MARGINAL COMMENT
By HAROLD NICOLSON
IREGRET that I was not invited to attend, in however servile a capacity, the recent Danube Conference at Belgrade.: I should have enjoyed watching Sir Charles Peake crossing swords with Mr. Vyshinsky and listening to the theatricals in which they each engaged. It would have been amusing to observe on the spot the relations between the Soviet delegation and their Yugoslav hosts and to note the different degrees of embarrassment manifested by the Balkan satellites. It would have been instructive to witness once again the absurd unreality of the voting system which has intruded its clumsy head into the cat's-cradle of international negotiation. It would have been interesting to be able to assess how far the American delegation were able to combine their attitude of observers with their desire to be direct participants. And, above, . all, it would have been of value to follow this , conference, which presented one of the most self-contained and intricate diplomatic patterns of recent years. Seldom have the several interests, rights and ambitions of the Great and Small Powers been so curiously entangled. To the conflicting and ill-balanced forces of legal rights, treaty rights, moral rights and rights of occupation and possession was added a most tangled historical story. Even geography came to insert her little wedge of controversy, and maps were produced to prove, or to disprove, exactly where and when and how the U.S.S.R. became riparian. It was one of those cases in which ostensible arguments and justifications are less determinant than the underlying practical interests and suspicions ; in which legal rights were blurred by history and practical, rights weakened by the fact of physical possession. The Russians were determined to upset the two previous conventions, since the first represented for them a servitude imposed after their defeat in the Crimean War, and the second that humiliating period when they were excluded - from the comity of nations. And the Western Powers, desiring to maintain the free navigation of the Danube, were impeded by the unalterable fact that the Russians and their allies are in possession of most of the river, whereas we are not.
* * The European Commission which was established by the Treaty of Paris in 1856 was at the time alleged to be a purely temporary and technical commission charged with the duty of carrying out the necessary dredging operations and the construction and siting of the several wharfs and docks. Thereafter it was to surrender its functions to a Commission consisting of the riparian States alone. It never surrendered its functions ; it in fact increased them. In the years between the Crimean and the First World War the Com- mission acquired for itself many extra-territorial functions ; it had its own flag and police, even its own courts of law. Nor can we really feel confident that the two Commissions established after the First World War gave sufficient powers or representation to those countries most directly concerned. It is not surprising that in 1940 the Russians, through the medium of a Tass communiqué, should have denounced a Convention which had been concluded without their approval and should have proclaimed that hence- forward the Danube would be controlled only by those Powers through or along the territories of which the river ran. It is not surprising that at Belgrade the other day they should have stuck to this assertion, and should have used the voting power of their riparian satellites to exclude the Western Powers from any direc- tion of Danube navigation. The result, as I said, was inevitable ; the Danube has become a Soviet river ; and the Western Powers are faced by the unpleasant fact that traffic on that vital waterway will now be dominated by Moscow, exercising power conjurato ab Istro, whatever the Dacians may feel or say.
The outcome of this Conference has reminded us, if any reminder were required, of the immense importance, in the present world pattern, of the Republic Of Austria. The fact that the British and French peoples have not as yet been able to make up their minds about Austria is due to the curious overlappings of history. It is not easy, after all that has intervened, to go back to the time of Charle- magne and to regard Austria as the Ostmark, the buttress of Christen- dom against the inroads of the Avars, the Magyars and other eastern barbarians. All manner of strange shadows and personalities inter- vene to prevent us from seeing Austria clearly as she stands today. There is the ghost of Metternich, fingering delicately the destinies of peoples, even as he delicately fingered the Order of the Golden Fleece which hung from his gold collar. There is the figure of Count Haynau, mobbed by the draymen at Barclay's brewery, upon the very site of Shakespeare's theatre, upon the very site of the prosperous establishment which provided Mr. Thrale with so large an income and Dr. Johnson with so many cups of tea. There is the figure of Count Aehrenthal who more than any man rendered inevitable the First World War. There is the figure of Count Berchtold whose vain nonchalance precipitated that dire conflict. There is the enigmatic figure of Dolfuss, intriguing with the Italian Fascists and gaining much popularity in this country by the charm of his personality and his dramatic death. There are the pictures of the citizens of Vienna rapturously garlanding Hitler's legions. There is thus a confusion of overlapping impressions. And, behind it all, a sense of the charm of the Austrians, their gaiety and good humour, their music and their Lederhosen, aleir gentle incom- petence which so enraged the Prussians, their happy Tyrolean side.
* * * We have not yet realised that the Austrians today have acquired that sense of national identity, that high patriotism, which, owing to the heterogeneous nature of, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, was lacking in the past. We have not realised that the Austria of today, if left to herself, could become a prosperous Social-Democratic State comparable to Switzerland. Our memories of the economic miseries which she endured between 1918 and /938 lead us to imagine that she will remain a liability in Europe and not an asset. This is not today a correct impression. Austria possesses great natural resources—iron ore, timber, magnesite, electric power, oil. Were Austria allowed to develop her own capacities she could become a rich country ; she has been much encouraged by the aid given her by the United States and Great Britain ; if only she could recover her independence and the control of her own resources, she could become an element of stability in this unstable world. It is not sufficiently realised in this country that the Austrians since 1946 have displayed extraordinary energy in re- building their economy and maintaining their independence and identity in conditions of immense complexity. We have not given to the present Austrian Government that degree of sympathy and esteem which they have certainly merited. We should dismiss from our minds the spectres of Metternich, Berchtold and Dolfuss ; we should forget all about the old ideas of the Austrians' indolence ; we should force ourselves to think less about their charm and more about their difficulties and their present energy. The days are far distant when Austrian officers lolled at Milan or dawdled by Illyrian seas ; the Austria of today is a small republic yearning desperately to be allowed to work out her own future. The Western peoples should applaud that desire.
* * * * The misfortune of Austria today is that she is regarded by both sides as a political and strategic outpost. Surrounded as she is by Communist States, she is striving to maintain the ideals of social democracy. Nothing can alter the geographical fact that the air- fields of Austria lie at an equal distance from London and Odessa and that the main communications with South-Eastern Europe run through Austrian territory. It is indeed a misfortune for a Government, which has the opportunity of creating a united and self-supporting country, based upon a combination of indivi- dual freedom with social justice, to find that country a bone of contention between East and West. We can at least try to appreciate its hopes and difficulties and accord them our sympathy and respect.
Previous page
