New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 4, July, 1915: April-September, 1915Various
History
New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 4, July, 1915: April-September, 1915
Various
World War, 1914-1918
The question is not how it may be possible to do away with all
differences of opinion under all circumstances, but whether it is at
all possible to do away with them without rendering the submarine war
impotent. This standpoint contains nothing unfriendly, nothing brusque
against the United States. The practical question remains whether we
can preserve our German standpoint and still come to an understanding
with America. If Mr. Wilson holds to his non-recognition of the war
zone, with all its corollaries, then we cannot see how we can possibly
come to a real understanding.
On the other hand, the question arises whether President Wilson would
continue to cling to that standpoint if certain modifications and
mutual guarantees could be brought about which under certain
circumstances would render American passenger traffic safe.
_A newspaper war between advocates of a friendly settlement and the
"no compromise" representatives soon began to rage. Naval writers in
particular urged that Germany could not afford to yield an iota
regarding the principles and practice of submarine warfare, but the
very violence of their attacks upon the advocates of an understanding
indicates that the latter are not without influence._
_The Cologne Gazette points out editorially that the German press in
general has shown satisfaction that President Wilson's communication
offers opportunity for an understanding, and expresses the belief that
diplomacy on both sides of the Atlantic will work with zeal and
good-will to this end. It adds:_
It is quite certain the German Government, at least, will do this, and
will be generally supported therein by the people. It would be pure
imbecility to seek to drag in without necessity a ninth or tenth enemy
for ourselves, even though its participation in the war should be
limited to supplying the Quadruple Alliance with money and munitions.
We say without necessity; for recognition of the fact that Germany is
acting in self-defense in using the torpedoes of its submarines
against hostile merchantmen so long as England maintains its business
blockade against us should, we believe, be a condition which the
United States should recognize as preliminary to negotiations.
_In a leading article entitled "Bad Advice" the Cologne Gazette takes
the Lokalanzeiger to task for attempting to palliate the British
"starving-out policy" and exportations from America of war supplies.
Conceding that the cutting off of supplies is an accepted method of
warfare, it states that international law provides expressly that this
weapon may be used only in the form of an effective blockade. It holds
that no effective blockade of the German coasts has been declared,
however, and that Germany therefore is deprived of the possibility of
taking action against blockading ships._
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account