Page:The New Europe (The Slav standpoint), 1918.pdf/11

Rh

1. The most striking feature when you ponder upon the war is its worldwide extent. Literally, the entire world has now for four years borne the sufferings of a war caused by an attack upon Serbia by Austria-Hungary, backed by Germany. The entire world has been divided into two camps. Austria and Germany have with them merely Turkey, Bulgaria and the Papal Curia; all the other states are on the side of the Allies. Only some of the small States have remained neutral, and in them the majority of the people are on the side of the Allies. Thus practically all mankind has taken a stand against Germany and Austria. If the consensus gentium was once accepted as an argument for the existence of God, this consensus of mankind surely has as great a moral significance—vox populorum, vox Dei.

Statisticians tell us that the total of killed, wounded, prisoners and missing amounts to 25 millions; those that survive the horrors of the war, the millions of soldiers and their families, and therefore whole nations and all humanity, will reflect on the war and its causes; millions and millions are pondering at this moment, while I write this, upon the war and the situation of nations and of mankind, as I am doing. It is not possible that this gigantic sacrifice of lives, health and fortune should have been offered in vain; it is not possible that the present organisation of states and nations from which the war has sprung should remain unchanged, that the responsible statesmen, politicians, leaders of parties, individuals, the nations and all humanity should not comprehend the necessity of radical political reorganisation. The war and its significance have knitted mankind closer together; humanity is to-day an organised unit, internationalism is much more intimate than it ever was; it has been created and renewed by this war and at the same time democratic views of society are everywhere strengthened—the fall of Tzarism is but one of the unexpected results of the war.

The unified organisation of all the nations of the world, of all humanity is the beginning of a new era, an era in which nations and all mankind will consciously control their development.

2. The modern historian, it is claimed, should narrate the history of the future, and the modern statesman should foretell the development of events—foresight being the measure of scientific exactness. During the war I gathered the books of several authors who in the form of stories or political essays foretold the war; but all these so-called prophecies foretold what actually has come to pass very vaguely. In a similar way I, too, foresaw the war. Since the Russian Revolution of 1905 I reviewed my studies of Russia and endeavoured to lay hold of the problem of Russia in its significance for Europe. To what extent I have succeeded may be seen from my book on Russia. In connection with this work I endeavoured to grasp the Jugoslav and Balkan problems—it was over these problems that I expected that the war would come, although I expected it later than it actually came and not to be so gigantic. In the spring of 1914, before the Sarajevo assassinations, I took steps to conciliate the Serbians and Bulgars, because I feared the hostility of the Bulgars to Serbia in the future war. My mediation met with a good reception on the part of Serbia—the fact is an interesting proof that the responsible Serbian statesmen were ready for a reasonable compromise, as, for that matter, was demonstrated during the tension with Austria in the Balkan war. (I have in mind my mediation between Minister Pashich and Count Berchthold.) A 2