A RUPTURE BETWEEN NATIONS

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3029, 16 March 1917, Page 5

A RUPTURE BETWEEN NATIONS

DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS | WHAT A SEVERANCE MEANS | In a general way most people know what is meant by tho term "diplomatic relations." They are aware that the phraso is used to cover tho customary official methods of intercourse, between civilised nations in times of peace. They understand, too, that the agencies through which this intercourse ■is carried on are tho Foreign Offices of the various Powers and thoir accredited representatives abroad—ambassadors, envoys, and ministers. When, hoivevor, they arc told that President Wilson, of the United States, has broken off diplomatic relations with Germany, they are likely, with only such gcueral knowledge, to be at a loss to understand the <Xact significance of his act. What precisely are tho relations that ho has severed? What isthe practical effect of tho severance? What, if any, its moral implication? To answer these and similar questions one ihust first glance at the historical development of what are now technically known as "diplomatic relations" in international law.

"Diplomatic relations" in the modern sense, liko international law itself, are a comparatively late growth, thsir real beginnings dating only from the fifteenth century of our era in Europe. For a considerable time after that they existed only in embryo. In ancient times, of course, there were heralds and envoys, sent from ono State or tribe to another, for special purposes, usually to_ present somo demand or to threaten lv'ar. These were almost universally treated with something of the respect which attaches to the ambassador of to-day, hut otherwise there was no recognition of the fact that States as sucli liad mutual rights and obligations. It is the recognition of mutual rights and obligations, together with the establishment of the principle that all independent- States within tho family of civilised nations are equal as touching, thoir sovereignty, that has made possible the pre-, sfent-day system of diplomatic relations. Under the Soman Empire, with its claim to universal sovereignty, tlicro could, of course, be no community of equal sovereign States. The idea of a superior to whom all States were legally subordinate lasted on long after the fall of tho Western Roman Empire. Tho international over-lordship was then held to be vested oither in tho Germanio Holy Roman Emperor or in tho Pope, or in tho two acting together as the temporal and spiritual vice-gorents of Heaven. When tho growth of vigorous national Governments came about the conception of the one Christendom subject to Popo and Emperor received a series of shocks which culminated in tho overthrow of the Pope's universal spiritual supremacy at the Reformation and of the Emperor's temporal authority over oven the German princcs at tile Peaco of Westphalia in 1648.

In the Middle Ages. During the Middle Ages the intercourse between tlio peoples of Europe was comparatively slight, less than during tho best days of tho Roman Empire, and consequently thero waa little need of negotiations between Governments. Diplomatic missions were only occasional incidents. Envoys wero sent to do somo special work, and when it was done they returned home. There wero no regular "diplomatic relations." "With tho Renaissance came a revival of learning and an increase of trade. Peoples awoko to tbo knowledge of tho world beyond their own immediate borders, and their aotivity was further encouraged by the discoveries of new lands east and west by Columbus and other navigators. More and more subjects for negotiations aroso. Governments found that thoy had to resort wore frequently to the practice of sending es.roy3, and gradually thoy realised the necesnicy of keeping permanent embassadors at foreign courts. Tho jistuto and crafty Louis XI of France is reputed to Ilavo been the first monarch to do so. His main purposo was to have a trusty servant at tho seat of Government in neighbour States in order that ho might obtain awnrato information as to what waa going on thero. Besides his regular ambassadors, ho used also to send on quasi-diplomatib missions persons ci lower rank—his barbor, for example— who did not receive public recognition, but worked secretly. Louis XI was doubtloss responsible to a Jarg© extent for the disfavour with which ofchor sovereigns at first regarded tho presence in their dominions of permanent ambassadors, but soon all the loading States perceived tho advantage to be derived from those'official channels of intercourse and information. In Mary's reign, for instance, we find .resident French, Spanish, and Venetian, ambassadors m England. Elizabeth had permanent ambassadors at some foreign courts, and received resident ambassadors at her own. In tho following century, the 17th, tho praciace had become general, and before that contury closed it war, looked upon as the regular and necossary method of official intercourse between, nations. As the complexity of international business increased, tho work of_ embassies and legations was midtipliixV and in course of tinio a wholo hierarchy of diplomats was called into being, consisting of sevoral classes of "ambassadors" or heads of missions, and of 60veral classes of assistants attached 'to (their feuites—secretaries and attaches. Among the latter aro now not infrequently commercial, roilitaiy, and naval, as well as purely diplomatic, (attaches. Tho duties and privileges of these resident diplomatists, together with tho observances connected with their offices, aro embodied in international law, or fixed by rules of international etiquette, or courtesy that aro almost as binding among oivilisod nations as rules of law.

Resident diplomatic representatives became, too. tlio immediate official "chiefs of the consular officers, whoso duties exocpt in special cases are not strictly diplomatic or international, but commercial and national. Consuls are, gonerally speaking, mercantile agents of a State in foreign countries. They aro expccted to protect the trade of the State to vindicate its merchants, perform for its subjects all such acts of a public notary as mav bo required, settle as far as possible their differences, obtain redress for them if they aro wronged, relievo distressed seamen, and keep their homo Government informed of commercial facts. Unless be is specifically invested with diplomatic powers, a consul cannot as such treat as the head of a mission can with tho Government of tho country in which he exercises his office. The office of mercantile consul dates back to the Italian trading communities of the ]2th century. Other trading communities and States adopted it, and it had become general in the 16tH century, when permanent diplomatic missions wero be-, ginning to bo established. Strictly' speaking, "diplomatic relations" do not include the ordinary routine work of consular officers. Consuls may go on exercising their functions in spite of a rupturo of "diplomatic relations," but thoy will bo greatly handicapped by the absence of a diplomatic "chief," who can treat with tho central Government of the country. For instance, a consul may find that one of his nationals has suffered injury, aud cannot obtain redress iu the courts or .from tla local authorities, jfonid^

then be liis duty to report the matte? to the ambassador or Minister at the capital for diplomatic action. When, diplomatic relations are severed he cannot do this. He could, of course* report it to his homo Government, buf> that Government would have no direct means of negotiating the question. Effects of a Breach. It will thus be seen that a breach of?' diplomatic relations between two coun-' trios may seriously affect the comfort? and security of the citizens of the on** country resident in the other. It also' : stops that early interchange of | about any subject of disputo that pre-: vents a. little difference, from becoming an acrimonious quarrel. In addition, it, of course, brings to a. standstill all the multifarious daily work that?, is transacted between a diplomatic mission and the Foreign Office on tlie country to which it is accredit-* ed. The practical inconvenience re-i suiting from it is so obvious that na great Power would think of lightljK bringing it about. Besides tho -prac-j tical inconvenience, there is another point to consider. The early distrnsb of permanent embassies has with time* changed to a feeling that the right to send tlicm, tlio Right of Legation, utj it is called, is one of the most imports ant signs- of the inclusion of a Statej 1 " -v lO family of sovereign independent civilised nations. Denial of the right f apart from the practical inconveniences, is really as deadly an affront as on 9 j great Power can offer to another, its was that way that Great Britain; snowed its moral condemnation of execution of Louis XVI, and tho chief: Powers of Europe their horror at the" assassination of King Alexander and! Queen Draga of Serbia. If it has any meaning, President "Wilson's action is' a strong moral condemnation of Germany— a declaration that so long as shel continues her career of 'submarine piracy sho is uufifc t<» enjov tbo privw leges accorded to members of tho family of civilised nations. It is a decree ot outlawry promulgated by the great, est of tho neutral l'owers-almost tho only one that daro risk bearding tho Internationa l bully. That most cortainly tho only construction that tlte. history of diplomacy allows us to pub on tho President's action. Germany, however, is quite impervious to mora? Si.- »'i K b . eheves on 'y in' "Realpolitik, tha u is to say, in political based on force and directed to some definite material end. The moral r£i probation of tho United States matters' wife ? T ? residon J t Wilson has withheld too long his condemnation of ! itTb? S nl L al / tT aJld lawlessnessfor ! llav f ? 1,1,1011 f orco as moral reprob^ that 1, 8 -irfJ' Bot ** that he IVI II bn ng himself to back it wile t her il, C °; <iouW whether the force, if brought?: to bear, would bo eummb +AI neutralise tlio aarantages sho hopes to^ ™.from her latest UmariT^K paip. A rupture of diplomats re-! nv A ° V - er T • el si ßn atrocities ot^ have , lg ° f the mfeh? on Germany M a V ° ly different «