A FEW MINUTES
BEFORE MIDNIGHT

 

EIN PAAR MINUTEN VOR MITTERNACHT

 

COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN GERMANY

AND THE USA DIRECTLY PRECEDING WWII

 

By Dr. Harrell Rhome

©2008 Harrell Rhome All Rights Reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

SOURCE NOTES

 

Exchange Of Communications Between The President Of The United States And The Chancellor Of The German Reich, April 1939, New York: German Library Of Information, Consulate General, May 1939 (With Roosevelt telegram, map of 1939 Germany, and Wilson’s Fourteen Points). 

 

Most often, the speech (approximately 20,000 words) is omitted from most WWII chronologies compiled by “scholars”.  The text of the address was published by a somewhat obscure agency, and the original booklet is rather hard to find, if one can be located at all.  Only a small part of the material quoted in my paper appears in the rather brief partial translation from the Yale Law School Avalon Project, which seems to be the only thing available.  But significant large sections are omitted.  It is my understanding that certain American nationalist groups circulated a copy or partial copy in the mid 20^th century, but probably even fewer of those are still around than of the original.  Hence, without having the booklet with the entire English translation, this crucial material is virtually unavailable to students and researchers of WWII.  In 2008, almost 70 years after the speech, one of the 1939 booklets curiously and unexpectedly came into my hands, so now this has changed. 

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

In April 1939, there was an exchange of documents and dialogue between Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Adolf Hitler, as well as between the Polish and German governments.  On 15 April, FDR sent a telegram to the Chancellor.  It made certain claims about Germany as an antagonist, demanding assurances of non-aggression.  Apparently, the Reichskanzler saw this as a last-minute chance to keep away from open hostilities in Central Europe, thus avoiding a horrible global conflagration.  Of course, he was right, and he used his opportunity to openly and honestly address all the nations, but especially those most directly involved.  On 28 April he called a special session of the Reichstag, and through German radio and relayed broadcasts, was heard over much of the world.  We assume that translations of the speech were distributed (as in the USA) by German Consulates.  Yet this major address, an honest and sincere effort to avoid war, is today ignored and secluded.  Hopefully, my paper represents a return to consciousness, a “recovered memory”, if you will.  As you read the selections, you will see why the Powers That Be chose to isolate and pay no heed to this document.  Indeed, you may see some parallels with current events. 

 

 

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHANCELLOR’S ADDRESS

 

Adolf Hitler took a last minute opportunity to speak, not only to the USA, but to the whole world, just as dark war clouds were surely and certainly on the horizon.  He not only addressed the topics in FDR’s wire transmission, but spoke clearly on other problematic key issues of the day such as the Versailles debacle, the Anglo-German Naval Treaty, the Munich Agreements, etc.  He told the truth about what had been and what was going on in Europe, exhaustively responding to each point raised by the American leader.  After a thorough reading, what did I conclude?  For one thing, it is quite evident that Germany invited continuing dialogue, not war.  Even the casual reader can see this.  While the Chancellor speaks strongly and straightforwardly, there are no threats, no aggressive language or provocations.  Interestingly, and contradicting the popular image of the “anti-Semitic Jew baiter”, he says little other than to assign them much of the blame for the financial failures of the postwar era and for the rise of Bolshevism; and this in just a few sentences.  His talk logically progresses into a longer, more detailed examination of how the opportunities following WWI were squandered, hijacked and sabotaged.  He asked that Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points be fully and equally implemented for all the nations, including Germany.  And, he fully recognized Poland’s right to the sea, but maintaining Danzig as a German ethnic area.  Several sections recount the various efforts to secure fair and lasting agreements with Poland, but all were summarily rejected by the oppressive and recalcitrant military dictatorship that ruled the newly emerged state.  And, there is more, but explore the selections below.         

 

This fascinating manuscript is quietly suppressed by simply ignoring it.  As said, the very limited partial translation does not do it justice, revealing very little of the real content of this timely foreign policy address by a major world leader.    We cover sections which readers may, hopefully, find educational and enlightening.  As said, almost all of the quotations herein seem to be unavailable anywhere else.  The introductory headings are from those appearing in the margins of the booklet pages.  Since the ill-fated Versailles Treaty was central to many of Europe’s problems, we begin with that.

 

 

“Peace hopes of millions disappointed.  Versailles Treaty ignored history.”

 

“But the millions were cheated of this peace; for not only did the German people or the other peoples fighting on our side suffer through the peace treaties, but these treaties had a devastating effect on the victor countries as well.”

 

“That politics should be controlled by men who had not fought in the war was recognized for the first time as a misfortune.  Hatred was unknown to the soldiers, but not to those elderly politicians who had carefully preserved their own precious lives from the horrors of war, and who now descended upon humanity as in the guise of insane spirits of revenge.”

 

“Hatred, malice and unreason were the intellectual forebears of the Treaty of Versailles.  Territories and states with a history going back a thousand years were arbitrarily broken up and dissolved.  Men who had belonged together since time immemorial were torn asunder….”

 

“No one knows this [the burdens of Versailles] better than the German people.  For the Peace Treaty… imposed burdens on the German people, which could not have been paid off in a hundred years, although it has been proved conclusively by American teachers of constitutional law, historians and professors of history that Germany was no more to blame for the outbreak of the war than any other nation.” It is hard to imagine a clearer and more concise summary of the massive errors at the end of the war, setting the stage for the next one.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Sufferings and despair of Germany under the republic.  Jewish and Bolshevik subversion.”

 

“The resultant misery and continuous want [after the war] began to bring our nation to political despair.  The decent and industrious people of Central Europe thought they could see the possibility of deliverance in the complete destruction of the old order, which to them represented a curse.”

 

“Jewish parasites, on the other hand, plundered the nation ruthlessly, and on the other hand, incited the people, reduced as it was to misery.  As the misfortune of our nation became the only aim and object of this race, it was possible to breed among the growing army of unemployed suitable elements suitable elements for the Bolshevik revolution.  The decay of political order and the confusion of public opinion by the irresponsible Jewish press led to ever stronger shocks to economic life and consequently to increasing misery and to greater readiness to absorb subversive Bolshevik ideas.  The army of the Jewish world revolution as the army of the unemployed were called, finally rose to almost seven million.  Germany had never known this state of affairs before.  … 

 

As a matter of fact, these democratic peace dictators destroyed the whole world economy with their Versailles madness.”

 

 

“Lies regarding German motives [in Spain].”

 

“They [Western powers] declared at the time that Germany intended to establish herself in Spain, taking Spanish colonies….  In a few weeks from now, the victorious hero of Nationalist Spain [Generalissimo Franco] will celebrate his festive entry into the capital of his country.  The Spanish people will acclaim him as their deliverer from unspeakable horrors as the liberator from bands of incendiaries, of whom it is estimated that they have more than 775,000 human lives on their conscience, by executions and murders alone.  The inhabitants of whole villages and towns were literally butchered, while their benevolent patrons, the humanitarian apostles of Western European and American democracy, remained silent.”

 

Apparently all of this was too big a dose of the truth.  Like most of the passages herein, this and the one before it are not found in the minimal translations available.  He told the truth, not only about subversive Illuminati Judaics in Germany, but also about Spain, where the forces of National Revolution won a resounding victory of freedom and truth over the Dark Forces of Judeo-Bolshevist terrorism.

 

 

“Problems settled without force.”

 

“Mr. Roosevelt declared that he had already appealed to me on a former occasion for a peaceful settlement of political, economic and social problems without force of arms. 

Answer: I myself have always been an exponent of this view, and as history proves, have settled necessary political, economic and social problems without force of arms – without even resorting to arms.”

 

“Unfortunately, however, this peaceful settlement has been made more difficult by the agitation of politicians, statesmen and newspaper representatives who were neither directly concerned nor even effected by the problems in question.”

 

Does this sound like an unstable, power-mad dictator, ready to launch his legions on the world?  Or, is this the voice of a reasonable world leader, still ready to negotiate for real and lasting peace?  Read on and decide for yourself.

 

 

“Motives of the warmongers [at 1938 Munich Conference].

 

This is a clear and eerie parallel with the warmongers and ongoing wars of our own day.  Similar tactics and protocols are now in process.  Just change the names and the places.

 

“If the cry of ‘Never another Munich’ is raised in the world today, this simply confirms the fact that the peaceful solution of the problem appeared to be the most awkward thing that ever happened in the eyes of those warmongers.  They are sorry no blood was shed – not their blood, to be sure – for those agitators are, of course, never to be found where shots are being fired, but only where money is being made.  No, it is the blood of many nameless soldiers!”

 

“They hate us Germans and would prefer to eradicate us completely.  What do the Czechs mean to them?  They are nothing but a means to an end.  And what do they care for the fate of a small and valiant nation?  Why should they worry about the lives of hundreds of thousands of brave soldiers who would have been sacrificed for their policy?  These Western Peacemongers were not concerned to work for peace but to cause bloodshed, so in this way to set the nations against one another and to thus cause still more blood to flow.  For this reason, they invented the story of German mobilization….”

 

“Moreover, there would have been no necessity for the Munich Conference, for that conference was only made possibly by the fact that the countries which had at first incited those concerned to resist at all costs, were compelled later on, when the situation pressed for a solution on one way of another, to try to secure for themselves a more or less respectable retreat; for without Munich – that is to say, without the interference of the countries of Western Europe – a solution of the entire problem – if it had grown so acute at all – would likely have been the easiest thing in the world.”

 

 

“1918, not the present time, marked losses of independence.”

 

Here, the Chancellor presents FDR with a needed history lecture.

 

“Mr. Roosevelt declared finally that three nations in Europe and one in Africa have seen their existence terminated.

Answer: I do not know which three nations in Europe are meant.  Should it be a question of the provinces reincorporated in the German Reich, I must draw the attention of Mr. Roosevelt to a mistake of history on his part.

It was not now that these nations sacrificed their independent existence in Europe, but rather in 1918.  At that time, in violation of solemn promises, their logical ties were torn asunder and they were made into nations they never wished to be – and never had been.  They were forced into an independence which was no independence but at most could only mean dependence upon an international foreign world which they detested. 

Moreover, as to the allegation that one nation in Africa has lost its freedom – that, too, is erroneous.  On the contrary, practically all the original inhabitants of this continent have lost their freedom through being made subject to the sovereignty of other nations by bloodshed and force.  Moroccans, Berbers, Arabs, Negroes, and the rest have all fallen victim to the swords of foreign might, which however, were not marked ‘Made In Germany’ but ‘Made by Democracies’.”

 

 

“Ireland charges English, not German oppression.  Palestine is occupied by English, not German troops.  Arabs appeal against English, not German methods.”

 

FDR makes a sweeping, somewhat grandiose demand.  It is clear that the Middle East, as it does today, occupied a crucial position.

 

“Are you willing to give assurance that your armed forces will not attack or invade the territory or possessions of the following independent nations: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain and Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Russia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Iraq, the Arabias, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran.”

 

The history lessons continue.  Listen for parallels with current events.  The same tactics are used today in Occupied Palestine.

 

“But I must also draw Mr. Roosevelt’s attention to one or two mistakes in history.  He mentions Ireland, for instance, and asks for a statement to the effect that we will not attack Ireland.  Now, I have just read a speech by Mr. de Valera, the Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister), in which he does not charge Germany with oppressing Ireland, but reproaches England with subjecting Ireland to continuous aggression.

With all due respect to Mr. Roosevelt’s insight into the needs and cares of other countries, it may nevertheless be assumed that the Irish Taoiseach would be more familiar with the dangers which threaten his country than would the President of the United States.”

 

“Similarly the fact has obviously escaped Mr. Roosevelt’s notice that Palestine is at present occupied not by German troops but by the English; and that the country is undergoing restriction of its liberty by the most brutal resort to force, is being robbed of its independence and is suffering the cruelest maltreatment for the benefit of Jewish interlopers.”

 

“The Arabs living in that country would therefore certainly not have complained to Mr. Roosevelt of German aggression, but they are voicing a constant appeal to the world, deploring the barbarous methods with which England is attempting to suppress a people which loves its freedom and is merely defending it.”

 

“This, too, is perhaps a problem which in the American President’s view should be solved at the conference table, that is, before a just judge, and not by physical force or military methods, by mass executions, burning down villages, blowing up houses and so on.

For one fact is surely certain.  In this case England is not defending herself against a threatened Arab attack, but as an uninvited interloper [think again of Occupied Palestine, aka Israel, today], is endeavoring to establish her power in a foreign territory which does not belong to her.”

 

And, the Chancellor reminds America that it should not fear Germany.  As we know, she did not have intentions or motives.  Besides, she did not have the natural or military resources to wage a world war across the Atlantic.  Only the USA had the wherewithal to do that.

 

“And, I here solemnly declare all assertions which have in any way been circulated concerning an impending German attack or invasion on or in American territory are rank frauds and gross untruths, quite apart from the fact that such assertions, as far as military possibilities are concerned, could only be the product of the silliest imagination.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Friendship and respect for the British Empire must be mutual.”

 

“During the whole of my political activity I have always propounded the idea of a close friendship and collaboration between German and England.  In my movement I found others of like mind.  Perhaps they joined me because of my attitude in this regard.  This desire for Anglo-German friendship and cooperations conforms not merely to sentiments based on the racial origins of our two peoples but also to my realization of the importance of the existence of the British Empire for the whole of mankind.”

 

“I have never left room for any doubt of my belief that they existence of this empire is an inestimable factor of value for the whole of human culture and economic life.  By whatever means Great Britain has acquired her colonial territories – and I know that they were those of force and often brutality – I know full well that no other empire has ever come into being in any other way, and that, in the final analysis, it is not so much the methods that are taken  into account in history as success, and not the success of the methods as such, but rather the general good which those methods produce.”

 

“Now, there is no doubt that the Anglo-Saxon people have accomplished immense colonizing work in the world.  For this work, I have sincere admiration.”

 

“I regard it as impossible to achieve a lasting friendship between the German and the Anglo-Saxon peoples if the other side does not recognize that there are German as well as British interests, that just as the preservation of the British Empire is the object and life-purpose of Britons, so also the freedom and preservation of the German Reich is the life-purpose of Germans.”

 

“A genuine lasting friendship between these two nations is only conceivable on a basis of mutual regard.  The English people rule a great empire.  They built up this empire at a time when the German people were internally weak.”

 

“Germany once had been a great empire.  At one time she ruled the Occident.  In bloody struggles and religious dissensions, and as a result of internal political disintegration, this empire declined in power and greatness and finally fell into a great sleep.  But as this old empire appeared to have reached its end, the seeds of its rebirth were springing up.  From Brandenburg and Prussia there arose a new Germany, the Second Reich, and out of it has finally grown the Reich of the German people.”

 

“And I hope that all the English people understand that we do not possess the slightest feeling of inferiority to Britons.  The part we have played in history is far too important for that.”

 

Then, he insisted on naval parity, renegotiating the Anglo-German Naval Treaty, and return of all German colonies.  It seems clear that Britain could have come to terms with the Reich, thus retaining her naval strength, her army and air power, and her colonies, therefore avoiding whatever hostilities there might have been on the continent.  Largely due to the provocations of Churchill and the war party, this option was never considered.  This is one of the great what-ifs of history.  Another little corner that events back in the day might have turned is to suppose that Edward VIII, who succeeded his father as King in January 1936, and who was openly a friend and admirer of Germany, never had his notorious love affair with the American divorcée, and remained as monarch.  Alas, other roads were taken. 

 

 

“A ‘Monroe Doctrine’ for Europe?”

 

This makes a lot of sense, but unfortunately, was ignored.

 

“If, however, President Roosevelt that he is entitled to address [the problems of Europe], in particular to Germany or Italy, because America is so far removed from Europe, we on our side might by the same right, address to the President of the American Republic the question as to what aim American foreign policy in turn has in view, and on what intentions this policy is based – in the case of Central and South American states, for instance.  In this event Mr. Roosevelt would, I must admit, every right to refer to the Monroe Doctrine and to decline to reply to such a request to interfere in the internal affairs of the American continent.”

 

“We Germans support a similar doctrine for Europe – and above all, for the territory and interests of the Greater German Reich.”

 

“Moreover, I would obviously never presume to address such a request to the President of the United States of America, because I assume he would probably rightly consider such a tactless presumption.”

 

 

“U.S. history was not made at the conference table.”

 

A little later in the speech, more history lessons are taught, especially about the violent history of the USA, which remains with us in today’s news and the actions of “our” government in the Middle Eastern countries we have invaded.

 

“For not statesmen, including those of the United States, especially her greatest, made the outstanding part of their countries’ history at the conference table.  The freedom of the United States was not achieved at the conference table any more than the conflict between the North and the South was decided there.  I will not mention the innumerable struggles which finally led to the subjugation of the North American continent as a whole.  I recite all this only in order to show that your view, Mr. Roosevelt, undoubtedly deserving of all respect, is not confirmed by the history either of your own country or of the rest of the world.”

 

 

“Deliverance of the German people [and] reconstruction.”

 

Very proudly and openly, the Leader of his people declares his purposes and deeper allegiances.

 

“I took the leadership of a state which was faced by complete ruin thanks to the promises of the outside world and the evil of its democratic regime.  …  Billions of German savings accumulated in gold or foreign exchange during many years of peace were extorted from us.  We lost our colonies.  In 1933 I had in my country 7,000,000 unemployed, a few million part-time workers, millions of impoverished peasants, trade destroyed, commerce ruined; in short, general chaos.”

 

“Since then, Mr. Roosevelt, I have only been able to fulfill one single task.  I cannot feel myself responsible for a world, for this world took no interest in the pitiful fate of my people.  I have regarded myself as called upon by Providence to serve my own people alone and to deliver them from their frightful misery.  Thus, for the past six and one half years, I have lived day and night for the single task of awakening the powers of my people in face of our desertion by the rest of the world, and of developing these powers to the utmost and for utilizing them for the salvation of our community.”

 

“I have conquered chaos in Germany, reestablished order, immediately increased production of all branches of our national economy, by strenuous efforts produced substitutes for numerous materials which we lack, prepared the way for new inventions, developed transportation, caused magnificent roads to be built and canals to be dug, created gigantic new factories.  I have striven no less to translate into practice the ideal behind the thought ‘community’, and to promote the education and culture of my people.”

 

“To protect them against the threats of the outside world, I have not only united the German people politically, but also rearmed them, I have likewise endeavoured to rid them of that [Versailles] treaty page by page, which in its 448 articles contains the vilest oppression which has ever been inflicted on men and nations.”

 

“I have brought back to the Reich its provinces stolen from us in 1919; I have led back to their country millions of Germans who were torn away from us and were in abject misery; I have reunited the territories that have been German throughout a thousand years of history – and, Mr. Roosevelt, I have endeavoured to accomplish this without bloodshed and without bringing to my people and so to others, the misery of war.”

 

[The Reichskanzler concludes his speech.]

                                                                                                  

“For my world, Mr. President, is the one which Providence has assigned me and for which it is my duty to work.  Its area is much smaller.  It comprises my people alone.  But I believe I can thus best serve that which is in the hearts of all of us – justice, well being, progress and peace for the whole community of mankind.”

 

 

SUMMATION

 

It is clear that rational freethinkers, without a lot of prejudice and bias in their minds, might decide this was a remarkably open and honest address, a courageous gesture and last try for peace before the war gods made their ride.  One might even conclude that the speaker was essentially a statesman and man of peace, but one who knew the evils and realities of war.  And, he did not just have idle opinions, but backed them up with concrete plans based on an incredibly successful record as head of government for six years.  Of course, throughout the whole address, the Chancellor’s dedication and devotion to his people is admirably clear and concisely expressed. 

 

Oh my goodness, we seem to have a problem here!  Or at least, for the Powers That Be.  Open-minded folk might eventually conclude, as has much of the world outside politically correct Europe and America, that this historical figure had important and meaningful things to say at one of the most crucial times in world history.  Could the demonic Hitler image change?  Could Adolf undergo a major media makeover?  Why not?  Stranger things have happened.  It did take 500 years, but think about the story of Joan of Arc.  But without sidetracking, this is precisely why documents and events such as this speech are ignored and suppressed.  In spite of this, now it lives again.  Please help me launch a truth-seeking missile.  Send it out to the world once more.  Show people today what really happened just a few short months before the world foolishly leaped again into the hell pit of war, a war which forever changed the destiny of our peoples. 

 

The parallels of seven decades ago with today are striking and too apparent to overlook.  As we know, those who do not learn the lessons of history are most often doomed to repeat them.  We approach a similar juncture.  Strange and challenging times are upon us.  However, we are far less prepared than those comrades of yesteryear.  Nonetheless, the signs seem right, and the times are changing, even as you read these words. 

 

Some of you write and tell me you like my compositions, but don’t like some of my grim conclusions, yet here I am, doing it again.  So, help me answer some questions so I might move on and write about more pleasant things.  Here goes.  Why do our people stand so ill-equipped and unsuspecting as we face similar or perhaps essentially the same threats as back in the ‘20s and ‘30s? Can we do better this time?  Are the Dark Forces and their barbarian hordes at the gates again?  Already inside, you say?  Who let them in?  What are we to do?  Where are our leaders?  Does anyone have plans?  Preparations?  Or, will the pernicious perfidious plots and Protocols progress and proceed, as they almost always seem to do?  Alas, so many questions, but so few answers.  Only time will tell, but, we may not have to wait all that long. 

 

 

EIN PAAR MINUTEN VOR MITTERNACHT?   

 

More often than not, historical trends and movements repeat themselves and reappear.  Is the cosmic clock, yet once again, just a few minutes short of midnight? 

 

 # # #

 

© 2008 Harrell Rhome All Rights Reserved.

 

 

APPENDIX

 

 

 

 CONTENTS OF APPENDIX

 

1.    Map Set.

2.    Official “scholarly” chronologies ignore the speech. 

3.    The text of the FDR telegram.

4.    President Wilson’s complete address with the Fourteen Points.  Use the links to access other WWII and early postwar documents such as Versailles Treaty and more.

5.    Partial Translations of the speech omit most of the more significant material, but here they are.

6.    Another last minute communication, a German Memorandum handed to the Polish Government, also on 28 April 1939.

7.    Hitler was named Time Magazine Man of the Year for 1938.  Interestingly, this issue was not the better-known one with his full cover photo, also appearing that year.  See other portrayals plus fake ugly baby photos and more.

8.    See images of the rare 1939 booklet cover and some about its origin.

9.    And, we were able to locate the entire German-language text of the speech.

 

 

 

MAP SET

 

The first one shows German Territorial Losses 1919-1921.

 

The second is a map of European language groups showing that territory sought by the Reich was ethnically and linguistically German.

 

The third shows German borders of 1939.

 

The fourth shows the division of Poland.  While the USSR annexed almost half of Poland, it was Germany who was portrayed as an aggressor who must be punished.

 

The last map shows this division.  This is the official map signed by both Stalin and von Ribbentrop 28 September 1939.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chronologies of Events:

 

http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu/bibl/mil/ww2/kron/chrono_1.txt This one includes the FDR telegram but ignores Hitler’s response.

http://www.indiana.edu/~league/1939.htm  This at least mentions the response, but summarizes the speech as primarily renouncing the Anglo-German Naval Treaty of 1935, obviously ignoring a wealth of other data.

 

 

 

FDR Telegram.

 

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/WorldWar2/fdr3.htm 

THE WHITE HOUSE, April 14, 1939.

You realize I am sure that throughout the world hundreds of millions of human beings are living today in constant fear of a new war or even a series of wars.

The existence of this fear-and the possibility of such a conflict-is of definite concern to the people of the United States for whom I speak, as it must also be to the peoples of the other nations of the entire Western Hemisphere. All of them know that any major war, even if it were to be confined to other continents, must bear heavily on them during its continuance and also for generations to come.

Because of the fact that after the acute tension in which the world has been living during the past few weeks there would seem to be at least a momentary relaxation-because no troops are at this moment on the march-this may be an opportune moment for me to send you this message.

On a previous occasion I have addressed you in behalf of the settlement of political, economic, and social problems by peaceful methods and without resort to arms.

But the tide of events seems to have reverted to the threat of arms. If such threats continue, it seems inevitable that much of the world must become involved in common ruin. All the world, victor nations, vanquished nations, and neutral nations will suffer. I refuse to believe that the world is, of necessity, such a prisoner of destiny. On the contrary, it is clear that the leaders of great nations have it in their power to liberate their peoples from the disaster that impends.

It is equally clear that in their own minds and in their own hearts the peoples themselves desire that their fears be ended.

It is, however, unfortunately necessary to take cognizance of recent facts.

Three nations in Europe and one in Africa have seen their independent existence terminated. A vast territory in another independent nation of the Far East has been occupied by a neighboring state. Reports, which we trust are not true, insist that further acts of aggression are contemplated against still other independent nations. Plainly the world is moving toward the moment when this situation must end in catastrophe unless a more rational way of guiding events is found.

You have repeatedly asserted that you and the German people have no desire for war. If this is true there need be no war.

Nothing can persuade the peoples of the earth that any governing power has any right or need to inflict the consequences of war on its own or any other people save in the cause of self-evident home defense.

In making this statement we as Americans speak not through selfishness or fear or weakness. If we speak now it is with the voice of strength and with friendship for mankind. It is still clear to me that international problems can be solved at the council table.

It is therefore no answer to the plea for peaceful discussion for one side to plead that unless they receive assurances beforehand that the verdict will be theirs, they will not lay aside their arms. In conference rooms, as in courts, it is necessary that both sides enter upon the discussion in good faith, assuming that substantial justice will accrue to both; and it is customary and necessary that they leave their arms outside the room where they confer.

I am convinced that the cause of world peace would be greatly advanced if the nations of the world were to obtain a frank statement relating to the present and future policy of governments.

Because the United States, as one of the nations of the Western Hemisphere, is not involved in the immediate controversies which have arisen in Europe, I trust that you may be willing to make such a statement of policy to me as the head of a nation far removed from Europe in order that I, acting only with the responsibility and obligation of a friendly intermediary, may communicate such declaration to other nations now apprehensive as to the course which the policy of your Government may take.

Are you willing to give assurance that your armed forces will not attack or invade the territory or possessions of the following independent nations: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain and Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Russia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Iraq, the Arabias, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran.

Such an assurance clearly must apply not only to the present day but also to a future sufficiently long to give every opportunity to work by peaceful methods for a more permanent peace. I therefore suggest that you construe the word "future" to apply to a minimum period of assured non-aggression-ten years at the least-a quarter of a century, if we dare look that far ahead.

If such assurance is given by your Government, I will immediately transmit it to the governments of the nations I have named and I will simultaneously inquire whether, as I am reasonably sure, each of the nations enumerated above will in turn give like assurance for transmission to you.

Reciprocal assurances such as I have outlined will bring to the world an immediate measure of relief.

I propose that if it is given, two essential problems shall promptly be discussed in the resulting peaceful surroundings, and in those discussions the Government of the United States will gladly take part.

The discussions which I have in mind relate to the most effective and immediate manner through which the peoples of the world can obtain progressive relief from the crushing burden of armament which is each day bringing them more closely to the brink of economic disaster. Simultaneously the Government of the United States would be prepared to take part in discussions looking towards the most practical manner of opening up avenues of international trade to the end that every nation of the earth may be enabled to buy and sell on equal terms in the world market as well as to possess assurance of obtaining the materials and products of peaceful economic life.

At the same time, those governments other than the United States which are directly interested could undertake such political discussions as they may consider necessary or desirable.

We recognize complex world problems which affect all humanity but we know that study and discussion of them must be held in an atmosphere of peace. Such an atmosphere of peace cannot exist if negotiations are overshadowed by the threat of force or by the fear of war.

I think you will not misunderstand the spirit of frankness in which I send you this message. Heads of great governments in this hour are literally responsible for the fate of humanity in the coming years. They cannot fail to hear the prayers of their peoples to be protected from the foreseeable chaos of war. History will hold them accountable for the lives and the happiness of all-even unto the least.

I hope that your answer will make it possible for humanity to lose fear and regain security for many years to come.

A similar message is being addressed to the Chief of the Italian Government.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

The Secretary of State at the same time, at the President's direction, addressed an identical telegram to Premier Benito Mussolini, of Italy.

Source: U.S., Department of State, Publication 1983, Peace and War: United States Foreign Policy, 1931-1941 (Washington, D.C.: U.S., Government Printing Office, 1943, pp. 455-58.

 

 

President Wilson's Fourteen Points

From World War I Document Archive

President Wilson's Fourteen Points

Delivered in Joint Session, January 8, 1918

Gentlemen of the Congress:

Once more, as repeatedly before, the spokesmen of the Central Empires have indicated their desire to discuss the objects of the war and the possible basis of a general peace. Parleys have been in progress at Brest-Litovsk between Russsian representatives and representatives of the Central Powers to which the attention of all the belligerents have been invited for the purpose of ascertaining whether it may be possible to extend these parleys into a general conference with regard to terms of peace and settlement.

The Russian representatives presented not only a perfectly definite statement of the principles upon which they would be willing to conclude peace but also an equally definite program of the concrete application of those principles. The representatives of the Central Powers, on their part, presented an outline of settlement which, if much less definite, seemed susceptible of liberal interpretation until their specific program of practical terms was added. That program proposed no concessions at all either to the sovereignty of Russia or to the preferences of the populations with whose fortunes it dealt, but meant, in a word, that the Central Empires were to keep every foot of territory their armed forces had occupied -- every province, every city, every point of vantage -- as a permanent addition to their territories and their power.

It is a reasonable conjecture that the general principles of settlement which they at first suggested originated with the more liberal statesmen of Germany and Austria, the men who have begun to feel the force of their own people's thought and purpose, while the concrete terms of actual settlement came from the military leaders who have no thought but to keep what they have got. The negotiations have been broken off. The Russian representatives were sincere and in earnest. They cannot entertain such proposals of conquest and domination.

The whole incident is full of significances. It is also full of perplexity. With whom are the Russian representatives dealing? For whom are the representatives of the Central Empires speaking? Are they speaking for the majorities of their respective parliaments or for the minority parties, that military and imperialistic minority which has so far dominated their whole policy and controlled the affairs of Turkey and of the Balkan states which have felt obliged to become their associates in this war?

The Russian representatives have insisted, very justly, very wisely, and in the true spirit of modern democracy, that the conferences they have been holding with the Teutonic and Turkish statesmen should be held within open, not closed, doors, and all the world has been audience, as was desired. To whom have we been listening, then? To those who speak the spirit and intention of the resolutions of the German Reichstag of the 9th of July last, the spirit and intention of the Liberal leaders and parties of Germany, or to those who resist and defy that spirit and intention and insist upon conquest and subjugation? Or are we listening, in fact, to both, unreconciled and in open and hopeless contradiction? These are very serious and pregnant questions. Upon the answer to them depends the peace of the world.

But, whatever the results of the parleys at Brest-Litovsk, whatever the confusions of counsel and of purpose in the utterances of the spokesmen of the Central Empires, they have again attempted to acquaint the world with their objects in the war and have again challenged their adversaries to say what their objects are and what sort of settlement they would deem just and satisfactory. There is no good reason why that challenge should not be responded to, and responded to with the utmost candor. We did not wait for it. Not once, but again and again, we have laid our whole thought and purpose before the world, not in general terms only, but each time with sufficient definition to make it clear what sort of definite terms of settlement must necessarily spring out of them. Within the last week Mr. Lloyd George has spoken with admirable candor and in admirable spirit for the people and Government of Great Britain.

There is no confusion of counsel among the adversaries of the Central Powers, no uncertainty of principle, no vagueness of detail. The only secrecy of counsel, the only lack of fearless frankness, the only failure to make definite statement of the objects of the war, lies with Germany and her allies. The issues of life and death hang upon these definitions. No statesman who has the least conception of his responsibility ought for a moment to permit himself to continue this tragical and appalling outpouring of blood and treasure unless he is sure beyond a peradventure that the objects of the vital sacrifice are part and parcel of the very life of Society and that the people for whom he speaks think them right and imperative as he does.

There is, moreover, a voice calling for these definitions of principle and of purpose which is, it seems to me, more thrilling and more compelling than any of the many moving voices with which the troubled air of the world is filled. It is the voice of the Russian people. They are prostrate and all but hopeless, it would seem, before the grim power of Germany, which has hitherto known no relenting and no pity. Their power, apparently, is shattered. And yet their soul is not subservient. They will not yield either in principle or in action. Their conception of what is right, of what is humane and honorable for them to accept, has been stated with a frankness, a largeness of view, a generosity of spirit, and a universal human sympathy which must challenge the admiration of every friend of mankind; and they have refused to compound their ideals or desert others that they themselves may be safe.

They call to us to say what it is that we desire, in what, if in anything, our purpose and our spirit differ from theirs; and I believe that the people of the United States would wish me to respond, with utter simplicity and frankness. Whether their present leaders