The New Federalist March 10, 1989 Page 5American AlmanacThe Dreyfus Affair And the Path To World War Iby D. Scanlon and J. Cheminade EIRNSLeft, U.S. economist and Democratic Party leader Lyndon LaRouche is led from the Alexandria, Virginia courthouse, following his January 27 sentencing to fifteen years in prison. Right, nineteenth-century depiction of the stripping of French Army Captain Alfred Dreyfus's rank of honor, following his 1984 court martial conviction for spying. In the year 1894, a French captain of the Jewish faith named Alfred Dreyfus was tried by a military court, found guilty of treasonous spying for Germany, and sentenced to life imprisonment on the penal colony hellhole known as Devil's Island. This gross miscarriage of justice had shattering implications for French political stability, law, and foreign relations. Had the Dreyfus Affair not taken place, it is at least conceivable that World War I might never have occurred. Thus, this scandal and trial unleashed a process leading inexorably to one of the worst and most bloody carnages in modern history.

Like the recent trial of Lyndon LaRouche and his associates, the Dreyfus trial did not occur in a vacuum. It, too, was politically motivated, with the difference that Captain Dreyfus was not selected for persecution because of his political activities, as in the LaRouche case, but rather because his religion made him a convenient and acceptable scapegoat for the French military chief of staff, and most importantly, the French press.

But Captain Dreyfus was also selected as the target because his scapegoating provided the opportunity for crushing France's emerging alliance with Germany against the monetarist and imperialist powers centered in the City of London. One of the dominant financial oligarchies of the day was the Rothschild familywhom, we shall see, had absolutely no compunctions about promoting anti-Semitism and racism on a vast scale, when it suited their interests to do so.The Strategic BackdropFrance, during the twenty years prior to the Dreyfus Affair, was dominated by a national obsession which sprang from its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War in 1870. This defeat was not only a humiliating blow to France's honor, it resulted in the loss of important territory, namely the Alsace-Lorraine region in eastern France. The entire country was vowed to revenge"la revanche" as it was called. France must recover this loss of territory, no matter what the cost. This, of course, suited imperialist Britain just fine. The more France was at logger-heads with Germany, the less Great Britain would have to fear about France's rivalry in Africa, Asia, and the Orient.But there were in France a handful of republican political figures and statesmen who were not blind to the fact that the Franco-German rivalry was being exploited to the hilt. The leading voice of that faction belonged to Gabriel Hanotaux, who was foreign affairs minister from 1894 to 1898. Hanotaux, who had extensively studied the great nation-building achievements of France's Cardinal Richelieu during the seventeenth century, had quietly set about the task of taking on the British Empire and challenging its racialist dogmas. In stark contrast to British law, Hanotaux wrote that "the colonies are an integral part of the Republic and are subject to the same constitutional law."

Inside France, a propaganda war was being waged in favor of the British racist policy. The propaganda war was originally set off by the 1881 publication by James Rothschild of Gustave Le Bon's Nazi-like ravings contrasting "primitive" to "superior" beings. Le Bon demanded that the process of "assimilation" be abandoned: "All our ideas about assimilating or Frenchifying any inferior people" are "dangerous chimeras."

Le Bon and his Rothschild patrons, just like the British, wanted raw loot, and nothing but the loot. Hanotaux countered: "A colony is not a farm given to the mother country for exploitation, which has no value unless it earns a rent by the end of each year."

Hanotaux also sought to ease tensions with Germany, in order to avoid what was rapidly becoming a complete consolidation of British imperialist strength across the African continent. In the change of climate afforded by the 1890 resignation of Chancellor Bismarck, Hanotaux was able to make some headway. By early 1896, the German foreign secretary spoke to the French ambassador in Berlin about "limiting the insatiable appetite of England. . . . It is necessary to show England that she can no longer take advantage of the Franco-German antagonism to seize whatever she wants."

It was in the midst of a strategic crisis brought about by Britain's seizure of the French-built Suez Canal in Egypt, that the Dreyfus Affair was unleashed. Of Hanotaux's anti-British diplomacy of the day, Lord Salisbury would write: "It is very difficult to prevent oneself from wishing for another Franco-German war to put a stop to this vexation."

When the first rumors of an investigation into a spy affair and a possible prosecution of Captain Dreyfus for spying for Germany made their way into the chambers of the Council of Ministers, Hanotaux intervened. If this suspicious affair of investigating, much less prosecuting, an officer on the basis of the flimsiest of evidence were pursued, he warned, it "would provoke the gravest of international difficulties," "a diplomatic rupture with Germany, even war." His advice was not heeded, and what happened is this.

As the historical record now shows, the actual perpetrator of the treasonous acts for which Dreyfus was unjustly convicted, was Count Ferdinand Walsin-Esterhazy, a gutter-level aristocrat who also happened to be a paid Rothschild agent. Esterhazy, as the record also shows, was an intimate collaborator of one of the most notorious anti-Semites of the day: the editor of the Jesuit-financed scandal sheet La Libre Parole, Edouard Drumont. These two scoundrels conspired in 1893 to stage a duel between each othereven though everyone knew they were the best of friends. This set the stage for Esterhazy to become subsidized directly by the Rothschild family, for his purported courageous service in defense of France's Jews against Drumont's filthy venom!It was Esterhazy who wrote letters to the German military attache in Paris, Colonel Von Schwarzkoppen, seeking to provide his services in exchange for money. This eventually consisted in providing low-grade, but useful military secrets. (In the future, their correspondence would refer to their mutual relations with "the House of R.")

Hanotaux's intervention in the Council of Ministers resulted in his securing an agreement that while investigations might continue into what was already called the Dreyfus case, nothing would be made public. Captain Dreyfus was taken into custody, where he was interrogated and asked to provide dozens of handwriting samples, none of which matched the handwriting on the intercepted "bordereau," the document addressed to the German military attache which listed the classified documents being enclosed.

Enter Major Hubert Henry, a member of the French general staff assigned to find the spy and a close friend of Count Esterhazy. (It was to be Major Henry who supplied the forgeries incriminating Dreyfus.) Major Henry heard of this decision not to proceed, and on October 28, 1894, leaked news of the "scandal" to Edouard Drumont's La Libre Parole: "They want to quash the case against the Jew," screamed the headlines the next day. The other anti-German "revanchist" press jumped into the act. The government then decided to put Captain Dreyfus on trial for treason.Dreyfus was speedily convicted by a military tribunal. Major Henry forged an entire dossier of "evidence" which was given secretly to the jury just before it retired for deliberations the defense was not allowed to see these "documents," for they were classified as state secrets. Captain Dreyfus was stripped of his rank in a humiliating public ceremony, and shipped off to Devil's Island for a life sentence.No account of the Dreyfus Affair would be complete without a closer review of the shocking conditions which prevailed in the courtroom during Alfred Dreyfus's trial.

Dreyfus's court martial lasted a mere three days, from December 19 to December 23. The defense was not prepared. The only so-called proof provided by the prosecution, was the claim that Dreyfus's handwriting resembled that found in the documents seized en route to the Germans. Nothing else was found. Of the five expert "graphologists" called as witnesses, two concluded that the Dreyfus handwriting did not match that in the documents.

But prosecutor Alphonse Bertillon, a notorious anti-Semite, secured the conviction. Bertillon presented a topsy-turvy theory to the court to ground his accusation. Casimir Perier, President of the Republic, later said of the prosecutor: "Bertillon is not bizarre. He is completely crazy, totally and esoterically mad. . . . I thought I had before me an escapee from Salptrire or Villejuif," two psychiatric hospitals of the time.

Though the court martial was predisposed to convict, composed as it was of officers more mindful of their careers than of truth, the prosecutor's position was improved by the fact that his arguments were coupled with a vile press campaign against the accused. Furthermore, false evidence was introduced.

Drumont's La Libre Parole, the first to receive leaks on the Dreyfus case, launched a campaign of anti-Semitism which it never abandoned, falsely pretending to defend "respect for the army."

"We at least have the consolation that Dreyfus is not really one of us," wrote La Libre Parole, agitating for the opening of the trial. "It is not a true Frenchman who committed the crime." In this atmosphere, any attempt to defend Dreyfus became a slander of the nation, an attack on the army. By early November 1894, other papers such as L'Autorit, Le Journal, Le Temps, Le Petit Journal and La Croix, the paper of the Order of the Assumption, rehashed the dirt, inventing, and lying. Dreyfus was alternately accused of being an agent of Germany or Italy. The climate was thus created for the mob to demand his death.

But the prosecution and those out to hang Dreyfus did not stop at this. To ensure the demise of Dreyfus, who they called "the Jew protected by Germany," Guene, an agent of the section of statistics of the Second Bureau of the High Command (counterespionage), manufactured two fake documents. They became the first of many such falsifications.

A small group of men, determined to convict Dreyfus whatever the cost, became involved in ever-greater violations of the law. Among them we find the minister of war, Mercier; the later minister of war, Boisdeffre; the latter's second-in-command, Gonse; Sandherr of the section of statistics; and the latter's subordinates Guene, Henry, Gribelin, and Lauth. The dark service that was done as a result of an initial moral corruption was made worse by spineless civil authorities.

The documents faked by Guene were slipped, along with other less relevant papers, into an envelope, and sent to the president of the war council on behalf of Minister of War Mercier. Mercier, in turn, sent them on to the court. The minister told no one about this secret communication. Neither the President of the Republic, nor the head of government, nor any other members of government ever learned of this. It was as if a secret government had arrogated to itself absolute power, usurping legitimate authority.

These secret communications were an absolute violation of the law.

From then on, the inexorable machine was at work. But the conspirators against Dreyfus had been forever tied together by their crimes, and, as the Dreyfus Affair grew, they were forced to undertake ever greater illegalities.

mile Zola's famous open letter urging Dreyfus's exoneration, J'Accuse, published in January 1898.In July 1906, nearly twelve years after his conviction, Captain Alfred Dreyfus was reinstated in the French Army with full honors. The Fight For ExonerationEarly on in 1895, one could find but few souls to defend Alfred Dreyfus. Left and Right together sighed a sigh of relief when he was convicted. A former officer in the French army was then forgotten, to spend four atrocious years in a penal colony.

Mistreated, malnourished, disconsolate, Dreyfus almost reached the end of his rope. But, he survived for two reasons: the love of his family, and the belief in the justice of his nation. He continued to hope, perhaps naively, that his superiors would seek to find the truth about his innocence.

Fortunately, Dreyfus's brother Mathieu was less naive. Mathieu rose to the occasion, to assemble and lead the fight for him, devoting himself totally to Alfred's cause. Little by little, Mathieu was joined by men of honor and heart, and a movement to free Alfred Dreyfus took shape.

In 1895, two crucial events opened the path to the reversal of Dreyfus's conviction. Both originated outside of official, established channels. Throughout, the political class of France remained obdurate in its refusal to rally to the cause of justice.

The first crack in the case came when crucial information fell into the hands of Mathieu Dreyfus. Through his perseverance, he learned from a friend of the President of the Republic, Flix Faure, that Dreyfus had been condemned not because the file supposedly implicating him had been discovered, nor on account of the public evidence produced in trial. "He was condemned," said Faure, "on the basis of secret documents communicated to the judges in the deliberations hall, documents which raisons d'etat (reasons of state) prohibited being made available to the defendant or his lawyer." With this information, Mathieu realized that a terrible illegality had led to the condemnation of his brother.

Three men, initially, provided a helping hand to Mathieu. The first was Alfred's lawyer, Edgar Demange. Catholic, conservative, and a renowned criminal lawyer, Demange displayed great courage, and struggled valiantly in the name of the law against his own personal inclinations and prejudices. He remained by the side of the Dreyfus brothers throughout the long ordeal. The second was a young Jewish writer, Bernard Lazare. The third was a man of great heart, Auguste Scheurer-Kestner, vice president of the French Senate, and a former parliamentarian from Alsace. It is he who became the soul of the struggle in the political world, though this cost him great isolation at first.

The second event was the discovery by the new head of the Second Bureau (intelligence section) Lt. Colonel Picquart, of a letter intercepted from the German military attache, addressed to Count Esterhazy, himself a commander of an infantry battalion at Rouen. This aroused Picquart's curiosity as to the person of the Count. (Picquart had also attended the Dreyfus trial as an observer, and had been shocked at the flimsiness of the "evidence" presented against him.) Then, a few months later, Esterhazy applied for a transfer to the General Staff. The handwritten application landed fortuitously on Picquart's desk. He immediately thought the handwriting was familiar, and compared it to the famous "bordereau" kept in the General Staff safe. Picquart's superior, General de Boisdeffre was forced to agree it was the same hand.

Boisdeffre then referred the matter to the deputy chief of staff, General Gonse. Gonse and de Boisdeffre then advised Picquart to separate the Dreyfus affairwhich was classified 'case closed'and that of Esterhazy, so as to avoid reopening painful wounds. Picquart's determination to force the truth out into the open led to his transfer out of the intelligence bureau. On November 16, 1896, Picquart was sent on a mission to eastern France, then sent to the south, and finally to Tunisia.Events began to move quickly. A faction within the army's high command and intelligence service joined together in an attempt to smother the affair. More fake documents were produced, myths were created, and rumors concocted concerning "Dreyfus's confession."

But the evidence was beginning to mount against Esterhazy. In 1896, the newspaper Le Matin published on its front page what it thought was a real scoop: a copy of what it believed to be the definitive proof of Dreyfus's guilta copy of the original "bordereau." It backfired.An old acquaintance of Esterhazy's recognized it as the handwriting of the count. Eventually, Esterhazy was brought before a court martial. Following an extremely heated trial, but after only three minutes of deliberations, the count was found not guilty. The press and the Paris populace cheered. Colonel Picquart was later arrested and charged with "breach of regulations" for having told the truth about his discoveries to his attorney.

Despite his victory in court, Esterhazy fled to London. There, he boasted to his mistress: "I would not harm a puppy, but I would kill one hundred thousand Frenchmen with pleasure. This is the feast I dream of."

But the effort to exonerate Dreyfus had already begun, and was galvanized in January 1898 by the French novelist mile Zola's famous open letter: "J'Accuse!" (I Accuse). Zola's open letter prompted a French assemblyman named Jean Jaurs to present the case for Dreyfus's retrial to the National Assembly on July 7, 1898. Of the documents used to prove Dreyfus's treason, Jaurs said: "They smell fake, they stink of fakery! They are fakes! Imbecilic fakes, produced to cover other fakes, and I will prove it."

Later that year, Major Henry's forgeries were uncovered. He committed suicide in prison after his arrest. It was years before Captain Dreyfus was fully exonerated.The Damage to The French NationIn the years between Dreyfus's conviction and exoneration, France was torn down the middle. The nation was in a state of collective psychosis. Government cabinets were toppled in rapid succession, and Hanotaux left office for good in 1898. The British ambassador in Paris, Monson, would write smugly to his government: "The existing conditions of unrest and suspicion is interesting to England on account of the influence it may exercise upon the foreign relations of France."

Indeed. Hanotaux's successors destroyed his years of efforts to restore normalcy to Franco-German relations. The pathetic Thophile Delcass had by 1899 accepted a treaty with the British establishing "spheres of influence" which totally excluded France from the Nile Valley in Egypt. He continued to capitulate under pressure of British agents such as the French Ambassador to London, Paul Cambonwhom Hanotaux had denounced at cabinet meetings as a "traitor." Enticed by the carrot of regaining the lost territories of Alsace-Lorraine, Delcass fully normalized relations with Britain. Part of the package was a "reinterpretation" of France's Dual Alliance with Russia, into a policy of aggressive encirclement of Germany.By 1904, Delcass signed the secret "Entente Cordiale" with the British. When its contents were finally made public in 1911, Hanotaux wrote that "the sustained effort of a diplomatic and political group, disposing of the most powerful means of information and action," had succeeded in imposing on France a new foreign policy, "a marvelous invention of English diplomatic genius to divide its adversaries." The treaty provided that France could control Moroccoprovided France would no longer deal with Germany. This set up one of the "bones of contention" between the two potential allies that fueled the inexorable momentum toward World War I.