  1899 Our diplomatic situation in 1899—William II visits the IphigÉnie—The Hague Conference—Germany the only obstacle to the fulfilment of the humanitarian plans of the Tzar. January 11, 1899. [1] Impelled by a simplicity of mind that suggests vacuity, a great many French patriots imagine that our country cannot be equally hated by two nations at once. Seeing England threatening France every day in every way and by all the means at her disposal, these hypnotised patriots with fixed and staring eyes, see only England and nothing else! No matter what misdeeds Germany may commit, they scarcely trouble to turn towards her their inattentive gaze. Some of them, even, whose lips are tightened with anger when they think of London, smile with a vague feeling of good-will at the thought of Berlin. And yet the other enemy, the German, emboldened by our absorption, is more ready to oppress the weak, reveals himself as bolder and greedier, more cynical and exclusive, more violent in denying to others their rights. German influence may spread all over the world, but refuses to allow any other influence whatsoever to penetrate Germany. Prussia introduced the law of force because she was strong; she is now inaugurating a new system of human rights to the exclusive advantage of Germany. One newspaper, the Vossische Zeitung, has dared to say: "This system is unworthy of a civilised state and must lead to our being morally humiliated before the whole world." But that is all. When Germany perpetrates some particularly monstrous act, she is only "a civilising power spreading the greatest of all languages." Moreover, Germany is the only nation that possesses a secular history; other nations have nothing more than a succession of irregular proceedings, tolerated by German generosity or indifference. The German Emperor, King of Prussia, wages a victorious war against everything that is not German. He has just put to the sword the French terms in the Prussian military vocabulary. In vain these poor words pleaded the authority of the great Frederick, who introduced them into Prussia. In spite of his fondness for imitating Frederick the Great, William II has slaughtered the French expressions "officier aspirant," "porte ÉpÉe," "premier lieutenant," "gÉnÉral," etc., etc. The massacre is complete, their exclusion wholesale; he leaves no trace of the enemy's tongue. William II follows with marked satisfaction the anti-French movement of opinion in England. "England will chastise France," he said to his Officers' Club, "and then she will come and beg me to protect her." Germany hates us with all her own hatred, added to that of England. She hopes for our defeat, but if we should win, she would come hypocritically to claim from us her vulture share of the spoil for her so-called neutrality. February 9, 1899. Bismarck's interest in things was never keenly aroused unless they were worth lying about. When he said "the Eastern question is not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier," he was formulating in his mind the programme of the "Drang nach Osten," the great push towards the East. The Russo-Turkish war; the humbling of the victorious Slav colossus by the Congress of Berlin; the diabolical treachery contained in the Resolutions of the said Congress (not one of which but contains the germ of some revolt or movement on the part of the races of the Turkish Empire); the separation of Bulgaria and Roumelia, united by the Treaty of San Stefano; the subsequent reunion, directed against Russia, of these two countries; the handing over of Bulgaria to a Coburg, bound by ties to Austria—all these things were brought about by the treachery and guile of the super-liar who ruled at Berlin. And since then, William II has done everything possible to advance this "Drang nach Osten," Prussia's favourite scheme. And whilst the menace of this "push towards the East" is steadily growing, whilst he who directs it from Berlin holds in his hand all the strings of the puppets who can help to advance it or pretend (as part of the conspiracy) to oppose it, what is great Russia doing, the mighty Tzar, and France? They tell us that Russia is abandoning her interests in the East and that the Tzar is dreaming of giving Europe a lasting peace—a peace chiefly favourable to the economic and commercial development of Germany and to the increase of her influence. Russia and France seem scarcely to realise that the only force which can drive back the tide of Germanic invasion is the Slav power, organised and firmly established in Europe. A Balkan league including Bulgaria, Serbia and Montenegro, a southern Slav kingdom, a Bohemia-Moravia, these might hold the German power in check and give to Europe the necessary equilibrium. France has an interest as great as Russia's in the organisation of this opposing force, but she does not realise the fact. Just as the Athenians stretched out their hands towards the power of Rome, deadly in its fascination, even so there are culpably blind patriots among us who dream the monstrous dream of an entente with Germanism. As well might one, to escape the flood, throw oneself into the rising ravening torrent. Before long, Germany will be the ruler of Austria, of Hungary, Turkey and Holland, and we shall have prepared no counterpoise to this encroachment, we, the Allies of the great Russian people, who, even though they may eventually succumb to the fatal attraction of Asia, might first help us to secure our racial psychology and to establish bonds between our Gallo-Latin soul and the soul of the Slavs. The Germans are establishing themselves comfortably and permanently in China. There lies before me an extract from the first number of a newspaper published by the Germans in China under the title of The German Asiatic Sentinel. This official organ of the Kiao-chao territory appears every week with six pages of articles and advertisements. It is strange to find in it advertisements of the most diverse description, from that which commends brown Kulmback beer, to that in which two young German merchants seek to correspond, with a view to marriage, with good-looking young German girls of good family. When one remembers the solemn investiture at Kiel of Prince Henry of Prussia, as leader of the crusade which was to spread the sacred words of Christianity amongst the barbarian followers of Confucius, and when one sees this investiture finding its expression in the initiation of the Chinese into the mysteries of Kulmback beer and the search for exportable Gretchens, the association of the two pictures reminds one somehow of tight-rope dancing. But ridicule is unknown in Germany. It seems to me that the Kaiser's latest speech, at the banquet of the provincial Landtag of Brandenburg, is in somewhat doubtful taste. On this occasion, he spoke first of the divine right and responsabilities of the Hohenzollerns on a footing of familiarity with God, and next he compared the functions of a sovereign with those of a gardener, who stirs up the earth, smokes the roots and hunts out noxious insects. True, the German Emperor has got to cultivate the tree of 1870-71 and to destroy "hostile animals," which I take to mean our good simple-minded Frenchmen! The campaign in favour of a rapprochement between France and Germany continues to be cleverly managed and directed in our midst. There is talk of a visit of the Tzar, who would come to Antibes and who would there receive William II at the same time as M. FÉlix Faure. The formula with which this arrangement is commended to us is "we have sulked long enough." In other words, they would convert a great, strengthening and enduring hatred into a trivial grudge. That, since Fashoda they should regard Sedan as a peccadillo is strange, to say the least of it. The Kolnische Zeitung, which opened the discussion with regard to a rapprochement with France, now closes it by observing— "That if ever the French should feel impelled to seek a reconciliation with Germany, it could only be sincerely effected on the condition that they abandon once and for all the idea of a reckoning to be settled between the two countries for the war of 1870-71." When we have estimated the nature and extent of Germany's greed, calculated the number of her demands and ambitions, reflected by the light of history and German exaggerations, on the character of the German race and its unbridled lust of domination, then the National, Colonial and Continental interests of France (considered dispassionately and without hatred for the conqueror or resentment for the cruel and humiliating past) do not lie in the direction of a rapprochement with Germany. They lie in the establishment and combination of the Slav States in Europe, in a more effective alliance with Russia, and a rapprochement between the Latin nations. March 27, 1899. [2] By our resistance, since the national defeat of 1871, we have pledged ourselves not to accept it. Our moral position and the dignity of our claims to restitution have been worthy of our history because we inveterate Frenchmen have never ceased to maintain that our power over Alsace-Lorraine has been overthrown by force, but that our rights remain undiminished. Austria, to Germany, and Italy, to Austria, have sacrificed this moral position and the dignity of their respective claims, in return for an alliance which, besides being treacherously false, has brought them neither wealth nor honour. But alas! even whilst our rights became strengthened by our very faithfulness and constancy, our rulers were yielding to the insidious counsels of the enemy. M. Ferry listened to Bismarck and slowly, drop by drop, we wasted the blood with which we should have reconquered Alsace-Lorraine. Bismarck, seeing us regaining our strength too quickly for his liking, and becoming a danger to Germany, and prevented by the Tzar from stopping our recovery by striking at us again, played his hand so as to throw us headlong into a policy of colonial adventures. But the Great Iron Chancellor, the would-be genial fellow, had not foreseen that his pupil William II would be inspired by ambitions entirely different from his own: that of a relentless colonial policy, that of commercial and industrial development, on broad lines of encroachment, and that of a navy. All these things however, followed logically, one from the other; for profitable colonisation one must have a market for one's produce, and to protect a mercantile marine one must have a navy. Therefore, under these conditions, which Bismarck did not foresee, the danger to France became an immediate and equal danger to Germany, for England would be free to sweep the seas of Germany's merchantmen as well as those of France. Certain misguided people, moved by their extravagant feelings either of hatred towards England or of fear, seized the opportunity of the hour of danger under cover of the well-worn word (which leads so many worthy folk to lose their heads, even when it represents just the opposite of what it means) pleading our interests, I say, seized the opportunity to lower France by making overtures to the Kaiser and to Prussia. Our interest, our twofold interest, was not to have a war with England, and to let Germany see that it was to her interest that we should not be deprived of our maritime power which protects the free development of German expansion. We possess at this moment a third of Africa, a portion of Asia and Madagascar; before trying to add to these possessions, let us endeavour to make the most of their wealth. To sum up: our position has never been better, if we know how to wait and not to make ourselves cheap. As the faithful Allies of Russia, either England or Germany will have need of us. * * * * * * And so, the German Emperor, King of Prussia, has added another chapter, and not the least astounding, to the volume of his swift changes and contradictions. The author of the telegram to President KrÜger has received at Berlin Mr. Cecil Rhodes, the instigator of Jameson, invader of the Transvaal! William II has been negotiating with him in the matter of the telegraph line and the railway. If any one had foretold, on the day that he sent his famous telegram concerning the rights of the South African Republic, that the paladin who signed this chivalrous message would come to discuss "business" with Sir [sic] Cecil Rhodes, or that the latter would have dared to present himself, in a check suit, before the Kaiser wearing his winged helmet—such a prophet would have been regarded as a dangerous lunatic. Nevertheless, so it is. Mr. Rhodes entered the Imperial Palace quite simply and naturally, conveying to the Emperor the affectionate regards of Queen Victoria. I do not know whether they shook hands. Between business men, shopkeepers ready for a deal, etiquette is superfluous and a ready understanding easy. Shake! Herr von BÜlow, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs communicated the news to the Reichstag, promising further information on the subject before long. And now, what becomes of the hope of a rupture with England, anticipated by our worthy apostles of the Franco-German Alliance against perfidious Albion? Not only does William II flirt with old England and give her pledges, but he opens his arms to the most dangerous, the most enterprising, the most compromised of Englishmen, the Napoleon of the Cape! April 27, 1899. [3] Were it not for Alsace-Lorraine, we should be the ally of colonial Germany. Were it not for Alsace-Lorraine, we should be the most ardent disciples of the noble, truly humane, and admirable work of disarmament undertaken by the Emperor Nicholas II. Alsace-Lorraine has made us the irreconcilable enemies of Germanism and at the same time the faithful, devoted and ever loyal friends of every Slav cause. Familiar with the work of these causes, attached to the greatness of our allies, those of us who were the first to seek that mighty alliance, will ever labour to strengthen and extend it by all the resources which can add to its glory, but at the same time we are anxious that nothing should be said or done to diminish our own first claims to restitution. An article in the Novae Vremya contains a protest against the idea (disseminated by the German Press) that Russia is working to bring about a reconciliation between Germany and France. The Russian organ declares that such a rapprochement would deprive France of all the advantages of her alliance with Russia. The St. Petersburg newspaper adds a sentence which appeals to us, because we can adapt it to our own case. "A Franco-German entente," says the Novae Vremya, "would erect a cross on the Franco-Russian entente." A Russo-German entente would erect a cross on the Franco-Russian entente. Needless to say, the Kolnische Zeitung informs us that the Novae Vremya only represents middle-class opinion in Russia. Well, that isn't so bad, considering that we are sure of the antipathy of the whole Russian people for the Germans. The Kleine Zeitung, already reckoning on the conclusion of the rapprochement between Germany and France, adds that it will be received with sympathy throughout the whole German Empire. I believe you, O Kleine Zeitung! And the more so when, with a mixture of haughtiness and careless indifference, you add "with the exception of the question of Alsace-Lorraine, which for us does not exist, there is no difference which should separate Germany from France!" O most generous Kleine Zeitung! it is sweet to differ. On condition that we do not ask you to give us back the flesh that you have torn from our side, you are willing to extend to us your mild greetings of disinterested friendship, and I have no doubt that you are ready to forgive us the crime you have committed against us! May 23, 1899. [4] Amongst the most definite impressions produced by the general proceedings of the Peace Conference there are two which stand out: one, that the diplomats invariably assert that it will not lead to any practical result, either as regards disarmament or the creation of an arbitration tribunal; the other, that all patriots who are enemies of Germany are filled with anguish at the sight of Germany endeavouring to direct its discussions. In its practical results, the Conference will not go further than the splendidly magnanimous proposal of Nicholas II, having for its object the humanising of war, the development of arbitration as a remedial measure, and the possibility of conditional and partial disarmament. All that will be accomplished might have been attained by the Tzar alone in case of war, in the event of proposals for arbitration, or by way of leading the Powers to recognise the economic dangers to which they expose their peoples by ever-increasing armaments. June 27, 1899. [5] We know what a struggle William II had to face on the subject of the canal from the Elbe to the Rhine, and what concessions he was compelled to make to the Prussian Chamber. Moreover he had a stiff fight in the Parliament of the Empire with regard to the new relations with [Transcriber's note: which?] he proposes to establish between Germany and England and her colonies. The agrarians of the Right and the Socialists found themselves united in violent opposition. Herr von BÜlow required genuine skill to avert the storm. The Kaiser met with a very decided rebuff in the matter of what is called in Germany the "convicts' law." It will be remembered that last autumn, in Westphalia, the Emperor had threatened the socialists that those who incited to strikes would be condemned to hard labour. Such a threat is easily uttered, but difficult to enforce by process of law. Under the conditions existing nowadays it does not do to speak of forced labour in connection with trades unions and strikes; nevertheless, in order to make good the word of the German Emperor, his Ministers tried to snatch a vote for a fight with the workers. Baron Stumm, a factory king possessed of great influence with the Kaiser, had inspired him with hatred against industrial workers, just as others had inspired him with love for them at the beginning of his reign. With all his swagger and bluster, William II is more a creature of impulse than of constancy. All parties united to oppose his scheme, except those who are known in every Parliament as Mamelukes. The former "Father" of the working classes, suddenly become their enemy, has experienced a personal defeat in this matter which is all the greater for the fact that the Socialists, while they rejoice at seeing it inflicted upon him by the Reichstag, will not forgive him for his "convicts' law." July 8, 1899. [6] The wretched policy, which sent French ships to Kiel to salute the flag of the King of Prussia, continues to be honoured—no, dishonoured—by the Government of the Republic of to-day. For this Government, the least of William's wishes is an order. So the Emperor William II has set foot upon the soil of France by paying a visit aboard of the IphigÉnie (for every one of our ships is a bit of the mother-country). The Waldeck-Rousseau Cabinet, the ideal of M. Urbain Gohier, has allowed this monstrous thing to be done almost immediately after William II had laid the first stone of his fortresses on the Moselle, fortresses intended (to use his own aggressive words) to hold the enemy under Germany's guns. So we are the enemy for Germany and yet, oh shame! even while she slashes us with this word, we seek to show her that she is our friend. * * * * * * It certainly looks as if the present Prussian Ministry has neither the prestige nor the strength of will to control successfully the conduct of the ex-Mamelukes. Its failure at the last session of Parliament was complete. It is amongst the strongest supporters of the monarchy that the most determined opposition was offered to the proposed law for the construction of the canal from the Elbe to the Rhine, an enterprise dear to the heart of the Emperor, once the father of his working men and now the father of German manufacturers. Where the political impediments block his path William II cuts and hacks away as it may please him. There is proof of this in the feverish haste with which he is lowering the age of officers in the army. On the 10th of June, six Prussian generals were allowed to retire; on the 15th, ten more were placed on the unattached list, and a further movement in the same direction is expected to take place after the great Imperial manoeuvres. July 25, 1899. [7] THE HAGUE CONFERENCEI desire to convince my readers by indisputable facts— (1) That the pacifist agitation in Europe, in all its various forms, is inspired and sustained by the most uncompromising military Power on this Continent, that is to say, by Germany; (2) That if the magnanimous humanitarian idea, so sincerely conceived by Nicholas II, has not been fulfilled, its failure is entirely due to the treachery of Germany. For that matter, Germany has been providentially punished for her machiavellian ways. Firstly, because she has been unable to conceal the fact that she is primarily responsible for this failure; and secondly (the fact is important in other ways and has proved in a most striking manner), because the Hague Conference has clearly demonstrated, that which the initiated have long suspected, that Germany is completely isolated in Europe! As a matter of fact neither Austria nor Italy were with her, only one Power voted solidly with Germany—the Power which is not content with war and supplements it by massacres—the Turkey of Abdul Hamid. This isolation (an indirect result of the Franco-Russian alliance, which has compelled Austria to come to a complete understanding with Russia in regard to affairs in the Balkans, and led Italy to draw closer to France), this isolation is a great and inestimable victory, whose benefit must be frankly recognised by every honest mind in the two allied countries, a victory for those who, like myself, have worked heart and soul for the Franco-Russian alliance. And it is now, now that these things are clearly proved, now, when For years, acting upon an evil policy which I propose to elucidate hereafter, the Government of the Republic first set itself to oppose the alliance with Russia, preferring an alliance with Germany; later, this Government saw in the Russian alliance nothing but a means to gain public applause, to acquire popularity. Now that the strength and worth of this alliance have been revealed in all their truth by the isolation of Germany, this same Government of the Republic compels our sailors to suffer the courtesy of William II and prepares us, by diplomatic communiquÉs, for an entente with Germany. Only super-simpletons can believe in William II's sham bluster against England on behalf of the Transvaal and of that Africa concerning which he has just concluded a binding treaty with Albion. One must either be hopelessly ignorant or wilfully blind not to see through the game of William II and to be fooled by his ingratiating ways. His only object is to compel England to throw herself into his arms and to bring about a great common alliance of the Anglo-Saxon races. Will not the cynical supporters of the "policy of interest" experience a revulsion of conscience if they know whither they are leading us, or a sudden enlightenment, if they do not know? If not, then to those who, through cowardice or treachery, have lightly ruined the noblest of all causes, I shall say, "I wash my hands" of this crime of ignorance or base surrender. Weary, sick at heart and indignant I shall say it, in my own name and in the name of those who have died, suddenly or mysteriously, for the Franco-Russian cause. Any one who followed carefully the successive events of the performance given under the direction of M. de Staal, any one familiar with the secret manoeuvres that led to the convening of the Peace Conference, could have had no difficulty in predicting what its end would be. From some of these secret manoeuvres in the wings, I propose to lift the veil; my readers will then be in a position to understand more clearly why it is that the truly Christian act of the Tzar (apart from certain unimportant improvements of the Brussels Convention) did not attain the result which might have been expected from the initiative of a powerful and generous sovereign. For the past year we have repeatedly been told, in more or less sensational revelations, that the influence which chiefly determined Nicholas II in his action, was his reading of a famous book on war by M. de Bloch. This is no doubt true and the fact may be admitted. Much moved by the eloquent description, given by the great financial writer of Warsaw, of the heavy burdens imposed on the nations by the extravagant armaments of the Continent, and terrified at the thought of the calamities which the next war would let loose upon all Europe, Nicholas II, full of Christian pity for the sufferings of humanity, directed Count Mouravieff to send the famous circular to the Powers, which resulted in the convening of the Hague Conference. But I would ask, how are we to reconcile the hostile attitude of William II's delegates to the Russian proposals with his solemn declaration that he was absolutely in agreement with his friend Nicholas II? Why did the German Emperor first give his approval to De Bloch's campaign in favour of disarmament and then make Von Schwartzkopf publicly repudiate the most important arguments of that writer's book? Was it that William II was in the first instance seduced by the lamentable picture which De Bloch gives of France and the organisation of her army, or (and this seems far more likely) did he simply approve of the intrigue set on foot by the author of this work on war, an intrigue which aimed at casting a shadow over the patriotic hopes that France placed on the Russian alliance, by inciting Nicholas II to call for a general disarmament? It must be confessed that the Franco-Russian alliance struck a bitter blow at the hopes of Polish patriots. The contempt and hostility towards France which inspire M. de Bloch's book are proof sufficient of the grudge its author bears us. It is perfectly evident that they must have been delighted in Berlin at the chief object of his work. But there were other objects in view. For years William II has unceasingly laboured to persuade England that she has every interest to join the Triple Alliance. His perseverance in this direction is quite natural. But if Germany succeeded last year in concluding an agreement with England on a few special questions, the Hague Conference has proved that it does not involve an agreement in matters of general policy. Nevertheless, William II counted on this Congress to produce closer relations with Great Britain. He hoped that the Congress would result in sharp antagonism between England and Russia and he reckoned on this antagonism to help him to inflict a severe defeat on Russia, which in its turn would have enabled him to draw one or other of these two Powers into the orbit of his policy. Great then was the disappointment of the German Emperor when, from the very outset of the Conference, England, performing a most unexpected volte-face, made proposals on the subject of arbitration, which went a great deal farther than the Russian proposals laid before, the Congress. This master-stroke of British diplomacy compelled Germany to come out into the open and to reveal herself in her true light: that is to say, as the only obstacle to the fulfilment of the Tzar's humanitarian designs. The Stengels, Zorns and Schwartzkopfs completed the success of British diplomacy by the brutal violence of their opposition and the cynicism of their proposals. It was not only on the two committees that dealt with arbitration and disarmament that German opposition (always supported by Turkey alone) wrecked the magnanimous attempt of Nicholas II to minimise the horrors of war. The committee presided over by M. de Martens succeeded in effecting certain improvements in the terms of the Brussels Convention; if the labours of its President and members were not successful in doing more to lessen the evils of war upon land, the fact is again due to the opposition of the German representatives. Thus, for instance, the humane measures proposed in forbidding the bombardment of open towns and private dwellings unoccupied by troops, or the destruction of unfortified villages, were not adopted because the German delegate insisted on the impossibility of limiting the powers of a commander-in-chief, who must remain the sole judge of the utility of such destruction in the general interest of military operations. It was the same in the case of the article whereby it was proposed that provinces occupied by enemy forces should be guaranteed in the maintenance of their autonomous administration and in certain rights against the demands of invasions, Germany declared her unwillingness to fetter in any way the decision of her army commanders. I would ask those amongst us who rejoice at the idea of seeing William II take part in the Exhibition of 1900, to let their thoughts dwell a little on the attitude of the Prussian delegates at the Peace Conference. William I took part in the Exhibition of 1867 and we know what that visit cost France three years later. Now that all the perfidious plans inspired by Berlin have come to nought, now that the defenders of German policy at St. Petersburg, Warsaw and elsewhere have come to grief, and that the Peace Congress—even though it may not have fulfilled the generous hopes of Nicholas II—has nevertheless led to a great advance in the opinion of the public as in that of governments, on the subjects of arbitration and disarmament, William II shifts his rifle on to the other shoulder. In order to clear Germany of the blame for the failure of the Conference in the eyes of the Tzar, the same individuals who constituted themselves the protectors and sponsors of M. de Bloch at the Russian Court and who had assured the Tzar of the absolute support of William II, have now started a campaign of intrigue against Count Mouravieff. That faithful minister and servant of the Tzar, who undertook with great skill to carry out the initiative of his sovereign, and who has devoted himself whole-heartedly to the task of winning over to the Tzar's ideas not only the sympathy of the entire civilised world, but even the vast majority of the sceptical diplomats, who are leaving the Conference with the conviction that they have done useful work—well, it is this same Count Mouravieff that the German Press is now trying to hold responsible for the misdeeds of the Stengels, the Zorns and the Schwartzkopfs. By way of a first attempt at abolishing the horrors of war by means of international agreements, the Hague Conference has given very satisfactory results, and the honour for these is due to M. de Staal, Count Mouravieff and M. de Martens. The Tzar has reason to be equally satisfied in that he has compelled his very good friend William II to throw off his mask and to reveal all his hostility towards Russia. It is now for those who had pledged themselves to guarantee the unconditional support of Germany for the Tzar, to bear the load of responsibility which is properly theirs for having unworthily deceived their Sovereign. Many other hopes, bearing on internal affairs in Russia, had been created by the authors of the intrigue which I have endeavoured to expose. We know how deeply rooted is the religious and pacific character of the Russian masses. No initiative could stir their hearts so profoundly as that which seeks to lessen the horrors of war and to relieve the people of the crushing burden of armaments. One has only to remember the sects which exist in Russia which are opposed to military service and duties. Such an initiative coming from their adored Tzar was bound to produce far-reaching results. |
|
