Munich and After
"Why do the heathens rage and the people imagine a
vain thing?"
Since the signing of the Peace Pact between Chamberlain and Hitler in September
events have moved rapidly in Europe. The reply in Great Britain to the Peace Pact
was a violent campaign in the British Press against Germany, and an attack on
Chamberlain's policy both by the Opposition in Parliament and by many members
of his own party. The Peace Pact was ignored and war with Germany discussed as
a matter of course. Chamberlain was only able to save his position by increasing
enormously the expenditure on armaments.
The large number of people in this country who believe a good understanding
with Germany essential had no opportunity of putting forward their point of view
in the press. The members of Parliament were intimidated by the press campaign.
The only institution left where a free expression of opinion was possible was the
House of Lords. The warmongers controlled both the press and the B.B.C.
The final victory of Franco enormously strengthened the position of the Axis in
Europe to the great astonishment of our press who, having pursued him with a
vile campaign of calumny during the war, assisted by a political agitation in this
country, imagined that he would join with us. Franco's reply to our advances was
to join
the anti-Comintern Pact and France, who had taken the side of the Communists,
found herself with three potential enemies on her three frontiers.
Hungary also joined the anti-Comintern Pact, and Jugoslavia entered into the
closest friendship with Germany and Italy, so that Great Britain and France found
themselves faced with a formidable bloc in Europe, of nations they had treated
with hostility or indifference.
President Roosevelt next joined the campaign against Germany and Italy. The
Press and the wireless had been used for months to spread lies about Germany
and when the ground had been prepared Roosevelt made a violent attack on
Germany and Italy, and proposed a combination of the Democracies against them
and a trade boycott. As Senator Pittman put it clearly, "Why kill them when
we can starve them?"
These proposals by Roosevelt were acclaimed by our Press but it soon became
evident that the people in the U.S.A. were not going to be drawn into another
European war and that Roosevelt would find it very difficult to get the Neutrality
Law altered so that he could if he chose supply munitions to one side and not to
the other, thus putting into the hands of the President the decision of Peace or
War.
It was obvious that Germany and Italy could not continue to ignore the feverish
preparations for war in Great Britain, France and the U.S.A., and consequently
two dramatic events took place, one quickly following on the other.
Slovakia separated herself from Czechoslovakia, claiming independence. The
Czech Government, faced by internal revolution, asked Germany to intervene and
Germany occupied Bohemia and Moravia, incorporating them as a Protectorate in
the Reich. It was impossible any longer to tolerate this promontory penetrating
deep into Germany and governed by people who were largely communistic and
hostile to Germany, an area which French military authorities had openly stated
would be used as a base for bombing planes, aiming at destroying the cities of
Germany.
It was evident from the replies made by Mr. Chamberlain and Lord Halifax that
they did not regard the occupation of Bohemia and Moravia as a matter affecting
our interests, as, owing to the break-away of Slovakia, Czechoslovakia had ceased
to exist and an occupation by German troops made at the request of the Czech
Government could hardly be described as an act of military aggression.
Then the storm cloud, organised by those working for war, burst and has swept
the Government like helpless logs in its torrent towards war. The public
excitement was increased by the publication in the London Press of a message
purporting to come from
Rumania - but now believed to have been concocted in London - to the effect that
Germany had threatened Rumania with war if she did not give her a complete
monopoly of all her external trade.
The British Ambassador in Berlin was instructed to lodge a protest with the
German Government, and to tear up the Peace Pact signed by Herr Hitler and Mr.
Chamberlain.
This was followed later by the occupation of Albania by Italy thus securing the
Adriatic from the hostile fleets of England and France bombarding Italian
towns.
According to Mr. Chamberlain these two necessary acts of self defence filled the
whole world with "horror". I have been young and now am old and in my lifetime
I have seen Great Britain wage war after war to "extend" the Empire. It is not for
us, satiated with conquest, and oppressing today by force the Arabs in
Palestine - a country in which we are interlopers, and which incidentally occupies
a strategic position on the
Mediterranean, - to criticise the actions of other nations.
These two inevitable acts were received quite calmly in Europe but were made
the excuse for a fresh campaign here and in the States in which it was stated that
Germany and Italy meant to invade and annex all the small nations in Europe as a
preliminary to world conquest, and our Press arranged for alarmist messages from
every capital in Europe. An imaginary crisis was created and the enemies of
Chamberlain gathered their forces to turn him out of office. Churchill, Eden and
their friends worked night and day to organise a revolt in the Conservative Party,
and Fleet Street said he would not remain in power for another week. If he fell,
Eden, who cannot speak without showing his insolent attitude to the German
people, Churchill, and their friends would form a government.
Chamberlain saved himself by his speech in Birmingham attacking Hitler, and by
proposing to resuscitate the old plan which he had only a year ago condemned as
unworkable - a coalition of the small nations in Europe against Germany. Without
waiting to be asked, we promised Poland to defend her if Germany attacked her
independence, went round Europe trying to draw the small nations into a
combination against Germany, and approached the Soviet for the same purpose.
When Italy occupied Albania, we hastened to offer Greece and Albania our
defence if their independence was attacked. The response to these efforts has
been very remarkable. Ten nations, in addition to France and Italy, are in contact
with the German frontier. Of these Belgium is guaranteed by England, France and
Germany. Of the other nine, only Poland has accepted. The other eight have
declined our offer of protection, saying they have no cause for alarm, and in
addition, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Latvia, Estonia and Bulgaria stand aloof. A
Norwegian Minister speaking the other day declared that for three hundred years,
the Scandinavian countries have been fighting with England for the right to
maintain their neutrality. Rumania and Greece have thanked us for our offer to
defend them, but have explained that they have no intention of entering into a
reciprocal treaty and only Portugal, Poland and Turkey have agreed to a mutually
defensive treaty. Rumania has been rewarded with a loan of five million pounds,
for graciously allowing us to defend her. The Soviet in spite of our beseeching
attitude has so far not come to any agreement with us. The part they will play if
war should come, is that of the jackal feasting on the corpses of the slain.
All we have done is to present Hitler with a splendid testimonial from the small
nations in Europe.
Just as we were forced by the "City" to crush the small independent Boer
Republic in order to gain control of the gold mines, so the real reason, why we are
interfering in Poland, Rumania and Greece, is that our financiers have large
interests in the Polish coal mines where the miners' wages are disgracefully low,
Rumanian oil and Greek banking. A pipe line runs from the oil fields of poverty
stricken Rumania to the city of London, pouring the wealth of that country into
the pockets of our financiers. They are determined that Germany be warned off
these countries, where they have established a monopoly of financial control. The
British public are deceived by the cry "Defend the independence of small
nations".
The attempt we are making to persuade the Soviet to invade Europe, pouring in
hordes of barbaric troops from European and Asiatic Russia, whose advance
would be accompanied by Communist risings and massacres, is probably the
greatest crime against Christianity and civilization in the history of Europe.
By following this extraordinary foreign policy our Government has sinned against
four principles which should govern the foreign policy of nations.
No Government has the right to pledge the lives of the people, except in self
defence or defence of a vital interest. The inclusion of Bohemia in the Reich
touches no interest of ours.
No Government has a right to hand the control of its foreign policy to another
nation or nations. Let us suppose, for instance, that Greece quarrelled with Italy
and they went to war; we are bound to fight for Greece whether she is right or
wrong.
The following quotation from a speech made by Captain Euan Wallace, Minister
of Transport, at Bognor, condemns the government foreign policy out of their
own mouths.
"Let us make no mistake about it, the decision whether we will fight has been
taken out of the hands of the people of this country, and out of the hands of our
governors. We have made commitments which are automatic. If those
commitments are broken, this country is committed for better or for worse to take
up arms."
It is the duty of a Government to reduce outside commitments which may lead to
war, and to secure the friendship of all nations. Our Government has increased
our commitments which may lead to war, and by this action caused the Peace
Pact and the Naval Treaty with Germany to be torn up. We had torn up the Peace
Pact and Germany has now quite reasonably denounced the Naval Pact which was
of great value to us. The final result of our action has been that Hitler is freed
from his Peace Treaty with Poland and any restraint in strengthening his navy, so
that he is left with a distinct diplomatic gain by our action.
No Government has the right to lure a nation into war with a third nation if they
cannot fulfil their offers of help. If Poland, having accepted our advances, makes
war on Germany, we could not by any possibility go to her assistance.
As the Führer pointed out in his speech on April 28, 1939, when he first
signed a Peace Pact with Poland he made no objections to the existing "Mutual
Security Treaty" with France; but for Poland, having signed the Peace Pact, to
make a treaty with Great Britain undertaking to make war on Germany under
certain conditions, is an obvious breach of the Peace Pact.
What does Poland imagine she gains by this move? The Polish Corridor is an
injustice to Germany and many people are astonished that she has put up with it
so long. Danzig is as much a German city as Liverpool is English. Suppose we
had lost the War and Germany had given Liverpool to De Valera? How long
would we have tolerated that state of affairs?
Hitler made the Peace Pact with Poland and has faithfully observed it. Now they
have broken it he is free to take back the Polish Corridor and include Danzig in
the Reich. If Poland imagines that she can drag England into a war with Germany
about Danzig she is greatly mistaken. Our Government has been careful to guard
themselves on that point. Supposing Poland declares war and does manage to
bring us in it will not save her. We are as helpless to save her as if she was on the
Planet Mars. For us to tempt her to make such a suicidal war is an act of mischief
deliberately disturbing the Peace of Europe.
Roosevelt who hopes for a third term of office in spite of having landed the
U.S.A. with a huge internal debt and 20 millions people on the dole, was looking
out for a good slogan and thought that a call to the Democracies to defend
"Christianity, Democracy and International Good Faith" would do.
He has had to retreat, and has thrown out a smoke screen to hide his retreat by
sending to the World Press and Hitler and Mussolini an absurd document, in
which they are told to pledge themselves to Peace for 25 years with a long list of
nations, and then hand their future over to a world congress controlled by the
three Democracies who were responsible for the Treaty of Versailles. This has
been hailed as a wonderful document by the Governments of Great Britain and
France.
In the meantime Peace among the nations of the Danube Basin and of the Balkans
is being assured by Hitler and Mussolini, who are having conference with the
various Prime Ministers and Foreign Secretaries. There are three dangers to
Peace, the territorial demands of Hungary and of Bulgaria, and the trouble with
the Croatians, but with the friendly assistance of Germany and Italy both nations
will doubtless be able to come to terms with their neighbours.
These nations are all centering round the Axis because it will give them the three
things which the people of Europe most
desire, - Peace, ordered stable Government, and trade.
The Totalitarian States stand for certain fundamental principles:
Peace among the nations, each following out its own economic life.
Government with only one object - the good of the people, instead of being used
for the struggle for power of rival political Parties.
The abolition of Politicians.
The abolition of the use of the Press controlled by financial groups to promote
war by spreading lies.
A higher conception of the relation of the individual to the community, which is
not merely
negative - the obeying of the law - but positive, - the service of the community
being the first duty.
A stable economic and financial system and work for all.
Freedom from control by international finance.
Arms for defence but not for attack.
It is obvious that the European nations are grouping themselves in friendly
alliance round the Axis and it is time we recognised that fact and accepted the
friendship which has been offered us by Germany and Italy.
It is also time that France, for long under the influence of our foreign office with
its pernicious traditions, reversed her policy and made friends with her
neighbours who have no quarrel with her, settled the quite reasonable demands of
Italy, and developed trade with the three countries on her frontiers.
Why should France sacrifice so much because we choose to quarrel with
Germany?
There will probably be no war in Europe because Hitler and Mussolini stand for
Peace.
The Europeans are settling down to a long Peace, which clears the deck for the
larger question of World Trade and the huge monopoly of Gold, Raw materials
and tropical
and sub-tropical products held by the three Democracies and the Soviet.
In every speech Hitler and Mussolini have given warning on this matter and they
not only represent the needs of themselves and Japan but many other nations.
This of course is what Roosevelt is really thinking about. He is prepared to plunge
into a World War to defend Monopoly in the name of "Christianity, Democracy
and Good Faith."
The power of the Monopolists is colossal. They possess the world's wealth, rule a
great part of the world's population, and have at their command our
overwhelming sea power, which enables them to control trade on the high seas,
and as we have seen, Roosevelt has already proposed that a trade boycott force
the Have Nots into submission.
It is really for this reason that Germany is seeking to develop trade on the old
trade route from Asia to Europe and it is for this reason that we are trying to
prevent it.
While in Parliament the Government talk about small nationalities, the
Conservative Party organisation through its political instructors is telling us that
we do not care what happens to small nationalities, but we must stop the
development of Germany's trade in the Danube Basin and the Balkans so as to be
able to starve her out by a blockade. It is obviously not only in the interest of the
Have Nots, but of the whole world and even of the Monopolists themselves that
the trade of the world be set free. Strangely enough the Monopolists are suffering
most from their own policy having huge armies of unemployed.
The British Empire when it was a Free Trade Empire had the goodwill of all the
world. To-day when it has surrounded itself with tariffs, Ottawa agreements,
quotas and international restrictions on output, it no longer has that goodwill
which was its real strength, and piling armaments on armaments is not the
solution of the question.
Not so important but of great interest is the Gold monopoly, a monopoly not only
of the Gold available but the world's Gold mines which the Monopolists share
with the Soviet.
The U.S.A. is still hoarding larger and larger quantities of Gold. It does not seem
to occur to her economists that to exchange goods for Gold, which is buried in
their Bank Vaults and is "sterilized" to use the Stock Exchange jargon, is to give
away their goods for nothing. Trade is the exchange of goods which have a utility
value for other goods which have a utility value, and sterilized gold has no utility
value at all.
As long as Gold is still regarded as wealth by the mass of mankind, it is thought
necessary for a trading nation to have a Gold reserve, but
Germany - deprived by her creditors of all her Gold - has challenged that idea and
is building up an export trade without it and
is to-day our largest customer.
Germany has not only challenged the political system of the Democracies but the
economic system of international finance and international monopolies, and it is
to that challenge that all the attacks in the Press and the attempts to force the
people of this country into war are due.
If Germany succeeds in her economic system of basing her currency on labour
values and exchanging goods for goods, the whole of the Gold stored in the Bank
vaults of the U.S.A. can be written off as a dead loss, and Gold mining which
depends on selling Gold at a higher and higher price to the Governments who buy
the Gold bars and do nothing with them, will collapse. The old story of King
Midas who starved because everything he touched turned to Gold will come
true.
The German Government has shown that Gold is not necessary and that is one of
the reasons for the policy pursued against them by Great Britain, France and the
U.S.A. Millions are being spent on this propaganda, but when once the peoples of
Great Britain, France and the U.S.A. realise that the cry that Germany aims at
universal dominion is a
lie to-day just as it was a lie in 1914; that the only danger facing Democracy is its
own misrule, weakness in the face of vested interests and sacrifice of public
interest to the greedy scramble of politicians for power; that they are being driven
like sheep to the slaughter by big finance just as they were driven into the Boer
war, they will turn in revolt. The revolt has already begun in England though not
reported by our Press.
Germany has symbolized international finance by calling it "the Jew". It is true
Jews are to a great extent interested. International finance is the public enemy and
the promoter of war among the peoples, but those controlling it belong to all
nations, and it is centred in London, Paris and New York. The "City" rules this
country. They threw the Labour Party out of power when it suited them, and they
control our Government today. When Roosevelt and our Government say they are
willing to consider how to set free the supply of raw materials they are promising
what they cannot perform as they are helpless in the grip of the huge combines.
Only the Totalitarian States are free states. King Midas is the Public Enemy
number one.
While the Monopolists combine to accumulate Gold it is no longer the basis of
their paper currency. We have ourselves abolished the ratio between Gold and
paper, and France devalues the Franc at intervals. The confusion between the
world currencies continues and will end in a collapse. The only sound
currency to-day is the German currency.
It is also necessary for the world to return in some form or other to Free Trade,
but it must be a Free Trade that does not cause a competition between different
standards of living. Germany has solved these problems by exchanging goods for
goods based on barter.
Before these international questions are discussed the Monopolists have to ask
themselves why, with the world wealth in their possession, they suffer from
serious unemployment, which has reached in the U.S.A. the appalling figure of 20
million people on the dole, while Germany has to hire surplus labour abroad.
They must reform their own economic system before they reform the world.
They have also to ask themselves two very fundamental questions, namely, is it
possible to combine the Democratic idea with the principle that the first duty of
the citizen is the welfare of the community, and with honest government not
controlled behind the scenes by the Financiers.
Democracies are in many cases financially corrupt Governments. In our case that
is not true but our Government and Parliament are intellectually dishonest. Truth
is sacrificed every day to a party advantage. If lies were only consciously told it
would not be so serious but political life produces a mental degeneration in which
it is no longer possible for the politicians to distinguish between truth and
falsehood.
An excellent example occurred in the House of Commons the other day when the
leaders of the Opposition accused Franco of dropping from his planes chocolate
boxes containing infernal machines so that when children picked them up they
were blown to pieces. Men who can say such things are really mentally insane
and these champions of Democracy are our rulers to whom we submit the safety
of our State.
The Parliamentary system is becoming unworkable. The Peoples of the
Democracies, owing to the iron control of publicity, are dumb and can be driven
to war without a protest. Even a pig is allowed to squeal before he is killed.
We shall owe to Germany not only the abolition of the Politician, but a new
ethical conception of a community, Peace in Europe and a reformed economic
and trading system which will reconstruct world economics and abolish the evil
influences of international finance and huge trading monopolies.
The great speech made by the Führer has deflated the war balloon blown
out with poison gas by the Press. Germany makes no threat of war against any
nation. The war anxiety among the small nations of Europe is not due to German
action but to the uncertainty as to whether we do not intend to provoke war and
the fear of our hysterical and unbalanced Democracy, for they know that Great
Britain is dangerous when she is filled with moral indignation at the sins of her
neighbours. When the giants are fighting the small nations will suffer.
It is true Holland is busy arming her frontier facing Germany but she is just as
busy arming her harbours facing England. France is evidently hesitating between
Peace, Trade and friendship with Germany and being further involved in our
reckless foreign policy. It is said that our beginning of conscription is the price we
are paying to keep her with us.
Before finally considering the two policies put before the peoples of Europe and
the peoples of this country by the Führer and the British Government
respectively, let us briefly look at the present condition of Europe as revealed by
our attempts to consolidate it in a new policy against Germany.
Switzerland, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania deny that they fear any act [of] aggression on the part of
Germany, refuse to be drawn into any alliance that may commit them to war, and
state that if war comes they will remain neutral.
Germany, Italy, Spain, Slovakia, Hungary and Jugoslavia are united in the closest
bonds of friendship and mutual confidence. Rumania and Greece, while not
refusing our offer of assistance if attacked, will not sign a Treaty which will in
any way commit them to war.
A chain of Peace Pacts beginning in Italy joins Italy to Jugoslavia, Jugoslavia to
Bulgaria, Bulgaria to Turkey.
Poland alone has formed a mutual security pact with us, and by so doing broken
her Peace Pact with Germany.
France is isolated in Europe to-day and has chosen to quarrel with her three
neighbours on her
frontiers - Spain, Italy and Germany. This attitude of hostility can be ended when
she chooses, and grants the quite reasonable requests of Italy.
Before Hitler rose to power all countries in Europe had armed and a criss cross of
mutual security pacts made war possible and no one could say where it would
stop. Since Germany rose to power the consolidation of Europe into friendly
nations promoting trade has proceeded apace. A central area of Europe from the
frontiers of Holland to the frontiers of Rumania, and united to Italy and Spain is
settled as a permanent area of
Peace, - an area equal to the old Austrian Empire and united to Germany by
friendship, not by dominance of a central Government. If Germany and Italy
acting jointly are able to settle the differences about land frontiers between
Hungary and Rumania, this will extend to the Black Sea.
Formerly Poland could be included. Unfortunately for her she has broken away
owing to our interference. This Pax Germanica which is gradually extending over
Europe is the work of two
men - Hitler and Mussolini.
Let us now consider the two policies offered by Hitler on the one hand and our
Government on the other.
To Hitler we owe the idea of Peace Pacts. Two nations agree not to go to war for
a term of years. This does not involve any alliance against a third Power. This
policy has spread over Europe and into Asia. Turkey, Iraq, Persia and Afghanistan
are united by Peace Pacts.
The first Peace Pact between Germany and Poland resulted in the friendly
settlement of very delicate and difficult points and it is disastrous for her that
Poland has broken it.
The other policy of mutual security pacts is simply the Policy of Treaties between
two nations directed against a third nation under a new name which existed
before the war and had such disastrous consequences. Germany was bound to
Austria, England was bound to France, and France to Russia, and so an
insignificant Balkan war involved all Europe in a catastrophe. This policy was
tried during the reign of the League and produced unrest and fear of war all over
Europe. It means the assumption by a nation of obligations to fight for a foreign
policy over which it has no control, and it ensures automatically a local war
between two powers involving all those linked by mutual security pacts. A break
at any point in the complicated chain involves the whole in disaster. It means
dividing Europe into two hostile camps, which must end in war sooner or
later.
Hitler has always denounced mutual security and Germany beyond her guarantee
of the integrity of Belgium and of Slovakia is free from all such commitments.
Our alliance with France has been disastrous to both countries as neither country
is free to follow the foreign policy suited to its own interests. It is, for instance,
essential for France today to develop friendly relations with Spain and Italy, and
above all with Germany. Many intelligent Frenchmen curse the alliance with us
dragging France into our disastrous and reckless Foreign Policy.
The peoples of Europe, of Great Britain and the British Empire have the chance
of adopting the policy of Hitler and Peace, or of Chamberlain who is being driven
by forces hostile to Germany to war. I thank God that the Peace of Europe is in
the guardianship of the Führer and therefore, in spite of the frantic efforts
of all those here and in Europe and America who want war, secure.
Epilogue by The
Scriptorium, November 11, 2003
These closing words were written in June 1939. As we all know, things turned out
rather differently than Dr. Laurie expected, and at the time of his writing the
remaining days of peace were already numbered at less than 100. It seems
appropriate, therefore, to close this book with just a few words from the most
virulent of those men who wanted the developments the world actually got, and
who with their frantic efforts succeeded in thwarting what could have been a long
and prosperous European and global peace:
Lord Vansittart, at the time of this quote Permanent Under-Secretary at
the British Foreign Office: "If Hitler fails, his successor will be Bolshevism; if he
is successful, we will present him with a European war within five years." In his
book Even now, London 1933, p. 69. [Note how close the
predicted timing was to actual fact!]
Winston Churchill, British Prime Minister: "Germany is becoming too
strong. We must crush her." Said to American General Robert E. Wood in
November 1936. And: "This war is a British war and its goal is the
destruction of Germany." Said in November 1939 in a radio address to the
British people. And just a short time later: "You must understand that
this
war is not against Hitler or National Socialism, but against the strength of the
German people, which is to be smashed for good regardless of whether it is in the
hands of Hitler or a Jesuit priest." Latter quoted in E. Hughes, Winston
Churchill - His Career in War and Peace, p. 145.
Duff Cooper, First Lord of the Admiralty and British Minister for
Information: "The coming peace treaty must be much harsher and more merciless
than Versailles. We can make no distinction between Hitler and the German
people!" Said on April 25, 1940, as quoted in: Father E. J.
Reichenberger, Wider Willkür und Machtrausch, 1955, p.
114.
And the list goes on...
 
The Case for Germany
A Study of Modern Germany
|