Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918: Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2Various
History
Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918: Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2
Various
World War, 1914-1918
Shortly after my arrival in London, in 1912, Sir Edward Grey proposed an
informal exchange of views in order to prevent a European war developing
out of the Balkan war, since, at the outbreak of that war, we had
unfortunately declined the proposal of the French Government to join in
a declaration of disinterestedness and impartiality on the part of the
powers. The British statesman maintained from the beginning that England
had no interest in Albania, and would, therefore, not go to war on the
subject. In his rôle of "honest broker" he would confine his efforts to
mediation and an attempt to smooth away difficulties between the two
groups. He, therefore, by no means placed himself on the side of the
Entente Powers, and during the negotiations, which lasted about eight
months, he lent his good-will and powerful influence toward the
establishment of an understanding. Instead of adopting the English point
of view, we accepted that dictated to us by Vienna. Count Mensdorff led
the Triple Alliance in London and I was his second.
GREY ALWAYS CONCILIATORY
My duty was to support his proposals. The clever and experienced Count
Szogyenyi was at the helm in Berlin. His refrain was "casus foederis,"
and when once I dared to doubt the justice of this phrase I was
seriously warned against Austrophobism. Referring to my father, it was
even said that I had inherited it. On every point, including Albania,
the Serbian harbors in the Adriatic, Scutari, and in the definition of
the Albanian frontiers, we were on the side of Austria and Italy, while
Sir Edward Grey hardly ever took the French or Russian point of view. On
the contrary, he nearly always took our part in order to give no pretext
for war--which was afterward brought about by a dead Archduke. It was
with his help that King Nicholas was induced to leave Scutari. Otherwise
there would have been war over this matter, as we should never have
dared to ask "our allies" to make concessions.
Sir Edward Grey conducted the negotiations with care, calm, and tact.
When a question threatened to become involved he proposed a formula
which met the case and always secured consent. He acquired the full
confidence of all the representatives.
AUSTRIA AND RUSSIA
Once again we had successfully withstood one of the many threats against
the strength characterizing our policy. Russia had been obliged to give
way to us all along the line, as she never got an opportunity to advance
Serbian wishes. Albania was set up as an Austrian vassal State, and
Serbia was driven away from the sea. The conference was thus a fresh
humiliation for Russia.
As in 1878 and 1908, we had opposed the Russian program without German
interests being brought into play. Bismarck had to minimize the mistake
of the Congress by a secret treaty, and his attitude in the Battenberg
question--the downward incline being taken by us in the Bosnian
question--was followed up in London, and was not given up, with the
result that it led to the abyss.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account