England, has obtained Adrianople, Smyrna, and Thrace. Turkey has been deprived of her territories in Asia, and so far are nonTurkish nationalities from security of life and autonomous development that they are now the joint plunder of France and Great Britain, the latter responsible for so drastic a system of military despotism in Mesopotamia, that 80,000 British troops are occupied, 'not in guarding the frontiers, but in holding the people down,' while the British people pay out anything upwards of £60,000,000, with an added upwards of £30,000,000 in Persia for these nefarious and futile military adventures, in which every principle is cast to the winds, every pledge violated with a cynical recklessness that proclaims the destruction of Turkish rule not in the interests of world peace, but at the instigation of international financiers who subsidize the gamble in human lives and happiness for the speculative profits latent in the oil fields of Mosul and the granaries of Bagdad. The establishment, under the general supervision and control of Lord Curzon, of the Middle East department merely accentuates the concerted design to exploit the countries in this area in the interests of capitalist rings. But the employment of Indian troopschiefly Mohammedan to subjugate these oriental nationalities, who are challenging Western despotism in their new-found passion for freedom, discloses an aspect of British foreign policy which has received insufficient attention. It is the forced service of one subject race to reduce others to a similar state of slavery, by a degenerate imperialism which, impervious to considerations of honor and responsibility, surrenders decent standards of chivalry and fair play to the dictates of semitic finance. The platonic assurances of the government and the India Office that, in their negotiations with anti-Turkish policies, they unsuccessfully espoused the Turkish side, neither deceive nor placate Indian opinion, but serve as an irritant to establish an agitation as a permanent and consolidated opposition. The Moslem claim has the solid support of the Hindus. Unless the Turkish peace terms are drastically revised the united people of India will declare themselves in open and perpetual conflict with the government of India, until such time as justice is assured to Turkey, and the insult to Islam redressed. It is noteworthy that Turkish wrongs have drawn expressions of sympathy from His Holiness the Pope, M. Giolitti, and other European diplomats. That the greatest Mohammedan power in the world, in violation of its repeated pledges, should acquiesce and participate in the destruction of the Turkish Empire, and outrage the spiritual fidelities of 100,000,000 of its subjects, reveals an utter bankruptcy of statesmanship which threatens not merely British security, but that of Western civilization itself. [Berliner Tageblatt (Anglophile Radical Liberal Daily), November 23] THE FIRST WEEK IN GENEVA BY PAUL SCHEFFER THE history-making first eight days of the League Assembly are over. It is still easy to take a pessimistic view of its proceedings; it is still difficult to be an optimist, particularly if you are a German. One thing is already obvious; the League of Nations is far from homogeneous. It is an organism capable of great development, of broad constitutional evolution, but it is composed of parts of very unequal importance and very different character; just for instance, as in a government, the cabinet, the civil service, and the legislature may be of very unequal ability and efficiency. Here at Geneva, every one is insisting that the League of Nations is not a superstate. An interesting debate arose over a proposal that the League should issue its own passports, but the suggestion was defeated. None the less, the machinery of the League of Nations is comparable only with the constitutional machinery of an independent government. During its evolution, constitutional controversies will inevitably play an important part in its history. Behind the smoke cloud of official speeches exists indescribable confusion. An enormous mass of materials and proposals has accumulated at Geneva-vividly suggesting what it must have been like at the Tower of Babel-and the confusion of counsels is likely to increase. Nevertheless, the main outlines of the structure which is rising here can already be distinguished and described. First, the League Assembly. That is organized according to strict parliamentary precedent. What a contrast with Brussels! With a very few exceptions, like Nansen, all the illustrious members have risen to their present prominence through long parliamentary careers at home. This explains why the proceedings have from the outset exhibited expert and professional efficiency. The whole affair is a test of West European parliamentarism, and judged from a purely technical point of view, it has so far been successful. However, this professionally competent Parliament must, first of all, master its materials. Its members are obliged to act primarily as representatives of their home governments. It is an embarrassing, perturbing thought that it is a parliament of diplomats. Can such a body be really productive? We shall have to wait and see whether the youthful inspiration of true league ideals will be able to make headway against the established traditional methods, interests, and solicitudes of cabinet diplomacy. However, one good sign has already appeared. This is the tendency to form parties at once manifest behind the scenes, and these parties are not slavishly following familiar national groupings. Spain is in close touch with the South American countries. The latter are much more united than ever before, even during their Pan-American meetings. Rather remarkably, Poland and Czecho-Slovakia are working together, and the other Balkan states are drifting into the same channel. It is hard to understand why so many people here assume that, when Germany is admitted, it will join the Balkan group. Quite naturally, the Scandinavians are frank allies, and the Dutch and Swiss representatives show a disposition to stand shoulder to shoulder with those powers. Holland also exhibits a tendency to align itself with the Balkan group, particularly Roumania. Italy is eagerly ingratiating itself with everyone. France is distrustful and on the defensive, but does not wish to figure as an obstructionist. In spite of their single vote, the French really hold the balance of power as matters stand at present. England is intent above all things upon avoiding an open break with her neighbor. Balfour's influence is still held in reserve, and the liberal views championed by Barnes are receiving full expression. Belgium is intermediate between England and France. The most powerful group likely to develop will consist of Great Britain and its Dominions, with the Spanish-speaking countries, which control a great number of votes. In any serious controversy, this group will probably have the majority. Another tendency which should not be overlooked is the disposition of the non-European countries to arrange themselves against European countries. From the point of view of a League of Nations, Europe is the continent most open to attack. Furthermore, England must keep a sharp eye upon the independent tendencies of its Dominions. For instance, Japan - as polite and observant as ever — and India will get along very well together. Great Britain's power upon the whole is due to its being the natural mediator between European and non-European countries. It is hard to conceive Great Britain in a minority. Of course all these combinations are likely to shift in the most unanticipated way at any moment, but their very existence gives an entirely new aspect to international policy as mirrored in the Geneva League Assembly. that all this is perfectly natural at the outset of a task which the people of the world, much as they desire to see it undertaken, considered until recently Utopian; and that only unthinking visionaries could expect it to be otherwise. They interpret the seriousness of these difficulties as a blessing; a proof that the results will be worth while. over numerous Not only enthusiasts, but practical and experienced men of optimistic vision- although the latter are not see the situation from the rosier point of view I have just described. Many of them are connected with the League's Secretariat, the Central Administrative Bureau of the new government or perhaps a better term would be its Chancery. The duties of this office are supposed to be only technical; but it is, in fact, the balance wheel of the whole maA person must use the words 'machine. Its splendid organization forms jority' and 'minority' with great cau- the backbone of the League. A number tion in describing this Parliament. It of offices devoted to international welis certain that France, dominated sim- fare work belong to this body; the ultaneously by fear and ambition, bureaus for war-prisoner relief, for would withdraw from the League and fighting epidemics, for regulating interthus destroy it were its national in- national communications- a gigantic terests not sufficiently consulted. No enterprise in itself the temporary one wants that. The undeniable dan- finance and economic commissions ger that France will withdraw is the these are a firm prop for the League of greatest peril, but not the only peril, Nations, evidently intended to prevent which faces the Assembly. Disarma- its overthrow. Beyond question, the ment, the mandates in respect to League cannot accomplish its full misthe latter of England's attitude, to say sion until the Secretariat is completely the least, is not very edifying raw organized. That will take one or two material monopolies, admission of new years longer. Naturally it has been members, the relation between the hampered so far by the international Council and the Assembly, are all ex- policies of different governments. It plosive questions. In addition, the has no supreme executive head as yet. Assembly will have to deal with a mul- But it possesses the immense advantitude of lesser problems, holding tage of being the sole permanently countless possibilities of unsuspected functioning organ of the League, and friction. So that body faces a gigantic therefore it alone has full knowledge of task, which cannot be performed unless all the League's activities. We most the old diplomatic methods used during assuredly find here a group of honest the war and armistice are greatly sim- men unreservedly devoted to promotplified and amplified. Optimists say ing a true League of Nations. Such anger, and quite just anger, as has existed hitherto in Germany and elsewhere regarding the League of Nations can logically be directed only against the Council of the League. That body has hitherto been the sole authority. It must now render an accounting of its labors to the Assembly. Beyond question, at the present stage of its debates, the Assembly is immeasurably more conciliatory, more truly representative of the League idea than the Council- that monstrous cross between a shepherd among nations and a wolf among nations -- has ever been. How then will the Council take the opinions of the Assembly? According to President Motta, its constitutional relation to the Assembly is 'unique'; but it certainly has more sovereign attributes, in comparison with the legislative branch, than are given the cabinet in any existing civilized government. So far it has shown itself very accessible and conciliatory, and has submitted beforehand to the decisions of the Assembly's committees dealing with specific questions. Of course representatives of the governments which have members in the Council sit in every one of those committees, and defend their government's interests. Those representatives, furthermore, propose amendments in the Assembly itself, to the very resolutions of the committees which they themselves have drafted. One of the principal duties at Geneva will be to clarify procedure on this point. At least the Council must be called to task personally by the Assembly, instead of hovering over it. A powerful movement has started in favor of creating a permanent executive. Beyond doubt, it is unquestionably respondent for that paper.] an excellent thing that Germany is not represented here at the present session. A member of the Assembly who is not given to paradoxes recently said: 'Ger many has more influence here as an absentee than it would have as a member.' Both directly and indirectly, Germany's case is being presented in every possible form, precisely because it is not represented at the session. We can well afford to wait in patience. It is clear that Geneva, like Brussels, is ever conscious of the unsettled reparation question. Both our friends and enemies are agreed as a matter of course that Germany's admission must be at its own request, as prescribed by the Covenant itself. However, a resolution has been suggested, to be brought up at the time Austria and Bulgaria are admitted, affirming the desirability that all countries become members. So far as our notes to the League of Nations Secretariat are concerned, the one relating to Eupen and Malmedy was very timely. The one regarding the mandates has elicited some surprise, because Germany has lost its colonies in any case; and because their disposition is a matter solely within the jurisdiction of the League of Nations, of which Germany is not a member. But the present prospect is that both notes will be read before the Assembly. It is impressed upon a person here every hour that we shall not enter this circle for a long time to come, and that our admission will be delayed by misunderstandings rather than by ill-will. [Berliner Tageblatt (Anglophile Radical Liberal Daily), November 13] MEMORIAL DAY IN PARIS BY PAUL BLOCK [The author, an old-time Paris correspondent and more recently Supplement Editor of the Berliner Tageblatt, has just returned to Paris as cor GAMBETTA'S heart was buried today in the Pantheon the heart of the man who admonished his conquered people, 'Keep thinking, but don't talk!' It will rest in France's Temple of Fame; for at length the wound of 1870 is healed by the glory of 1918, and Frenchmen are now free 'to talk.' This formal transfer to the home of the great dead is a gesture in an age which has lost faith in gestures; but it does not lack dignity, and we Germans, who have had no Gambetta in our hour of defeat, have no reason to ridicule this nation's gratitude to the man who kept vigil over its sacred fire. No one ventured to criticize the honor done Gambetta, not even the Socialist press. But much opposition was aroused to the second ceremony planned in memory of the recent victory; the solemn interment of the body of an unknown soldier, a nameless victim of the Battle of Verdun, as a symbolic honor to the great rank and file of the army, whose glory is immortalized only in the name of its leaders. L'Humanité called it infamous to use the bones of an unknown proletarian to glorify war. Other newspapers protested against interring an unknown person in the Pantheon, the place reserved for famous Frenchmen -to which one paper replied quite truly that there was many a man among these famous Frenchmen whose name the people have utterly forgotten. After long debate and indecision, it was decided at the last hour, to the satisfaction of all except the anti-militarists, that the heart of famous Gambetta should be borne on the same bier with the wooden coffin containing the humble remains of the unknown soldier through the Arc de Triomphe to the Pantheon, where it should be received with formal speeches and solemn music, and then returned for half a day to the Arc de Triomphe to receive the homage of the multitude. After this ceremony the people were to disperse to less solemn celebrations to public dances and bright illuminations, while the remains of the two dead, the great and the humble, were quietly to be interred, one in the Pantheon and the other under the Arc itself. They can now rest, both of them; the war is really over. I personally witnessed the public part of the celebration. I was in the Pantheon, at Place de la Concorde and at the Arc de Triomphe, and the impressive military spectacle probably affected me, a German, temperamentally fond of such exhibitions, quite as much as it did the French. Yet I must say, with a feeling of surprise and shock, that it was a spectacle and, alas, nothing more. Where was the enthusiasm which I had seen in the same place on other far less important historical occasions? Was its absence due to the chilly November weather? Or are the common people of France, like those of Germany, weary of warlike displays? When the column crossed Pont de la Concorde and turned into the great square, and Gambetta's catafalque and the poilu's coffin covered with the tricolors defiled through a host of fluttering banners past the monument to recovered Strassburg, I expected to hear the thunder of thousands of voices shouting Vive la France! until the passing military music became inaudible. Instead I only heard the calculating conversation of some men who had erected a stand for spectators, and were going to lose money on their venture. Prices were speedily run down from ten francs to one franc a seat. Likewise, some hours later, at the Arc de Triomphe, there was not the slightest display either of enmity to Germany or of patriotic enthusiasm. The crowd watched the catafalque pass in apathetic silence, except for one pathetic touch-the many women in black, both the distinguished and the humble, who did honor to the un |