THE ALLIES’ STRONGEST WEAPON.

Wairoa Bell, Volume XXXI, Issue 215, 11 January 1918, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE ALLIES’ STRONGEST WEAPON.

HOW TO BRING GERMANY TO SUBMISSION.

By

G. HOLT THOMAS

"the “Sunday Pictorial.”

(Mr. Thomas shows how the Allies, by .a threat gf economic boycott, might bring the war quickly to an end.)

There is one strong weapon which we have not yet used, against the enemy . Why not? Why do we not immediately make the fullest use of our “ economic” power to bring Germany' ho her knees ? Just think for one moment of the nations which constitute the Allies: France, Russia, Italy, Japan, Portugal, Rumania, Serbia, Montenegro, Brazil, China, Great Britain, Austral- . .ia, Canadp, South Africa, Inidia and many Colonies, to which huge agglomeration of Powers we now have added the United States, and, perhaps, the Argentine. . What, we anay well ask, is the unfortunate people pitted .against such a collection of nations going to do ip the future, if we say, AND STICK TO IT, that none of us, umcfier any circumsffmces whatever, will have any dealings •with them for a defined period of years to come? • , No military defeat could possibly -compare with such an overwhelming disaster. Every port closed against their shipping; no products of theirs admitted to what practically amounts to the rest of the world, and no raw materials obtainable -at all. It is appalling to think of: and, bitterly as we detest the Germans to-day, the contemplation of such ian idea, which is well within our power to carry out, makes one almost sorry for them. But why should we not use ANY weapon we possess against the barbarous nation who, thinking to sweep over the world, atoning for their atrocities only by a rapid victory, have broken every international law and l every code of honour in trying to attain that end? To stop the war without having secured that for which we are_ fighting—the right to live in peace —is unthinkable; every day, cost what it may, makes us more determined. But why should we continue it, except at THEIR cost and penalty, when we have such enormous economic power to our hands? Clearly we must go on until our terms are obtained, but there is not the slightest reason why we shoiuPd not plainly set out what the continuation will mean to our enemies. If they could conquer us from a. military point of view, it would be different, but they CANNOT beat the nations arrayeidl against them. We are bound to win in 'the end, land they know it; and, knowing it, it is my firm opinion that if the Allies were to lay down a well-considered schedule of economic disabilities which the Central Powers will have to bear Bind bear, say, for a year for every month the war continues until they accept our peace terms in every detail it would be a very short time before the finish came. Economically wc oan do anything we think it -wise to .do. Germany was almost bankrupt, and my contention has II see no reason to ! real reason of the hat she had to disthe war has only to to drag the Allies iflous condition. rITH A PEN ALTS USE. ing for onei moment :cept on our own suggesting that we .. terms NOW, and age onwards every Id be at Germany’s more than that; 1 bill against her for international law, t or land. aarks out a danger ,’s that, from a cer--1 sink every Ship, ral, tbalt ventures What 'gross impertne response should And I Cannot think nd one with a more t, than to reply: but remember this, sink in contraven.l law, we shall def.l] ied port against ods and every man for a term of yehrs. ace will be permitlied countries withpassport. None of l to do 'business of Allies. We mean a sworn agreement bether the war goes ore oh twenty, this , and a part which nothing will deter us from carrying out, of the peace terms, whenever they may come.” Such a declaration would, iii my opinion, have had a very definite result ; but how much more now, when we can include America on our side? It is no use saying we will simply boycott Germany. Rather the reverse. What I suggest is to lay down tlie terms on which we will not boycott her; to lay down the terms on which stand her last chance of a peace which will he a real finish to the war, and not a peace by which she is going to be punished in another way for years to come, a peace under which the Staite will become impoverished, her manufacturers bankrupt, her workmen fighting for existence. That is the condition which we have the power to enforce the day peace from, a military point of view is made, and if we declare it now the German people will know that for every month of war—a war of their own making—a. year of servitude will result. It is the ONE weapon we possess that Germany does not. This fleet alone proves that we should use it. We can do perfectly well without her. If she in her turn announced that she would boycott the Allies we should laugh at her threats. We do not need Germany. The Allied countries can supply all the raw materials they require, and our exports to Germany, which-never consisted of aynthing she could make herself, will he compensated for by world’s markets which was’ formerly almost a German monopoly. But does Germany need us? Yes. Where is she going to get her cotton, minerals, rubber andl other raw material? Where is' she going to sell her products ? Presumably to the Turks or Bulgurs. Tt is certain that she could no longer exist, as a European Power. It is appalling to think of the power possessed by the Allies practically to crush Germany out of existence. From a military point of view it is not easy; from a. commercial point of view it is easy, when we have won, as we are go- . ing- to win. , ~ . But why not -cut short that pertoa by telling, her NOW what our programme is if our peace terms, which must he carefully set out, are not- accervted by -a oerfbn'in date in tlie near K future? G. HOLT THOMAS.