ARE OUR PEACE TERMS FOOLISH?

Taranaki Daily News, 9 August 1917, Page 8

ARE OUR PEACE TERMS FOOLISH?

By Robert Blatchford,

Aro our statesmen prepared to let the Germans down too lightly? Mr Blatchford looks around and makes sonic pertinent comments on this and other vital problems of the hour.

NO "FOOL'S PEACE." waters. Have our readers, I wonder, noticed the remarkable reticence of tlio British Press with regard to the» Allied terms? Those terms, though, very satisfactory to the Americans and some other neutrals, do not appeal to a-Briton. After so much sacrifice and loss wo seem to he amazingly modest in our demands. We seem to-be more than modest; we.see mto be fcoushly mr.guanimous, dangerously-incau-tious"*' ..... But our Pre-.' '>r-.r, naid so ntu» about it that r :•: .rvl./thc Press must bo thinlcin- a W.. I don't think we need worry. I notice in the official terms of peace published by the Allies at least two blessed words: reparation" and "guarantees.^ When the time comes for-a moro definite formulation of terms! fancy those two words, "reparation" and | "guarantees," will bulg« somewhat. largely on the enemy and neutral; eyes. There will, for instance, he reparation for the murders of British women and men, and for the sinking ot Allied and neutral merchant ships. There may he guarantees for future peace that will throw a naw light upon the modest and gentle document sent to President Wilson. We went, to war, we were told, to break the Prussian power. We muse have guarantees that the Prussian power is broken. There will be some guarantees. Beaten at Jutland, beaten at Verdun, beaten on the Somno, beaten at Ypres and Nancy and in Champagne, with the blow at Egypt foiled, with the British Empire resolute and united, with a fighting Government in power, with a steadily tightening tdockade, the Germans have begun to talk of peace. We do not need spirits risen from the vasty deep to make clear to us the meaning of such proposals. The answer is No'.

But when we come to consider the tenr.s formulated by the Allies for the information of President Wilson we find ourselves in deeper THE NEUTRAL BOGEY.

Wo need not worry over the inclinations, interests, or embarrassnients of Holland, America, Norway, or Sweden- What the neutrals think or want is their affair. They are neutrals. Putting aside the neutrals ami avoiding all unnecessary analysis and speculation, we find ourselves confronted with a very simple proposition, quite easy to understand. If German asks for peace it. because she wants peace, and the fact that she wants peace is a sound reason why we should refuse it. Such open and apparent hypocrisy would not deceive a child. The answer of the Allies was inevitable: "No. We do not intend to discuss terms of peace; we intend to impose them." Before the end of the year, perhaps, peace may bo within the Allies' reach; but it will have to be won by the Allies' arms; only a fool will hope for it by German concessions.

The Germans entered this war with every advantage on their side. They had the central position, they had unity of control, they had a war machine the most tremendous ever seen; they had a clearly marked plan; they were ready to a gaiter button; they had the advantage of surprise; they had all tbo value of 40 years of espionage and peaceful penetration; and the nations they attacked ware unprepared. And the Germans have failed. They never defeated the French army; they never defeated the Russian army. They failed with tlrcdr. Zeppelins and submarines; they failed upon the seas. They are held upon the Eastern and the Western fronts, and the power of the Russians and the British grows greater every day.