GREAT BRITISH PROBLEMS" Ma. ELLIS BARKER might have widened the
title of his book, for the problems with which he deals are, most of them, European. Some are more distinctively European than British. Yet since Great Britain has, under the stress of war, become the centre of the European and American Alliance for the salvation of our com- mon civilization, we will accept his problems as among those which demand the urgent attention of British statesmen. A con- siderable part of the book consists of articles, now revised and brought up to date, whirls the author contributed to the Nineteenth Century, but it is none the worse for that.
He points out that the Peace Congress, which he assumes (perhaps wrongly) must most at some time when the war has ended, and re- settle Europe on the general principle of the right of all nationalities to a peaceful life, must face four tremendous problems which have baffled the world for centuries. They are the problems of Constanti- nople, Asiatic Turkey, Austria-Hungary, and Poland. Each one of them has been the cause of countless wars ; each one, unless settled on a basis of common and generally accepted justice, may be the occasion of countless future wars. At the Congress of Vienna • hundred years ago little regard was paid to any claims save those of competing dynasties, and the competing dynasties have brought Europe to its present pass. Unless after this war those who are responsible for the terms of peace can agree upon a new basis of the common right of peoples to be' governed as they wish, there will he no peace. Europe has endured more than enough from competing ambitious dynasties.
We agree with Mr. Barker that the European Powers, hypnotized fey Napoleon, have made too much of the strategical importance of Constantinople and the Dardanelles, For generations British statesmen feared to see them in Russian possession, and supported Turkey, who has again and again betrayed her trust. The Bos- phorus and the Dardanelles are the one sea outlet for the Black Sea and Southern Russia. Their free use in peace and in war is a Rol Russian interest, and almost as vital an interest to those countries which live upon Russian and Rumanian wheat. If Russia can have peaceful use of the Straits—whether by occupation or under international control—she will no longer be bottled up. Euless she secures this free outlet, Russia, whether a monarchy or a republic, must continually press for it, and be a disturber of the world's peace. Revolutionary Russia has declared her indifference to Constantinople, but revolutionaries are not always the beet judges of the needs of their country. " The war has shown," says He. Barker, and his words are undeniably true, " that the Power which controls the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles can blockade Russia, can strangulate the economic life of the country. That is a position which may appear undesirable even to the most enthusiastic Russian democrats and to the most convinced anti•annexationists. After all, a great nation requires adequate access to the sea."
While we agree with Mr. Barker in his condemnation of Napoleon's dictum that Constantinople is the key to the dominion of the world—has Turkey, ono may ask of Napoleon's shade, possessed all these years the dominion of the world 1—we are disposed to think that he overrates the strategical importance of the position et Asiatic Turkey. He compares the geographical features of Asia Minor with those of Switzerland, and writes: " Nature has made Asiatic Turkey an impregnablefortress. another Switzerland. How- ever, while little Switzerland dominates by its natural strength and its strategical position merely three European States—Germany, France, and Italy—Asiatic Turkey dominates the three most populous, and therefore the three most important, Continents of the world." This seems to carry the geographical theory of domination to excessive lengths. Does little Switzerland really " dominate " Germany, France, and Italy ? One does not " dominate " great and powerful countries by sitting upon high mountain roofs and over- looking them. Mountains dominate nothing beyond the range of guns act upon them. But, though Mr. Barker's theories of geographical domination seem to us to be fantastic, he is right when he claims for Asia Minor a central position which would render it highly dangerous to the peace of the world if held by a groat and un- scrupulous military Power—Germany, for example. We can all be clear upon this point, and yet not be so apprehensive as is Mr. Barker about the dangers of partitioning Asia Minor into " spheres of influence." Powers, weary of war—especially Powers which have fought for years in a common cause—can settle down in their re- spective spheres of influence without trespassing upon one another's cabbage-patches. "It is much to be feared," says Mr. Barker, " that it [os partition of Asia Minor] would lead to a disaster perhaps as great as the present war."
• 7Ar crest TrOilln18 of Britith ....lotoonsonehip. 111 J. Me Barker. Lenten: data Armor. 110e. ed. atm
We cannot follow Mr. Barker through all the chapters of his interesting book. But before concluding we must call attention to his views upon the German Emperor's position in declaring war upon Russia and France in defiance of the German Imperial Constitution. The Kaiser's broach of the Constitution may have been condoned while Germany appeared to be winning, but when defeat comes upon his country he may be called to account. Mr. Barker's case against the Kaiser appears to be unanswer- able. He traces the history of the Imperial Constitution of 1871, and shows that under Article XI, the Prussian King and German Emperor was deliberately restricted by the other Kings and ruling Princes from declaring war unless an attack on territory or the coast of the Empire had taken place. He also shows that the Andre- German Alliance of 1879 was a strictly defensive ono. Yet, in spite of the written terms of this Alliance and of the Constitution, the Kaiser did declare war upon Belgium, France, and Russia without the assent of the Council of the Empire. Hence the desperate efforts to persuade the German peoples that Belgium began the war, or Russia began the war, or France began the war, or—most preposterous of all—Great Britain began the war. It is the breach of the Constitution which accounts for all the pretences that Germany was forced into war by the attacks of enemies. Mr. Ellis Barker, after quoting his authorities, delivers judgment. " In attacking Russia and Franco the German Emperor not only violated the Imperial Constitution, but he acted with an absolute disregard of the maxims of State which the creator of modern Germany bad laid down, and he cannot oven plead that he was compelled to go into war because of the Austro-German Alliance. His contravention of the German Constitution may possibly in course of time aasurno an exceedingly serious aspect."
Previous page
