The European Outlook

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · BATTLE CREEK, MICH. · Jan 17, 1871

The European Outlook.

In that month of all the year that has been specially consecrated, by tradition and religious observance, to the birthday of the Prince of Peace, the world is this year compelled to look forth upon a prospect of war, unparalleled in magnitude and uncertain in its course and conclusion. The Franco-Prussian contest still rages, and not only engenders its own woes and crimes, but imbitters the new conflict now threatened in the Eastern countries of Europe. Should war actually break out between England and Russia, it would scarcely fail to become general throughout Europe, and, by so doing, materially to change its original shape and tendency. It would directly become involved with the war now raging in France; for, of necessity, England would then become the ally of France, as she was in the Crimean war; while Russia would ally herself with Germany. Nor could this struggle long continue without the result foreshadowed by Lord Clarendon in his secret dispatch to Sir Hamilton Seymour, in March, 1853. The English minister, then holding the same place and the same sentiments that Lord Granville now holds, said, that “no great question can be agitated in the East without becoming a source of discord in the West; and every great question in the West will assume a revolutionary character, and embrace a revision of the entire social system.” And we have the authority of no less a person than Count Bismarck that such revisions can only be accomplished by “blood and iron”—a remark which he has been illustrating, on a grand scale, since the first of August last.

It may be, however, that a general European war is not so imminent as many imagine. If the demands of Gortschakoff for a revision of the treaty of Paris are persisted in, and if diplomacy cannot settle the matter, war is certain to follow,—but it may not be for months yet. It is probable, however, that, if the Franco-Prussian war does not soon close, this fact alone will compel hostilities between England and Russia; for in no way, except by war, can England and Austria make sure of checking the progress of Russia in Turkey. As “England’s distress is Ireland’s opportunity,” so the humiliation of France is the opportunity of Russia. If the Czar really means to carry out the policy of his father Nicholas, and establish himself as the political head of the fifteen million Christians now under the Sultan’s government, he can do so now with very little opposition, if England does not threaten war. He will not need the active co-operation of his kinsman, the king of Prussia, nor will he fear the military force of Austria and Turkey. England alone has the power to thwart him, either by actual war, or by such a menace of it as will persuade him that diplomacy is his best resort. The maintenance of general peace in Europe depends, therefore, to-day upon the firmness of Russia in pushing forward, and the resolution with which England opposes.

The immediate cause of quarrel is what is known as “the neutralization of the Black Sea.” This phrase came into general use at the time of the treaty of Paris, in March and April, 1856; but the fact implied had existed by treaty ever since June, 1841. In that month a treaty was made between the five great powers of Europe—England, France, Austria, Prussia, and Russia—by which the Sultan was allowed to exclude from the entrance of the Black Sea all ships-of-war. He might invite them to enter; but he was at liberty to exclude them. During the Crimean war, Gortschakoff, now the Russian prime Minister, but then ambassador at Vienna, proposed, as one condition of peace, that the Czar and Sultan should both be allowed to maintain war vessels in the Euxine,—the number to be decided upon by the two powers between themselves,—while all other war vessels should be excluded. This, of course, was refused by the other powers, and the eleventh article of the Paris treaty, taken in connection with a special convention on the subject, fixed the number of war vessels of Russia and Turkey in the Black Sea at ten each, for coast service. All other vessels-of-war, of any nation, were to be excluded. It is this stipulation of 1856 that Russia now maintains the right to disregard. The answer made by Lord Granville is the obvious one,—that condition imposed by a Congress of powers cannot be set aside at the will of a single nation. It is our secession movement over again,—Russia claimed the right to secede from the Paris agreement, just as South Carolina seceded from the Federal Union. In itself, however, the Russian demand for a revision of the treaty is not an unfair one; and it re-opens the old question, whether the Western powers of Europe will maintain the Turks in possession of their decaying empire.

In his remarkable conference with Sir Hamilton Seymour in 1853, the Czar Nicholas asserted that it was not for the interest of Europe that the “Sick Man” of Turkey should continue there. “The Turkish Empire,” he said, “is to be tolerated,—not reconstructed if it falls in pieces.” England then thought otherwise; and so she does now. There is no point of her foreign policy so well established, none which she is so little likely to yield as this, and hence the danger of war now as in 1854. It might then have been averted but for the intrigues of Louis Napoleon, who wanted to strengthen his then recent usurpation by an alliance with England against Russia; it might now be averted but for the ruin which Louis Napoleon has finally brought upon France. If that great nation is allowed to remain under the chastisement of Prussia, war between England and Russia, to be followed by a general European war, seems inevitable. Of this, the English have gradually become aware, and the whole weight of that nation is now throwing itself, to some purpose, in favor of an armistice in France. And thus the Eastern menace of war may bring about peace in the West of Europe. This is the gleam of hope in the stormy sky of this sad December.

There is, however, a far better hope in the results of the conflict now raging. The basis of peace proposed by Bismarck—the cession of territory—can hardly be accepted by France. If forced upon her now, she will exact vengeance for it hereafter, when her turn comes. But the basis of peace suggested by Senator Sumner—the general disarmament of the European nations—is timely, practical, and of immense value to civilization. In the demonstration which Russia is now making, the shrewd ministers of the Czar have several objects in view; but one of them, no doubt, is such a general disarmament. And if a peace congress of the European powers should assemble to consider the propositions of Russia, we doubt not that one of them would look to the reduction of the standing armies. For such a result the way is now open. The French standing army is destroyed; that of Austria can with difficulty be supported from her bankrupt treasury; that of Prussia will no longer be needed, nor will the people tolerate the burden of it much longer. If Russia, then, comes forward, and offers to disband half a million of soldiers, a European peace may yet be possible on the condition of a universal disarmament. This is the most hopeful view that can be taken of the present European complication.

The dethroned emperor of France is cherishing the hope that he may be recalled to Paris when peace is declared, and be allowed to rebuild the throne of his son, if not his own. Probably there are many Germans and a few Frenchmen who believe such a restoration possible; but we think that they cherish a delusion. The republic may not endure; but it is not likely to be succeeded by a Bonaparte empire; so much seems to have been made sure by the events of the war. The virtual union of Germany under a single government is another of its good results. Indirectly, the deposition of the pope as temporal sovereign has been caused by the war, the good effects of which have, so far, greatly outweighed its evils. A war between England and Russia would probably drive the Turk out of Europe, and liberalize the whole political system of the Old World. The cause of the people in Europe is now in such a posture that it must advance by whatever takes place. It has had already some signal triumphs in the year 1870, and appears destined to other successes in 1871. But its hope now is in peace rather than in war, and the American people, as its most powerful representative, ought to offer their prayers and exert their influence for the restoration and continuance of peace.—Scribner’s Monthly, Jan., 1871.