CHRISTIAN PEACE—PROCEDURE

[This article, by a writer intimately conversant with German life, has arisen out of recent articles on War Aims in THE SPECTATOR and a recent letter by the Archbishop of York in the "Daily Telegraph." His views on the Treaty of Versailles are not necessarily THE SPECTATOR'S] ISTILL believe that the Government is right in refusing to fix detailed terms of the eventual settlement we wish to secure. Such specification would be incompatible with the aim of a negotiated peace which all responsible states- men in this country have proclaimed. But there is a different issue on which more clarity and more precise definition seem indicated. What are the conditions under which we should be prepared to make an armistice and sit down at the conference table to negotiate the final peace?

I am under no illusion. Any conditions compatible with our obligation and our honour would be met by Hitler with an arrogant " No." He could say nothing else without the surrender of his faith. But I am equally certain that there is in Germany a potentially powerful body of Christian opinion which would whisper a fervent " Yes " today, and that this whisper would become an audible murmur tomorrow, and might be translated into action before the winter has gone.

But only on one condition, that there has occurred in the meantime some impressive disillusionment for Germany. Until this happens millions of Germans believe Hitler a god, and those who believe him a devil have become con- vince since Prague that the devil is invincible.

This peace crisis, if and when it breaks out, may quite possibly end in another temporary triumph for Hitler and another St. Bartholomew's Day like that of June 3oth, but there is no doubt that, whatever its outcome, such a crisis must so damage the German war effort as to shorten the war, perhaps by years.

Now it will not cease to be a matter of dispute between Christians whether war can ever be justified. The con- science of the genuine objector is protected in this country, but to millions of Christians there is a greater evil than war —the triumphant and unchecked progress of the murderer of one nation after another. I, for one, am convinced that the enormous power gathered within the vast Commonwealth of this Empire has no moral basis unless our resources in man and treasure are devoted to this task of liberating Hider's victims of yesterday and today, and of defending others that may be threatened tomorrow, thereby protecting ourselves and our good name. But on one point at least there is no difference of opinion in Christian England today. We should never cease to watch for an opportunity to do or say anything that may narrow the gulf between the belligerents. But what, it may be asked, can be said that has not been said already? Have not Mr. Chamberlain and Lord Halifax made our disinterested purpose clear beyond all misunderstanding? Has not Mr. Chamberlain addressed the German people, and solemnly pledged his word that this is not a war to humiliate or cripple the German Reich? Have the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary left room for any doubt in any mind how deeply this country feels our obligation to help the nations which are enslaved by Hider. All that is true. I am convinced that, amid the setbacks and tribulations which may be in store for us, neither Mr. Chamberlain nor Lord Halifax would falter in their determination to see justice done to the Poles and the Czechs. I am equally certain that they will keep faith with the German people, even if the war lasts long and they are in the end surrounded by the temptations both of bitterness and victory—but can the German nation be blamed if they are not convinced that this time pledges will be kept?

There are certain truths which it may be unwelcome to hear. We have a clear conscience towards Herr Hitler, but we can only speak to the German nation as one brother sinner towards another.

" It is for Germany to make her choice," said Mr. Chamberlain on October 12th, 1939.

" It is within the choice of the German nation to alter it," said President Wilson on October 14th, 1918.

The German nation did make its choice—and obtained the Versailles Treaty. This Treaty constitutes a broken pledge—broken to the German people. In fact, the struggle won by the penalisers against President Wilson and his Fourteen Points now proves to be one of the decisive battles in the history of the world. But worse was to come. In 1921 and in 1923 the Treaty of Versailles was trifled with in the very clauses that were meant to protect Germany. On the first occasion Mr. Lloyd George said (May 13th, 1920:— It is not merely a matter of honour—and that surely is not to be despised—it is a matter of safety, it is a matter of security, that we should show that we must adhere to that Treaty when it is for us—yes, and when it is against us! I dislike, and I fear more than I can tell, this sort of trifling with the Treaty, this playing with it, and saying, "After all, they are only Germans." (May 13th, 1931.) If that was a British statesman's view, what must the views of Germans be?

When Herr Hitler arraigns the Versailles Treaty and in the same breath defends his aggressions in the name of security against a new Versailles which is threatening, he is dexterously mixing one truth with many lies. If we, in answering him, deny his truth and his lies without dis- tinction we render him a signal service. If we want to unmask him before the German nation we must frankly condemn the Versailles Treaty ourselves, and then challenge comparson between the relative benevolence of its terms and those of the " settlements " Hitler has imposed on the Czechs and wants to impose on the Poles. No honest German mind can be blind to the contrast.

But we must go further, and reassure the German nation that we are resolved on a programme of procedure excluding both the Versailles spirit and the Versailles technique. We must in fact use the present Heaven-sent respite to dig our Maginot line against the evil passions that will soon engulf us. I suggest some such programme as this: (a) A conference for a comprehensive peace, to be held in a neutral capital.

(b) No negotiations to begin till the freedom and sovereignty of the Czech and Polish nations are effectively guaranteed.

(c) The frontiers of the re-created States to be dis- cussed in free negotiations between the disputing parties, on a basis of equality, both parties to bind themselves in advance, in case of disagreement, to accept the findings of an impartial arbitral body composed of States which were neither gainers nor losers under the Versailles Treaty ; the same method of settlement to be at the service of other European nations whose frontiers still cause friction.

(d) The Colonial question to be reopened. Here Britain can define her purpose in advance by stating that she is prepared to give Germany a share in Colonial responsibility under an extended mandatory system, but only under adequate guarantees that no alien race can be treated by a mandatory Power as the Jews were treated by the Nazis.

By such a declaration we would indeed have broken with Versailles. Hitler would he forced to admit that if war goes on it is not to protect the Greater Reich of German nationhood, or to re-establish the equality of Germany in the trusteeship of undeveloped races, or to bring about a further revision of the 1919 treaties where revision is required by justice, but solely to maintain, at the sacrifice of millions of lives, Hitler's enslavement of Czechs, Poles and Germans.

If Hitler is right in believing the whole German nation to be behind him in this criminal ambition, then the war must go on for years, until this ambition is broken. But what is the true mind of Germany? Let us never forget that the Nazis take no less trouble to deceive us about the inner life of Germany than they do to hide from the German people the truth about what is happening in our country. The young of Germany to-day still sing that century-old song: " God who makes the iron grow does not want slaves."

He does not. He does not want German slaves or Polish slaves or Czech slaves or Finnish slaves.

Here, then, is a programme of peace procedure that should be continuously proclaimed to the world. Sooner or later the submerged Germany must come to the surface. Let us pray that this will not come too late.

If the programme of procedure were adopted before the great sacrifices in the wcst are begun, we should indeed have renounced war as an arbiter of international disputes. By acting as if there already existed a super-national authority we should have laid the foundation-stone on which to build this authority, which will one day speak with an unquestioned will to justice and with a might that no oppressor or aggressor will dare resist.

Collective security was longed for and prayed for in the last war by millions who suffered and fought, but that war lasted too long for the enemy of today to become the friend of tomorrow, so the League of Nations was built on quick- sands on a treaty that aimed at judging and sentencing the enemy. Co-operation of reconciled enemies—that is the bed- rock on which alone a new world order can be founded.