II

It is not, however, enough to draw up a just and far-sighted peace

with Germany. If we are to offer Europe an alternative to Bolshevism

we must make the League of Nations into something which will be both

a safeguard to those nations who are prepared for fair dealing with

their neighbours and a menace to those who would trespass on the

rights of their neighbours, whether they are imperialist empires or

imperialist Bolshevists. An essential element, therefore, in the

peace settlement is the constitution of the League of Nations as the

effective guardian of international right and international liberty

throughout the world. If this is to happen the first thing to do is

that the leading members of the League of Nations should arrive at an

understanding between themselves in regard to armaments. To my mind

it is idle to endeavour to impose a permanent limitation of armaments

upon Germany unless we are prepared similarly to impose a limitation

upon ourselves. I recognize that until Germany has settled down

and given practical proof that she has abandoned her imperialist

ambitions, and until Russia has also given proof that she does not

intend to embark upon a military crusade against her neighbours, it

is essential that the leading members of the League of Nations should

maintain considerable forces both by land and sea in order to preserve

liberty in the world. But if they are to present a united front to the

forces both of reaction and revolution, they must arrive at such an

agreement in regard to armaments among themselves as would make it

impossible for suspicion to arise between the members of the League

of Nations in regard to their intentions towards one another. If the

League is to do its work for the world it will only be because the

members of the League trust it themselves and because there are no

rivalries and jealousies in the matter of armaments between them. The

first condition of success for the League of Nations is, therefore, a

firm understanding between the British Empire and the United States

of America and France and Italy, that there will be no competitive

building up of fleets or armies between them. Unless this is arrived

at before the Covenant is signed the League of Nations will be a sham

and a mockery. It will be regarded, and rightly regarded, as a proof

that its principal promoters and patrons repose no confidence in its

efficacy. But once the leading members of the League have made it

clear that they have reached an understanding which will both secure

to the League of Nations the strength which is necessary to enable

it to protect its members and which at the same time will make

misunderstanding and suspicion with regard to competitive armaments

impossible between them its future and its authority will be assured.

It will then be able to ensure as an essential condition of peace that

not only Germany, but all the smaller States of Europe, undertake to

limit their armaments and abolish conscription. If the small nations

are permitted to organize and maintain conscript armies running each

to hundreds of thousands, boundary wars will be inevitable, and all

Europe will be drawn in. Unless we secure this universal limitation we

shall achieve neither lasting peace nor the permanent observance of

the limitation of German armaments which we now seek to impose.

I should like to ask why Germany, if she accepts the terms we consider

just and fair, should not be admitted to the League of Nations, at

any rate as soon as she has established a stable and democratic

government? Would it not be an inducement to her both to sign the

terms and to resist Bolshevism? Might it not be safer that she should

be inside the League than that she should be outside it?

Finally, I believe that until the authority and effectiveness of the

League of Nations has been demonstrated, the British Empire and the

United States ought to give France a guarantee against the possibility

of a new German aggression. France has special reason for asking for

such a guarantee. She has twice been attacked and twice invaded by

Germany in half a century. She has been so attacked because she has

been the principal guardian of liberal and democratic civilization

against Central European autocracy on the continent of Europe. It is

right that the other great Western democracies should enter into an

undertaking which will ensure that they stand by her side in time to

protect her against invasion should Germany ever threaten her again,

or until the League of Nations has proved its capacity to preserve the

peace and liberty of the world.