Señores del Congreso:
Una vez más los portavoces de los imperios centrales han indicado su deseo de debatir los propósitos de la guerra y la posible base de una paz general. Se han llevado a cabo negociaciones en Brest-Litovsk entre representantes rusos y representantes de las potencias centrales a las que han sido invitados todos los beligerantes con el objeto de establecer si sería posible ampliar esas negociaciones a una conferencia general sobre los términos de una paz. Los representantes rusos no sólo presentaron una declaración perfectamente definida de los principios de acuerdo según los cuales estarían dispuestos a firmar la paz, sino también un programa de aplicación concreta de esos principios. Los representantes de las potencias centrales presentaron un borrador de acuerdo que, aunque mucho menos definido, parecía susceptible de interpretación liberal hasta que se añadió su programa específico de términos prácticos. Dicho programa no proponía ninguna concesión ni a la soberanía de Rusia ni a las preferencias de la población cuyas fortunas afectaba, sino que significaba que los imperios centrales conservarían todo palmo de territorio ocupado por sus fuerzas armadas como añadido permanente a sus territorios.
Cualesquiera que sean los resultados de las negociaciones de Brest-Litovsk, cualesquiera que sean las confusiones de parecer y propósito en las declaraciones de los portavoces de los imperios centrales, éstos han intentado una vez más informar al mundo de sus objetivos en la guerra y han desafiado una vez más a sus adversarios a decir cuáles son sus objetivos y qué clase de acuerdo considerarían justo y satisfactorio. No hay ninguna razón por la cual este desafío no deba ser respondido, y respondido con completa franqueza. Nosotros no hemos esperado. Una y otra vez hemos presentado con plenitud nuestro pensamiento y propósito al mundo. Hay, además, una voz que pide esas definiciones de principio y propósito que es, a mi entender, más conmovedora y apremiante que cualquiera de las muchas emotivas voces que llenan el perturbado aire del mundo. Es la voz del pueblo ruso. Están postrados y casi indefensos ante la siniestra potencia de Alemania, que hasta ahora no ha conocido aplacamiento ni piedad. Aparentemente, su poder está hecho añicos. Y, sin embargo, su alma no es servil. No cederán en el principio ni en la acción. Su concepción de lo que es justo o de lo que es humano y honorable para ser aceptado por ellos ha sido explicitado con una franqueza, una amplitud de miras, una generosidad de espíritu y una simpatía humana universal que debe estimular la admiración de cualquier amigo de la humanidad; y se han negado a amoldar sus ideales o abandonar otros con el fin de salvarse ellos mismos. Apelan a nosotros para preguntarnos qué es lo que deseamos, en qué difiere, si difiere en algo, nuestro propósito y nuestro espíritu de los suyos. Lo crean o no sus actuales dirigentes, nuestro más sentido deseo y nuestra más sentida esperanza es que pueda establecerse un medio mediante el cual tengamos el honor de ayudar al pueblo de Rusia a alcanzar su plena esperanza de libertad y paz ordenada.
Entramos en esta guerra porque se produjeron unas violaciones del Derecho que nos afectaron en lo más vivo y hacían imposible la vida de nuestro pueblo. Lo que pedimos es que el mundo sea un lugar apto y seguro para vivir, y, en particular, para todo país amante de la paz que, como el nuestro, desee vivir su propia vida, decidir sus instituciones, recibir garantías de justicia y tratos justos por parte de otros pueblos, así como contra la fuerza y la agresión egoísta.
El programa de la paz mundial es nuestro programa; y este programa, el único programa posible, a nuestro entender es éste:
I. Deben alcanzarse acuerdos abiertos de paz, de acuerdo con los cuales no habrá decisiones ni acciones internacionales particulares de ningún tipo, sino que la diplomacia procederá siempre con franqueza y a la vista pública.
II. Libertad absoluta de navegación por los mares, fuera de las aguas territoriales, tanto en la paz como en la guerra, excepto cuando los mares queden cerrados de forma total o parcial debido a una acción internacional para el cumplimiento de acuerdos internacionales.
III. La supresión, en el mayor grado posible, de todas las barreras económicas y el establecimiento de una igualdad de condiciones comerciales entre todos los países que consienten en la paz y en asociarse entre ellos para mantenerla.
IV. Se darán y aceptarán las garantías adecuadas para que los armamentos nacionales se reduzcan al nivel más bajo compatible con la seguridad interior.
V. Una resolución libre, razonable y completamente imparcial de todas las reclamaciones coloniales, de acuerdo a una estricta observancia del principio según el cual en la determinación de todas esas cuestiones de soberanía los intereses de la población implicada deben tener igual peso que las reclamaciones justas del gobierno cuyo derecho deba determinarse.
VI. La evacuación de todo el territorio ruso y un arreglo de todas las cuestiones referentes a Rusia de un modo que le asegure la mejor y más libre cooperación de los demás países del mundo en el acceso a una oportunidad sin trabas para la determinación independiente de su propio desarrollo político y su propia política nacional, y que le asegure una sincera bienvenida en la sociedad de las naciones libres bajo instituciones de su propia elección; y, más que una bienvenida, también la ayuda de todo tipo que pueda necesitar y desear.
VII. Bélgica, según estará de acuerdo todo el mundo, debe ser evacuada y devuelta sin ningún intento de limitar la soberanía de que goza en común con todas las demás naciones libres. Sin este acto reparador, toda la estructura y validez de la legislación internacional queda menoscabada para siempre.
VIII. Todo territorio francés debe ser liberado y las partes invadidas devueltas, y el daño hecho a Francia por Prusia en 1871 en la cuestión de Alsacia-Lorena, que ha perturbado la paz del mundo durante casi cincuenta años, deberá ser corregido con el fin de que la paz pueda estar de nuevo asegurada en beneficio de todos.
IX. Debería efectuarse un reajuste de las fronteras de Italia siguiendo unas líneas claramente reconocibles de nacionalidad.
X. Los pueblos de Austria-Hungría, cuyo lugar entre las naciones deseamos ver salvaguardados y asegurados, deberían tener la oportunidad más libre de desarrollo autónomo.
XI. Rumania, Serbia y Montenegro deberían ser evacuados; los territorios ocupados, devueltos; Serbia, obtener un acceso libre y seguro al mar, y las relaciones de los diversos estados balcánicos entre sí, regirse por el parecer amistoso siguiendo líneas históricamente establecidas de lealtad y nacionalidad; asimismo, deberían darse garantías internacionales de la independencia política y económica y de la integridad territorial de los diversos estados balcánicos.
XII. Las partes turcas del actual Imperio Otomano deberían recibir garantías de una soberanía firme, pero habría que garantizar a las otras nacionalidades que se encuentran ahora bajo gobierno turco una indudable seguridad vital y una oportunidad de desarrollo autónomo no perturbada por interferencia alguna; y los Dardanelos deberían abrirse permanentemente como paso libre para los barcos y el comercio de todos los países de acuerdo con garantías internacionales.
XIII. Debería crearse un Estado polaco que incluyera los territorios habitados por poblaciones indiscutiblemente polacas, con acceso libre y seguro al mar, y cuya independencia política y económica e integridad territorial quedaran garantizadas por un acuerdo internacional.
XIV. Debe formarse una asociación general de naciones de acuerdo con convenios específicos con el propósito de conceder a los estados grandes y pequeños, sin distinción alguna, garantías mutuas de independencia política e integridad territorial.
No cabe duda de que hemos hablado en términos demasiado concretos para admitir ninguna duda o pregunta. Un principio evidente recorre todo el programa que he esbozado. Es el principio de justicia para todos los pueblos y nacionalidades, y sus derechos a vivir en igualdad de condiciones de libertad y seguridad con los demás, ya sea fuertes o débiles. Si este principio no se convierte en parte de sus cimientos, no se sostendrá ninguna parte de la estructura de justicia internacional.
WOODROW WILSON
Original
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 representatives of the Central Powers to which the attention of all the belligerents has 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 peoples’ 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 significance. 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 on 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 definitive 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 helpless, 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 believe it or not, it is our heartfelt desire and hope that some way may be opened whereby we may be privileged to assist the people of Russia to attain their utmost hope of liberty and ordered peace.
It will be our wish and purpose that the processes of peace, when they are begun, shall be absolutely open and that they shall involve and permit henceforth no secret understandings of any kind. The day of conquest and aggrandizement is gone by; so is also the day of secret covenants entered into in the interest of particular governments and likely at some unlooked-for moment to upset the peace of the world. It is this happy fact, now clear to the view of every public man whose thoughts do not still linger in an age that is dead and gone, which makes it possible for every nation whose purposes are consistent with justice and the peace of the world to avow now or at any other time the objects it has in view.
We entered this war because violations of right had occurred which touched us to the quick and made the life of our own people impossible unless they were corrected and the world secured once for all against their recurrence. What we demand in this war, therefore, is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression. All the peoples of the world are in effect partners in this interest, and for our own part we see very clearly that unless justice be done to others it will not be done to us.
The program of the world’s peace, therefore, is our program; and that program, the only possible program, as we see it, is this:
Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.
Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.
The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.
Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.
A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy.
Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.
All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interests of all.
A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.
The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development.
Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.
The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.
An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.
A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.
In regard to these essential rectifications of wrong and assertions of right we feel ourselves to be intimate partners of all the governments and peoples associated together against the Imperialists. We cannot be separated in interest or divided in purpose. We stand together until the end.
For such arrangements and covenants we are willing to fight and to continue to fight until they are achieved; but only because we wish the right to prevail and desire a just and stable peace such as can be secured only by removing the chief provocations to war, which this program does remove. We have no jealousy of German greatness, and there is nothing in this program that impairs it. We grudge her no achievement or distinction of learning or of pacific enterprise, such as have made her record very bright and very enviable. We do not wish to injure her or to block in any way her legitimate influence or power. We do not wish to fight her either with arms or with hostile arrangements of trade if she is willing to associate herself with us and the other peace-loving nations of the world in covenants of justice and law and fair dealing. We wish her only to accept a place of equality among the peoples of the world, — the new world in which we now live, — instead of a place of mastery.
Neither do we presume to suggest to her any alteration or modification of her institutions. But it is necessary, we must frankly say, and necessary as a preliminary to any intelligent dealings with her on our part, that we should know whom her spokesmen speak for when they speak to us, whether for the Reichstag majority or for the military party and the men whose creed is imperial domination.
We have spoken now, surely, in terms too concrete to admit of any further doubt or question. An evident principle runs through the whole program I have outlined. It is the principle of justice to all peoples and nationalities, and their right to live on equal terms of liberty and safety with one another, whether they be strong or weak.
Unless this principle be made its foundation no part of the structure of international justice can stand. The people of the United States could act upon no other principle; and to the vindication of this principle they are ready to devote their lives, their honor, and everything they possess. The moral climax of this the culminating and final war for human liberty has come, and they are ready to put their own strength, their own highest purpose, their own integrity and devotion to the test.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario