LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
THE NEW DIPLOMACY AND THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—Open diplomacy by Conference and the League of Nations as the highest court of reference have been trium- phantly acclaimed by the anticipations of the optimist. They were to supersede the wicked wiles and tangling meshes of the old diplomacy, misconceived by popular imagination as traditionally committed to dubious practices analogous to that of overlooking your opponent's hand and thus acquiring a strategical advantage in the game. In reality the function of the old diplomacy was to attenuate the conflict between divergent international opinions and interests, to make reasonably plain the ease for the other side by clearing the atmosphere of prejudices and misrepresentations, to reduce differences to their proper and essential proportion by cool- headed investigation carried on with the language and forms of courtesy, and if possible to settle them by equitable proposals for mutual concession. Does the new practice tend to ensure a more satisfactory solution and to eliminate the element of intrigue inspired by the incentive of self-interest ? Have its advocates not too eagerly ignored certain factors in human nature, certain national or racial habits of mind which will readily adapt themselves to changed conditions and find ways of using other instruments for similar ends ?
Those who have recently attended the public meetings of the Council at Geneva, and have observed with careful attention the attitude of certain members of the League of Nations, cannot fail to have found reason for some misgivings. Their conclusions will not be depreciatory of the value of an institution which has successfully surmounted a severe ordeal, but they will have impressed them with the danger of par- ticular tendencies and manifestations quite alien to the spirit in which the League of Nations was conceived.
Speaking in very general terms it may be said that the northern races of Europe incline to idealism, while the southern and especially the Latin nations are influenced rather by logical and material appreciations. Races are, of course, seldom pure, and there are cross-currents of influence, nowhere more conspicuous than in the clement of idealism infused among the Latins of Italy by the advent of the Lombards. There at moments, and in conspicuous instances, the idealist has prevailed. But in the long run it is generally the logical Latin instinct which ends by holding the field after using the idealist element as its instrument. The idealists cling to the belief that the world can be moved by the ideals which are to them a faith and an inspiration. The logical materialism of the Latins accepts the deduction which follows from premises based upon the evidence of human experience. For them that experience teaches that the ultimate factor in this world is physical and not spiritual, and that the last and dominant word will be not with those who appeal to an ideal and are prepared to surrender some portion of their own independence to uphold it, but with those who have the power to enforce acceptance of the policy which is consistent with their own interest.
The Covenant of the League of Nations was welcomed with enthusiasm by the idealists who saw in it a guarantee of security for the weaker nations. It was received with
acquiescence by certain more powerful peoples, whose native scepticism was constrained by obligations of international ethics to subscribe to principles of abstract justice, not perhaps
without a mental reservation that there might be des accom- modements avec k dd. Among our own people largely
governed by sentiment and always ready to respond to the spirit of fair play, the principles of the Covenant found cordial acceptance, not perhaps the less eager because it was believed that they would have a practical effect in accelerating dis- armament and in allowing us to devote resources and energies to more profitable enterprises.
The feeling of the civilized world was unanimously with Italy when she demanded exemplary punishment for the outrage of Janina. It was almost unanimously against her at Geneva when she claimed in that particular case exemption from the obligation, by which she had of her own free will bound herself, to submit international disputes to the League of Nations for settlement. A public repudiation of the competence of the League aroused strong feeling, and for a moment it appeared almost inevitable that the repudiating State would be isolated and must choose between receding from that position or withdrawing from the association of nations. But the constitution of the League requires unani- mous decisions. Had all its members been ready to consider the issue exclusively on its merits there could have been little doubt of the result. But it became immediately evident from the attitude of the French Press which reflects the views of the Government—and not from the attitude of the Press only—that interests were going to outweigh obligations, and that unless the obvious issue could be turned unanimity would not prevail.
The League nevertheless found means of accomplishing the task prescribed. The Council successfully endeavoured to
" effect a settlement of the dispute," and took such action as might " be deemed wise and effectual to safeguard the peace of nations."
Signor Mussolini has not hesitated to express his mistrust of an institution which allows the smaller nations to intervene in the affairs of the greater, and claims that there is a " hier- archy of nations." Such a contention may be legitimate in itself. But it should have been considered when his country undertook to defer, in the case of international disputes, to the collective opinion of the nations in conclave, where no dis- tinction was laid down between stronger and weaker, except as regards the permanent elements in the Council. You cannot insert a post-dated condition into an unconditional contract. His attitude towards the League, however difficult to defend, has in any case been frank and apparently un- influenced by ulterior considerations beyond those of the immediate issue. But can anyone who has followed the proceedings at Geneva and studied the articles of the Paris Press have any illusions as to the motives underlying the attitude of France or regard them as consistent with the spirit in which the League of Nations was founded ?
Nor does the most recent instance afford by any means a solitary example of political manoeuvring within the orbit of the League, where some ground for serious reflection is afforded by the continued exclusion of .Germany contrasted with the admission to membership of one of the last African States which still tolerates the traffic in slaves.
The ultimate sanction of the old diplomacy was the physical force behind it, for which it has been sought to substitute a moral sanction. Is it only due to coincidence that so strong an influence should be exercised in the new diplomacy by the only effectively armed nation in Europe ?—I am,
Previous page
