Evening star., 1924-09-21
Germany Not Able to Escape
Penalties for Guilt i'm War

many guilty as the nation which
Willed the war.
But the evidence which weakens
the case for guilt does not in the
least reduce the possibility More
overland the point is capitalize
devastation in Belgium and France.
which constitutes the main burden of
reparations claims, does not arise
from anything but the violation OF
Belgian territory. The destruction
caused in France by the German
armies which marched from German
to French soil directly in 1914 was
then and thereafter Of small conse-
quence. The bill for restoring the
country from Nerdun to Switzerland
would be insignificant. But it is in
the industrial north, in the regions
adjoining Belgium and lying between
Namur and Paris that the great dam
aSe was done. Therefore the crime
against Belgium, the guilt which is
established by confession not under
duress. involves the responsibility for
reparations just as clearly as would
just conviction on the charge OF
unique war guilt and premeditated
violence in the Serbian affair.
The Germans believe that the YER
dict of posterity will reverse that
of the cotemporary world of the war
period so far as war responsibility is
concerned After ten years one may
say quite fairly tnat time has tended
to convict German leaders of being
fools rather than deep-dyed criminals.
and Germany as having played the
part of a blind accomplice rather
than a deliberate accessory to the
crime of the World War. But it has
not modified cotemporary judgment
in the matter of the invasion of Bel
gium. precisely the act from which
tod l,o a lSfa i1h
Germany is now called upon to pay
reparations.
Blunder G<e Thnn Crime.
The famous phrase, Worse than
crime-a blunder." will it seems to
me, ultimately be employed to de-
scribe German policy and perform
anCe between the assassination of
Serajevo and the outbreak of the
World War. Austrian guilt and Ger
| man folly will appear the precipi-
tating causes of the conflict. The
war itself will appear made in Vienna.
not in Berlin. But at least nothing
! yet has come to light to relieve Ger
man leaders from the terrible respon-
| sibility Of having approved of Aus
| tria's departure upon the adventure
| which ended as it was logically bound
| TO end, a a Bismarck. for example.
would have foreseen that it must
! end
| But if one admit that. to a certain
| extent. this later judgment may tend
| to improve the moral status of the
| German people. so far as the matter
| of war guilt is concerned, there is no
! reason to Concede that this in any
| measure reverses the judgment passed
| upon the nation for the Belgian act
| of violence, the consequence of which
| was the devastation of Belgium and
J ;>tr f-rr S-r,S ~ ETroT
| sible only by the Belgian route.
| Grant that this was the act of the
militariSts. not the people: argue, if
| you please. that even here il remains
! impossible TO indict whole nation
| and there remains the liability for
| damage.
| Debt Still a Just One.
To revise the treaty of Versailles.
| and particularly with respect of the
| war guilt detail might conceivably
| lead TO the ultimate verdict of i'm
partial judges that the Hapsburg
monarchy was on the moral side
uniquely guilty, and that Germany.
like Russia, France and Britain, to-
gether with Serbia and Belgium, was
a victim; although the German assent
to the Austrian policy in advance
certainly establishes a certain diff
ference between Germany and the
others. there would still remain the
matter of the violation of Belgian
neutrality and the consequent liabI-
itv for the devastation of regions
which suffered because of that viola
tion.
To say Germany should pay because
she was uniquely guilty of having
caused the war may in the end prove
to be unsound argument. but to say
that Germany should pay for that
devastation which was incident to her
Illegal entrance upon Belgian terri
tory, both the devastation in Belgium
and in the adjoining departments of
northern France into which she came
through Belgium. seems to me to as
sert only what is just. And, so far
as France and Belgium are concerned.
their share of payments under the
Dawes plan will not be adequate to
meet this bill.
Thus. whatever the advantages to
Germany of a revision of the treaty
of Versailles, in so far as the moral
values are concerned. there is no
prospect that such revision would
modify the material consequences.
the chief of which is her liability for
destruction in Belgium and northern
France Nevertheless. the German
campaign to this end deserves con-
tlnuing attention. and is destined to
have future Importance.
Copyright. 1924, by the Mcclure Newspaper
Syndicate.)
al