President Wilson's Speech of July 4 and the German Press

The way the Austro–German press greeted Wilsons's speech was what we should have expected of them. The more the United States participates in the war, the more anxious is public opinion growing in Austria and Germany, while the press anxiously tries to reassure them, lessening the effect of all American news. This anxiety is twofold: both political and military.It is not only through an afflux of troops and material that the United States are making themselves felt, but by a contribution of ideas. If, through their military cooperation they can modify the aspect of the war more and more, they also bring a political ideal, about the relations of nations which will be influential in shaping peace.
The German press, so anxious to represent America's war activities as inefficient, tries nevertheless to mislead public opinion on the subject of the political significance of its intervention. A system of defense has been organized, a list of arguments invented, orders came to direct the newspapers, and in this way an obliging doctrine has been elaborated for the use of the press, telling the role of the United States in the war, and the aspect of their politics.
This is the doctrine expressed at the time of Wilson's last speech; it not only inspired the judgment of the German press but also that of the principal Austro–Hungarian papers who obey in a remarkably docile way the suggestions made by Berlin; it even penetrated as far as certain pro–German papers in neutral countries. Doubtless that explains the striking uniformity of the reactions in the enemy's opinions. Whether it is a question of articles about Independence Day, opinions on Wilson's speeches, it is always the same parrot–like repetition, often expressed in the same terms; independent opinions are growing scarcer, and public opinion is kept by a small number of decided minds.
The great majority of the newspapers has proven hostile. The only point brought out in Wilson's speech was that of waging war to the bitter end. This is the interpretation of most of the pro–German and reactionary newspapers, and of the Austro–Hungarian papers directed by the German Great General Headquarters; the differences of opinion expressed a few months ago by the annexationist press and newspapers supposedly for peace in the Reichstag have disappeared.The tone of the comments alone has changed; if there is more abuse and violence on the pan–German side, and more reserve and bearing on side of the Center and of the nationalist–liberals, the is still the same. The officious Germania who exerted itself for a long time to connect Wilson's principles with those of , is remarkably quiet this time, and by a few lines vies in bad temper with the Taegliche Rundschau, thus proving the absolute submission of the to military power. The Viennese Fremdenblatt, agrees with the Lokal Anzeiger in Berlin, and in this way demonstrates the friendly feeling between the two cities. And the pacifist National Zeitung of rivals the Nationalist–liberal Schwabischer Merkur in unfairness. The abuses hurled at by the annexationist press are devoid of novelty. It has denounced his hypocrisy for a long time. In spite of his protests of disinterestedness, he is; “the most typical representative of Americanism, the agent for that billionaire group who hold the economic and political fate of America in the hollow of their hands.” (Baedische Landeszeitung, 6, 70). He is not proclaiming his own aims in the war, but those of a coterie of capitalists. American high finance is the inspiration of this war which would like to have the appearance of being a crusade for right. This is what makes the difference between the war of independence and -.”
It is not true that the entrance of the United States in the war on the side of the Entente, is consistent with the principles from which the young Republic has risen, and from which the claims to come. In spite of what he says, there is an irreducible antagonism between the past and the present. His speech is a mockery of the Declaration of Independence. “The authors of that Declaration would turn in their graves if they could see how has destroyed the moral idea of their work, and what a melodrama is being enacted over the tomb of the man, who sword in hand freed his country of English domination.” (Berliner Lokal Anzeiger) The American nation, who at one time, freed itself from English oppression, is actually placing its sword at the disposal of British imperialism.At the same has become the despot of the Entente. “What can we say, writes the Catholic “Reichspost” of Wilson, in a particularly malignant article, of this dictator to whom an anti–democratic constitution has promised absolute power, which he uses more brutally than czarism was used for the unhappiness of the world in general and his country in particular?.... To–day he is merely the spokesman for Republican ideas of destruction which are embedded in international freemasonry.” All these abuses have no other object than to give vent to the profound disappointment stirred up by Wilson's speech. It might be that, in spite of his recent statements in , which showed as clearly the new trend of his thoughts, public opinion, official opinion even, expected, at the time when America was entering the war to her fullest extent, some new idea to prolong the discussion and once again obscure its meaning. Wilson's speech crushed this hope.The press shows itself to be disconcerted; while there is a statement of the Doctrine, it is accompanied by concise statements of the warlike spirit of America, of its decision to throw all its strength into the war, and there seems to be no further discussion possible. The press does not misunderstand the meaning of this determination; it talked directly of the part where Wilson's thoughts were clearest, and the majority of the papers took up what he said about a definite settlement and the impossibility of a compromise. They are aware that after trying to obtain from Germany some statement as to her idea of peace, he is, from now on, opposed to any transaction, any half compromise. - Wilson's new manifestation is a cruel deception for the partisans of an entente. After a speech of that kind, all transactions with and his Allies are henceforth impossible! (Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten). “All attempts at talking it over, says , are useless and harmful”. (Deutsche Tageszeitung 7, 7.) The Pro-German Berner Tageblatt looks on this as the funeral of peace and reconciliation, and the Austrian press which had always speculated about America's pacific intentions, records this new attitude with great discouragement. “This commemorative speech, says the “Neues Wiener Tagblatt”, has ended with a warlike flourish”. And the “Neus Freie Presse” sadly comments: Peace no echo in any more”. From the moment determines to wage war to a finish, a discussion of the theoretical part of his speech is . “All this pacific babbling is nonsense, says Germania, if they declare war to the death”! In fact, certain papers insist that this speech has nothing new and is an uninteresting repetition of his previous speeches. Too general and inconsistent, it offers no field for discussion. “The conditions just expressed, adds Germania, are so devoid of clarity, and precision that they cannot bring any reconciliation”. To Wilson, this speech is only a collection of sentences without sincerity; and to the “Post” it is a deception. All this ideology is fantastic and produces no result. “, says the Berliner Lokalanzeiger is a master of phraseology and pathos devoid of meaning”. A great many newspapers do not judge at all, and are satisfied to reproduce without comment, the reflections of the “Handelsblad” of , transmitted by the German propaganda service. According to the Dutch paper, “this speech is altogether ”. It is the speech of a professor of philosophy, who would like to open future of liberty and happiness for the world, a future without conflicts or suffering. It is not a statesman's speech”.Once more the German press has evaded a deep and serious discussion of Wilson's ideas. Avoiding a direct inspection of his program, it breaches the subject by a subterfuge and makes use of double tactics: which is a hypocritical method it is used to. The pacific tendencies of the Central powers are asserted; and are intimated to be ready to agree to a reconciliation, to a peace honorable for the two parties. Wilson's principles are said to have been long known and recognized. and are said to have agreed to it long ago, and the answer to the was conceived in the same spirit. Therefore nothing presents itself as opposed to a solid agreement and a lasting one on a basis of this idea. in his memoir states the perfect conformity of the Austro–Hungarian point of view to the four principles expressed by , which is merely a repetition of this same manoeuvre.But this accord, and that is the counter movement of the German press, is impossible unless and his Allies prove their sincerity and make their acts conform to their words. All the politics of the Allies are an absolute contradiction of the ideal they profess. In this answer, there is a remarkable unity.These are the contradictions they have discovered:
1) Contradiction of Wilson's idea of liberty and the politics of the Entente in general, which in the course of these last four years of war has imposed on the small nations of both Europe and America a revolting reign of terror. The policy of encircling started by and has been kept up. It has dragged all the neutrals in the conflict, and the treatment recently inflicted on Holland shows what the fate of those who resist is.
2) Contradiction of America's peace program and her politics. America's policy, as a matter of fact, is a policy of egoism and oppression. The war with Spain, the annexation of the Philippines, the seizure of Panama reveal America's imperialistic appetite. As to Wilson's intention of destroying Germany's military dictatorship, “let him begin, says the Tagliche Rundschau, by abolishing his own autocracy and that of high finance in his own country.”
3) Contradiction of Wilson's principles and those of the European countries in the Entente. French and Italian imperialism do not agree very well with his principles. France's policy in is a proof of this, and her pretensions about Alsace–Lorraine “whose population is 90% German” are no more justifiable than Italy's claims to and the . But it is England they are chiefly aiming at. “Even to–day she oppresses every nation. All the small nations, in the course of this war have had occasion to feel her attacks on their autonomy”. (Berliner Lokalanzeiger) Not satisfied with starving entire nations by her blockade, she makes the people under her feel the weight of an intolerable yoke. “Let Wilson address himself to England, Writes the Taegliche Rundschau”, and let him begin by freeing Ireland, Egypt, India from the despotism to which they are submitted”. The Reichspost is moved to pity over Ireland's fate “who is grieving more than ever under England's economic and political yoke”. The “Neue Freie Presse”, adds to the list of victims Egypt, Arabia, Syria, Persia and Mesopotamia. Here one finds again one Germany's favorite propaganda themes, one of those which inspired the pacifist press in neutral countries the most and the National Zeitung of , naturally did not fail to exploit this. In reality, this program of emancipation brought forward by hides a dangerous move of anglo–saxonism, according to the enemy press. The peace he dreams about is an anglo–american . His real aim is to establish anglo–saxon supremacy and “the anglo–saxon is a menace for all free people”. (Berliner Lokalanzeiger) The pan–German press had for a long time talked of this danger, but never before uttered such a cry of alarm.Besides it is not enough to allow the German people to believe they are threatened by anglo–saxon imperialism; they must be of the desire to exterminate, to annihilate which fires the enemy. This will, the newspapers found , in Wilson's first principle. The demanded “the destruction of arbitrary power, which could through its own will trouble the peace of the world”. This destruction, according to the interpretation of most of the German papers, is equivalent to that of Germany, and the German people will be entirely assimilated, through a clever disturbance by the who govern them. The American press tries to breach the problem of the Atratization of Germany and timidly observes (Neue Freie Presse, Neues Wiener Tagblatt), that each country must have its particular institutions and that the History Professor, meaning , demonstrates very little historical sense, in wanting to impose the same form of government on every nation, and to judge European matters from an American point of view.The German press prudently leaves this question alone, and satisfies itself by asserting that America's real aim is Germany's destruction and that she will not proceed to the reorganization of the world, until after she is rid of her. “All her efforts, writes the Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten have a tendency to take from Germany the right of disposing of herself, and to subject the inhabitants to the domination of the Entente.” , (Deutsche Tageszeitung) compares this first principle of Wilson's speech to that of who demanded, ever since , that Germany's war strength be broken and that the German empire be placed in such a way that she could never recover. As to the Taegliche Rundschau, it sums up all of Wilson's war aims in this simple phrase, which is also the aim of and “Implacable annihilation of the enemy”.The German nation therefore can no longer have any illusions on the fate in store for them, in a Wilsonian peace. According to the Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten they will have to oppose “the will to live free and to dispose of themselves in a free way” to this desire for annihilation. The war they are waging is a defensive war brought on by their adversaries. To them it is a question of life or death. Their existence depends on the success of their arms. “It is important to fight and win, says , not in order to satisfy a desire for conquest, but to escape a more or less complete annihilation.” This speech will open the eyes of all the partisans of a peace of renouncement. It will make them understand that peace is only possible through a military decision. It is not around the green cloth that Germany will decide her destiny, but on the battle–field.“But the time is not far distant when will consider himself lucky to escape with a compromise peace.” (Badische Landes zeitung) and the Poster Lloyd does not hesitate to make this warlike declaration, which after the Italian events, was to the point: “We do not want a peace. Our military force and the knowledge of our dignity, protect us from a peace such as that.

______________________

II
_________
It is owing to this firm resolution of Wilson's to pursue the war to a finish, which explains the reserved and embarrassed attitude of the newspapers of the Left. It is very significant that a paper like the Frankfurter Zeitung should only quote a part of his speech, and adds a short comment, containing some of the arguments of the reactionary press, even doubting the sincerity of his statements.The Berliner Tageblatt, is equally serious, and after referring to Wilson's program, which does not seem to bring up any question of principle, and as a matter of fact partly gained the approval of the majority of the Reichstag, concludes with the following: “There is nothing in Wilson's conditions to prevent the world from making peace. On the other hand speaks of a war to the death. He should know that Germany is still alive and has the strength to live”.The radical Morgenpost emphasizes the understanding of German politics with Wilson's ideas, and seriously reproaches him for not having answered who was said to have agreed to the essentials of his plans.Same uncertain attitude on the part of the Munchner Neueste Nachrichten, as a rule so heedful to voices from overseas. After finding out that the judges Europe from an American point of view, and that his war aims differ from those drawn up in or , it emphasizes the analogies of his plans, with the answer sent by the government to the Wilson's note. “But, it adds, these principles are too generous to admit discussion with any chance of agreement. We must await the publication of the original of this speech, in order to judge if it is a serious attempt to end the war, or only a piece of propaganda to react on the morale of the American people.The original text appeared, but the journal took good care not to bring the subject up again, and give the answer it had announced, unless it is in the reflections of its military editor. “American politics must not wish for England's unconditional victory. America's interests lie in a peace of reconciliation. This is why, we are considering Wilson's declarations with less suspicion than usual”.The attitude of the socialist voices, on the whole agrees with the liberal or radical papers. Their constraint reveals the absolute confusion of German socialism, which also tries to avoid a sincere inspection. Like the middle class papers, the Versaarts doubts , and does not stop to ask itself if his plan of assuring to each people the right of disposing of themselves, is not precisely the idea of peace from justice, that international socialism is striving for. “Speeches made by and cannot in any way help make peace, they say. If these two statesmen think that peace can only come through a decisive victory of their weapons, the German nation will merely answer such a pretention with a simple word: inacceptable. All the assurances given us, once defeated, that Germany will not suffer any harm, but that she will be treated according to justice are worthless to anyone with the slightest idea of history... The assurance, often given, that war only being waged against the government, and not against the people, has never prevented the defeated people from paying for their government at the end. If Wilson decides on war to a finish, noone can ask the German people to consent gracefully to the finish. As long as the enemy is animated by such sentiments, as long as it will not recognize that it is not the final victory but a lasting peace, which alone will assure a happy future to mankind, Germany can do nothing but defend herself resolutely the end. The Berlin correspondent of the Basler Nachrichten quotes this verdict as being particularly representative of public opinion. As to the other socialist papers of the same kind, they do not even trouble to comment on the speech, and the Volksstimme and Volksfreund of merely print a few extracts.The only newspaper of the Left, who considered Wilson's speech worthy of attention, and tried to start a discussion was the Vossische Zeitung. Its intervention started a controversy worthy of further attention, as it clears up the real tendencies of opinion.Under this significant title: “What do our enemies want?” , asks how Wilson's plans are applicable to the present situation.From a theoretical point of view his proposals cannot raise any objections and an agreement can easily be brought about. Here we find again, together with the same insidious reservations the point of view taken by several liberals. The “ideal” plans are as follows:
1) . On this point, Germany will follow Japan for her army and England for her fleet. She will therefore await their decisions.
2) Concession to all nations of the right of .This question, of little interest to Germany — feigns not to trouble himself over the existence of the problem of Alsace–Lorraine, not to mention Schleswig–Holstein, The Polish provinces of Germany, which have an enormous importance for Austria–Hungary. But the German empire asks nothing more than to give her Ally excellent advice on this subject, on one condition however: That is to know what attitude England expects to adopt, and especially her solution of the Irish problem. will do well to consult his British Allies first of all. The argument is well–known: it is borrowed from pan–German propaganda.
3) Founding of a League of Nations. No observance of principle. The essential thing to do is to determine the Statutes and having thought about this for a long time will not be taken unawares. But a league of nations, consistent with his ideal of justice and equality, could not refuse the small nations equal rights with the great ones. By small nations we mean such as the Scandinavian countries, as opposed to Great Britain or the United States, and it is also advisable, that in the future no civilized nation may bring in “savage hordes”, they might be tempted to mobilize “in defense of their rights”. But whatever sympathy one might feel for the theoretical plans of , practical problems according to are of greater importance and a league of nations will only be possible if one can foresee now the frontiers of the different nations and the new division of colonies. Here is what he proposes:—

1. That Italy who is claiming and the , “although she has never won them”, and France — the author carefully refrains from saying the word Alsace–Lorraine make their own arrangements with their neighbors.

2. Special transactions by Germany with Belgium, and of Austria–Hungary with Serbia

.3. Revising of the Treaty of Brest–, but by a direct understanding with the Russian government, or not.

4. German demands; restoration of her colonies; restoring the independence and complete autonomy of Belgium—one knows what thoughts this uncertain plan is hiding—restoration of all their property overseas, to the merchants of the Central Powers; evacuation by England of all the territories she occupies in Turkey and Persia; in Egypt the restoration of things as they were before the war; opening of the Dardanelles to Russian commerce, according to a treaty concluded among the residents along the banks of the Black Sea.Judging from a Wilsonian point of view, this project, supposedly one of reconciliation, appears like one of complete denial of the principles which the has not ceased crying out, especially in his message of January, 1918; the entire first part of this compromise rests on a system of separate agreements. “Neighboring countries, declares , Wilson, will be called on to settle their frontiers amongst themselves. Any intervention of a third power can only retard peace”.That is how the question of Alsace–Lorraine is reduced to a simple question of a party wall and the fate of Belgium, though brought forward by international law demanded by Wilson, is still dependent on the bargaining of a separate peace. Never has the principle of nation to nation and the secret conference forbidden by , been asserted with more force than by this so–called partisan of an agreement.What is even more characteristic of this misunderstanding, voluntary or not, what is the foundation of Wilson's doctrine and and an essential condition for a lasting peace, is the welcome given this proposition by the German press. Mr. took good care beforehand to announce that the suggested bargain had no official stamp and to present it as bait. According to him, it was only a question of knowing if similar conditions “the German people will not fail to judge out of proportion to their success in war”, were susceptible of receiving the compliance of the enemy. “If the enemy repulses them, he adds, it will be incontestable that all hope of peace is a decoy”. The official answer was not long in coming. Removing the contrast mentioned by , between these propositions and the military success of Germany, the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung says that a large part of the German people would hardly approve of similar conditions. “Public opinion in Germany no doubt knows that a peace consistent with the actual war map would not be favorable to the normal development of Germany; but between extreme annexation and the modesty of the demands of the Vossische Zeitung, there is a vast difference where the line of German interests must be clearly pointed out, without impairing the honor and vital necessities of our adversaries.”As to the Vossische Zeitung, it answers timidly, trying to defend itself to have dared suggest a peace offer. It merely wanted to start a new method of discussion, and “Show a determined policy under the concrete form of practical propositions. We have especially selected , with a view to opposing a certain political system offered by the Entente”. Looking in other qualities, the plan set forth by the Vossische Zeitung has at any rate that of clearness: it states precisely the maximum of concessions to which certain partisans of a compromise peace believe in in without giving up their hopes on the President.

III
_______
As a matter of fact, a peace of reconciliation is only asked for by a small number of newspapers, belonging to the extreme–left party. We do not know what attitude was taken by the mouthpiece of minority socialists, the Leipziger Volkszeitung, on the subject of Wilson's , for it is no longer allowed out of Germany. The attitude of the Münchner Post, while showing an inclination towards majority socialism, has maintained an independent air about certain ideas, and in Bavaria benefits from a more liberal form of government than that controlled by Prussia, and the Arbeiter Zeitung are characteristic of the sympathy aroused in certain circles by Wilson's speeches; but it is more and more evident that the political influence of this pacifism is nothing and expression of these sympathies have only the value of a symptom. For the Münchner Post the sense of Wilson's speech leaves no room for doubt. His attitude is one of conciliation, and his good will is obvious. “It is time, it says, that the German government which pretends interest in peace and the League of Nations, make a definite offer, that it accept Wilson's outstretched hand, that it adhere to the four principles of his plan, and make known its desire to sit at the peace table.”As to the Arbeiter Zeitung, which has always preached an immediate accord with America, it dispenses with a discussion of the heart of the matter. It analyzes at great length and sympathetically the book, written by Professor Benn, professor at the School of Advanced Commercial Studies in Munich, under the title of “What does Wilson want?” and concludes with these words: “Protected by the sea, America cannot be defeated. A nation as great, as proud, as conscious of their strength will only give in when they are beaten. They will fight until they are successful, and if it should happen that all of France was conquered by , and that a continental war became impossible, they would keep up a naval warfare, a war of the necessities of life, an economic war, up to the moment when they could conclude a peace capable of satisfying the high opinion they have of themselves. And so are we to agree with ? But our agreement is only possible if we prove ourselves disposed to join the League of Nations. And that is only possible if we give up the west, and in the east by allowing whole nations to be under the domination of strangers. And the more authority given democracy in our country, the easier this agreement will be. could be more in sympathy with a democratic Germany than with the Supreme Head; and with Austria as a federation of free people than a country where the ruler treats the majority of population like disobedient children. The more we agree with the ruling powers of to–day, the more difficult it will be to agree with Wilson.

IV
_______
But these are only isolated voices and without action. The general impression that stands out from these observations is that German opinion is influenced more and more through the opinions of Wilson, and becomes more and more refractory to a reconciliation. It is guided ever since the treaties of Brest– and Bucharest in a direction that is lost to view. The further one advances, the more one notices that the attention given is of superficial character. The only part of his speech which aroused an echo was that which proclaimed the resolve of the American people to make peace according to their ideals. Germany feels that there is no more room for a half–arrangement; she feels the necessity for something definite and if a few papers try to convince themselves that there is only a temporary misunderstanding, and that with a few conciliatory advances everything would be arranged, the greater part of the press pretends not to be affected by it. What constitutes on the whole, in spite of the apparent differences of opinion, the unity of these judgments, is the impression of doubt and uneasiness they leave. On one hand they affect belief in the principles laid down by , and to likewise want a peace of liberty and justice. But on the other hand they continue, as is proven by these press advices, dreaming of a peace which would insure Germany, in exchange for certain territorial pledges, academic and military securities which she needs.And there one finds the lie where the politics of the Central Powers stick. This lack of sincerity has become especially accentuated in these latter times: the reception given to Wilson's speech made itself manifestly felt the moment it was made. Germany has been living for the last few months in a fever of expectation and hope. The promises of a decisive offensive which would bring peace through victory in a very short while, stopped all thoughts of a settlement.This explains why Wilson's words, like Wilson's speech, were drowned in the clamoring of more or less open annexationism.But let victory again appear uncertain, let the military party fail in its promises, let the coming months fail to bring the longed for solution and we will not fail to see Germany again affecting conciliatory manners; the Reichstag again start a comedy like that of , and the press, disavowing military decisions, will turn to to start a new diplomatic offensive for peace.

_______________________
Translation of a report from the French High Commission.

.A handwritten note in the left corner of page 1 reads “Mr. C Translation of report to French Government E. C.TC; Wilson Papers, Library of Congress.