And they succeeded in sweeping the German Government off its feet as well as the sober and sensible thinking majority of the German people.
They succeeded in rushing your Government and people into the belief that the Russian mobilization signified a menace dangerous to Germany"s very existence, and that every day of delay in meeting that danger might mean disastrous consequences.
This was not the first time that an attempt had been made by that party to bring the Kaiser and his people suddenly face to face with a situation which they meant should spell war--a war which they felt certain would end in a quick and decisive German victory. Of at least one flagrant example of such manoeuvring I have personal knowledge.
That the jingo party, against what I believe to have been the tendencies of the Kaiser"s and the Chancellor"s policies, thus succeeded at last in their fateful and atrocious design--although the manifest interests and, doubtless, the inclination of the ma.s.ses of your people were for the maintenance of peace--is explainable only by the Germans" amazing lack of understanding for the deeper qualities, sentiments, ideals, modes of thought and characteristics of other nations as distinguished from their outward peculiarities, methods and habits.
This lack of understanding, doubly amazing in a people so intelligent and instructed and so successful in its commercial dealings with the rest of the world, is strikingly exemplified in your complete misjudgment as to the cohesive power of the British Empire and as to the loyalty of its component parts and subject races; by your gross underestimate of France _and by your general miscalculation as to how the peoples challenged by you would react to the supreme test of war_.
That Austria and Russia, through their mobilizations and other measures originating from a mixture of bluff and fear, managed to get each other into an utterly unreasoning state of nerves, is entirely comprehensible. They did not trust each other, and above all, they did not trust themselves, their own strength and preparedness.
But Germany, in the knowledge of her powerful moral and military superiority, and of her incomparable war machine, perfect and ready in every detail, could have, and should have dominated the confusion and danger of the situation with the sang-froid and self-confidence born of strength, instead of allowing herself to be swept along by the sinister currents leading to an ocean of blood.
And if Germany, with trembling Europe hanging on her words, had proclaimed boldly "There shall be peace," and thus by her veto had saved the world from the curse of this war, she would not only have done a splendidly meritorious deed, unequalled in the world"s history, which would have brought her immortal fame and would have been greeted by the joyous acclaim of all peoples, but she would have gained by that very act the uncontested leadership amongst the nations. From their grat.i.tude for being freed from the nightmare of war"s menace, she would readily have obtained (as intimated by Sir Edward Grey in his telegram) compliance with any reasonable demand she might have put forward for the extension of the scope of her development and influence.
4. Once the Entente existed it seems to me so obvious that England _in an aggressive war waged by Germany and Austria_ against France and Russia _was bound to throw in her lot with the latter country_, that I was quite unable, at the time, to understand Germany"s outburst of surprise and fury against England. Alliance or Entente, call it what you will--had England backed out in that crisis it would have been a miserable breach of faith on her part, by which she would have forfeited her place in the world"s respect and which would have been bitterly resented by her former friends and left her completely isolated henceforth.
Moreover, apart from all moral obligations and the compelling force of political considerations, she could have felt all the less tempted to enter into a separate agreement with Germany at that critical juncture and remain neutral, as the latter at that very moment had demonstrated that she did not consider herself bound by any treaty, when military interests seemed to her to make the breach of such treaty advisable. In the face of Germany"s violation of Belgian neutrality, how could England have felt a.s.sured that, if an arrangement between the two countries had been effected, it would be respected by Germany, in case at any given moment it might appear to the German Government to be requisite from the point of view of military necessity, or even mere advantage, to ignore such agreement?
You call it a hideous crime and eternal shame that the English "called to their aid" against you the j.a.panese and the Indians.
As far as j.a.panese military aid is concerned, it has been practically limited to action in China, and thus has not to any material degree influenced the European war.
And with regard to the relatively inconsiderable number of Indians that England brought over, the simple fact is that these few brigades or divisions form part of the small standing army that she possessed--the very smallness of which is further proof of how little she had contemplated war. In her critical situation, and with her great lack of trained troops, she called in these detachments, which were commanded by English officers.
I feel certain that an unprejudiced judgment can see neither crime nor shame in that act. If there were, you would be no less subject to reproach for accepting the military aid of Turks and Arabs.
5. When a country in so short a time has made such unexampled progress as Germany, and through her own capacity and the favour of fate has achieved so much of wealth, power and well-being for her people, she can well afford to indulge in the luxury of modesty and a conciliatory disposition.
A nation thus blessed ought to thank G.o.d that all is going so well with her, and should recognize that such brilliant success is bound to produce a certain amount of irritation and jealousy, just as it does in the case of an eminently successful individual.
While rejoicing in her achievement, she ought carefully to refrain from boasting or flaunting her superiority in the face of the world.
While unceasingly continuing to strive and build up, she ought to do so tactfully and with all possible consideration for her less successful neighbours.
She should know how to restrain herself and wisely to keep her ambitions within bounds; to live and let live; to regard, without jealousy or envy, possessions which are the heritage of others less efficient than herself; and to leave it to time, slowly but surely, to do its work in rewarding merit and punishing inefficiency and sloth.
Have you thought and acted thus?
Have you not, on the contrary, in the justified consciousness of your greater efficiency and more strenuous effort, allowed the fact of the great inherited advantages possessed by others to become a thorn in the flesh, and an ever-rankling bitter grievance, which dimmed your contentment and soured the joy at your achievements?
Have you not estranged and affronted and antagonized other nations--not by success in open compet.i.tion with them, which I grant was far from pleasing them, but to which in the end they had come to accommodate themselves as to an unavoidable evil--but by the manner and matter of your writing, speaking and acting? Have you not made such nations your enemies by thrusting before them aims and visions of the future, calculated to arouse in them most serious alarm and apprehension, and thus eventually caused them to unite against you--not, as you think, through envy or hate, but through the much more powerful motives of self-preservation, and of fear of your aims and intentions?
In this letter, which, I am sorry to say, has a.s.sumed formidable proportions, I have tried, next to expressing my own convictions, to represent to you, as I see them, what are at this time the predominant and controlling views and sentiments among the American people. I have met with much the same ideas among the great majority of neutrals with whom I have discussed the subject--neutrals from many countries whom I have met here in the last six months.
If I have expressed myself freely, in some respects even bluntly, I hope you will make allowance for the honest and deep anger and grief that move me when I see how, through a needless war wantonly started, Germany and England-France, the three countries of Europe whom the world most needs, the three races from whom humanity has most to expect, are engaged in tearing one another to pieces in senseless fury.
I have welcomed with hope certain signs in the last few weeks which seem to indicate that more moderate, fairer and calmer sentiments, a more correct understanding, and more far-sighted views are beginning to get a foothold in certain circles in Germany.
You have so incontestably vindicated the prowess of your arms, and so impressively demonstrated the power, courage, self-sacrificing patriotism and high ability of your nation, that no possible suspicion can attach to you of yielding under compulsion, should you rise to the moral heroism of taking the first step towards dispelling the dreadful misery which weighs upon Europe through this appalling war.
What is done, is done. The guilt will be adjudged by history. Eleven months ago it was you who spoke the fateful word that meant war. Will it now be you to first speak the redeeming word that shall bring hope of peace?
Whether such a word from you--a word, not of victorious peace, but of righteous peace, a word of human feeling and of political moderation, of conciliation, aye, and of atonement where due--would now be listened to by your opponents, in view of their bitterness at your actions and their mistrust of your intentions, and would actually bring peace, I do not know.
But of this I am sure: that such a step would be welcomed with grat.i.tude, gladness and sympathy by all at least of the non-combatant nations, and that it would be set down as a moral a.s.set for you in the ledger both of history and of contemporary opinion. Nor can I doubt that, even regarded merely from the point of view of politics, it would be wise, well-judged and timely.
Yours sincerely, (Sgd.) OTTO H. KAHN.
NOTE.--To this letter a short note merely of acknowledgment was received, containing the intimation that, in view of the wide divergence of views between the writer and the recipient, no useful purpose could be served by continuing the correspondence.