Слике страница
PDF
ePub

Japan

(1) Fear of commercial power of Germany in the far East and in the Pacific.

(2) Spirit of expansion and nationality.

(3)

Economic needs arising from great population with little room to expand.

(4) The Japanese "Monroe Doctrine"-similar to position of U. S. with respect to Latin America.

Small States of Europe, Asia and America, such as Portugal, Cuba, Siam, and semi-belligerent attitude of

several other countries in Eastern

and Western Worlds

(1) Democracy vs. Autocracy.

(2) Violation of international law and rights of neutrality by Germany and other Central powers.

(3) Treaty obligations with larger nations, with protection they afford (as in Cuba with United States, Portugal with England, etc.).

(4) Sufferings and hardships caused by the German submarine blockade and destruction of neutral commerce (so strong as to warrant separation from the four causes above-in fact, the leading cause for war with several of the small States referred to).

Belgium

(1) Invasion by Germany, which carries with it: (a) Fight for national honor and for existence-purely a case of self-defense.

(b) Maintenance of her solemn treaty obligations with England and France (the same obligation that Germany had with these same countries and Belgium, and which Germany so contemptuously broke, as "mere scraps of paper").

THE CENTRAL POWERS

Austria-Hungary

(1) Desire for control of the Balkans (conquest) with Constantinople, and predominating influence in the near East, particularly the Mediterranean countries and com

merce.

(2) Growth of nationality among the Slavic and other peoples of the Austrian Empire, with its consequent peril to the oppressive, autocratic government of the Dual Monarchy-(well may she fear it!)

(3) Growth of democracy among the several peoples of the Empire (the companion to national feeling and desire for independence).

(4) Pan-Germanism-philosophy of imperialism.

Germany

(1) Militarism, the doctrine of "blood and iron."

(2) Jealousy of England's commercial power and determination to wrest from her the supremacy on the sea, and in colonial commerce.

(3) Pan-Germanism—imperialism, the dream of a Teutonic "Mittel-Europa," with German domination on the continent of Europe. (Berlin to Bagdad Railroad and country.)

(4) Autocracy's struggle with the growing spirit of democracy throughout the world—the curse of "divine right” kings.

(5) Domineering German diplomacy (one of the greatest immediate causes).

Turkey

(1) Hope of regaining lost provinces in Europe. (2) Revenge upon the Balkan States for their conquests of Turkish territory in the Balkan wars, 1912-13. (3) German influence and propaganda.

Bulgaria

(1) Revenge upon the other Balkan States for depriving her of much of her conquests in the First Balkan war, 1912.

(2) Hope of regaining her conquests of 1912.

(3) German influences and sympathies, particularly of the ruling house in Bulgaria.

U. S. REASONS FOR GOING TO WAR WITH
GERMANY

(1) To uphold the principles of international law, the sacred obligations of treaties, and the rights of neutrals, and of small States.

(2) The moral ground of humanity, in the scale against barbarism.

(3) To uphold her own honor and respect among the powers of the earth, and to prove the sincerity of her professed principles.

(4) To cast in her powerful resources with the liberal governments of the world with the cause of democracy vs. autocracy, to help make the world "safe for democracy."

Explanation of Causes

And now, to discuss the above causes briefly. We shall follow the order given in our outline, and take England, of the allies first.

(1) Protection of colonial possessions and maintenance of supremacy on the sea and in commerce. It has been claimed by Germany that she has as good right to a colonial empire and supremacy on the sea as England has, which would be true if she gave her colonies the same freedom and self-government that England does hers. But just the opposite is the case, as Germany's colonies in Africa have shown. True enough it is that Great Britain got many of her colo

nial possessions and much of her consequent commercial power unjustly and by methods of oppression and force. But this nearly all happened before England became the democracy she is today; and she has done as much as any nation on earth could do in recent years to right those wrongs of "kings and aristocracies”-in fact so much that her colonies are allowed more freedom than those of any other country (as England has always done on colonial liberties among the powers of Europe); while on the other hand, Germany's government and exploitation of her colonies has been so oppressive generally speaking, and so feudalistic, that the colonists hate her, and welcomed the chance of war to remedy their condition. Again, Great Britain's fleet and commerce threaten the world in no such manner as Germany's do, but have repeatedly been a protection to other countries from diabolical intrigues and aggressions by the German government and its agents. It was Germany above all others that worked and plotted to throw China into anarchy and disruption, at the same time extorting concessions from that helpless government that were most humiliating and embarrassing to the Chinese, as though China were vassal to the Kaiser,-all through a process that exhibited a deliberate policy of atrocity that rivaled in every respect the more recent ravages of Belgium. The Kaiser set these crimes afoot with the injunction to his agents that they should make the power of Germany felt in China, that the Chinese should be impressed by it. It is the German government that has upheld and been chiefly responsible for the continuation of the horrible, ghastly murders, starvation and practical annihilation of the Armenian Christians in Turkey. By his mere word the Kaiser could easily have put an end to this butchery, any time in these recent years; but instead, a few months ago, after one of the greatest massacres of wholly innocent people was perpetrated, the Kaiser sent the congratulation to the Sultan, "God bless you for your noble victory,” etc., etc.

(2) Democracy versus autocracy. We have already called attention to the fact that Great Britain as a whole is a democracy practically as much as our own. In fact it is more so, in several particulars (though not in others), especially, since 1900. On the other hand, we need only to read any historical account of the form and workings of the Prussian and German imperial governments to realize that they were practically absolute monarchies, each in its sphere, and the Kaiser being at the head of both—veiling to the people their feudalistic character (a scheme of Bismarck's, but followed more extensively since) only by paternalistic reforms.

(3) Germany's invasion of Belgium, besides breaking faith with England, presented a direct menace to that country, from across the Channel, greater than any danger that has confronted her since the period of the early career of Napoleon Bonaparte, before the battle of Trafalgar, more than a century ago. Autocracy so near a growing democracy was not to be tolerated.

(4) As to maintenance of the "balance of power" in Europe, we may say that the development of Germany in the present generation, agriculturally, commercially, scientifically, financially and otherwise industrially—has been phenomenal, and has astonished the world! Add to this fact that her militarism and Machiavellianism in politics have kept pace with all this growth, and you have the "Teutonic menace" to Europe and to the world.

Next France, with her causes. France, of course, was more directly menaced than England. Although France had compulsory and universal military service she was more democratic and therefore less prepared for immediate action than was Germany, and was a year—a fateful year-behind Germany in her military program. A democracy cannot mould a people into a perfect military machine so quickly as an absolute power above them can drive them into it. Yet, France saw that once more she must fight for liberty,

« ПретходнаНастави »