Why We Are At War (2nd Edition, revised)

n of Britis

inst Russia, and would have stood on the defensive against France; and England would not have been dragged into war.[105] The question of British neutrality first appears in the British White Book on July 25th, whe

ide ... This impression ought, as I have pointed out, to be dispelled by the orders we have given to the First Fleet ... not to dispers

dently. Sir Edward Grey, in an interview with Prince Lichnowsky, told him 'he did not wish the Ambassador to be misle

British interests required us to intervene, we must intervene at once, and the decision would have to be very rapid.... But ... I did not wish to be open to

the Imperial Chancellor had made his notori

in any conflict there might be. That, however, was not the object at which Germany aimed. Provided that neutrality of Great Britain were certain, every assurance would be give

ies respected the integrity and neutrality of the Netherlands, Germany was ready to give His Majesty's Government an assurance that she would do likewise. It depended on the action

repudiated (July 30) by

entertain the Chancellor's proposal that they sh

nch colonies are taken and France is beaten so long as German

hout further territory in Europe being taken from her, could be so crushed as

ake this bargain with Germany at the expense of France, a disgr

ver obligation or interest we have as regards the neutrality

ds absolutely free and hinted at some scheme for preventing

gressive or hostile policy would be pursued against her or her allies by France, Russia, and ourselves, jointly or separately ... The idea has hitherto been too Utopian to form the subject of definite proposa

not be violated. It is interesting to note how this extremely serious warning was received by Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg:-'His Excellency

him, so that he could scarcely complai

the effect which this warning had upon Berlin; but it may be remarked that a

liatory advice to Austria, as she seemed convinced that we should act wi

the Italian Minister gave this information to Sir Rennell Rodd late in the day, after hav

f France and Germany whether they were 'prepared to engage to respect neutrality of Belgium so long as no other Power vio

om what he said that he thought any reply they might give could not but disclose a certain amount of their plan of campaign in the event of war

acts have already been committed in Belgium. As an instance of this, he alleged th

d Prince Lichnowsky was warned the next day that 'the neutrality of Belgium affected feeling in this coun

e combatant, while the other respected it, it would be extrem

he gave to Sir Edward Goschen in rejecting what is now known as Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg's 'infamous proposal', namely, that France without actually losing territory might be so crushed as to lose her position as a Great Power, and become subordinate to German policy. And if there should be still any doubt about Sir Edward Grey's policy at this moment, we would refer to his statement in the House of Commons on August 27.[117] The important points are that the offers of August 1 were made on the sole responsibility of Prince Lichnowsky, and without authority from his Government;

in Berlin that this was an offer to guarantee French neutrality by the force of British arms, and the German Emperor in his telegram to the King gave evidence of the relief His Imperial Majesty felt at the prospect that the good relations between the two co

867 had agreed to a 'collective guarantee' by which it was not intended that every Power was bound single-handed to fight any Government which violated Luxemburg. Although this gross disregard by the Germans of their solemn pledge did not entail the same consequences as the subsequen

for 'diplomatic intervention to safeguard the integrity of Belgium'.[121

ntegrity of the kingdom and its possessions at the conclusion of peace, threatening in case

d Russia to maintain the independence and integrity of Belgium.[123] On receipt of the protest of Sir Edward Grey, it would seem that Herr von Jagow made one more desperate effort to bid for British neutrality: 'Germany will, under no pretence whatever, annex Belgian territory': to pass through Belgium was necessary because the 'German army could not be exposed to French attack across Belgi

n Affairs stating that German Government will be compelled to carry out

t Belgian territory has b

s, we must repeat that request, and ask that a satisfactory reply to it and to my telegram of this morning be received here by 12 o'clock to-night. If not, you are instructed to ask for your passports, an

n Great Britain and Germany, it is our belief that their origin must be found in the highest authority in the German Empire, whom we believe, in spite of petty signs of spitefulness exhibited since the war broke out, to have been sincerely and honestly working in favour of European peace, against obstacles little dreamt of by our countrymen. But certain signs are not wanting that, in the lower ranks of the German hierarchy, war with this country had been decided on, and that Sir Edward Grey was not far wrong when he wrote to Sir Francis Bertie on July 31, 'I believe it to be quite untrue that our atti

instructive. In conversation with Sir Edward Goschen, neither Herr von Jagow nor the Chancellor urged that the French had violated the neutrality; the argument is purely and simply that the route by way of the Vosges is difficult, time is everything, and it is a matter of life and death to Germany to crush France as quickly as possible, in order that she may be able to meet the Russians before they reach the German frontier. This excuse does not seem to have been ve

neutrality of Belgium, as long as her opponent respects it. We knew, however, that France stood ready for invasion. France could wait but we could not wait. A French movement upon our flank upon the Lower Rhine might have been disastrous. So we were compelled to override the just protest of the Luxemburg an

their own folly and be attacked not only by Belgium but also by Great Britain, to whom not five days before they had solemnly promised to observe the neutrality, and whom such a gross violation of the French word must indubitably have kept neutral, if it did not throw her on to the side of Germany. In regard to Belgium the Germans have indeed put forward the plea that the French had already violated its neutrality before war was declared. This plea has been like a snowball. It began with the ineffective accusation that the French were at Givet, a town in French territory, and that this constituted an attack on Germany, th