PEACE SIGNED AT PARIS; RUSSIA AND THE ALLIES AGREE TERMS

PARIS, 1856-03-30. — The plenipotentiaries assembled in Paris have this day signed a general treaty of peace, bringing the long negotiation over the Eastern war to its decisive conclusion. Russia, France, Great Britain, Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire have subscribed the settlement, together with Austria and Prussia. The signatures crown the congress which opened here on the 25th of February under the presidency of Count Walewski, the French Minister for Foreign Affairs. Ratification by the several sovereigns remains necessary; nevertheless, the agreement now sets down the conditions upon which armies may withdraw, prisoners return, and ordinary intercourse between the contending nations be restored.

The treaty declares that, from the exchange of ratifications, “there shall be peace and friendship” between the sovereigns lately at war. Its importance lies not merely in that accustomed assurance, but in the particular restraints and guarantees by which the negotiators seek to secure it. The Black Sea, the navigation of the Danube, the position of the Principalities, and the standing of the Ottoman Empire within Europe have all received attention. No single conquest supplies the measure of this peace. The settlement attempts instead to alter the circumstances which permitted a quarrel concerning the Sultan’s dominions to become a general European struggle.

Russia has been represented by Count Orlov and Baron Brunnow; Great Britain by Lord Clarendon and Lord Cowley; and France by Count Walewski and Baron Bourqueney. Aali Pasha and Mehemed Djemil Bey have acted for the Porte, while Count Cavour and the Marquis de Villamarina have represented Sardinia. Austria’s participation has been of particular consequence. Though not a belligerent, she pressed the proposals upon which Russia accepted negotiation, and her position between the opposing combinations gave weight to her representations. Prussia, likewise outside the war, has joined the concluding settlement. Thus the instrument bears the authority of a wider company than the combatants alone.

The most striking provision concerns the sea upon which so much of the contest has turned. “The Black Sea is neutralised,” the treaty states. Its waters and ports are opened to merchant vessels of every nation, but, subject to specified exceptions, closed to the flags of war both of the neighbouring states and of other Powers. Russia and the Sultan further undertake neither to establish nor maintain military-maritime arsenals upon its coast. A separate convention regulates the limited light vessels which the two bordering Powers may retain. These provisions seek to remove the means of sudden naval predominance, rather than merely to change the possession of a fortress.

Territorial arrangements accompany that restraint. Russia is to restore Kars and the other Ottoman territory occupied by her troops; the Allies are to restore the places taken from Russia, including Sebastopol. There is, however, to be a rectification of the Russian frontier in Bessarabia, with the ceded territory attached to Moldavia under the Sultan’s suzerainty. The object is connected expressly with the freedom of the Danube. For that river, the treaty establishes arrangements intended to clear the mouths and neighbouring approaches of impediments to navigation. The work of peace will therefore include engineering and administration, as well as the evacuation of military positions.

The Powers also undertake to respect “the independence and the territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire,” making their preservation a concern of Europe collectively. The Sublime Porte is admitted to participation in the advantages of the public law and concert of Europe. A further article records the Sultan’s recent communication concerning the condition of his subjects, without conceding to the signatory states a right to intervene, separately or collectively, in his relations with them. The distinction is material. Improvement in the government of the Sultan’s Christian subjects is acknowledged as important, but the treaty does not make that acknowledgment a warrant for foreign direction of Ottoman domestic affairs.

Moldavia and Wallachia remain under Ottoman suzerainty, enjoying privileges and immunities under a collective guarantee rather than the exclusive protection of a single foreign Power. Arrangements are prescribed for ascertaining the wishes of their inhabitants concerning their future organisation. Serbia likewise retains its position under the Porte, with its privileges placed under the common guarantee. These provisions show how far the conference has travelled beyond the immediate military question in the Crimea. The difficult business is to provide security for the Sultan’s European territories without ignoring their several institutions, and without leaving any one neighbouring empire master of their political fortunes.

The background to today’s signatures is written in the losses of three campaigning seasons. The Russian occupation of the Danubian Principalities in 1853, the outbreak of war with the Porte, and the destruction of the Ottoman squadron at Sinope were followed by the intervention of Britain and France in 1854. The struggle then spread beyond its first theatre. In the Crimea, the Allies fought at the Alma, Balaclava and Inkerman, and conducted the protracted siege of Sebastopol. The fall of the southern part of that fortress last September gave force to the demand for a settlement; Russia’s subsequent capture of Kars supplied her negotiators with an important counterclaim.

In political terms, the congress has placed Paris at the centre of European deliberation. The Emperor Napoleon receives the distinction of a settlement concluded in his capital, while Austria has demonstrated the influence available to a state whose intervention has been diplomatic rather than military. Russia accepts substantial restrictions, but the treaty proceeds by reciprocal engagements and restorations, not by an attempt to dictate her internal government. For merchants, shipowners and the public treasuries, the immediate interest is equally plain: renewed commerce and a prospective reduction in the burdens of war. No precise movement of prices is necessary to establish the commercial importance of reopening secure communications.

There remain duties which signatures cannot perform. Ratifications are to be exchanged at Paris within four weeks, or sooner if possible; military withdrawals, the return of prisoners and the execution of the river and frontier arrangements must follow their prescribed courses. Nor can a European guarantee enforce itself. Its worth will depend upon the willingness of the participating governments to consult and act when difficulties arise. Today, however, the essential change is beyond dispute: the representatives of Russia and her enemies have agreed upon a common instrument. The question before Europe is no longer upon what terms peace may be discussed, but how faithfully the peace now signed shall be carried into effect.