SETTLEMENT BETWEEN RUSSIA AND EUROPE.
A BROAD line must be drawn not only between the quarrel which Russia has been carrying on against Turkey, and the much more serious account which Russia owes to Europe, but also between the claims of either side as they have hitherto been discussed, and the grounds on which a settlement must be sought henceforward. So long as the contest was only between Russia advancing untenable demands and Turkey resisting those demands, the question of the Holy Places or of patronizing Orthodox Greek Christians might be discussed on the basis of old treaties; but as soon as Russia en- deavoured to take the judgment and the award into her own hands, it became evident that she had vitiated her case, and that a mere permission for her to retreat would not satisfy either justice or policy. It has long been our opinion that Russia could not be permitted to resume the status quo ; but that after the termination of the present conflict the relations which Russia bears to the con- terminous state must be placed upon a better footing. We are glad to see that the same view has been supported by the Econo- mist ; and our contemporary supplies one very excellent argument for taking this opportieeity of revising the relations of Russia to the important tract of country under the rale of Turkey. "If we are parties to reestablishing peace by the restoration of previously existing treaties, we shall be guilty and blind to an almost incredible degree. Why, it is these very treaties which have given to Russia perpetual pre- texts for interference in Turkish internal affairs—which have made the con- nexion between the two countries one chronic irritation—which have ena- bled Russia to undermine, to weaken, to disorganize, to madden Turkey— which she looks to and relies on for enabling her gradually to destroy and absorb that unhappy power. It is under these very treaties that she has been enabled to rum and control the navigation of the Danube, to rob Eng- lish merchants, and to sap the sources of Bulgarian and Wallachian pros- perity.* It is under these very treaties that she is now crushing the liber- ties and destroying the peace and property of those wretched Principalities. It is under these very treaties that she is empowered to exclude all other ships of war from the Black Sea, and thus to operate there uncontrolled. It is these very treaties, the abrogation of which (not their maintenance') Eng- land ought most vehemently to insist upon ; an abrogation for which the present war offers so admirable and just an occasion, and for which all its cost and bloodshed would scarcely be too high a price ; an abrogation which would be the fitting penalty to inflict on Russia for her misconduct, and the • The navigation of the Danube, its present condition, and the gross breach of compact which Russia perpetrated when she permitted the accumulation of mud at the Sullins mouth, were explained in the Spectator of Tith August, in a paper at page 832, fitting indemnity for Turkey to demand and to obtain for the unwarrantable occupation of her territories."
As the party which has wantonly brought a vexations action, Russia should be made to pay the costs—to indemnify Turkey For all the consequences of resisting an unjust attack ; and no form of indemnity could be so good as that which secured Turkey against similar aggression for the future. As the Economist says, England cannot actually lend her aid "to replace her injured ally" in that fatal position which renders him liable to a perpetual repe. tition of the wrong," by a renewed abuse of the treaty stipulations. And independently of these considerations, the very events of the year have proved that the relations between Russia and Turkey are such as to provoke breaches of the order of Europe, instead of securing it. On every ground, therefore, it is necessary that the treaty relations of the two countries should be reduced to a more rational condition. It is satisfactory to see that the third condition on which Turkey now consents to negotiate—the non-renewal of the treaties—raises this question of an ulterior settlement. The occasion not only affords the opportunity for realizing some of the benefits said to be secured under international law, but its inevitable tendency is to place international law itself upon a much sounder basis than it has hitherto stood upon. It is a common object of treaties to secure the free navigation of every great river for the advantage of the inhabitants which reside upon its banks, and for those other nations which seek it as a highway of com- merce. Professedly, the Danube is thus secured ; but in fact it has been closed by the malignant neglect of Russia. The expe- diency of the object is not only admitted in most countries, but the admission is formally recorded in treaties ; and in arranging for the settlement of the present dispute, it is desirable that the great water highway of the Danube should no longer be intrusted to the treaoherous mismanagement of its professed curator, but should be thrown open in fact as well as in law. All commercial countries have a common interest in securing that 'object; but besides the advantages accruing to commerce, there is a political guarantee in a free communication between the several countries of Europe. If Austria, Hungary, Servia, Wallachia, Bulgaria, and Moldavia, be kept open for intercourse with England, France, America, Holland, and the many commercial countries which are sure to seek that highway, a great safeguard is attained against a monopoly of power by any one state, or against that closing of whole tracts of the Continent by the will of a orowned individual. In exacting these concessions from Russia, the Powers intrusted with the settlement of the dispute would be enforcing no retri- butive humiliation, which has been thought to be the privilege of the victorious party. Nothing would be taken from Russia for the sake of destroying her or humiliating her ; nothing which she has not abused to the injury of her neighbours, of' commerce, and of Europe. In this respect, indeed, the war which is about to commence wholly differs from any that has preceded it. It is not a war of conquest or retaliation ; it is not a war even to subdue one dangerous power for the security of the rest; in short, it is not a war for the sake of victory, but one entirely for the sake of order, as that is understood by the majority of the European Powers. The security of order and of peace has often been pro- fessed as the object of such contests, because in manifestoes and diplomatic records it is customary to give the objects of aggressors or retaliators as fine a name as possible; but the war to put down Napoleon was mingled with dynastic objects and purposes of con- quest, to say nothing of the blind prejudice with which that great adventurer was assailed in many eases by men inferior to himself. The present war is carried against Russia solely to execute the award of the common opinion of Europe. We have the very best of tests that the decision is the common opinion of Europe ; for the main conditions which are to be enforced upon Russia have re- ceived the assent of Austria, France, England, and Prussia— states entirely differing in their own individual interests, differing in their political views, differing in their relations with Russia, and agreeing only in the very broadest principles which it has been thought necessary to guarantee. Even if Austria should lack the courage to enforce this award, she has already given to the award her deliberate sanction. It is a war, therefore, wholly and solely to secure that which all the great Powers have agreed to consider just and essential to the order and peace of Europe : it has no fur- ther object whatever. The very purpose of such a war is an inno- vation in the history of warfare and of international law. Indeed, it is the first step to the recognition of any common law worth calling by the name. The primary object of the war is, not to establish the rights of Turkey ; not to judge the question between Russia and the Ottoman empire ; but to confirm this great first principle of social order—that the individual shall not take the law into his own hands. We have already established that rule in the municipal law; it is for the first time distinctly recognized in the basis of the present attempt to enforce the common verdict of Europe on a point of international law. If the Four Powers or the Western Powers arrest Russia, it is, in the first instance, not upon the merits of her quarrel with Turkey, but upon the ground that she is breaking the peace and taking the law into her own hands, and that she is to be prevented from so doing. When once she is brought into court, indeed, the merits of the case upon which she has acted thus unlawfully will come under considera- tion ; and it is to be expected that the court will make such an award as shall prevent the repetition of the offence, coupled with a virtual indemnity of the injured party. But the primary and paramount object is to secure respect for the opinion and common law of Europe. Incidentally, another fundamental and important principle has been introduced and recognized. In the settlement of the quarrel, it is argued, regard must be had not only to the independence of the Ot- toman empire, but also to the just rights of the Greek subjects of Tur- key. The common opinion, therefore, which checks the individual presumption of Russia, distinctly recognizes the rights of peoples, and renders that a subject which may be entertained by the court. This is a most important principle : for we may recollect that the Greek subjects of Turkey are not the only races who are oppressed —who are made to undergo intolerance and practical injustice, social as well as political. On the contrary, there are other races subject to still more wrongful treatment; and if states rush intp court, it is well that they should understand their liability to be called to account for the treatment of their subjects. In short, the common law of Europe has begun to recognize the rights of peoples as well as of sovereign powers. The recognition was in- evitable; it might long since have been foreseen ; but the cir- cumstances of Turkey bring the recognition to a practical point. Important as they are, the principles which are thus attaining to recognition must concede to another of still more commandins. importanee. The present war, we say, was instituted to execute the award of the common opinion of Europe, as opposed to an in- dividual state taking the law into its own hands. It is desirable for the stability of thrones, as well as for the constitutional liberty of peoples, that this consent to sustain the common law should re- ceive es broad a support as possible ; for it is indeed the protection of all constituted authority, as well as of social freedom. Hitherto, doctrine and policy have been dictated by the most powerful; in- telligence and conscientious opinion have repeatedly been sacri- ficed to that dictate. The present operations of Russia proceed entirely upon the old fashion of coercins.b other states into an al- liance against their likings if not against their convictions. Not- withstanding her diplomatic cleverness, Russia is by no means a fair type of European intelligence or honesty ; for there are many other states which would be called of less importance, but in which knowledge, cultivated understanding, moral uprightness, and respect for humanity, stand higher. It would be unjust to Bel- gium, Prussia, Saxony, or France, if they were rated at the level of Russia. Russia, however, is now trying to coerce or cajole many states of Europe into taking her side. Like a noble in the middle ages, the Czar seeks to bribe or bully his betters into stand- ing by him ; and hitherto the minor states of Europe, if not those of the first rank, have even been obliged to sacrifice their own clear perception and their conscience to their policy or their fear. Let the principle and practice be established, that the individual shall not be suffered to dictate, but that the Powers of Europe will unite to sustain the common law of Europe, and every state would be released from this species of coercion. In other words, the conscience of Europe would be the high court of appeal, under whose protection every state should be independent, and no crowned man • should make it afraid.
Previous page
