WHO WILL MOVE NEXT ?
LAST week we described the comparatively fluid state of opinion about the Ruhr. The change was noticeable ; Frenchmen who hitherto had not been troubled by doubts were becoming aware of the extreme unprofitableness of their policy ; the French Government, for its part, was reacting to these doubts, and M. Loucheur had just visited London as a more or less authorized inquirer on behalf of M. Poincare. Upon such a basis hopes were reared that a further move would be announced or suggested by M. Poincare or Dr. von Rosenberg, the German Foreign Minister, both of whom were about to make speeches.
We now have these speeches before us, and it cannot honestly be said that they help us in any notable degree. On the other hand, many of the French newspapers are undoubtedly unfair when they call Dr. von Rosenberg's speech a mere string of negations. The fact that what is known as the Bergmann scheme has at last come to life and is a definite proposal, though no doubt an inade- quate one, is distinctly a point gained. Dr. von Rosen- berg proposes a reparation figure of £1,500,000,000. That amount is, of course, capable of extension ; a bargainer never names at the outset the figure to which he, will finally agree. On the whole, therefore, we feel that though the situation has not improved noticeably since last week, it has nevertheless improved. There is a feeling in the air that we are on the threshold of further negotiations. If the Germans had intended to maintain an adamantine opposition they would not—for the first time, be it remarked—have volunteered a definite figure. We must give them a grain of credit for not being the dupes of their own pride as at one time they threatened to be. After all, they are the debtors, and it is the duty of an honest debtor to make reasonable offers, however impatient and irritable his creditors may be. It was time that Germany did something.
M. Poincare's speech was delivered at Dunkirk last Sunday. He said that the French Government, as the result of the occupation of the Ruhr, had been con- vinced that Germany could have delivered the coal she had refused, " since," said he, " she manages now to do without Ruhr coal." The argument does not convince us. In what sense does the rest of Germany " do with- out " Ruhr coal ? It is probably true that most factories have managed up to the present to carry on somehow, but one might almost say with equal cogency that a family can " do without " food because when they are penniless they can manage to survive somehow for a time by tightening their belts and living on their tissue. M. Poincare went on to say that it had also been proved that Germany could have paid France in foreign values since she was to-day employing " a considerable quantity of these values " to make purchases abroad. But it has always been admitted by every competent observer that Germany has many investments abroad. Mr. McKenna, when pointing out that so far as Germany could pay in money she could pay only by means of these very investments, valued them at £200,000,000. Did M. Poincare give any other estimate of the amount of these investments ? There is none in the reports of his speech which we have read, but unless he offered one the argument does not seem to have any significance. Next, M. Poincare said that Fiance had been able to unmask and dissolve the military organizations which Germany had created under the harmless name of Schultz- polizei. We should like to have more information about these organizations. The manner in which Prussia recovered her military strength under the very eyes of Napoleon by passing an enormous number of men through the small cadres which she was allowed to main- tain is a famous incident. If the same thing is being done again we should like to know, but at present there is nothing but flat assertion and counter-assertion on the subject between France and Germany.
M. Poincare came to the general conclusion that, on the evidence acquired in the Ruhr, it was obvious that, if a moratorium for two years had been granted to Germany in accordance with the British proposal, Germany would have replied at the end of that period with refusal and defiance. He therefore still considered the French policy to be the only practical one. France would withdraw in measure as payment was made by Germany but not before. On the other hand he stated —and we were very glad indeed to read this declaration— that " no sensible person could really believe that France, which promulgated the Rights of Man, had the mad idea of subjecting foreign populations to her authority and of taking possession of territories against the wish of the inhabitants."
- We pass now to Dr. von Rosenberg's speech in the Reichstag on Monday, with its reference to the Bergmann scheme of which we have already spoken. We must recall the history of this scheme. On December 31st Dr. Cuno made a speech at Hamburg which was developed later into this plan. A definite proposal for paying repara- tions was transmitted to the German Ambassador in Paris, but for various reasons was never presented. Now we at least have it formally set out. It is an offer of £1,000,000,000 in gold marks, with interest at 5 per cent., to be raised by means of an international loan. This sum would be increased at the end of four and eight years by fresh sums of £250,000,000 each. That is to say, the total amount would be £1,500,000,000—" if the International Consortium considered it within Germany's capacity." We do not say that this is nearly good enough, but we do say that it is something to go on with. The alternative is worse. The alternative is that France should go on ruining not only Germany but herself. In the end nobody would gain anything. It is just because we foresee the ruin of France, and because we are her friends, that we cannot hesitate to use plain language when we write about the Ruhr.
Another notable point in Dr. von Rosenberg's speech was his pointed reference to the proposal made by Mr. Hughes at New Haven for the investigation of the reparations question by an independent tribunal. The German Government, Dr. von Rosenberg said, had addressed Notes to various neutral Governments express- ing its readiness to have the problem settled on some such lines, but so far there had been no response. Here, at all events, is another road which leads in the right direction. Will not America accept the invitation to serve humanity—for that is what the invitation amounts to ? A new Canning—an American one—could now step forward with enormous effect to call in the New World to redress the balance of the Old. The essential points are : (1) To determine what Germany can pay ; (2) to discover the best method of compelling her to pay without such a resort to force as France is now apply- ing, with the result that the old hatreds instead of fading away are stewing up into a new devil's broth ; (8) to convince Germany that she has everything to gain- and nothing to lose by abandoning her suspicious and evasive policy. The time could hardly be riper, the invitation Could hardly be plainer.
Previous page
