THE ONLY WAY TO PEACE. [TO THE EDITOR OF THE
" SINICTATOR.1 Sin,—Lord Cromer's letter in the Times on President Wilson's recent speech was also in my opinion so useful that I sent our paper a trans2 lation of it. And I wish your two leading articles on that subject could be spread broadcast in neutral countries. Many enlightened, and I dare say the best, people there will agree with your observation that "at this moment ' Peace ' is in danger of becoming the most ill- ominous, the most threatening word in the human. vocabulary." Of course the peace propaganda in neutral countries is cunningly stimulated from the German side, but it is also significant that in neutral countriet the peace talk is heard chiefly from those who are in sympathy with Germany Nowhere are the friends of the Allies talking of peace, and for very good reason. They do not forget that the Prussian military oligarchy has, for the fourth time in fifty years, wantonly provoked war to satisfy its ambition, and that therefore the world cannot get d lasting peace so long as the prestige of that oligarchy remains unbroken. The decisive defeat of Germany can alone produce peace and security to all independent nations, be they small or large. And the Allies are quite capable to end the war in that only satisfactory manner: Why, then, should neutrals meddle with it ? There is for no neutral country glory attached to any mediation, while the ruthless invaders still occupy territory on which they fell without right or reason. It might have been the lasting glory of any neutral country if she had called on the whole civilized world to prevent Germany starting :his war. But all neutral countries neglected sadly the duty which the solemn pact, made in 1907 at the Hague. imposed on them. They all allowed Germany to unsheath the sword and trample on the Hague Conventions. Now the sword can but vindicate Right and Justice. Neutrals can and ought to hasten that end by withholding their sym: pathy, yea, and their aid, from the wrongdoer Before my mind stands always the lofty maxim of our great Dutch countryman, Hugo Grotius; who, clearly distinguishing between a just war and a wrong ono, wrote three centuries ago : "Neutral peoples are bound to abstain from anything which can strengthen those whose cause is bad ; nor must they impede the movements of those whose cause is good." Should we now, in a more enlightened ago, hesitate to follow that noble advice ? Only timidity can do it. But so great are the issues at stake in this war for all liberty-loving peoples and independent nations, that none should submit to the fear which Germany's strength and German boasts spread in neutral countries. Even if Germany could win this war, every neutral should still resist that fear and speak out for the cause that is right and just. But Germany never will or can win the war. Why, then, should neutrals hesitate to side with those who are waging not their own but the world's righteous battle? The German Imperial Chancellor can never convince well meaning neutrals that Germany will win "for smaller peoples the lasting freedc.m of the sea routes, now closed by England's domination." In peace time all countries, Germany included, had on the sea "full eqLzlity of rights." The bugbear of what is called British " maritimism," by which Germans have sought to incite neutrals against this country, is as unconvincing as the German-made phrase of "freedom of the seas." British naval power has never made the sea unfree for any country, but Germany has in this war made the sea unsafe for all peaceful neutral traders. What, then, would a peace be worth which left that country in pos- session of its aggressive and mischievous power ? But all will be well with the world. And in spite of German boasting about the battle of Horn Reef, the really victorious heroism of the British Fleet must fill
all well-meaning neutrals with infinite joy as heralding the peace that
is to be am, Sir, he., JOHN C. VAN DER VEER,
Previous page
