The Washington times., 1917-02-07
WHAT WILL THE OThER
NEUTRALS Do?

IOpOSlDS q lCoSNS W
peace is a different thing from pro-
posing a league to bring about a
particular peace at particular time.
That is why many folk who only see
the chimera of an impossible ideal
ism, or the possibility Of future COM
plications, in the Presidents plan for
a world alliance based on universal
enforcement of an international Mon
roe doctrine heartily approve his ap-
peal to the neutral nations to join
the United States in breaking rela-
tions with Germany because Of her
violation of all established principles
of warfare in her submarine cam
paign.
German propagandists profess to
be perplexed at the United States
objection to her submarine blockade
in view of this country's acquiescence
in Great Britain's blockade. They
cannot be credited With being sincere
in such an argument since the rec
ord is patiently clear that England
has maintained her blockade in full
compliance with principles of inter
national law. Those folk who can
not see any difference between such
blockade, and that proposed by
Germany, with its implication OF Ne
stroying human lives, and lives OF
neutrals at that, because she is using
the submarine, are either incapable
of obvious distinction or prefer to be
morally obtuse.
The result of the acquiescence of
any considerable number Of nations
with the Presidents appeal for a
general severance of relations would
be to hasten the process of starving
out the nation that would then be-
come the professed enemy of the
neutrals. The severance of diplo-
matte relations would mean that
these nations would cease trading
with Germany, That would be seri-
GUS blow to Germany, which just
now seems to be in a position to
need the aid of neutrals very much,
especially in her importations Of cop
per, rubber, and wool. Starving out
Germany, it must be remembered.
refers not only to cutting of her
food supply. 1t means depriving her
of those other necessities. including
the commodities mentioned, which
she must have to carry on the war.
A New York commentator recalls
that thih is the sort Of starvation"
we applied to the South during the
civil war. Equipment of the Confed-
eracy's railroads deprecated and she
could not replace it. She lost ships
and had not the materials to build
new ones. Then she found herself
without the materials to clothe her
soldiers. Her food supply did not
suffer greatly.
Germany's lack of cotton and wool
now are reasonably apparent. She
is said to be operating on a narrow
margin of copper and rubber. To
take any step which would further
interfere with her supply Of these
articles would mean an inestimable
advantage to her opponents. The re-
ported declination of Switzerland to
follow the course of the United
States is not so important. Her
trade intercourse with Germany has
not been particularly significant.
But the severance of relations by
Norway and Sweden, and to a less
degree by Holland and Denmark,
would be tremendous blow to Ger
many. Yet it is not likely that the
entente can count on such action.
Denmark and Holland have learned
too forcibly the lesson of neutral
Belgium. Sweden and Norway are
German in sympathy, and their
thriving commerce with Germany
during the war has increased this tie.
So it is not probable that they will
accept President Wilson's objection.
This conflict of interests in the
present crisis, on a point which is 50
clearly an affront to all neutral ma
tions, clearly demonstrates the diff
Guilty Of getting all nations of the
world to line up on q platform OF
permanent cooperation, and accept a
pig in a poke" alliance, the results
of which they know nothing, and the
ramiications of which no human be.