Germany and Austria
IT is a first-rate irony that the proposal Of Germany and Austria to enter into a Customs Union should be • setting Europe by the ears, ' for nothing could be more desirable in itself than thereinoval Of fiscal barriers be- tween two friendly countries.. • A particular acuteness is ' given to the irony by the strong resemblance between the scheme of Germany and Austria. and the policy of regional economic agreements preached bY M. Briand as a preliminary stage' to the economic union of all Europe. M. Briand nevertheless feels constrained by other considerations to frown on the Austro-German proposal.
We hope that the British Government will not incon,. tinently join in the chorus of annoyance which is swelling in France and Czechoslovakia, but will earnestly try to, reconcile the very natural inclinations of Germany and Austria with the Treaty rights of other countries and with the presumed needs of French security. It must be admitted that Germany and Austria have acted tactlessly. They have been concocting this agreement for a Zollverein for at least a year, but when the German Foreign Minister; Herr Ctutius, went to Vienna the other day to put' the finishing touches. to it he said not a word about the purpose of his visit. The secret was, indeed, kept • with a strictness which is remarkable in these days of easy leakage. It is Plain., enough now that when Dr. Schober, the Austrian Foreign Minister, visited Berlin a year ago he went to make the first draft of the agreement. Germany and Austria would have done better to prevent suspicion —so far as that was possible—by taking the rest of Europe into their confidence.
They would have had a particularly good opportunity for general consultation at this moment. The Research Commission which is investigating the possibilities of M. Briand's scheme for the economic federation of Europe is sitting in Paris. Even _ if Germany and Austria had wished to keep their 'negotiations secret up to this point they might have used the meeting of the Commission as the occasion of a frank declaration. They could then have announced their plan with unusual relevance and point ; they could have appealed more convincingly than they. can hope to do • now to the precedents of the Customs Unions between Rumania and Jugoslavia and between Latvia and Estonia.
The clumsiness of Germany and Austria has, however, been confined to their procedure. There is no economic or political clumsiness in their desire to draw closer. together. Our own view is frankly that they cannot he kept permanently apart ; and when we are told—as France and Czechoslovakia tell us with every expression of horror—that the Customs Union is merely a preparation for the Anschluss, or political union, we do not attempt to deny that the Anschltas is in contemplation. No one can have watched the shaping of the educational curricula and the penal codes of both countries on the same model without detecting an intention to make political union easy when the hour strikes. All we would say is that though political union has our sympathy, there is no need whatever to disguise it.
Germany and Austria under the Peace Treaties have a perfect right to bring up their, grievances for revision. When they do so, however, they must appeal to the League and only to the League. Their cause will be enormously weakened if it can be proved that their method has been local manoetivre. Austria was left by the Peace Treaties in a cruelly isolated position. Vienna was like a beautiful head from which the body and limbs had been torn away. Vienna dismally tries to be still a great centre of finance and commerce, though all the sources which contributed to her power and accepted her direction have been wrested from her. Austria, pledged as a matter of honour to maintain her independence, is like the unhappy owner of some depreciated industrial share which has become a, liability. Until there can be revision, however, there is no getting away from the fact that the maintenance of Austria's independence, by Germany as Well as by herself, is an explicit duty. Let us quote Article 80 of the Treaty . of Versailles :— " Germany acknowledges and will respect strictly the inde- pendence of Austria within the frontiers which may-be fixed in a Treaty between that State and the Principal Allied and Associated Powers—she agrees that this independence shall be inalienable except with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations.!'
The objections of France, Czechoslovakia and, in a lesser degree, of Italy, to the proposed Zollverein are inspired by the dread of a new Germanic bloc. France has never forgotten that a Zollverein was one of Bismarck's principal instruments for forging the unity of the German Empire. In vain Germany and Austria point out that their plan is obviously not exclusive, as they deliberately invite other. countries to join . in it. France baldly retorts—and. the, echo of her words unfailingly comes from Czechoslovakia—that :the . Customs Union is a screen behind which French. security is being threatened. Security ! • France can never get away from. the word ; but we agree with her, in this respect if in no other, that Germany and Austria might have been expected to treat the ideal of disarmament with more considera- tion, for that ideal is bound to be affected by every move which can conceivably be represented as a danger to security. We can deplore the tactlessness of Germany and Austria for this reason, while_ fully accepting, as we do, their 'assurances that no blow against the Peace Treaties .was intended.
France and Czechoslovakia argue that the proposed Custcims Union would violate the Geneva Protocol of *1922, by . Which Austria, under the sponsorship of the League, - obtained a loan on the strict understanding that she would. do nothing "directly or indirectly" to compromise her independence. This provision about the maintenance of her independence was, of course, transferred from the clauses in the Treaty of Versailles restricting the relations of Germany and Austria and from the Treaty of St. Germain. 'Notoriously the purpose of the • Peace Treaties was to perpetuate the division of Germany and- .Austria' in the assumed interest of European Peace. We take quite andther view : that no peace is likely to be perthanent which postulates that division. • If all the nations are sincere in banning war, what danger can there possibly. be in a Germanic fusion ? All roads lead us back to this central question of sincerity.. • France may be expected to make some play with the Franco-German Commercial Treaty, for on the face of it it gives France the right to claim equality of treatment with Austria in the proposed Zollverein. France might do this to balk the scheme, but her argument would be capable of another application. Germany could reason- ably retort that a scheme which included France was not and could not be a menace to French safety. Mr. Henderson will be hard put to it to prevent_ European passions. from passing out of control, but it is quite possible that he will be able to bring good out of evil. After all, every removal of tariffs is to be heartily wel- comed. And if a new emphasis is given to the natural ties of Germany and Austria, no harm will be done by the need for thinking hard on this subject and facing for the first time one of the most vital of the future problems of peace,
Previous page
