NOTES ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS FROM JULY 5 TO AUGUST 5
Prepared by Allan Westcott, Professor, U. S. Naval Academy
GERMAN REPARATIONS
Request for Moratorium.—On July 12 Germany presented to the Reparation Commission a formal request for complete relief from all cash payments of indemnity until January, 1923. In reply the commission insisted upon prompt payment of the 32,000,000 gold marks due on July 15 (after a reduction of 18,000,000 marks for delivery of coal and dyes), and set August 15, as the date for a decision on the question of a moratorium. The Special Commission on Guarantees returned to Paris from Berlin, and on July 19 reported that Germany had consented to Allied supervision of German finances, including budget, exports and imports, publication of statistics, and recovery of evaded capital. In view of this attitude on the part of Germany, it was thought a majority of the Reparation Commission would report favorably on delay or reduction of indemnity payments.
Reduced Private Debt Payments Denied.—At the same time as her request for a reparations moratorium, Germany presented directly to France a request for reduction from $10,000,000 to $2,000,000 of the monthly payments pledged by the German Government on debts of German nationals to Allied citizens contracted prior to the war. This request France refused in a sharp note setting 10 days as a limit for Germany to signify continuance of full payments. Upon a subsequent German refusal, France sent a 4-day ultimatum, with threats of seizure of German property in case of failure to comply.
Meeting of Premiers on August 7.—At the close of July, Premier Lloyd George sent to Premier Poincare, and also to the Belgian and Italian Governments, invitations to a conference in London on Aug. 7. The chief business of the conference was to be the question of delayed or reduced payments on the German indemnity, though the Tangier and Near East questions were also up for consideration.
England Demands Payment.—In an important note sent to France and other powers on August 1, the British Government declared that, in view of the insistence of the United States on payment of the British debt, Great Britain would be forced to insist on payment of debts owing to her, though she would have preferred a policy of general cancellation. The note, apparently intended for American reading, is summarized as follows:
London, August 1 (Associated-Press).—The British Government cannot treat the repayment of the Anglo-American loan as if it were an isolated incident in which only the United States and Great Britain had any concern, said the note addressed by the Earl of Balfour to France, Italy, Jugoslavia, Romania, Portugal and Greece.
Declaring it is regretfully constrained to request the French Government to make arrangements for dealing to the best of its ability with the Anglo-French loans, the British Government says it desires to explain that the amount of interest and repayment for which it asks depends less on what France and the other allies owe Great Britain than on what Great Britain has to pay to the United States.
The policy favored by his Majesty, the note states, is that of surrendering Great Britain's share of German reparations and writing off, through one great transaction, the whole body of inter-allied indebtedness.
"But if this is found to be impossible of accomplishment," the note says, "we wish it to be understood that we do not, in any event, desire to make a profit out of any less satisfactory arrangement. In no circumstances do we propose to ask more from our debtors than is necessary to pay our creditors.
"And while we do not ask more," it continues, "all will admit that we can hardly be content with less; for it should not be forgotten, though it sometimes is, that our liabilities were incurred for others, not for ourselves."
Pointing out in conclusion that it is not merely a question among the Allies, because former enemy countries also are involved, and the greatest debtor is Germany, the note declares that the government does not suggest, either as a matter of justice or expediency, that Germany should be relieved of her obligations to the other Allied States. But Great Britain would be prepared, subject to the just claims of other parts of the Empire, to abandon all further right to German reparations and all claims to repayment by the Allies provided this renunciation should form a part of a general plan whereby this great problem could be dealt with as a whole and a satisfactory solution found.
A general settlement, in the view of the British Government, the note says, would be of more value to mankind than any gains that could accrue from the most successful enforcement of legal obligations.
GERMANY
Bavaria. Asserts State Rights.—The German Government was in difficulties at the close of July, over the refusal of Bavaria to enforce the stringent federal laws recently enacted for safeguarding the republic, and directed against monarchist activities. Bavaria objected chiefly to what she regarded as federal interference and especially to the provision for the trial of offenders under the new act in a special federal court of Leipzig. Instead of promulgating the law, therefore, she proclaimed modified ordnances of her own.
Bavaria's action appeared in violation of Article XIII of the Weimar Constitution providing that "Reich's law breaks land law" (i.e., law of individual states). President Ebert evaded a crisis by sending a letter to Premier Lerchenfeld of Bavaria on July 27, citing the power of the Reich to make null and void the measure adopted by the Bavarian Diet, and calling upon the Bavarian Premier to consider whether it was not possible to avoid this action. A federal court at Munich was feasible if this offered a solution.
GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Civil War in Ireland.—Following the downfall in Dublin of forcible resistance to the Free State Government, the center of hostilities shifted . to Limerick and Southwestern Ireland. Limerick and also Waterford fell to the government forces on July 21. The Free State Troops attacking Limerick were estimated at about 700 and the irregulars about 1,000. Subsequently the government forces reported slow but steady progress, and strong support from the civil population. On July 30, they captured Tipperary and were closing in on Kilmallock.
ITALY AND THE NEAR EAST
Facta Cabinet Reorganized.—The Facta Cabinet in Italy resigned July 19, after 4 months' existence, during which the chief event was the Genoa Conference. Its overthrow was accomplished by a combination of Socialist, Democratic, and Catholic parties, the latter withdrawing their support owing to the government's failure to take stronger measures against the Fascisti.
Great difficulty was experienced in organizing a new ministry owing to the inability of leaders to get parliamentary support for a strong policy against either of the extreme elements in Italy—Fascisti on the one hand and Communists on the other. The Fascisti leader Mussolini on July 19 threatened open insurrection, declaring no cabinet that employed force against the Fascisti could rule in Italy. On the opposite side, the Socialists blocked ex-Premier Orlando's efforts to form a new cabinet by insisting that it be made up entirely from the parties by which the former cabinet had been overthrown. The old Facta Cabinet was finally reorganized, with ten members retained and five new ones added, without much change in its political alignment.
Greek Threats in the Near East.—On July 27, the Greek Government sent a note to the Allied powers declaring its intention to resume entire liberty to take what steps it thought fit, to end the war on the Turkish nationalists. At the same time troops to the estimated number of 25,000 were concentrated at the port of Rodosto and 70,000 along the whole Thracian front in an apparent threat against Constantinople.
Allied forces in the city (about 10,000 in addition to the British squadron) at once took precautionary measures, and the Allied Governments sent warnings to Greece. On July 31, Premier Lloyd George announced that Greece had reaffirmed her promise not to invade the neutral zone without the consent of the powers.
On July 30, Greece issued a proclamation declaring a regime of self government in the regions of Asia Minor occupied by the Greek troops, the new state to be known as Occidental Asia Minor. This move was contrary to the Allied peace proposals of last March, which provided for complete Greek evacuation.
These measures of King Constantine's Government were interpreted as efforts on his part to bolster up his power at home by assuming an aggressive policy abroad.
RUSSIA AND NORTH EUROPE
Close of Hague Conference.—On July 16, when the Hague Conference on Russia was on the point of breaking Up, the Russian delegates put forward new proposals in the form of a request for a statement of the total amount of compensation desired for foreign property in Russia, and an agreement to settle these claims so far as possible. The letter suggested that 90% of the claims could be settled by direct negotiations with private claimants. This new offer, though apparently indicating a shift of position on the part of the Soviet Government, served only to prolong the conference four days. The rejection of the Soviet proposals and the closing of the conference came on July 20, through the discovery that they called for de jure recognition of the Soviet Republic and for individual negotiations in each case between private claimants and the Soviet Government, with no guarantee of satisfactory settlement of claims.
"The task of the Hague," said Sir Philip Lloyd Greame, the British expert, "was to get a bilateral agreement with detailed provision for guarantees and with assurances to the non-Russian powers that the agreement would be carried out, but the Bolshevist Government insisted on treating with the people and taking matters out of the hands of the government."
"The Hague conference," continued Sir Philip, "brought the Russian Government face to face with actualities as never before. It has shown Russia the willingness of other countries to co-operate with her, while at the same time showing the inevitable character of the economic forces which govern co-operation.
"If Russia decides to pursue the policy foreshadowed by the Russian delegation, she will not merely be entering on a path to bring her back into the community of nations, she will be setting out en the road to the complete restoration of her economic life."
The conference in closing adopted a resolution pledging the powers represented to use their influence with their nationals to prevent the latter from accepting concessions in Russia involving property formerly belonging to foreigners without the consent of these former owners.
Polish Cabinet Crisis.—After the Ponikowski cabinet in Poland was forced to resign by President Pilsudski on June 2, there was a two months' struggle for supremacy between president and parliament. Two efforts to form a cabinet without a parliamentary majority ended in failure. On July 30, the president gave in to the will of the Nationalist majority in the Diet by calling on Dr. Nowak, rector of the University of Cracow, to organize a ministry.
The fall of the Ponikowski cabinet ended the work of two able leaders—Michalski, who set Poland on her feet financially; and Foreign Minister Skirmundt, who secured alliances with the Baltic States and with the Little Entente. Poland elects her first constitutional president this autumn.
Recognition of Baltic States.—A the close of July, the United States Government announced its decision to recognize the Baltic republics formed since the war from former Russian territory. These republics include Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Finland was recognized some months ago.
LEAGUE OF NATIONS
Approval of Mandates.—At the special (nineteenth) session of the League of Nations Council which opened in London on July 17, the mandate terms offered by France and Great Britain in the Near East were the special subject for consideration. . Both the British mandate for Palestine and the French mandate for Syria were formally approved on July 24, to go into force after settlement of certain questions at issue between France and Italy over the rights of Italian nationals in Syria. Speaking of Arab objections to the Palestine mandate, the Earl of Balfour declared the Arabs were fully protected and would secure liberty undreamed of under Turkish rule.
American Attitude Toward League.—In an exchange of letters in July, with Hamilton Holt, Secretary Hughes defined and defended the policy of the present United States Administration toward the League of Nations. Secretary Hughes justified the separate treaty with Germany, cited the accomplishments of the Washington Conference in the direction of peace, and, presented evidence to show that, while protecting American rights, the government had not needlessly delayed the execution of the mandate policy. In a letter dated July 19, Mr. Hughes said in part:
"In your observations you seem to imply that I have been invested with some authority to make this government a member of the League of Nations upon such reservations as I might propose. If you have any such notion, I must ask you to disabuse your mind of it. Entrance into the League of Nations upon any conditions could be accomplished only by treaty, and treaties cannot be made except in the constitutional manner.
"It is idle to propose what it is found cannot be effected. That it is not the way to make progress internationally or otherwise. What I said with respect to the treaty with Germany is applicable.
"Really I cannot see any reason why you should address me in the manner you have chosen, in view of the fact that the attitude of the administration upon the subject was frankly and definitely stated in President Harding's message to Congress in April, 1921.
The secretary then quoted the President's speech condemning the League because linked with the Versailles Treaty, and declaring our willingness to enter an "association to promote peace" for all nations without surrender of national sovereignty.
Plan for Disarmament.—On July 4, before the special League Commission on Disarmament, Lord Robert Cecil presented a draft treaty for reduction of armaments.
As a preface to his proposal, the British representative laid down five principles which provide an interesting amendment to the famous Article X of the Covenant of the League. These principles are as follows:
"1. No scheme for reduction of armaments can be effected which is not a general one.
"2. In the present state of the world no government could accept responsibility for a serious reduction of armaments unless it received some satisfactory guarantee of safety for its country.
"3. Such guarantee can be found only in a defensive alliance of all the countries concerned, binding them to come to the assistance of any one of them if attacked. It should be provided that the obligation to come to the assistance of an attacked country should be limited to those countries which belong to the same quarter of the globe.
"4. In cases where for historical, geographical or other reasons a country is in special danger of attack, detailed arrangements should be made beforehand for its defense.
"5. It is understood that all of the above resolutions are conditional on a reduction of armaments to an agreed scale being carried out and on the provision of effective machinery to insure such reduction being made and maintained."
Pledge of Mutual Support
These five resolutions, Lord Robert said, contained the essential element of his plan, but for purposes of elucidation he had drafted them into the form of a treaty which provides that "the high contracting powers hereby agree that if any one of them is attacked all the others will forthwith take such action as they may have agreed upon under Article IV of this treaty. This obligation, however, shall not come into force unless the naval, military and air forces of the party attacked shall have been reduced in accordance with the terms of the treaty."
Article IV reads: "In the event of any of the high contracting powers regarding itself as menaced by the preparations or action of any other state, whether a party to this treaty or not, it may so inform the secretary general of the League, who shall forthwith summon a meeting of the council of the League, and if the council by not less than a three-fourths majority shall be of the opinion that there is reasonable ground for thinking that said preparations or action do constitute a menace as alleged they shall report such representations to the government creating the menace in respect of such preparations or action as they may think right, and shall direct the permanent Military Commission of the League to submit plans for assistance to be given by the high contracting powers to the party menaced.
"Such plans if approved by three-fourths majority of the council shall become binding on the high contracting powers.
"Neither under this nor any other article of this treaty, however, shall any of the high contracting powers not being a European state be bound to furnish any naval, military or air force in Europe; or not being an American state, in America: or not being an Asiatic state in Asia; or not being an African state, in Africa."
Other articles in the draft provide for the right of inspection by League Commissioners of the armament situation, and a clause is added that nothing in this treaty shall be deemed to diminish the provisions in the covenant for maintaining the peace of the world.
For the present Lord Robert accepted as a compliment to his proposal the disarmament scheme proposed at the last meeting by Lord Esher, which provides that the restriction of land armaments be fixed by ratio, following the naval precedent at Washington. In this scheme Lord Esher fixed the unit for military and air forces at 30,000 men, with co-efficient, as follows: Belgium, 2; Czecho-slovakia, 3; Denmark, 2; France, 6; Great Britain, 3; Greece, 3; Italy, 4; Jugoslavia, 3; Poland, 4; Rumania, 3; Spain, 3; Switzerland, 2.
Some discussion took place on Lord Robert's scheme and it was then referred to a sub-commission to be examined in detail.—New York Times, 5 July, 1922.
The Cecil plan was subsequently adopted by the commission for presentation to the League Assembly in September. The Chilean representative on the commission also stated that the whole question of military and naval disarmament would be laid before the Fifth Pan-American Conference at Santiago, next March.
Germany Not to Enter League.—Following Premier Lloyd George's statement that it was desirable that Germany should enter the League of Nations at the next assembly. Premier Poincare intimated that Germany's entry should be delayed until she had given, in the language of the League Covenant, "effective guarantees of her sincere intention to observe her international obligations." Later it was said that the British premier would make the admission of Germany a condition to the proposed cancellation of the French debt.
In view of the French attitude, Germany manifested no eagerness to apply for admission, apparently satisfied to remain outside in the company of the United States.
UNITED STATES AND LATIN AMERICA
Philippine Appeal for Independence.—To the Philippine appeal for independence, supported by every member of both houses of the Philippine Legislature and presented in July, President Harding replied that, with every regard for Philippine achievements, aspirations, and loyalty, the time was not yet ripe for independence."
In press comments, the McEnery Resolution (accompanying ratification of the peace treaty with Spain) was quoted as evidence of our promise of independence, and the assertion was made that failure to carry out this promise would mean insurrection. It was noted also that aside from their strategic importance, the Philippines contained valuable raw materials
including vast quantities of hardwood, and practically all the hemp in the world.
Canada for Permanent Peace Treaty.—On July 12, Premier Mackenzie-King and Minister of Defense Graham of Canada called on Secretary Hughes in Washington to propose a new treaty between the United States and Canada perpetuating the ideas of the Rush-Bagot Agreement, now, 105 years old, and providing for permanent peace without defenses on the United States-Canadian frontier. In Washington the proposal was favorably received and a treaty anticipated.
To End Control in Dominica.—On July 4, Secretary Hughes issued a statement announcing the conditions under which American military forces and administration would be withdrawn from the Dominican Republic. The statement referred to the proclamation made by Admiral Robinson in June of 1921 which it had been impossible to carry out, and declared that the present plan was based on conferences with Dominican leaders. It provides for: (a) a provisional government which will appoint a cabinet to take over executive duties; (b) concentration of American forces at from one to three points, and maintenance of order by the Dominican National Police; (c) a convention with the United States recognizing the validity of orders and bond issues under the American administration, and enforcement of the Convention of 1907, so long as any bonds of the issues of 1918 and 1922 remain unpaid; (d) withdrawal of American forces after a general election and assumption of office by a constitutional president.
To ascertain whether this plan met the approval of the Dominican people, Mr. Sumner Welles of New York was appointed envoy extraordinary to investigate and report on political conditions in Dominica.
Tacna-Arica Arbitration Agreement.—To end the deadlock in the conference between Chili and Peru over the Tacna-Arica dispute. Secretary Hughes in June made proposals for arbitration. On July 17, it was announced that these proposals were acceptable to both States in the following modified form:
"That the arbitrator decide whether a plebiscite shall be held in the disputed province of Tacna-Arica, as originally provided by the Treaty of Ancon.
"That in case a plebiscite is decided on, the arbitrator shall fix the conditions under which it is to be held.
"That if the decision is against a plebiscite, Chili and Peru will enter into direct negotiations to decide to whom the province belongs, and that in the event these direct negotiations do not result in an agreement within a specified time, both sides will request an exercise of good offices by the United States to aid in a settlement."—Literary Digest.
Yap Treaty Proclaimed.—On July 17, the United Slates Government proclaimed the Yap treaty as in full force, and for the first time published the complete text.
The text of the treaty proper provides:
"Subject to the provisions of the present convention, the United States consents to the administration by Japan, pursuant to the aforesaid mandate, of all the former German islands in the Pacific Ocean lying north of the equator."
Article II provides that the United States and its nationals shall receive all the benefits of the engagements of Japan defined in Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the mandate, notwithstanding the fact that the United Stales is not a member of the League of Nations. These articles of the mandate prohibit the slave trade or forced labor, prohibit military training of natives otherwise than for internal police purposes and local defense of the territory, and prohibit the establishment of military or naval bases or fortifications. It is further agreed between the high contracting parties, the treaty sets forth, as follows:
- Japan shall insure in the islands complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship which are consonant with public order and morality; American missionaries of all such religions shall be free to enter the islands and to travel and reside therein, to acquire and possess property, to erect religious buildings and to open schools throughout the islands; it being understood, however, that Japan shall have the right to exercise such control as may be necessary for the maintenance of public order and good government and to take all measures required for such control.
- Vested American property rights in the mandated islands shall be respected and in no way impaired;
- Existing treaties between the United States and Japan shall be applicable to the mandated islands;
- Japan will address to the United States a duplicate of the annual report on the administration of the mandate to be made by Japan to the council of the League of Nations;
- Nothing contained in the present convention shall be affected by any modification which may be made in the terms of the mandate as recited in the convention unless such modification shall have been expressly assented to by the United States.
Article III provides:
The United States and its nationals shall have free access to the island of Yap on a footing of entire equality with Japan or any other nation and their respective nationals in all that relates to the landing and operation of the existing Yap-Guam cable, or of any cable which may hereafter be laid or operated by the United States or by its nationals connecting with the Island of Yap.
The rights and privileges embraced by the preceding paragraph shall also be accorded to the government of the United States and its nationals with respect to radio telegraphic communication; provided, however, that so long as the Government of Japan shall maintain on the Island of Yap an adequate radio-telegraphic station co-operating effectively with the cables and with no other radio stations on ships or on shore, without discriminatory exactions or preferences, the exercise of the right to establish radio-telegraphic stations on the island by the United States or its nationals shall be suspended.
Article IV declares that in connection with the rights embraced by Article III specific rights, privileges and exemptions, in so far as they relate to electrical communications, shall be enjoyed in the Island of Yap by the United States and its nationals.
No censorship or supervision is to be exercised over cable or radio messages or operations.
Nationals of the United States are to have complete freedom of entry and exit in the islands for their persons and property.—New York Times, 18 July, 1922.
FAR EAST
Conditions in South China.—On July 15, it was reported that four of the naval vessels controlled by Sun Yat-sen at Canton had deserted, leaving only two cruisers, two destroyers, and two transports under his orders. According to a dispatch of August 2, President Sun's long expected troops had returned from the North and were defeated in an attack on General Chen Chiung-ming's lines, 130 miles north of Canton.
In Manchuria the defeated General Chang Tso-lin had made new alliances with the Anfu leader, Tuan Chi-jui, and with Sun Yat-sen, and had forced General Wu to resume active military operations. The Chinese parliament met on August 1, with members in attendance sufficient for a quorum. Parliament and President Li Yuan-hung were reported in agreement over the adoption of a permanent constitution for China.
Warning from Japan to China.—Early in July, the Japanese government issued a warning to China that unless the Chinese Government took adequate steps to prevent the recurrence of outrages against Japanese in Manchuria, Japan would dispatch troops from Korea and assume responsibility for the protection of its nationals. Bandits, on June 28, raided the Manchurian town of Tou-tae-kon, near the Korean border, set fire to the Japanese consulate, and killed two Japanese, one Korean, and three Chinese. This, according to the Japanese statement, was the third affair of this kind since September, 1920.
Japanese Policy.—Mr. Isaac F. Marcosson, American correspondent in the Far East, upon his return in July, expressed the view in the New York Times, that Japan had actually changed her policy toward China from aggressive penetration to the cultivation of friendly feeling. He declared that the Japanese economic situation made it impossible for her to continue her aggressive policy or wage war on a modern scale. Retrenchment was essential to avoid national bankruptcy.
Regarding China, he believed General Wu Pei-fu to be an honest and strong leader, but "unification of China will be a slow process because of endless jealousy and corruption."