Comment of an English Editor

_Valentine Chirol, former foreign editor of The London Times,

published the following in that newspaper on March 26, 1918:_

The publication of Prince Lichnowsky's memorandum furnishes evidence

which even the most skeptical Englishman can hardly question of the

peculiar system of dualism practiced by the German Foreign Office in the

conduct of its diplomacy abroad. To those who had opportunities of

observing its methods at close quarters this is no new revelation. The

German Foreign Office has almost invariably conducted its diplomatic

work abroad through two or more different channels, for it was always

too tortuous and complicated to be intrusted to any single agent. There

was the public policy directed toward more or less avowable ends to be

propounded in official dispatches and conversations, and there was "the

higher policy" to be promoted by means of discreet propaganda in the

press and in society, and especially by appropriate appeals to the

prejudices or interests of political and financial and commercial

circles. Hence in the more important posts abroad it was the habit of

the Wilhelmstrasse to rely mainly upon the Councilor of Embassy both to

check the proceedings of the Ambassador and to manipulate all the

complicated threads of its diplomatic network in which, for various

reasons, it was deemed inexpedient for the Ambassador to get himself

entangled, sometimes lest inconvenient disclosures might impair his

influence with the Government to which he was accredited, and

sometimes--as in the case of Prince Lichnowsky in London, and of the

late Prince Radolin in Paris--because the Ambassador's personal sense of

honor or his belief in the superiority of honorable statesmanship

recoiled from the duplicity of "the higher policy." * * *

I gained an insight into this complex machinery when I went to Berlin as

correspondent of The Times, in the early years of the present Emperor's

reign, through Baron Holstein, who was then known as the "eminence

Grise" of the German Foreign Office from the commanding influence he

wielded without the slightest ostentation of power. Owing to accidental

circumstances, I came into much closer intimacy with him than he was

wont to allow, not merely to journalists, but even to the chief foreign

diplomatists in Berlin; and, subject to occasional intermittences when

he resented somewhat ferociously my expositions of German policy, I

maintained friendly relations with him long after I had ceased to reside

in Berlin and he had himself outlived the Emperor's favor, for which he

lacked the courtier's obsequiousness. He had been bred in the

Bismarckian tradition; he had been a member of the old Chancellor's

staff throughout the Franco-Prussian war, and had acted as his

confidential agent when he was Councilor of Embassy in Paris under Count

Harry von Arnim, whose sensational downfall he helped to bring about at

Bismarck's behest. Although in other respects a man of great integrity

and with many admirable qualities, including, besides a certain rather

cynical frankness, a thoroughly un-Prussian contempt for the gewgaws of

official life, he was so saturated with the Wilhelmstrasse tradition

that he was rather proud than otherwise of the unsavory part he had

played toward his Paris chief, and had, therefore, the less hesitation

in disclosing to me, when he thought it served his purpose, the

existence of equally peculiar relations between Count Wolf-Metternich,

then Councilor of Embassy in London, and the then Ambassador, Count

Hatzfeld.

In the face of such a confession as Prince Lichnowsky's, it would be

amusing, were it not so pitiful, to see the same British politicians who

were so egregiously duped by Germany's "secret" diplomacy before the war

still venting their chagrin in the House of Commons, not on their German

"friends," by whom they were constantly fooled, and are apparently quite

prepared to be fooled again tomorrow, but upon the British Foreign

Office, whose timely appreciation of the German menace they invariably

derided and whose endeavors to forearm the country against it they did

their utmost to defeat.

Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918 Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2 · 第 395 / 400 题