INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE HAGUE CONFERENCES
INTERNATIONAL LAW.--In the civilized world to-day each community is
made up of citizens who have a right to the protection of the laws of
their community and who in turn have the duty of obedience to those
laws. During recent centuries improved means of communication and
transportation have brought all parts of the world closer together, and
there has grown up in the minds of many enlightened thinkers the idea
that the whole civilized world ought to be regarded as a community of
nations. In the past the relations of nations to one another have been
very nearly as bad as that of persons in savage communities. Quarrels
have usually been settled by contests of strength, called wars.
Believers in the idea of the community of nations argue that wars would
cease or at least become much less frequent if this idea of a community
of nations were generally accepted.
The body of rules which nations recognize in their dealings with each
other is usually spoken of as _international law_. As to certain rules
of international conduct the civilized nations of the world have been in
general agreement for many centuries. Among such rules are those for the
carrying out of treaty obligations, the punishment of piracy, the
protection of each other's ambassadors, the rights of citizens of one
country to the protection of the laws of the country they are visiting,
the protection of women and children in time of war.
As in community law so also in international law rules have frequently
grown up as matters of custom. In the second place agreements have
sometimes been reached through negotiation and written out in the form
of treaties between the two nations concerned. In the latter half of the
nineteenth century several attempts were made to strengthen
international law by means of general conferences of the nations. One of
the most famous of these was the Conference of Geneva in 1864, which
reached a number of valuable agreements on the care of wounded soldiers
and gave official international recognition to the Red Cross. At the
very end of the century occurred the first of the two famous
international conferences at The Hague.
Toward this growing movement in the direction of the setting up of a
community of nations in which each has equal rights and equally
recognizes the force of international law, the German Empire has taken
an attitude of opposition. She has steadily refused to accept her place
as a member of a family of nations. Her leaders have taken the ground,
as explained in Chapter II, that strong nations should control weaker
nations whenever it is to their own interest. As a principle this is
just as barbarous as if in a community the man with the strongest
muscles or the biggest club should be permitted to control the actions
of his neighbors who happened to be weaker or less effectively armed.
Just as the strong brutal man must be taught that laws apply to him as
well as to the weaker members of the community, so must Germany learn to
respect the laws of nations and the rights of weaker peoples.
THE CALL FOR A WORLD PEACE CONFERENCE.--In spite of the rapid growth
of armaments in Europe after 1870 there was growing up among many of the
leading thinkers of the nations a movement looking toward permanent
peace in the world. The movement soon gained great strength among all
classes. Peace societies were formed, meetings were held, and pamphlets
were prepared and distributed. Toward the close of the century public
opinion in most countries was leaning more and more toward the idea of
universal peace. Governments, however, were slower to take up the
problem. Strangely enough the first government to take action in the
matter was that of Russia, at the time the most autocratic of all the
nations of Europe.
Two years before the close of the century Czar Nicholas II sent out an
official invitation calling upon the nations to send representatives to
an international conference to discuss the problem of the prevention of
wars. The Czar pointed out the dangers which must surely result if the
military rivalry of the nations were not checked. He referred to the
fact that European militarism was using up the strength and the wealth
of the nations and was bringing about a condition of military
preparedness which must inevitably lead in the end to a war more
disastrous and terrible than any war in the history of mankind. The Czar
did not go so far as to suggest complete and immediate disarmament.
Every one knew that Europe was not ready to consider so violent a change
of policy. The Russian invitation merely proposed that the conference
should try to agree upon some means for putting a limit upon the
increase of armaments. It suggested that the nations should agree not to
increase their military or naval forces for a certain limited period,
not to add to their annual expenditure of money for military purposes,
and to consider means by which later on there might be an actual
reduction of armaments. It was necessary to avoid the jealousies which
might arise among the great powers if the capital of one of them were
selected for the conference, so the Czar suggested that the meeting take
place at The Hague, the capital of small, peace-loving Holland.
THE FIRST HAGUE CONFERENCE.--The conference called by the Czar met on
May 18, 1899. All the great nations of the world sent delegates, as did
many of the smaller nations. In all, twenty-six governments were
represented, twenty of which were European. The United States and Mexico
were the only countries of the New World which sent representatives. The
queen of Holland showed her appreciation of the honor conferred upon her
country by placing at the disposal of the conference, as its meeting
place, the former summer residence of the royal family, the "House in
the Woods," situated about a mile from the city in the midst of a
beautiful park.
DISARMAMENT.--Although the menace of the tremendous armaments of
Europe had been the chief reason for the conference, absolutely nothing
was accomplished toward solving that problem. This failure was largely
due to the opposition of Germany, which, as the strongest military power
in Europe, would listen to no suggestion looking toward the limitation
of military force. At one of the early meetings of the conference a
German delegate brought out clearly and unmistakably his government's
opposition to any consideration of the subject. In a sarcastic and
arrogant speech he defended the German system of compulsory military
service and her expenditures for military purposes. While it is
extremely doubtful, in view of the difficulties in the way of any
general policy of disarmament, that much could have been accomplished by
the conference even under the most favorable circumstances, this stand
on the part of the German government meant the immediate and absolute
defeat of the suggestion. The other nations of Europe had established
their large military systems as a measure of defense against Germany, so
that in the face of that government's refusal to agree to the policy of
limiting armaments, no neighboring country on the European continent
could adopt it. In the conference, the matter was dismissed after the
adoption of a very general resolution expressing the opinion "that the
restriction of military charges ... is extremely desirable for the
increase of the material and moral welfare of mankind."
ARBITRATION.--The conference met with a somewhat larger measure of
success when it came to discuss the question of the peaceful settlement
of international disputes, though here also the attitude of the German
government stood in the way of complete success. The United States from
the days of John Jay had taken the lead among the nations of the world
in the policy of settling international disputes by peaceful means.
Quite different has been the traditional policy of Prussia, which
throughout its history has relied upon force to accomplish its purposes.
All the German wars of the nineteenth century could easily have been
averted if the Prussian government had honestly desired to settle its
quarrels by peaceful methods. She has taken the ground, however, that
arbitration can only work to her injury, since she is better prepared
for war than any other nation and can mobilize her army more rapidly
than any of her neighbors. "Arbitration," said one of her delegates at
The Hague, "would simply give rival powers time to put themselves in
readiness, and would therefore be a great disadvantage to Germany." This
point of view shows clearly how the German leaders place the growth of
German power far above such considerations as right and justice.
THE HAGUE PEACE TRIBUNAL.--The struggle in the conference over the
question of arbitration centered about the establishment of a permanent
tribunal or international court of arbitration to which nations might
bring their disagreements for settlement. The United States delegation
favored making a definite list of the kinds of disputes which nations
would be compelled to bring to the tribunal for settlement. On the other
hand, the Kaiser himself sent a dispatch from Berlin in which he spoke
strongly against anything in the nature of an arbitration tribunal.
Largely through the efforts of Mr. Andrew D. White, head of the American
delegation, the German government was brought to modify its stand.
Germany finally agreed to the creation of the tribunal, but only on
condition that in no case should the submission of a dispute to it be
compulsory. The tribunal was to be established, but it would have the
right to render a decision only in those cases which the disagreeing
nations might decide to submit to it.
The Hague Tribunal is not made up of permanent judges like an ordinary
court. It consists of persons (not more than four from each country)
selected by the various nations from among their citizens of high
standing and broad knowledge of international affairs. From this long
list any powers between whom there is a disagreement may choose the
persons to form a court or tribunal for their special case.
THE SECOND HAGUE CONFERENCE.--The conference of 1899 had proved an
absolute failure so far as disarmament and compulsory arbitration were
concerned. In fact the years immediately following were marked by two
destructive wars: that between Great Britain and the Boers of South
Africa, and the war between Russia and Japan. These wars made it clear
that with the applications of modern science warfare had become so
terrible that, if the nations could not arrange by agreement for its
abolition, they should at least take steps to lessen its horrors. This
was the chief reason back of the invitation for a second Hague
Conference, which was issued by the Czar at the suggestion of President
Roosevelt. Forty-seven nations--nearly all the nations of the world---
were represented when the conference assembled on June 15, 1907.
Attempts were made to reopen the questions of disarmament and compulsory
arbitration, but without success. Germany again stood firmly against
both suggestions. The conference consequently confined its efforts
almost entirely to drawing up a code of international laws--especially
those regulating the actual conduct of war--known as "the Hague
Conventions." They contain rules about the laying of submarine mines,
the treatment of prisoners, the bombardment of towns, and the rights of
neutrals in time of war; they forbid, for example, the use of poison or
of weapons causing unnecessary suffering. Even on these questions
Germany stood out against certain changes which would have made war
still more humane. But her delegates took part in framing the Hague
Conventions; and Germany, like all the other powers later engaged in the
Great War, accepted those conventions by formal treaty, thus binding
herself to observe them.
RESULTS OF THE HAGUE CONFERENCES.--Leaders of the movement for
universal peace felt that in spite of the small success of the Hague
Conferences a definite beginning had been made. Many of them were very
hopeful that later conferences would lead to larger results and that
even Germany would swing into line. There were plans to hold a third
conference in 1914 or 1915. As we look back upon the years between 1907
and 1914, it seems hard to understand the general blindness of the world
to the certainty of the coming struggle. Armaments were piled up at a
faster rate than ever. Naval armaments also entered into the race. From
the point of view of bringing about permanent peace in the world we must
view the conferences at The Hague as having hopelessly failed.
They did accomplish something, however. Arbitration was accepted by the
nations of the world, in principle at least. Moreover, the conferences
helped the cause of international law by showing how easily
international agreements could be reached if all the nations were
honestly in favor of peaceful decisions. Some day when the present war
has taught the world the much needed lessons that the recognition of
international law is necessary to civilization, and that the nations
must join together in its enforcement, the work begun at The Hague in
1899 and 1907 will be taken up once more with larger hope of success.
SUGGESTIONS FOR STUDY.--1. How are ordinary laws enforced?
How is international law carried out? Why the difference? 2.
Enumerate the instances in which questions of international
law have been brought up during the present war. 3. Look up
the history of the Red Cross movement. 4. Why did the Hague
Conferences fail to attain their great objects? 5. Summarize
what was actually accomplished by the Conferences. 6. Has the
history of the Hague Conferences any lessons which will be of
value after this war?
REFERENCES.--_War Cyclopedia_ (C.P.I.), under "Red Cross,"
"Hague Conferences." See also publications of the World Peace
Foundation; _International Conciliation_ (C.P.I.); _War,
Labor, and Peace_ (C.P.I.).