Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-08-10
EUROPEAN PEACE HOPE
SEEMS RESTING ON UNITY
Two Great Factions, One Wishing to
Maintain Versailles Boundaries and
Other to Change Them.

are themselves unable to make head
against the French coalition, 1t is new
ertheless patent that these states In
alliance either with Italy or with Rus
STA might constitute an effective coun-
terbalance to the French combination.
Moreover, 1t is plain that for several
years Mussolini has been deliberately
striving to bring of some form of Italo-
German combination, along with a Bal
kan system which should counterbal-
ance the little entente. To the Fascist
mind the most promising development
would be an anti-French coalition be-
tween Italy and Germany, with Italy,
today the stronger military state, the
dominating factor.
Refusals by Germany.
So far, however, the Germans have
refused all gestures made in Rome. The
reason has been twofold. In the first
place, until German territory had been
evacuated Germany was in no position
to provoke French reprisal. In the
second, the Germans still recall with
bitterness the course of Italy in 1914-15,
and have no present intention to enter
upon a new contract with an old part
ner who, to the German mind, betrayed
her ally in 1914.
And just as long as Germany holds
to this policy no really effective anti
French combination Is possible. On the
other hand, one must recognize the
ever-present temptation of the Ger
mans. determined as they are to achieve
q revision of their eastern frontiers, to
give ear to the voice which from the
Roman hills daily urges an alliance
based upon the principle of treaty re-
vision.
Thus the great question which faces
the world is whether Europe will pres
emily drift back into pre-war condition
on which two armed camps will repro
duce the situation of 1914 or will find
some peaceful means of adjusting the
great issue, which is the preservation
or amendment of the peace treaties.
When one contrasts the Europe of
today with that of Is years ago 1t is
obvious that one great change is dis
closed In the existence of the League
of Nations. 1t must be recognized,
however, that considerable as has been
the achievement of the League, it has
in the nature of things been unable to
do anything to abolish these issues,
this supreme issue, which divides
European powers. Revision Of the peace
treaties can come only by war or by
voluntary renunciation' by one set OF
states Of territory actually possessed.
It is obviously possible, therefore, that
in the next few years We may see
Europe again resolve itself into rival
groups Of powers; that Italy and Ger
many, perhaps with the support Of Rus
STA, may presently challenge France, the
little entente and Poland on the issue
of revision against the status quo. All
the material out Of which wars are
made Is ready to hand.
No War Settlement.
On the other hand, it is clear that
no war could conceipably permanently
settle the questions involved. The ter
ritories which are involved have been
the prize OF victory and the price Of
defeat before. A new set Of powers
would infallibly undertake to challenge
any new set of frontiers created after
easily be ruined once and for all as a
result of~the general war which would
certainly attend any effort at revision
today or tomorrow.
Perceiving this, European statesman
have filled this postwar period with
proposals for cooperation, eliminating
for the moment in the project of M.
BRAND for o United States of Europe.
1t is easy to be cynical over this or any
other concrete proposal, yet it is clear
that the very existence and multiplica-
the notion Of cooperation, indicates
that European minds are wrestling with
the terrible problem.
On this sixteenth anniversary the
great division in Europe is becoming
clear. The possibilities for war and
peace are assuming a material rather
than a moral aspect. If one may say
it, the European problem is taking on
the aspect more of disease than a
crime, more of an unfortunate inheri-
lance than q deliberate choice. Today
the situation is still in fiux. II pres
emily the new Europe shall take form
rigidly divided between powers who
would keep what they posesse and those
who would recover what they once held,
the return to the status Of 1914 will be
fairly rapid and the consequence in
evitably a new general war. The al
tentative, so far as any has been dis
covered, Is the United States of Europe,
today unthinkable and unacceptable.
And the sharpest contrast between 1914
and 1880, and not impossibly the best
hope for future peace, is the extent to
which Europe is discussing that unity
which no European can quite believe
even remotely possible.
Finally, there Is growing apprecia-
ton of the fact that common tariff
walls were even more potent than Bis
marck in creating German unity, and
that today the economic reasons for
unity and peace at least make respec-
table showing against the ethnic con-
siderations which impose division and
war.
United we eat divided we starve.
This in q nutshell is the basic argu-
ment for peace in European argument
unknown before 1914.
fConvrIoht Ip30l