| Primary
Source |
| Imperialism |
Colonial Policy | [P|S|M] |
Deutscher
Kolonial-Atlas mit Jahrbuch (Atlas German Colonies, with Yearbook),
edited by the German Colonial Society, 1918, What
presses Germany
|
What presses
Germany
Despite all differences of opinion over what the coming peace conclusion shall
bring in security for Germany and the German people, there is agreement
concerning one war aim : the return of the German colonial property presently
occupied by the enemies, and its expansion in order to form an economically and
politically productive German colonial empire.* Without
presenting specific demands here, further down aspects are described which
have to be an orientation for the colonial peace programme.
Matters in
World Politics
(p.35) The English historian Seeley once has coined the phrase, that present-day
Britain compares to a Venice translated gigantically, with oceans and Canals.
The same phrase fits for Germany in a certain degree. Was it not, as in the case
of Britain, owner of large overseas territories, so a network of cultural and
economic threads covered the entire world, which was plaited denser every year,
and in the construction of which millions and
millions were involved at home in Germany and overseas. One land after the other
became the field of operation of German spirit and German economy. There hardly
exists a corner in the world, be it as remote as it may, where the German
homeland did not send her first advance messengers in form of German products.
From year to year the network of German steamer lines, crossing all the world's
oceans, grew denser, and the capital Germans
invested in non-European countries amounted to billions. As in the economic
terrain, so in the cultural area, too. German schools have emerged, in East Asia
universities for the natives have been established, our missions worked in all
parts of the world, directly or indirectly contributed to the spread of a
civilization, the strength of which finally has only been proven by the war.
It may have fitted the mainly continentally oriented perspective of the Germans
that they were satisfied with the existence of this cultural network covering
the entire world, that they even believed to do a favour to foreign peoples by
expanding it, but that they completely forgot, that all these relations merely
had been tolerated by the others. When war broke out, we had to experience that
a spirit of destruction took hold of everything what the German side had
constructed. The fact that an institution was German sufficed to sentence her to
death. And the death sentence could ** be spoken,
because the German side did do nothing to (p.36) protect German world economical
and cultural-political interests. We are rather familiar with the development,
than in case of a growing city its defense installations are moved further and
further out. The defense installations, however, were limited to the home
districts, while no protection existed for the outposts. We did, as is
well-known, dispose of a fleet of cruisers. The names Emden, Königsberg,
Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Karlsruhe are forever engraved in the history of the
German nation. But they could not provide a protection of the German interests,
as nothing existed which provides the basis for modern warships to operate, such
as ammunition depots, coal stations etc. Britain, on the other hand, with its
many fleet bases and coal stations spread all over the world has the possibility
to clear the sea within days, in a wide circle, of everything what could place
itself in her way. So numerous ships sailing under the German flag became
victims of a spirit which could only rule, because it could not be resisted, for
the lack of coal stations. Contrary to the German Weltpolitik, which did not
seriously consider the possibility of a war, as far as trade and shipping were
concerned, Britain always has implemented the principle that growing trade
required growing protection.
So the powerful bases emerged, which provided Britain with the rule over the
oceans, and such, over the world. The area of the Indian Ocean alone be
mentioned, one of the world's smaller oceans. Britain commands access by the
means of the line Gibraltar-Malta-Port Said-Suez-Aden. In addition, the entire
ocean is bracketed by a cross of British fleet stations, which permit Britain,
within short time to seal off the Indian Ocean. Just this aspect requires more
attention when freedom of the seas is discussed, because freedom of the seas
does not only mean freedom of the North Sea and of her exit, but security for
German interests in the seas surrounding Europe as well as in the seas
surrounding Africa, Asia and America.** With justification
it has been said that only he can be strong in the world who is strong on the
oceans. This war's events have most clearly proven that strength on the seas
necessarily requires strength at the seas, i.e. that there is a future for the
demand that the German world interests have to be given the necessary protection
by advanced outposts of German power, so that they not again are defenselessly
exposed to anyone in the possession of overseas "trenches". As long
as Britain alone disposes over such "trenches" and their effect is not
counterbalanced by the existence of other "guard posts", freedom of
the seas and protection of German interests in the overseas territories remain a
utopia !**
To this another fact has to be added, which became evident only in the present
war with its mass involvement of men : the militarization also of the
inhabitants of colonial territories, also by the entente ! It will forever
remain an irony of world history that it was just those countries who stood up
to fight Prussian militarism who brought this ostensibly so much hated
militarism to foreign peoples, with no other legitimation but force. Just a few
years before the war the judgment in England seemed unshakable that it would be
a crime against civilization to use coloured troops on European battlefields. As
it is commonly known, for a colonial power, especially for one of the status of
Britain, such a natural conviction of the moral duty of the countries owning
colonial possessions, did not prevent Britain from, shortly after the war began,
sending Indian troops in large numbers onto the European battlefields. At least,
it seems, Britain in this aspects has limited herself somewhat, although if it
was moral considerations or the possibility to recruit masses of white men from
her large "white" colonies of Canada, South Africa and Australia, may
be open to discussion. France did not dispose over such an option, and in this
war it made use of the possibility which, years before the war, has been
discussed in length and detail. How strong the coloured troop masses employed on
European soil by France have been in total has never been made public in detail.
In spring 1916, according to an announcement made on the colonial debate in
Toulouse it were 600,000 men already, the numerous coloured forces France has
brought in from her colonies to employ them as workers in her war factories. By
now obligatory military duty has been introduced in France's West African
colonies, and in January 1918 the black deputy for Senegal has been appointed
High Commissioner for the purpose of recruitment.
Before we discuss the questions raised by the militarization of Africa in detail
(p.37), a general remark may be expressed. It is namely the French and British
side which again and again emphasizes that the Entente fights for aims which
form a command of justice. To judge over this statement, of course, this is not
the proper place. But we may ask
: does it fit civilization and justice, if a colonial power to force millions of
natives entrusted to her by history to fight for a cause which is of no concern
for the well-being of these natives ? Does it fit justice, that hundreds of
thousands of men not qualified to make their own decisions, whom to elevate and
to develop France has obliged herself to by taking possession of their
territories, were made victim of a state ideology, the justification of which is
at least dubious ? Disregarded the fact that those natives, forced by the French
administration to serve as cannon fodder, who return alive to their homelands,
have been given a strange impression of the solidarity of the white race which
has been preached to them by the representatives of christian missions. It shall
be completely disregarded, that the returning natives will describe Europe and
the Europeans from a perspective, which does not serve the interests of Europe
and the white nations.
In any way, so much can be said, that the militarization of Africa has created a
danger, as for instance South African General Smuts admitted, for the entire
European, and thus for world civilization, a danger for which those peoples are
to be made responsible, who committed the sacrilege to transport their native
proteges to the battlefields of Macedonia and France. In purely
political-military terms the militarization of Africa during this war has the
consequence that steps have to be taken to prevent a repetition in the future.
The discrepancy between the earlier expressed opinion in Britain and action
taken during the war goes to prove, that it is dangerous to invest one's hopes
in international agreements to that aim strong enough to prevent the repetition
of such spectacles. If the racial conscience of the British did not prevent them
from employing, in violation of century-old principles, Indian and black troops
in Europe, so the danger is imminent that France, whose population figures have
been affected even more, will even less bother to follow such international
agreements. If it will be in danger or believes to be so, it will not refrain
from placing millions of natives familiar with war and capable of fighting, from
her near north and west African colonies , in the service of her mainland
policy.
To prevent this possibility once and for all is a demand of German security. By
the means of our own, large colonial property on African soil, sufficiently
equipped with means of fortification, we have to prevent France ever again being
in the state to strip her west and north African colonies of her men. If we
dispose of the necessary fleet bases and the corresponding installations in our
colonies, we are capable of doing so. Then we have the means to energetically
protect or world political and world economical interests, so that they not
again are easy prey for any attacker.
Note *
: in the original emphasized by fat font
Note ** : in the original emphasized by blanks between the
letters
|
|
Source:
Deutscher Kolonial-Atlas mit Jahrbuch, (Atlas German Colonies, with
Yearbook), edited by P. Sprigade und M. Moisel, Surveys and retrospects
by Dr. Karstedt. Berlin 1918, p.35ff. |
GM
(digitalisation) and AG
(translation)
posted on the web for psm-data;
many thanks to
Staatsbibliothek
zu Berlin / Preußischer Kulturbesitz

Kartenabteilung
Dokument in deutscher
Sprache
|
|

|