PAN-GERMANISM, HOLLAND, AND BELGIUM.
[To THE EDITOR 05 TRH "SPECTATOft."] SIR,—Would you allow me to express the feelings of a German reading the leading article about "Pan-Germanism, Holland, and Belgium" in the Spectator of September 1st ? You will, I trust, publish my letter with your well-known love of justice and for the sake of the importance of our theme.
The writer of the article takes as his text the article of M. Ives Guyot in the September Nineteenth Century. Why, I must ask the writer, does be not mention the essays by M. Jaures about an eventual annexation of Belgium and Holland by Germany published in the Sozialistische Monatshefte, February, 1906? Why not the article by the well-known French statesman and Minister, Clemenceau, about the possibility of the annexation of German Austria by William II. published in the Aurora? I think it would have been only just to balance this accusation of the German Government by a notorious Germanophobe with a neutral and quite impartial opinion. Instead of that, the writer makes the opinion of M. Guyot his own, and leads the English public to infer that Germany wants to annex Holland and Belgium. I am glad, indeed, to be one of your readers, and to have the opportunity of replying to the writer.
(1) M. Guyot affirms, and the writer accepts the statement, that the so-called Pan-German Party in Germany wants the annexation of Holland and Belgium as well as of Austria, Hun- gary, Switzerland, Roumania, and Bulgaria. This affirmation is erroneous. If you read the Altdeutsche Platter (Pan-German Gazette) of the year 1905, you will find there a series of essays by General Kelm, one of the Pan-German leaders, about the annexa- tion of Austria by Germany. General Kelm explains as clearly as possible that the entrance of German Austria into Germany would be one of the greatest political blunders ever made. He states all the considerations, which you also mention in your article, especially the increase of the Roman Catholic ascendency in German internal policy. And as for the idea that Germany should absorb Switzerland, Hungary, Roumania, and Bulgaria, there is none of the Pan-German leaders who cherishes so fantastic a dream as this which M. Guyot attributes to them.
(2) M. Guyot affirms, and the writer of your article accepts the statement, that the German Emperor favours Pan-Germanism. This affirmation is erroneous. The Emperor has repeatedly expressed in speeches and telegrams his disapproval of the over-ardent propaganda of the Pan-Germans. And what the German Govern- ment as a whole thinks about an annexation of German Austria you may see in a speech of the son of the Regent of Bavaria, Prince Ludwig, made at Munich in 1906. In this speech he warned the Austrian Pan-Germans to desist from their dreams of entering into the German Empire, and to adhere to the old Austrian dynasty. These were the words of one of those South Germans who, as you think, desire the annexation of Austria, and they were at the same time the words of a Roman Catholic, to whom an increase of the Roman Catholic vote in Germany must be very welcome. They were the words of one who will one day himself be Regent, and who is now an intimate friend and adviser of the Emperor. But M. Guyot knows very well that the German Government never thinks of an annexation of Austria. Therefore he asserts that the Emperor will pose as being very generous and will proclaim to the astonished world: "Look at me, I resign all annexations in Austria." That is to say, M. Guyot first of all attributes plans of conquest to the Emperor, and then will make him out to be a hypocrite if he resigns these plans, which in truth are of M. Guyot's own invention. But N. Guyot has a new invention, that the Emperor, having resigned Trieste, now fixes his eyes upon Holland and Belgium. I do not want to deny that there are many Pan-Germans who do think about an annexation of Belgium and Holland. But I ask you, have not you in England, and has not France, enough people who, in an exaggerated patriotism, invent the most fantastic plans? Yet you would not like their opinion to be taken by foreigners as the opinion of the Government. Bismarck has said : "Etery country has its national fools." The German people does not wish an annexation of Holland or Belgium. But at the same time, I have never read a better presentation of the case for that annexation than your article, and I hope that it will not be widely read in Germany.
I believe that the question discussed in your article is not only at present outside of practical politics in Germany, but that under William II. it will remain outside. But this will not be because of the internal difficulties and problems of which the article speaks. Never was the national harmony and the political contentment so entire as in the year of the Moroccan conflict. In all the international difficulties of the last year the great majority of the people were solidly with the Kaiser. An indica- tion of this appeared in the largely increased support given at that time in the Reichstag, to the Government's naval pro- gramme for the year, and many other illustrations of the Emperor's popularity might be quoted did space allow me. I believe that your article gravely exaggerates the difficulties of the internal situation, which you think may lead the Emperor into an adventurous policy. The by-elections to the Reichstag show a continual falling-off of the Socialist vote, and, as you have repeatedly pointed out in your able journal, the great increase of the Socialist vote has caused the rise within it of a very powerful moderate wing.
Moreover, the Emperor himself has shown his desire for peace, not only in many speeches, but by deeds. Let President Roose- velt's telegram to,William II. on the conclusion of peace between Russia and Japan, that only by his help had peace been attained, be remembered.
(Darmstadt, Hessia).
Ninewells Mains, Chirnside, Berwickshire, N.B.
Previous page
