THE ILLUSION OF DEFENCE .
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
[Correspondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. The most suitable length is that of one of our " News of the Week " paragraphs. Signed letters are given a preference over those bearing a pseudonym.—Ed. TIIE SPECTATOR.] [To the Editor of Tin SPECTATOR.] Sm,—In his article on "The Illusion of Defence" published in your issue of the 20th, Dr. L. P. Jacks has pictured a harrowing state of affairs as likely to ensue from the rearmament of this nation. His picture conjures to the mind a species of military Moloch sitting in Whitehall and demanding this and that to satisfy his insatiable appetite, nn appetite quite uncontrolled by any consideration of the needs of other members of the community. Meanwhile, as I translate Dr. Jacks, servile servitors in the persons of civilian ministers, bankers, merchants and manufacturers hasten to, glace on the banqueting table all this greedy monster demands.
1)r. Jacks is wringing our withers needlessly : matters do not, and never have since the days of Cromwell, worked like that. In the first place, the military advisers (by military esivisers I presume Dr. Jacks means the professional heads of the Navy, Army and Air Force) have no say whatever in the foreign policy of the Government and nation ; they can only deal with the consequences of that policy. They cannot, even if they wished to—which they certainly do not—urge on the Government a policy aggressive or likely to lead to war. Our Constitution and customs forbid such a course, and a military adviser who attempted to interfere with foreign policy would receive short shrift. Secondly, military advisers, when in recent times they have been asked to proffer their advice or been in a position which required them to do so, have invariably counselled the avoidance of war, if possible.
A notable instance is the advice tendered to the British Government by General Sir William Butler when acting as High Commissioner in South Africa, prior to the South African War. Other instances are Lord Kitchener's sym- pathetic treatment of the Boers' point of view at the con- clusion of the South African War, and most notable of all Wellington's insistence that after Waterloo the French should not be treated as a conquered people to be crushed and humiliated. Wellington was in a strong enough position to carry his policy through, and in consequence Europe enjoyed over fifty years of peace. Such have been the characteristics displayed by British military leaders and advisers of the Government when they have had the oppor- tunity and duty of bringing their influence to bear. But those who are in a position to advise the Government and people of this country on military matters (I use the word military in its broadest sense) have to face two facts : (I) There is no such thing as European civilisation. There is a certain amount of luxury, a standard of living, the use of scientific methods, occasional humanity, but no true civilisa- tion. Nor will there ever be such civilisation until war is regarded by all as an impossible outrage.
(2) The British peoples are anti-militaristic, uninterested as a rule in foreign affairs and slow to read the future : but their sympathies arc easily roused, and once so roused they will fight for what they consider right, and expect their military leaders to gain victory, and that speedily—as witness the sudden rousing of the nation over the invasion of Belgium in 1914 : over the Abyssinian question last year. In the present state of civilisation or rather non-civilisation of the world, a nation cannot make its voice heard on such questions unless its own position is secure.
Shortly after the conclusion of the Great War the British Government of the day laid down for the guidance of its military advisers, the axiom that there would be no European war for ten years. Within a brief period we nearly embarked on a war with Turkey. However little faith the military advisers of the Government had in the above somewhat optimistic forecast, they had to accept it ; it was neither their duty nor province to question it. This axiom held good until few months ago when the pressure of events caused the Govern- ment to scrap it. It is now the duty and province of the military advisers to assist the Government in placing the defences of the nation in order, however much they may regret the necessity for doing so.
In January, 1914, Mr. Lloyd George, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, stated in a public speech that the prospects of European peace were never brighter, and deprecated expendi- ture on armaments. Military men in touch with the realities of the situation knew that this forecast was delusive, that Germany intended on suitable occasion to attack France through Belgium, that in that event the British Empire would almost certainly oppose her, that the task would be far more formidable than this nation realised : but their position as servants of the Government forbade their voicing their views and fears. All they could do was to be prepared within the limits allowed them by Parliament and the Government. In consequence of the views held by the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the army estimates were cut by half a million, the Expeditionary Force had to fight without an adequate supply of machine-guns and ammunition. It was annihilated, but performed its task long enough to save the situation.
In ]914 the manufacturers in this country could not meet Lord Kitchener's dernimds for ammunition and arms. In this connexion I advise those interested to read an article on the subject in the English Review of December, 1933, entitled " Mr. Lloyd George : The War Office and Munitions." It will then be realised that modern warfare necessitates some prior consideration and preparation by the industrial firms of the country. But military advisers cannot order that such con- sideration and preparation take place ; only the Government, under mandate of the people, can do that : and the latter and the latter only decide whether military force is used. Nor are the military advisers of the Government ever likely to urge the adoption of conscription. During the Great War, an attempt was made by certain politicians to jockey Lord Kitchener into demanding conscription. Lord Kitchener rightly declined to do so, stating in effect that as chief military adviser it was his duty to state merely how many men were likely to be required, it was the duty of the Cabinet as a whole to decide how such men were to be provided. Dr. Jacks in this connexion is implying that military advisers will exceed their duty and province.
Further, we have to face the fact that the general staff of a hostile army is not likely, in the future, to waste time in attempting to annihilate a small Expeditionary Force cast on the Continent to gain time for the organisation of our resources ; but that such a general staff will attempt to strike from the start at the industrial centres of this country, to overawe and destroy the civil population. The nation should be grateful that there arc men who devote their lives and brains to preparations to meet such a possible situation, and that there are young men, who by joining the Air Force, Navy and Army show that they arc willing to devote life itself to provide for the security of our peoples. This nation has never at any time in its history over-insured in the matter of preparations for defence, and is unlikely to do so now.
As I read the nation's will, it is that we should support the League of Nations and Collective Security : the latter involves assisting the weaker nations as well as being assisted ourselves by others. The richer and more powerful a nation, the more the other members of the League are likely to expect of it. Hence the Government's anxiety as regards defence and the provision of the necessary supplies on which such defence depends. It would be fratricide to demand our young men to face the dangers that may ensue from the avowed policy of the majority of the nation ill-equipped for the task.
The writer of these lines has spent a life-time among British soldiers and those of our Dominions and has formed the conclusion that until all peoples adopt the simple, broad- minded views, tolerance, humanity and inarticulate religious faith of the average soldier, wars will not cease. It may appear a paradox, but among such men are to be found the true pacificists, men who face realities with clear eyes and courage, but who love peace, security and ordered government.
Aldermoor, Beaulieu, Hants. Major-General (Retired). Aldermoor, Beaulieu, Hants. Major-General (Retired).
Previous page
