PRICE 50 CENTS THEMARTYR PEOPLES By IRWIN ST. JOHN TUCKER In Six Lectures PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR 1541 UNITY BUILDING, CHICAGO, ILL. 304 Lectures in this Series Lecture 1. Israel: The Crucible of God. Lecture 2. Serbia: The Valley of Division. Lecture 3. Ireland: The Sorrowful Nother. Lecture 4. Belgium: The Storm Center. Lecture 5. Poland: Land of the Four Eagles. Lecture 6. Armenia: Crucifixion of the Soul. The Martyr Peoples BY IRWIN ST. JOHN TUCKER In Six Lectures LECTUREI. Price 50 Cents PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR 1541 UNITY BUILDING, CHICAGO, ILL. 304 Lectures in fhis Series . Lecture 1. Israel: The Crucible of God. Lecture 2. Serbia: The Valley of Division. Lecture 3. ‘Ireland: The Sorrowftil Mother. Lecture 4. Belgium: The Storm Center. Lecture 5. Poland: Land of the Four Eagles. Lecture 6. Armenia: Crucifixion of ~the Soul. _I _ FOREWORD IRST among’all the settlements which peace must make is the F -settlement of the fate of the small nationalities. In the swift and fateful debates which preceded the bl,ast from hell-deeps of war, the rights, powers and duties of the small countries loomed largest. Even now the fate of Serbia, of Holland and*Belgium, of Armenia, of Ireland, rouse more passion and debate than the fate of the greater lands drawn into the conflict by the problem of the destiny of the small ones. “Self-determination of all nationalities” was written into the principles of diplomacy by the Russian revolution. This pungent phrase has been enlarged upon by President Wilson in his various speeches and papers, until one would think that the whole war arose out of a desperate determination on the part of all the Great Powers to protect their smaller brethren against all comers. As we look back through history we find that the small na- tionalities of today are an old, old problem, with a new face. There are certain striking resemblances about the fates of all of them. As we study the history of the small nationalities which have been turning-points in war and peace, they come to resemble triggers which when pressed explode a tremendous charge of dynamite. Each of the small nationalities whose fate is so much at stake is-or has been-the occupant of a disputed locality, a territory or gateway whose possession was sought by conflicting and more or less- equally balanced powers. Belgium has since the dawn of European history been the battleground on which Germanic and Latin peoples fought for possession of the mouth of the Rhine. Serbia sits astride the land route to Constantinople and Saloniki. Armenia occupies the Cross of Taurus, the crucial land between four seas through which lead all the ways between Europe wd India. The ancient cases of the Jews and the Irish are more pro- foundly tragic, for they mark conflicts not so much between rival powers as between theories of social organization which are enemies to the death. Each of the Martyr Peoples is a battle-ground between rival Empires, or Balances of Powers. Each owes its misery to the, ambitions of its imperial neighbors. Martyrdom is the product of Imperialism. The question, then, Whence comes Imperialism, and how can it be ended? runs through the problem of the fate of the Little Nations. There are only two possible solutions; either the world must be given over ,absolutely to the domination of one Empire so completely sovereign than none shall dare dis- pute it; or Empires must be abolished. Whether the Empire maintain itself by gold or the sword, so long as one nation seeks - 4 .- to lord it over the round world there will always be martyrs, until it is successful or is destroyed. Concern&g this, H. H. Powers says, in “America among the Nations”; Page 244. “Of the score or more of countries which make up modern Europe, the majority are popularly regarded as negligible in any consideration of our national defense: They are too small, too poor in resources, or too handicapped by situation or other cir- cumst,ances to give us any concern. Such are the’ Scandinavian countries, the Balkan states, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, and perhaps Italy and Spain. Our peaceable relations with these countries are important and mutually profit’able. gut if’ these relations should be strained to the breaking point, the advantage would be overwhelmingly with us. No doubt this is the pre- vailing opinion in America. Our relation to the minor powers of Europe, as regards problems of nation,al defence, gives us no concern. “It may be doubted, however, whether this complacency is justified. It is based on the mistaken assumption that these na- tions are separate units, and to be dealt with singly in any emergency which may arise. They are, on the contrary, nearly all- of special strategic importance in the European scheme of things. We have to deal, not *with them alone, but with their backers. “As regards the problem of our national defense, our inter- est in these powers lies in their relation to these backers, into whose plans they enter, and whose bidding they are likely to do. Such states as Belgium, Portugal, Albania, and Turkey, are not natural states at all, but artificial creations or unnatural sur- vivals, maintained by the ‘great powers in the interest of their national defense. “The same is true, if in less degree, of nearly all the lesser powers of Europe. We are strong& than they, but we have not to deal with them alone. By thsmselves they are negligible, but as;+:auxiliaries of the greater powers, willing or unwilling, they may turn the scale. Was not Belgium Germany’s undoing? Did not Greece thwart the plans of the Allies ? “There is more than one way in which a’ little nation may play the decisive role in great events. It may be the protege of a great power, voluntarily making common cause with it. Such is Portugal in relation to Britain, such Germany asserts Belgium to be in regard to Britain and France. Again, it may be an inevitable victim in the line of imperialistic aggression, and may yield, be it ever so unwillingly, a strategic site which is vital to the great schemes to which it itself is sacrificed. Such is the relation of Belgium and Holland to Germany, of Serbia to Austria,- and of Turkey to Russia. And finally, to vary the case just mentioned, it may .possess dependencies which it cannot defend, and which, when seized by a greater power, quite change the -5- relation of the latter to other powers. Thus Denmark, though completely helpless as against Russia or Britain, w,as none the less their deadly menace by virtue of her possession of Schles- wig Holstein, so vital to Germany’s schemes. Similarly, mori- bund Turkey held Egypt, and China held Korea, each indispens- able to the supremacy of the powers into whose hands they have since fallen.” “The possession of Belgium~ would give to Germany so great an advantage over France and England as to make her the para- _ mount power in Europe, and make it impossible for other powers effectually to oppose her designs. What country could be more remote from American interests than Bulgaria? Yet the control of Bulgaria by Germany is an important link in the continuous chain which she expects to extend through the Balkans and across Asia Minor and Mesopotamia to the Persian Gulf. Bulgaria. may be our undoing. Equally and more, Turkey has sites in her possession which are the key to the entire balance of the modern world. Our interests in Turkey are more than mission schools. Broadly stated, the minor powers of Europe hold the balance of power in the world. Powerless for independent action, they are/ capable of tipping the scale into which their weight is thrown, either by choice or compulsion. In but few cases is it possible to anticipate their action, the more so as their freedomof choice is so limited. They remain as residual unorganized material among the growing aggregations of Europe. “For the moment they are the object of the knight-errantry of-Europe, guided, as humanity loves to be, by the instinct of self-preservation and the sincere pretext of generous chivalry. Their independence, tenaciously maintained and chivalrously up- held, has its place, but it can hardly continue. Slowly, involun- tarily, imperceptibly, half unconsciously, it may be, these little peoples, scarce one of whom represents an ethnic unity of a seriously distinctive culture, will range themselves under the larger banners. The result is likely to be.momentous. It is one to which we cannot be indifferent.” When one comes upon such an interpretation as this, self- determination of nationalities simply means a choice as to which empire the little peoples will join. And that is no longer a matter of choice, but of the arbitrament of battle. Seen in this light, we were fighting to give the small nationalities a freedom which they cannot enjoy beyond the day they get it. What savage sarcasm is this ? Yet Professor Powers speaks from facts. Let us examine a while and see what this self-determination means : Who are the nationalities whose independence is at stake? why do they remain independent ? These questions are vital, for our President- once assured us that it was for these things that we fought. - March, 1919. Lecture 1. Israel: The Crucible of God When General Allenby at the head of the British army from Egypt marched into the city of Jerusalem, Te Deums were sung in Christian Churches all over the world, and the impulse toward a Palestinian Jewish state received a great impetus.