New York Times Current History: The European War from the Beginning to March 1915, Vol 1, No. 2 - Who Began the War, and Why? by Various
page 71 of 540 (13%)
page 71 of 540 (13%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
French Ambassador and M. Sazonof both continue to press me for a
declaration of complete solidarity of his Majesty's Government with French and Russian Governments.... (British "White Paper" No. 6.) This shows plainly that the Russian mobilization must have been planned even before July 24, for otherwise M. Sazonof could not have spoken of the necessity of carrying it through. It is furthermore very remarkable that the Russian Minister on this early day spoke of the mobilization in general and not of the partial mobilization against Austria-Hungary. Finally we find that the British Government was fully informed at the very latest on July 24--it may have had before it previous documents, but they are not contained in the "White Paper"--concerning Russian mobilization and thereby the development of Russian and French politics that had to be anticipated. Russian Aggression. Had there been any doubts concerning these matters on the part of the British Government, the continual urging of Russian and French diplomatists must have made things plain. Russia's aggressive policy, and not the Austrian declaration of war on Servia, which did not come until five days later, led to the European war. Servia meant so little to England, although England traditionally poses as a protector of small nations, that the British Ambassador in St. Petersburg was able to describe England's interest in the kingdom on the Save as "nil." Only later, after the beginning of the war, England warmed up to Servia, and in the aforementioned speech Mr. Lloyd George found the most hearty |
|