AFTER THREE YEARS' WAR.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 November 1917, Page 7

AFTER THREE YEARS' WAR.

THE ANXIETY'OF GERMANY. (Sy W, Douglas Newton). Thff German newspapers continue f# give their summaries of the three rears of war. The usual, and it might be said, semi-offieifti attitude of self-con-scious and determined optimism is generally observed in these commentaries. At the same time, they are not without fairly definite signs that the military writers experienced some difficulties in squaring their optimism with the facts of the situation. There are some of them, indeed, who fee! that the only way to enheartcn their readers is to paint a strong picture of Germany still powerful in the face of enemies rapidly weakening. This type of assessor of events invariably falls back upon the submarine, apparently their one remaining hope of positive victory. It is insisted that the submarine is already undermining the strength of the eoeray. Some journals claim fliat the offensive in Flanders is hampered through not being supported by Buch supplies of munitions as were available at the time of the Somme. The Lokal Anzeiger goes further. Thanks to the submarine, it declares we have not even an adequate supply of men. England, it seeing, has to employ at home those men who should be in the firing line. The weakness of this kind of reasoning is not merely that it misstates facts, but that : the Germans must themselves know that it misstates facts. They have only to read their own official communiques to' see this. The first sentences of the German Headquarters report, issued on August 1, give such assertions the lie direct. Talking of the Danders battle on July 31, this report states emphatically "with masses such as have -never been used in any period of this war, not even in the east by Brusiloff, the English attacked on a 15rr.ile front.'' That is not exactly a hint of man shortage. ' There is no "hint of munition shortage either. The game report describe? the battle as "one of the most tremendous of the third year of the war." On the same day, August 1, the German wireless paid tribute to "the extreme use of their (the British) guns, war lyiateria!, and reserves." The Lokal Anzeiger and its group are thus confounded by. their own military leaders. Some of this school of commentators do not distort facts so palpably; their method of encouraging the Germans Is more subtle, they simply omit facts. Anything derogatory to Germany is not mentioned at all, and the-result is thus a picture of unblemished victory. Lieu-tenant-Colonel Baron von Ardenne is a master of this method. In the Magdeburgische Zeitung of July 31 and August 1, he published two long and copious articles which will convince many of his readers that Germany has gone through three years of war without losing a single battle, or meeting with a single check.' The Baron's manner is beat described in his own words; it is to look at the outstanding points of the war only "somewhat in tho way that when characterising a mountain one only speaks of the highest peaks and leaves unmentioned the connecting hilly landscapes and tho lower slopes." Quite an admirable idea, especially when the only "highest peaks" one notices German, and all the achievements of the Allies are but "lower slope" affairs in one's eyes. In this way he is conveniently blind to all that happened in Eaat Prussia before Tannenberg. The outrage to Belgium and the great efforts of the Belgian army becoming no more than j "the BurprUe of Liege and Namur," after which the Germans swept gloriously into France. The Marne, ; by this method, beaomes not a disaster to Germany so much as an indication—astonishing fact —of the "treachery" of Italy, which allowed Joffre to mass troops for this counte'r-stroke:, Again, of the wonderful advance of the Russians on Cracow in 1914, the only "peaks" perceptible to the Baron are the Austrian victories of Lyas Gora and Krasnik. The battles of Opole, Tomasov mid Eava Russlca are not mentioned; apparently they com* under the designation of "connecting hilly landscapes." All the same, the battles chosen by the Baron had practically no effect on the campaign, while the three Russian victories were so crushing that they were the means of putting Austria temporarily put of action. It will be seen by these examples exactly how von Ardenne goes, to work. It would be tedious to follow all his points, but one other instance will suffice to show how untrustworthy is his method He describes ; the battle of Verdun ' with ft wealth of detail. He tells, how each of the successive lines, of defence were taken. He calls it a "colossal attack" carried out with "endless trouble that it raged right up to the middle of ' 1917. But though he describes with so • much care the German side of the fight, be does not utter a word concerning th)e sweeping Frenph counter-strcfees which so rapidly won back from the Germans practically all the important ground. Reading his account, one would never suppose that the Germans were driven back at Verdun. Again, this battin is a German victory to him, but he does not tell ub why. He certainly says it aimed at anticipating a French attack, but since he is aware that the French attacked at the Somme, and in a manner to make the battle, as he says, "huge war-epic," lie can scarcely claim Verdun as a success on this count. Further, lie dismisses the offensive of the Western Allies and the Russians in 1910, as failures, because only "moderate gains" of territory were won. Then can the very moderate gain of territory attuined at Verdun be a victory, while the larger gains of ground on the Somme, and on the Volhynia-Galician fronts represent only defeat? Only a German military critic seems able to understand why these things should be.' Other German writers on the three years of war are not so prone to misstatement as tjw Lokal Anzeiger and von Ardenne, yet something of their anxiety at the present situation can be gathered from their tone. Thus a paper like the Kolnische Zeitung, while affecting satisfaction at the present state of things, betrays its nervousness in a furious attack on America, who, "At last threw off the mask and placed itself openly in the ranks of our enemies, for which President Wilson found an. excuse in the submarine war, to which we wore compelled to resort." The..Frankfurter Zeitung's attitude of jtudied calm towards America's part hi the fourth year of the war also shows some hints of trepidation. The Frankfurter thinks that, while America can raise a great army, 6he will bo chary of trusting Buch a force—which must) number at least 1,000.000 men—to seas infested with German U-boats. In any case, the weight America could add to the Entente has been counter-balanced by losses in the East. This slighting atti'tudu towards America, it will be seen only leads to a rather vaeue hope for

the future. Other papers have no sueta hope. The Muncher Neuesto Nachriehtefl declared bluntly, "The military importance of America is great. She only roquirs time to become effective." The Munehner Xouesto Naehrichten is, in fact, very uneasy about the general situation, on the ground that German diplomacy has led the country into an impossible position. In an article, "The Fourth Year of War" (August 1), it compares muddling German diplomacy with efficient British diplomacy. Of the latter is says: "It has constantly brought new nations into the war, and is always Making new foes, new tasks, and new difficulties for the German nrmy, so that :no\v there are 1350 million foes against 150 million Germans and German symj pathisers. In an appeal to the judgment of humanity at a world conference or world trihunnal, the proportion would be 135 to 15. In this command of the opinion of the world, England has gained enormous strength. We have neglected to trouble about the opinion of the world, childishly supposing we can gain sympathy without it.'" No wonder this paper sums up the situation in the following gloomy words:"On the entry of the fourth year of war we dare not conceal the fact that the right for existence claims all our strength, and that we perish as a nation if tlie enemy is victorious. We must not bo blind to the seriousness of the situation and foolishly imagine that people are kept in better spirits by lies. On the contrary strength only comes out of truth." That the truth is bitter enough, the Munehner Neueste Nachrichten has itself implied, but we only realise how hitter it is when that firebrand, Reventlow, is betrayed into a melancholy comparison of things as they' wore and as they are now. "In the heroic days of 1914,". he declares, "God gave us as our daily bread a daily Victory. We must fan into flame once more the glorious enthusiasm of those days. Our losses, both in materia! things and in human life, have been great. Terrible, too, is the havoc the war has wrought in our political, moral anil religious life at home. The high aspirations of the early days bavr> burned themselves aWay to ashes. The spirit at the front alas! has no longer a counter part in the spirit at home." As Reventlow implies, the spirit has gone out of the German purpose, as tho hope of success has gone. With difficulty, tho illusion of an invincible German is kept up, the string o f supposedly decisive German victories >< which the military writers talk so glibly, has brought Germany no satisfaction and no result. And moreover they are all in the past. Germany is living on its past, while it faces the future with anxiety. It lias before it a time which the Kolnisfflie. Volkzeitung foreshadows under jthe title "Heavy Hours." These are the hours, this paper warns Germany, in which the worst hardships are about to come, since the Allies are making a threefold offensive round Ypres, on the .Aisne, and on the Somme. The enemy, the paper dHares, is determined to try everythbig to break through this time. It adds that "Hindenburg'B talent is unbroken as vet in the confidence of the people and the soldiers. All hope centres on him." There is a pregnant sens* of qualification in that "as vet"; it would seem that Germany's confidence is wavering even in regard to their only hope.