CHAPTER XII
PREPAREDNESS
The worst foes of a long era of peace for the world are the idealists known as extreme pacifists and the socialistic dreamers. These fantastic thinkers forget that man is a dominating and a fighting being. In peace man struggles for mastery and success in human society; his victories in peace are the results of the lesser forces skillfully employed in a warfare of a social variety. Collectively, men love warfare more than peace. The will to dominate, which cannot be eradicated from human nature, impels men, combined in nations, to the use of the major forces whenever they are necessary to attain national domination. The weapons employed in national force are called "armament s." If nations were to disarm by agreement, they would soon improvise the more primitive weapons necessary to enable them to carry out their new schemes of national domination. Battles might for a time be less scientific, but human ingenuity would make them hardly less sanguinary or less savage. It is idle to think that wars would be avoided because of national disarmaments. New and cheaper arms hastily improvised would be substituted for the abandoned armaments, but wars would not cease, and will never cease, while mankind remain masterful and contending beings. If nations were disarmed, the numerically weak nation would be placed at a greater disadvantage. The nations of millions would soon overcome and depress the nations of thousands by the very force of numbers. Disarmament, to be effectual, would require the redistribution of countries into districts of equal content.
The men termed "pacifists" are of two varieties: those who would promote peace by sensible endeavor, and those who believe that wars may be eradicated by some scheme of universal disarmament or the total neglect of military education. The second kind of pacifists are called "extreme pacifists" because they believe that every warlike preparation is a moral offense. Extreme pacifists, in the very face of danger to their country, would consent to render it an easy prey for the enemy. Of all dangers to the state the extreme pacifists are the greatest. Every cultivated or thoughtful man is in some degree a pacifist. He loves peace and he believes in the substitution of arbitration for force in the greatest possible number of international differences. But he recognizes that some national differences can be solved in only one way, and that way is by the employment of the national force in war. There have been wars from the very morning of history, and there will be wars until the night sets in for all mankind. There is not in Europe or in Asia a single eminent statesman who believes for one instant that warfare will ever be a thing of the past.
Preparedness has to do with the national necessity called war. If a nation is right-minded, and there are nations which are not so, the extremity of war will be avoided whenever possible. But whenever a war is inevitable, a right-minded nation will be prepared to meet it, and that kind of nation will survive in the struggle for human existence. If a nation neglects preparation for war, and leaves itself exposed to every hostile aggression, that nation will be exterminated pursuant to the law which dooms all weaker beings in the struggle for existence. A nation which neglects preparedness is a weak or a decadent nation; it is a nation which lacks sense of proportion, one where the pursuit of wrong ideals has dulled the national intelligence. It is a nation which has decided to neglect its progeny and its future. Deliberately such a nation has chosen to be trampled on in the end by the more aggressive and the more enduring types of men and nations. America is not such a nation. It will end in being prepared for all eventualities. That is preparedness.
The first requisite for national preparedness, in view of the complicated, costly, and scientific military apparatus now employed in warfare, is a highly efficient civil government. The main efficient in modern warfare is a treasury balance on the right side, a prosperous national agriculture, and a rich and profitable national commerce. In a strong government all the national industries and organizations are sustained and made successful by judicious and highly scientific measures. Nothing good in the state is allowed to fall down. The education, the morale, the health, and the prosperity of the people of the nation are at all times maintained by governmental regulations at the highest stages of national efficiency. This desirable condition can be brought about only by a government conducted on the highest possible plane. Good government is essential to a strong and powerful nation and to preparedness.
Preparedness for America takes into consideration the extent of the territory to be defended. America has four military fronts open to enemy attack. The Pacific coast-line is exposed to attack by any great Asiatic power. The Atlantic coast is exposed to the hostile actions of any European power at war with the United States. Mexico and Canada, both weak countries, are not able to defend their neutrality, and the territories of either or both may be readily used as a base by any great power or combination of powers at war with the United States. Future wars will probably be conducted by groups of powers allied for the time being. An attack on America may be simultaneously made on all its fronts. Preparedness for America, therefore, presents the problem how best to defend the country against hostile attacks from any or all directions. Preparedness in America is not an aggressive, but a defensive, policy for a naturally peaceful and rich country living under a lax and decentralized government in times of peace. In times of war American Government, like the Roman, becomes more highly centralized, indeed a virtual dictatorship of an extremely powerful kind. The difficulty in America is that the conversion from one form of government adapted to peace to the other form more adapted for war takes time. In modern warfare there is little time given for preparedness. Consequently, if America wishes to continue as it is, it must live under a regime of preparedness. Most sensible men who love peace and security support a national scheme for minimum preparedness.
If Canada and Mexico were by proper and friendly treaties committed to some general alliance by which the whole of North America was obligated to resist hostile aggressions from across the seas, the problem of preparedness would for the United States be much simplified. America would then be virtually an insular country. The first line of defense would be exclusively on the high seas, and this line could be held for a long time by a powerful and efficient navy. For the purposes of the exterior line of defense America should possess in the Pacific a modern fleet equal to that of the greatest Asiatic power. In the Atlantic, America should maintain a fleet equal to that of the greatest European power. With a coast-line of 6000 miles to guard, a little navy is of no use to the country. It would be better for America to abolish the naval service altogether than to trust its defense to a small navy. A navy of the size here suggested would be an adequate protection for a great and a rich country and enable it to meet the attacks which are sure to come in the future of the nation.
The second line of defense for the proper security of America consists of the modern fortifications and military protective works necessary to guard the harbors and landing-places available for an enemy. To guard the second line the strongest possible modern fortresses should exist not at some points of the coast, but at all necessary points. Kept fully equipped with ordnance of the greatest power and range and with all the most advanced auxiliaries of modern defense, the second line of defense would be a protection to the country of the most efficient kind which it is overt treason in the military and the congressional authorities to neglect. The supplements to this second line of defense, the routes of quick communications, have not yet received all the attention their great importance demands of the authorities. There is now no system of strategical railways in America. But this defect can be readily overcome. The third line of defense is the army. The character and quality of this branch of the national defense is the supreme military problem. The United States will soon have to protect over two hundred millions of prosperous and peaceful citizens. It is thought by the best military authority that a standing army, for the effective defensive purposes of such a vast population, should consist of at least half a million men. This would be only one fourth of one per cent, of the population. Two hundred thousand soldiers would be required in the West and as many more in the East. One hundred thousand would be held in a central position, where they could easily be mobilized either on the Southern or the Northern borders as the need developed. Such a regular army, if highly trained and disciplined in the most modern and scientific methods, would be the nucleus of the greater army of national defense. Under-disciplined, carelessly trained, or obsoletely armed and equipped, a regular army of even 500,000 would be worse than useless to the nation. An efficient modern army requires not only the most modern equipment, but an abundance of trained officers possessed of the best attainable military education. The Military Academy and the war colleges in America must therefore be kept superior to the best foreign standards. That they are so now many traveled Americans very much doubt; there are too many signs to the contrary.
It is generally assumed that a standing army has not been popular in America. Certainly many American politicians of the easy-going, every-day variety have been opposed to a standing army, and the demagogues among them have long proclaimed that a standing army is a menace to liberty. But all Americans are not of the politician kind. Some of them are beginning to be convinced that in such a vast country, so rich and so largely populated, a regular army has become necessary for defense. A regular American Army, as most intelligent men believe, would have little power to harm liberty. Many civilians are now convinced that the power for good of a regular army would more than compensate for any risk it entails. A regular army would not bring about a perpetual dictatorship a day sooner. America will not submit to a dictatorship until the country has become so fallen and so utterly wretched as to be able to be saved from disorder in no other way. When America has fallen into that degraded condition, no regular army will be necessary to bring about a dictatorship. When the time is ripe, a dictatorship will come about in America by acclamation, just as it came about in ancient Rome. In all probability the American Republic will not for centuries fall through the rise of a dictator or through the machinations of ambitious men. If it falls, it will be through a conquest by stronger powers.
It is thought by skilled military men to be possible for a combination of powers at war with America to land in North America in a comparatively brief space of time a million trained soldiers, properly equipped. There are now at least eight of the great powers each of which has an army of far more than two and a half million men. To cope with half this number speedily, a regular army of 500,000 men, scattered throughout the United States, is conceded by experts to be wholly inadequate. A large part of the regulars would be required at the principal military stations throughout so vast a country. The regular army in America must therefore be largely supplemented by a national army quickly mobilized for the purpose of defense. A national army should be composed in the last extremity of all the men of military age. Probably there would never be an occasion when all would be called into the field.
The old militia system is obsolete and useless for defense. The testimony of the leading military authorities in America, from Washington down, is, in substance, that a militia is not an effective military arm of the nation. Since Washington complained of the militia it has become, under modern conditions, even less effective. However well disposed and patriotic the militia may be, it requires immediate reorganization in every war. It is always reorganized as a national army. Consequently, it has become the general opinion in the country that the old militia system is obsolete and that it must give way to universal military service, preferably on the Swiss plan. The Swiss or the Australian plan seems to be the most democratic and the least expensive plan for the national army of a republic. The time it requires for training is short; it interferes little with the ordinary pursuits of the young men of the nation, while its cost to the republic is comparatively small.
The Swiss system gives to every male under age, as a part of his general education, a compulsory military training of about one year. Thereafter the only additional military training necessary is about sixty-five days for the infantry, seventy-five for field artillery, and ninety days for the cavalry. The subsequent trainings, known as "repetition courses," are confined to eleven days annually. After their twenty-third year the young men are placed in the reserve. The reserve is called upon only in cases of dire necessity. The Swiss system, if adopted in the United States as in Australia, would have the merit of not seriously interfering with the civil life and industries of the country, while it would create a national army of millions of men, trained, disciplined, and effective for all purposes of defense. Together with the regular army and navy, this system would render the country invulnerable to attack, and thus tend to make it immune from hostile aggression. The unfortunate tendency in America has been toward a general indisposition to undergo military hardships of any kind. The inclination of the young men in particular is to seek the softer, the slouching, and the indifferent phases of life. This tendency would be overcome if the Swiss system were adopted. Intensive military training promotes the general health, discipline, and order in ways most valuable for the country at large. A hardy body of young men, drilled, disciplined, and obedient to authority, would invigorate the whole country and stimulate the desired public order in all directions. Besides, universal military training would create a patriotic spirit and a love of country, without which no country can be in a healthy or a sound condition. Unless in such a condition, a nation is not prepared to meet all the vicissitudes of national existence, and it ultimately would fall down before stronger and better-prepared nations.
If the United States were to adopt the Swiss system, a great national auxiliary army of the highest efficiency for all purposes would at once spring into being. Universal military service is thoroughly democratic and consistent with modern pressure. Modern military movements are so speedy that there is now no time given to create an army. An army must in modern times be in existence and able to be mobilized, thoroughly armed and equipped within a few days. Every man enrolled in the general army should always know his station in the event that the general army is quickly mobilized. Mobilization requires that the arms and equipment of the army shall always be ready. The greatest test of the military efficiency of a nation is the speed with which mobilization may be effected. In order to mobilize speedily, everything must be ready. Modern guns and military material have become so elaborate and scientific that they cannot be improvised within a moderate space of time. They must be always on hand. Nothing can now be left to the future or chance. The general staff should therefore always know that all the necessary military equipment and appliances for the army and navy are ready to meet an attack from any quarter. The expense to the nation of being ready is small compared with the cost to a rich nation caught unprepared. Improvidence and lack of military preparation have cost the United States far more in the aggregate than the largest standing army has cost the most warlike nation in Europe.
The cost of maintaining a proper and efficient military establishment in the United States in time of peace would be far less than the cost of a hurried and nervous preparation on the eve of a great war. Statistics show that the cost of the past wars conducted by the United States under the old plan of voluntary enlistment and improvised preparation for war has been the greatest of all modern wars. Indeed, the expenditures for military purposes in the United States have in recent years been almost as great as those of the most efficient military powers in Europe. In the United States only has the vast expenditure for military purposes been wasted and useless. From the present outlook it would appear that Americans have now determined to substitute an intelligent scheme of defense for the past wasteful extravagance amounting to national debauch. How best to accomplish it is the problem of preparedness.
All the former national wars of America have been conducted in circumstances more favorable than will occur again. The adversaries have been either weak nations or the terrain has been of America's own choice. Conditions have greatly changed. In the employment of the old rifle or musket American farmers and frontiersmen of the last century needed little training to make them efficient; they were accustomed to the use of these arms. With the disappearance of large game and the old frontier life, all this former advantage has been lost. In the use of modern weapons of defense no other nation is now more unskilled than the American. In modern warfare neither arms nor their proper employment can be suddenly improvised. Their production and their skilful use require a long period of preparation in times of peace. Unless America arouses itself to the necessity of preparedness as a policy, it is doomed sooner or later to destruction as a great power. There are elements of dissolution within every organism; there are also foes external as well as foes internal. Preparedness would postpone the natural operation of these forces for centuries, perhaps. Of all the enemies of a great nation the worst are the dreamers who see ahead an era of universal and perpetual peace. As man is constituted, perpetual peace is impossible. The life of nations, like the life of man, is one long struggle. Only that nation will survive which is strong in all directions.