The Times of Monday publishes from its Berlin corre- spondent
an interesting summary of German feeling as to the retention of Kiao-Chau. It appears that the Reichstag in Committee have seriously considered the advisability of abandoning the leased territory. During the ten years of occupation £5,500,000 has been spent, and several more millions will be required to complete the contemplated scheme of development. Germany is confronted by a dilemma which is defined in the Zukunft by the well-known naval critic, Count Reventlow. In view of the overwhelming naval strength of Great Britain and Japan in the Far East, he describes German military aspirations at Kiao-Chau as absurd. As for the commercial value of the territory, be considers it very slight indeed. "Commercially it is at best only a speculation, politically it is an anxiety, and as a military position it is already lost." Why, then, should it be retained ? Count Reventlow, who is in favour of retention, believes that the maintenance of her prestige in the Far East is really important for Germany. Voluntary retirement would mean a great loss of prestige abroad as well as depression at -home. If- Germany were compelled to retire by foreign Powers, the bitterness in Germany might somehow be turned to good account. Therefore, he concludes that the best bad better be made of a bad bargain. One is tempted to think
that Germany's regrets over her acts of foreign policy are generally in proportion to the enthusiasm with which the policy was launched.
Previous page
