Bosnia-Herzegovina, the formation of the Balkan League and the intrigues which provoked the Second Balkan War, which in turn takes us to the Turkish invasions, the emergence of the independent Balkan nations from Turkish supremacy.

And this in turn touches Austrian and Russian policy and Russia's claim to be the leader and protector of the Slav peoples, her interference in Balkan politics, and her designs on Constantinople.

Which brings us to questions of the European alliances, the balance of power, the conflict between Slav and Teuton; the development of German policy since unification; the wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870; the position of Prussia in Germany; the attitude of the Social Democrats; the difference between the new Germany and the old; the influence of the newer German philosophies of Nietzsche, Haeckel, Treitschke, Feuerbach, Schopenhauer, as the reaction against those of Kant, Hegel and Fichte.

The annexation of Alsace-Lorraine and its effect on FrancoGerman relations; the problems arising from the partitions of Poland, between Prussia, Russia and Austria; German fear of the Slav menace; the influence of the pan-German school; German colonial and naval expansion and the course of Anglo-German relations; the formation of the Triple Alliance, the Dual Alliance, and the Franco-British Entente; the guarantee of Belgian neutrality.

And now we may add the question of the Roumanians in Transylvania, the Italians in the Trentino and Trieste, Italian interests in Dalmatia and Albania, the problem of SchleswigHolstein, the position of Bohemia.

QUESTIONS OF THE SETTLEMENT.

The settlement raises questions of:

The principle of nationality,

The use of plebiscites,

The value of guarantees,

The value of indemnities,

The validtiy of treaties and of international law.

The broader questions of the relations of States,

The bearing upon politics of economics and of both upon strategy,

The competition of armaments,

The system of alliances and groupings of the powers,

The alleged rivalry of nations,

The effects of absolutism and democracy upon national policies,

Imperialism and autonomy,

The nature and functions of the State, arbitrations, limitations of armaments, diplomacy and its defects.

How is it humanly possible for the average man concerned with the daily affairs of his life, and with scant leisure for public questions to find his way through this maze?

Now, as already hinted, the problems of this war are only too plain. We started out with the hope that it was to be

$314]

BASIS OF PEACE

347

the war that would end war. Is that possible? It is surely the fundamental question that we all have in our minds. Is this really to be the last war? In other words,

(1) Is a Society of Nations possible?

From that major question arises the secondary one whose answer alone can give us an opinion. Is conflict between . nations inevitable owing to the struggle for life? Is war really a "struggle for bread"? Is war thus biologically inevitable? Is this the true application of evolution to human society? Is peace even desirable? Would mankind in a world of peace "perish from its own moral and physical corruption," as a great English scholar recently declared? Does war make for the "survival of the fittest"? Did Nietzschze believe that "war for its own sake is one of the highest goods that can come to a nation"? Is this true? Do the Germans believe it? Is this a war between conflicting ideals, between the ethics of Nietschze and the ethics of Christ?

(2) Should the Settlement be based on the Principle of Nationality?

Is nationality a matter of race, language, mode of life, common traditions, or is it made up of all these things? Is the sentiment of nationality a valuable element in the life of civilized peoples or a survival that should be swept away by the increase of travel and interdependence? Is nationality primarily a spiritual force or a demand for political independence? What light is thrown on this question by the position of the Jews; of the French-Canadian; of the Germans in the United States and of the Slav races in AustriaHungary?

(3) What Frontier Rearrangements are Necessary?

How is the Alsace-Lorraine problem to be solved? Is its retrocession to France likely to cause a war for its reconquest by Germany in the next generation? How is the new Poland to be constituted? Should Italy have the Trentino? or Russia Constantinople? Should the Dardanelles be internationalized? Should the boundaries of Serbia be enlarged? (4) Can National Greatness be Built upon Military Power? What makes a nation great? Is it a question of extent of territory? Is a German greater than a Belgian? Is it a question of the happiness, moral elevation and well being of individual citizens? Can these be advanced by military power?

(5) Can We Avoid European Wars in the Future?

How do wars arise? Can they be avoided "by being so strong that your enemy will not dare to attack you"? Are they caused by "the ineradicable wickedness” or the “eradicable folly" of mankind? Is war "the failure of human wisdom" or is it the result of the inevitable rivalry of competing states? Is the tendency of progress towards rivalry or towards co-operation?

(b) [§315] Basis of Durable Peace.

A REVIEW OF A BOOK BY "COSMOS" (Jan. 28, 1917).

TASK OF PEACE.

The task "Cosmos" undertook was a review of the chief conditions bearing on the possibility of enduring peace and a statement of the principles by which efforts at such a peace must be guided. He started from the assumption, generally accepted in this and other neutral countries, that Germany has tailed in the aggressive aims with which she made war in the first instance; that the Allies are sure of success in resisting these aggressive aims; that, though the German armies may not be definitely beaten, and the German State may not, and should not, be disintegrated, the Allies will be able to exact from Germany restitution, reparation, and above all, valid security for the future. The facts on which this assumption, or inference, is based are discussed carefully and candidly, and this discussion forms an important and extremely interesting part of the pamphlet; but probably the most effective and suggestive portion is that devoted to two elements in the problem of security for durable peace.

The first is the creation of a tribunal of international justice coupled with an international commission of inquiry, the former charged with the adjudication of justiciable differences in accordance with international law where it exists and is applicable, and the other charged with the investigation and determination of facts in disputes arising between the powers joining in the creation of these agencies.

The second element in the problem of durable peace which "Cosmos" treats most effectively is the removal of causes of war by an agreement for the firmest possible establishment of the “open door" in international trade and for the “freedom of the seas." By the open door is meant the nearest practical approach to the abolition of monopoly and privilege in trade and the nearest practical approach to equality of opportunity in commerce, enterprise, and finance. By freedom of the seas is meant immunity from capture or destruction on the ocean of all private property not contraband of

war.

INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL.

In the establishment of an international tribunal, "Cosmos" would have the Allies begin where the Second Hague Conference had arrived at its adjournment. That body had agreed to such a tribunal, but could not agree as to the selection of judges. In agreeing to the tribunal the powers represented in the conference accepted the principles that the tribunal should apply international law where it was applicable, and, where it was not, should adjudicate in accordance with reason and justice, thus laying the foundation for a real court and the gradual creation of a true common law of nations-an invaluable advance.

If such a tribunal should be established by the Allies without waiting for the Central Powers it would, after the arrival

§8315-316]

DIFFICULTIES OF PEACE

349

of peace, be a powerful agency for the maintenance of durable peace. "Cosmos" cannot accept the scheme of the League to Enforce Peace, because he thinks no peace will last which is not desired and demanded by the public opinion of the civilized nations. If this sanction be lacking, we must wait. But the creation of an international tribunal authorized to pronounce judgment in accordance with reason and justice or under international law would tend constantly and powerfully to build up this essential sanction.

OPEN DOOR AND FREEDOM OF THE SEAS.

In the "open door" and "the freedom of the seas," as he clearly and happily defines them, "Cosmos" urges two conditions which enlightened opinion is coming to regard not only as essentially helpful but positively indispensable to general and lasting peace. His exposition of their nature, relations, and operation is masterly, and has that fine eloquence which flows from profound sincerity, a lofty point of view, and conscientious clarity. The spirit of his remarkable contribution to the education of public opinion regarding the basis of durable peace is expressed very simply in his concluding paragraph:

SPIRIT OF PEACE.

"In conclusion, then, a durable peace depends upon the victory of the Allies in the present war and upon the establishment in public policy of the principles for which they are contending. It depends upon a withholding of all acts of vengeance and reprisal, and the just and statesmanlike application to each specific problem that arises for settlement of the principles for which the war is being fought. It depends upon the establishment of an international order and of those international institutions that have been here sketched in outline. It depends upon a spirit of devotion to that order and to those institutions, as well as upon a fixed purpose to uphold and to defend them. It depends upon domestic policies of justice and helpfulness, and the curbing of arrogance, greed, and privilege, so far as it is within the power of government to do so. It depends upon the exaltation of the idea of justice, not only as between men within a nation, but as between nations between themselves; for durable peace is a by-product of justice. When these things are accomplished there will be every prospect of a durable peace because the essential prerequisite will have been providedthe Will to Peace.

(New York Times, Jan. 28, 1917.)

(c) [8316] The Difficulties of Peace.

BY PROFESSOR KIRSOPP LAKE.

When the war is over the nations of Europe will make what will be called peace, but the fact that the armies will be obliged to stop fighting is far from being a guarantee for permanent peace. It is, of course, impossible to foretell

the details of the conditions of the treaty which will be made at the end of the war, but it seems desirable to state broadly what are the reasons which render doubtful a permanent and durable peace.

NATIONALITY.

No

The chief reason may be put in a single sentence. treaty of peace can be permanent which does not grapple fairly with the question of nationality, and it has hitherto proved an insoluble problem for European statesmen to deal with the actual conditions of European life so as to recognize the claims of nationality without encouraging that clash of interests which in the end brings about war.

Nationality is more frequently discussed than defined; in fact, the difficulties of the question begin with the definition. It is clearly not exclusively conditioned by either race or language, and probably the best that can be said is that men belong to the same nation when they possess either a common tradition as to the past, or a common hope for the future, as to what they will do, or their children will do after them. Nationality thus raises life to a higher plane than that of the family or tribe, but falls far short of unity, so that to thinking men the existence of a world of many nations has at all times been a stimulus to visions of something higher.

In theory, then, the world has long recognized the existence of a higher unity, but unfortunately the numbers of those who have been so dazzled by the vision of a commonwealth of the race as to ignore the just claims of nationality have been about balanced by those to whom patriotism has seemed the final form of human virtue, and between them we have been apt to forget that the problem is neither the extinction nor the glorification of nationality, but its proper adjustment in a larger system.

Remarkable for its success, when it has been fairly tried, is the experiment which was started by Rome, and has been carried out by methods which differ only in detail by Great Britain and the United States. Each of these countries has endeavored to respect fully the different nationalities which go to make up the federation or the empire of the whole, and at the same time to prevent the rights of the individual members of the groups from conflicting with the general common good of all.

Some of the recently suggested terms of peace raise the hope that the true Germany-not the Germany which destroyed Louvain and torpedoed the Lusitania and Arabicwill in the end join decisively with England and America and choose to follow the example of the Roman Empire.

UNION OF NATIONS.

One of the good results of this war is the abundant proof that civilization is best and most strongly built up by nations which are united by the enjoyment of local freedom and the sentiment of loyalty to a common heritage of empire which