all their expenses in the country become war damage compensation. They can seize our entire merchant marine of around 5,000,000 of the world's most modern tonnage. They can seize all Norwegian claims abroad. And they can - if they want - take so much that there is nothing left for ourselves.
It was this danger that Vidkun Quisling on 9 April last year wanted to save the country from. He wanted to ensure that we were not defeated in war, that we did not become a conquered country that a victor - according to international law - could treat at will.
It has caused irreparable damage to our country that a group of the country's leading men, among whom some of our first jurists and our highest clergy were represented, joined together to destroy Vidkun Quisling's government.
These men had all the prerequisites to understand the selfless sense of patriotism that dictated Vidkun Quisling's action on 9 April. But they would not understand. Vidkun Quisling's government withdrew. And we got a board under a German Reichskommissar. We still have this board to this day.
Due to some of our leading men's unfathomable incomprehension, we have now come to the position that we must ask the victor to give us what we could otherwise have demanded as our right.
I do not believe that we will be treated by our German kinsmen as a defeated enemy. We will most certainly not get a peace settlement of the kind that the victors dictated to Germany in Versailles in 1918. I believe that we can count on an elegant and fair treatment from the Germans, - despite the fact that we have groomed ourselves in such a way that we have become beaten by Germany in war.
Germany has officially declared that the Nasjonal Samling shall be given the opportunity to restore Norway's freedom and independence, and that it is only through the Nasjonal Samling that this restoration can take place. But then we can also hope that Nasjonal Samling wins such great support in the people, that we in Nasjonal Samling are able to solve this task. And I would like to say that everyone who gives up on this work is thereby participating in the country's recovery. Anyone who sabotages this work, big or small, is thereby helping to work against Norway's freedom and independence. With every large or small act of sabotage, he drives a nail into the coffin of the fatherland.
I will relate a small episode which gives an illustration of such an act of sabotage:
At the beginning of the war in Norway last April, twelve Norwegian students were studying at the University of Heidelberg in Germany. One of the professors was tasked with looking after the foreign students and down in Heidelberg had been really kind and nice to the twelve Norwegians. When the war broke out, all Norwegians returned home to Norway.
A couple of weeks ago, the professor came here to Norway and decided to visit his young Norwegian friends. When he greeted the first, he was told that the student wanted nothing to do with the professor - at least not for as long as the war lasted. With the next man, the professor got the same answer. However, he decided to go full circle. But not a single one of his twelve students would have anything to do with him - not even talk to him.
The professor is obliged - like all other German civil servants in wartime - to write a report on his journey. This story that this professor had to tell - and a thousand other such stories are constantly being reported and collected and they constitute - seen in context - a terrible accusation - not only against twelve ill-mannered students - but against the Norwegian people.
The Germans ask themselves: - When we have so many enemies in Norway, where are our friends? Where are the Norwegians who understand that the fight we are now waging in the east is a fight for all Scandinavian people to the same extent as it is a fight for Germany's salvation? What proportion of the Norwegian people is behind the Nasjonal Samling? Is the Nasjonal Samling strong enough for us Germans to hand over government power to the Nasjonal Samling's men?
It must be clear to everyone that Germany would not in the long run leave power in the country in the hands of the Administrative Council, which declared that it managed the government ministries as representatives of the emigrants in London. It is clear that Germany will not give power in Norway to Germany's declared enemies. And it is then also understandable that the Germans are investigating whether there is any risk for them themselves in giving government power to Germany's Norwegian friends.
Now the support for Nasjonal Samling and its program is much greater in Norway than even the number of members gives the impression, - although the number of members, even in my judgment today, is much more than enough for Nasjonal Samling to take over government power at any time. I encounter many examples every day of how many people there are who are actually involved in the work of the Nasjonal Samling, but who do not dare to take the full step and register as a member of the party.
Yesterday I had a visit from a cooperative manager. He told me that he knew for sure that he would lose his position as manager of the cooperative if he joined the party. I hear almost daily about people who do not dare to register because they risk being subjected to financial boycott.
There is another kind of boycott that is carried out and which can be called a social boycott. Those who join Nasjonal Samling experience that friends and acquaintances do not want to associate with them, do not want to talk to them, do not want to greet them, when they wear NS's badge in their buttonhole. Here in Norway today there are thousands and tens of thousands of people who would be prepared to support the Nasjonal Samling and its work completely, if they were not cowed under the pressure of this social boycott.
There is a third category of people who are sympathetic to the Nasjonal Samling movement, but who do not want to join. And there are all those who agree with the Nasjonal Samling's program and guidelines and the Nasjonal Samling's work, but who believe that they are doing the cause a greater service by formally staying out, while at the same time asserting the Nasjonal Samling's opinions and views everywhere in their work, when the discussion turns to current problems and the Nasjonal Samling's policy. To these, I would say that the argument itself may well have something to it. It is undoubtedly the opponents of the Nasjonal Samling movement in Norway, who through this kind of people occasionally get to hear a reasonable argument that they would not have listened to at all if the respective supporter of the Nasjonal Samling had been a registered member of the movement.
But I am completely convinced that the importance of this argument is greatly exaggerated. I don't think the Nasjonal Samling has gained very many converts in this way.
For Nasjonal Samling's cause, it is of immeasurably greater importance that all those who are with us, also through their membership in the Nasjonal Samling movement, help to manifest the strength of the movement.
If there was no real rush to get a Norwegian government and an all-Norwegian administration in Norway, you could let events take their course. The Nasjonal Samling is growing strongly. The understanding of what NS strives for is spreading among the Norwegian people from day to day. And the unfounded arguments of our opponents are more and more eroded with each passing day. So if we were not in a hurry, we could take it easy and let the necessary changes to the status quo come in the fullness of time.
But the relationship is that it is urgent. It is very much required that we get a Norwegian government that makes peace with Germany and that comes to an understanding with Germany with regard to as many of the problems as possible that today remain unresolved between the two countries, before the final war settlement takes place. I need not explain any details in this matter. The matter is self-evident.
But then the resistance must also be broken down. Precautions must be taken against the organized social boycott of NS, which in reality is not based on any general attitude of the Norwegian people, but which is led by a few small but well-organized cliques in the cities, and which - despite all logic - has proved to be able to exert a significant influence on the population's attitude.
And as far as the economic boycott is concerned, I would say: Report all cases where this kind of boycott has taken place. And where there is evidence that such a boycott has really taken place, action will be taken with a heavy hand against those who have dared to exercise it. And the Nasjonal Samling's members will be completely protected.
It is a duty today for all nationally-minded people to join NS, and thereby support the work for the rebuilding of our fatherland. And those who do not dare or do not want to participate in this work fully and completely and enter as a member of the Nasjonal Samling movement, have nothing to do in public administration. They should look for another field of activity in life.
Source: Til Ordførere og Lensmenn - Taler av fylkesmennene Eggen og Prytz ved Trøndelagstevnet 1941, Oslo: NS Presse og Propagandaavdeling, 1941
.png)
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar