Speaking about the results of the First World War, it is necessary to emphasize the unprecedented scope of the national and national liberation movement.
The last years of the war were marked by the collapse of four once powerful empires: Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman. In Europe, without waiting for international legal formalization, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Finland, Czechoslovakia, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia declared their independence. Such a radical break in the international structure required the victorious powers to make significant adjustments to their approach to the problems of a peaceful settlement, taking into account the new political realities and the national interests of the newly formed European states.
Almost the entire colonial world was engulfed in the national liberation struggle. In 1918-1921. major anti-colonial and anti-imperialist demonstrations took place in India, China, Mongolia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, Afghanistan and other colonial and dependent countries. Like the revolutionary upsurge in Europe, the national liberation movement in the colonial world contributed to the democratization of international relations. It was at this time and for this reason that many representatives of the political elite of the West started talking about the "right of nations to self-determination" and about resolving the colonial issue "taking into account the interests of the local population." History of modern times of the countries of Europe and America. 1918-1945 / Ed. E. Yazkova. M., 1989 - S.137
The nature of the new system of international relations and its legal formalization depended to a decisive extent on the alignment and balance of forces between the great powers - the main subjects of world politics.
The United States of America won the most. The war turned this country into a first-class world power. It created favorable conditions for rapid economic growth and a significant strengthening of the financial position of the United States.
The United States entered the war only in April 1917, and began active hostilities in June 1918, i.e. shortly before completion. US losses were relatively light; 50 thousand people were killed and 230 thousand were wounded. The territory of the United States itself was not affected by hostilities and, therefore, unlike the European countries, the United States managed to avoid any material damage and destruction.
The strengthening of the financial position of the United States, combined with economic leadership, created the material basis for the transformation of the country from a regional to a great world power. In a broader international aspect, this meant the transfer of the industrial and financial center of the capitalist world from Europe to North America.
These were the reasons that led to the intensification of US foreign policy. Having become the world's leading power in terms of economic and financial indicators, the United States is beginning to claim a leading role in world politics. Already in April 1917, President Woodrow Wilson publicly proclaimed: "We are faced with the task of financing the whole world, and those who give money must learn to manage the world."
At the same time, the change in the balance of power between the great powers in favor of the United States during this period did not lead to its transformation into a political leader on a global scale. This was explained, first of all, by the fact that American business was not yet sufficiently “prepared” for the role of a trendsetter in the global economy. In the US, the development of a vast domestic market is far from being completed. In the early 1920s, 85-90% of industrial output produced in the country was consumed domestically. As for the surplus capital, except for the emergency situation during the war years, it was exported to a limited number of countries in the Western Hemisphere. In other sectors of the world market, where the dominant position.
Describing the international position of Great Britain after the end of the war, one can state a certain weakening of its positions in the world. The victory went to England at a high price. Its casualties amounted to 744 thousand killed and about 1,700 thousand wounded. The war caused significant damage to the British economy. Significantly yielding to the United States, England finally lost its former industrial leadership in the world. Its share in world industrial production decreased, amounting to 9% in 1920 (compared to 13.6% in 1913). Huge military spending dramatically worsened the financial situation of Great Britain. For the first time in its long years of financial prosperity, it has evolved from the most integral international creditor and debtor country. Its post-war external debt was estimated at $5 billion, of which $3.7 billion was owed to the United States. During the war, England's foreign trade positions were also undermined. The country lost 40% of its trade front. As a result, British foreign trade declined by almost 2 times. The powerful upsurge of the national liberation movement was another "blow of fate" from which England, which occupied a leading place among the colonial powers, suffered the most.
At the same time, the negative consequences of the First World War for Great Britain cannot be absolutized. There were other factors that allowed this country not only to maintain its positions as a great world power, but even to strengthen them in some areas.
The World War brought significant changes to the international status of the French Republic. The triumph of victory could only temporarily obscure the extremely difficult consequences of the war: huge material damage and numerous human casualties. In terms of military losses, France was second only to Germany and Russia: 1,327 thousand killed and 2,800 thousand wounded. The northeastern departments of France were almost completely devastated. The material damage I suffered during the war years was estimated at 15 billion dollars, which amounted to 31% of the pre-war national wealth. Even more serious losses awaited France in the financial field. The war deprived it of the role of the "world usurer", putting it on a par with other debtor states. The French debt of the USA and England exceeded 7 billion dollars. A strong beat The October Revolution inflicted on the financial positions of France: 71% of all debts of the tsarist and Provisional governments canceled by the Soviet government fell to the share of the French Republic. The consequences of the war also had a negative impact on the international position of France, such as a sharp reduction in foreign trade turnover (almost 2 times) and foreign investment(by 30%), as well as the aggravation of the national liberation struggle in the French colonies.
However, as in the case of England, the positive outcomes of the war for France prevailed over the negative ones, which allowed her not only to maintain, but also to strengthen her position as a great world power.
Another victorious country - Italy - before the war was rightfully considered one of the weak links among the great European powers.
The World War did not bring any major changes to this situation. Rather, on the contrary, she demonstrated the economic and military failure of Italy, becoming an unbearable burden for her. During the war, Italy lost 580 thousand soldiers and officers. The record number of deserters and voluntarily surrendered (more than 1 million people) allowed military experts to call the Italian army "the most captive army in the world." The economic recession and the social were strained by a deep political crisis, which manifested itself in the extreme instability of power structures.
Japan, which entered the war on the side of the Entente back in August 1914, did not take an active part in it. Her military operations were mainly reduced to the hunt for German cruisers in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Japan's contribution to the overall victory over the enemy can be indirectly estimated by its military losses, which amounted to about 300 people.
But the outcome of the war was more than favorable for Japan.
Having seized with lightning speed already at the very beginning of the war the German possessions on Far East and the Pacific Ocean, Japan has significantly strengthened its position in this region of the world. She took possession of strategically and economically important regions: the Marshall, Caroline and Mariana Islands, the territory of Guangzhou leased by Germany in China, as well as the Chinese province of Shandong. Taking advantage of the preoccupation of the European powers with the war, Japan made the first attempt to establish control over all of China. In January 1915, she presented an ultimatum to the interim President of the Republic of China, Yuan Shikai, which went down in history under the name "21 Demands." This document actually turned China into a Japanese semi-colony. Another extremely beneficial result of the war for Japan was the ousting of the Western powers engaged in the war in Europe from the Asian markets. This largely explained the extremely rapid growth of the Japanese economy. In 1920, the volume of industrial production exceeded the pre-war level by 70%, and the export of Japanese goods increased by 330%. History of modern times of the countries of Europe and America. 1918-1945 / Ed. E. Yazkova. M., 1989 - S.139
Germany excelled in the number of irretrievable military losses: 2 million 37 thousand died. German soldiers and an officer. The direct result of the war was the catastrophic state of the economy. The output of industrial output in 1920 compared with the pre-war level was 58%. An acute social and political crisis resulted in the revolution of 1918-1919, the overthrow of the Hohenzollern monarchy and the proclamation of the Weimar Republic. Already by the Armistice of Compiegne, Germany lost its navy, a significant part of its weapons and all colonial possessions. Thus, Germany lost its status as a great power, she left the international arena as a great world power for decades to come.
An even more crushing blow World War inflicted on the international positions of Austria-Hungary.
Unlike Germany, Austria-Hungary did not simply and not temporarily lose its great power status, it lost it forever; in the recent past, a powerful empire ceased to exist not only as a great power, but also as a state. History of the First World War 1914-1918. / edited by I. I. Rostunov. - in 2 volumes. - M.: Nauka, 1975.
Despite significant territorial losses in the European part of the former Russian Empire (Finland, Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania became sovereign states, the western parts of Ukraine and Belarus went to Poland, and Bessarabia was annexed by Romania), Russia continued to be an important factor in international life. Most importantly, it retained the status of a great power.
The most ambitious was the plan of the United States. It was set forth by President Woodrow Wilson in a message to the US Congress on January 8, 1918, in the form of the Fourteen Points or "Basic Principles." Wilson's "Peace Program" boiled down to the following propositions. Point 1 declared the rejection of secret diplomacy, publicity in peace negotiations. Point 2 solemnly declared freedom of navigation in peacetime and in war time. Point 3 spoke of freedom of trade and the elimination of all customs barriers. Point 4 demanded the establishment of firm guarantees to ensure the reduction of national armaments "to the utmost minimum." Point 5 proclaimed "a completely independent, impartial solution to the colonial question." Point 6, devoted to Russia, affirmed its right to "free determination" of the path of political development. Points 7 to 13 contained the American version of solving a number of important territorial-state problems, which formed the basis for their discussion at the peace conference.
The 14th and last point provided for the establishment of an international organization for the preservation and maintenance of peace. The President of the United States called the projected organization the "League of Nations".
Thus, in Wilson's program, democratic and even radical slogans, unusual for that time, were put forward.
The program put forward by Wilson was the first official declaration of the American government about the claims of the United States to the role of world political leader, the "ultimate arbiter" in international affairs. It was a bid to lead the post-war world.
The "peace program" of the United States not only proclaimed a fundamentally new goal of American foreign policy, it also introduced qualitatively new methods for achieving this goal.
The plan for the reorganization of the world, put forward by the American president, was of a dual nature, combining the principles of globalism and liberalism. This conclusion was shared by Wilson himself, who called for "combining participation in the world struggle for power with the leadership of the world liberal movement."
During the war years, England successfully managed to realize its foreign policy plans. Its main rival Germany was defeated as a naval and colonial power. A significant part of the German colonies and territories Ottoman Empire were under the control of Great Britain and its dominions. Therefore, the main task was to preserve and legally consolidate what had already been achieved and won.
The inclusion of the United States and Japan among the great world powers gave the concept of the balance of power a global character. The interests of maintaining a favorable global balance explained the struggle of England with the hegemonic aspirations of the United States.
The French policy of the balance of power became an auxiliary means of achieving strategic goals. It assumed the formation on the eastern borders of Germany of a military-political bloc of small European states under the auspices of France. This bloc was seen by the French government as a counterbalance to Germany, on the one hand, and Soviet Russia, on the other.
The attitude of France towards the attempts of the United States and Britain to introduce liberal principles into the system of international relations can be characterized as condescending and mostly negative. J. Clemenceau, being a prominent representative of the old diplomatic school, considered all the arguments about the "new, more just world order" "harmful utopia" and demagogy.
The central idea of the liberals about the creation of the League of Nations, in principle, was not rejected by Clemenceau, but with one significant reservation. The projected peacekeeping organization, according to the French Prime Minister, must have strength, otherwise its activities will be ineffective. This force in the first post-war years could be provided only by France, which had a millionth land army. In other words, only under the French leadership could the League of Nations turn from a utopia into a really functioning body. Another example of France's negative attitude towards the liberal studies of England and the USA was its approach to the Soviet problem. Clemenceau, unlike Lloyd George and Wilson, put forward not a liberal, but a conservative alternative to the socialist threat. He was a resolute opponent of any negotiations with the Bolsheviks, one of the initiators of the anti-Soviet crusade.
In the post-war plans of the other two victorious powers - Italy and Japan - not global, but regional problems were touched upon.
On January 18, 1919, the Paris Peace Conference was solemnly opened in the Hall of Mirrors of the Grand Palace of Versailles. It was the largest international forum since the Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815. The conference was attended by representatives of 27 victorious countries that fought or declared war on Germany.
The most important task of the Paris Conference was to create and legalize a new system of international relations. In fact, it was about the redistribution of spheres of influence between the great powers, about deciding the fate of the peoples of Europe and the world, about establishing a new world order.
The historical significance of this task predetermined the selection of the following main questions: 1) a peaceful settlement of the German problem; 2) development and conclusion of peace treaties with the former allies of Germany - Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey; 3) territorial and state reorganization in Central, Eastern and Southern Europe; 4) determination of the status of the former colonies of Germany and possessions of the Ottoman Empire; 5) the creation of the first international organization in the history of mankind to ensure the peace and security of peoples; 6) a special place was occupied by the “Russian question”, without the resolution of which it was impossible to seriously talk about an all-European peace settlement.
The Paris Peace Conference became the scene of a fierce struggle that unfolded between the victorious countries, and above all between the USA, Britain and France. This struggle was due to the deep contradictions reflected in the plans for the post-war organization of the world. This was the root cause of the unusually heated discussion between the three major political figures of that time: W. Wilson, D. Lloyd George and J. Clemenceau.
An important place in the work of the conference was occupied by the polemic on the questions of a peaceful settlement with Germany.
In the fight against the Anglo-American bloc, France was forced to make serious concessions in a number of areas.
The result of the work of the Paris Peace Conference was the adoption of compromise decisions that formed the basis of the Versailles system of international relations.
On June 28, January 10, in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles, a German delegation headed by the newly appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs G. Müller and Minister of Justice I. Eell signed a peace treaty with representatives of the victorious countries. The organizers of the conference timed the signing of the treaty with Germany to the fifth anniversary of the Sarajevo massacre, which served as a pretext for the start of the First World War.
The Treaty of Versailles was a set of 440 articles divided into 15 parts. Part I (Charter-League of Nations) and part XIII ("Labour" - on the creation of the International Labor Organization under the League of Nations in order to achieve "social justice") were included in all other peace treaties.
After the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles in Germany, which found itself in the position of a “humiliated and insulted” country, revanchist sentiments became widespread. The struggle for the abolition of the hated treaty and revenge on the victorious powers became the main task of German foreign policy in the near future. Understanding this, Marshal Foch uttered prophetic words: "This is not peace, but a truce for a period of 20 years." In other words. The Versailles Peace Treaty, perceived in Germany as a symbol of national humiliation and deep injustice, strategically created all the prerequisites for the struggle for a new redivision of the world.
Peace treaties with Germany's former allies were deemed to establish a new geopolitical structure for Europe and other regions of the world after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires.
The peace treaty with Austria was signed on September 10, 1919. in the Paris suburb of Saint-Germain-en-Laye.
Austria was destined for a very modest place in the European system of international relations; having lost the position of a great power, it stole the status of one of the small countries of Europe.
Under the Treaty of Neuilly, Bulgaria lost 11% of its pre-war territory. South Dobruja and some other areas with a Bulgarian population were assigned to Romania. 4 districts on the western borders of Bulgaria, predominantly populated by Bulgarians, departed to the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The most important economic and strategic loss was the establishment of the jurisdiction of the "major allied powers" over Western Thrace, which was soon transferred to Greece. Thus, Boltaria was deprived of access to the Aegean Sea.
The Treaty of Neuilly sharply worsened Bulgaria's international position, even compared to what it had been after the defeat in the Second Balkan War.
On June 4, 1920, the ceremony of signing a peace treaty with Hungary took place in the Grand Trianon Palace of Versailles.
Since Hungary for a long period was integral part dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy, many articles of the Treaty of Trianon coincided verbatim with similar provisions of the Treaty of Saint-Germain.
Despite the fact that the decision to establish the League of Nations was chronologically the first of those adopted at the Paris Conference, it was it that summed up the final result of the hard work on the formation of a new system of international relations. This decision reflected the desire of the peoples for a just, civilized world order, so it should be attributed to the most significant successes of the victorious powers.
In July 1921, US President Warren Harding took the initiative to hold an international conference in Washington on the limitation of naval armaments, Pacific and Far Eastern issues. At the Paris Peace Conference, these important problems of the post-war settlement were either not fully resolved or not touched upon at all. In this sense, the Washington Conference was a kind of continuation of the Paris Conference. It was called upon to complete the process of forming a new system of international relations. The completion of the Washington Conference marked the beginning of the functioning of the Versailles-Washington system of international relations. The Versailles-Washington system was the international legal registration of the results of the First World War and the new alignment of forces that developed after its end. Its creation completed the process of transition from war to peace and contributed to the temporary stabilization of international relations.
But the Versailles-Washingtoian system was complex and contradictory. It combined both democratic, just and conservative, imperialist principles of a peaceful settlement.
Thus, the new model of international relations, which differed from the old ones in a well-known liberalism, was predominantly conservative in its content and character, and in a broken sense, although with a different alignment of forces, was the “successor” of the former international systems.
Ministry of Education and Higher School of the Republic of Kazakhstan GOU SPO PPET Pechora
Abstract on the topic:
"Settlement of international relations after the First World War"
Introduction
The topic of world war is relevant. Many people talk about it and each person has his own attitude to the war. We chose a report on the First World War because we wanted to know more about the causes of the war, its results and how countries solved the difficult problem of regulating international relations after the war. After all, the further life of all people on Earth will depend on how the countries agree.
The theme of the World War is well covered in the literature. I noticed that they write about the war not only in documentary, but also in fiction. There are a lot of books by famous writers who, unfortunately, had to face the hardships of the war and they had the courage to write about it. But still, I took the main information in documentary books.
Having chosen this topic, I pursued personal goals - I wanted to learn about the causes and results of the war of 1914-1918, to find out why this war did start, and were there any chances to avoid it?!
Of course, there were chances to avoid war, but on the other hand, it is not known how the fate of mankind would have developed if it had not been. No one can change history, and it makes no sense to talk about what could have been done differently - it will never be different.
It is known that the murder on June 28, 1914 was the reason for the start of the war. in Sarajevo, the heir to the Austrian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who arrived in Bosnia and Herzegovina for the teaching of the Austro-Hungarian troops.
In this war, each country pursued its own goals. France intended to return the lost in 1871. territory and, if possible, seize the banks of the Rhine. Britain's goal was to crush Germany as the main rival on the Continent. Austria-Hungary hoped to put an end to Serbia and the pan-Slavic movement in the Balkans and the main stronghold - Russia. Germany sought not only the defeat of France and Great Britain, but also the capture of part of Russian territory for colonization. Some of the claims of the participants in the two military-political blocs were framed in secret agreements.
The First World War (1914-1918) is one of the longest, bloodiest and most significant in terms of consequences in the history of mankind. It went on for over 4 years. It was attended by 33 out of 59 countries that had state sovereignty at that time. The population of the warring countries was over 1.5 billion. person, i.e. about 87% of all inhabitants of the Earth. A total of 73.5 million people were put under arms. More than 10 million were killed and 20 million wounded. Casualties among the civilian population affected by epidemics, famine, cold and other wartime disasters also numbered in the tens of millions.
Chapter I. Treaty of Versailles
The positions of the powers in the international arena as a result of the First World War
By the end of the First World War, the capitalist countries were approaching a peaceful settlement in 1918. in an unusual situation. The problem of peace arose as an immediate task not only because one of the fighting coalitions was defeated on the military front. There was also the threat of a revolutionary exit from the war - especially for the Central Powers.
The alignment of forces in the world after the end of the First World War reflected the contradictions of the system of international relations that had taken shape by the end of the war. One of its most important results was the October Revolution in Russia, the falling away from the capitalist system of 1/6 of the territory of the earth, the beginning of the general crisis of capitalism.
Significant shifts have also taken place within the capitalist world. The most significant were, on the one hand, the defeat of a world-class power - Germany, on the other - the entry of the United States into the international arena as an active contender for world domination. The war enriched the United States unheard of. Over the years of the war, they turned into the military arsenal of the Entente, its most important source of food and equipment. The US has not only paid off its own debt, but has become one of the main creditors of the world. They lent the countries of Europe about $10 billion. About $6.5 billion were private investments by American capitalists.
The ruling circles of the United States sought to use the position of the world creditor to achieve world domination. They expected to dictate their will at a peace conference. Back in July 1917. President Wilson wrote: "England and France do not in the least share our views, but when the war is over, we will be able to get them to join our opinion, since by that time they will be in our hands financially." It was on this confidence that the American "peace program" proclaimed in Wilson's 14 Points on January 8, 1918, was based. Declaring its commitment to "open peace negotiations" (p. 1), the US government thus declared its non-recognition of all secret treaties and agreements signed by the Entente countries without the participation and knowledge of the United States. Wilson put forward the principles of "freedom of the seas" and "freedom of trade" (p. 2, 3), which were considered as instruments of "peaceful" single combat and the victory of the United States in the struggle, primarily with Great Britain, France and Japan. The demand for a "reduction of national armaments" (clause 4) was supposed to cover up the arms race that had begun in the United States, and in the statement on the "free settlement" of colonial problems (clause 5), the United States made claims to strengthen its positions in the colonies and dependent countries. Paragraphs 7-11 dealt with issues that were decided at the armistice talks in Compiègne. Paragraph 12 demanded the autonomy of the peoples that were part of Turkey and the opening of the Black Sea straits, paragraph 13 spoke of the creation of an independent Poland, paragraph 14 - of the creation of the League of Nations. As already noted with regard to the "Russian question" (point 6), the entire American program of "peace settlement" was calculated to be able to cover up the expansionist interests of the US imperialists with pacifist phraseology.
The Compiegne Truce was formally based on Wilson's 14 Points. Germany also appealed to them. But sharp contradictions arose between the former allies. One of the first problems that caused the conflict was the attempts of the Entente powers to link their debts to the United States with reparations that were supposed to be collected from Germany, and with the "general settlement of international debts." However, these attempts were not successful.
The United States also fought hard for European markets. For this purpose, the "Food Administration of the United States" was created. Under the slogan of helping the peoples, American capital sought to strengthen its position in the post-war world to the detriment of its competitors.
Great Britain retained the status of a great power after the war, although it was pushed into the background by the United States. By the beginning of the peace conference, she had already received almost everything for which she fought the war. Germany ceased to be her rival at sea and her competitor on world markets.
The position of France was also strong enough. But the French "peace program" was still far from being realized. Referring to the need to ensure the security of France, French diplomacy hoped to deprive Germany of the possibility of revenge and establish French hegemony in Europe. France's intentions were recorded in a secret treaty with Russia, signed in February 1917. It provided for the rejection of a number of territories from Germany. Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France, it received the Saar coal basin, its borders with Germany were pushed back to the Rhine.
Representatives of Italy, Japan and other countries arrived at the peace conference with their claims. Despite the fact that the first two of them belonged to the "great powers", their real influence was insignificant and affected only the solution of local issues.
Inter-imperialist contradictions at the Paris Peace Conference
The peace conference began in Paris on January 18, 1919. on the same day as in 1971. The German Empire was proclaimed. The conference was attended by representatives of 27 countries. It was widely advertised as an example of "open diplomacy". More than a thousand delegates came to Paris. But there were no representatives of Germany, whose fate was decided at the conference. But there were no representatives of Soviet Russia either. The Paris Conference, in essence, has become the headquarters of the anti-Soviet intervention. It was on the day of its opening that the Allies approved the document "On the need for Allied intervention in Russia." The Russian Question was one of the most important at the conference. There was not a single meeting at which it was not discussed, either directly or in connection with other issues. There were periods when the Paris Conference dealt only with it, that is, with a set of issues related to the intervention in Russia and its blockade. Contrary to statements about a "just peace" and the rejection of "secret diplomacy", the main decisions of the conference were the result of an unspoken collusion between representatives of the major powers, primarily the United States, Great Britain and France. In parallel, numerous commissions worked on individual problems of a peace treaty with Germany and post-war device peace. Wilson insisted on the priority of developing and discussing the League of Nations, emphasizing that it should become an integral part of all treaties. The United States expected to play a leading role in the new "peace preservation" organization.
Great Britain, France and Japan actively opposed US hegemony. They feared that the adoption of the charter of the League of Nations would make it difficult to discuss territorial and financial problems. The issue was resolved by the creation of a special commission on the League of Nations, chaired by Wilson.
On February 14 Wilson, in pathetic style, presented the Charter of the League of Nations to the peace conference, characterizing it as the instrument he had finally found for the preservation of "eternal peace." In the Charter of the League of Nations, some general international legal principles were fixed, the renunciation of wars was proclaimed, an attempt was made to distinguish between the aggressor and his victim, and sanctions were provided against the aggressor. However, it was not the “principles” themselves that were decisive, but their interpretation. In fact, the League of Nations secured the victory of the allies in the war and the preservation of the status quo in the world they divided. The admission of Soviet Russia to the League of Nations was ruled out in those years. In the Charter of the League of Nations, at the insistence of Wilson and as a result of the forced consent of the allies, the principle of the mandate (authority to manage) was enshrined - new form colonial policy of the imperialist powers.
American diplomacy sought to link the system of mandates with the principle of "open doors" and "equal opportunities" proclaimed by the United States at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. The United States insisted on the inclusion of the Monroe Doctrine in the Charter of the League of Nations, demanded the extension of the principle of "open doors" to the colonial possessions of other countries, their "internationalization". The essence of this "new diplomacy" was reduced to attempts to strengthen the position of the United States.
A bitter struggle was waged over the question of "freedom of the seas". Only in April 1919. A compromise solution was reached. In accordance with it, the United States refused to fully implement its naval programs, promising to exchange information on this issue. They recognized Britain's "special position" as a maritime power. In turn, Great Britain recognized the League of Nations as an integral part of the peace treaties. Later, the issue of including the Monroe Doctrine in the Charter of the League was resolved. France made this concession in response to the recognition by the United States of French claims regarding the status of the Saarland and the Rhineland.
Could not solve the Paris Peace Conference and reparations problems. Based on the principle of maximum weakening of Germany, France demanded the establishment of a huge amount of reparations. However, such a prospect was not in keeping with the British program for a post-war peace. Great Britain considered Germany as a market for its goods. A weakened Germany, Wilson reasoned, would not be able to pay reparations, and this would indirectly hurt American creditors.
After lengthy discussions, a reparation commission was created, which was entrusted until May 1, 1921. study the problem and present the final reparations demands to the German government.
Treaty of Versailles
The Treaty of Versailles was the main document of the post-war peace settlement. Then peace treaties were signed with Germany's allies - Bulgaria, Turkey and, since Austria-Hungary broke up, separately with Austria and Hungary. Each of the treaties began with the Charter of the League of Nations.
Under the Treaty of Versailles, Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France, the districts of Eupen, Malmedy and Morenay were transferred to Belgium, Northern Schleswig - to Denmark. Germany recognized the independence of Poland and Czechoslovakia. Part of the Silesian territory departed to Czechoslovakia. Poland received separate regions of Pomerania, Posen, most of West and part of East Prussia, and, in addition, part of Upper Silesia. The city of Danzig (Gdansk) with the territory adjacent to it turned into a "free city" under the control of the League of Nations. It was included in the customs borders of Poland. The territory of the so-called Danzig Corridor separated East Prussia from the rest of Germany. Germany recognized the independence of Luxembourg, pledged to "strictly respect" the independence of Austria. Memel (Klaipeda) and the surrounding areas were transferred under the control of the League of Nations (in 1923 they were included in Lithuania). The territory of Germany on the left bank of the Rhine and its right bank to a depth of 50 km. were demilitarized. The Saar coal basin passed "to the full and unlimited property" of France, while the region itself remained under the control of the League of Nations for 15 years. In general, Germany lost 1/8 of the territory and 1/12 of the population.
The Treaty of Versailles deprived Germany of all colonies, spheres of influence, property and privileges outside the country. The German colonies were divided (in the form of mandates) between France, Japan, Belgium, Portugal, Great Britain and its dominions. Cameroon and Togo were divided between Britain and France. Australia received part of New Guinea, and New Zealand- Western Samoa. Japan received German concessions in Shandong, as well as the islands in the Pacific Ocean that previously belonged to Germany, which lay north of the equator.
The Treaty of Versailles provided for the disarmament of Germany. The land army was reduced to 100 thousand. people (with 4 thousand officers). The surface navy of Germany was sharply limited, and it was forbidden to have submarines. The same applied to military and naval aviation. Germany was declared responsible for the outbreak of the world war and the damage caused by it. Thus, a legal basis was created for collecting reparation payments from Germany to compensate for "all losses and all losses" of the Allies. Some articles of the treaty reduced Germany to the position of a dependent country.
The text of the Treaty of Versailles in a special section called "Labor" provided for the creation of an international labor office under the League of Nations. This organization was founded on the principles of "class peace" and collaborated with the reformist Amsterdam Trade Union International. The International Labor Office was an information body and had no practical significance in solving the problems of "social justice".
The Treaty of Versailles was the basis of the post-war peace settlement system. He proceeded from the imperialist principles of solving world problems, fixed the existing alignment of forces in the world. However, the positions taken by the powers in 1919 could not remain unchanged. In accordance with the law of uneven development of the capitalist powers, the “balance” fixed in the post-war treaties was unstable.
Chapter II. Washington Treaty
The clash of imperialist interests of Great Britain, the USA, and Japan in the Far East
world war treaty imperialist
An important object of the post-war peace settlement was the Far Eastern knot of inter-imperialist contradictions. Japan, which actually did not take part in the war, took advantage of the fact that its main rivals were busy in the European theater of operations, strengthened its positions in the Pacific Ocean and the Far East, especially in China. Nearly half of China's foreign trade was in the hands of Japan. Under the Treaty of Versailles, she inherited a significant part of the German "inheritance", which, in the opinion of the American ruling circles, seriously infringed on US interests in the Far East.
Japanese expansion in this area was opposed by both Great Britain and the United States, although its forms were different. Having created an international banking consortium after the end of the war, the United States demanded the "internationalization" of China under the slogans of "open doors" and "equal opportunities." Britain, on the other hand, defended the traditional principle of dividing China into "spheres of influence." The atmosphere within this trio of imperialist powers was very tense. Even the possibility of a military clash was discussed in the ruling circles of the USA and Japan. In addition, American intelligence found that the warships being built in Britain and Japan were superior in power to the American ones. The United States had great material resources to eventually win the naval rivalry, but this took time.
Japan was becoming a serious rival to the US and Great Britain in the Far East. Anglo-Japanese alliance, concluded in 1902. mainly against Russia, Japan intended to use against the US. Relations between the UK and the US also remained tense. By the beginning of the 1920s, the amount of various forms of debt of European countries to the United States was already over 18 billion US dollars. opportunities" in trade and entrepreneurship in all parts of China.
Opening of the Washington Conference. Treatise of the Four Powers
Nine powers were invited to the conference, which began on November 12, 1921: the USA, Great Britain, Japan, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, Portugal and China. The People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR expressed a strong protest against the exclusion of Soviet Russia from the conference participants. He announced the non-recognition of decisions taken without the consent of the Soviet state. The Far Eastern Republic (FER) was not invited either. The special position of the Far East, which was not then part of the RSFSR, aggravated the Japanese-American rivalry in the struggle for dominance in Eastern Siberia. In the negotiations in Dairen with representatives of the Far East, Japan tried to impose on her complete economic and political enslavement. These reasons were categorically rejected.
Officially, the organizers of the Washington Conference declared "arms limitation" as their goal, appealing to the pacifist sentiments of the peoples. Statesmen and diplomats renounced "secret diplomacy", plenary sessions of the conference were held in public. The core of the speech by the chairman of the Washington Conference, US Secretary of State Hughes, was a proposal to stop the construction of super-powerful warships in all countries and disable some of them. However, in the course of specific negotiations, which, by the way, were not public, sharp discussions unfolded. The representative of Great Britain conditioned the limitation of the power of the fleet by the reduction of the huge French land army. The French Prime Minister rejected such demands, citing the "danger of Bolshevism." The United States supported the position of France on this issue in order to isolate Great Britain, to deprive it of the halo of the "guarantor" of the Versailles Peace. Other powers also opposed the reduction of the army. It was not possible to achieve an acceptable result for all agreements on this issue.
December 13, 1921 Representatives of the United States, Great Britain, Japan and France signed the Treaty of the Four Powers. It guaranteed the island possessions of its members in the Pacific Ocean. Anglo-Japanese alliance 1902 was terminated. The treaty was military in nature. This seemingly ordinary agreement caused a sharp controversy in the US at the time of its ratification. And not by accident. It was about guaranteeing possessions that were "in a state of mandate." It could happen that the United States, which did not receive mandates, would have to protect other people's possessions. Therefore, during the ratification of the treaty, an amendment was adopted that "without the consent of Congress" the US government should not assume obligations to protect the possessions of other nations in the Pacific Ocean. This circumstance could not but weaken the effectiveness of the treatise. But at the same time, the declaration of December 13, 1921, attached to the treaty of the four powers, clearly showed the fact that the signing of the treaty does not mean the consent of the United States to existing mandates and "does not exclude the possibility of concluding agreements" between the United States and the Mandatory Powers on the islands located "in a state of mandate". Thus, the possibility of acquiring the islands by the United States remained.
On the whole, this agreement had a stabilizing effect on the positions of the powers in the Pacific. To some extent, it was the embodiment of the American idea of the "Association of Nations", that is, the creation of a bloc of the most powerful powers in the Far East, which could be used in the fight against Soviet Russia and the national liberation movement in China.
The agreement reached on a number of contentious issues made it possible to take another step towards strengthening the position of the United States.
Five Power Treaty
February 6, 1922 signed a five-power treaty - the United States, Great Britain, Japan, France and Italy - on the "limitation of naval armaments". Between them, the following proportions of the linear fleet were established, respectively: 5:5:3:1.75:1.75. the powers undertook not to build battleships with a displacement of more than 35 thousand tons. tons. However, the treaty did not limit the tonnage of the cruising and submarine fleet. He forbade the creation of new naval bases and the strengthening of the coast guard. An exception was made only in favor of the USA and Great Britain: the USA received the right to fortify the islands protecting the direct approaches to their territorial waters; similar exemptions were made for the British dominions of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. If the US refusal to fortify the Philippines and Guam took into account the interests of Japan, then the transformation of the British possession of Singapore into a military fortress was directed against her.
The treaty of the five powers was not "disarmament". There was only a shift of forces in favor of the United States. Britain had to make significant concessions. She was forced to abandon the traditional principle of the "two-power standard", according to which the British fleet should not be inferior to the fleet of the two largest maritime powers. At the same time, Great Britain retained its positions: having got rid of the cost of battleships, it had the opportunity to build high-speed cruisers and merchant ships that could easily be turned into military ones.
The Japanese delegation sharply objected to the proportion of the battle fleet fixed in the five-power treaty. However, her claims to the "equality" of the fleets were rejected. In the press, Japan was inspired by a noisy campaign against the "Washington shame". In reality, the balance of power established in Washington was quite favorable for Japan. In addition, Japan had well-fortified naval bases in the area.
Nine Power Treaty
Particular attention at the Washington Conference was given to the problem of China. China did not sign the Treaty of Versailles, demanding the return of the German colonies transferred to Japan on its territory. In response to the Versailles robbery in 1919. The May 4th National Liberation Movement began in China. The United States tried to flirt with the leaders of this movement, but there was no question of restoring China to the rights of a truly sovereign, independent state. Acting under the slogans of "open doors" and "equal opportunities", under the guise of "friends of China", the United States hoped to strengthen the position of American capital in this country and eliminate the "spheres of influence" of other powers.
British diplomacy sought to maintain its traditional positions in China, counting on an agreement with Japan on the principles of the Treaty of Versailles. In the face of Japan, she saw not only a rival, but also an ally, moreover, she was destined for the role of a gendarme in the Far East. However, all attempts to defend the colonial status of China in the traditional form were not successful.
February 6, 1922 signed a treaty of nine powers - all participants in the conference. He hypocritically proclaimed the principle of China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Powers, the document said, pursue the goal of "protecting the rights and interests of China", "providing China with the fullest and unhindered opportunity to develop and maintain a viable and stable government." In essence, this document meant the formation of a united front of the imperialist powers against the national liberation movement in China. Recognition of the principles of "open doors" and "equal opportunities" created the threat of China's enslavement by the most powerful imperialist state, which the United States, not without reason, considered itself to be. Japan gave up its monopoly position in China and undertook to return to it the former German concessions in Shandong and withdraw its troops from there. However, the unequal treaties with China were not cancelled, and foreign control over Chinese customs remained. Japan rejected Chinese demands to withdraw troops from South Manchuria, which allowed it to later use Manchuria as a springboard to expand its expansionist policies in the Far East.
The contradictions between the imperialist powers during the Washington Conference hastened the liberation of the Soviet Far East from foreign interventionists. The Dairen talks convinced the Soviet government that Japan, by delaying the evacuation of its troops, was making plans to turn Eastern Siberia into its "sphere of influence." In this situation, the FER delegation came to Washington. Declaring a desire to cooperate with the United States, she began negotiations with Hughes. It soon became clear, however, that the United States was not averse to replacing the Japanese in the Soviet Far East. After that, the FER delegation publicized the results of negotiations with representatives of Japan and the United States. The publication of documents about the true intentions of the imperialist forces in relation to Soviet Russia caused a real stir in diplomatic circles and in the capitals of the major powers. Inter-imperialist contradictions, and most importantly, the successful actions of the Red Army, resulted in an accelerated withdrawal of Japanese troops from the territory of Eastern Siberia and complete liberation in 1922. Soviet Republic from the interventionists.
The contradictions of the Versailles-Washington system
During the post-war peace settlement, a whole complex of treaties was created, known in history as the Versailles-Washington system. If the Versailles system regulated the post-war problems of Western Europe, as well as the interests of its leading powers in Africa and the Middle East, then the Washington system tried to resolve contradictions in the Far East and the Pacific Ocean in the interests of the United States. In this sense, Washington was a continuation of Versailles, its geographical complement; and not the first, and at the second conference there was an imperialist redistribution of the world.
At the same time, the Washington Conference was also the beginning of the revision of Versailles. Its initiator - the United States - after the collapse of the first round of struggle in Paris began to search for a new foreign policy course to solve the same goal - American leadership in the capitalist world. This new leadership claim was made at the Washington Conference. However, rivalry with Great Britain and Japan somewhat changed its original design. The results of the conference testified that the United States managed to achieve recognition of the principle of "freedom of the seas", weaken Great Britain as a great maritime power, push Japan out of China, achieve the establishment of the principle of "equal opportunities", but the strategy of complete domination of the United States in the Far East and the Pacific Ocean was only partially implemented. Japan retained strong enough positions to create the first hotbed of World War II in 10 years, and in 20 years to be able to attack the United States.
Contradictions between the European powers were also acute. In 1921-1922. under the auspices of France, the so-called Little Entente (Czechoslovakia, Romania, Yugoslavia) was formed. Based on this military-political alliance, France sought to assert its influence in post-war Europe. It was also directed against the revisionist claims of the defeated states, against Soviet Russia and the revolutionary movement.
The Versailles system of treaties created a "powder magazine" in Europe, and in the Middle East - a hotbed of almost uninterrupted cataclysms and explosions of the national liberation movement. A fierce struggle between the victorious powers began immediately after the armistice. The United States, having failed to achieve an "American peace" in Paris, rejected the Versailles system, waiting for the right moment for revenge.
Arising under the sign of deep contradictions. The system of predatory contracts began to fall apart. One of the first to fall was the Treaty of Sevres with Turkey. In an attempt to weaken the effect of centrifugal forces, the victorious powers set up numerous commissions, which were ordered to implement various articles of the Treaty of Versailles, which entered into force on January 10, 1920. The general supervision of its execution was entrusted to periodically convened conferences of the ambassadors of Great Britain, Japan, France and Italy, chaired by the representative of France. The United States had its observer on them. During these conferences sharp Anglo-French contradictions emerged. Only by concessions to Great Britain in the Middle East did France receive its often inconsistent support in deciding European problems especially concerning Germany. Germany tried to split the allies, to achieve concessions. Moreover, in Berlin they never hid their dreams of revenge, but officially preferred not to demand revenge with “loud screams”.
Particularly heated discussions unfolded on the question of reparations. The Reparation Commission first determined the total amount of German reparations in the amount of 269 billion. gold marks. But a month later, in the city of Spa, at the request of Germany, the issue was again brought up for discussion. However, it was only possible to establish the principles for the distribution of reparations among the powers. France was to receive 52% of the total, Great Britain - 22%, Italy - 10%, the rest was transferred to other countries, including the United States. It was envisaged that Russia would also receive a certain amount of reparations. The subsequent conference reduced the total amount of reparations to 226 billion. gold marks. However, Germany refused to accept this demand. Finally, on May 5, 1921. the London ultimatum was sent to her, setting the final amount of reparations at 132 billion. gold marks. In the context of the political crisis and after the change of government, this ultimatum was finally accepted. However, Germany carried it out only for one year. In January 1923 Anglo-French disagreements on the reparations question reached unprecedented sharpness. London's proposal to reduce the total amount of German reparations to 50 billion. gold marks Paris indignantly rejected. French President Poincaré wrote in this regard that if the British version was adopted, "Germany's hegemony over Europe" would be established in 15 years.
Failing to win the support of Great Britain, France decided to take over the so-called productive deposits: the coal mines of the Ruhr and the steel industry of the Rhine Province. January 11, 1923 The Franco-Belgian army occupied the Ruhr. The Ruhr conflict began. In the autumn of 1923 the United Kingdom and the United States intervened. The Ruhr conflict resulted in the collapse of France's claims to hegemony in Europe.
Equally sharp were disagreements about the size of the German army and the nature of its weapons. Some provisions of the Treaty of Versailles were categorically rejected by Germany, and the victorious powers were unable to force them to comply. The articles on the prosecution of persons "accused of committing acts contrary to the laws and customs of war" were not generally implemented. Escaped court and Wilhelm II. From the very beginning, many of the military provisions of the Treaty of Versailles were not implemented. But German revanchism was not the only source of international tension and the threat of a new world war. It was paved the way for the totality of the antagonisms of the imperialist system of international relations created at Versailles.
On the whole, the Versailles-Washington system completed the process of post-war peace settlement, the transition from war to peace, and prepared the conditions for the temporary relative stabilization of capitalism in the sphere of international relations as well.
Posted to site
Similar Documents
The development of the foreign policy process in the first half of the 20th century as the formation of the prerequisites for its development after the Second World War. The results of the Second World War and the change in the status of Great Britain on the world stage. Formation of the British Commonwealth.
term paper, added 11/23/2008
Review of foreign policy of foreign powers towards Iran after the First World War. The study of the development of revolutionary events in the province of Gilan. An analysis of the perception by the Persian political elite of the actions of the great powers in the Middle East.
thesis, added 04/09/2012
The beginning of the First World War as a result of the aggravation of imperialist contradictions, uneven economic development various European countries. Analysis of the beginning of the First World War and its causes. The main goals of the states in the war of 1914.
term paper, added 06/04/2014
International relations in 1919-1929, prerequisites for the conclusion of the Versailles Peace Treaty. The finalization of the results of the First World War, the creation of a system for maintaining international security. Changing the balance of power in Europe after the war.
abstract, added 12/14/2011
The development of German armored forces in the pre-war (after the First World War) period. Prohibitions of the Treaty of Versailles on the production of armored vehicles in Germany. The evolution of the Panzerwaffe of the Wehrmacht. Improvement of tanks during the Second World War.
report, added 10/14/2015
History of Japan on the eve of the establishment of fascism. Socio-economic and political changes in Japan after the First World War. Domestic policy of Japan after the First World War. Japan's foreign policy during the establishment of the fascist dictatorship.
abstract, added 02/12/2015
Concepts of foreign policy activity of the USA and Great Britain and traditions of the American-British relations on the eve of the First World War. American-English Relations (August 1914-1916): Problems of History and Historiography. America's entry into the war.
thesis, added 03/18/2012
Imperialist character of the First World War. Unleashing a war. Military operations in 1914-16. 1917 The growth of revolutionary activity and the "peaceful" maneuvers of the warring countries. Russia's exit from the First World War, its completion.
control work, added 03/26/2003
Russia in the First World War. Military plans of the major warring powers. Russia's exit from the First World War. Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets. The first decrees and the Constitution of the RSFSR. The first Soviet socio-economic and political transformations.
abstract, added 12/10/2011
Causes, nature and main stages of the First World War. Socio-economic situation in Russia during the First World War. Power, society and man during the First World War. Results of the First World War. The balance of power at the beginning of the war.
On November 11, 1918, at 11 o'clock in the morning, 101 volleys of artillery thundered in Paris. salute that heralded the end of the war. 1st world war - coalition. The Entente fought against Germany and its allies.
On November 11, early in the morning in a forest near Compiègne (Compiègne Forest) in France, an armistice with Germany was signed on the staff train of the commander of the Entente, Marshal Foch. Thus ended this war, which lasted 51 months. This war was the most terrible in the history of mankind at that time, about 10 million people died, led to the fact that about 20 million people were injured, became disabled, used weapons of mass destruction, gases. Destruction of cities, villages, famine, disease, revolution. Such was the result of this great tragedy that mankind has endured.
In international relations, a new system had to be created. When an armistice agreement was signed, and then a peace treaty was concluded, in principle, no one wanted a repetition of this tragedy. Everyone thought about how to make sure that the world no longer experienced the horrors of the world war. In international relations, it was necessary to create such a system of cooperation between states in order to ensure lasting peace in the future.
However, the peace turned out to be fragile, it lasted only 20 years, after which the 2nd World War began, even more terrible than the first.
Why did politicians and statesmen try to prevent a new war, but it still happened? To answer this question, it is necessary to consider the alignment of political forces in the world after the end of the war, and find out whether all the contradictions that led to the emergence of a global conflict have been eliminated?
So, balance of power at the end of 1918.
A new huge state appeared on the political map of the world - Soviet Russia, which proclaimed a new path of development. The policy of Soviet Russia created serious problems for the countries of the West.
Serious changes have also taken place within the Western world. Now, after the end of the 1st World War, the United States is being put forward as a contender for world domination. The United States has grown unheard-of rich during the years of the war; it has become, in fact, one of the world's most important creditors. The USA entered World War I in 1917. When US President Woodrow Wilson declared in the summer of 1917 that when the war was over, we could get England and France to join us, since by that time they would be in our hands financially. The US believed that with the help of economic levers it would be possible to force its allies in Western Europe to submit to US opinion.
On January 8, 1918, Woodrow Wilson laid out the American program to the world. Those. The Americans put forward the idea of a peaceful settlement and became the main initiators of ending the war. This American peace program is known in history as "Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points". Here the United States tried to take into account only its own interests, and financial issues played an important role here. Wilson suggested that, after the end of the war, a new international organization be created to oversee the maintenance of peace throughout the world. He proposed the formation of the League of Nations. Those. peace, the revision of borders on disputed issues, freedom of trade and peaceful settlement in the person of the League of Nations. Here are the main provisions of the 14 points.
This is what the United States put forward as the basis for signing a truce. To a certain extent, they succeeded in doing so.
But we must keep in mind that the Western allies, primarily England and France, were by no means going to share the US claims to world leadership. England and France - the winners in the 1st World War, they did not want to give their victory to anyone. Each of them claimed a leading position in Europe and in the world. Let us recall the political map of the world at the beginning of the 20th century. These were the states that controlled half the world, these were gigantic colonial empires. In this case, these countries did not want to concede to the United States.
Both the United States, England and France sought to achieve maximum results from the outcome of the end of the 1st World War.
As for Germany. Germany lost this war. But not everything is so simple. German troops on the battlefields, in principle, did not lose the war. German troops were in foreign territories. Not a single Entente soldier trampled on the holy German soil. In this case, for many Germans, such a catastrophic ending of the war was unexpected. The German generals did not allow the thought of defeat, they were preparing to fight at least one more winter, and in this case what happened in the Compiègne Forest was perceived as a blow of enormous force to national pride.
Why did Germany sign this agreement so hastily on November 11, 1918? Because a revolution has begun in Germany. About her later. And for the German leadership, it was important to keep the army from complete defeat, to prevent the transformation of the territory of Germany into a theater of military operations, which would bring ruin to the country. In addition, the Compiègne truce was not an unconditional surrender. This is not what Germany then signed in 1945 in Reims.
The signing of the Compiegne Armistice, however, obliged Germany to fulfill the following conditions: the Germans had to urgently withdraw all their troops from the occupied territories. Evacuate within 2 weeks troops from the territory of France, Belgium, Luxembourg, from Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Romania, and from the border in the west, were to be introduced from the left bank of the Rhine. German troops could not be withdrawn only from the territory of Russia, but until the replacement of these troops by the Entente.
However, the withdrawal of a huge army from the occupied territories was very tight in terms of time, and Germany was unable to fulfill this. Germany did not fit into the terms of the armistice, and twice these terms were pushed back, until February 17, 1919.
Already during this period, contradictions begin to arise in the camp of the winners. Much of it has to do with economics. It was about the fact that it was necessary to solve the problem of the post-war structure in the West, the restoration of the economy, it was necessary to find sources, resources. The Entente powers tried to solve their economic problems at the expense of German reparations. The Americans began to talk about the debts that Europe owed the US. Moreover, the United States was by no means satisfied with the ruin of Germany; Washington opposed excessive reparation payments. Contradictions began to arise between Europe and America.
On the other hand, Europe was categorically opposed to the US idea of freedom of the seas and open markets, equal opportunities. Freedom of the seas and equal opportunities - Woodrow Wilson put forward this idea as the provisions of a peaceful settlement. Europeans were afraid to open markets and allow the freedom of the seas for the United States.
As a result, considering the alignment of forces after the end of the 1st World War, we can say that no one managed to win at that moment. The United States failed to achieve its goals in full. England and France retained the status of great powers, they continued to fight for leadership not only on the European continent, but also outside it.
After the Compiègne armistice, Germany lost the opportunity to influence the solution of world problems.
What is the difference between a truce and a peace treaty?
A truce is the end of hostilities. The peace treaty is the end of the war.
In this case, after the signing of the armistice agreement, it was also necessary to sign a peace treaty. To this end, on January 18, 1919, a peace conference was opened in Paris ( Paris Peace Conference). It basically solved 3 tasks:
- 1) Development and signing of a peace treaty with Germany
- 2) Reaching a peace settlement and signing a peace treaty with Germany's allies
- 3) The problem of the post-war device.
Conference participants. It was attended by over 1000 delegates from 27 countries. Never before in the history of this scale has a conference been held. In conference not participated: Germany, Germany's allies, Soviet Russia.
So, on January 18, 1919, the Paris Conference opened. At the opening of the conference, the President of France, Raymond Poincaré, expressed the idea that at that time was shared by many: Gentlemen, exactly 48 years ago in the mirror hall of the Palace of Versailles the German Empire was proclaimed, and today we are gathered here in order to destroy and replace what was created that day.
Those. it was about destroying the empire.
The intentions of the victorious powers pursued such goals that were supposed to redraw the political map of Europe and the world. The most bloodthirsty position was occupied by France. The leadership of France wanted to dismember Germany and throw this state back to the position it held before the Frankfurt Peace, i.e. turn Germany into that conglomeration of principalities and free cities, as it was before. The French wanted to draw a new state border with Germany, which was supposed to pass along a natural barrier, which, as it were, separated France from Germany, along the Rhine. At least Marshal Foch clearly stated to journalists that the border should go only along the Rhine. The French were already afraid of Germany, realizing that Germany's potential, not only economic, but also human, was much higher than that of France. France was afraid that Germany would someday take revenge.
In the east and south of Europe, France wanted to create a kind of counterbalance to Germany from among the new states that had arisen on the ruins of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. It was about uniting those countries that had just appeared as a counterbalance to Germany. It was about Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Yugoslavia.
France sought to demand colossal reparations from Germany and the seizure of all her colonies from Germany.
Those. the task was to undermine the economic power of its neighbor and create opportunities for French claims to the leading state in Europe.
In this case, we can say: you never know what the French wanted, they want a lot. But it must be borne in mind that behind the shoulders of the French delegation was the most powerful army in Europe. In this case, France went to the conference confident in its abilities.
England. The situation in England is different. England was a sea power. She intended to consolidate her naval superiority. England sought to retain all those German colonies that the British managed to capture from Germany, plus the Turkish colonies. At the same time, the French were very scared of the British. In this case, the task of the British was also to moderate France's claims to European and world leadership. The British were frightened by the fact that France was seeking to strengthen its position in Eastern Europe, primarily in the Balkans.
USA. The United States at the Paris Conference based its tactics on Woodrow Wilson's 14 points. They sought to prevent the complete defeat of Germany, they were afraid of the growth of the naval power of England, they tried to solve post-war economic problems by obtaining debts from European countries. By the way, the debts were in the amount of 10 billion dollars.
An important task was pursued by the Americans at the conference: the creation of the League of Nations. It was supposed to be an international organization that would oversee the maintenance of peace throughout the world.
Along with France, England, the United States, 2 more countries tried to play an important role. This is Italy, which was always trying to get something. The Italian organization was very talkative. Once they even left the meeting room in protest. But no one even noticed their departure. The Italians gained little during the work of the Paris Peace Conference.
And Japan, which was also part of the Entente. The Japanese hoped to achieve some territorial gains in Asia. The Japanese were the most silent of the delegations, but got everything they wanted.
The rest of the conference participants did not play an independent role.
So, these 5 states were trying to decide the future of the world.
From these five countries, 2 delegates were nominated, who made up the so-called Council of Ten, which was supposed to solve the main problems at the conference.
English and French were approved as working languages. The Japanese also had to speak either English or French. Perhaps that is why they were silent.
In this case, French Prime Minister Georges Clemonceau was elected as president of the conference. He was a 77-year-old man with a large bald head, thick eyebrows, and a walrus mustache. His hands were affected by eczema, so he always wore gloves. He was resourceful and often resorted to rude tabloid expressions. When there was no quorum, he turned to the English delegation and said: call your savages. It was about the representatives of Canada and Australia.
His colleague in leadership of the conference was US President Woodrow Wilson, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, Italian Prime Minister Orlando, adviser to the Emperor of Japan Sai Re Ji.
The work of the conference was chaotic. A number of important meetings were even left without minutes. In this case, the role was played by the same Clemonceau, who said: to hell with the protocols.
Ultimately, this deprived historians of important sources on the work of this conference. As for the work itself, it began, as always, with disagreements. And above all, this affected the creation of the League of Nations. The fact is that Woodrow Wilson planned the creation of the League of Nations as a priority for the Paris Peace Conference and demanded the adoption of the charter of the League of Nations, on the basis of which peace treaties with Germany and its allies were to be developed later. The adoption of the charter of the League of Nations meant for France and Great Britain, as well as Japan, that they could lose all their ambitions in relation to the defeated state, i.e. make it difficult for them to discuss territorial and economic issues. This conflict situation ended with the creation of a special commission on the League of Nations, headed by Woodrow Wilson himself.
The second problem that caused controversy was the fate of the German colonies. All participants in the conference were of the same opinion that the colonies should be taken away from Germany, there were no disputes here. Disputes arose already in another: to whom these colonies will then go. And again nothing was decided. From the very beginning, a very tense situation was created, which could have completely disrupted the Paris Peace Conference. Woodrow Wilson even announced that he was going to leave her. This alarmed everyone, but the impasse was broken only 10 days later, when Woodrow Wilson announced that he had developed the charter for the League of Nations.
On February 14, 1919, by the scheduled date, Wilson, in a solemn atmosphere, outlined the draft charter of the League of Nations to the peace conference. He said: here is our treaty of brotherhood and friendship. And all the conference participants in their speeches congratulated themselves on the creation of an instrument of peace. In principle, the conference approved the charter League of Nations.
The charter of the League of Nations contained the most important principles international law. The rejection of wars as a way to resolve international conflicts was declared.
The definition of the aggressor and victims of aggression was given. Sanctions against the aggressor were supposed.
The so-called principle of a mandate to govern territories that were colonially dependent on the defeated states was introduced. Those. according to this principle of the mandate, the mandated territories of the colonial possessions of Germany and Turkey were to be distributed.
Thus, by approving the charter of the League of Nations, the motives that seemed to hinder the discussion of a peace treaty disappeared, and it seemed that now the conference would begin to work actively. Moreover, even the main characters they considered that their mission was completed, and by the beginning of the discussion of the actual terms of the peace treaty with Germany, they left Versailles. Woodrow Wilson, pleased with himself, sailed to the United States, accompanied by an artillery salute. After that, David Lloyd George went to London. Orlando left for Rome.
Clemenceau left Versailles, he was assassinated by an anarchist. Clemonceau ended up in a military hospital.
And now, at this moment, the main serious problems of a peace treaty with Germany were to be worked out by the foreign ministers. They had to solve largely territorial issues, issues of future borders of states. The atmosphere during the conference heated up again. And in the end, everyone again gathered in Versailles.
In mid-March 1919, Clemonceau, Wilson, Lloyd George, and Orlando were again at Versailles. And again fierce disputes broke out between them. We can say that the conference was again on the verge of collapse, it reached a dead end.
She broke the impasse only on March 25, 1919. On March 25, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George (he was a master of compromises, could find proposals acceptable to all states) left for a while to rest in the suburbs of Paris, at the residence of the French kings of Fontainebleau. And here in Fontainebleau, on March 25, he drew up a memorandum that was addressed to Wilson and Clemonceau. He tried to take into account various differences, he was a very flexible politician. He proposed and demands of France, but not all; tried to take into account the interests of all. The essence of the proposals: to prevent the dismemberment of Germany.
With regard to the security of France, he proposed the creation of a demilitarized zone on the border with France, where there would be no troops, the Ruhr area; return to France Alsace and Lorraine, lost during the Franco-Prussian war; allow the French to use the Saar coal basin (this is the territory of Germany) for 10 years. The French wanted to annex this territory to themselves, but Lloyd George offered only for 10 years.
Some border regions of Germany to transfer to Belgium and Denmark.
Allow Poland to access the Baltic Sea, create a Polish corridor that would allow Poland to have access to the Baltic. This is the so-called Danzig Corridor. But in this way, the territory was taken away from Germany.
Avoid excessive demands in matters of reparations.
This proposal of Lloyd George caused stormy indignation and Clemonceau, and Wilson's threats to go to America again. But in the end, they still managed to reach a compromise based on the proposal of Lloyd George, written in Fontainebleau.
After lengthy discussions, the leaders of the leading countries felt that this was the only way out of the situation.
After it was possible to agree on the main provisions, the draft peace treaty with Germany was ready at the end of April 1919. A German delegation was invited to Versailles so that they could receive a draft peace treaty.
The Germans actually expected not only to receive a draft peace treaty, they counted on negotiations, they prepared for these negotiations very carefully, they rented a whole mansion in Paris, installed a radio antenna on the roof so that they could quickly contact Berlin. But the negotiations failed.
At the head of the German delegation was the German Foreign Minister, Count Brockdorf. On May 7, 1919, he was presented with a draft peace treaty at Versailles. At the same time, it was said that German comments should be submitted in writing within 15 days.
It was immediately clear to the German delegation how harsh the terms of the peace treaty were. The very atmosphere of the delivery of the contract was indicative. The treaty was handed over in the White Hall of the Palace of Versailles. This is the throne room of Louis 14. In the place where the throne once stood, 5 chairs were placed. On these chairs sat the main characters of the Paris Conference. The floor was taken by Georges Clemenceau, who said harshly: gentlemen deputies of the German state, there is no place for superfluous words, you have imposed a war on us, we are taking measures so that such a war does not happen again. The hour of reckoning has come. You asked us for peace, we agree to grant it to you.
The secretary presented the contract to Brockdorf. And the Germans realized that there would be no negotiations. They also realized how cruel the peace treaty itself was. After the Germans received this project, protest demonstrations swept through Germany. On May 12, 1919, Minister Scheidemann declared irritably from the balcony: let the hand of the one who signs this treaty dry up. The Germans were not going to sign this treaty. The German Foreign Minister said that no one would have the conscience to sign this treaty, since it is impossible to implement.
The Germans took the treaty negatively, as they did not feel that they had been defeated in this war. German diplomats drew up 17 notes on certain provisions of the draft. Basically, the Germans were trying to get support from the United States here, referring to Woodrow Wilson's 14 points, and trying to revise the principles of the Paris Peace Treaty. But the French did not allow revision. Clemonceau took a very decisive position. On June 28, he announced that if Germany did not sign a peace treaty, then France was ready to continue the war. In other words, France put forward an ultimatum, and Germany had no choice but to accept the ultimatum demands and sign this treaty.
The Treaty of Versailles was signed on June 28, 1919. And already signed it new minister German Foreign Affairs Müller, and Minister of Justice Bern. They put their signatures under this agreement. And after them, representatives of other powers put their signatures.
A few years later they wrote: 60 million Germans instantly fell to their knees. France had brought Germany to its knees before the whole of Europe, and the Germans could now only watch as freight trains went west, taking away reparations. For Germany, it was a shame and a trauma. In Germany, there was mourning, flags were flown at half mast.
France rejoiced. The inhabitants of Paris took to the streets, sang the Marseillaise, hugged, kissed.
The main provisions of the Versailles Peace Treaty:
Territorial highlights:
Alsace and Lorraine returned to France. The Saar coal basin passed into the ownership of France and management for 15 years. After these 15 years, it was proposed that the population of the Saar coal basin express their attitude towards the future, hold a plebiscite (referendum) on which country they want to belong to.
3 regions of Germany were transferred to Belgium.
Part of northern Germany was transferred to Denmark.
Poland received part of Upper Silesia.
Czechoslovakia also received part of Silesia.
Danzig (Gdansk) passed into the control of the League of Nations and was declared a free city. But Poland got access to the Baltic Sea. As a result of this, East Prussia with the city of Koenigsberg was separated from Germany. It is worth paying attention to this, since then in 1939 this issue will be actively discussed.
In 1939, another problem will be discussed, this is the territory of Lithuania. The fact is that the German city of Mener (now Kleiner)?) was first administered by the victorious powers, and since 1923 it was transferred to Lithuania. This is Klaipeda, the largest port in Lithuania, a typical German city.
The left bank of the Rhine was occupied by the Entente troops for 15 years, the territory from the Rhine to the western border.
The right bank of the Rhine, about 50 km wide, was declared a demilitarized zone. It was forbidden to place troops and military installations there.
The German colonies were divided among the 3 states of the Entente. They were received by England, France, Japan.
The size of the German army was limited to 100 thousand people.
The German Navy was only allowed to have 36 capital ships. The submarine fleet was prohibited. Military aviation and tank troops were banned.
Germany had to pay reparations for 30 years, and the amount of these reparations was not determined, they were to be determined by a special reparation commission.
These conditions caused fits of great joy in Paris. The fires were on. In the evening, huge bunches of three national colors were sent from the Eiffel Tower. Crowds of people, a torchlight procession, the sounds of the Marseillaise.
What was the fate of the peace treaties of Germany's allies?
In the 1st World War, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria (it is always in all wars against Russia), Turkey fought on the side of Germany. But by the time the peace treaties were actually drawn up, Austria-Hungary no longer existed. Therefore, peace treaties were signed separately with Austria and Hungary.
On September 10, 1919, an agreement with Austria was signed at the Saint-Germain Palace. All these contracts are of a standard nature.
Austria transferred part of its territory to Italy, Czechoslovakia, Hungary.
The Austrian army was determined by the number of 30 thousand people.
The military and merchant fleets were transferred to the allies. Austria was losing the opportunity to have a fleet.
Austria was forbidden to unite with Germany, the so-called Anschluss was forbidden.
November 27, 1919 in the city of Ney, an agreement was signed with Bulgaria. Bulgaria also transferred part of its territory to neighboring states: Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece.
Bulgaria also transferred its entire fleet to the allies.
The armed forces were determined to be 20 thousand people.
What is the size of the Petrovsky Stadium? 24 thousand people. Those. the entire Bulgarian army could be stationed at our Petrovsky stadium.
Hungary. On June 4, 1920, a peace treaty with Hungary was signed at the Grand Trianon Palace of Versailles.
Hungary lost a significant part of its territory, it really suffered: Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, many territories of Romania - northern Transylvania. This territory was inhabited by Hungarians, was rich in oil.
Hungary ceded 70% of its territory and 50% of its population to neighboring states.
The Hungarian army was limited to 30 thousand people.
Hungary signed a fairly tough, humiliating peace treaty.
Turkey. On August 10, 1920, an agreement was signed with the Sultan's government of Turkey in the city of Sevres in France. Under this treaty, the Ottoman Empire was divided. Part of the territory was transferred under the mandate of England, part of France.
Turkey is not part of Asia Minor at that time, it was a colossal empire.
England received Palestine, Trans Jordan, Iraq.
France received Syria, Lebanon.
The Turks lost all their possessions in the Arabian Peninsula.
The Turks had to cede part of their territory in Asia Minor to Greece.
Turkey has lost 80% of its territory.
The Bosphorus and Dardanelles were declared open to Entente ships. In peacetime and wartime, international control was established over these straits.
International control was also established over Turkey. Objectively speaking, Turkey has become a semi-colony of Western Europe.
The Treaty of Sevres with Turkey was the final act of the Versailles system of peace treaties.
The Treaty of Versailles fixed the contradictions between the victors and the vanquished for a long time. Contradictions between the allies also began to appear during this period.
The League of Nations was proclaimed at the Paris Peace Conference. Its charter was signed by 44 states.
Published with the support of the MacArthur Foundation
Scientific and auxiliary work on the manuscript was made by E.N. Orlova
ISBN 5-89554-139-9
© A.V. Malgin, A.D. Bogaturov, compilation, 1996, 2000
© S.I. Dudin, emblem, 1997
- Section II. THE INITIAL STAGE OF THE POST-WAR SETTLEMENT (1919 - 1922)
- Section III. FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE WASHINGTON ORDER IN EAST ASIA
- Section IV. STATUS QUO AND REVOLUTIONARY TRENDS (1922 - 1931)
- Section V. GROWING INSTABILITY IN EUROPE (1932 - 1937)
- Section VI. THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WASHINGTON ORDER
- Section VII. CRISIS AND DECAY OF THE VERSAILLES ORDER (1937 - 1939)
- Section VIII. THE SECOND WORLD WAR AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE POST-WAR SETTLEMENT
- Main publications used
Section I. END OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR
- 1. Declaration of Russia, France and Great Britain on the non-conclusion of a separate peace, signed in London on August 23 (September 5), 1914
- 2. Note of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Provisional Russian Government, P.N.
- 3. Communication of the Provisional Russian Government of April 22 (May 5), 1917, transmitted to the ambassadors of the Allied Powers and explaining the note of April 18 (May 1)
- 4. Appeal of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies to the socialists of all countries of May 2/15, 1917.
- 5. From the declaration of the Provisional Russian Government of May 5/18, 1917
- 6. Decree on Peace, adopted by the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets on October 26 (November 8), 1917
- 7-11. The question of the Brest peace
- 7. Declaration made by the representative of the RSFSR L.D. Trotsky at a meeting of the political commission of the peace conference in Brest-Litovsk on January 28 (February 10), 1918
- 8. From the peace treaty between Russia, on the one hand, and Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey, on the other, signed in Brest-Litovsk on March 3, 1918.
- 9. From the speech of V.I. Lenin at the VII Congress of the RCP (b)
- 10. From the speech of L.D. Trotsky
- 11. From "Essays on Russian Troubles" by A.I. Denikin
- 12. Agreement between the RSFSR and Romania on the cleansing of Bessarabia by Romania, concluded in Iasi on March 5, 1918 and in Odessa on March 9, 1918.
- 13. German-Finnish peace treaty concluded in Berlin on March 7, 1918
- 14. Telegrams exchanged between the President of the United States of America, W. Wilson, and the 4th All-Russian Extraordinary Congress of Soviets, announced at a meeting of the Congress on March 14, 1918.
- 15. Armistice between the Allies and Germany, concluded in the forest of Compiègne near Rétonde on November 11, 1918.
- 16. Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on the annulment of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, adopted in Moscow on November 13, 1918
- 17. About "Turkish Armenia". Appeal of the People's Commissar for Nationalities I.V. Dzhugashvili-Stalin dated December 29, 1917 (January 11, 1918)
- 18. Decree of the Council of People's Commissars on "Turkish Armenia" of December 29, 1917 (January 11, 1918)
- 19. Decree of the People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR on the non-recognition of Georgia as an independent state of December 24, 1918
- 20. Resolution of the People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR on the abolition of resolutions relating to the Ukrainian State, of December 24, 1918
Section I. END OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR
1. Declaration of Russia, France and Great Britain on the non-conclusion of a separate peace, signed in London on August 23 (September 5), 1914 1
[Commissioners: Russia - Benckendorff, France - P. Cambon, Great Britain - Grey.]
The undersigned, duly authorized by their respective governments, make the following declaration:
The governments of Russia, France and Great Britain mutually undertake not to conclude a separate peace during the present war.
The three Governments agree that when the time comes to discuss the terms of peace, none of the Allied Powers will lay down any peace terms without the prior consent of each of the other Allies.
Note of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Provisional Russian Government P.N. Milyukov dated April 18 (May 1), 1917 on the tasks of the war, handed through Russian representatives to the Allied Powers
On March 27 of this year, the provisional government published an appeal to the citizens, which contains an exposition of the views of the government of free Russia on the tasks of this war. The Minister of Foreign Affairs instructs me to communicate to you the aforesaid document and make the following remarks.
Our enemies in Lately they tried to bring discord into inter-allied relations by spreading absurd rumors that Russia was ready to conclude a separate peace with the middle monarchies. The text of the attached document best of all refutes such fabrications. You will see from it that the general propositions expressed by the Provisional Government are in full conformity with those lofty ideas which, right up to very recent times, have been constantly expressed by many outstanding statesmen of the allied countries and which have found particularly vivid expression on the part of our new ally, the great transatlantic republic, in the speeches of her president. The government of the old regime, of course, was not in a position to assimilate and share these ideas about the liberating nature of the war, about creating solid foundations for the peaceful coexistence of peoples, about the self-determination of the oppressed nationalities, and so on.
But a liberated Russia can now speak in a language understandable to the advanced democracies of modern mankind, and it hastens to add its voice to the voices of its allies. Imbued with this new spirit of liberated democracy, the declarations of the provisional government, of course, cannot give the slightest reason to think that the coup that has taken place has entailed a weakening of Russia's role in the common allied struggle. On the contrary, the popular desire to bring the world war to a decisive victory only intensified, thanks to the awareness of the common responsibility of each and every one. This desire has become more real, being focused on a close and obvious task for everyone - to repel the enemy who has invaded the very borders of our homeland. It goes without saying, as stated in the reported document, that the provisional government, protecting the rights of our country, will fully comply with the obligations assumed in relation to our allies. While continuing to have full confidence in the victorious end of this war, in full agreement with the Allies, it is also fully confident that the questions raised by this war will be resolved in the spirit of laying a solid foundation for a lasting peace and that the advanced democracies, imbued with the same aspirations, will find a way to achieve those guarantees. and the sanctions that are needed to prevent more bloody clashes in the future.
From the speech of L.D. Trotsky
We place all our hope in the fact that our revolution will unleash the European revolution. If the rebellious peoples of Europe do not crush imperialism, we will be crushed, that is beyond doubt.
11. From "Essays on Russian Troubles" by A.I. Denikin
What justification did the Brest-Litovsk tragedy have?
Phrases Soviet rulers about "the fire of the world revolution already flaring up, about negotiations "over the heads of the German generals with the German proletariat"" were only phrases intended for the crowd. The internal situation of Europe did not give any decisive grounds for such optimism of the people's commissars. During the period of the Brest-Litovsk negotiations, however, a general strike took place first in Austria, then in Berlin; the leader of the independent Social Democrats, Haase, spoke about the motives of the latter in the Reichstag: “The strike was not conducted for small economic gains, but served as a political protest with a high-ideological goal. The German workers were indignant at the fact that they had to forge chains to oppress the Russian brothers who had abandoned their weapons. But this was only a short-lived outbreak, essentially using only a suitable pretext for settling the scores of the Social Democracy with its government. The Reichstag approved the peace terms by a huge majority, with majority socialists abstaining and against the votes of the "independents".
Even less grounded was Lenin’s statement that this treaty was “only a respite, only a piece of paper that can be torn up at any time ...” The Germans then had real power and secured sufficient guarantees and an advantageous strategic position to insist on the implementation of the treaty.
Perhaps, however, the Soviet government no longer had any resources at its disposal and the “obscene peace” was inevitable? Even the Soviet Headquarters could not agree with such a hopeless point of view. The chief of staff of the Commander-in-Chief, General Bonch-Bruevich, at the military council on January 22, insisted on the need to continue the struggle, pointing out new methods of it: the immediate removal of all materiel into the interior of the country, the rejection of continuous fronts, the transition to maneuver operations in the most important directions to the vital centers of the country and wide guerrilla war. He saw forces for this struggle in the new "workers' and peasants'" army, in national formations and in the surviving parts of the old army.
One can have different opinions about the combat value of all these elements, but there is no doubt that the vast Russian expanses embraced by the uprising would absorb such colossal forces and means of the Germans, already weakened to the end, that their invasion into the depths of Russia would hasten catastrophe on the Western Front. ..
But for this, the Bolsheviks would have to temporarily abandon demagogic slogans and postpone the civil war.
Finally, at the very time when the Council of People's Commissars was discussing the cruel ultimatum of the Central Powers in stormy and panicked meetings, the mood in the camp of the enemies was even more subdued. The German government, fearing a rupture, made every effort to restrain the immoderate demands of the main apartment. Count Chernin threatened that Austria would conclude a separate peace with Russia if the excessive demands of her allies upset the negotiations. Berlin, Kreuznach (Stavka) and Vienna lived through days of agonizing expectation and fear, not considering it possible to wage a long war on the Eastern Front, even against a crumbling army. And when, after a break in negotiations, Trotsky arrived in Brest-Litovsk by January 7, “it was interesting to see,” says Chernin, “what joy seized the Germans. And this unexpected, so violently manifested joy proved how hard the thought was for them that the Russians might not come.
So, Germany needed peace at all costs. No intermediate forms of it (a truce, "neither peace nor war") could save the situation. The Council of People's Commissars also needed peace at any cost, even at the cost of dismembering, humiliating and destroying Russia.
This motive was quite frankly voiced in the appeal of the council on the night of February 6 “To the entire working population of Russia” - an appeal that justified the consent of the council to the demands of peace presented to it by the Central Powers: “... we want peace, we are ready to accept a difficult peace, but we must be ready to fight back if the German counter-revolution tries to finally tighten the noose on our advice.”
Then just fight back!
“Set by the people under the sign of peace,” the Soviet government had to give peace, at least a ghostly one, otherwise it was in danger of death. Death "in the order of popular anger" or due to the German offensive and occupation of the capitals.
The motive for the self-preservation of Soviet power, which was put at the heart of the Brest-Litovsk action, never aroused any serious doubts among the Russian public. The situation was somewhat different with regard to another accusation of people's commissars, which still causes an ambivalent attitude towards itself. Some consider Brest-Litovsk just a comedy, played out for the sake of appearances, since paid agents of the German General Staff, including Lenin and Trotsky, could not fail to fulfill the requirements of their employers. Others refuse to recognize this crime, perhaps not so much out of confidence in the named persons, but because of the consciousness of the enormity of the very fact, mortal shame and deep pain for the desecrated national dignity of Russia ...
But the totality of the tragic circumstances of the relationship between the Germans and the Bolsheviks created in me personally an intuitive deep conviction of the betrayal of the Soviet commissars. Such a conviction, inherent in wide circles of the Russian public, penetrated the people and aggravated hatred for the Soviet regime.
Whatever the internal motives of the people's commissars, Russia faced, in all its oppressive gravity, a formidable real fact: Brest-Litovsk ...
12. Agreement between the RSFSR and Romania on the cleansing of Bessarabia by Romania, concluded in Iasi on March 5, 1918 and in Odessa on March 9, 1918. 1
[Delegates: RSFSR - Rakovsky, Brashovan, Yudovsky, Voronsky and Muravyov, Romania - Averescu.]
(Extract)
Art. 1. Romania undertakes to clear Bessarabia within two months...
Art. 2. Immediately after the signing of the agreement, the protection of Bessarabia passes into the hands of the local urban and rural police ...
Art. 3. Romanian citizens arrested in Russia are exchanged for Russian revolutionaries, officers and soldiers arrested in Romania.
Art. 4. Romania undertakes not to take any hostile military or other actions against the All-Russian Federation of Soviet Republics of Workers and Peasants and not to support those taken by other states.
Art. 5. Russia undertakes to provide Romania with a surplus of grain located in Bessarabia after satisfying the needs of the local population and Russian military units ...
Art. 7. In the event of a forced retreat of the Romanian army from Romanian territory, it finds shelter and food on Russian territory.
Art. 8. In the event of parallel actions against the central states and their allies between the highest Russian military command of the Russian Soviet armies and Romanian contact is established.
Art. 9. In order to settle any disputes that may arise between Romania and Russian Federation Soviet Republics of Workers' and Peasants' misunderstandings, international commissions are formed in Odessa, Kiev, Moscow, Petrograd, Iasi and Galati from representatives of Russia and Rumania, England, France and the United States.
Alsace-Lorraine
The High Contracting Parties, recognizing as a moral obligation to remedy the injustice inflicted by Germany in 1871 both on the law of France and on the will of the population of Alsace-Lorraine, cut off from their fatherland, despite the solemn protest of its representatives at the Assembly in Bordeaux, have agreed on the following articles:
Article 51 Territories ceded to Germany by virtue of the Preliminary Peace signed at Versailles on February 26, 1871, and the Frankfurt Treaty of May 10, 1871 1 shall return to French sovereignty from the day of the armistice of November 11, 1918.
The provisions of the Treaties establishing the outline of the frontier before 1871 will again come into force...
Article 80 Germany recognizes and will strictly respect the independence of Austria within the limits to be established by the Treaty concluded between that State and the Principal Allied and Associated Powers; it recognizes that this independence cannot be alienated without the consent of the Council of the League of Nations.
Article 81 Germany recognizes, as the Allied and Associated Powers have already done, the full independence of the Czechoslovak State, which will include the autonomous territory of Rusyn south of the Carpathians. It declares consent to the frontiers of that state as they are to be determined by the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and other interested states.
Article 82. The frontier between Germany and the Czechoslovak State will be determined by the former frontier between Austria-Hungary and the German Empire, as it existed on August 3, 1914.
Article 83. Germany renounces in favor of the Czechoslovak state all its rights and titles to a part of the Silesian territory ...
Article 87 Germany recognizes, as the Allied and Associated Powers have already done, the complete independence of Poland and renounces in favor of Poland all rights and titles in the territories bounded by the Baltic Sea, the eastern border of Germany, as defined in Article 27 of Part II ( frontiers of Germany) of this Treaty, to a point about 2 kilometers east of Lorzendorf, then by a line extending to an acute angle formed by the northern border of Upper Silesia, about 3 kilometers northwest of Simmenau, then the border of Upper Silesia, to its meeting with the former border between Germany and Russia, then this border to the point where it crosses the course of the Neman, after that the northern border of East Prussia, as defined in article 28 of the above part II ...
Article 102. The Principal Allied and Associated Powers undertake to form from the city of Danzig, with the territory specified in Article 100, a Free City. He will be placed under the protection of the League of Nations.
Article 104 ... Include the Free City of Danzig within the customs border of Poland and take measures to establish a free zone in the port.
Ensure Poland, without any restrictions, the free use and operation of all waterways, docks, basins, embankments and other structures on the territory of the Free City, necessary for the import and export of Poland ...
Article 116 Germany recognizes and undertakes to respect, as permanent and inalienable, the independence of all the territories that were part of the former Russian empire by August 1st, 1914...
The Allied and Associated Powers formally stipulate Russia's rights to receive from Germany all restitutions and reparations based on the principles of this Treaty.
Article 119 Germany renounces in favor of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers all her rights and titles to her overseas possessions.
Article 160. At the latest, from March 31, 1920, the German army shall not have more than seven divisions of infantry and three divisions of cavalry.
From this moment on, the total strength of the army of the states forming Germany should not exceed one hundred thousand people, including officers and non-combatants, and will be exclusively intended for maintaining order in the territory and for the border police.
The total number of officers, including the personnel of the headquarters, whatever their formation, should not exceed four thousand ...
The German Grand General Staff and all other similar formations will be disbanded and cannot be re-established in any form...
Article 173. Every kind of universal compulsory military service will be abolished in Germany.
The German army can be built and manned only by voluntary recruitment.
Article 175 ... Newly appointed officers must undertake to be in active service for at least twenty-five years without interruption ...
Article 180. All land fortifications, fortresses and fortified places located on German territory to the west of the line drawn fifty kilometers east of the Rhine will be disarmed and demolished ...
The system of fortifications of the southern and eastern borders of Germany will be preserved in its present state.
Article 181. After the expiration of a period of two months from the date of entry into force of the present Treaty, the strength of the German navy shall not exceed in armed courts:
- 6 battleships of the "Deutschland" or "Lothringen" type,
- 6 light cruisers,
- 12 counter-destroyers,
- 12 destroyers,
- or equal number replacement ships built as provided in Article 190.
They must not contain any submarines.
Article 183 officers and personnel of every rank and every kind, shall not exceed fifteen thousand men.
The total number of officers and "Warrant Officers" must not exceed one thousand five hundred.
Within two months from the entry into force of this Treaty, personnel exceeding the above strength shall be demobilized...
Article 191 The construction and acquisition of all submarines, even merchant ships, will be prohibited to Germany.
Article 198 The military forces of Germany must not include any military or naval aviation...
III. Action plan
The restoration of the regime of order in Russia is a purely national matter, which must be carried out by the Russian people themselves.
However, we must give him the means for this and help his healthy elements: support them by encircling the Bolshevik armies; give them our material and moral support.
The encirclement of Bolshevism, begun from the north, east and south, should be supplemented:
In the southeast, actions taken from the Caspian Sea region to ensure effective closure of the two main groupings of national forces (the armies of Denikin-Krasnov and the Ural army).
In the West, through the restoration of Poland, capable of militarily defending its existence.
Eventually, by occupying Petrograd and in any case by blockade of the Baltic Sea.
The immediate support to be given to the Russian national forces consists, above all, in the supply of the necessary materiel, in the establishment of a base where these forces can continue their organization and from where they can then launch their offensive operations.
In this regard, there is a need for the occupation of Ukraine.
The actions of the Entente must, therefore, be directed mainly towards the realization: the complete encirclement of Bolshevism, the occupation of the Ukraine, the organization of Russian forces.
IV. Implementation
The Entente is capable of carrying out this program.
1. More environment
A. Communication Denikin - Kolchak.
It falls to England to establish communication between Denikin's armies and the armies of the Urals, which is so important for the unification of Russian national forces.
It has the necessary resources locally, in the Caucasus, Macedonia and Turkey.
B. Restoration of Poland - this should be the work of the Polish army.
France can organize this army and, with the assistance of the Allied sea transport, transfer 6 infantry divisions formed in France.
For the security of communications of the Polish army on the Danzig - Thorn line, it is necessary to occupy the area of the lower reaches of the Vistula with inter-allied forces consisting of one or two infantry divisions to be created for the most part by American troops.
B. The action to blockade the coast of the Baltic Sea can be easily carried out by the British fleet.
As for possible operations in the direction of Petrograd, they can be planned as the completion of the offensive of the Estonian troops, which has recently resumed from the area of Reval and Narva. To make it possible, it is enough to give our support to the forces created in this area by Gen. Yudenich.
2. Occupation of Ukraine
It falls to the Allied armies in the East.
Against the Bolshevik army, which is disunited and lacking in materiel, Berthelot's army, consisting of three French infantry divisions, three Greek infantry divisions, supported by the Romanian army, reinforced by the 35th Italian division, equipped with modern weapons that we can give it in in large numbers, can penetrate into the heart of Ukraine, liberate Donets, where the invasion has already begun, and capture Kiev and Kharkov.
3. Organization
This organization continues in northern Russia(British command) and in Siberia (gen. Janen and gen. Knox).
However, in southern Russia, the bulk of national forces should be created for the offensive against Moscow with the help of the armies of Denikin - Krasnov, local troops recruited in Ukraine, Russian prisoners to be repatriated from Germany to this area.
V. Conclusion
For the powers of the Entente, there is a vital need to overthrow him [the Soviet government. - Comp.] as soon as possible, and there is a duty of solidarity to carry out joint efforts to this end.
In carrying out the action plan to be approved by them, the participation of each of them can be determined as follows:
- actions in northern Russia and in the Baltic Sea area;
- participation in the intervention in Poland;
- actions in southeastern Russia in order to unite the Siberian forces with the armies of Denikin and Krasnov;
- organization of these armies.
United States
- actions in Poland (management of inter-allied actions).
- actions in Siberia and Ukraine;
- organization of the Polish army.
- participation in actions in Ukraine.
An agreement must be reached as soon as possible, meaning: setting the principle of intervention in Russia, clarifying the distribution of tasks, and ensuring unity of leadership.
This agreement should be the first step towards the organization of peace.
Cannes Resolutions
When, according to the decision of the Supreme Council of January 10 of this year. Russia was invited to participate in the Genoa Conference, she was informed of the resolutions adopted by the Supreme Council in Cannes on January 6, but the invitation itself was not conditional on the adoption of these resolutions or any other requirements.
However, the Russian delegation, proceeding from the conviction that with a correct and consistent interpretation of the Cannes resolutions, grounds could be found for mutual understanding and settlement of disputed issues between the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic and the Western European countries, at the very first plenary session of the Genoa Conference declared that it accepts in principle provisions of the Cannes Resolutions, while reserving the right to amend them and propose new paragraphs. According to the delegation, the basis for an agreement on controversial issues is the three main theses of the Cannes resolutions: 1) recognition for each nation of full sovereignty in establishing systems of property, economy and government in their country; 2) legislative, judicial and administrative enforcement of the personal and property rights of those foreigners who choose to go to Russia for economic activities, and 3) recognition of the principle of reciprocity in the performance by all governments of their obligations and in compensation for losses incurred by foreign citizens, as explained in the note for the press prepared by ministers and experts at Cannes, the official nature of which was pointed out by the First Minister of Great Britain in his parliamentary speech of April 3 of this year.
Terms of future work
Proceeding from the general provisions indicated in the introduction to the memorandum, the representatives of the governments of Europe gathered at the conference should have given their main attention to the question of the means necessary for raising the productive forces of Russia, and not to the means of satisfying the claims of Russia's creditors, as is done in the memorandum...
At the same time, the delegation considers it necessary to note that the authors of the London memorandum, while outlining in the second chapter the necessary, in their opinion, guarantees for the economic work of foreign capital in Russia, sharply deviate from paragraph 1 of the Cannes resolutions, seeking to impose on Russia certain domestic legislation that is alien to its current system, under the pretext of creating "conditions for successful work" of foreign capital, introduce a system of capitulations in Russia that encroaches on its sovereignty. The most striking example of this is Art. 24th memorandum, seeking to establish the judicial extraterritoriality of foreigners, as well as the entire organization of the Russian debt commission, the plan of which is set out in Appendix 1, which, if carried out, would undoubtedly turn into an organ of foreign control over the entire economic life Russian Republic, like the reparation commission established by the Treaty of Versailles.
foreign intervention
Not satisfied with this break in relations with Soviet Russia, the powers of the Accord began military intervention and blockade, quite openly supporting local uprisings created by their own agents (Czechoslovaks, Don and Kuban Cossacks, White Guards in Siberia, Yaroslavl, etc.) and reinforcing the military actions of the armies Kolchak, Denikin, Yudenich, Wrangel, etc. by sending their own military forces to the north of Russia, the Black Sea and the Caucasus. In fact, it has been established that the Soviet government, even in the first months of its existence, easily coped with attempts to revolt by local discontented elements, and only where these elements were organized and actively supported by the allied governments, supplying them with money, ammunition, uniforms and military instructors, these sporadic and small uprisings turned into whole fronts civil war, accompanied by wild excesses, such as the destruction of entire villages, ugly Jewish pogroms and similar atrocities. Military expertise categorically asserts that without the indicated intervention of foreign powers, individual local uprisings in Russia could never take on the character of a devastating civil war, why the guilt and responsibility of the allied governments for organizing and supporting the civil war in Russia, for causing colossal losses to the Russian people and state not the slightest doubt...
The share of this responsibility for all this falls on those neutral countries which, while offering hospitality to counter-revolutionary elements for preparing plots against Russia on their territory, recruiting participants in civil wars, purchasing and transiting weapons, etc., at the same time took part in boycott and blockade of Russia. Put by foreign intervention and blockade into the need for desperate self-defense, the Soviet government was actually forced to intensify the pace of nationalization of industry and trade, as well as to apply to the owners of foreign property in Russia those measures of liquidation of enterprises, confiscations or gratuitous nationalization of property that were introduced into international use as a new " usus" by the belligerent - and most of all - allied governments. However, the Soviet government never applied measures to restrict the personal and property rights of foreigners only because the state of defense against intervention gave it this right. These measures were applied only insofar as it was required by the interests of public safety and welfare, in particular, the implementation of the plan for the nationalization of industry and trade, which inevitably followed from new economic and legal relations and from the need to hastily reorganize production and distribution within the framework of an isolated state, cut off from any world by a blockade. Here, too, the Soviet government used only the right, which undoubtedly belongs to any state, to involve in the performance of public duties and the right to dispose of the property of its own and foreign citizens, when the vital interests of the country so require.
Intervention and blockade on the part of the Allied Powers and the civil war supported by them for more than three years caused Russia losses that far exceeded the possible claims against it from foreigners who suffered from the Russian revolution. In addition to gold sequestered abroad and exported from Russia, and a whole range of stocks and goods, the Russian state demands compensation for railways, bridges, rolling stock, port and other facilities, sunk ships, as well as factories, plants and numerous property of private citizens destroyed by military operations. - both houses in cities, and peasant estates in villages. In addition, it demands the return of its military and merchant fleet, taken away by the Allied Powers directly or by the White Guard armies under the protection of the Allied Powers. Along with these claims, expressing direct damage to the state and private economy of Russia, a long list of losses to both the nationalized industry and the private economy inflicted by military operations on the territory occupied by foreign and White Guard armies is subject to satisfaction, and compensation to many hundreds of thousands of invalids of the civil war and families dead.
These losses of the Russian people and state give a much more indisputable right to compensation than the claims of the former owners of property in Russia and Russian loans belonging to the nations that won the world war and received colossal indemnities from the vanquished, while their claims are made against a country devastated by the war. , foreign intervention and desperately fighting for its own existence in those state forms that it considers the only possible ones for itself.
It is most strange to hear the demand for compensation for losses suffered by citizens of states that fought unsuccessfully against Russia from the lips of representatives of governments that used during the war the right to confiscate the private property of citizens of the opposite side on their territory and approved this right by the Treaty of Versailles even for peacetime, imposing, in addition to moreover, on the entire population of the defeated state, property liability for losses caused to the victors by the military actions of its government.
Young's plan
[A second reparation plan for Germany, drawn up by a committee of experts chaired by the American financier Owen Young, was approved at an international conference in The Hague in January 1930.]
Report of the Committee of Experts
(Extract)
In place of the existing system of transfer protection, which contains semi-political control, the creation of restrictions on the German initiative and the possible (adverse) impact on (its) credit, we propose a system of annuities, much smaller than those established by the Dawes plan, subject to a new and flexible conditions... This system gives Germany the desired exemption from foreign interference and control...
The new plan will come into force on 1 September 1929 with 37 annuities of 1,988.8 million Reichsmarks each until 31 March 1966.
In the future, Germany will be left to make the payments indicated in the following table, since no special regulations will be adopted for these years.
| 1966/67 | ......... 1607,7 | 1977/78 | ......... 1685,4 | |
| 1967/68 | ......... 1606,9 | 1978/79 | ......... 1695,5 | |
| 1968/69 | ......... 1616,7 | 1979/80 | ......... 1700,4 | |
| 1969/70 | ......... 1630,0 | 1980/81 | ......... 1711,3 | |
| 1970/71 | ......... 1643,7 | 1981/82 | ......... 1687,6 | |
| 1971/72 | ......... 1653,9 | 1982/83 | ......... 1691,8 | |
| 1972/73 | ......... 1662,3 | 1983/84 | ......... 1703,3 | |
| 1973/74 | ......... 1665,7 | 1984/85 | ......... 1683,5 | |
| 1974/75 | ......... 1668,4 | 1985/86 | ......... 925,1 | |
| 1975/76 | ......... 1675,0 | 1986/87 | ......... 931,4 | |
| 1976/77 | ......... 1678,7 | 1987/88 | ......... 897,8 |
merchant ships
- Political significance
- Economic importance
- Military significance
- Demographic importance
- public
- New ideologies
The First World War itself and its results, in short, were of great historical significance for the subsequent development of not only European states, but the whole world. First, it forever changed the existing world order. And secondly, its outcome became one of the prerequisites for the emergence of a second world armed conflict.
Politics
The war was of the greatest importance for the further political interaction of countries.
After the war political map the world has changed quite a lot. Four large empires that played a significant role in world politics disappeared from it at once. Instead of 22 European states, at the end of the military confrontation, there were 30 countries on the continent. New state formations also appeared in the Middle East (instead of the ending Ottoman Empire). At the same time, the form of government and political structure changed in many countries. If before the start of the war there were 19 monarchical states on the European map and only three republican states, then after it ended, the first became 14, but the number of the second increased immediately to 16.
The new Versailles-Washington system, which was formed to a greater extent taking into account the interests of the victorious countries, had a huge impact on further international relations (Russia did not enter there, as it had withdrawn from the war earlier). At the same time, the interests of the newly formed states, as well as the countries that were defeated in the war, were completely ignored. And even, on the contrary, the young states had to become obedient puppets in the struggle against the Russian Bolshevik system and the German thirst for revenge.
In a word, the new system was completely unfair, unbalanced, and, consequently, ineffective and could not lead to anything other than a new large-scale war.
Economy
Even with a brief examination, it becomes clear, but the First World War was of no less importance for the economy of all countries that took part in it.
As a result of hostilities, large areas of countries lay in ruins, settlements and infrastructure were destroyed. The arms race has led to the skew of the economy in many industrial countries towards the military industry, to the detriment of other areas.
At the same time, the changes affected not only the major powers, who spent colossal sums on rearmament, but also their colonies, where production was transferred, and from where more and more resources were supplied.
As a result of the war, many countries abandoned the gold standard, which led to a crisis in the monetary system.
Almost the only country that benefited from the First World War is the United States. Observing neutrality in the first years of the war, the states accepted and carried out the orders of the belligerents, which led to their significant enrichment.
However, despite all the negative aspects in the development of the economy, it is worth noting that the war gave an impetus to the development of new technologies, and not only in the production of weapons.
Demography
The human losses of this protracted bloody conflict numbered in the millions. And they did not end with the last shot. Many died due to their wounds and the outbreak of the Spanish flu pandemic ("Spanish flu") already in the post-war years. The countries of Europe were literally drained of blood.
community development
In short, the First World War was also of considerable importance for the development of society. While men fought on numerous fronts, women worked in workshops and industries, including those that were considered exclusively male. This was largely reflected in the formation of women's views and rethinking their place in society. Therefore, the post-war years were marked by mass emancipation.
Also, the war played a huge role in strengthening the revolutionary movement and, as a result, in improving the situation of the working class. In some countries, the workers achieved their rights through a change of power, in others the government and the monopolists themselves made concessions.
New ideologies
Perhaps one of the most significant outcomes of the First World War was that it made possible the emergence of new ideologies, such as fascism, and gave a chance to strengthen and rise to a new level the old ones, for example, socialism.
Subsequently, many researchers have repeatedly proved that it is precisely such large-scale and protracted conflicts that contribute to the establishment of totalitarian regimes.
Thus, it can be said that the world after the end of the war was completely different from the one that entered it four years earlier.
Loading...