GERMAN AFFAIRS AND THE INDEMNITY.
,N 0 one can say from day to day, or even from hour to hour, what may happen in Germany. There is a tremendous clash of rival authorities and rival doctrines. On the whole the extremists or Bolsheviks seem to be losing ground, and this is all to the good, not only for Germany but for the whole world. Let us summarize recent events so far as we can dis- entangle them. On Monday the Congress of the Soldiers' and Workers' Councils of the Empire was opened in Berlin. It may be remembered that before this Congress was sum- moned, the Berlin Council of Soldiers and Workers had usurped the right to try to govern the country. It will be noted that just as Prussia used to be the only authority which seriously counted when the Kaiser was on the throne, so to-day the bad old habit lingers, and the workers of the capital have tried to reproduce the old situation in a new shape and under a new name. The Berlin Council was avowedly hostile to Herr Ebert's Government, and carried on as though Herr Ebert did not exist. The most important fact at the moment is that the Congress of Soldiers and Workers representing the whole Empire have deposed the Berlin Council. The dele- gates turned the Bolshevik President out of the chair, ac- claimed the latest speech of Herr Ebert, refused to admit the Bolsheviks, Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg (the well- known leaders of the Spartacus group), to the Congress, and generally gave the Congress a Majority Socialist complexion. Of course it may be said that as the Majority Socialists showed themselves throughout the war utterly insincere, it is not a good thing but a bad thing that they should be overcoming their enemies. But on the whole we cannot help thinking that, though we have every reason to mistrust the Majority Socialists, it is better that they should win through, with the prospect of keeping Germany in some sort of order, than that chaos and disintegration—in short, Bolshevism—should be the result of the present trouble.
So far we have stated the principal feature of the conflict, but we have by no means exhausted the list of rival elements. The various Soviets throughout Germany are not like the Russian Soviets, each compact of soldiers, workmen, and peasants fi p- operating together. The German Soviets are exclu- sive ; the soldiers, workmen, and peasants have their separate organizations. It need not be supposed, by the way, that the Berlin Council, which has taken representatives from every kind of Soviet, is entirely Prussian in composition, though it is predominantly Prussian in that respect and is quite Prussian in character. Apart from the extraordinary variety of Soviets, a number of which may coalesce at any time and form the nucleus of a new movement, other elements exist which, if they are not hostile to Herr Ebert's Government, are at all events independent of it. The Trade Unions have with the permission of Herr Ebert made themselves respon- sible for economic affairs, and, so far as we can gather, Herr Ebert never interferes with them. Again, most of the Departments of State continue to act very much as though there had been no revolution at all. Possibly the new Government, or Governments, have not yet had time to re- organize them or overthrow them. Yet again, the Reichstag professes to believe that it is only in a state of suspended anima- tion, and that it would be competent to meet at short notice. Every one read in the papers a few days ago of an attempt actually to summon a meeting of the Reichstag. Finally, there is the organized power of the troops, who appear to respect Marshal von Hindenburg and to acknowledge his orders. And when it is remembered that among German civilians also Hindenburg has not altogether forfeited bis reputation, it will be seen that the Army is an element that may yet have to be reckoned with.
As regards the policies of these various groups, the primary issue, and the only one with which we need trouble ourselves now, is whether a National Assembly shall or shall not be convoked. The Majority Socialists, together with the more powerful of the Independent Socialists, are in favour of getting the proposed National Assembly together as soon as possible. The extremists, who may be described all together for convenience as the Spartacus group, do not want a National Assembly because they know perfectly well that it would probably give the death-blow to their ideas. The Spartacus leaders want to follow the disastrous course of the Russian Bolsheviks. They have their own notion of how they would like Germany to be governed, and they want to impose their doctrine, by force if necessary, but in any case to impose it, upon the nation. This of course is a blank negation of demo- cracy. The Spartacus group are intolerant to the point of death of all ideas but their own. They do not say that the voice of the people shall prevail ; they do not care what the voice of the people may be, and do not try to find out ; all they say is that the system of government—or rather no- government—approved by Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg shall prevail. The very name Spartacus is symbolical' of the amazing cynicism of this political philosophy. Readers of Roman history know something about Spartacus. He was a slave and a gladiator who came to the conclusion, naturally enough, that it was not good enough to continue either in that condition or in that occupation. Being a man of ability and commanding personality, he organized a great many of his brother-slaves, many of whom were gladiators, took to the open country, and defied the Government at Rome. As all this happened during the civil strife at Rome between 73 and 71 Lc., Spartacus chose a favourable opportunity for his rising, but there is no doubt that he also displayed great capacity and daring. Before he was cornered and slam in the South of Italy he was in command of quite a large army, and he had spread devastation over large tracts of territory. The - - -- German people have had so little practice in sell-government that they may find it difficult to overcome cynicism in practice itnd under arms. We are inclined to think, however, that the German sense of order may fill the gap made by want Of experience, and that the German Revolution will result quite differently from the Russian Revolution, though it must be admitted that so far there have been many points of resemblance.
As several correspondents have written to us about the indemnity which it is proposed that Germany should pay, we desire to say a few words on the subject. An old reader of the Spectator, for example, writes as follows :— " Did we, or did we not, receive the German surrender under a pledge of peace conditions in which the indemnity claimed was limited to full reparation for all damage done by the enemy's land, sea, or air forces to civilian property ? And if so, what is the name to be given to the demand uttered in the election addresses of the Prime Minister and others that the enemy shall pay the full cost of the war up to the last penny that it may prove possible to extract, and to the contention of the leading article in your issue of last week opening with the statement that ' One of the few satisfactory features of the present General Election is the way in which electoral pressure has stiffened the attitude of the Government with regard to an indemnity ' ? "
We have been unable to discover any valid reason for our correspondent's anxiety. It seems to us that his own words answer his question. If the Associated Nations had informed Germany that she would have to pay no in- demnity, we could not of course honourably ask for one. That is obvious. It has been said that Germany signed the armistice on the understanding that she accepted President Wilson's fourteen points with their subsequent ex- tensions, and that the Peace was to be made on that basis. Mr. Wilson's fourteen points and the further points he made in later addresses to Congress, however, do not deal with the .question of an indemnity. In looking for evidence on the subject, therefore, the best thing is to turn to the Notes which Mr. Wilson wrote during the negotiations that immediately preceded the signing of the armistice and to the terms of the armistice itself. The papers of November 7th published a Note from Mr. Wilson in which he quoted certain reservations made by the Allied Governments in discussing with him the conditions on which they could grant an armistice. One of these reservations reads as follows :- "Further, in the conditions of peace laid down in his address to Congress on January 8th, 1918, the President declared that in- vaded territories must be restored, as well as evacuated and made free. The Allied Governments feel that no doubt ought to be allowed to exist as to what this provision implies. By it they understand that compensation will be made by Germany for all damage done to the civilian population of the Allies, and to their property by the aggression of Germany by land, by sea, and from the air."
Mr. Lansing then adds on behalf of the President : " I am instructed by the President to say that he is in agreement with the interpretations set forth in the last paragraph of the memorandum above quoted." We do not know what con- struction our correspondent and others may place upon these words, but in our view compensation for damage done to the civilian population of the Allies by the aggression of Germany covers every kind of loss that we have suffered throdgh the war. Every extra tax that we have paid, all the excessively high prices of the food we have eaten, every penny which we have had to pay but should not have had to pay had there been no war, are damage done to the civilian population. It is property lost ; and the loss was caused by Germany. Now as regards the terms of the armistice as signed by the German delegates, published in the papers of November 12th, Clause 19 contains the demand for " reparation for damage done." If by " indemnity " people mean a fine inflicted on Germany as a mere punishment—a money payment over and above complete reparation for all damage and losses of pro- perty—then we should say that such a fine was apparently not contemplated. But full reparation for our losses is certainly included, and that is what we understand and mean in the present discussion by " indemnity."
Previous page
