Evening star., 1934-10-21
BY JAMES T. SHOTWELL.


Professor Of History. Columbia University;
Author Of War as an Instrument of
National Policy. Etc.
THOSE who think that the pub
lie opinion of the civilized
world has learned nothing
Il from the World War and the
years of costly experiment
which followed 1t should study the
way in which the assassinations at
Marseille have been commented upon
in the press of Europe as well as in
our own newspapers. Tragic as that
happening was, it failed to draw at
tention away from the issues involved
in the political alignments of Europe
The human episode had those ele-
ments of poignant suffering and un-
solved mystery which might have
been expected to submerge, for the
time being, at least, all other popular
interest. But instead of this there
was from the very first a widespread
speculation as to the consequences of
the act upon that great political
drama which is now being enacted by
the nations of Europe. 1t was not
only Yugoslavia which was affected
by the aSsassin's bullets, but the plans
which under the leadership of France
had been rapidly maturing in recent
weeks for a new state system of
Europe.
The extent to which this dominat-
ing fact of recent history had en-
gagged the attention of the common
man, not only in Europe but in the
United States as well, could be to
some extent measured by the fact
that the first question which people
asked of one another as the news of
the murders spread was, What will
be the effect upon the peace of
Europe?" Fully half the news items
in the press dealt with this Ques-
ton. One must not overestimate the
significance of this fact, for perhaps
in most peoples minds it was the
memory of Sarajevo rather than a
mature consideration of the issues
now at stake which caused the
anxious question to be asked, whether
1894 was to see a repetition Of 1914
Nevertheless, it is significant that pub
lie opinion today is alert to these
questions.
Barthou More Powerful
OF the two chief victims Of the
assassin, the more powerful figure
was not the King of Yugoslavia but
the Foreign Minister of France M
Barthou was an outstanding repre-
sentative of that great tradition OF
French diplomacy which can be
traced through men like M. Poincare
back to Richelieu-men who have
fought with unrelenting perseverance
to secure the hegemony of France on
the Continent of Europe. He had
known how to turn the turbulence of
Hitler's political slogans to the ad-
vantage of the third republic. His
star was apparently in the ascend
ant, and it would have been his
greatest triumph if he could have
succeeded, as a result of the visit
of King Alexander, in reconciling
Yugoslavia and Italy to friendship
with each other through common
friendship with France. With Soviet
Russia as an additional guaranty
against any adventure upon the part
Of the Nazis, and Poland's disaffec-
tion checked for the time by suf-
ficient subsidies, it began to look as
though the third republic was
achieving the greatest diplomatic VIC
tory In all its history.
But these trends might have
proved deceptive. A Bismarck might
dominate Europe for almost a gener-
alton, but times have changed since
then. The new nations which have
carved out of the old empires or have
arisen along their frontiers, largely
through the help or influence of
France, are now no more anxious to
see the balance of power completely
out of equilibrium in Europe than
England has been in the past. Too
great triumph in diplomacy brings
its penalties, as was wisely pointed out
by that master of the craft, Prince
Metternich.
1t, Is therefore, by no means certain
that the plans of M Barthou could
have been followed through to what
looked like their logical conclusion.
All that would be necessary to put
them in jeopardy would be for Ger
many to find the way to reaSsure its
neighbors by policies like those which
it has now adopted with reference to
Poland. Politics of power is by its
very nature unstable, for it depends
upon the continuance and the avail
ability of power itself. NJ. Barthou's
greatest ally was none other than Hit
Ter, but it is not risking much to sup
pose that he might prove an uncertain
ally at best.
France Consistent in Policy.
Strong and forceful as he had
shown himself, however, M. Barthou
did not embody in his person the at
tributes of sovereignty, as was the
case with King Alexander. He was
but minister of state, and a minister
is, after all, a servant of the state, not
its master as in the case of a dictator.
The policies of M. Barthou were not
of his creation; they were the tradi-
tional policies of France throughout
almost all modern history-policies
followed as consistently on the Conti-
nent of Europe as those of England
lldNC DNC1l Will 4C1ClCLlCC W SOAO1lAol
problems ard sea power. Therefore
while France will miss the guidance
of an experienced hand, there is not
likely to be any change in the direc-
tion Of its effort.
The Quai d'Orsay is the repository
of a fixed purpose, whose keynote is
national security and peace. This
does not change with shifts of min
istries, although the means to that
end may change. Sometimes the ac-
cent is upon cooperation, at other
times upon politics of power. But the
shift in emphasis is due to what hap
pens outside France much more than
to any change of outlook upon the
part of the French people. No nation
is more conservative than they in the
of policy, but conserva-
tives are realists and pursue their
aims with a technique suited to the
changing situations that arise from
time to time.