EUROPEAN WARS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 4472, 13 February 1917, Page 7

EUROPEAN WARS.

THE ROLE OF BRITAIN. At a meeting convened in the Town Hall in Petrograd in November to pay a tribute to the efforts of Russia’s Allies, Profesor P. G-. Vinogradoff, of Oxford University, delivered an address, in the course of which he said : We are living in a remarkable age. Not only are the guns thundering as they never 'thundered before in history, but emotions hitherto unknown are stirring the political world, and the most astonishing events are taking place in the spiritual world and in tiie minds of the peoples. We are witnesses of a tremendous hypnotisation of the whole world. We see a vast st'heme of mendacious advertisement, worked out with German precision, which puts into the shade Napoleon’s bulletins, and even the insolent self-assurance of Bismarck. This advertisement is showing its hypnotising power. Words lose their old meanings and acquire new ones. The aim of this hypnotisation is being attained ; German public opinion is being perverted; some pressure is being exercised on the views of neutral countries.

A prominent' part in this hypnotisation is being played by the Chancellor, who lias been entrusted with a special task. Oil every'grand occasion he proves that neither Austria nor Germany is responsible for tlie war, but Russia, who, for the maintenance or peace, made all concessions but oliothe institution of an inquisition in Belgrade—and 1 England, who used ail her endeavours to prevent the war, hut joined in when Germany violated Belgian neutrality. In a word, they are trving to prove that black is white and white is black. But this is being done so assuredly and systematically that the aim is being attained to a greater or less degree. Another ruling motive in the Chancellor s utterances is the desire of Great Britain to dominate the world. This accusation was proclaimed long ago. 1 his 1 mere playing with words. Undoubtedly, England is one of the mightiest countries in the world, but from that you cannot conclude that she desires the hegemony of the world. oucli an aspiration is unattainable foi Ln,-,-land, owing to the character of her chief weapon- —- the licet. Jhe old English principle of keeping the Meet on a level of superiority to the united fleets of the two next most powerful States was abandoned before the commencement of the war In England it is openly admitted that the Bnti. h licet cannot and must not be a weapon for crushing others. Li that cas England would run the risk oi bringing upon herself a coalition of the naval Powers. Apart from that, the significance of the fleet as a vcapon for influencing the destiny of the world is limited in itself- Jins was well expressed by Lord Salisbury timing the Armenian massacres, when lie”said : “"We cannot send battleships on to the Armenian plateau.’’

THE ENGLISH ARMY. The English Army can never play an aggressive role. Even the creation of a 5,000,000 army could _ not place England in the first rank of the military Powers. The truth is that England has always waged coalition wars, always represented the concentration of the coalition against the strongest Continental Powers. Thus, she imparted the energy and stubborn perseverance of the British race _ to the struggle of the coalitions against. Philip L, Louis XIV., Napoleon 1., Nicholas L, and now "William 11. The forces of the British Empire for defence are tremendous; those for aggression small. In that lies the pith of the situation. England’s policy aims not at aggression, but at maintaining her position. Her task is to uphold the balance of power. "We have a sure indication of that being England’s position in the reaction between her internal and foreign policies. It is to be seen in her relations to her colonies. In this sphere there aie two types of relationship. Aggressive countries exploit tliencolonies. trying to compensate in direct benefits for their losses in blood and money. Countries that have lost the taste for external conquest base their ties between the metropolis and the colonies 011 citizenship and freedom. The result of this policy in England’s case is the sincere and tremendous part taken in this war by her colonies, an absolutely voluntary part. If England had only pursued such a policy in the eighteenth century the U.S.A. would still have been part of the British Empire. Tins is an object lesson which shows what compulsion leads to, and what is attainable by respect for the rights and liberty of others.”