LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
[Letters of the length of one of our leading paragraphs are often more read, and therefore more dective, than those which fill treble the space.] FOR THE SAKE OF BRITISH-ITALIAN FRIENDSHIP. [To TEE EDITOR or TEM " SPECTATOR."] 6111,—TO people who have long failed to account for the unfriendly attitude shown to Italy by the majority of the British public opinion since the war was over, it has caused a satisfactory surprise to read in the Spectator (July lith) two articles referring to British-Italian relations in the most sympathetic terms. It would be difficult to conclude that they represent anything beyond the expression of personal views, yet there are signs that, through the lessons of time and events, a more equanimous interpretation of facts and rights is being adopted. I hope, therefore, that further elucida- tion of facts will be appreciated by those who are anxious that friendly understanding between the two nations should be maintained.
The explanation given in " Italy our Friend for what might he called the evolution of Italian public opinion from Giolitti to Giolitti is not entirely correct. The fact that the Italians who had shouted Morte a Ciolitti in 1915 have now shouted as loudly Morte a Nitti and called Giolitti back to Govern- ment is but the natural consequence of the exasperation of national sense caused by Nitti's anti-national Government. However illogical that call may seem, it gives the measure of that exasperation. Signor Nitti was by no means as moderate as the writer seems to believe. He was simply a slave in the hands of the Socialist Party, upon which he mainly relied in the hope to carry out his ambitious designs, for his personal ambition was boundless. His misgovernment had become utterly unbearable. Therefore, as the moment came to over- throw it, the Italians shouted "Let the Devil come, Morte a Nitti!" Now they are watching Giolitti. They know him to be well aware of what would be the consequences of a policy not harmonizing with national feeling. Simply on account of that they support his Government.
Concerning British-Italian intercourse, two facts have especially wounded the sensibility of the Italians. In any dispute between Yugo-Slavia and Italy they saw the former constantly sided by British public opinion. It was that sort of pert pris which caused their friendly feelings to drop, mainly because it was utterly illogical. It should be borne in mind that the Italians are quite as intensely logical as they are sensible. Mrs. Re-Bartlett's courageous article " Italy in the Adriatic " has done a good deal in the way to re-establish British-Italian cordial understanding, mainly on account of her being strictly logical. I would only point out that Italian Nationalism is not, as she seems to believe, a political Party, and should never become anything like it. Nationalism is in no connexion whatsoever with political or social organization. Its principal aim is to preserve national feeling and mind, and prevent them from dropping or becoming subordinate forces in political or social competitions. Yet Nationalism, as an instrument for propaganda, can extend over all political and social divisions without altering its own nature. That "many liberal consciences reject as explicitly as any Nationalist a settlement of the Adriatic question which should not be the application of the Treaty of London " is but the proof of the above allegation. As to the Italian character of Dalmatia, though not refusing to recognize that the writer's statements may be occasionally correct, owing to occasional exaggeration I would ask her to note that statistics are neither the only nor perhaps the principal factor of nationality. The geographical, historical, cultural ones should not be neglected in regard to a region in which, as in Dalmatia, they have a considerable weight.
I would finally point oat that as long as Italy is dubbed imperialist "in a tone of condemnation," one should never accuse Italian Nationalism to be disingenuous. This is the second fact wounding Italian sensibility. It has never been the question of " refusing Italy her share in the tutelage of lees developed races," which the writer takes to be imperialism, so giving this word a quite unusual meaning. It hoe always been the question of Italy's greediness, and the offensive char- acter of the word is evident. Italy is the only nation "whose rights and interest "—says the writer—" have been unfairly and most unwisely sacrificed to Anglo-American or Anglo- French policy, under the veil of justice to a smaller Power, which was often no more than a convenient screen." One could not better support Italy's right to reject the accusation of greediness and imperialism. To claim a narrow strip of poor land and a few islands from which nothing valuable can be obtained either from the soil or the underground is not imperialism, whatever the sense of the word may be.
The Italians are sincerely indebted to Mrs. lie-Bartlett for giving the Adriatic question her most benevolent attention, and congratulate her, as well as her anonymous colleague, on their courageous appeal to righteousness and justice. Such writers do much more than any diplomacy can do to preserve friendly relations between the two nations.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Royal Italian Navy (Retired).
Previous page
