Was Parliament Deceived?
A few members of the English Parliament who on Aug. 3 dared to gingerly
protest against the war may have had reason to complain about the hiding
of facts from the House of Commons. When such understandings can be made
without any one having an idea of their existence, then--so far as
England is concerned--the supervision of the Government, theoretically
being exercised by a Parliament, becomes a fiction.
Veiled Defensive Alliance.
As a matter of fact, Grey does not desire to have accepted as political
obligations the conversations of the French and English Army and Navy
General Staffs concerning the future plans of campaign which took place
from time to time in times of peace. However, the true tendency of this
agreement, for such it is, gives itself away in the promise to
immediately enter with France into a political and military exchange of
opinions in every critical situation; it means in realty nothing less
than a veiled defensive alliance which by clever diplomatic
manipulations can be changed without any difficulty to an offensive one,
for inasmuch as the English Government promises to consult and work
together with France, and consequently also with its ally, Russia, in
every crisis, before a serious investigation of the moments of danger,
it waives all right of taking an independent position.
How would England ever have been able to enter a war against France
without throwing upon itself the accusation of faithlessness against one
with whose plans for war it had become acquainted through negotiations
lasting through years?
Here a deviation may be permissible, which leaves for a moment the basis
of documentary proof.
If one considers how this agreement of such immeasurable
consequences was not only hidden from the British Parliament by the
Cabinet, but how to the very edge of conscious deceit its existence was
denied--in the year 1913 Premier Asquith answered a query of a member of
the House of Commons that there were no unpublished agreements in
existence which in a case of war between European powers would interfere
with or limit free decision on the part of the British Government or
Parliament as to whether or not Britain should take part at a war--then
certain reports making their appearance with great persistency in June,
1914, concerning an Anglo-Russian naval agreement are seen in a
different light.
Persons who were acquainted with the happenings in diplomacy then stated
that the Russian Ambassador in Paris, M. Iswolski, during the visit
which the King of England and Sir Edward Grey were paying to Paris, had
succeeded in winning the English statesmen for the plan of such an
agreement. A formal alliance, it was said, was not being demanded by
Russia immediately, for good reasons. M. Iswolski was attempting to go
nearer to his goal, carefully, step by step.
It had been preliminarily agreed that negotiations should be started
between the British Admiralty and the Russian Naval Attaché in London,
Capt. Wolkow. As a matter of fact Wolkow during June went to St.
Petersburg for a few days to, as was assumed, obtain instructions and
then return to London.
Grey's "Twisty" Answer.
These happenings aroused so much attention in England that questions
were raised in Parliament concerning them. It was noted how twisty
Grey's answer was. He referred to the answer of the Premier, already
mentioned, stated that the situation is unchanged, and said then that no
negotiations were under way concerning a naval agreement with any
foreign nation. "As far as he was able to judge the matter," no such
negotiations would be entered into later on.
The big Liberal newspaper, The Manchester Guardian, was not at all
satisfied with this explanation; it assumed that certain conditional
preliminary agreements might not be excluded.
This Russian plan, which was later worked out in St. Petersburg, went
into oblivion on account of the rapidly following European war. In the
light of the following revelation of Grey's agreement with France, the
news of the naval agreement desired by Iswolski assumed another aspect.
Let us return to the Anglo-French agreement. The following remarks by
the French Ambassador in London, reported by Grey, prove that, on the
ground of this agreement, France, with very little trouble, would be
able to make out of a diplomatic entanglement a case for Allies'
interest as far as England is concerned.