FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186  
187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   >>   >|  
d would have welcomed a separate peace on our part, even during Clemenceau's period of office; but in that case we should have had to accept the terms of the London conference. Such was the peace question then. How it would have developed if no misleading policy had come into being naturally cannot be stated. I am not putting forward suppositions but confirming facts. And the fact remains that the failure of the U-boat campaign on the one hand, and a policy carried on behind the backs of the responsible men on the other hand, were the reasons why the favourable moment passed and the peace efforts were checked. And I herewith repeat that this fact does not in itself prove that peace negotiations would not also have failed later if the two reasons mentioned above had not existed. It became quite clear in the autumn that the war would have to continue. In my speeches to delegations I endeavoured to leave no doubt that we were faithful to our Allies. When I said "I see no difference between Strassburg and Trieste," I said it chiefly for Sofia and Constantinople, for the overthrow of the Quadruple Alliance was the greatest danger. I still hoped to be able to prop the trembling foundations of the Alliance policy, and either to secure a general peace in the East, where the military opposition was giving way, or to see it draw nearer through the anticipated German break-through on the Western front. Several months after my dismissal in the summer of 1918 I spoke in the Herrenhaus on foreign policy, and warned everyone present against trying to undermine the Quadruple Alliance. When I declared that "honour, duty to the Alliance, and the call for self-preservation compel us to fight by the side of Germany," I was misunderstood. It did not seem as though the public realised that the moment the Entente thought the Quadruple Alliance was about to break up, from that moment our cause was lost. Had the public no knowledge of the London agreement? Did they not know that a separate peace would hand us over totally defenceless to those cruel conditions? Did they not realise that the German army was the shield that afforded us the last and only possibility of escaping the fate of being broken up? My successor steered the same course as I had done, doubtless from the same reasons of honour and the call for self-preservation. I have no particulars as to what occurred in the summer of 1918. Afterwards events followed in rapid su
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186  
187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Alliance

 

policy

 

Quadruple

 

moment

 

reasons

 

summer

 
public
 

preservation

 

German

 

honour


separate
 

London

 

office

 

period

 

declared

 

undermine

 

compel

 

Clemenceau

 
misunderstood
 

Germany


present

 
accept
 

Western

 

anticipated

 

nearer

 
Several
 

months

 
Herrenhaus
 

foreign

 

warned


dismissal

 

realised

 

possibility

 

escaping

 

broken

 

shield

 

afforded

 
Afterwards
 

doubtless

 

particulars


successor
 
steered
 

realise

 
conditions
 
Entente
 
thought
 

knowledge

 

agreement

 

defenceless

 

totally