Letter: In defence of King Leopold
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr John Cairns
Sir: In the report "Allies' dilemma over 'cowardice' of Belgian king" (4 January), commenting on a release of Public Record Office papers, it is stated that
King Leopold III's surrender of the Belgian army jeopardised the Dunkirk evacuation and branded him a coward..."
Let us consider some facts:
The evacuation from Dunkirk started on 26 May 1940, following the gradual withdrawal by the RAF of air cover for the Belgian army. Lord Gort, the Commander of the British Expeditionary Force, deliberately omitted to inform the king of this decision. The Belgian army held out until 28 May, thus assisting the British forces' evacuation. Sir Basil Liddell Hart, one of the best commentators on military matters of his day, stated that by prolonging his troops' resistance, King Leopold had "saved the British army from destruction".
Paul-Henri Spaak, the Belgian foreign minister, and other members of the government attempted to persuade the king to back them in efforts to negotiate a settlement with the Nazis. The king would have nothing to do with it. Spaak later admitted that, by his refusal, the king had prevented him and his colleagues from being cast in the role of Quislings.
There is a dictum that truth is the daughter of time. How much more time is needed for the injustices perpetrated against King Leopold, and the shame of those guilty of them, to be exposed and universally acknowledged, once and for all?
Yours faithfully,
John Cairns
Ghent
Belgium
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments