BALKAN QUARRELS

Since the seventies the conditions have changed fundamentally in

Austria, and also, perhaps, in Bavaria. Just as here a return to

Pan-German particularism and the old Bavarian policy is not to be

feared, so there a revival of the policy of Prince Kaunitz and Prince

Schwarzenberg is not to be contemplated. But by a constitutional union

with Austria, which even without Galicia and Dalmatia is inhabited at

least to the extent of one-half by non-Germans, our interests would

suffer; while, on the other hand, by the subordination of our policy to

the point of view of Vienna and Budapest, we should have to "épouser les

querelles de l'Autriche."

We, therefore, had no need to heed the desires of our allies. They were

not only unnecessary but dangerous, inasmuch as they would lead to a

collision with Russia if we looked at Eastern questions through Austrian

eyes. The transformation of our alliance with its single original

purpose into a complete alliance, involving a complexity of common

interests, was calculated to call forth the very state of things which

the constitutional negotiations were designed to prevent, namely, war.

Such a policy of alliances would, moreover, entail the loss of the

sympathies of the young, strong, and growing communities in the Balkan

Peninsula, which were ready to turn to us and open their market to us.

The contrast between dynastic and democratic ideas had to be given clear

expression, and, as usual, we stood on the wrong side. King Carol told

one of our representatives that he had made an alliance with us on

condition that we retained control of affairs, but that if that control

passed to Austria it would entirely change the basis of affairs, and

under those conditions he could no longer participate. Matters stood in

the same position in Serbia, where against our own economic interests we

were supporting an Austrian policy of strangulation.

Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918 Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2 · 第 345 / 400 题