Book: In the World War

C >> Count Ottokar Czernin >> In the World War




Finally, the third phase comprises the comparatively short period
between our defeat at Luck and the outbreak of the war in Roumania,
and was simply the death throes of neutrality.

War was in the air and could be foreseen with certainty.

As was to be expected, the inefficient diplomacy displayed in the
preparations for the world war brought down severe criticism of our
diplomatic abilities, and if the intention at the Ballplatz was to
bring about a war, it cannot be denied that the preparations for it
were most inadequate.

Criticism was not directed towards the Ballplatz only, but entered
into further matters, such as the qualifications of the individual
representatives in foreign countries. I remember an article in one of
the most widely-read Viennese papers, which drew a comparison between
the "excellent" ambassador at Sofia and almost all of the others; that
is, all those whose posts were in countries that either refused their
co-operation or even already were in the field against us.

In order to prevent any misunderstanding, I wish to state here that in
my opinion our then ambassador to Sofia, Count Tarnowski, was one of
the best and most competent diplomats in Austria-Hungary, but that the
point of view from which such praise was awarded to him was in itself
totally false. Had Count Tarnowski been in Paris, London or Rome,
these states, in spite of his undeniable capabilities, would not have
adopted a different attitude; while, on the other hand, there are
numbers of distinguished members of the diplomatic corps who would
have carried out his task at Sofia just as well as Count Tarnowski.

In other words, I consider it is making an unwarrantable demand to
expect that a representative in a foreign land should have a leading
influence on the policy of the state to which he is accredited. What
may be demanded of a diplomatic representative is a correct estimate
of the situation. The ambassador must know what the Government of the
state where he is will do. A false diagnosis is discreditable. But it
is impossible for a representative, whoever he may be, to obtain such
power over a foreign state as to be able to guide the policy of that
state into the course desired by him. The policy of a state will
invariably be subservient to such objects as the Government of that
period deem vital, and will always be influenced by factors which are
quite outside the range of the foreign representative.

In what manner a diplomatic representative obtains his information is
his own affair. He should endeavour to establish intercourse, not only
with a certain class of society, but also with the Press, and also
keep in touch with other classes of the population.

One of the reproaches made to the "old regime" was the assumed
preference for aristocrats in diplomacy. This was quite a mistake. No
preference was shown for the aristocracy, but it lay in the nature of
the career that wealth and social polish were assets in the exercise
of its duties. An attache had no salary. He was, therefore, expected
to have a tolerably good income at home in order to be able to live
conformably to his rank when abroad. This system arose out of
necessity, and was also due to the unwillingness of the authorities to
raise salaries in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. The consequence
was that only sons of wealthy parents could adopt such a career. I
once told some delegates who interviewed me in connection with the
subject that a change of the system depended entirely on themselves
and their increased munificence.

A certain amount of social polish was just as necessary for diplomats
of the old regime as was the requisite allowance for their household
and a knowledge of foreign languages. So long as courts exist in
Europe, the court will always be the centre of all social life, and
diplomats must have the entree to such circles. A young man who does
not know whether to eat with his fork or his knife would play a sorry
part there--his social training is not an indifferent matter.
Preference is, therefore, not given to the aristocracy, but to young
men of wealth familiar with European society etiquette.

That does not mean that a diplomat is to consider it his duty only to
show himself at all the parties and fetes given by the upper ten
thousand, but it is one of his duties, as at such places he might gain
information unobtainable elsewhere. A diplomat must be in touch with
all sources from which he can glean information.

Individual capabilities and zeal will naturally play a great part; but
the means that a Government places at the disposition of its foreign
missions are also of the highest importance.

There are people in the East--I do not know whether to say in
contradistinction to the West--who are not immune to the influence of
gold. In Roumania, for instance, Russia, before the war, had
completely undermined the whole country and had lavished millions long
before the war in the hope of an understanding with that country. Most
of the newspapers were financed by Russians, and numbers of the
leading politicians were bound by Russian interests, whereas neither
Germany nor Austria-Hungary had made any such preparations. Thus it
happened that, on the outbreak of war, Russia was greatly in advance
of the Central Powers, an advance that was all the more difficult to
overtake as from the first day of war Russia opened still wider the
floodgates of her gold and inundated Roumania with roubles.

If the fact that the scanty preparation for war is a proof of how
little the Central Powers reckoned on such a contingency it may on the
other hand explain away much apparent inactivity on the part of their
representatives. Karl Fuerstenberg, my predecessor at Bucharest, whose
estimate of the situation was a just one, demanded to have more funds
at his disposal, which was refused at Vienna on the plea that there
was no money. After the war began the Ministry stinted us no longer,
but it was too late then for much to be done.

Whether official Russia, four weeks in advance, had really counted on
the assassination of the Archduke and the outbreak of a war ensuing
therefrom remains an open question. I will not go so far as to assert
it for a fact, but one thing is certain, that Russia within a
measurable space of time had prepared for war as being inevitable and
had endeavoured to secure Roumania's co-operation. When the Tsar was
at Constanza a month before the tragedy at Sarajevo, his Minister for
Foreign Affairs, Sassonoff, paid a visit to Bucharest. When there, he
and Bratianu went on a walking tour together to Transylvania. I did
not hear of this tactless excursion until it was over, but I shared
Berchtold's surprise at such a proceeding on the part of both
Ministers.

I once, in 1914, overheard by chance a conversation between two
Russians. It was at the Hotel Capsa, known later as a resort for
anti-Austrians. They were sitting at the table next to mine in the
restaurant and were speaking French quite freely and openly. They
appeared to be on good terms with the Russian Ambassador and were
discussing the impending visit of the Tsar to Constanza. I discovered
later that they were officers in mufti. They agreed that the Emperor
Francis Joseph could not live very much longer, and that when his
death occurred and a new ruler came to the throne It would be a
favourable moment for Russia to declare war on us.

They were evidently exponents of the "loyal" tendency that aimed at
declaring war on us without a preceding murder; and I readily believe
that the majority of the men in Petersburg who were eager for war held
the same view.




CHAPTER V

THE U-BOAT WARFARE


1

My appointment as Minister for Foreign Affairs was thought by many to
indicate that the Emperor Charles was carrying out the political
wishes of his uncle, Ferdinand. Although it had been the Archduke's
intention to have made me his Minister for Foreign Affairs, my
appointment to the post by the Emperor Charles had nothing to do with
that plan. It was due, above all, to his strong desire to get rid of
Count Burian and to the lack of other candidates whom he considered
suitable. The Red Book that was published by Count Burian after the
outbreak of war with Roumania may have attracted the Emperor's
attention to me.

Although the Emperor, while still Archduke, was for several years my
nearest neighbour in Bohemia--he was stationed at Brandeis, on the
Elbe--we never became more closely acquainted. In all those years he
was not more than once or twice at my house, and they were visits of
no political significance. It was not until the first winter of the
war, when I went from Roumania to the Headquarters at Teschen, that
the then Archduke invited me to make the return journey with him.
During this railway journey that lasted several hours politics formed
the chief subject of conversation, though chiefly concerning Roumania
and the Balkan questions. In any case I was never one of those who
were in the Archduke's confidence, and my call to the Ballplatz came
as a complete surprise.

At my first audience, too, we conversed at great length on Roumania
and on the question whether the war with Bucharest could have been
averted or not.

The Emperor was then still under the influence of our first peace
offer so curtly rejected by the Entente. At the German Headquarters at
Pless, where I arrived a few days later, I found the prevailing
atmosphere largely influenced by the Entente's answer. Hindenburg and
Ludendorff, who were apparently opposed to Burian's _demarche_ for
peace, merely remarked to me that a definite victory presented a
possibility of ending the war, and the Emperor William said that he
had offered his hand in peace but that the Entente had given him a
slap in the face, and there was nothing for it now but war to the
uttermost.

It was at this time that the question of the unrestricted U-boat
warfare began to be mooted. At first it was the German Navy only, and
Tirpitz in particular, who untiringly advocated the plan.
Hohenlohe,[5] who, thanks to his excellent connections, was always
very well informed, wrote, several weeks before the fateful decision
was taken, that the German Navy was determined and bent on that aim.
Bethmann and Zimmermann were both decidedly against it. It was
entirely in keeping with the prudent wisdom of the former not to risk
such experiments; Bethmann was an absolutely dependable, honourable
and capable partner, but the unbounded growth of the military
autocracy must be imputed to his natural tendency to conciliate. He
was powerless against Ludendorff and little by little was turned aside
by him. My first visit to Berlin afforded me the opportunity of
thoroughly discussing the U-boat question with the Imperial
Chancellor, and we were quite agreed in our disapproval of that method
of warfare. At all events, Bethmann pointed out that such essentially
military matters should in the first instance be left to military
decision, as they alone were able to form a correct estimate of the
result, and these reflections made me fear from the very first that
all reasonable political scruples would be upset by military
arguments. On this my first visit to Berlin, when this question
naturally was the dominating one, the Chancellor explained to me how
difficult his position was, because the military leaders, both on land
and at sea, declared that if the unrestricted U-boat warfare were not
carried out they would not be able to guarantee the Western front.
They thus brought an iron pressure to bear on him, for how could he,
the Chancellor, undertake to guarantee that the Western front could
hold out? As a matter of fact, the danger of introducing the
unrestricted U-boat campaign became greater and greater, and the
reports sent by Hohenlohe left no doubt as to the further development
of affairs in Berlin.

On January 12 he reported as follows:

The question of the extension of the U-boat warfare, as Your
Excellency is aware from the last discussions in Berlin, becomes
daily more acute.

On the one hand, all leading military and naval authorities insist
on making use of this means as speedily as possible, as they
declare it will end the war much more rapidly; on the other hand,
all statesmen have grave fears as to what effect it will have on
America and other neutrals.

The Supreme Military Command declares that a new offensive on a
very large scale is imminent in the West and that the armies which
are to resist this attack will not be able to understand why the
navy should not do all that lies in its power to prevent, or at
any rate to decrease, the reserves and ammunition being sent to
our adversaries. The absence of co-operation on the part of the
navy in the terrible battles the troops on the Western front will
again have to face will have a most _injurious_ effect on their
_moral_.

The objections put forward as to the effect the proceeding might
have on America are met in military circles by the assumption that
America will take good care not to go to war; that she, in fact,
would not be able to do so. The unfortunate failure of the United
States military machine in the conflict with Mexico clearly proves
what is to be expected from America in that respect. Even a
possible breaking off relations with America does not necessarily
signify war.

Meanwhile all the leading naval authorities reassert that they may
be relied on, even though they are not considered capable of
crushing England, at least to be able, _before_ America can come
in, so to weaken the British Island Empire that only one desire
will be left to English politicians, that of seating themselves
with us at the Conference table.

To this the Chancellor asked who would give him a guarantee that
the navy was right and in what position should we find ourselves
in case the admirals were mistaken, whereupon the Admiralty
promptly asked what sort of position the Chancellor expected to
find when autumn arrived without having made a proper use of the
U-boats and we found ourselves, through exhaustion, compelled to
_beg_ for peace.

And thus the scales went up and down, weighing the chances for or
against the U-boat war, and there was no possibility of positively
determining which decision was the right one.

Doubtless the German Government in the near future will be
constrained to take up a definite standpoint respecting the
question, and it is obvious--whatever the decision may be--that we
also shall be largely involved. Nevertheless, it appears to me
that when the German Government does approach us in that
connection we should act with all possible reserve. As the matter
now stands, a positive decision as to which course is the right
one is not possible. I have, therefore, thought it inadvisable to
take side definitely with either party and thus remove much of the
responsibility from the German Government and render it possible
for them to lay it upon us.

The Imperial and Royal Ambassador,

G. HOHENLOHE, M.P.

The concluding passage of the above cited report had already been
anticipated by me in a telegraphic communication in which I begged the
ambassador with all possible energy to urge the political arguments
opposed to the unrestricted U-boat warfare, which is proved by a
telegram from Hohenlohe on January 13 as follows:

Reply to yesterday's telegram No. 15.

In accordance with the telegram mentioned, and after discussing it
with Baron Flotow, I went to the Secretary of State--not being
able to see the Chancellor to-day--and in conformity with Your
Excellency's intentions called his attention to the fact that we
should participate in the results of the U-boat war just as much
as Germany and that, therefore, the German Government is bound to
listen to us also. All the leading German statesmen know that Your
Excellency, during your stay here, expressed _yourself as opposed
to the movement_, but that I had come once more as Your
Excellency's representative to repeat the _warning against too
hasty action_. I further emphasised all the arguments against the
U-boat warfare, but will not trouble Your Excellency with a
repetition of them, nor yet with the counter-arguments, already
known to Your Excellency, that were put forward by the Secretary.
I gave a brief summary of both these standpoints in my yesterday's
report No. 6 P.

Herr Zimmermann, however, laid special stress on the fact that the
information he was receiving convinced him more and more that
America, especially after the Entente's answer to Mr. Wilson,
which was in the nature of an insult, would very probably not
allow it to come to a breach with the Central Powers.

I did all I possibly could to impress upon him the responsibility
Germany was taking for herself and for us by her decision in this
question, pointing out very particularly that before any decision
was arrived at our opinion from a nautical-technical standpoint
must also be heard, in which the Secretary of State fully
concurred.

I have the feeling that the idea of carrying out the U-boat
warfare is more and more favourably received, and Your Excellency
had the same impression also when in Berlin. The last word as to
the final attitude to be adopted by the German Government will no
doubt come from the military side.

In conformity with the instructions received, _I will nevertheless
uphold with all firmness the political arguments against the
U-boat warfare_.

Baron Flotow will have occasion to meet the Secretary of State
this afternoon.

I had sent Baron Flotow, a Chief of Department, to Berlin at the same
time, in order that he might support all Hohenlohe's efforts and spare
no pains to induce Germany to desist from her purpose.

Flotow sent me the following report on January 15:

After a two-days' stay in Berlin my impression is that the
question of the unrestricted U-boat warfare has again been brought
to the front by the leading men in the German Empire. This
question--according to Herr Zimmermann--under conditions of the
greatest secrecy where the public is concerned, is now under
debate between the heads of the Army and Navy and the Foreign
Office; they insist on a decision. For if the unrestricted U-boat
warfare is to be opened it must be at a time when, in view of the
vast impending Anglo-French offensive on the Western front, it
will make itself felt. The Secretary of State mentioned the month
of February.

I wish in the following account to summarise the reasons put
forward by the Germans for the justification of the unrestricted
U-boat warfare:

Time is against us and favours the Entente; if, therefore, the
Entente can keep up the desire for war there will be still less
prospect of our obtaining a peace on our own terms. The enemy's
last Note to Wilson is again a striking example of their war
energy.

It will be impossible for the Central Powers to continue the war
after 1917 with any prospect of success. Peace must, therefore,
unless it finally has to be proposed by the enemy, be secured in
the course of this year, which means that we must enforce it.

The military situation is unfavourable owing to the impending
Anglo-French offensive, which, it is presumed, will open with
great force, as in the case of the last offensive on the Somme. To
meet the attack, troops will have to be withdrawn from other
fronts. Consequently, an offensive against Russia with intent to
bring that enemy to his knees, which perhaps a year ago would have
been possible, can no longer be reckoned on.

If, therefore, the possibility of enforcing a decision in the East
becomes less and less, an effort must be made to bring it about in
the West, and to do it at a time when the unrestricted U-boat
warfare would affect the coming Anglo-French offensive by impeding
the transport of troops and munitions sailing under a neutral
flag.

In estimating the effect on England of the unrestricted U-boat
warfare, there will be not only the question of hindering the
transport of provisions, but also of curtailing the traffic to
such a degree as would render it impossible for the English to
continue the war. In Italy and in France this will be felt no less
severely. The neutrals, too, will be made to suffer, which,
however, might serve as a pretext to bring about peace.

America will hardly push matters further than breaking off
diplomatic relations; we need not, therefore, count for certain on
a war with the United States.

It must not be overlooked that the United States--as was the case
in regard to Mexico--are not well prepared for war, that their one
anxiety is Japan. Japan would not allow a European war with
America to pass unheeded.

But even if America were to enter the war it would be three to
four months before she could be ready, and in that space of time
peace must have been secured in Europe. According to the estimate
of certain experts (among others, some Dutch corn merchants),
England has only provisions sufficient for six weeks, or three
months at the outside.

It would be possible to carry on the U-boat warfare on England
from fifteen bases in the North Sea, so _that the passage of a
large vessel through to England would be hardly conceivable_.
Traffic in the Channel, even if not entirely stopped, would be
very limited, as travelling conditions in France exclude the
possibility of suitable connection.

And if the unrestricted U-boat warfare once were started, the
terror caused by it (the sinking of the vessels without warning)
would have such an effect that most vessels would not dare to put
to sea.

The above already hints at the rejoinder to be put forward to the
arguments advanced by us against the opening of the unrestricted
U-boat warfare, and also combats the view that the corn supply
from the Argentine is not at the present moment so important for
the United States as would be a prompt opening of the U-boat
campaign, which would mean a general stoppage of all traffic.

The fact that America would not be ready for war before the end of
three months does not exclude the possibility that it might even
be as long as six or eight months, and that she therefore might
join in the European war at a time when, without playing our last
card, it might be possible to end it in a manner that we could
accept. It must not be forgotten, however, that in America we have
to do with an Anglo-Saxon race, which--once it had decided on
war--will enter on it with energy and tenacity, as England did,
who, though unprepared for war as to military matters, can
confront to-day the Germans with an army of millions that commands
respect. I cannot with certainty make any statement as to the
Japanese danger to America at a time when Japan is bound up with
Russia and England through profitable treaties and Germany is shut
out from that part of the world.

Among other things I referred to the great hopes entertained of
the Zeppelins as an efficient weapon of war.

Herr Zimmermann said to me: "Believe me, our fears are no less
than yours; they have given me many sleepless nights. There is no
positive certainty as to the result; we can only make our
calculations. We have not yet arrived at any decision. Show me a
way to obtain a reasonable peace and I would be the first to
reject the idea of the U-boat warfare. As matters now stand, both
I and several others have almost been converted to it."

But whether, in the event of the ruthless U-boat warfare being
decided on, it would be notified in some way, has not yet been
decided.

Zimmermann told me he was considering the advisability of
approaching Wilson, and, while referring to the contemptuous
attitude of the Entente in the peace question, give the President
an explanation of the behaviour of the German Government, and
request him, for the safety of the life and property of American
citizens, to indicate the steamers and shipping lines by which
traffic between America and other neutrals could be maintained.

_Vienna, January 15, 1917._

FLOTOW, M.P.

On January 20 Zimmermann and Admiral Holtzendorff arrived in Vienna,
and a council was held, presided over by the Emperor. Besides the
three above-mentioned, Count Tisza, Count Clam-Martinic, Admiral Haus
and I were also present. Holtzendorff expounded his reasons, which I
recapitulate below. With the exception of Admiral Haus, no one gave
unqualified consent. All the arguments which appear in the official
documents and ministerial protocols were advanced but did not make the
slightest impression on the German representatives. The Emperor, who
took no part in the debate, finally declared that he would decide
later. Under his auspices a further conference was held in the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs at 2 o'clock; the report is as follows:

Copyright (c) 2007. knowncrafts.net. All rights reserved.