They have annexed territories and we have annexed territories.
Annexations are the necessary results of the contact of order with
anarchy. If we work together the regeneration of Asia may proceed
peacefully and beneficently. If we quarrel in earnest, as things now
stand, the whole enormous continent will be split into factions, nation
against nation, tribe against tribe, family against family. From the
Bosphorus to the Wall of China, and perhaps inside it, there will be an
enormous faction-fight, with an amount of misery to mankind of which no
recorded war has produced the like. It will be a war, too, which can
lead to no atoning results. England staggers already under the vastness
of her responsibilities, and even if she conquers can undertake no more.
That we might not conquer is an eventuality which our pride may refuse
to entertain; yet such a thing might happen, and if we are defeated we
are a lost nation. Russia might recover, but we could not; a disaster on
the Dardanelles or the Afghan frontier would cost us our Indian Empire.
[Sidenote: RUSSIA AND ENGLAND]
In such a war we stand to lose all and to gain nothing, while in itself
it would be nothing less than a crime against mankind. We are told that
a cordial co-operation with Russia is impossible. It will not be made
more possible by a quarrel over Turkey. Yet to a peaceful arrangement we
must come at last if the quarrel is not to be pursued till one or other
of us is destroyed. These are the broad facts of the situation, to which
the fate of the Principalities or of the Bosphorus itself are as
feathers in the balance. Disraeli, in whose hands for the moment the
tremendous decision rested, chose to overlook them. He persevered in the
policy of upholding the Turkish Empire. It was the traditional policy of
England, and, as he professed to consider, the most consistent with
English interests. It may be that he remembered also that the Turks had
befriended his own race when the Russians had been their bitterest
enemies. It may be that something of his early vanity still lingered in
him, and that he was tempted by the proud position of being the arbiter
of Europe. But fact was against him. Turkish rule in Europe is an
anachronism, and neither force nor diplomacy can prevent the final
emancipation of Christian nations from Mahometan dominion. He chose a
course which gave him for a moment an ephemeral glory, but it was at the
cost of undoing the effects of his whole political life, wrecking again
the party which he had reorganised and giving a fresh lease of power to
the revolutionary tendencies which threatened the dismemberment of the
Empire.
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