B-26 Marauder 320th Bomb Group

 

Tragedy on the Mountain
by Paul Schamberger

 

Home 
Editor's Message 
History 
Missions 
Photo Archive 
Film Clips 
Stories 
320th Aircraft 
Reunion Assoc. 
Memorials 
POWs 
Books/Art 
Bulletin Board 
Roster 
Remembrances 
Memorabilia 
Links 
Search 
Contact me 

 

Max Petitpierre of the Swiss Foreign Affairs Department Responds

 


  The Swiss remain silent in regard to the Allied men's deposition

 

Petitpierre was in no hurry to reply. When he got around to it on 7 May, he wrote back to Norton:

I have submitted the report on this tragic and deplorable affair to a fresh examination and I am bound to state that I cannot bring myself to your point of view. I cannot see how we could have held the two soldiers of the 92nd Battalion responsible for the death of these escapers since they had done everything possible for their relief. One cannot reproach them for not having understood exactly what was said to them by their foreign comrades in view of the language difficulties, nor for not having known the details of the Brissago locality, as they had only just arrived in the area.

However, it is surprising that in endeavoring to find the path whose outline is at moments difficult to trace in the blizzard and with approaching night, that the number of victims, considering the exhausted state of these refugees, was not eventually higher.

After all, their idea in separating to go and get aid may have been a mistake, but at the same time this decision could be defended on the grounds that they were trying to get help, and had the circumstances not been so unfavorable, it would have been possible to assure for the foreign soldiers the assistance which they required.[13]

By now His Majesty's diplomats may have had an uncanny feeling that they were playing a futile game on a skewed chessboard. Petitpierre's "fresh examination" had produced nothing new. It seemed as if they were back to square one. The Swiss were adamantly refusing to promote the three unfortunate pawns from the dreary anonymity of foreign soldiers to the tell-all clarity of British and American soldiers who, as would-be évadés, would have been entitled to succour and protection under international law and, in the case of Clarke, under the terms of the 1943 Anglo-Swiss Gentlemen's Agreement.

And the Swiss were still maintaining an icy silence over the seven Allied men's depositions. What further moves were available when no less a heavyweight than the Swiss foreign minister himself gave preference to a manufactured version of events which in turn was based on a superficial account supplied by the army?

Even if there were a few grains of truth in the Swiss report (Brig. Cartwright never doubted the whole thing was a cunningly crafted edifice of distortions, exaggerations and lies), it must seem extraordinary – then as now – that the critical areas of the report rested entirely on the say-so of two young, immature and possibly badly frightened militia men. Had the investigating Oberst been unusually obtuse – or did he discern the truth behind the facade but had the nous not to spill the beans on paper?

Meanwhile, however, there was no known move in the book which the embattled diplomats in the Thunstrasse could employ to progress around the stone wall that constituted Switzerland Inc.

In a final comment on Petitpierre's letter, Brig. Cartwright noted laconically in a minute dated 16 May:

"[It is] a not very clever tour around the snags (never touching them) on which one Swiss soldier at least is guilty; if the Swiss evidence, as given to us, means anything."14 With that, the legation's file on Douglas William Clarke, the unfortunate farmer-soldier from Zululand, was slapped shut.


  A diplomatic stalemate evolves and the case is closed

 

Inexplicably, it seems that both the Foreign and the War Offices in London treated the frantic Clarke-related ciphers from Berne "for information only", and pigeonholed them. As far as the records show, London never as much as acknowledged receipt of these ciphers, took a position on the matter, or sent instructions of any kind to the legation. Not even Norton's top secret personal cipher of 6 April to Anthony Eden seems to have persuaded the influential British Foreign Secretary to take an interest in the case. With both Petitpierre and Eden acting like Tweedledum and Tweedledee in the matter of Clarke's death, the frustrated players in the British legation were well and truly checkmated. (Continued)


Topical Articles Index Page


Copyright(c) 2006 320th Reunion Association. All rights reserved.