Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1917-07-31

NSAN VA
ficers In the Norwegian and Swedish
armies.
honor redeemed the pledge which
their nations, as such, had ignored.
That has never been forgotten in
Denmark.
way led to the great dramatist, Hem
rik Ibsen's exiting himself for a num-
Der of years. He was SO deeply hurt
because of his country's passivity that
he preferred to live abroad, and he
wrote M of his fleriest and most ytr-
lie poems, "A Brother in Disaster" as
a final greeting to his own people, ups
braidtng 1t because 1t had allowed
mark.
After the war in 1854 the idea OF a
politically unified Scandinavia was
kept in the background. 1t was felt
that the necessary basis Of mutual un-
derstanding was lacking.
But the so-called neo-Scandinavism
interested q great number of people
In the three countries. 1t was really
the old idea Of a union, less the po-
litical. program. Neo-Scandinavism
considered almost solely the intel
lectual aspects Of the issue. It must
be said, however, that comparatively
Few men and women throughout the
north were earnestly interested in the
subject.
Then came the new century. On
June z. 1905, Norway decided to dis
solve Its union with Sweden and to
depose the Bernadotte- dynasty. At a
resentauves recognized the coup
d'etat. chiefly because King Oscar II.
Was of a too peaceful disposition toilet
the question proceed to it's extremes.
Despite the official recognition Of the
breach the Swedish nation continued
to be bitter in its denunciation Of
Norway, and the fact that a Danish
made The relationship between. Swe-
den and Denmark rather unpleasant
for a time.
The tension prevailing between
Sweden on one side and Norway Dem
mark on the other 1essened somewhat
between 1905 and 1914. In Sweden
1t was recognized rs an amiabie vi
tesy that Denmark neglected to cele-
brate the 250th anniversary of the
Danish defeat Of King Karl Gustaf x.
OF Sweden-always a painful and
touchy point Of Issue between the two
nations. In 1907 the present Swedish
king paid q visit to Norway's capital,
and In Sweden 1t was observed with
some satisfaction that Norway SEEM
ed to be entirely satisfied with its new
government, as represented by King
Haakon VII.
When the world war. broke out,
the three Scandinavian countries inn
medtately realized that they must
stand together, and a series of con-
ferences between the kings and their
premiers were i~naugurated with the
kings meeting in Malmoe, December,
1914. Since then, kings and ministers
I ha yo honnE IN rnnfo~onna T,,ran onrvnroJ
occasions in the capitals of the three
countries.
The chief topic of discussion at
these meetings as in the interchange
of views succeeding them, vas the
maintenance Of neutrality. The coun-
tries have been one in their firm in
tention to remain neutral.
There Is no official treaty between
them to the effect that they will TAXI
Joint action In case neutrality becomes
impossible. But it is generally under
stood that there is some sort of 'gen-
tlemen's agreement" providing that if
one nation Is attacked, the two others
will consider themselves enemies OF
the attacking power, There is also an
indication that the countries are
working out q plan Of tariff union
which will serve to bind them closer
together.
In connection with the question OF
an actively working Scandinavia
union, The following excerpts of an
article which Fridthiof hansen, now
IN this country, recently has written
for the Norwegian periodical, Sam
ttden." have some timely interest:
Regarding political and military co
operations DR.. Nansen says: II believe
1t is possible. In fact, during the first
period of the var I was so enthusiasts
tic about 1t that Il went to Denmark
to lecture on the subject. +. ....It
will be understood that just now ]
look at Scandinavia from the view
point of war. II we three nations
ttnent. If one of us stands alone, we
amount to nothing. If we In ali
seriousness stand together, there Is q
very great chance that our neutrality
will be respected. This cooperation
naturally pre-supposes an honest will
to maintain u neutrality and to de-
fend 1t, IL need be. I do believe that
that honest will exists among the
three nations.
The policy Of neutrality is really
the easiest Of ALI policies. The policy
OF action is far nor difficult. The
question here Is not whether to pull
IN one direction or the other. The task
is to go right ahead in the direction
OF conserving peace. It is all right
that we morally support one another
But 1t is not enough. We must gei
to a point where the violation Of the
neutrality of country is considered
the violation of the neutrality Of ali
three countries. Such q constellation
may be formed either by q situation
created by outside pressure OF
through initiative from within.
The time may not yet be ripe. But
such q Scandinavian must be our moi
too remote ideal. This war will not be
the last one in history. A victorious
Germany will be no guarantee for fu-
Iture world peace. A defeated Ger.
many will mean just as little in this
respect. Such a Germany will merely
esk: How long time is necessary fol
us to recuperate In preparation for re-
yenge? a Germany crushed, nobody
believes In"
With regard to possible future con.
hicts, growing out OF the universal
war, DR.. Nansen has this to say
Il feel certain that IL we three
countries stand firmly together, nc
great power will dare attack us. The
Iof the countries would not offset the
eeffcts Of joint action ON the part 81
the other two. Norway thinks tina
In all reason, It must be on the side
of England, Through the existencs
Iof sentimental politics Denmark
might be persuaded I mobilize
against Germany. But 1T will be diff.
icult to make Sweden follow this pol.
Hey by any argument conceivable.
This is a d%ifficulty. But, on Tho
other hand, 1t Ia the pre-suppositior
for the existence OF our neutrality
league: that such q difficulty VIII