The Dominion. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1917. HAS AMERICA AN IRON HAND IN HER VELVET GLOVE?

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3006, 17 February 1917, Page 8

The Dominion. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1917. HAS AMERICA AN IRON HAND IN HER VELVET GLOVE?

- There . arb organisms in -Nature that' resemble one thing, - but are' really other things. Mimiciy abounds in Nature; " A puff-adder mav' resemble a harmless lorest becl but it has a strange power to kill. There arc men with a dual personality. They look like Dr. Jekyl but they are really Mr. . Hyde. These conditions exist _in the region fo statecraft and M diplomacy. A representative of a nation .may wave the olive branch of peaco "m one hand and hold tho "big-stick of , coercion in the other. Something like this has been going on in the United States. President Wilson has won for himself! the reputation of a peace-at-any-prico mail, and yet in recent clays perhaps only one other man has preached throughout his country the iron gospel of ' Preparedness/' which means fitness tor war, more vigorously than he. .It is -well known that .President Wilson, in his peaco. diplomacy, moved oil "the. tight-rope of legality with perfect balance," but it is not so well known that ho closccl his first term, as President by sanctioning a. vote of-nearly £120,000,000 oi expenditure on Army and Navy. Germany fooled and 'flouted Wilson •for long months in his diplomatic encounters' with her, but tho'_timc seems to have como when he will be fooled no longer. -The diplomatic policy of the United Stains . has seemed that of a feeble hand in a velvet glove. But that policy plainly is a thing of the past. It may be that the United States's unreadiness for war forced her _to make a virtuo out of a necessity. Mr. Woodrow Wilson, in his History of the American People, wrote in terms of warm approval of tte iron hand policy of his country in relation to Britain in 1895, and to Spain in 1898, and the unhcroic part he played for long as President was in striking contrast to his previously expressed views. Be that as it may, the United States to-day is showing the iron hand in the velvet glove.. A change amounting to a revolution has conic over the United States Congress in relation to war. The "big stick" policy of Roosevelt is dwarfed into insignificance by the present "preparedness-" policy of Wilson. No more sensational news ever came from the United States thai! that dated February 14, which says that "the Naval Appropriation Bill for £368,000,000 has been passed.' , lir these figures be accurate then Woodrow Wilson, who began his first term of President desirous of reducing expenditure on Army and Navy, begins his second term by leading in an increased expenditure without parallel in the history of the United States. The war expenditure in her terriblo civil war was only about twice the amount of this "naval appropriation" vote. Even if wo correct the message' by reading dollars'for pounds, the vote is' a colossal vote for a nation at peace. Tho United States in the future should have an iron hand, and not a feeble hand in her velvet glove of international diplomacy. Tho voice of the peacc-at-any-price politician is silenced to-day by the man-of-war. Bear-Admiral Fiske, a commanding personality in the United States Navy, not long ago . declared:

"'l'ho dangerous enemy of tho United States is not Gennany or '.Japan; it is the American politician. ... It is the politician who prevents our getting an adequate army and navy; who persuades tho people that such an army .and navy will cause a .horribje-thing-the politician .calls 'militarism.'' 'The. nation can the victory over a foreign foe, but it is powerless against the . politician, the •'souless politician/ as Wliitten calls him. •who gambles for office with dice loaded ■with human hearts."

To-day tho politician with alacrity complies, with tho wishes of the man-of-war and votes for colossal sums pass Congress with great enthusiasm. If these votes materialise into actual warships then, in the near future, tho United States will be a great sea Power and may bo in . a position to . challenge the greatest sea. Power that, may exist after tho war. ■ Within the last few months Mr. Archibald • Hurd, the well-known authority on naval affairs, in two informing articles'in the Fortnightly Review, called attention to this new departure in the naval policy of the United States. In tk/June. Fortnightly he wrote on "America's Bid for Sea Power." Ho pointed out that "America - already, possesses a • navy larger far than the navies either- of France, Italy,' 'Russia, .Austria-Hungary, or Japan, and .'comparable, bearing _in mind strategical arid 'other considerations,- to the German Fleet," j and yet proposals were being , made i to Congress for an'- increased naval

expenditure of £100,000,000, spread over five years. In tho November Fortnightly Mr. Htjrd continues his story in his article on "America's Naval Policy," and he tells rather an exciting tale. Tho proposal to spend £100,000,000 in five years was turned down by the House'of Representatives and . a much more modest scheme adopted. This modest scheme was examined by the Senate, but before it gave its decision the Battle of Jutland took place and then the unexpected happened. The Senate brushed aside the modest scheme; of the House of Representatives, discussed the "big stick" £100,0G0,0'00 scheme spread over five years, which the Lower ' House had in anger rejected, and adopted a colossal forward movement which shortened the term from five years to three! The modest schcmc of the Lower House provided for 72 ships in five years, among which were no battleships. The Senate provided for 223 ships in three years, among which were 14 battleships! And this scheme, with a provable expenditure of £100,000,000, was adopted! Mr. Hued comments thus:

"Whether the British Fleet, hitherto the defender'of the Monroe Doctrine, was less efficient than hacL been thought; whether it was decided that the German Navy offered a greater menace to the world's peace than its history and development had previously suggested; or whether the destruction of so many vessels in both fleets led to the anticipation that before the'war was over the two greatest navies . would ■ he, greatly reduced in strength, offering, to the United States the opportunity of seizing the trident, nru6t remain matters of conjecture. In any event, the action of the Senate was sensational."

The United States, rolling as she is to-day in material wealth, will have no difficulty in financing this naval bill, and her iron and steel industries, which have been in full blast making munitions for the Allies, can now be used to work out her new scheme. In the near future she will be one of the great Powers on the sea.

This aim at sea power .on the part of the United States is partly caused by the humiliating results of her diplomatic with Germany. The Kaiser and his war lords know that the .United States was not prepared to use force, and with amused interest they listened to. President AVilson's expostulations. "Germany," says Mr. Buchan, in his History of the War, "like a street urchin, regarded her. mentor, with her fitigcr to her nose." But the United States is constrained by other reasons. She has interests in the Pacific and in Panama that need the protection of a strong navy. Then her new Monroe Doctrine, which a Latin Republican has called "a shield and buckler of aggression," may bo challenged at any time. General Hojieii Lea, in his Valour of Iynorance, has said that "the Monroe Doctrine, if not supported by naval and military power sufficient to enforco its observance by all nations, singly or in coalition, becomes a fact more provocative of war than any other national policy over attempted in modern or ancient times." In tho future force will support this Doctrine. Such is the United States to-day. She is no longer at the cross-roads. She may now show the iron hand, and not tho feeble hand, ki her international policy of the future.