Part 11 (1/2)
”There is another reason which speaks against the creation of a Deutschbohmen. I am convinced that _if a plebiscite were carried out among German people in Northern Bohemia, they would declare against separation from Bohemia_. Why? Because the Germans are too clever not to know that Bohemia forms not only a historical and geographical unity, but that this unity has besides a historical basis, also a practical foundation. The relation between the Czech part of Bohemia and Northern Bohemia is to a large degree the relation of the consumer and the producer. Where do you want to export your articles if not to your Czech hinterland? How could the German manufacturers otherwise exist? When after the war a Czecho-Slovak State is erected, _the Germans of Bohemia will much rather remain in Bohemia and live on good terms with the Czech peasant than be identified with Germany, boycotted, opposed and hated by the whole world_, especially if we guarantee, not only by promises, but by deeds and laws, full autonomy to the German population within the Bohemian State.
”_The real question which puzzles us to-day is: How can Austria exist at all?_ That is the question. And I again repeat solemnly Palack's word that _Austria may exist only so long as her nations wish for it_, and that _she will cease to exist_ as soon as her nations do not want her to exist. The Slav nations of Austria declared clearly and emphatically their wishes and desires in their proclamations. If instead of working for the conversion of the ruling factor in favour of these wishes Dr. Seidler shows us Gessler's hat of Austria with a German head and backbone, then let him remember that _we shall hate this Austria for all eternity_ (loud cheers and applause) _and we shall fight her, and G.o.d willing, we shall in the end smash her to pieces so completely that nothing will remain of her_.”
_The President:_ ”I cannot admit such an expression about this state and I call the deputy to order.”
_Dr. Stransk_: ”Excellency, I really do not deserve such a rebuke. It would be sad if we could not speak freely and with proper emphasis against a state form which has been imposed upon us.
”Let Dr. Seidler remember that _we regard Austria, whose integrity according to him must not be questioned, as a centuries-old crime on the liberties of humanity. Let him remember that it is not only our political intention, not only our instinct of self-preservation, but our highest duty and--do not hesitate to say so--our national religion and our greatest moral mission to damage Austria wherever and whenever possible, and that our loyalty to our own nation, to our native country, to our history, to our future and to the Bohemian Crown, prompts us to betray Austria which is backed up by Germany. We are therefore determined faithfully to betray her whenever and wherever we can_. I tell you further, gentlemen, that this state, this Austria which Seidler talks about, is not a state at all. _It is a hideous, centuries-old dream, a nightmare, a beast, and nothing else_. It is a state without a name, it is _a const.i.tutional monarchy without a crown and without a const.i.tution_. For what kind of a const.i.tution is it if it has not the necessary confirmation by oath and won the general approval of nations because it was found to be untenable? _It is a state without patriots and without patriotism_, it is a state which arose by the amalgamation of eight irredents--the German one included--it is a state which had no future and in which the dynasty ... (suppressed) ... in a word, it is a state which is no state at all.
_As a matter of fact, Austria no longer exists_, it is an absurdity and an impossibility. If I spoke about Czech regiments which went to embrace their 'enemies,' I must admit that personally I know nothing about them except what I heard from my German colleagues who persist in making complaints against us. We believe every word of what they say to be true, but ... (suppressed by censor). Did you ever hear that a husband conscious of his honour and respectability told the whole world about the infidelity of his wife who left him because he ill-treated her? No, because the husband knows that it is his shame and not hers.
_And if Czecho-Slovak brigades are to-day fighting against Austria-Hungary it is only a proof that there is something very wrong with Austria, that Austria is more rotten than Shakespeare's Denmark._ For what other state has soldiers who ran over voluntarily to the enemy? You keep on saying that England has the Irish problem. _Did you ever hear of Irish brigades, did you ever hear that any French legions were fighting for the Central Powers against France_, or Russian legions against Russia when we were at war with Russia? Indeed, gentlemen, not even Turkey has any legions fighting with the enemy against her. _There must therefore be some deep reason for Czecho-Slovak, Polish and Yugoslav legions fighting on the side of the Entente_.”
We think that any comments on this explicit declaration, in which a Czech deputy representing his whole nation openly expressed hope for the dismemberment of Austria and praised the Czecho-Slovak troops fighting for the Allies, are superfluous.
VIII
CZECHO-SLOVAK CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER NON-GERMAN NATIONS OF CENTRAL EUROPE
The Czechs have always clearly seen that one of the chief reasons which enable the German-Magyar minority to rule over the Slav majority is the lack of co-operation amongst the subject peoples. Already before the war the Czechs were pioneers of Slav solidarity and reciprocity, wrongly called Pan-Slavism. Thanks to their geographic position, they have no claims conflicting with any nations except the Germans and Magyars who are their only enemies.
In these efforts for promoting Slav solidarity the Czechs met serious obstacles. In the case of some of their Slav friends it was lack of internal unity which prevented co-operation. In other cases it was the quarrels artificially fomented by Austria between her subject nations, notably between the Poles and Ruthenes and between the Yugoslavs and Italians. Finally, the Poles lacked a definite international point of view.
They were justly sceptical of Slav solidarity seeing that they were oppressed by a government which claimed to represent a great Slav nation.
All these obstacles, however, have one by one disappeared as the war has gone on. All the subject peoples of Central Europe saw that they were persecuted and driven to be slaughtered by the same enemies in Berlin, Vienna and Budapest. The oppressed races found at last that they have common aspirations and interests, and the collapse of Russia to-day makes even the Poles realise where their real enemies are. The Polish people may to-day have only one orientation: against the Central Powers. It is an inspiriting sign that even some Polish ”Realpoliticians” begin to realise that Austria is doomed and that it is bad politics to count upon Vienna, to say nothing of Berlin.
_(a) The Congress of Rome_
In order to give practical expression to the growing sense of co-operation amongst the oppressed nations of Austria-Hungary, their representatives a.s.sembled in Rome at the beginning of April, 1918. In those days the great spirit of Mazzini revived again in Rome, and from that moment Italy definitely became the champion of the movement of the oppressed nations of Austria-Hungary towards independence.
The congress was attended by numerous Italian senators, deputies, ministers and other leading men. The Yugoslav Committee was represented by its president, Dr. Trumbic, the Dalmatian sculptor Mestrovic, the Bosnian deputy Stojanovic and others; the Czecho-Slovak Council by Dr. Benes and Colonel Stefanik; the Poles by the Galician deputy Mr. Zamorski, and by Messrs. Seyda, Skirmunt, Loret and others; the Rumanians by the senators Draghicescu and Minorescu, the deputy Lupu and the Transylvanians Mandrescu and De Luca. The Serbian Skupstina sent a deputation of twelve deputies and a delegation of officers from the Yugoslav division at Salonica. Among the foreign visitors invited to the congress were M. Franklin-Bouillon, President of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the French Chamber of Deputies, the ex-minister M. Albert Thomas, M. Fournol, M. Pierre de Quirielle, Mr. H.W. Steed, Mr. Seton-Watson, and Mr. Nelson Gay.
The congress unanimously adopted the following general resolutions agreed upon between the various nationalities and the special Italo-Yugoslav Convention concluded between Messrs. Torre and Trumbic:
”The representatives of the nationalities subjected in whole or in part to the rule of Austria-Hungary--the Italians, Poles, Rumanians, Czechs and Yugoslavs--join in affirming their principles of common action as follows:
”1. Each of these peoples proclaims its right to const.i.tute its own nationality and state unity or to complete it and to attain full political and economic independence.
”2. Each of these peoples recognises in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy the instrument of German domination and the fundamental obstacle to the realisation of its aspirations and rights.
”3. The a.s.sembly recognises the necessity of a common struggle against the common oppressors, in order that each of these peoples may attain complete liberation and national unity within a free state.
”The representatives of the Italian people and of the Yugoslav people in particular agree as follows:
”1. In the relations between the Italian nation and the nation of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes--known also under the name of the Yugoslav nation--the representatives of the two peoples recognise that the unity and independence of the Yugoslav nation is of vital interest to Italy, just as the completion of Italian national unity is of vital interest to the Yugoslav nation, and therefore pledge themselves to employ every effort in order that at the moment of the peace these decisions _(finalita)_ of the two nations may be completely attained.
”2. They declare that the liberation of the Adriatic Sea and its defence against every present and future enemy is of vital interest to the two peoples.
”3. They pledge themselves also in the interest of good and sincere relations between the two peoples in the future, to solve amicably the various territorial controversies on the basis of the principles of nationality and of the right of peoples to decide their own fate, and in such a way as not to injure the vital interests of the two nations, as they shall be defined at the moment of peace.
”4. To such racial groups _(nuclei)_ of one people as it may be found necessary to include within the frontiers of the other there shall be recognised and guaranteed the right of preserving their own language, culture, and moral and economic interests.”
The Polish delegates laid before the congress a special memorandum of their own from which we quote the following: