NOTES ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS FROM SEPTEMBER 25 TO OCTOBER 25
Prepared by Allan Westcott, Professor, U. S. Naval Academy
NEAR EAST
Armistice Signed at Mudania.—On October 11 an armistice agreement ending hostilities between Greece and the Turkish, Nationalists was signed at Mudania, on the Sea of Marmora, by military representatives of the Turks and the Allied Powers. The terms were those previously agreed upon by Great Britain and France, and presented by General Harrington, the British representative, on behalf of the Allies. The armistice made the following provisions:
- Greek evacuation of Eastern Thrace within fifteen days under supervision of Allied missions and troops, and transfer of civil control to Turkey within thirty days.
- The Turks to be allowed 8,000 gendarmerie in Thrace (2,000 originally proposed by the Allies) to reinforce the civil authorities.
- Allied missions and forces to be withdrawn within thirty days after the Greek evacuation.
- New neutral zones of Allied occupation established in the Chanak and Ismid areas (the line running about fifteen kilometers from the coast of the Dardanelles and forty kilometers from the coast of the Bosphorus); and the Constantinople neutral zone to extend about thirty miles west of the Tchatalja line.
- The western boundary of the Turkish possessions in Thrace to follow the Maritza river from its mouth to the Bulgarian boundary.
The Greek delegates refused to sign this agreement, but the fulfillment of its terms by Greece was guaranteed by the Allied powers. Greek military evacuation of Thrace began on October 15, and was accompanied by an exodus of a large part of the 500,000 Greek population.
Details of Negotiations.—On September 29 the Turkish National Assembly replied favorably to the Allied joint Note of September 23, and in accordance with this note the armistice conference met at Mudania on October 3, with military representatives of Great Britain, France, Italy, Greece, and the Turkish Nationalists.
The Turkish demands presented by General Ismet Pasha and calling for evacuation of Thrace within eight days were declared unacceptable. After a rupture on October 5, the conference met again on October 7, with a more conciliatory attitude on the part of the Turks.
In the meantime Foreign Minister Curzon and M. Poincare met in Paris and reached an agreement upon the terms which were subsequently accepted. After submission to the Turkish Assembly, these terms were approved and embodied in an armistice agreement as stated above.
Near East Peace Conference.—In accordance with the Allied joint Note of September 23, accepted by the Turks, a peace conference was to follow the Mudania armistice. The date of this conference was later set for November 20, and Lausanne, Switzerland approved as the meeting place. The idea of a preliminary Allied conference to settle upon financial and economic terms for Turkey was abandoned.
New Regime in Greece.—Following the abdication of Constantine of Greece and the accession to the throne of his son George, former Premier Venizelos accepted the duty of special Greek ambassador in foreign capitals, though he refused to return to Athens and resume a leading role in Greek politics. M. Politis, who served as Foreign Minister under Venizelos, accepted this office in the new government. Parliamentary elections were set for November 13. The British, Belgian, Italian, and other diplomatic representatives at once visited the palace, indicating a favorable attitude toward the governmental change.
GREAT BRITAIN
Change of Ministry.—A meeting of Conservative members of parliament at Carlton House, London, on October 19, decided by a vote of 187 to 87 to enter the next elections as a separate party with its own leader and program. This decision ended the Liberal-Conservative coalition which had supported the Lloyd George Ministry since 1916. It was made against the opposition of Mr. Austin Chamberlain, Lord Balfour, and other leaders of the independent wing of the party, who argued that separation of the older parties would throw the government ultimately into the hands of the Labor Party. On the other hand Mr. Bonar Law and other Conservatives held that Premier Lloyd George had lost the confidence of the country, and that it was more important for the Conservative party to stand together on its own platform, than to win the election by a coalition.
On October 19 Mr. Lloyd George called on the King to present the resignation of his cabinet. Mr. Bonar Law was requested to form a new ministry with assurance of the continuance of Lord Curzon as Minister of Foreign Affairs. The new premier asked the king to dissolve parliament and call for elections on November 13.
The Lloyd George Ministry.—Of the four premier statesmen who conducted the World War to a successful termination in the autumn of 1918 and, in the new year, convened at the Paris Peace Conference as the "Big Four," David Lloyd George is the last to retire. The first was Signer Orlando of Italy, who was defeated at Montecitorio in the following June on account of his failure to have his Government's views prevail at the conference. Clemenceau, after having signed the principal treaties of peace retired from office in January, 1920. In the following March the United States Senate failed to ratify the treaties negotiated by President Wilson at Paris and in November his party was defeated in the National election.
All the four allied and associated nations indicated, with the exception of the United States, had conducted the war by means of coalition governments which, beginning after the outbreak of hostilities, by collections of the most eminent men, whatever their politics, changed as the exigencies of political and military affairs demanded, from political coalition ministries of multiple portfolios to war cabinets of greater centralized power at home and greater prestige, if not authority, abroad.
At the beginning of December, 1916, principally owing to the attacks of the Northcliffe press, it had become a public conviction in the United Kingdom that the Asquith Government in which Lloyd George had been successively Chancellor of the Exchequer, and as such had prepared the first war budget of November, 1914, and then as Minister of Munitions, when the first coalition was formed in May, 1915, was not conducting the war as intensively as the circumstances warranted. Lloyd George writing to the Prime Minister threatened to resign unless the conduct of the war should be placed in the hands of the committee of four which did not include Mr. Asquith. Mr. Asquith declined and so the ministry was formed under Lloyd George with Bonar Law as his partner. The Government so formed had not only the support of those Unionists and nearly all those Liberals who had been supporting the Asquith Government, but also of the Labor Party.
Although Lloyd George had continued to advocate a neutral policy for the Government while Sir Edward Grey, as the British Foreign Minister, was attempting to prevent the great war in the last days of July, 1914, nevertheless, he had at the time of the Agadir crisis in July, 1911, made an eloquent speech in defense of the empire, and when a British declaration of war became inevitable owing to Germany's invasion of Belgium, he had at once begun, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, to conduct British finances in a masterly manner. Later as Minister of Munitions he had gained public confidence quite as much by his speeches as by his actions.
Prior to December, 1916, the Cabinet had consisted of the political chiefs of the principal Government departments, exceeding twenty in number. With the formation of the Lloyd George Government the Cabinet was reduced to six. This was the Cabinet which became known as the "War Cabinet," and, as occasion required, was expanded into the "Imperial War Cabinet" by the inclusion of the Colonial Prime Ministers and other representatives of the various parts of the empire. The powers of this Cabinet had so expanded that in July. 1918, just at the time of the beginning of the Foch counter-offensive, each Dominion Prime Minister had the right to nominate a Cabinet Minister, either as resident or visitor, to represent him at the meetings held between the plenary sessions. From about the same date began the assembly of the political heads of departments known as the "Standing Committee of Home Affairs," which dealt with internal policy alone. This committee, together with the original "War Cabinet," was dissolved in October, 1919, and a full Cabinet of about twenty members was re-established.
A general election was held on December I4. 1918, with the result that, while seventy-three Sinn Feiners had been elected, who declined to take their seats, the Government, in spite of the deflections of the Labor Party, which henceforth were to become more pronounced, was able to control 471 votes in the Commons out of a total of 707.—New York Times, October, 1922.
Proceedings of Irish Parliament.—The Irish Parliament on October 3 proclaimed amnesty to political offenders to extend until October 15. As no advantage of this offer was taken by the opposition, military operations were resumed more actively after that date.
In parliamentary committee, progress on the draft of the new Irish Constitution proceeded with little difficulty and it was regarded as certain of adoption without noteworthy change. Art. XVII, containing the much-discussed oath for members of parliament, was approved by a large majority.
UNITED STATES
Canada to Negotiate Frontier Treaty.—Washington, October 16. In recognition of Canada's particular interest in maintenance of amicable relations with the United States, the British Government has decided to authorize the Canadians to negotiate directly with the American State Department in the framing of the new treaty to regulate naval strength on the Great Lakes. In the near future a representative of the Canadian Government is expected in Washington to begin these negotiations, the foundations for which were laid during the visit here last July of Premier McKenzie King.
The matter of naval vessels on the lakes will probably be only one of several subjects covered by the new treaty, which is now expected to supplant entirely the treaty of 1817. It is understood that there is no disposition on either side to increase naval armament on the lakes beyond the needs of militia training and customs law enforcement, but it is probable an effort will be made to define zones in the lakes wherein customs and militia vessels may operate lawfully even where purely territorial waters are involved.—New York Times, 17 October, 1922.
No Extension of Three-Mile Limit.—Washington, October 16. The British Government today rejected the American Government's proposal for a treaty between the two nations under which the authorities of each would be authorized to exercise beyond the three-mile limit of territorial water the right of search for the purpose of preventing the smuggling of liquor into the United States.
The proposal for such a treaty was submitted by Secretary Hughes on June 26, in a note to the British Ambassador, Sir Auckland Geddes, seeking co-operation between the British and American Governments against persons engaged in illicit liquor trade from the Bahamas and other British possessions in violation of American constitutional and statutory provisions.
The outstanding feature of the treaty was a reciprocal provision authorizing each Government to exercise a right of search of vessels of the other beyond the three-mile limit of territorial waters to the extent of twelve miles from the shore.
Great Britain's refusal to acquiesce in the proposal treaty is based on the time-honored principle under which the British Government has opposed the search in time of peace of British vessels anywhere on the: high seas outside the three-mile limit. The note delivered by Ambassador Geddes to Secretary Hughes asserts that Great Britain has always consistently opposed any extension of the three-mile limit and cannot "properly acquiesce in order to meet a temporary emergency in the abandonment of a principle to which they attach great importance."—New York Times, 17 August, 1922.
Hague Court Decision Against United States.—On October 13 the Hague Court of Arbitration announced the award to Norway of $12,000,000 for ships requisitioned by the United States in the World War. Norway had presented claims for $13,000,000 plus interest, and the United States had recognized liability for $2,500,000.
Although the convention establishing the Hague Court does not provide for protest of its decisions, the United States arbitrator, Chandler P. Anderson, absented himself when the decision was announced and sent a letter declaring that the court had disregarded the terms of submission and exceeded the authority conferred by the special agreement of June 30.
The last similar instance of protest was by a Japanese twenty years ago.
GERMANY
Further Reparation Discussions.—The British plan for further adjustment of the reparation problem, as presented by Sir John Bradbury to the Reparation Commission in October, was in general terms a five-year moratorium for Germany. On the other hand, a French Memorandum presented on October 10, proposed: (1) Complete and rigid control of German finances by the creditor nations, including power to veto expenditures, regulate taxation, and dictate the arrangement of the budgets of the various German states; (2) limitation of the power of the Reparation Commission to the application of new guarantees and reforms, leaving the settlement of more comprehensive issues to an international conference. It was the French view that this should be the business of the proposed Brussels Conference in December.
President Ebert's Term Extended.—In the middle of October the Reichstag passed a measure altering the Constitution so as to extend President Ebert's term of office until 1926. Herr Ebert was elected provisional president by the Weimar National Assembly in 1919, pending a regular election. The extension was decided upon in order to avoid the dangers and difficulties of a popular election at the present time.
Limitation of Armaments.—Geneva, September 28. After spending two years in laying foundations, the League of Nations has now faced squarely up to the problem of disarmament. It was perhaps inevitable that the early stages of the work should show disappointingly slow progress, but the vigor Lord Robert Cecil managed to infuse into the commission concerned, as soon as he became a member of it, suggests that if he had been there sooner the commission might have moved a little faster.
However that may be, it has moved well in the past three months, and with its scheme definitely approved by the League Assembly, the nations of Europe, and some other nations, too, have now to say yes or no to a practical proposition, the acceptance of which would to all appearance bring to the overburdened citizens of every country the first hope of relief they could clutch at since the Armistice.
So long as nations believe that they have no means of security but force, they will clearly not reduce the force they command while dangers manifestly impend. Poland, Rumania, Jugo-Slavia, Czecho-Slovakia would and could return no other answer than that to the proposals of the armament reducers. But if another security could be substituted for the security conferred by a state's own national army the case might be altogether different. That has been recognized by Lord Robert and made the basis of his scheme.
If one state in isolation cannot reduce its army, a number of states in combination may well be strong enough to protect one another against any threatened aggression. But the number of states so binding themselves in a defensive guarantee must be large enough. It may well be doubted, for example, whether the four states mentioned above would feel that even with the completest understanding between themselves, they could reduce their armies while the intentions of Russia are unknown. If, on the other hand, they had behind them France, and Italy, and Britain, and Holland, and Spain, and Belgium, then a new situation would be created and practically every state of Europe could reduce its forces to something below their present level.
That is the scheme the League of Nations Assembly has approved, and matters have gone so far that a competent commission has been instructed to prepare a draft treaty embodying these principles in the form of obligations which the several nations can thereupon be invited to accept.
But the League is pushing forward on other lines at the same time. In deciding to convene at Geneva next May (the date was chosen so as to fall after the Pan-American Congress), a naval conference, to which all states shall be invited, the League ranges itself directly in line with the organizers of the Washington parley and the authors of the pacts there concluded. It is a matter for satisfaction that Brazil, which at first took exception to this proposal, has withdrawn its objections and declared its intention of attending the conference.
Finally, one more endeavor is being made to overcome the obstacles placed in the way of a limitation of instruments of war by the decision of the United States Government not to ratify the Arms Traffic Convention of St. Germain.
The League is calling a further conference to deal with these problems, and encouraged by the declaration of the United States Government that, though it will not ratify the St. Germain convention, it cordially approves the objects the convention has in view; it intends to invite the United States both to state its objections to the convention and to be represented at the conference.—Baltimore Sun, 14 August, 1922.
Relief for Austria.—Geneva, October 4 (Associated Press)—Ignaz Seipel, the Austrian Chancellor, and the representatives of Great Britain, France and Italy this afternoon signed the protocol making effective the plan of the League of Nations to save Austria.
The protocol consists of three documents. The first is a declaration by Great Britain, France, Italy and Czecho-Slovakia, the principal guarantors of the loan which will be made to Austria, that they will respect the territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty of Austria and will seek no special or exclusive financial or economic advantages that would compromise Austria's independence.
The other two documents authorize Austria to issue for sale bonds sufficient to produce the equivalent of a maximum of 650,000,000 gold crowns, and provide for the guarantee of interest on the sinking fund by Great Britain, France, Italy and Czecho-Slovakia of eighty per cent of that sum. Austria pledges for the payment of the interest on the bonds her customs receipts and the tobacco monopoly, and agrees to undertake reforms necessary to balance her budget.
The Austrian Government accepts supervision in the application of reforms by a Commissioner of the League of Nations, whose authorization will be necessary before the Austrian Treasury proceeds to realize on loans guaranteed by the powers. It abandons all rights to issue paper money or negotiate loans, and accepts supervision by a commission composed of representatives of each nation guaranteeing a portion of the loan.
FRANCE
Russian Rapprochement with France.—As a result of divergence between Great Britain and France, especially over German reparations and, Near East problems, French political sentiment has shown a tendency to revive the old understanding with Russia, in spite of the difference between Soviet Russia and the Russia before the war. Indication of this trend of political alignment was the importance attached to the visit to Russia of M. Herriot, the President of the French Radical Socialist Party. M. Herriot declared the Russians were willing to recognize the Russian debt to France, and that thus the chief barrier to an understanding was removed.
FAR EAST
Japanese Evacuation of Vladivostok.—Japanese evacuation of troops from the Vladivostok district began on October 6, and was completed on October 26. With the withdrawal of the Japanese, the "white" government in Vladivostok under General Dieterichs was exposed to overthrow by "red" forces of the Far Eastern Republic which closed in on the city. American and British marines were landed on October 20 to protect foreign lives and property.