THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONFLICT

BARON ROSEN

ASIDE from all political, economic, and psychological motives, the deep significance of the conflict before us, and the source of the determination of the Allies to fight to a finish against Germany's desire to dominate by brutal force the whole world, is the conviction rooted in the public mind that the German doctrine of "Might is Right" constitutes the gravest danger to the human race, and cannot be tolerated.

In such a just cause the whole civilized world should have been on the side of the Allies, especially the countries geographically so situated that they are in danger of having to share the fate of brave and hapless Belgium. Why is it, then, that in reality their attitude is somewhat indifferent? It is undoubtedly in our power to remove one of the causes which make the public opinion in neutral countries hesitate about taking up an attitude favorable to us.

In this war against German absolutism, in this struggle for right and justice, and for the freedom and independence of the smaller nations, we fight hand-in-hand with the

This speech was delivered in June, 1916, by Baron Rosen in the Upper Chamber of the Russian Duma.

The speaker, formerly ambassador to the United States, is one of the ablest men in Russia. The particular significance of this liberal speech was that it voiced the spirit of liberal Russia nine months before the Revolution. As a result of it, Baron Rosen was dismissed from the appointive Upper Council, and the final reaction toward despotism set in, which led directly to the Revolution. The speech is, therefore, really historic.

most advanced peoples in Europe, and we cannot win the sympathy of the civilized world unless we bring our internal front, so to speak, on a level with the political ideas of our valiant allies, and apply them in the administration of our border provinces and in the government of the nationalities forming part of the population of Russia. There are two diametrically opposed methods of government. One is the method adopted by our allies. Its results were seen in the enthusiastic outbursts of patriotism throughout the self-governing British Colonies, and even among the non-English elements - the Irish, French-Canadians, Boers, and Indians. They all rushed to the defense of the British Empire. Thanks to this method of government it was possible for England to intrust the chief command of the troops in South Africa to that very general who, sixteen years ago, led the Boers against the English, and who is now Prime Minister of British South Africa.

The other method is that of the Germans. They have applied it to the population of Posen, Schleswig, Alsace and Lorraine, with the result that even the pure German portion of the population of Alsace retained its passionate attachment for France, who never treated them as secondrate citizens, or as possible traitors to their country.

In our policy toward our border provinces, and toward the so-called non-Russian nationalities, we have, to the greatest detriment of the real interests of Russia, followed closely the German system of government. We have even improved upon it by an addition of medieval religious intolerance. People may say that war is decided by military power and not by the degree of sympathy which neutral countries may show for the home policy of this or that State. The German Government obviously regards the question in a different light, or else it would

not be spending millions on propaganda in all countries, even the remotest in the world. Not only do we not counteract this propaganda, but by our domestic policy we supply our enemies with weapons with which to set against us the public opinion of such countries as the United States of America the only great neutral power

and our neighbor Sweden. It is inconceivable that those who guide our home policy should not be able to realize that by our medieval treatment of the Jewish population of Russia, and by our systematic outrages upon the constitutional habit of mind of the Finnish people, we are helping enormously the pro-German propaganda in neutral countries which our enemies carry on with lavish means to the detriment of the cause of the Allies. The question is, why has not our Government settled these questions once and for all, as it did — alas, so late the question of Polish autonomy? The only answer is that our Government did not wish to renounce a traditional policy so dear to the hearts of our militant Nationalists.

It is therefore incumbent upon the Legislative Chambers to assist the Government in this matter, and to introduce bills abolishing all the restrictive laws against the Jews, and canceling the laws of July 17 concerning Finland. Such measures would undoubtedly facilitate the task of the Government in international matters, and would meet with the lively appreciation of our valiant allies.

We must bear in mind that this great European War is not only a conflict of interests, but also of ideas and principles. In fighting against German militarism, Russia is taking her stand on the side of those who fight for the triumph of the idea of Right and Freedom, and it is necessary that in Russia there shall henceforth be no people oppressed or deprived of their inherent rights.