THE LESSON OF AUSTRIA

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue LXXXVIII, 10 September 1914, Page 6

THE LESSON OF AUSTRIA

In connection with the Austrian disaster in Galicia, one of the facts strongly emphasised in several cable messages is the lukewarmness — to put it mildly— of the Slav soldiery, who in some cases have tendered submission to their fellow Slave from Russia, in preference to continued service under the ruling races, of Austria-Hungary, the Germans and the Magyars. About a fortnight ago, in discussing this factor, The Post remarked that one of the vital questions of the ■war was whether the Austrian Slavs, who form about half the total population, would prove patrioticafly loyal to the Austro-Hungarian -colours; and that, while the heterogeneous race-texture of tho Dual Monarchy suggested an emphatic negative, the expert testimony of a specialist such as Dr. Dillon was confidently positive. In an article about three months ago, Dr. Dillon observed : "It is true that tho peoples of Austria-Hungary call themselves Germans, Czechs, Hungarians (Magyars), Serbs, Rumanians, Italians, Poles. But it is equally true that the army and the navy are Austro-Hungarian." If the cabled statements of fact are right, Dr. Dillon's opinion is clearly wrong ; and the masterly inactivity of disaffected portions of the army is fraught with dire consequences for the Dual Monarchy. Never before has it seemed more certain that with the death of the aged Em-peror-King Francis Joseph the heterogeneous Empire, which for over half a century cohered beneath his rule, totters to its fall. Recently it appeared that the passing of Francis Joseph was only a matter of hours; so imminent a thing, indeed, that a suspicion has arisen that the hour hos really sounded, and that for State reasons Vienna withholds the announcement. Whether this is so or not, the demonstration that the sub* ject races can wreak on the battlefield a terrible revenge iipon their rulers is evidently the beginning of the end, if not the end itself, of the strange creation known as Austria-Hungary. According to the 1910 census, the population of the Empire of Austria and the Kingdom of Hungary was just over 50 millions. Of these. 25 millions were Slavs — Czechs, Poles, Ruthenians (Little BueslasM), Slovaks, Slovsiws, Cr<Mtkn«i £ervi«tt6 t and ot-here. The German*

(dominant in Austria) numbered 12 millions, and the Magyars (rulers of Hungary) about 10 millions. Also, a big Rumanian population in Transylvania, and a considerable colony of Italians in Trentino and on tho Adriatic littoral, form a standing temptation to two of the present neutral nations, Rumania and Ita,ly. On the face of these figures, the fact that Austria-Hungary has so long ] survived, in, spite of ethnographic dis- 1 abilities, is astonishing enough} that she should endure the war-shock that has overtaken her in Galicia, and continue intact, seems almost impossible. Not the least strange thing about the AustroHungarian paradox is the fact that the ruling races, German and Magyar, hate each other, and have merely co-operated because, by united action, they could succeed in peace time in suppressing the Slavs and in mutually maintaining their own dominions. Nothing in fiction reads stranger than the history of Austria-Hungary since she was deposed from the leadership of the Germanic Confederation by the Prussian armies in the war of 1866, in which Bismarck laid the foundations of modern Qerruany. If in the present conflict Germany is defeated, it may be well for Britain to remember that Bismarck, in a similar situation, not only saw the necessity o£ making war upon Austria, but, looking far beyond with his clear statesmanlike vision, saw also the necessity of making a friend of the conquered enemy. It was, for a master-mind like his, not sufficient that Austria should be deposed from the too powerful hegemony of the Germanic States,* she must also be resurrected as an ally of her conqueror and as a check upon Russia and the non-Russian Slavs. What was true in Bismarck's time concerning Austria is probably equally true to-day with regard to Germany. Some nation must impose a frontier against Slavdom if the balance of power in Europe is to be maintained, and the Latin races can hardly do it without Teutonic aid. Even while the then n»\v breech-load-ing guns of the Prussians were destroying Austrian supremacy on the battlefield of Sadown, Bismarck's eyes were upon the future. "With regard to Austria," he himself explained on one occasion, "I had two courses open to me after hei defeat, either to destroy her entirely or to respect her integrity and prepare for our future reconciliation when tho fire of revenge had died out. 1 chose the latter course, because the former would have been the greatest possible act, of folly. . . . For the sake of our own life Austria must live. I had no_ hesitation, therefore, and ever since 1866 my constant 'effort has bee_ to stitch up the great torn texture and to re-establish amicable relations with our ancient associate of the Confederation." That ctitching-up, in spite of the racial problem, has lasted fifty yeare. If Bismarck were an Englishman of to-day, it is at least arguable that he would look upon Germany in the same light as he contemplated Austria ; for the present conflict is hardly likely to mark the end of racial rivalry upon the Continent of Europe, and the trend of international affinities is notoriously tortuous.