The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, RussiaBeck, James M. (James Montgomery)
Philosophy
The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, Russia
Beck, James M. (James Montgomery)
World War, 1914-1918 -- Causes
The German Ambassador especially directed my attention to
the last two paragraphs of his note before he read it. He
indicated that in them lay the chief point. I took note of
the actual text, which is as follows: "The German Government
considers that the present question is a matter to be
settled exclusively between Austria-Hungary and Servia, and
that the Powers have the greatest interest in restricting
it to the two interested parties. The German Government
ardently desires the localization of the conflict, since by
the natural play of alliances any intervention by another
Power would have incalculable consequences."
I remarked to the German Ambassador that just as it appeared
to be legitimate to call for the punishment of all those
concerned in the crime of Serajevo, on the other hand it
seemed difficult to require measures which could not be
accepted, having regard to the dignity and sovereignty of
Servia; the Servian Government, even if it was willing to
submit to them, would risk being carried away by a
revolution.
I also pointed out to Herr von Schoen[52] that his note
only took into account two hypotheses: that of a pure and
simple refusal or that of a provocative attitude on the
part of Servia. The third hypothesis (which would leave
the door open for an arrangement) should also be taken
into consideration; that of Servia's acceptance and of
her agreeing at once to give full satisfaction for the
punishment of the accomplices and full guarantees for the
suppression of the anti-Austrian propaganda so far as they
were compatible with her sovereignty and dignity.
[Footnote 52: The German Ambassador.]
I added that if within these limits the satisfaction desired
by Austria could be admitted, the means of obtaining it
could be examined; if Servia gave obvious proof of goodwill
it could not be thought that Austria would refuse to take
part in the conversation.
Perhaps they should not make it too difficult for third
party Powers, who could not either morally or sentimentally
cease to take interest in Servia, to take an attitude which
was in accord with the wishes of Germany to localize the
dispute.
Herr von Schoen recognized the justice of these
considerations and vaguely stated that hope was always
possible. When I asked him if we should give to the Austrian
note the character of a simple _mise en demeure_, which
permitted a discussion, or an ultimatum, he answered that
personally he had no views.[53]
[Footnote 53: French _Yellow Book_, No. 28.]
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