Secret Diplomacy: How Far Can It Be Eliminated?Reinsch, Paul S. (Paul Samuel)
Philosophy
Secret Diplomacy: How Far Can It Be Eliminated?
Reinsch, Paul S. (Paul Samuel)
Diplomacy; Europe -- Politics and government
“From time to time in recent years the French and British Naval
and Military experts have consulted together. It has always
been understood that such consultation does not restrict the
freedom of either Government to decide at any future time
whether or not to assist the other by armed force. We have
agreed that consultation between experts is not and ought not to
be regarded as an engagement that commits either Government to
action in a contingency that has not yet arisen and may never
arise. The disposition, for instance, of the French and British
fleets respectively at the present moment is not based upon
an engagement to coöperate in war. You have, however, pointed
out that if either Government had grave reason to expect an
unprovoked attack by a third Power it might become essential
to know whether it could in that event depend upon the armed
assistance of the other. I agree that if either Government had
grave reason to expect an unprovoked attack by a third Power,
or something that threatened the general peace, it should
immediately discuss with the other whether both Governments
should act together to prevent aggression and to preserve peace,
and, if so, what measures they would be prepared to take in
common. If these measures involved action, the plans of the
General Staffs would at once be taken into consideration and the
Governments would then decide what effect should be given to
them.”
A reply from the French Ambassador accepted this understanding.
Side by side with the Anglo-French military and naval collaboration,
there went the making of joint plans by France and Russia which
culminated in the Franco-Russian military convention of August, 1912.
At the same time Russia had pressed upon France the need of increasing
her army by raising the term of service to three years. Concerning the
new disposal of the French fleet, according to the desires of Russia,
President Poincaré stated to Ambassador Isvolsky in November, 1912:
“This decision has been made in agreement with England, and forms
the further development and completion of arrangements already
made previously between the French and English staffs.”
Thus the chain of coöperation was completed, and England was
effectively tied up with the situation in the Balkans, in which only
Russia had a primary interest.
Meanwhile, the repeated denials previously set forth kept the British
Parliament and public from all knowledge of the exceedingly important
relationships which were growing up between the Naval and Military
establishments of Great Britain and France.
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