CHAPTER I

OLD EUROPE’S SUICIDE

“For History of Times representeth the magnitude of actions and

the public faces and deportments of persons, and passeth over in

silence the smaller passages and motions of ‘men and matters.’”

--_Francis Bacon_

BRIGADIER-GENERAL CHRISTOPHER BIRDWOOD THOMSON

General Thomson comes of an English family of soldiers. He is about

forty-five years old, and has a career of active service behind him,

having served as subaltern four years in the Boer War, then having

passed the Staff-College, and subsequently having been employed by the

War Office in Balkan service.

At the very beginning of the Great War he was engaged in Staff work

at the French front, and in 1915 to 1917 was the British military

representative in the Balkans. In the Palestine campaign he saw active

service in the field until the occupation of Jerusalem.

When the Supreme War Council was convened at Versailles, Thomson was

recalled and was attached as British Military Representative in 1918

remaining until the conclusion of its peace negotiations. In 1919 he

retired with rank of Brigadier General--Royal Engineers.

He has now entered the field of politics as a member of the Labour

Party and is the selected candidate for Parliament, standing for

Central Bristol. He was a member of the Labour Party commission which

recently visited Ireland; and his services in the intensive campaign

work of the Labour Party in Great Britain have occupied the past year.

[Illustration: THE PYRAMID OF ERRORS]

OLD EUROPE’S

SUICIDE

OR

THE BUILDING OF A PYRAMID

OF ERRORS

An account of certain events in Europe during

the Period 1912-1919

By

BRIGADIER-GENERAL

CHRISTOPHER BIRDWOOD THOMSON

[Illustration]

NEW YORK

THOMAS SELTZER

1922

Copyright, 1922, by

THOMAS SELTZER, INC.

_All Rights Reserved_

DEDICATION

THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED TO ONE

I HAVE ALWAYS CALLED

“LA BELLE SAGESSE,”

WHO GREATLY

LOVES HER COUNTRY AND HER

GARDEN BY

THE “SLEEPING WATERS”.

PREFACE

This book is a retrospect covering the period 1912-1919. It begins with

the first Balkan War, and ends with the Peace Conference at Paris.

Many of the events described have been dealt with by other writers,

and the only justification for adding one more volume to an already

well-stocked library, is that the author was an eye-witness of all

that he relates and enjoyed peculiar opportunities for studying the

situation as a whole. To impressions derived from personal contact

with many of the principal actors in this world-drama has been added

the easy wisdom which comes after the event. With these qualifications

a conscientious effort has been made to arrange the subject matter in

proper sequence and to establish some connection between cause and

effect--not with a view to carping criticism, but rather to stress the

more obvious errors of the past and glean from them some guidance for

the future.

It would be a rash statement to say that a European conflagration was

the inevitable outcome of a little Balkan War, but metaphor will not

be strained by comparing that same little war to a spark in close

proximity to a heap of combustible material, a spark fanned in secret

by ambitious and unscrupulous men, while others stood by, and, either

from ignorance or indifference, did nothing to prevent an inevitable

and incalculable disaster. That, as the present writer sees it, is the

parable of the Balkan Wars. And so in the first part of this book,

which deals with the period 1912-1914, the selfish intrigues of the

Central Empires are contrasted with the equally vicious proceedings

of the Imperial Russian Government, with the ignorance and inertia

which characterized Great Britain’s Continental policy and with the

vacillations of the Latin States. In later chapters, comments are made

on the diplomatic negotiations with the neutral Balkan States in 1915

and 1916, on the conduct of the war and on the Treaty signed June 28,

1919, in the Palace at Versailles.

The title refers to the downfall of the Central Empires, which were the

last strongholds of the aristocratic traditions of Old Europe, both

from a social and a political point of view. It is submitted that these

Empires perished prematurely through the suicidal folly of their ruling

classes. Under wiser statesmanship, their autocratic governmental

system might have survived another century. Germany and Austria-Hungary

were prosperous States, and were assured of still greater prosperity if

events had pursued their normal course. But pride, ambition, impatience

and an overweening confidence in efficiency without idealism destroyed

their plans. They put their faith in Force, mere brutal Force, and

hoped to achieve more rapidly by conquest a commercial and political

predominance which, by waiting a few years, they could have acquired

without bloodshed. In the end, the military weapon they had forged

became the instrument of their own destruction. Too much was demanded

from the warlike German tribes; an industrial age had made war an

affair of workshops, and against them were arrayed all the resources of

Great Britain and America. Blind to these patent facts, a few reckless

militarists who held the reins of power goaded a docile people on to

desperate and unavailing efforts, long after all hope of victory had

vanished, and thus committed suicide as a despairing warrior does who

falls upon his sword.

The Prussian military system collapsed in the throes of revolution and

the rest of Europe breathed again. Materialism in its most efficient

form had failed, and to peoples bearing the intolerable burden

imposed by armaments came a new hope. Unfortunately, that hope was

vain. With the cessation of hostilities, the suicide of Old Europe

was not completely consummated. After the signing of the Armistice,

enlightened opinion, though undoubtedly disconcerted by the rapid march

of events, expected from the sudden downfall of the Central Empires a

swift transition from the old order to the new. The expectation was

not unreasonable that four years of wasteful, mad destruction would

be a lesson to mankind and, in a figurative sense, would form the

apex of a pyramid of errors--a pyramid rising from a broad base of

primitive emotions, through secret stages of artifice and intrigue,

and culminating in a point on which nothing could be built. A gloomy

monument, indeed, and useless--save as a habitation for the dead.

In an evil hour for civilization, the delegates who met to make the

Peace in Paris preferred the prospect of immediate gain to laying

the foundation of a new and better world. They, and the experts who

advised them, saw in the pyramid of errors a familiar structure, though

incomplete. Its completion demanded neither vision, nor courage, nor

originality of thought; precedent was their only guide in framing

Treaties which crowned the errors of the past and placed its topmost

block.

The chickens hatched at Versailles are now coming home to roost.

Democracy has been betrayed, our boasted civilization has been exposed

as a thin veneer overlaying the most savage instincts. Throughout

all Europe a state of moral anarchy prevails, hatred and a lust for

vengeance have usurped the place not only of charity and decent conduct

but also of statesmanship and common-sense. Peoples mistrust their

neighbours and their rulers, rich territories are unproductive for lack

of confidence and goodwill.

These ills are moral and only moral remedies will cure them. Force

_was_ required, and has done its work in successfully resisting

aggression by military states now humbled and dismembered. But Force is

a weapon with a double edge, and plays no part in human progress.

While this book endeavours to draw some lessons from the war and from

the even more disastrous peace, at the same time it pleads a cause.

That cause is Progress, and an appeal is made to all thinking men and

women to give their attention to these urgent international affairs,

which affect not only their prosperity, but their honour as citizens

of civilized States. The first step in this direction is to inform

ourselves. If, in the following pages, a little light is thrown on what

was before obscure, the writer will feel that his toil in the execution

of an unaccustomed task has been rewarded.

C. W. THOMSON

LONDON.

December 6, 1921.

CONTENTS

PAGE

PREFACE xi

CHAPTER

I. A DAY ON THE DANUBE 1

II. BELGRADE--OCTOBER, 1912: A VIEW FROM A WINDOW 10

III. THE BATTLE OF KUMANOVO 20

IV. MACEDONIA--1912 35

V. ALBANIA--1912-1913 49

VI. THE SECOND BALKAN WAR AND THE TREATY OF BUCHAREST 59

VII. TWO MEN WHO DIED 69

VIII. “1914” PEACE AND WAR 74

IX. THE NEUTRAL BALKAN STATES--1915 84

X. SLEEPING WATERS 99

XI. THE DISASTER IN RUMANIA--1916 108

XII. THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION AND THE RUSSO-RUMANIAN

OFFENSIVE--1917 127

XIII. A MIDNIGHT MASS 143

XIV. “WESTERNERS” AND “EASTERNERS” 147

XV. THE PEACE CONFERENCE AT PARIS--1919 161

XVI. LOOKING BACK AND LOOKING FORWARD 177

OLD EUROPE’S SUICIDE

CHAPTER I

A DAY ON THE DANUBE

“When the snows melt there will be war in the Balkans,” had become an

habitual formula in the Foreign Offices of Europe during the first

decade of the twentieth century. Statesmen and diplomats found comfort

in this prophecy on their return from cures at different Continental

spas, because, the season being autumn, the snow had still to fall, and

would not melt for at least six months. This annual breathing space was

welcome after the anxieties of spring and summer; the inevitable war

could be discussed calmly and dispassionately, preparations for its

conduct could be made methodically, and brave words could be bandied

freely in autumn in the Balkans. Only an imminent danger inspires fear;

hope has no time limit, the most unimaginative person can hope for the

impossible twenty years ahead.

Without regard either for prophecies or the near approach of winter,

Bulgaria, Servia, Greece and Montenegro declared war on Turkey at

the beginning of October, 1912. The Balkan _Bloc_ had been formed,

and did not include Rumania, a land where plenty had need of peace;

King Charles was resolutely opposed to participation in the war, he

disdained a mere Balkan alliance as unworthy of the “Sentinel of the

Near East.”

Bukarest had, for the moment anyhow, lost interest; my work there

was completed, and a telegram from London instructed me to proceed to

Belgrade. The trains _via_ Budapest being overcrowded, I decided on the

Danube route, and left by the night train for Orsova, in company with

a number of journalists and business men from all parts of Rumania. We

reached the port of the Iron Gate before dawn, and found a Hungarian

steamer waiting; soon after daybreak we were heading up stream.

Behind us lay the Iron Gate, its gloom as yet unconquered by the

sunrise; on our left the mountains of North-Eastern Servia rose like

a rampart; on our right the foothills of the Carpathians terminated

abruptly at the river’s edge; in front the Danube shimmered with soft

and ever-changing lights; a stillness reigned which no one cared to

break, even the crew spoke low, like pious travellers before a shrine.

War’s alarms seemed infinitely distant from those glistening waters set

in an amphitheatre of hills.

“How can man, being happy, still keep his happy hour?” The pageant

of dawn and river and mountain faded as the sun rose higher; dim

outlines became hard and sharp; the Iron Gate, surmounted by eddying

wisps of mist, looked like a giant cauldron. The pass broadened with

our westward progress revealing the plain of Southern Hungary, low

hills replaced the mountains on the Servian bank. A bell rang as we

stopped at a small river port, it announced breakfast and reminded

us, incidentally, that stuffy smells are inseparable from human

activities, even on the Danube, and within sight of the blue mountains

of Transylvania.

My travelling companions were mainly British and French, with a

sprinkling of Austrians and Italians. To all of them the latest

development in the Balkan situation was of absorbing interest, and they

discussed it incessantly from every point of view. Their attitude, as

I learnt later, was typical, not one of them had failed to foresee

everything that had happened; in the case of the more mysterious

mannered, one had a vague impression that they had planned the whole

business, and were awaiting results like rival trainers of racehorses

on the eve of a great race. These citizens of the Great Powers were,

in their commerce with the Balkan peoples, a curious mixture of patron

and partisan. The right to patronize was, in their opinion, conferred

by the fact of belonging to a big country; the partisan spirit had

been developed after a short residence in the Peninsula. This spirit

was perhaps based on genuine good will and sincere sympathy, but it

certainly was not wholly disinterested. There was no reason why it

should have been. No man can, simultaneously, be a good citizen of two

countries; he will nearly always make money in one and spend it in the

other. Patriotism is made to cover a multitude of sins, and, where

money is being made, the acid test of political professions is their

effect on business.

Listening to the conversation on the steamer I was astonished by the

vivacity with which these self-appointed champions urged and disputed

the territorial claims of each Balkan State in turn. Remote historical

precedents were dragged in to justify the most extravagant extension

of territory, secret treaties were hinted at which would change the

nationality of millions of peasants, and whole campaigns were mapped

out with a knowledge of geography which, to any one fresh from official

circles in London, was amazing.

From breakfast on, the babel of voices continued, and it was curious

to note how the different nationalities grouped themselves. The

British were, almost to a man, pro-Bulgar, they wanted Bulgaria to

have the greater part of Macedonia and Thrace, some of them even

claimed Constantinople and Salonika for their protégés; they were on

the whole optimistic as to the success of the Allies. The French and

Italians urged the claims of Servia, Greece and Rumania in Macedonia;

in regard to Albania the French were in favour of dividing that country

between Servia and Greece, but this latter suggestion provoked vehement

protests from the Italians. The three Austrians hardly joined in the

discussion at all, one of them remarked that he agreed with the writer

of the leading article in the _Neue Freie Presse_ of a few days back,

who compared the Balkan Peninsula to a certain suburb of Berlin, where

there was one bank too many, and where, as a consequence, all banks

suffered. In the Balkan Peninsula, according to this writer, there was

one country too many, and a settled state of affairs was impossible

until one of them had been eliminated; he didn’t say which.

I asked whether a definite partition of the territory to be conquered

was not laid down in the Treaty of Alliance. No one knew or, at least,

no one cared to say. There seemed to be a general feeling that Treaties

didn’t matter. The journalists were in a seventh heaven of satisfaction

at the prospect of unlimited copy for several months to come; the

business men expected to increase their business if all went well. On

that Danube steamer the war of 1912 was popular, the future might be

uncertain, but it was full of pleasant possibilities.

I thought of London and remembered conversations there three weeks

before the declaration of war. The general opinion might have been

summarized as follows: The Bulgars were a hardy, frugal race, rather

like the Scotch, and, therefore, sympathetic; they were ruled over by a

king called Ferdinand, who was too clever to be quite respectable. As

for Servia, the British conscience had, of course, been deeply shocked

by the murder of the late King, and the Servian Government had been

stood in the diplomatic corner for some years, but the crime had been

more or less expiated by its dramatic elements and the fact that it

had taught everybody a little geography. King Nicholas of Montenegro

was a picturesque figure and had an amiable habit of distributing

decorations. In regard to Greece, there were dynastic reasons why we

should be well disposed towards the descendants of the men who fought

at Marathon, not to mention the presence in our midst of financial

magnates with unmistakably Greek names. Lastly, the Turks. In London,

in 1912, these people enjoyed considerable popularity; they were

considered the only gentlemen in the Balkans, the upper-class ones of

course. Admittedly Turkish administration was corrupt and the Turks

had a distressing habit of cutting down trees everywhere, but their

most serious defect was that they were a little sticky about affording

facilities for Western enterprise. This latter consideration was

considered really important. Matters would improve, it was thought,

after some changes had been made in the Consular Service.

The war had come at last. Few people in England knew its cause or its

objects; many thought and hoped the Turks would win. We had played the

part of stern moralists when a debauched and tyrannical youth received

summary justice at the hands of his outraged subjects, but we watched

lightheartedly the preparations for a struggle which would soak the

whole Balkan Peninsula in blood.

Night was falling as we passed under the walls of the old fortress of

Belgrade. During the last hour the conversation had taken a purely

business turn about coal concessions in the Ergene Valley[1] and a

French company which was being formed to exploit Uskub. Both localities

were in Turkish territory, but would change their nationality after the

war, if the Balkan Allies were the victors.

The steamer ran alongside the jetty; the journey was, for most of us,

at an end. Every one was in high spirits; the near prospect of dinner

in an hotel had produced a general feeling of optimism in regard to the

Near Eastern question. One felt it wouldn’t be the fault of any one

on our steamer if things went wrong. Our advice would always be given

gladly and ungrudgingly, and we would accept any responsibility except

that of putting into execution our own plans. We considered we were

playing quite an important part in the Balkan drama, but, belonging as

we did to big countries or Great Powers, once the fighting began we

were forced to stand aside.

Belgrade seemed half asleep already. The city is built on a ridge

overlooking the junction of the Save with the Danube. From the quay

a long line of white houses was visible, flanked at one end by the

Cathedral and a dark mass of trees, at the other by a large, ugly

building, behind which stands the Royal Palace. Lights were few and

far between, the aspect of the town was cold and inhospitable, it was

evidently no busy centre eager to swallow up travellers and take their

money. The Servian capital has nothing to offer to pleasure seekers,

and sightseers must be content with scenery. Across the river, half

a mile away, the lights of the Semlin cast a glare upon the sky, one

could even hear faintly the strains of a Hungarian military band.

Only three of my fellow travellers remained on the landing stage; they

were Austrians. Two of them were going to Semlin in the steamer, the

third was, like myself, waiting for his baggage to be disembarked. This

man and I were to see a good deal of each other during the months that

followed; he was the Austrian Military Attaché at Belgrade.

The steamer whistle gave the signal for departure and farewells

were exchanged. Just before stepping on board, one of the departing

Austrians said, “Well, Otto, when next we meet I suppose the Turks will

be here,” to which the military representative of the Dual Monarchy

replied, “The sooner the better.” He then got into his cab and drove

off to the house where, for three years, he had enjoyed all the

privileges due to his diplomatic functions.

I had spent the whole day with a crowd of talkative and communicative

men, but, as a rickety old cab took me up the hill towards the town,

I remembered more distinctly what the comparatively silent Austrians

had said than anything else that I had heard. These men seemed to mix

up private business and politics less than the others; they gave the

impression of thinking on big lines, of representing a policy of some

sort.

In October, 1912, many people still believed that the British

Government had a Balkan policy. The war had been foreseen for so

many years, its repercussion on Asia Minor and the whole Mohammedan

world could hardly fail to be considerable, while the risk of the

conflagration spreading, so as to involve all Europe, was universally

recognized. Under such circumstances, it seemed incredible that those

responsible for the maintenance of the British Empire would leave

anything to chance. Of course, we British had a policy, but personally

I hadn’t the faintest idea what it was, nor, for the moment, could I

think of any one who had.

At last the hotel was reached. A sleepy “concierge” showed me to my

room, a vast apartment whose outstanding feature was its painted

ceiling. This work of art was oval in shape and consisted of a vault

of almost inky blue spangled with stars, round which were cherubs and

angels in appropriately exiguous costumes. The subject was perhaps

meant to be a celestial choir, but the artist had somehow missed his

mark; the faces were neither angelic nor cherubic; they wore an air

of mystery not unmingled with self-satisfaction. The figures emerged

in stiff, conventional fashion from the edges of the ceiling into the

central blue, and, if it hadn’t been for their lack of dress and look

of conscious superiority, they might have been a collection of quite

ordinary men, gathered round an oval table stained with ink. One of the

cherubs bore a strong facial resemblance to a distinguished diplomat of

my acquaintance; he was whispering something in his neighbour’s ear,

and the latter seemed amused. The neighbour was a cherub, not an angel;

he had a queer, wizened face of somewhat Slavonic type.

I was tired out, but I did not sleep well. I had been thinking about

British policy in the Balkans before I fell asleep, and had strange

dreams which were almost nightmares. It was all the fault of the

ceiling; that cherub was so exactly like the diplomat and I dreamed

he was telling the other one a secret, this explained the whispering,

and that it was an important State secret, connected with my visit to

Belgrade.

Who knows? The artist who had painted that hideous ceiling may have

done so in a mood of irony. He may have chosen, as models for his

cherubs, some well-known personages engaged in propping up a crazy

structure known as “the balance of power in Europe.”

Old Europe's Suicide; or, The Building of a Pyramid of Errors An Account of Certain Events in Europe During the Period 1912–1919 · 第 1 / 16 章