My Immortal Boyfriend

Chapter 8 history

CHAPTER XI

EDWARD VII PREPARES THE HUMILIATION AND DESTRUCTION OF

GERMANY 1905–1908

The first European crisis engendered by the new British policy broke out in 1905. On account of her geographical situation on the shores of the Atlantic and the Mediterranean, with her Northern coast bordering the Straits of Gibraltar, Morocco is a country of much importance; England wished her now obedient vassal France to take possession of it. Spain, it is true, was to receive a strip of territory as hinterland to Ceuta, while Tangier was to remain “international.” It was forbidden, in the interests of England, to fortify the coast near the Straits of Gibraltar. With these reservations Morocco was handed over by Great Britain to France. Germany was intentionally ignored, and the convention of 1904 was not even brought officially to the knowledge of the German Government. The latter waited a whole year, but when the French Government commenced taking steps with a view to placing Morocco under its protectorate, Germany protested; the final result of her protest was the resignation of M. Delcassé. The policy of this statesman had been to refuse systematically all German demands, even at the risk of war. He was convinced that Germany would retreat the moment she knew that Great Britain had decided to stand by France and to back up the latter energetically. The attitude of the Premier, M. Maurice Rouvier, and the declaration made by the Ministers of War and Marine to the effect that France

was unprepared for war, brought about the departure of M. Delcassé quicker than England had expected it. The “inner” history of the crisis of 1905 is not yet fully known; but the course taken by events shows sufficiently clearly that the London Cabinet subsequently took the reins into its own hands. The attitude of the French Government, which had at first been conciliatory, changed within a very short time, and became either dilatory or hostile; and when the German Government made the great mistake of proposing an international conference to settle the Moroccan question, Germany found herself alone in front of an overwhelming hostile majority. Here is not the place to discuss the aims which our Moroccan policy set itself in those days. The basis of Prince Bülow’s policy was invariably the open door, the principles of which he and his successors always consistently upheld. The German Government was further of opinion that war should not be waged on account of Morocco, unless a question of national honor were involved. Prince Bülow believed this to be no longer the case after the departure of M. Delcassé. On the other hand, the public and secret agreements between France and England aimed at creating a condition of affairs, the inevitable result of which could not but be the destruction alike of the open door, of the integrity of Morocco, and of the sovereignty of the Sultan. To speak, under these circumstances, of the open door, was to maintain a fiction in which no one could believe. The fact that the German Government consistently kept up this fiction, necessarily awakened in England and France the impression that Germany only wished to “save her face” in the eyes of the world, and that she would on no account wage war. This was certainly the weakest spot in the armor of German diplomacy, at a moment when the latter was face to face with very resolute adversaries. For Great Britain was resolved to prove to the world that she and her

new ally France were in absolute opposition to the German Empire; she wished further to prove that a war could only be prevented by a German retreat. All the demands of the German representatives at the Algeciras Conference were rejected, and not a single Power was to be found to back up Germany energetically. German’s isolation was so complete, that she was thankful to Austria- Hungary when the latter’s representatives declared themselves ready, in one particularly knotty question, to build a bridge over which the Germans could effect an honorable retreat. The Algeciras Act, a very voluminous document, was from beginning to end a complete farce. Those who knew the conditions did not for a moment doubt that it could never be put into practice. The secret agreements between France and England were alone sufficient to deprive the Act of all value. As a matter of fact it was never enforced, and France never allowed herself for one minute to be influenced—much less bound—by it. To a certain extent did the Conference keep up appearances, as far as Germany was concerned; but in reality the whole thing was a failure from beginning to end. The new European policy of England had stood its first test. In 1905 it was clear to all the nations of Europe, with the exception of the Germans, that henceforth international politics would be dominated by the Anglo-German rivalry.

Before and during the Algeciras Conference, preparations were going on in view of an Anglo-Russian understanding. Russia had been vanquished in the Far East, and British diplomacy drew the logical conclusion from her defeat. The idea found active and enthusiastic supporters in France, who were also anxious to create a Triple Alliance directed against Germany. A number of opportunities for working together were furnished by the Algeciras Conference. On the other hand, Germany experienced a

disagreeable surprise on seeing Russia, who had apparently entirely forgotten the invaluable services rendered her by Germany in her hour of need, combat all the latter’s demands at the Conference. Italy had already entered previously to the Conference into certain obligations towards France and England; she had, in return, been granted by these Powers a right of priority in Tripoli. The Italians were also to be found at Algeciras among Germany’s adversaries; the same was the case with nearly all the smaller European States, and with the United States of America. This was a phenomenon, the importance of which completely overshadowed that of the Moroccan question taken by itself. With extraordinary skill, rapidity, and energy, England’s statesmen had understood how suddenly to represent the German Empire as the disturber of European peace, as a danger to France, and as jealous of Great Britain.

A short time before England herself had been quite isolated, and she had only recently emerged from out of the grave crisis of the Boer War, and from out of the not less grave crisis in the Far East; and yet, already in 1905, King Edward and his advisers had been able to come to an understanding with France and Russia. They had further succeeded in loosening the ties which bound Italy to the Triple Alliance; and, quite apart from the question of a participation of Italy in a war, they had managed to induce her to place, at the Algeciras Conference, her diplomacy at the service of Germany’s adversaries. Up till a few years previously, Germany had been on excellent terms with Spain. England spoke a few words behind the scenes, Spain was promised a piece of Morocco and was henceforth to be counted likewise among Germany’s opponents. British diplomacy had succeeded, during the Venezuela affair, in creating in the United States such intense bitterness

against Germany, that the Americans, albeit the Morocco question did not concern them in the least, could not wax sufficiently indignant at the spectacle of German “illegalities” and “attempts to disturb the peace of the world.”

In the following year, 1906, the understanding between England and Russia was effectively concluded. In 1907 it was sealed by the agreement concerning Persia and Central Asia. The co-operation of the two Powers in Oriental questions immediately commenced. The Russian defeats at Tsushima and Mukden had produced the consequences desired by British statesmen. Incapable henceforth of continuing her policy of expansion in the Far East, bereft of nearly her entire fleet, weakened at home by the revolution, Russia now judged it to her interest to be on friendly terms with the very Power to whose systematic intrigues and icy-cold calculations all the misfortunes of the Empire of the Czars were due. The Anglo- Russian Convention put an end to the anxiety hitherto felt in London concerning the possibility of a Russian advance on India by way of Central Asia. Persia was divided into spheres of interest, between which a neutral sphere was created, and in this way peace was also assured here. England did, in fact, relinquish many of her hopes and ambitions in Persia, for the sake of arriving at an understanding—deemed to be of priceless value—with Russia. During the years which followed the war with Japan, British and French diplomacy were equally active in their efforts to turn Russia’s attention towards the Balkans and Constantinople. The object was to create friction and dissension between Russia and Germany, and between Russia and Austria-Hungary. England intended that here also Russia should fight her battles for her—this time in conjunction with the Balkan peoples—just as she had fought them in the Far East.

King Edward and his Ministers attached particular importance to the friendship of the smaller States, and England’s “wooing” was done skilfully and systematically. Frequent journeys consolidated the personal ties of friendship uniting rulers and statesmen, and England was always able to promise either real or apparent advantages. With Greece and Italy the old relations of guardian to ward were resumed, as also with Spain. King Edward succeeded in placing a British Princess on the Spanish throne. The reconstruction of the Spanish fleet was entrusted to English builders, and a Spanish loan was floated in London in order to cover expenses.

England and France concluded with Spain a so-called Status Quo Agreement concerning the Mediterranean, whereas nothing is known in regard to the conventions signed about the same time with Italy. It is, however, certain that they were likewise directed against Germany. In the North of Europe, British policy had been able to register a great success: namely, the division of the hitherto united Scandinavian monarchy into the two kingdoms of Sweden and Norway. These two large countries, united under Swedish leadership, lived on friendly terms with the German Empire. This could not be allowed. With the help of all the means at her disposal for use in such cases, England set to work; the result being that the old Norwegian jealousy was rekindled, and a separation became inevitable. A Danish Prince with an English wife ascended the Norwegian throne, and ever since then Norway has stood under English influence. Everything was done with a view to inducing Denmark to come over to England’s side. In 1905 a British fleet visited Esbjerg, and afterwards passed through the Skagerrack and Kattegat. It was during the time of the political tension caused by the Morocco difficulty, and the world had just learnt, through the

so-called revelations of M. Delcassé, the plans of the British Government with regard to a landing in Jutland. The Danish royal family at that time would doubtless have been inclined to draw the sword in a war against Germany; but not the Danish nation—with the exception of some fanatics. At any rate, when the English fleet paid its visit to Esbjerg, a representative of the Danish Government took the opportunity of declaring that the latter’s programme consisted in a single word: neutrality. He was thereby referring alike to the English crimes of 1800 and 1807, and to the war of 1864 with its consequences. We would observe, by the way, that Denmark was already in 1905 of great strategical importance to the English, on account of the question of the passage of the fleet, in time of war, through the Sound and the Great Belt. Ever since 1900 the English press had been full of articles concerning the passage through these waters in time of war; and every effort was made to persuade the Danish nation that, in the event of such a war, its place must be at the side of England. The journey of the English fleet through the Skagerrack and the Kattegat to the Baltic in 1905, was undertaken for reasons which cast a very clear light on the thoughts and intentions of British statesmen. During the Moroccan crisis the British Admiralty announced, quite suddenly, that the North Sea Squadron would go to the Baltic for the purpose of practising there. In the press comments on the matter, we find the view expressed that the Germans considered the Baltic as a closed sea belonging to Germany, and that they considered the growing strength of their navy to give them the right to claim it. But England wished to show the whole world that she did not recognise such a claim, and that she was determined to let the British fleet perform its practises in every sea which it should please the Admiralty to select. So far the press. The voyage of the British fleet was therefore nothing else but a threat—and a wholly

unjustifiable one. Neither the German Government nor the German people had ever entertained so foolish a thought as that of regarding the Baltic as a closed sea. In our days a sea can only be shut from outside; and to close the Baltic in times of peace to the fleet of another nation would be a silly and meaningless act, even if the German navy were capable of enforcing such an order. The journey of the British fleet, which was extended so as to include visits to a number of German Baltic ports, was, as we have said, nothing but a well calculated and demonstrative threat. It was destined to prove to all the Northern States that, if it pleased the British fleet to penetrate into the Baltic and to visit German ports there, nothing could stop it; the German navy would be but an insignificant hindrance in time of war. Therefore, o ye Northern States, do not venture to stand by Germany, or it will be the worse for you!

In 1905 and 1906 England concluded definite agreements with Belgium in case an European war should break out. The agreements were completed by other conventions between France and Belgium, and between France and England. Belgium, as is well known, was a neutral State. Already at this time England knew that, in the event of a war between France and Germany, the former, relying on the strength of the line of fortresses on the Franco-German frontier, would march through Belgium with a view to invading Prussia. But England had a poor opinion of French organisation, and of the French army as a whole, and judged it necessary to take steps in the matter herself. In the military conventions with Belgium, an Anglo-Franco-Belgian plan of campaign against Germany was worked out in all its details. England desired to land an expeditionary corps, and wished under all circumstances to make Antwerp a basis of supplies: all this has

been proved by documentary evidence already published. When we analyse these events it appears incontestable that, quite apart from purely military considerations, England intended, by means of her co-operation with Belgium, to lay hands on Antwerp. English policy, as usual, was playing a double game. According to the way in which events shaped themselves, the British expeditionary troops could either march directly against Germany, or they could remain on Belgian soil, and occupy Antwerp or other towns on the coast. In this way, Belgium would have developed from a simple outer fortification into England’s Continental basis of operations, and England would have opened, by virtue of her own power, the mouth of the Scheldt at Holland’s expense. Belgium would have become a second Portugal, and England would have had the free use of all her harbors, etc. The military conventions drawn up by England with Belgium in 1905–06 pursued very ambitious aims—political, naval, and military. It was at this time that Belgium forfeited her neutrality and became the obedient ally of England, and also of England’s chief servant France.

The British Government endeavored to go still farther, and to form a great anti-German union of the neutral States. With this aim in view, every effort was made in order to bring about an alliance between Holland and Belgium. The plan was frustrated by Holland’s refusal. Both in peace and war the Dutch Government has maintained the same strict and honorable neutrality, however difficult it may have been at times to persist in such an attitude. By the formation of a Union of the Neutral States, Great Britain would have created a union of vassals, which would have appeared on the scene as soon as the war against Germany had broken out. The existence of such a plan is likewise proved by documentary

evidence, discovered since the outbreak of hostilities. All this goes to show how extensive were the preparations made, in view either of holding the German Empire in check by inspiring it with fear— or else, if need be, of waging the war so that it must result in the total destruction of Germany alike as a trading Power, a political Continental Power, and a maritime Power.