16
Britain having levied 3,000,000 men, did much more than she was expected to do, at any rate more than she was obliged to do. But the development of the war and especially Germany’s designs against the British Empire, forced England to protect herself against this unexpected thrust, and, therefore, she has to raise a very large army. I am convinced that the Germans will only be thrown back in the West and defeated, if Britain can bring to the front much more than a million soldiers, perhaps twice that number.
France appears to have called up all the men she had; therefore, Britain and Russia must open their “reservoirs” of men, if the Germans and their Allies are to be met with an outnumbering army.
Britain should introduce universal compulsory service. This system is more just and democratic, and it is much cheaper.
The British Army must be superior in numbers, because, compared with the German Army, it has some drawbacks due to natural circumstances.
In recent times its only experience of war has been against uncivilised tribes and nations: whereas the Germans have quite a different experience, besides being a military nation par excellence. The English resemble in that respect the Russians; although both had one analogous war experience—the Wars with the Boers and Japanese.
The British Army, being raised from non-soldiers, has one great drawback—it has few officers of experience especially in the higher ranks. That is a very real drawback, which must be taken into consideration; the more so, that the number of previously trained men is also small. Generals cannot be trained in a few months—therefore the most conscientious selection of the best men is necessary.
The papers announced that the British troops are to be drilled for six months; perhaps that is a good and expedient measure for England. In Austria and Germany the drill of the new men lasts only six weeks. It has been tried in Austria to send to the fighting line men after only a four weeks drill, but the experiment failed.
The long drilling period of the English recruits is, I presume, partly due to the voluntary system, getting men little by little; compulsory universal service would shorten the period of drilling.
The British Officers look very unmilitary and unwarlike; an eye accustomed to see German, Austrian, and Russian officers, detects at the first glance that the majority are more sportsmen than soldiers. Sport is a good preparatory school to military service, but it is not military service itself. The outfit of an officer is too luxurious and too costly to be military. I do not doubt, of course, that these men will fight very gallantly, that they will die with the greatest dignity, but England does not so much need officers who can die, as officers who can fight and win.
Of course the whole so-called voluntary system with its high pay is unmilitary, at least unwarlike. I read in serious papers, that industry and food production requires so many men, that universal service is impossible. This is a mistake. Universal service would not withdraw the necessary men from industry; it is merely a matter of ascertaining how many men industry requires, and these would then be provided. The Government must, of course, be in a position to know the requirements. Germany has an effective industry in spite of the compulsory system. Britain, of course, cannot compete with Germany (45 millions to 68 millions), but there is Canada, Australia—always assuming that the Navy is able to provide the necessary transport.
One fact has repeatedly forced itself upon my notice here. I find a striking lack of imagination among the English: often even men who are interested in the war as specialists are unable to anticipate the future developments of the situation; there is a peculiar lack of creative
