In the first year of the war the Government of Germany stirred up among
its people a feeling of resentment against the United States on account
of our insistence upon our right as a neutral nation to trade in
munitions with the belligerent powers. Our legal right in the matter was
not seriously questioned by Germany. She could not have done so
consistently, for as recently as the Balkan wars of 1912 and 1913 both
Germany and Austria sold munitions to the belligerents. Their appeals to
us in the present war were not to observe international law, but to
revise it in their interest. And these appeals they tried to make on
moral and humanitarian grounds. But upon "the moral issue" involved, the
stand taken by the United States was consistent with its traditional
policy and with obvious common sense.
For, if, with all other neutrals, we refused to sell munitions to
belligerents, we could never in time of a war of our own obtain
munitions from neutrals, and the nation which had accumulated the
largest reserves of war supplies in time of peace would be assured of
victory.
The militarist State that invested its money in arsenals would be at a
fatal advantage over the free people who invested their wealth in
schools. To write into international law that neutrals should not trade
in munitions would be to hand over the world to the rule of the nation
with the largest armament factories. Such a policy the United States of
America could not accept.
[Sidenote: Controversy about German submarine war zone.]
[Sidenote: The sinking of the _Lusitania_.]
But our principal controversy with the German Government, and the one
which rendered the situation at once acute, rose out of their
announcement of a sea zone where their submarines would operate in
violation of all accepted principles of international law. Our
indignation at such a threat was soon rendered passionate by the sinking
of the _Lusitania_. This attack upon our rights was not only grossly
illegal; it defied the fundamental concepts of humanity.
[Sidenote: Murder of noncombatants not to be settled by litigation.]
Aggravating restraints on our trade were grievances which could be
settled by litigation after the war, but the wanton murder of peaceable
men and of innocent women and children, citizens of a nation with which
Germany was at peace, was a crime against the civilized world which
could never be settled in any court.
Our Government, however, inspired still by a desire to preserve peace if
possible, used every resource of diplomacy to force the German
Government to abandon such attacks. This diplomatic correspondence,
which has already been published, proves beyond doubt that our
Government sought by every honorable means to preserve faith in that
mutual sincerity between nations which is the only basis of sound
diplomatic interchange.
[Sidenote: Bad faith of the Imperial German Government.]
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