Then, on Saturday 9 January, Churchill received an appreciation of the
Dardanelles operation from Lewis Bayly, an admiral he admired but who was under
a cloud following the torpedoing of Formidable
when under his command, which was attributed ‘to the neglect of ordinary
precautions.’
Bayly proposed ‘to get through the Dardanelles by steaming as fast past, and
as close to, the forts as is possible; to enter the Dardanelles just before
dawn…Owing to the necessity of getting quickly past the forts the ships must
go at their highest possible speed…[I] suggest that the squadron be preceded
at about half a mile…by the destroyers each towing an explosive sweep…If
steamers of 17 knots could be obtained, they should be sent ahead of destroyers,
in pairs, with a 3½-inch wire hawser between each pair…It is possible that a
feint of landing on the West side of the Gallipoli peninsula, made...the day
before, might assist the forcing of the Strait.’
Disgraced or not, it was at least another indication that the forcing of the
Straits might be possible; in addition, it chimed in with Churchill’s own
thoughts as the First Lord maintained that the original request to Carden ‘had
contemplated something in the nature of an organized “rush”.’
Nevertheless, as late as Monday 11th, Churchill still fully favoured the
Northern option. Sir John French, who had become aware of what had transpired at
the War Council on Friday, was, naturally, loathe to countenance any diminution
in his strength and had gone so far as to send his memorandum of 5 January,
highlighting the futility of subsidiary action, direct to Asquith with
instructions to hand Kitchener a copy!
Churchill strongly urged French – military situation permitting – to attend
the next War Council, scheduled for Wednesday 13 January.
‘I am in entire agreement with the notes you so kindly sent for my perusal’,
he informed French before adding, in a clear indication that he had not yet
divulged Carden’s cautious reply, ‘I argued in the War Council strongly
against deserting the decisive theatre & the most formidable enemy
antagonist to win cheaper laurels in easier fields. The only circumstances in
which such a policy could be justified would be after every other fruitful
alternative [in the main theatre] had been found impossible…I favour remaining
in the Northern theatre…It is not until all the Northern possibilities are
exhausted that I would look to the South of Europe as a field for the profitable
employment of our expanding military forces. But plans should be worked out for
every contingency.’
Churchill confirmed this in person to French when the latter arrived in London
on the 12th, the day after a further crucial development had occurred.
Up to this point, Churchill had not been against an attack at the
Dardanelles per se but was opposed to
the concomitant diversion of troops away from the main lines. The only way to
reconcile the competing schemes, given the impossibility of releasing troops for
the southern front, was for a naval operation, either as a demonstration to
relieve the pressure on the Russians, or a concerted attempt to knock Turkey out
of the war. Then, on the 11th, the detailed scheme Churchill had requested from
Carden arrived in London. Upon studying the plan, Churchill now realized that
the chances of a master-stroke at the Dardanelles would be far greater than in
the Baltic. At last the possibility presented itself of achieving the victory he
so desperately needed. Carden’s planners envisaged a four stage operation
which would commence with the total reduction of the defences at the entrance of
the Straits. Once accomplished, the defences inside the Straits could be cleared
up to Kephez Point. This part of the operation would be made much more difficult
if Goeben was assisting the defence
and, unless a submarine attack against the German ship proved successful, would
necessitate the employment of the British battle cruisers. Churchill was aware,
of course, that Goeben could not interfere in this way for at least another two
months; however what Churchill did not know was that, although the Dardanelles
defences were not as modern as was generally believed, according to the American
Ambassador 85% of the men on duty in the forts were now made up from the crews
of the German ships.
In the third part of the operation the defences at the Narrows would be reduced
and, finally, a passage would be cleared through the minefield allowing the
final advance to the Sea of Marmora. The time required would depend on how well
the enemy morale held up under the bombardment and also on the weather, as gales
were frequent at that time of year; nevertheless it was anticipated ‘Might do
it all in a month about.’ Although the expenditure of ammunition would be
prodigious, once through, it was hoped to have in the Sea of Marmora: two battle
cruisers, four battleships, three light cruisers, a flotilla of destroyers,
three submarines and auxiliary vessels, while the remainder of the force kept
the Straits open and clear of mines!
This was a far cry from Fisher’s force of pre-dreadnoughts.
But Fisher was about to add a new twist to his original scheme: aware of
Carden’s plan, he saw Tyrrell (Grey’s private secretary) on 12 January and
recorded his views in a letter to him the following day:
if
the Greeks would land 100,000 men on the Gallipoli Peninsula in concert with a
British Naval attack on the Dardanelles I think we could count on every success
and quick arrival at Constantinople. A naval approach to Constantinople without
any troops at all would occupy a month for the first shot fired at the mouth of
the Dardanelles and would involve a loss of ships, and expenditure of
ammunition and a wearing out of the heavy guns of the Fleet beyond
approval and when the remains of the Fleet got to Constantinople it could do
nothing else but carry out a futile bombardment with an accompanying massacre à
la the bombardment of Alexandria! …The real people to fight with us for
Constantinople are the Bulgarians! — (one Bulgarian worth a thousand
Greeks!)…
Fisher
did not deny the possibility of a purely naval attempt but limited himself to
pointing out that the effort would not be commensurate with the result. Of
greater import, aware that the magnificent new battleship Queen
Elizabeth was about to conduct the test firing of her 15-inch guns off
Gibraltar, Fisher initiated an inquiry to Percy Scott to ascertain if there was
anything to prevent the ship using the Dardanelles forts as target practice.
‘If this is practicable’, he then instructed Admiral Oliver, ‘she could go
straight there, hoist Carden’s flag & go on with her gunnery
exercises…’
Once more, Fisher was sending conflicting signals: Tyrrell would have
been as much impressed by the benefits of having troops available as Churchill
would have been by the spontaneous proposal to send Queen
Elizabeth which pointed to the feasibility of a wholly naval success. The
motives underlying Fisher’s actions become increasingly difficult to discern.
Carden’s unexpected plan and Fisher’s suggested use of Queen Elizabeth converted Churchill. That day, 12 January, he
ordered that definite plans should be worked out, with operations timed to
commence on 1 February; but he also added the important proviso that it was
‘not necessary to develop the full attack until the effect of the first stage
of the operation has become apparent.’ Churchill continued to underestimate
the fighting qualities of the Turks, as much as he overestimated the effect of
modern, low trajectory naval gunfire even if from such a devastating weapon as
the 15-inch guns of Queen Elizabeth.
This, however, was lost sight of in the euphoria of that Tuesday: ‘The forcing
of the Dardanelles as proposed’, Churchill declared, ‘and the arrival of a
squadron strong enough to defeat the Turkish fleet in the Sea of Marmora, would
be a victory of the first importance, and change to our advantage the whole
situation of the war in the East.’
Now that it appeared the navy could do the job alone Churchill was, therefore,
correct in a limited sense when he told Sir John French that night that ‘the
time was not yet ripe to consider a diversion of our troops to other more
distant theatres.’
The War Council reconvened at midday on Wednesday 13 January at which
French, now present, argued persuasively for a new offensive in Flanders: losses
would be ‘light’, he confidently asserted, while the German reserves would
be exhausted by October 1915! Even Kitchener began to waver in the face of
French’s onslaught and volunteered hesitatingly to advance the dispatch of two
Territorial divisions; only Lloyd George and Balfour remained unconvinced. Yet,
when pressed, French had to admit that Russian support continued to be
essential; the irony of this admission, in view of the Grand Duke’s appeal,
apparently went unnoticed. Churchill, seated between Admirals Fisher and Wilson,
again unsuccessfully pushed his Zeebrugge plan until, when it became clear that
sufficient enthusiasm was lacking, he decided the moment had at last arrived to
drop his bombshell: the way to reconcile the competing claims upon the troops.
Asquith, who had remained silent, had adjourned the meeting for lunch at 2 p.m.
at which Fisher and Balfour returned to the Admiralty where they lunched with
Lord Esher, who recorded ‘the strong body of opinion crystallizing round the
idea of taking the initiative at, perhaps, Gallipoli.’
At 3 p.m., before reconvening, Asquith was handed a letter from Venetia
Stanley; he started to reply to this at 3.30 p.m., only to have to break off as
the members of the War Council returned — Sir John French resuming his seat in
pride of place next to the P.M. By 4 o’clock the meeting was again in progress
and Churchill was now ready to make his surprise announcement.
‘The blinds had been drawn to shut out the winter evening. The air was heavy
and the table presented that rather dishevelled appearance that results from a
long session.’ For Hankey, whose description this is, it had been a tiring
day; he was ‘looking forward to release from the strain of following and
noting the prolonged and intense discussion…At this point events took a
dramatic turn, for Churchill suddenly revealed his well-kept
secret of a naval attack on the Dardanelles.’
The minutes that Hankey kept that day noted that,
MR
CHURCHILL said he had interchanged telegrams with Vice-Admiral Carden…in
regard to the possibilities of a naval attack on the Dardanelles. The sense of
Admiral Carden’s reply was that it was impossible to rush the Dardanelles, but
that, in his opinion, it might be possible to demolish the forts one by one. To
this end Admiral Carden had submitted a plan.
Churchill
then outlined the plan, which would require three modern battleships and twelve
old battleships that could now be spared ‘without reducing our strength in the
main theatre of war.’ Two battle cruisers were already in the Mediterranean
and, Churchill added, it was now feasible for Queen
Elizabeth ‘to conduct her trials against the Dardanelles forts…’ The
Admiralty, who were making their own study, believed ‘that a plan could be
made for systematically reducing all the forts within a few weeks. Once the
forts were reduced the minefields would be cleared, and the Fleet would proceed
up to Constantinople and destroy the Goeben.
They would have nothing to fear from field guns or rifles, which would be merely
an inconvenience.’
Hankey again describes the scene after Churchill’s announcement and if
his account seems over-enthusiastic it should be remembered that he had been the
first to advocate the ‘southern option’; the War Council was now merely
confirming his sound judgment. When Churchill finished,
The
idea caught on at once. The whole atmosphere changed. Fatigue was forgotten. The
War Council turned eagerly from the dreary vista of a ‘slogging match’ on
the Western Front to brighter prospects, as they seemed, in the Mediterranean.
The Navy, in whom everyone had implicit confidence and whose opportunities so
far had been few and far between, was to come into the front line. Even French
with his enormous preoccupations caught something of the general enthusiasm.
Churchill unfolded his plans with the skill that might be expected of him,
lucidly but quietly and without exaggerated optimism.
This,
however, conveys a somewhat different impression to Hankey’s own contemporary
minutes, wherein Lloyd George merely ‘liked the plan’ while Kitchener
‘thought it was worth trying. We could leave off the bombardment if it did not
prove effective.’ This last assumption, shared by Carden, Churchill and
Kitchener ignored the obvious question of the loss of face which so concerned
the likes of Crewe.
Asquith, mute and watchful (apart from furtive glances at Miss
Stanley’s latest missive) was, at last, observed to be writing something and
then intervened to ‘suggest’ four conclusions ‘which will keep both Navy
& Army busy till March.’ With his usual mixture of immodesty and
self-doubt, the Prime Minister, while suggesting that his conclusions had
received harmonious agreement, was still keen to tell Miss Stanley all about it,
and ‘see if it meets with your approval.’
Certainly, beyond concurring in the unanimity with which they were greeted,
Churchill thought that the two conclusions relating to the Admiralty were
expressed in a ‘curious form’. Asquith had written the following:
1.
That all preparations should be made, by concert between the Naval and
Military authorities, including making ready for dispatch of 2 Territorial
divisions, without guns, to reinforce Sir J. French by the middle of February,
for an advance along the line Dixmunde to the Dutch frontier. The actual
decision whether the circumstances call for such an operation can be postponed
till the beginning of February.
2.
That the Admiralty should consider promptly the possibility of effective
action in the Adriatic – at Cattaro, or elsewhere – with the view (inter
alia) of bringing pressure on Italy.
3.
That the Admiralty should also prepare for a naval expedition in February
to bombard and take the Gallipoli peninsula, with Constantinople as its
objective.
4.
That if the position in the Western theatre becomes in the spring one of
stalemate, British troops should be despatched to another theatre and objective,
and that adequate investigation and preparation should be undertaken with that
purpose, and that a Sub-Committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence be
appointed to deal with this aspect of the situation.
As
it was the stalemate in December that had prompted these War Council meetings,
for Asquith to base one of his conclusions on the possibility of the position in
the west becoming one of stalemate in the Spring would seem to indicate that he
was paying more attention to his letter to Miss Stanley than to the discussion!
Asquith had fudged the issue, throwing a sop to French, Kitchener and Churchill,
and hedging his bet by referring to the inevitable, if rarely forthcoming,
‘adequate investigation and preparation’. Yet even this sloppy final
conclusion was surpassed by the preceding one: how was a naval expedition to
‘take the Gallipoli peninsula’ without troops which, as Asquith clearly
indicated, were not yet available? In what sense was Constantinople the
objective: did the War Council seriously entertain the proposition that the mere
appearance of the British fleet off the Golden Horn would precipitate an
immediate surrender? And what of the French who were supposed, in view of the
Agreement of 6 August 1914, to have strategic control in the Mediterranean?
The decision had, however, been made; the decision, that is, to
‘prepare for a naval expedition’ in Asquith’s nebulous terminology.
Churchill obviously considered that the step which had been taken went further
than Asquith had intended for he enthusiastically informed Fisher and Oliver
later that night (Jackson was away, ill) that ‘This enterprise is regarded by
the Government as of the highest urgency and importance.’
Churchill had now hijacked the operation from Fisher.
Late the following day the First Lord drafted a telegram to Carden to
inform him that his scheme had been approved in principle and that there would
be no problem in providing the force required, including Queen Elizabeth, by 15 February. ‘We entirely agree’, Churchill
added, ‘with your plan of methodical piecemeal reduction of forts as the
Germans did at Antwerp…The sooner we can begin the better…Continue to
perfect your plan.’
On 15 January Jackson, now back at the Admiralty, recorded his comments on
Carden’s plan, with which he now generally concurred; seeing the drift towards
an idea he had previously disparaged Jackson now became more amenable and the
only proviso he wished to attach to the expedition was that it should not be
attempted unless the Admiralty were prepared to expend a considerable amount of
ammunition.
Churchill also informed the French of the plan, through their Naval Attaché,
and invited their co-operation which would not, however, be the foregone
conclusion he seemed to think.
Even so, Fisher was the immediate problem, having in the meantime become alarmed
by Jellicoe’s dire warnings of the position in the North Sea.
By 11 January (that is, before the War Council had reached the above
conclusions) Fisher was already concerned, writing to Jellicoe to agree that he
had said ‘golden words when you protest “against
taking risks for which there is no compensating advantage”. What I wish
you would impress on the First Lord when you write to him (and which he won’t believe) is that German submarines of
the latest type, with their 3000 miles radius of action and seaworthy qualities,
can face weather that our destroyers
don’t like! That’s an absolute fact.’
The more Fisher mulled over the War Council decision, the less he liked it;
finally, on 18 January, he informed Churchill that, while not wishing to
‘cold-douche’ any projects for being troublesome to the enemy, he desired
‘to emphasize the necessity of sticking to the enemy’s vitals!’ This was
rich coming from the man who, a fortnight earlier, had been proposing a
grandiose scheme to attack Turkey while Churchill insisted that Northern Europe
remained the main theatre of operations; now the rôles were reversed. While not
trying to minimize the Dardanelles operations, Fisher wished to ‘aggrandize
the great big fact that 750,000 men, landed in Holland, combined with intense
activity of the British Fleet against, say, Cuxhaven, would finish the War by
forcing out the German High Sea Fleet and getting in rear of the German
Armies…’
This plan, of course, shared one common feature with his earlier plan against
Turkey: they were both impossible of achievement. It seems extremely unlikely
that Fisher did not realize they could not be carried out as proposed — both
involved large numbers of troops, considerations of neutrality, and hazardous
operations under hostile fire. By putting forward these extravagant schemes the
First Sea Lord was hoping to disguise the excessively defensive mentality to
which he had succumbed.
Having made his feelings known to Churchill, Fisher spelled out his main
complaint to Jellicoe the following day: the margin of safety in the North Sea
was too narrow,
And
now the Cabinet have decided on taking the Dardanelles solely with the Navy,
using 15 battleships and 32 other vessels, and keeping out there three battle
cruisers and a flotilla of destroyers — all
urgently required at the decisive theatre at home! There is only one way
out, and that is to resign! But you say ‘no’,
which simply means I am a consenting party to what I absolutely disapprove. I
don’t agree with one single step taken, so it is fearfully against the
grain that I remain on in deference to your wishes. The
way the War is conducted both ashore and afloat is chaotic! We have a new plan
every week!…
Fisher
then used Jellicoe’s anxiety to attack Churchill by maintaining that, if not
checked, Jellicoe’s ‘temporary depression’ would spread throughout the
Fleet. Churchill replied immediately, pointing out the obvious — that Fisher
himself had advised the removal of a number of ships from the North Sea since
resuming office. In an attempt to suppress this unexpected revolt the First Lord
made a number of sensible proposals which, Fisher admitted, met the case put
forward in his minute; but Fisher would not leave well enough alone. He pressed
for the return of the destroyer flotilla from the Dardanelles, to be replaced by
French boats, arguing that the French replacements would be adequate as ‘The
whole Turkish Naval Force is quite a negligible quantity even with German
officers (with the Goeben knocked out
as we know her to be!)…’
As has been shown, the information regarding the damaged state of Goeben
had been available since 7 January and may have helped Churchill to decide that,
without this major adversary, a purely naval operation was feasible. But despite
being – apparently – mollified Fisher, true to form, vented his feelings
even more forthrightly to Jellicoe the following day:
…This
Dardanelles operation, decided upon by the Cabinet, in its taking away Queen Elizabeth, Indefatigable,
and Inflexible and Blenheim,
with a flotilla of destroyers arranged to have been brought home, is a serious
interference with our imperative needs in Home waters, and I’ve fought against
it ‘tooth and nail’...
Leaving
aside Fisher’s own responsibility for the absence of Queen
Elizabeth, compare this with his letter to Hankey on 2 January in
appreciation of Hankey’s memorandum which first suggested an attack upon
Turkey: ‘The more I think over your paper’, Fisher had then told Hankey,
‘the more I like it — Winston spontaneously gave me your paper to read &
I went for it “tooth & nail”!…’ Fisher was telling Churchill one
thing; Hankey another; and Jellicoe something different still!
Fisher’s claim to Jellicoe on 21 January that he had fought against the
Dardanelles operation ‘tooth & nail’ was an outright lie — Fisher had
first suggested the use of Queen Elizabeth
and had not voiced any opposition in the War Council, while, as far as Churchill
was concerned, any misgiving regarding the new plan on Fisher’s part was
confined to pushing impractical schemes which he hoped would be given precedence
over the Dardanelles operation. Fisher did at least admit to Jellicoe that there
was a possibility that unless something were done to aid the Russians there was
a danger that they might seek to negotiate a separate peace with Germany but, he
then added,
I
just abominate the Dardanelles operation, unless a great change is made and it
is settled to be made a military operation, with 200,000 men in conjunction with
the Fleet. I believe that Kitchener is coming round to this sane view of the
matter…
Whatever
Fisher believed, he had had no indication from Kitchener or anyone else that the
Secretary of State for War was against the Dardanelles operation unless it could
be a combined operation. Having made his point Fisher then (conveniently) caught
cold and placed himself in quarantine: ‘Please don’t attempt to catch it by
seeing me’, he warned Churchill, ‘as there is nothing on except those d—d
mines which you are all quite determined shant be put down.’
This was, perhaps, just as much a blessing for Churchill who was now fully aware
of Fisher’s dissatisfaction and wished it to be kept as private as possible so
as not to jeopardize his (Churchill’s) own control of the forthcoming
operation.
Churchill’s
relationship with Fisher had weathered many storms throughout the years, the
result, for the most part, of the voluble Admiral’s mercurial character.
Fisher had scored an immediate coup after taking over from Battenberg at the
Admiralty when he dispatched the battle cruisers that subsequently destroyed von
Spee’s squadron at the Falkland Islands. It is not too much to say that, in
the complex admixture of emotions binding Churchill to Fisher, envy and jealousy
played their part. Churchill’s congratulatory letter to Fisher following
Sturdee’s victory was not entirely ungrudging: ‘This was your show & your
luck’, the First Lord had written.
Now Churchill had a chance to turn the tables; Fisher, by his silence in the War
Council, played into the First Lord’s hands. But Fisher could not disguise his
feelings from Maurice Hankey. The ubiquitous Hankey, aware of Fisher’s unease,
saw Asquith on 20 January to inform him confidentially of this new development.
Asquith lost no time in passing on full details of Hankey’s approach to Miss
Stanley: Fisher, Asquith related to his young friend, had come to Hankey
in
a very unhappy frame of mind. He likes Winston personally, but complains that on
purely technical naval matters he is frequently over-ruled (‘he out-argues
me’!) and he is not by any means at ease about either the present disposition
of the fleets, or their future movements. Of course he didn’t want Winston, or
indeed anybody to know this, but Hankey told him he should pass it on to me. Tho’
I think the old man is rather unbalanced, I fear there is some truth in what he
says; and I am revolving in my mind whether I can do anything, & if anything
what? What do you say?…
Miss
Stanley’s response is, unfortunately, not available. What is known is that
Asquith decided to summon Jellicoe from his command at Scapa Flow to be
interrogated at the next War Council; this would be the simplest method of
resolving the doubts Fisher had now burdened himself with over the margins in
the North Sea. It would also be a logical step following French’s presence at
the previous War Council. Asquith informed Churchill of his decision on 21
January, just as Hankey was also admitting Balfour into the select group being
made aware of Fisher’s predicament. ‘Fisher, I find,’ Hankey informed
Balfour, ‘frequently disagrees with statements made by the First Lord at our
War Council. I wish he would speak up…’
At the time, Hankey could not envisage what the cost of Fisher’s silence would
be.
Churchill now had to act with dispatch: he knew only too well what would
result from Jellicoe’s appearance at the War Council. Although inarticulate,
the Admiral could hardly avoid making his feelings known, which would then place
a serious question mark over the Dardanelles operation. Churchill, now fatally
seduced by the allure of the ancient battlefield, found it impossible to turn
back; Jellicoe’s recall to London would have to be resisted. The First Lord
saw Asquith early on the afternoon of the 22nd and ‘groused a little about
[Asquith’s] demand that Jellicoe should come up next week to the War
Council.’ As the Prime Minister pertinently pointed out, Churchill was all for
having French at these meetings, ‘but doesn’t like his own men to be
summoned & cross-examined.’
Churchill promptly scurried back to the Admiralty where he composed a long and
closely argued letter to Asquith as to why Jellicoe should not attend. He noted,
disingenuously, that he, too, desired to have Jellicoe in London for a few days
to discuss minor matters but felt ‘difficulty either in directing him to come
or in leaving it to his judgement.’ Churchill must have realized that, if that
criteria were applied, Jellicoe would spend the entire war at Scapa Flow! The
First Lord then developed a tenuous line of reasoning that there was ‘no
similarity between the position and functions of a naval Commander-in-Chief and
of a modern General in the field.’ Churchill was now in full flow: ‘Believe
me’, he assured Asquith, ‘it is not out of any desire to raise difficulties
that I put these considerations before you. Still less do I wish to prevent the
fullest interrogation of the Commander-in-Chief by yourself or any other member
of the War Council.’
It would not be to hard to imagine Churchill’s pen spluttering at this point!
Jellicoe’s attendance would have raised the most serious doubts about the
contemplated naval operations and it was a crucial, if perhaps typical, lapse of
Asquith’s judgment that he did not press the point. What is more surprising is
Fisher’s reaction as, rather than siding with Asquith in wanting Jellicoe to
appear, Fisher instead wrote to the Admiral: ‘For some subtle reason I can’t
fathom the PM wants you to attend the next War Council on Thursday next [28
January]. It’s absolutely wrong your leaving the Fleet & Winston agrees
with me — they say Sir John French came over last week but he only commands
1/10th of the line of Battle — You command 10/10ths! that’s the
difference...’
If Fisher were genuinely worried about the situation in the North Sea,
yet refused to speak up himself in the War Council, why also veto Jellicoe’s
attendance? That Asquith’s initial concern was merely to act upon Hankey’s
report of Fisher’s unhappiness, which Fisher had then interpreted (in his
letter to Jellicoe) as the P.M.’s devious machinations, illustrates only too
well the muddled method of conducting the war at the highest level and also
Fisher’s paranoia. Fisher had come to realize just how much was at stake: this
new war was unlike anything he had previously experienced. His sudden conversion
to an extreme defensive position could have represented no more than, to use the
terminology of the day, an old man in a blue funk. He had taken fright at
Jellicoe’s warnings and envisaged his own oft-derided concerns regarding the
offensive capabilities of submarines coming to fruition.
It was said of Jellicoe that he was the only man who could have lost the
war in an afternoon; this thought must have passed through Fisher’s mind and
weighed heavily on him. In Hankey’s subsequent judgement: ‘The fact is that
Fisher was too old. He still possessed vision and driving power. But these were
accompanied by a senile exaggeration of the defects of his character —
head-hunting carried to excess, suspicion, exaggerated desire for power; and in
addition he tired easily and shrank from responsibility.’
Captain Richmond, writing at the time, supported Hankey’s later opinion: ‘In
reality [Fisher] does nothing: he goes home and sleeps in the afternoon. He is
old & worn out & nervous. It is ill to have the destinies of an empire
in the hands of a failing old man, anxious for popularity, afraid of any local
mishap which may be put down to his dispositions. It is sad.’
This explains the constant putting forward of plans which he must have known
could never be put into action. On a more cynical level, Fisher might also have
realized that, had Jellicoe ventured south, the Admiral would have discovered
the extent of Fisher’s personal responsibility for the Dardanelles operation;
that it was Fisher himself who had advocated the use of Queen
Elizabeth and that opposition to a purely naval operation was nowhere near
as strong as Fisher had led Jellicoe to believe. For the time being however
outside events impinged: no sooner had Fisher written to Jellicoe than news was
received in the Admiralty from intercepted signals of a German reconnaissance in
force off the Dogger Bank. All thoughts of the Dardanelles disappeared for the
moment as, before dawn on the 24th, Churchill, Fisher, Wilson and Oliver
gathered in the Admiralty War Room to follow the course of the action in the
North Sea which, as so often, ended disappointingly for the British.
Others though had been busy on Fisher’s behalf. Both Hankey and Sir
Julian Corbett assisted in the preparation of a memorandum which Fisher put his
name to on 25 January, the First Sea Lord’s 74th birthday. Hankey, whose
Boxing Day memorandum had started the ball rolling, had become increasingly
concerned that his original proposition – to devote three army corps to the
campaign in Turkey to act alongside the Greeks and Bulgarians – had now become
a purely naval action. To assist in voicing his concern Hankey would later
recirculate to the War Council the deliberations of the C.I.D. in 1906 upon
‘War with Turkey’ at which Esher had spoken for most when he made it
‘clear that the Committee consider that any attempt upon the passage of the
Dardanelles by the fleet must necessarily be supported by military force.’
For the moment however, considering the rather anomalous position in which
Hankey was placed at the War Council by virtue of his position as its secretary,
Fisher’s memorandum would have to do; until, that is, Asquith intervened.
Fisher first informed Churchill on 25 January that he had ‘no desire to
continue a useless resistance in the War Council to plans I cannot concur in’,
and requested that ‘his’ memorandum should be printed and circulated before
the planned meeting on the 28th. Again, Churchill had to act quickly. French’s
memorandum of 5 January, which made an impression when read out at the War
Council three days later, had spoken of an attack upon Turkey as playing the
German game. Churchill now read the following — ostensibly Fisher’s
memorandum but which bore all the imprints of Hankey’s authorship:
We
play into Germany’s hand if we risk fighting ships in any subsidiary
operations such as coastal bombardments or the attack of fortified places
without military co-operation, for we thereby increase the possibility that the
Germans may be able to engage our fleet with some approach to equality of
strength. The sole justification of coastal bombardments and attacks by the
fleet on fortified places, such as the contemplated prolonged bombardment of the
Dardanelles forts by our fleet, is to force a decision at sea, and so far and no
further can they be justified.
If
this were not bad enough, the ending was pure Fisher:
It
has been said that the first function of the British Army is to assist the fleet
in obtaining command of the sea. This might be accomplished by military
co-operation with the Navy in such operations as the attack of Zeebrugge, or the
forcing of the Dardanelles, which might bring out the German and Turkish fleets
respectively. Apparently, however, this is not to be. The English Army is
apparently to continue to provide a small sector of the allied front in France,
where it no more helps the Navy than if it were at Timbuctoo.
Being already in possession of all that a powerful fleet can give a
country, we should continue quietly to enjoy the advantage without dissipating
our strength in operations that cannot improve the position.
Churchill
set about to refute this memorandum which, he argued, ‘would have condemned us
to complete inactivity’. Propitiously he could call on Sunday’s experience
at the Dogger Bank where the margin had been narrow (five British capital ships
to four German) but which Churchill now described as ‘decisive’. ‘On these
terms’, he confidently stated, ‘the German ships thought of nothing but
retreat…’ Churchill was able to identify no fewer than twenty-one
pre-dreadnought battleships which he asserted were surplus to current
requirements and therefore of use ‘for special services and for bombarding as
may be necessary from time to time in furtherance of objects of great strategic
and political importance, among which the following may be specifically
mentioned:— 1. The operations at the Dardanelles; 2. The support of the left
flank of the Army; 3. The bombardment of Zeebrugge; and later on 4. The seizure
of Borkum.’
Thus, since 3 January, Churchill had reversed the order of importance, a volte-face
he could now blame on the Commander-in-Chief. Jellicoe’s reluctance to conduct
offensive operations in the Northern theatre had, Churchill pleaded in
mitigation, ‘made me only the more anxious to act in the Mediterranean.’
Confident that he had rebutted Fisher’s claims, Churchill informed him on 26
January: ‘There is no difference in principle between us. But when all your
special claims are met, you must let the surplus be used for the general cause.
I suggest I show your Memo. & my comment to the Prime Minister: instead of
printing & circulating the documents. You & I are so much stronger
together.’
At this point – two days before the scheduled War Council meeting – the fate
of the Dardanelles operation hung in the balance. Not only had Fisher and Hankey
become seriously alarmed, but problems had also arisen with France and Russia.
The French, in particular, were causing Churchill additional headaches and
Fisher’s intransigence was the last thing he wanted. Churchill had his way in
that his ‘comment’ was circulated to members of the War Council; however, in
a further lapse of judgment, Asquith, with whom Churchill dined that night (and
who had now also been converted to the Dardanelles), declined to circulate
Fisher’s memorandum.
Asquith’s remarkable decision owed perhaps as much to the Prime
Minister’s annoyance at Fisher’s continual change of mood and opinion.
Fisher tried to get round Asquith by sending out copies of his memorandum
privately: Balfour received his copy on 29 January with the covering letter ‘This
is the paper I wished the Prime Minister to circulate to the War Council &
which I handed to Winston five days ago — however they don’t wish it so
I say no more…’
But it was by then too late and, in any case, Balfour’s reaction was not what
Fisher expected; Lloyd George also received a copy, as did the Leader of the
Opposition, Andrew Bonar Law (to whom Fisher complained that it was beyond his
comprehension why Asquith had suppressed it).
He had missed his chance, however: the time to make a stand had been at the War
Council on 28 January. Yet, on the morning before, Fisher had intimated that he
would not attend the War Council — a threat which sent Churchill speeding to
Asquith, who then directed that Churchill and Fisher should meet him privately,
twenty minutes before the War Council was due to commence.
 |