The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915: What Americans Say to EuropeVarious
Philosophy
The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915: What Americans Say to Europe
Various
World War, 1914-1918
Being herself more than half of Slavic stock, she has every reason for
living on good terms with the various Slav kingdoms south of her. Being
herself forced, through the conglomerateness of her population, to
constant compromises in her internal affairs between conflicting
nationalities within her borders, she could not possibly absorb a large
additional amount of foreign territory. She is bound to respect the
existing lines of political demarkation in the Balkans, and her sole
object can be through commercial treaties and tariff legislation to open
up what used to be European Turkey to her trade and her civilizing
influence.
In this she must clearly be supported by Germany. For only if Austria is
left free to exercise her natural protectorate over the Balkan States
can the passage between Germany and the Near Orient, one of the most
important routes of German commerce, be kept open.
Russia's unwillingness, then, to allow Austria a free hand in her
dealings with Servia was an open menace to Germany, a challenge which
had to be accepted unless Germany was prepared to abdicate all her
influence in the Near Orient and to allow Russia to override the
legitimate claims and aspirations of her only firm and faithful ally.
This formidable coalition of the three greatest European powers,
threatening the very existence of Germany, has now been joined by Japan,
openly and boldly for the purpose of snatching from Germany her one
Asiatic possession.
If any additional proof had been needed to make it clear that, if
Germany wanted to retain the slightest chance of extricating herself
from this worldwide conspiracy against her, she had to strike the first
blow, even at the risk of offending against international good manners,
this stab in the back by Japan would furnish such proof.
Dr. Sanderson Replies
_To the Editor of The New York Times:_
Although I hate to enter into a controversy with Prof. Kuno Francke, who
was once my excellent friend, I cannot refrain from answering his
article which appeared in last Sunday's NEW YORK TIMES.
How can any one say, in all fairness, that Germany's policy toward
France during the last forty-three years has been one of the utmost
restraint and forbearance, and has been dictated by the one desire to
make her forget the loss of the two provinces? What are the facts? We
know that not once, but again and again, since 1878, Germany has tried
to provoke France into war. We know that on one occasion Queen Victoria
herself threatened the Kaiser with Great Britain's intervention if he
did not desist from his intended attack on France. And to cite only the
two most recent instances, the Agadir affair and the enforced
resignation of the French Premier, Delcasse! Would Germany have
swallowed such insults?
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