The hope of Europe—one good hope at least—is the new attitude of
France under the Herriot Government. In his great speech defending the
acceptance of the London Agreement it was significant that loud cheers
were raised when he said that an end had been put to “the romantic idea
that in order to make certain of the fruits of victory Germany must
be ruined.” France, he said, must no longer count only on force and
ultimatums. At present she needed to rest, to restore her finances,
to build up her population. “Reassure the mothers!” he cried amidst
passionate applause from the Left. “That also is patriotism.” Those
words to the mothers of France found an echo in the hearts of all
those women who have lost their sons. France above all, dreads a new
sacrifice of youth, and the policy of Poincaré failed because it seemed
to lead to that necessity, and aroused the fear of the peasant farmers
and small shopkeepers who remember their dead sons.
The London Agreement, based on the Dawes Report, may break down in its
financial operations. I believe it will, for the reasons I have given.
But those words of Herriot renouncing the romantic idea of Germany’s
ruin as the fruits of victory for France promise a way of further
compromise and conciliation if the burden of the London Agreement
cannot be fulfilled, literally, by the German people, or if the effect
of fulfilment is disastrous to other nations.
The London Agreement, after all, is only the first step towards the
pacification of Europe, and its greatest benefit will be its clearing
the way for other steps along the road to stable conditions and general
security. The first of these is the demilitarisation of Europe, a
relief from the crushing costs of great standing armies, preceded by
absolute guarantees to prevent the re-arming of Germany. “The central
fortress of Europe,” said Herriot, “must be demolished, and the German
democrats must aid us.” That was a figure of rhetoric, for at the
present time the “fortress” of Germany is dismantled of great artillery
and under the power of French guns. But the French Premier was holding
out a new hope for the world when he promised that France would base
her security upon the moral guarantee of the world powers acting
through the military control of Germany by the League of Nations in a
general scheme of disarmament.
One other Conference and attempt at settlement will arise out of
the London Agreement. That is the question of inter-allied debts,
overshadowing the financial relations of the world and the cause of
grave anxiety and much antagonism. At the present time Great Britain
is the only country paying off her war debts. In spite of payments to
the United States which are weighing heavily upon her financial health,
she is not receiving a penny from France or other countries to which
she lent far more than she borrowed from the United States. If Germany
is able to pay substantial reparations to France, Belgium and Great
Britain, it will be an easy matter of arithmetic to write off many of
these debts all round. I do not think it is going to be as easy as all
this, because the future of German reparations is vastly uncertain.
Nevertheless it is impossible for England to demand her “pound of
flesh” from France if Germany is reprieved. I think England will act
more generously than she can afford for the sake of good will all
round, and I hope the United States will help her to be generous....
If all that could be cleared away, Europe and the whole world would
indeed be in possession of a fair field of hope in which we could sow
and reap new harvests in the security of peace. There is bound to be
much trouble, argument, friction, heart-burning, before that work is
accomplished, yet we are moving slowly along to that endeavour, and
there is a light in the sky beyond the jungle of all the undergrowth in
which international relations are entangled.