The temper of Europe may be gauged9 from the reception accorded to these heedless pyrotechnics on the part of national leaders by their own countrymen. Every time it occurs, whether in France, Italy or Turkey, and whether it be Poincaré, Mussolini, or Mustapha Kemal who directs the show, applause greets the exhibition. I remember the first days of the Great War. There was not a belligerent10 capital where great and enthusiastic crowds did not parade the streets to cheer for war. In those days men did not know what war meant. Their conception of it was formed from the pictures of heroic—and always victorious—feats, hung in national galleries and reproduced in the form of the cheap chromos, engravings, and prints, which adorn11 the walls in every cottage throughout most lands. The triumphant12 warriors13 on horseback with the gleaming eye and the flourishing sabre are their own countrymen; the poor vanquished14 under the crashing hoofs15 are the foe16. Hurrah17 for more pictures! The Crown Prince denies that he ever used the phrase "This jolly war." His denial ought to[Pg 61] be accepted in the absence of better proof than is yet forthcoming as to the statement ever having been made. But the phrase represented the temper of millions in those fateful days. It used to be said that in wars one lot cheered and the other fought. But the cheering mobs who filled the streets in August were filling the trenches18 in September, and multitudes were filling graves ere the year was out. But when they cheered they had no realisation of the actualities of war. They idealised it. They only saw it in pictures.
But the cheerers of to-day know what war means. France lost well over a million lives in the last fight. Italy lost 600,000, and there are men in every workshop in both countries who know something of the miseries19 as well as the horrors of war and can tell those who do not. What, then, accounts for the readiness, at the slightest provocation20, to rush into all the same wretchedness over again? The infinite capacity of mankind for deluding21 itself. Last time, it is true, it was a ghastly affair. This time it will be an easy victory. Then you had to fight a perfectly22 armed Germany, or Austria; now it is a very small affair indeed—in one case a disarmed23 Germany which cannot fight, or, in the other case, a[Pg 62] miserable24 little country like Greece with no Army or Navy to talk of. So hurrah for the guns! A bloodless victory, except, of course, to the vanquished. More pictures for the walls to show our children what terrible people we are when provoked!
This episode may end peaceably, but it was a risk to take, and quite an unnecessary risk under the circumstances of the case. Italy was indignant, and naturally indignant, at the murder of her emissaries in cold blood on Greek territory and, although it took place in a well-known murder area—on the Albanian border where comitadjis and other forms of banditti reign—still, Greece was responsible for giving adequate protection to all the Boundary Commissioners25 who were operating within her frontiers. Italy is, therefore, entitled to demand stern reparation for this outrage26. This Greece promptly27 concedes. Not merely has Greece shown her readiness to pay a full indemnity28, but she has offered to salute29 the Italian flag by way of making amends30 for the offence involved to the Italian nation in this failure to protect Italian officers transacting31 legitimate32 business on Greek soil. Mussolini's answer to the Greek acknowledgment of liability is to bombard a[Pg 63] defenceless town, kill a few unarmed citizens, and enter into occupation of a Greek island. Does any one imagine, if the incident had occurred on French soil, and the French Government had displayed the same willingness to express regret and offer reparation, that, without further parley33, he would have bombarded Ajaccio? Or, had it been Britain, would he have shelled Cowes and occupied the Isle34 of Wight? But Greece has no Navy. That, I suppose, alters the merits of the case! Force is still the supreme35 arbiter36 of right and wrong in international affairs in Europe. It is worth noting how a new code of international law is coming into existence since the War. The French armies invade a neighbour's territory, occupy it, establish martial37 law, seize and run the railways, regulate its Press, deport38 tens of thousands of its inhabitants, imprison39 or shoot down all who resist, and then proclaim that this is not an act of war. It is only a peaceful occupation to enforce rights under a peace treaty. Signor Mussolini shells a town belonging to a country with whom he is at peace, and forcibly occupies part of its territory, and then solemnly declares that it is not an act of war, but just a reasonable measure of diplomatic precaution. Once force decides the[Pg 64] issue it also settles the rules. There was a time when English and Spaniards fought each other in the West Indies whilst their Governments at home were ostensibly at peace. And French and English fought in India without any diplomatic rupture40 between Versailles and St. James's. But in those days these lands were very remote and the control of the centre over events at these distances was intermittent41 and occasionally feeble. And sometimes it suited Governments to ignore what was taking place on the fringe of Empire. But even in those days an attack on the homeland meant war, and it would mean war to-day were the attacked countries not powerless. I have heard it said that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor. There is no doubt one international law for the strong and another for the weak.
What about the League of Nations? This is pre-eminently a case for action under the Covenant42. Italy and Greece are both parties. How can they, consistently with the terms of the Treaty they so recently signed, refuse to leave this dispute to be dealt with by the League? Italy had a special part in drafting the Treaty and in imposing43 it upon Germany and Austria. She cannot now in decency[Pg 65] repudiate44 its clauses. It is suggested in some quarters that, the dignity of Italy being involved in the dispute, she cannot possibly consent to leave it in the hands of the League. That surely is a fatal limitation on the activities of the League of Nations. Every dispute involving right implicates45 the national honour and as every nation is the judge of its own honour, ultimately all differences would be ruled out of the Covenant which it did not suit one country or the other to refer. The League is not allowed to touch Reparations. If this quarrel also is excluded from the consideration of the League, it is no exaggeration to say that this valuable part of the Treaty of Versailles becomes a dead letter. It is one of the gross ironies46 of the European situation that the Treaty of Versailles is being gradually torn to pieces by the countries which are not only the authors but have most to gain by its provisions. France has already repudiated47 the first and most important part of the Treaty by declaring that it will refer no question arising between herself and her neighbours under the Treaty itself to the League of Nations. She has further invaded and occupied her neighbour's territory in defiance48 of the provisions of the Treaty. If Italy also declines to[Pg 66] respect the first part of that Treaty, then nothing is left of it except what it suits nations to enforce or obey. And if the framers do not owe allegiance to the Treaty they drafted, why should those who only accepted it under duress49 bow to its behests? The victors are busily engaged in discrediting50 their own charter. It would have been a more honourable51 course for the nations to pursue if they had followed the example of America by refusing to ratify52 the whole Treaty. To sign a contract and then to pick and choose for execution the parts of it that suit you is unworthy of the honour of great nations which profess53 to lead the world towards a higher civilisation54.
There are ugly rumours55 of possible complications arising out of this unfortunate incident. It does not need a vivid imagination to foretell56 one or two possible results of a disastrous57 character. In this country they would be deplored58, not only for their effect on European peace, but for the damage they must inevitably59 inflict60 on the best interests of Italy. She has had enough of victory. What she needs now—what we all need—is peace. There is no country which has more genuine goodwill61 for Italy's prosperity and greatness than Great Britain. It is[Pg 67] an old and tried friendship. The two nations have many common interests: they have no rivalries62. Hence, the deep anxiety of Britain that Italy should not commit a mistake which will mortgage her future even if it does not imperil her present.
There are no doubt strategic advantages for Italy in holding Corfu. It enables them to "bottle up" the Adriatic. But it is Greek and it menaces Slavonia, and this introduction of foreign elements into the body of a State for strategic reasons always provokes inflammatory symptoms injurious to the general health of a community. They tend to become malignant63 and sooner or later they bring disaster. Bosnia ultimately proved to be the death of the Austrian Empire. When the Bosnian cancer became active the evil of Italia Irredenta broke out once more, and between them they laid the Empire of the Hapsburgs in the dust. Italy has played a great part in the work of civilisation, and so has Greece. They have still greater tasks awaiting them—one on a great and the other necessarily on a smaller scale. It would be a misfortune to humanity if they spent their fine enthusiasm on hating and thwarting64 each other.
London, September 3rd, 1923.
点击收听单词发音
1 Mediterranean | |
adj.地中海的;地中海沿岸的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 eruptions | |
n.喷发,爆发( eruption的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 eruption | |
n.火山爆发;(战争等)爆发;(疾病等)发作 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 devastating | |
adj.毁灭性的,令人震惊的,强有力的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 cinder | |
n.余烬,矿渣 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 cinders | |
n.煤渣( cinder的名词复数 );炭渣;煤渣路;煤渣跑道 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 conflagration | |
n.建筑物或森林大火 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 stifles | |
(使)窒息, (使)窒闷( stifle的第三人称单数 ); 镇压,遏制 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 gauged | |
adj.校准的;标准的;量规的;量计的v.(用仪器)测量( gauge的过去式和过去分词 );估计;计量;划分 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 belligerent | |
adj.好战的,挑起战争的;n.交战国,交战者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 adorn | |
vt.使美化,装饰 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 triumphant | |
adj.胜利的,成功的;狂欢的,喜悦的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 warriors | |
武士,勇士,战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 vanquished | |
v.征服( vanquish的过去式和过去分词 );战胜;克服;抑制 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 hoofs | |
n.(兽的)蹄,马蹄( hoof的名词复数 )v.(兽的)蹄,马蹄( hoof的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 foe | |
n.敌人,仇敌 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 hurrah | |
int.好哇,万岁,乌拉 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 trenches | |
深沟,地沟( trench的名词复数 ); 战壕 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 miseries | |
n.痛苦( misery的名词复数 );痛苦的事;穷困;常发牢骚的人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 provocation | |
n.激怒,刺激,挑拨,挑衅的事物,激怒的原因 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 deluding | |
v.欺骗,哄骗( delude的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 perfectly | |
adv.完美地,无可非议地,彻底地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 disarmed | |
v.裁军( disarm的过去式和过去分词 );使息怒 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 miserable | |
adj.悲惨的,痛苦的;可怜的,糟糕的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 commissioners | |
n.专员( commissioner的名词复数 );长官;委员;政府部门的长官 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 outrage | |
n.暴行,侮辱,愤怒;vt.凌辱,激怒 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 promptly | |
adv.及时地,敏捷地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 indemnity | |
n.赔偿,赔款,补偿金 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 salute | |
vi.行礼,致意,问候,放礼炮;vt.向…致意,迎接,赞扬;n.招呼,敬礼,礼炮 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 amends | |
n. 赔偿 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 transacting | |
v.办理(业务等)( transact的现在分词 );交易,谈判 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32 legitimate | |
adj.合法的,合理的,合乎逻辑的;v.使合法 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
33 parley | |
n.谈判 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
34 isle | |
n.小岛,岛 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
35 supreme | |
adj.极度的,最重要的;至高的,最高的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
36 arbiter | |
n.仲裁人,公断人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
37 martial | |
adj.战争的,军事的,尚武的,威武的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
38 deport | |
vt.驱逐出境 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
39 imprison | |
vt.监禁,关押,限制,束缚 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
40 rupture | |
n.破裂;(关系的)决裂;v.(使)破裂 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
41 intermittent | |
adj.间歇的,断断续续的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
42 covenant | |
n.盟约,契约;v.订盟约 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
43 imposing | |
adj.使人难忘的,壮丽的,堂皇的,雄伟的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
44 repudiate | |
v.拒绝,拒付,拒绝履行 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
45 implicates | |
n.牵涉,涉及(某人)( implicate的名词复数 );表明(或意指)…是起因 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
46 ironies | |
n.反语( irony的名词复数 );冷嘲;具有讽刺意味的事;嘲弄 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
47 repudiated | |
v.(正式地)否认( repudiate的过去式和过去分词 );拒绝接受;拒绝与…往来;拒不履行(法律义务) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
48 defiance | |
n.挑战,挑衅,蔑视,违抗 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
49 duress | |
n.胁迫 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
50 discrediting | |
使不相信( discredit的现在分词 ); 使怀疑; 败坏…的名声; 拒绝相信 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
51 honourable | |
adj.可敬的;荣誉的,光荣的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
52 ratify | |
v.批准,认可,追认 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
53 profess | |
v.声称,冒称,以...为业,正式接受入教,表明信仰 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
54 civilisation | |
n.文明,文化,开化,教化 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
55 rumours | |
n.传闻( rumour的名词复数 );风闻;谣言;谣传 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
56 foretell | |
v.预言,预告,预示 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
57 disastrous | |
adj.灾难性的,造成灾害的;极坏的,很糟的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
58 deplored | |
v.悲叹,痛惜,强烈反对( deplore的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
59 inevitably | |
adv.不可避免地;必然发生地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
60 inflict | |
vt.(on)把…强加给,使遭受,使承担 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
61 goodwill | |
n.善意,亲善,信誉,声誉 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
62 rivalries | |
n.敌对,竞争,对抗( rivalry的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
63 malignant | |
adj.恶性的,致命的;恶意的,恶毒的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
64 thwarting | |
阻挠( thwart的现在分词 ); 使受挫折; 挫败; 横过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |