Peace Theories and the Balkan War

ism, Old or Ne

impos

unli

t fu

medy, and at time

n the whole so conclusive and comple

rom the charges too readily brought agains

s, economic considerations, anyt

of its economic futili

slightest use, since force a

ly without casuistry and logic-chopping, and honestly desiring to avoid paradox and "cleverness." And these quite simple answers will

s may be summ

nciples, this country would not have "backed the wrong horse," and this war, two wars which have preceded it, and many of the abominations of which the Balkan peninsular has been the scene during the last 60 years might have been avoided, and in any case

cifist ever said it was; it is not the likelihoo

ording as the parties to a dispu

ile; and forc

an end, we who do not believe in force and conquest rejoice in their action, and believe it will achieve immense benefits. But if instead of using their victory to eliminate force, they in their turn pin their faith to it, continue to use it the one against t

people, to exploit them as a means of livelihood, and this conception was at the bottom of most of Turkish misgovernment. And in the larger sense its cause is economic because in the Balkans, remote geographically from the

t of the fact that a means of livelihood (an economic system), based upon having more force than someone else and usin

their quarrels and ended the abominations of the Balkan peninsula long ago-even in the opinion of the Times. And it is our own false statecraft-that of Great Britain-which has a large part of the responsibility for this failure of European civi

ngs that can prevent future wars, just as they were the only things that brought religious wars to an end-a preponderant power "imposing" peace playing

eligious persecution for instance-are inevitable; they cease with better underst

preparation may include battleships and conscription, those elements will quite obviou

replies need a