THE POSSIBILITY OF WAR BETWEEN BRITAIN AND AMERICA. SUCH A WAR IS
BEING PREPARED NOW. WHAT ARE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE TO DO ABOUT IT?
Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy is one of the most vivid and provocative
members of the House of Commons. He qualifies great abilities by a
certain tactlessness which has won him an unpopularity altogether
beyond his merits. The other day, for example, when he was in America
he confided to an interviewer, who quoted some trivial comment I had
made upon the Labour Party, that I had “gone gaga.” In that manner he
made reverence to my seniority of twenty years. He now asks me to say
something for his forthcoming book, “Will Civilization Crash?” It is, I
assume, a respite from the gaga sentence; and gladly do I halt on the
road to Dr. Voronoff or the crematorium to salute the still-unmellowed
vigour of my friend’s intelligence.
He has done a very useful, very competent, very stimulating book. I am
happy to recommend it. I do not think it would be easy to better his
summary of the complex of forces that make for war in the world to-day.
He has a good clear sense of fact, and of the size of a fact and the
weight of a fact; and if, in his culminating chapter, “The Only Road,”
he does a little seem to fade, it is only where we all fade. Because,
although the omens of another great war are as plain now as they were
in 1907, the forces to which one can turn to stem the drift seem
relatively even more confused and feeble than they were in the days
when King Edward the Peacemaker flitted amiably about the Continent.
David Lubin made his treaties for economic controls with every country
upon earth, the League of Nations Society met thinly ever and again to
hear the discreet counsels of Sir Willoughby Dickinson and Mr. Aneurin
Williams, and Sir Charles Walston preached a federal constitution for
Europe.
In those days one relied very much on the common sense of mankind. I
will confess I was taken by surprise by the Great War. Yet I saw long
ahead how it could happen, and wove fantastic stories about it, I let
my imagination play about it, but at the bottom of my heart I did not
feel and believe it would really be let happen. I did not suspect that
Lord Grey, the German Emperor, and the rest of them were incompetent
to that pitch. And when at last it did happen, and that profession of
ruthless insensitive mediocrities, the military profession, was given
power for four years of stupid, clumsy, and inconclusive massacre and
destruction, I still clung to a delusion that at the end the common
sense of mankind would say quite definitely, “Never again,” to any such
experience, and would be prepared to revise its ideas of nationality,
empire loyalty, race competition, and propagation, soundly and
effectively as soon as it could for a moment struggle out of the mud
and blood and reek in which it was entangled. Whether the phrase “the
war to end war” was my contribution to the world or not, I cannot now
remember. My mistake was in attributing any common sense to mankind.
To-day the huge majority of people in the world think no more about the
prevention of war than a warren of rabbits thinks about the suppression
of shot-guns and ferrets. They just don’t want to be bothered about it.
It is amazing how they accept the things that will presently slaughter
them.
The other day my wife and I were sitting on the lawn of a pleasant
seaside hotel. Charming young people in pretty wraps raced down to
the water to bathe; others came chatting from the tennis courts.
The sea front below was populous with a happy crowd; the sands gay
with children. The faint sounds of a distant band on the pier were
punctuated rather quaintly by practice gunfire from a distant fort.
About us, in chairs of the most comfortable sort, sat the mature and
prosperous, smiling pleasantly at the three military aeroplanes that
manœuvred overhead. “Wonderful!” they said.
Of the hundreds of people in sight then, many scores will certainly
be killed in horrible ways if war comes in the next twenty years, they
will be suffocated by lethal gases, torn to ribbons by explosives, sent
limping and crying for help with frightful mortal mutilations, buried
and smashed and left to die under collapsed buildings. Many more will
be crippled; most perhaps impoverished. But they weren’t worrying.
They weren’t taking life as seriously as that. Across the trim turf
came a group of military officers, discussing some oafish “idea” of a
landing, of “operations,” and so forth, and casting no shadow at all
upon the smiling people about them. Just the same fine sort of fellows
they were, agreeably dull-witted, as sent hundreds of thousands of
Englishmen to cruel and useless deaths in France.
They passed, and we heard a note of anxiety from an adjacent
bathchair. So after all there was some one who saw it as well as
ourselves! We listened, but it was only an old gentleman worried by
the morning’s newspaper, vexed at the last reprieve of Sacco and
Vanzetti and troubled by another fall in the British birth-rate. He was
expostulating about it to his stout and elderly wife, who assented as
by habit and seemed chiefly preoccupied with her knitting.
He did not know what the world was coming to, he said. Lucky old boy!
He never may.
I doubt if there was a human being in sight who was ever likely
to read Commander Kenworthy’s admirable chapter on the application
of Science in Battle or his other on War in the Air, and learn the
pleasures awaiting those whose share in the next war may include a
whiff of diphenyl chloroarsine. Perhaps they will know everything that
is practically important about this delicious substance long before
they know its name. They may even try to call it by some quite wrong
name before they choke. It is very conveniently administered by air
bomb in the form of an intensely irritating smoke which can penetrate
most gas-masks yet devised. Says the “1926 Manual of Chemical Warfare”
quoted by Commander Kenworthy:--
“In man slight and transitory nasal irritation is appreciable
after an exposure of five minutes to as little as one part of
diphenyl chloroarsine in two hundred million parts of air, and
as the concentration is increased the irritation shows itself
sooner and in rapidly increasing severity. Marked symptoms are
produced by exposure to one part of diphenyl chloroarsine in fifty
million parts of air, and it may be stated in general that this
concentration forms the limit of tolerance of ordinary individuals
for an exposure lasting five minutes. A concentration of one part
in ten million will probably incapacitate a man within a minute
from the pain and distress, and nausea and vomitting accompany an
exposure of from two to three minutes of this concentration....
These substances are generally used to cause such sensory
irritation that the victim is unable to tolerate a respirator.”
Then the victim tears it off, and the other gas with which the region
has been soaked, the killing gas, gets him.
When the lieutenant-commander raised the question of teaching the use
of gas-masks to children in the infant schools during the debate on
the Air Estimates in the House of Commons in 1927, he was greeted with
laughter by the members present. Nothing could better illustrate the
happy carelessness with which we move towards the next catastrophe. The
air manœuvres over London this past summer have demonstrated clearly
that it will be almost impossible to prevent the copious gassing of
that great warren within a few hours of the opening of any new European
conflict of first-class rank.
The gravest chapters in this book are not so much the recital of the
novel and enhanced horror, for civilians quite as much as for soldiers,
of the next war, as the excellent and disturbing study of the gathering
rivalry of the United States and Britain in naval affairs, and the
discussion of the possibility of a war between these two halves of the
English-speaking world. The stupid professionalism of the experts is
largely to blame, and the still more stupid readiness of the present
governments in both Britain and America to follow the lead of these
obsessed gentlemen. Whether a war between the United States and Great
Britain is to be regarded as a tolerable possibility does not enter
into the philosophy of the naval monomaniacs on either side of the
water. Their business is to make Britain “safe” from the United States
and the United States “safe” from Britain, and they are quite capable
of calculating on Japan as an ally in such a war. The wholesome
brotherly jealousy of our two people is to be fostered and inflamed
in the cause of armament and preparedness to the fighting pitch. The
rivalries of industrialists and oil manipulators are to be dragged into
the elaborating quarrel.
The reader must turn to Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy’s book to realize
how far this obscene foolery with human welfare has gone already and
how easily it may go further. He shows how step by step the trouble may
be worked up until the two great masses of English-speaking people find
themselves upon different sides in the alliances of a new war that will
outdo all the destructions and miseries of 1914, as that outdid the
Napoleonic wars.
Very good and convincing, too, is the summary of the activities of
the League of Nations, and the very complete demonstration that that
ill-planned and ill-supported assembly has fallen back even from the
poor courage of its earlier enterprises. As a means of settlement for
minor international difficulties, which the states concerned want
settled, it has a considerable usefulness, but as a guarantee against
graver quarrels it is beneath contempt.
It is more than useless because it is dangerous; a great number of
people in Europe and America are persuaded that it is a sort of war
preventative, and that when they have paid their subscription to a
local branch of the League of Nations Union and been to a lecture or a
garden-party once a year under its auspices, they have done all that
they can be reasonably required to do to secure world peace for ever.
Upon many such excellent people the existence of the League of Nations
acts as a mischievous opiate. They would be far more actively and
intelligently at work against the war-makers, if it did not exist to
lull them into a false security.
But when I reach Chapter the Nineteenth, which is to tell us what is to
be done, I find, as I have remarked already, a certain fading in the
tones of our author’s voice. He is for an alliance to suppress war;
and he points out very clearly that the United States, Great Britain,
Holland, and Switzerland could prohibit war to all the rest of the
world to-morrow--if they chose. Between them they
“control the finance of the whole world. No nations breaking the
peace could hope for any financial help against their combined
boycott. England, America, and Holland between them control the
greater part of the world’s supplies of petroleum, Russia being
the only large-scale producer of oil in an independent position.
England and Holland between them control the world’s supplies
of rubber. England and America between them control the greater
part of the world’s supplies of cotton and copper, Russia again
producing comparatively small quantities of cotton and copper
independently. England and France and Belgium, if she adhered, as
is highly probable, control the greater part of the tropically
produced edible fats. Most of the wool and jute is controlled by
the British Empire.
“Without money, oil, cotton, wool, rubber, copper, zinc, jute, tin,
or edible fats no war on the modern scale could be waged for very
long. A very large proportion of the meat and wheat of the world
would also be controlled by this group of peace-keepers. Do not let
us involve ourselves in complications about aggressive Powers or
who is to blame in any war. To do so would simply be to cloud the
issue.”
Let us, in short, simply put our collective foot down and say, “Stop
that war!” and it will stop.
That is an excellent passage. It should be given out as a dictation
lesson in every school in the English-speaking world. We, just
ourselves, can stop war almost completely.
But who are “we”?
America, Britain, Holland, Belgium, and Switzerland, with France and
Germany in accord, will be the reply. But in what form are they to do
it? There the lieutenant-commander boggles and remains vague. Because
you see there is no way of getting these Powers together except by
getting them together, and that means a federal merger of so much of
their independent sovereignty as concerns their foreign relations.
Before we can have peace these Powers must form a league to enforce
peace. That means no tinpot debating society of every state, big or
little, barbaric or civilized, strong or feeble, at Geneva, with no
powers worth speaking about, but a real permanent league and alliance
of these, the only really war-potent states, and _a sincere surrender
of independent action_ on the part of all of them for the general good.
Well, not one of the communities named is even slightly prepared for
such a step. It would shock them more than any declaration of war could
possibly do. And until the common sense of these communities can be
raised to the level of realizing this, they will continue to drift as
they are drifting--to another shattering war catastrophe.
I suspect that the author of this book before me knows that as well
as I do. But there is Hull to consider. What would happen to the
lieutenant-commander’s majority if he advocated plainly and simply
putting the Empire under a greater League? I quite realize he cannot
afford to take so grave a risk of extinction and frustration.
A phrase, now popular in America, seized upon him in the ensuing
hesitation, and was for the moment “The Only Road.” Yet it is not a
road out or anything like a road. It is just another piece of empty,
fruitless American “idealism” utterly worthless to the world at large.
War is to be “outlawed.” A wonderful word! Senator Borah finds the
phrase suits his voice, and I gather it has the approval of that
champion international visitor and retriever of foreign orders and
honorary degrees, President Nicholas Murray Butler. Between these
gentlemen and Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy I note much friendliness
and intimacy exists. He has been in windy, unsubstantial company,
where phrases and good feeling count for more than effective action.
You are to “outlaw” war. You are just to make a treaty between the
Powers concerned saying as much--and there you are! You leave those
Powers completely untrammelled by their declaration. Indeed, you leave
everything as it was before. But you say it.
Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy gives a treaty projected by Mr. Houghton,
“speaking in his private capacity as a citizen”--and only so far in
earnest--which is probably the most vacuous treaty ever proposed. At
present, peace, for an indefinite period, exists legally between all
these great Powers; nevertheless “a hundred years’ peace agreement
between the United States and Great Britain and, perhaps, other Powers”
is to be signed with much fuss and ceremony--“in the most solemn
manner.” I can see the impressive gatherings that could be imposed
upon the affair, the parties, the megaphoned and broadcast speeches,
the grip of hand and hand, the noble, rich, respectable emotions.
Royalty would have to be present, and Washington--it would surely be
Washington--would be as full of silk hats and uniforms as a Buckingham
Palace garden-party. No intimations of any method of settling all
possible issues conclusively without war are made in this resonant
phantom of a proposal. To do that would be to limit sovereignty.
I am sorry I cannot share Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy’s faith in this
magic word “Outlawry” and its stately solemnization. I accept all his
premonitions of another great war; they are only too convincing; but I
believe that the ending of war is a far more complex, laborious, and
difficult task than such mere gesticulations as this imply. A great
change is needed in the teaching of history and the training of the
young citizen, a substitution of a biological for a merely economic and
political conception of human life, before we can begin to hope for
the secure establishment of these world controls upon which alone an
enduring world peace can be sustained.
In the meantime the most effective resistance to the approach of
another great war lies in the expressed determination _now_ of as
many people as possible that they will have nothing to do with it,
that they will not fight in it, work for it, nor pay taxes when it
comes--whatever sort of war it is.
Pacificism is very ineffective, and has an unpleasant flavour if it
is adopted after war has arrived; the time for active pacificism is
while peace still rules. People who have made no effort to avert war
cannot very well resist and grumble when through their tacit invitation
war takes hold of them. The last war was a war to end war, and the
politicians and statesmen have not made good. So now is the time for a
great pacificist effort. Now is the time for people who want to delay
and avert a catastrophe before the more deliberate organization of a
world peace can be achieved, to make it clear that the war-makers will
have to reckon with immense defections. That is the really practicable
anti-war measure to attempt now, but it is much more likely to lead to
jail than to impressive ceremonial junketings at the White House.
_2 October, 1927._