TASK 1 - Problems faced by the Peacemakers
1. Why did the economic, political and social conditions of the time make it so much more difficult to negotiate a just and balanced pace settlement?
The sudden defeat of the central powers had made Europe vulnerable to the spread of communism by Russia. This put the statesmen of the Allies in a difficult position in January 1919. For much of the winter of 1918-19 Germany was on the brink of revolution. With the break down of the Austrian, Turkish and Russian empires, anywhere east of the Rhine had no stable government. In March, when communists temporarily seized power in Hungary, it seemed to the Allied leaders that the door to the heart of Europe was now open to communism.
The fear of revolution was intensified by the influenza pandemic and near famine in eastern Europe, which by the spring of 1919, had killed millions of people. Therefore the statesmen of Paris also faced a need to avert economic chaos and famine.
The task of rebuilding a peaceful and prosperous Europe made more difficult by the continued strength of nationalist feeling among the populations of the Allied powers. They believed that their leaders should crush the enemy in order to make up for the suffering that had been inflicted upon them during the war.
At the Congressional elections in the US in November 1918, republicans (opposite of Woodrow Wilson) gained the majority, putting a much larger strain on the prospect for real peace in Europe. The Republicans were determined to campaign for hard peace with Germany and insisting that the US should not have to finance any expensive schemes for European reconstruction.
2. What problems did the peacemakers face in 1919?
In January 1919 the leaders of 32 countries assembled in Paris to make peace with the Central Powers. However criticisms of the way the conference was conducted, including:\
- The decision of the Allied leaders to participate in the work of detailed negotiations personally
- the 'secret diplomacy' - where negotiations were taking place behind closed doors
- Representatives from Russia, Germany and other defeated powers were excluded from the peace making process
- No agreement had been reached on the programme to be followed or how the conference was to be organised
The peacemakers also faced problems, including:
- Had to deal with treaty commitments, promises and pronouncements which had been made during the war
- The breakdown of the German (Hohenzollern), Russian (Romanov), Austro-Hungarian (Habsburg) and Turkish (Ottoman) empires had resulted in economic chaos, famine and outbursts of nationalism
- There was fear that Bolshevism (communism) would spread from Russia through Europe
- Peacemakers had to make sure that the peace settlement reflected the intense feelings within their own countries
- Decisions would have to be made quickly
The Big Three (Lloyd George, Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson), each had large supporting teams of experts, who were concerned with one main question: how to provide security for the future and all had different views on the issue. Once the Treaty of Versailles had been signed in June 1919, the Big Three returned home.
TASK 2 - Aims of the Peacemakers
1. What were the aims of Wilson and the USA?
Wilson had stated that the eventual peace should contain 'no annexations, no contributions, no punitive damages'. He was determined to ensure that his 14 Points served as the basis for the coming peace negotiations, however they were regarded by many European Statesman as idealistic pipe dreams. Clemenceau and Lloyd George also expressed reservations about the Points as the people back home wanted harsh punishment for the Germans. However, they could not be rejected fully as if Britain and France wanted to defeat Germany they would have to retain the support of the USA; the strongest economical power in the world.
Wilson was not particularly interested in punishing Germany. The US had no territorial or economic aims, Wilson was primarily concerned in creating a a fair and lasting system of international relations.
There was a general agreement among the victors to set up independent nation-states in eastern Europe and the Balkans and confine Turkey to it's ethnic frontiers, all of which was anticipated by points 10-13. Points 7 and 8, covering the liberation of Belgium and the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France, had already been fulfilled at the start of the armistice. On other issues, Wilson was willing to compromise. For example, Britain was assured that Point 2, which demanded the 'freedom of the seas' didn't mean the immediate uplifting of the blockade on Germany.
2. What were the aims of Clemenceau and France?
France had lost Alsace-Lorraine in 1871 and had been forced to pay massive reparations, it also had the highest casualties, in proportional terms, out of all of the Allies. Therefore with France weakened and Germany potentially stronger than it was in 1914, Clemenceau was less impressed with Wilson's 14 Points. He wanted to enforce maximum disarmament and reparation payments on Germany. He also wanted to set up independent Polish, Czechoslovak and Yugoslav states and an additional independent Rhineland state. Furthermore he wanted an alliance with Britain and the US that would result in financial and economic co-operation into the post-war years. Clemenceau felt that he was asking no more than what every citizen expected.
3. What were the aims of Lloyd George and Great Britain?
Britain's territorial ambitions lay in the Middle East not in Europe so there were no claims to make. Lloyd George was anxious to preserve the British naval supremacy and was willing to enlarge the Empire. He was also anxious to destroy German militarism (German generals had great political influence), and even supported demands that the Kaiser should be hanged. However he believed that it seemed unwise to punish the German people for the sins of the Kaiser; he feared that if Germany was excessively humiliated it might be driven to Bolshevism. Thus British policy pointed towards peace and reconciliation rather than revenge. However Britain adopted a much harsher approach in two key areas: reparations and war guilt. In December 1918 Clemenceau and Lloyd George agreed that the Kaiser should be by an international tribunal for war crimes.
4. What were the aims of Japan?
Japan wanted recognition of the territorial gains made in the war. The also pushed to have a racial equality clause included in the covenant of the League of Nations. They hoped that this would protect Japanese immigrants in the USA.
5. What were the aims of Italy?
The Italian Prime Minister, Orlando, was anxious to convince voters that Italy had done well out of the war, and concentrated on holding the Entente to the promises they made in the Treaty of London, as well as demanding the port of Fiume in Adriatic.
TASK 3 - Organisation of the Paris Peace Conference.
1. How effective was the organisation of the Paris Peace Conference?
Compared to the Vienna Conference of 1814-15, the conference was a showpiece of sophisticated organisation. However it got off to a slow start and little progress was made in the first 2 months towards a German settlement. This was partly due to the organisation and partly due to the Allied statesmen forming a 'Cabinet of Nations', which could ignore the pressing problems of immediate post-war Europe. They had to consider the emergency consignments of food to central and eastern Europe, set up the Supreme Economic Council to deal with the financial and economic problems affecting both occupied and unoccupied Germany, and negotiate the easing of the food blockade of Germany in exchange for the surrender of the German Merchant fleet.
2. What problems faced the Council of Ten?
4. What were the aims of Japan?
Japan wanted recognition of the territorial gains made in the war. The also pushed to have a racial equality clause included in the covenant of the League of Nations. They hoped that this would protect Japanese immigrants in the USA.
5. What were the aims of Italy?
The Italian Prime Minister, Orlando, was anxious to convince voters that Italy had done well out of the war, and concentrated on holding the Entente to the promises they made in the Treaty of London, as well as demanding the port of Fiume in Adriatic.
TASK 3 - Organisation of the Paris Peace Conference.
1. How effective was the organisation of the Paris Peace Conference?
Compared to the Vienna Conference of 1814-15, the conference was a showpiece of sophisticated organisation. However it got off to a slow start and little progress was made in the first 2 months towards a German settlement. This was partly due to the organisation and partly due to the Allied statesmen forming a 'Cabinet of Nations', which could ignore the pressing problems of immediate post-war Europe. They had to consider the emergency consignments of food to central and eastern Europe, set up the Supreme Economic Council to deal with the financial and economic problems affecting both occupied and unoccupied Germany, and negotiate the easing of the food blockade of Germany in exchange for the surrender of the German Merchant fleet.
2. What problems faced the Council of Ten?
When the peace conference opened on 18 January 1919, the delegates of 27 states attended. However, in reality, the power lay within the 'big five': Britain, France, USA, Italy and Japan. With the exception of Japan, each country was represented by its wartime leaders in the Council of Ten (two representatives per country). Neither Russia nor the defeated powers attended.
Right up to April, Allied powers were not sure whether to follow the pattern of previous peace conferences and plan for a preliminary peace with Germany and other central powers. This would only contain the disarmament terms and outlines of the territorial settlement. Then, at a later date, when tensions had cooled, an international congress would be called to which the ex-enemy states would be invited.
Thus the Council of Ten, unsure whether they were working on a preliminary or final treaty, began to tackle the intricate problems of peace making. 58 committees were set up to draft the clauses of not only the German treaty but also the treaties with Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary and Turkey. Their work was made more difficult by the absence of any central co-ordinating body, thus the different committees worked in isolation and sometimes came up with contradictory solutions.
3. Why did the organisation of the Paris Peace Conference have to be streamlined?
It wasn't until March 24th that the organisation of the Paris Peace Conference was streamlined as a result of Lloyd George's controversial Fontainebleau memorandum. Inspired by the fear that the Allies might drive Germany into the arms of the Bolsheviks, this urged major concessions in Berlin, and so raised important issues which could only be resolved by secret discussions among Clemenceau, Lloyd George, Orland and wilson. This 'council of four' proved so effective that it became the key decision-making committee of the conference. This briefly became the 'council of three' when Orlando left it in protest against its refusal to agree to Italian claims in Fiume and Dalmatia.
Thus the Council of Ten, unsure whether they were working on a preliminary or final treaty, began to tackle the intricate problems of peace making. 58 committees were set up to draft the clauses of not only the German treaty but also the treaties with Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary and Turkey. Their work was made more difficult by the absence of any central co-ordinating body, thus the different committees worked in isolation and sometimes came up with contradictory solutions.
3. Why did the organisation of the Paris Peace Conference have to be streamlined?
It wasn't until March 24th that the organisation of the Paris Peace Conference was streamlined as a result of Lloyd George's controversial Fontainebleau memorandum. Inspired by the fear that the Allies might drive Germany into the arms of the Bolsheviks, this urged major concessions in Berlin, and so raised important issues which could only be resolved by secret discussions among Clemenceau, Lloyd George, Orland and wilson. This 'council of four' proved so effective that it became the key decision-making committee of the conference. This briefly became the 'council of three' when Orlando left it in protest against its refusal to agree to Italian claims in Fiume and Dalmatia.
TASK 4 - The Settlement with Germany - Treaty of Versailles
1. Explain the main terms of the treaty:
A) War Guilt
There was universal agreement among the victorious that Germany was responsible for starting the war. Therefore Germany was forced to accept blame and sign the the War Guilt clause (Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles), taking responsibility for all losses and damages. This provided a moral basis for the Allied demands for Germany to pay reparations. As stated in in Article 231, 'Germany accepts responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all of the loss and damage to which the Allied and associated governments and their nationals have been subjected'.
B) Reparations
There was considerable debate on how much money should be payed. Wilson wanted a reparations settlement based on Germany's ability to pay. However the French and British publics wanted to 'squeeze the German lemon till the pips squeaked'. They also needed to give high reparations in order to meet the costs of the war and to also keep Germany's economy weak for years to come. At a time of extreme social unrest, no Allied country could easily face the prospect of financing debt repayments by increasing taxation and introducing cuts on expenditure. Lloyd George was determined to get Britain's fair share of reparations and insisted that 'damage' should include merchant shipping losses and the costs of pensions to those disabled, widowed or orphaned by the war. However, like Wilson, he thought that Germany should only pay what it could afford as he did not want to lose previous trade. Yet, he could not ignore the fact that he had been elected based on the promises to screw Germany 'to the uttermost farthing'. It was also initially hoped that the USA would continue war time inter-allied economic cooperation, but by the end of 1918 Wilson had dissolved all of the agencies in favour of this in Washington, so it became obvious that this would not happen.
In 1921 the commission recommended a sum of £6.6 billion. Although this was far less than originally envisioned, it was far more than Germany could afford.
In 1921 the commission recommended a sum of £6.6 billion. Although this was far less than originally envisioned, it was far more than Germany could afford.
C) Disarmament
All nations agreed on the necessity for German disarmament, but there some differences in emphasis. Britain and the US wished to destroy the German tradition of conscription and to replace it with a small professional army, similar to the British and American peacetime armies. However General Foch feared this army would become a tightly organised group of trained men that would be capable of quick expansion if the opportunity arose.
Foch was overruled and in March the Council of Ten came to the agreement that inter-allied commissions would be set up to monitor the pace of the German disarmament, the abolition of the general staff, the creation of a new regular army with a maximum of 100,000 men, the dissolution of the air force and the reduction of the navy to a handful of ships.
In simple terms they agreed that:
- Germany was to have no heavy artillery, tanks of aeroplanes
- the German army would have a maximum of 100,000 men
- Germany was to have no capital ships and no submarines
D) Territorial Settlement
- Clemenceau wanted Germany's western frontier to be fixed to the river Rhine: the left bank would go to France or become an independent buffer state - Wilson and Lloyd George both apposed this idea believing it would be a cause for resentment in Germany, and instead promised France Anglo-American military support.
- Germany would return Alsace-Lorraine to France
- Northern Schleswig went back to Denmark
- Eupen and Malmedy went back to Germany
- The Rhineland would be occupied by Allied troops for 15 years and was to remain permanently demilitarised
- The Saar region was placed under the control of the League of Nations for 15 years, during which time the French would work its mines, a plebiscite would then be held to decide the areas future.
- The 14 Points promised an independent Poland, Clemenceau wanted a strong Poland, Lloyd George was worried about the millions of bitter Germans within the new state and his pressures ensured that:
> The port of Danzig would be made a Free City under the LoN
> a plebiscite was held in 1921 in Upper Silesia - 1/3 of the area went to Poland
- Germany lost the Polish Corridor and also Memel to Lithuania
- It was forbidden to unite with Austria
E) Colonies
Germany lost all of it's colonies, an Wilson insisted that the league should have ultimate control over the former colonies.
Germany had been led to believe that Wilson's 14 points would be the basis of the treaty, however they were not. On the 7th of May the peace terms were presented to the Germans and they were given a mere 15 days to draw up their reply. The German government bitterly criticised the treaty for not sticking to the 14 Points and demanded significant concessions, including immediate membership of the LoN. These demands would have would have strengthened Germany's position in central Europe and were rejected outright by the Allied and associated powers. Lloyd George pushed for Article 431, which meant that 'once Germany had given concrete evidence of her willingness to fulfil her obligations' the Allied and associated powers would consider 'an earlier terminations of occupation' in the Rhineland.
Overall there were many issues with the treaty such as the arguably unfair reparations and exclusion of Germany from the LoN. However it could be argued that the problem was not with the terms of the treaty but with what the treaty represented; a defeat the most German people were not willing to accept. Even if the treaty had been based on the 14 Points it may not have been enough for the German people as it still would have involved a loss of land to Poland. On 16 June, the Germans were handed the final version of the treaty. The extreme opposition among the German people led to a political crisis, splitting the cabinet into two sides.
4. Why did the Americans not ratify the treaty?
By January 1920 the treaty had been ratified (gave consent to make valid) by all of the signatory powers, except the USA. In Washington, isolationists feared that if the USA joined the League, it would have to protect other League members, even if it meant going to war, and therefore it would have to abandon its traditional policy of isolationism. They therefore proposed that congress should be empowered to veto US participation in any League initiative that clashed with their policy of isolationism. Wilson thought that these movements would paralyse the league and refused to accept them, however he failed to convince his government.
Without US ratification, the Anglo-American military guarantee of France lapsed and the burden of carrying out the treaty fell on Britain and France.
TASK 5 - The Other Treaties
1. AUSTRIA: What were the main terms of the Treaty of St Germain, September 1919?
This treaty split up the Austrian Empire. It was given independence but Rump Austria was now reduced to a small, weak, German-speaking state of some 6 million people.
Of all of the defeated powers, Hungary suffered the most in 1919. By the Treaty of Trianon, Hungary lost over 2/3 of it's territory and 41.6% of its population. Its fate was sealed when, in November 1918, Serb, Czech and Romanian troops all occupied the regions they claimed. The Treaty was delayed in 1919 when there was a communist uprising. When this died down the treaty was signed in 1920:
The most serious clash of opinions in the conference took place within Italy and the USA over Italian claims to Fiume, Istria and Dalmatia. Orlando wanted to prove to the Italian electorate that Italy was not a 'proletarian nation' (lacked an empire and materials) which could be dictated by the Great Powers. It also insisted on its right to annex both Albania and the port of Fiume. The annexation of Fiume would have denied Yugoslavia its only effective port in the Adriatic, thereby strengthening Italy's economic grip on the region. In April 1919, Orlando was prepared to accept Fiume as a compromise for giving up Italian claims on Dalmatia. However Wilson was determined to make a stand on the 14 Points in the Adriatic. Orlando walked out of the Peace Conference in protest and did not return until May. His resignation allowed for secret negotiations to begin in Paris.
However the lynching of 9 French troops in Fiume by a Italian mob in July, and the seizure of the city by an Italian nationalist in September, prolonged the crisis. In November 1920 Italy and Yugoslavia agreed on a compromise and signed the treaty of Rapallo:
A) To what extent was the Treaty of Sevres 1920, so harsh that it was bound to have a backlash?
Lloyd George hoped to drastically weaken Turkey by depriving it of Constantinople and control of the Straits. He also wanted it to force it to surrender all territories where there was no ethnic Turkish majority. He wanted Greece to fill the vacuum left by the fall of Turkish power, thus becoming the agent of the British empire in the Eastern Mediterranean. France however wanted to preserve a viable Turkish state. Above all he wanted the Turkish government to remain in Constantinople, where it would be vulnerable to French pressure.
Overall it was a harsh and humiliating treaty. Constantinople remained Turkish, however Thrace and most of the European coastline of the Sea of the Marmara and the Dardanelles were to go to Greece. Large parts of the Arab areas of the Ottoman Empire were given as mandates to Britain and France. The Straits were to be demilitarised and placed under international supervision.
B) Why was Britain able to revise the Sykes-Picot Agreement to suit its own interests?
In May 1916 Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement. In this they would divide up Mesopotamia, Syria and the Lebanon into Anglo-French spheres of interest once the war against Turkey had been won. However, as Britain had the largest army in the Middle East, it was able to revise the agreement without consultation to the French. In 1917, Britain insisted on claiming the whole of the Palestine, which was quite contrary to the agreement. By supporting the Zionists' ambition to establish a national home for the Jews in Palestine through the Balfour Declaration, Britain cleverly managed to secure US backing.
C) What was the Chanak crisis and how did this result in the Treaty of Lausanne, 1923?
In 1919-20 Mustafa Kemal led a national uprising. His aim was to liberate his country from continuing Allied military control and Greek occupation in the west. By 1920 he controlled Turkey. In March, with the support of Lloyd Georgie, Greece fought back, but failed to make much headway.
Meanwhile Kemal had come to terms with Italy, France and the USSR. In 1922 Turkish forces launched a major offensive. Greek resistance collapsed and the Turks threatened the British forces occupying the international zone of the straits.
Lloyd George seemed to be prepared to go to war to defend the Straits, even though Britain would not be receiving support from France. At the end of September 1922 Turkish forces reached Chanak, the British base. Military confrontation was only avoided because of the cool judgement of the commanders on the spot. The Turks, who had no wish to go to war with Britain, agreed to respect the international zone. The whole affair was seen as unnecessary war-mongering on Lloyd George's part , contributing to his downfall in October 1922.
Negotiations took place between Kemal and Lord Curzon, the foreign secretary. The Treaty of Lausanne was signed in 1923.
1. What was the machinery for carrying out the Treaty of Versailles?
Once the treaty was ratified, the powers set up a series of inter-Allied commissions to organise the plebiscites, monitor German disarmament and examine Germany's financial positions with a view to payments of its reparations. These then reported to the Conference of Ambassadors in Paris. However the real decisions were taken by the Allied prime ministers, who between January 1920 and January 1924 met 24 times to review progress made in carrying out the Treaty of Versailles.
2. Why did Britain and France's views on how to implement the Treaty of Versailles conflict?
Britain wanted:
Germany lost all of it's colonies, an Wilson insisted that the league should have ultimate control over the former colonies.
- Britain gained German East Africa and the Cameroons
- Australia took New Guinea
- South Africa took South-West Africa
- New Zealand got Samoa
- Japan took all German possessions in China and in the Pacific North of the equator
On Wilson's insistence, these areas were to be ruled as mandates and ruling powers had to bear in mind the wishes of the colonies inhabitants, who would eventually self govern under the supervision of the league.
F) The League of Nations
Wilson believed that Britain and France would oppose the League, however they were both willing to accept the LoN in return for US friendship. Britain prepared a scheme that became the framework for the League. Germany was not allowed to join until it had proved it's intention to carry out the peace terms.
2. Why did the terms and conditions of the Treaty of Versailles cause resentment in Germany?
- The treaty was imposed on Germany without consultation and was not based on the 14 Points
- They were forced to reduce their army when no other country was disarming, making it vulnerable to attack and causing further instability within German
- They lost European territory which was important economically and militarily
- The Polish corridor split Germany in two
- It's European rivals could now exploit it's overseas possessions in Africa
- Reparations were set at an extremely high and unachievable levels
3. How justified was German criticism of the Treaty of Versailles?
Germany had been led to believe that Wilson's 14 points would be the basis of the treaty, however they were not. On the 7th of May the peace terms were presented to the Germans and they were given a mere 15 days to draw up their reply. The German government bitterly criticised the treaty for not sticking to the 14 Points and demanded significant concessions, including immediate membership of the LoN. These demands would have would have strengthened Germany's position in central Europe and were rejected outright by the Allied and associated powers. Lloyd George pushed for Article 431, which meant that 'once Germany had given concrete evidence of her willingness to fulfil her obligations' the Allied and associated powers would consider 'an earlier terminations of occupation' in the Rhineland.
Overall there were many issues with the treaty such as the arguably unfair reparations and exclusion of Germany from the LoN. However it could be argued that the problem was not with the terms of the treaty but with what the treaty represented; a defeat the most German people were not willing to accept. Even if the treaty had been based on the 14 Points it may not have been enough for the German people as it still would have involved a loss of land to Poland. On 16 June, the Germans were handed the final version of the treaty. The extreme opposition among the German people led to a political crisis, splitting the cabinet into two sides.
4. Why did the Americans not ratify the treaty?
By January 1920 the treaty had been ratified (gave consent to make valid) by all of the signatory powers, except the USA. In Washington, isolationists feared that if the USA joined the League, it would have to protect other League members, even if it meant going to war, and therefore it would have to abandon its traditional policy of isolationism. They therefore proposed that congress should be empowered to veto US participation in any League initiative that clashed with their policy of isolationism. Wilson thought that these movements would paralyse the league and refused to accept them, however he failed to convince his government.
Without US ratification, the Anglo-American military guarantee of France lapsed and the burden of carrying out the treaty fell on Britain and France.
TASK 5 - The Other Treaties
1. AUSTRIA: What were the main terms of the Treaty of St Germain, September 1919?
This treaty split up the Austrian Empire. It was given independence but Rump Austria was now reduced to a small, weak, German-speaking state of some 6 million people.
- Italy got South Tyrol (home to 230,000 ethnic Germans)
- Czechoslovakia got Bohemia and Moravia (home to 3 million Germans) - France pushed for this to happen as they wanted this potential ally to be strengthened.
- Yugoslavia got Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Dalmatia
- Poland and Romania gained Galicia and Bukovina
- A plebiscite was held in Carinthia for the Germans who did not want to be part of Yugoslavia, in 1920
2. HUNGARY: What were the main terms of the Treaty of Trianon, June 1920?
Of all of the defeated powers, Hungary suffered the most in 1919. By the Treaty of Trianon, Hungary lost over 2/3 of it's territory and 41.6% of its population. Its fate was sealed when, in November 1918, Serb, Czech and Romanian troops all occupied the regions they claimed. The Treaty was delayed in 1919 when there was a communist uprising. When this died down the treaty was signed in 1920:
- Austria was given the the most German speaking area in the former west Hungarian state
- Czechoslovakia was given the Slovakian and Ruthenian regions in the north
- Romania got the east
- Yugoslavia got the south
Hungary was made an independent state but was left weak and small.
3. BULGARIA: What were the main terms of the Treaty of Neuilly, November 1919?
The treaty was signed on November 1919. France and Britain regarded Bulgaria as the 'Balkan Prussia', which needed to be restrained. Despite reservations from Italy and America, they pushed to reward their allies, Romania, Greece and Serbia at the Bulgarians expense.
- Southern Dobruja, with only 7000 Romanian residents, was given to Romania
- Greece got western Thrace
4. ITALY: Why could Orlando and Wilson not agree on the future of Fiume, Istria and Dalmatia?
The most serious clash of opinions in the conference took place within Italy and the USA over Italian claims to Fiume, Istria and Dalmatia. Orlando wanted to prove to the Italian electorate that Italy was not a 'proletarian nation' (lacked an empire and materials) which could be dictated by the Great Powers. It also insisted on its right to annex both Albania and the port of Fiume. The annexation of Fiume would have denied Yugoslavia its only effective port in the Adriatic, thereby strengthening Italy's economic grip on the region. In April 1919, Orlando was prepared to accept Fiume as a compromise for giving up Italian claims on Dalmatia. However Wilson was determined to make a stand on the 14 Points in the Adriatic. Orlando walked out of the Peace Conference in protest and did not return until May. His resignation allowed for secret negotiations to begin in Paris.
However the lynching of 9 French troops in Fiume by a Italian mob in July, and the seizure of the city by an Italian nationalist in September, prolonged the crisis. In November 1920 Italy and Yugoslavia agreed on a compromise and signed the treaty of Rapallo:
- Istria was partitioned between the two powers
- Fiume was to become a self-governing free city
- The rest of Dalmatia went to Yugoslavia
5. TURKEY
A) To what extent was the Treaty of Sevres 1920, so harsh that it was bound to have a backlash?
Lloyd George hoped to drastically weaken Turkey by depriving it of Constantinople and control of the Straits. He also wanted it to force it to surrender all territories where there was no ethnic Turkish majority. He wanted Greece to fill the vacuum left by the fall of Turkish power, thus becoming the agent of the British empire in the Eastern Mediterranean. France however wanted to preserve a viable Turkish state. Above all he wanted the Turkish government to remain in Constantinople, where it would be vulnerable to French pressure.
Overall it was a harsh and humiliating treaty. Constantinople remained Turkish, however Thrace and most of the European coastline of the Sea of the Marmara and the Dardanelles were to go to Greece. Large parts of the Arab areas of the Ottoman Empire were given as mandates to Britain and France. The Straits were to be demilitarised and placed under international supervision.
B) Why was Britain able to revise the Sykes-Picot Agreement to suit its own interests?
In May 1916 Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement. In this they would divide up Mesopotamia, Syria and the Lebanon into Anglo-French spheres of interest once the war against Turkey had been won. However, as Britain had the largest army in the Middle East, it was able to revise the agreement without consultation to the French. In 1917, Britain insisted on claiming the whole of the Palestine, which was quite contrary to the agreement. By supporting the Zionists' ambition to establish a national home for the Jews in Palestine through the Balfour Declaration, Britain cleverly managed to secure US backing.
C) What was the Chanak crisis and how did this result in the Treaty of Lausanne, 1923?
In 1919-20 Mustafa Kemal led a national uprising. His aim was to liberate his country from continuing Allied military control and Greek occupation in the west. By 1920 he controlled Turkey. In March, with the support of Lloyd Georgie, Greece fought back, but failed to make much headway.
Meanwhile Kemal had come to terms with Italy, France and the USSR. In 1922 Turkish forces launched a major offensive. Greek resistance collapsed and the Turks threatened the British forces occupying the international zone of the straits.
Lloyd George seemed to be prepared to go to war to defend the Straits, even though Britain would not be receiving support from France. At the end of September 1922 Turkish forces reached Chanak, the British base. Military confrontation was only avoided because of the cool judgement of the commanders on the spot. The Turks, who had no wish to go to war with Britain, agreed to respect the international zone. The whole affair was seen as unnecessary war-mongering on Lloyd George's part , contributing to his downfall in October 1922.
Negotiations took place between Kemal and Lord Curzon, the foreign secretary. The Treaty of Lausanne was signed in 1923.
- Turkey retained Eastern Thrace, Smyrna and the Aegean islands it had won back from Greece.
- Turkey accepted the loss of its Arab territories and agreed that the straits should remain demilitarised and open to the ships of all nations in time of peace.
TASK 6 - Enforcing the Treaty of Versailles 1920-23
1. What was the machinery for carrying out the Treaty of Versailles?
Once the treaty was ratified, the powers set up a series of inter-Allied commissions to organise the plebiscites, monitor German disarmament and examine Germany's financial positions with a view to payments of its reparations. These then reported to the Conference of Ambassadors in Paris. However the real decisions were taken by the Allied prime ministers, who between January 1920 and January 1924 met 24 times to review progress made in carrying out the Treaty of Versailles.
2. Why did Britain and France's views on how to implement the Treaty of Versailles conflict?
Britain wanted:
- A balance of power in Europe that would prevent German of French domination
- Leave Europe free to deal to deal with the growing challenges to its power from nationalist movements in India, Egypt and Ireland.
- Believed only a prosperous and peaceful Germany could pay reparations and play it's pat in the European economy
France wanted:
- swung between economic cooperation with Germany and applying forceful measures to weaken Germany and force it to fulfil the treaty.
3. Why did it take so long to regulate Poland's eastern border with Russia?
The Poles used the chaos that followed the Bolshevik revolution to extend their eastern frontier deep in the Ukraine and Belorussia. In December 1919 they rejected the proposed eastern frontier based on recommendations put forward by Lord Curzon, and in early 1920 embarked on a full scale invasion of Ukraine.
By August, Bolshevik forces had pushed the poles back to Warsaw. However, with help from the French, the Poles rallied and defeated the red army just outside Warsaw. Soviet troops were pushed back, and in March 1921 Poland's frontiers were fixed by the Treaty of Riga. Poland annexed a considerable area of Belorussia and the western Ukraine, all of which lay to the east of the proposed Curzon line.
4. Why did the British and French disagree about the Upper Silesian frontier?
By the end of 1920, the Marienwerder and Allenstein plebiscites had been held. The population voted to stay in Germany and Danzig became a free city under the administration of the League of Nations in November 1920.
However fixing the Upper Silesian frontiers was a much greater issue. Upper Silesia had a population of over 2 million Germans and Poles, who were divided through ethnic lines, and a concentration of coal mines and industries that were second only in size to the Ruhr.
A plebiscite was held on 17 March and gave an ambiguous result, which did not solve the Anglo-French disputes over Poland. Britain argued that the result justified keeping the key industrial regions of the province German, while the French insisted that they should be awarded to Poland. However the Poles seized control of the industrial area and an uprising broke out in May 1921. Order was eventually restored by French and British troops in July and the whole question was handed over to the LoN in August. In 1922 the league handed over the most of the industrial areas to Poland.
5. Why did all efforts to solve the reparation questions fail by the end of 1922?
However fixing the Upper Silesian frontiers was a much greater issue. Upper Silesia had a population of over 2 million Germans and Poles, who were divided through ethnic lines, and a concentration of coal mines and industries that were second only in size to the Ruhr.
A plebiscite was held on 17 March and gave an ambiguous result, which did not solve the Anglo-French disputes over Poland. Britain argued that the result justified keeping the key industrial regions of the province German, while the French insisted that they should be awarded to Poland. However the Poles seized control of the industrial area and an uprising broke out in May 1921. Order was eventually restored by French and British troops in July and the whole question was handed over to the LoN in August. In 1922 the league handed over the most of the industrial areas to Poland.
5. Why did all efforts to solve the reparation questions fail by the end of 1922?
Both the British and the French hoped to solve the reparation problems by fixing a global total as soon as possible on the assumption that once Germany knew the full sum of its debts it would be able to raise money in the USA from the sale of government bonds and begin payments.
In April 1921 the Reparation Commission fixed a global total for reparations of 132 billion gold marks to be paid over 42 years. When this was rejected by Germany, on the grounds that the sum was too high, an ultimatum was dispatched to Berlin giving the Germans only a week to accept the new payment schedule, after which the Ruhr would be occupied.
To carry out the London Ultimatum a new government was created by Joseph Wirth on 10 May, who was determined to pursue a policy of negotiation rather than confrontation. However by the end of the year the German government said that, due to inflation, they could not meet their next instalment of reparation payments.
6. Why did the Geneva Conference of 1922 fail?
Lloyd George was sure that Germany needed a temporary moratorium (suspension from payments), to put its economy in order, whilst in the long term the solution for reparation payments and a European revival lay in creating a European group of industrial nations, including Germany, to rebuild Russia. He hoped that this would create an international trade boom, enabling Germany to pay its reparations.
The new French Prime Minister, Raymond Poincaré consented to holding a conference at Geneva, in which Germany and the USSR would be invited to discuss these plans. However he vetoed any concession on reparations. During the conference they were able to secretly negotiate the Rapallo Agreement with Germany, in which both countries agreed to write off any financial claims on each other dating from the war. Germany also pledged to consult with Moscow before participating in any international plans for exploiting the soviet economy.
Rapallo killed Lloyd George's plan. And, whilst the plan helped Germany to escape from isolation, it increased French suspicions of its motives. However these suspicions appeared to be justified as Germany signed a secret annex in July, allowing them to train soldiers in Soviet territory, thereby violating the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.
7. Why did the Ruhr crisis mark a turning point in the post war European history?
A confrontation between France and Germany seemed inevitable when in July 1922 Germany requested a 3 year moratorium. At the same time, due to pressure from the US to repay their war-time loans, Britain announced that it needed the repayment of money it loaned to former allies, particularly France. France believed that this demand contrasted with the concessions Lloyd George was willing to offer the Germans.
On 27 November the Poincaré cabinet decided that occupation of the Ruhr was the only way to force Germany into paying reparations. On 11 January French and Belgian troops invaded the Ruhr. Britain took on a policy of 'benevolent neutrality' and did not join France.
For 9 months the French occupation of the Ruhr was met by passive resistance and and strikes that were financed by the German government. This increased the cost to the French, but also caused hyperinflation in Germany. In September, Germany was on the brink of collapse and the new chancellor, Gustav Streseman, called off passive resistance.
France had weakened itself and prolonged the crisis in the Ruhr. Their attempts to back Rhineland Separatism and to create an independent Rhineland currency were not yet successful. Separatist leaders were assassinated by German nationalist agents or lynched by angry crowds. Thus Poincaré had to cooperate with an Anglo-American initiative for setting up a commission chaired by US financier Charles Dawes. It would study Germany's capacity for payment and advise how to balance the budget and restore its currency. The Ruhr crisis showed how the Treaty should now be revised instead of being carried out with force.
In April 1921 the Reparation Commission fixed a global total for reparations of 132 billion gold marks to be paid over 42 years. When this was rejected by Germany, on the grounds that the sum was too high, an ultimatum was dispatched to Berlin giving the Germans only a week to accept the new payment schedule, after which the Ruhr would be occupied.
To carry out the London Ultimatum a new government was created by Joseph Wirth on 10 May, who was determined to pursue a policy of negotiation rather than confrontation. However by the end of the year the German government said that, due to inflation, they could not meet their next instalment of reparation payments.
6. Why did the Geneva Conference of 1922 fail?
Lloyd George was sure that Germany needed a temporary moratorium (suspension from payments), to put its economy in order, whilst in the long term the solution for reparation payments and a European revival lay in creating a European group of industrial nations, including Germany, to rebuild Russia. He hoped that this would create an international trade boom, enabling Germany to pay its reparations.
The new French Prime Minister, Raymond Poincaré consented to holding a conference at Geneva, in which Germany and the USSR would be invited to discuss these plans. However he vetoed any concession on reparations. During the conference they were able to secretly negotiate the Rapallo Agreement with Germany, in which both countries agreed to write off any financial claims on each other dating from the war. Germany also pledged to consult with Moscow before participating in any international plans for exploiting the soviet economy.
Rapallo killed Lloyd George's plan. And, whilst the plan helped Germany to escape from isolation, it increased French suspicions of its motives. However these suspicions appeared to be justified as Germany signed a secret annex in July, allowing them to train soldiers in Soviet territory, thereby violating the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.
7. Why did the Ruhr crisis mark a turning point in the post war European history?
A confrontation between France and Germany seemed inevitable when in July 1922 Germany requested a 3 year moratorium. At the same time, due to pressure from the US to repay their war-time loans, Britain announced that it needed the repayment of money it loaned to former allies, particularly France. France believed that this demand contrasted with the concessions Lloyd George was willing to offer the Germans.
On 27 November the Poincaré cabinet decided that occupation of the Ruhr was the only way to force Germany into paying reparations. On 11 January French and Belgian troops invaded the Ruhr. Britain took on a policy of 'benevolent neutrality' and did not join France.
For 9 months the French occupation of the Ruhr was met by passive resistance and and strikes that were financed by the German government. This increased the cost to the French, but also caused hyperinflation in Germany. In September, Germany was on the brink of collapse and the new chancellor, Gustav Streseman, called off passive resistance.
France had weakened itself and prolonged the crisis in the Ruhr. Their attempts to back Rhineland Separatism and to create an independent Rhineland currency were not yet successful. Separatist leaders were assassinated by German nationalist agents or lynched by angry crowds. Thus Poincaré had to cooperate with an Anglo-American initiative for setting up a commission chaired by US financier Charles Dawes. It would study Germany's capacity for payment and advise how to balance the budget and restore its currency. The Ruhr crisis showed how the Treaty should now be revised instead of being carried out with force.
No comments:
Post a Comment