The Armistice
Meanwhile the Allied peace terms presented to the German
delegation were stiff. The Germans were required to evacuate Belgium, Northern
France and Alsace – Lorraine, in fact all territories acquired since the war
began.
German troops in
East African together with the German Colonies were to surrender, the German
forces in Eastern Europe were to withdraw to the prewar boundaries while the
treaties of Brest – Litvosk and Bucharest were to be annulled and the Germans
were to repatriate all prisoners of war and a substantial quantity of their war
materials.
These included 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine
guns, 1,700 aircraft, 5,000 locomotives and 150,000 … cars alongside the
ongoing Allied block side. The German delegation pleaded for respite to save
the nation from being overrun by Bolshevik forces.
In view of this, the Allies mitigated their terms
concerning the blockade, a reduction in the quantity of arms to be handed over
and a permission for the German forces in Eastern Europe to remain for the time
being. While the negotiations were going on, the Allied advances continued
albeit slowly because of the German destruction of the railways and supply
routes.
By November 11 the
Allied lines ran through Sedan, Mezieres and Mons to Ghent. Foch’s forces this
time numbered a Franco – US force of 28 divisions and 60 French in the south
ready to strike through Metz into northeastern Lorraine. By this time also US
forces in France had risen to over 42 divisions. The Allies thus planned a
fresh offensive for November 14.
However by 5:00 am on November 11, the German delegation
signed the Allied peace terms in Foch’s railway carriage at Rethondes. At 11:00
am the same day the war came to an end. In the dying days of World War 1,
Mathias Erzberger a civilian led the German delegation that signed the
armistice.
A myth soon
spread in Germany that these men were traitors who signed away an undefeated
Germany and worse still Ludendorff who superintended the whole process of the
armistice came to join with the Nazis and other proponents of this theory that
the armistice was a stab in the back by civilian collaborationists to undermine
Germany’s military effort.
This turn of events and the branding of these men as
November criminals was to let loose a tide that would soon culminate in the
outbreak of another conflict 20 years later when Adolf Hitler’s Socialists and
workers party will use this event as an excuse to seek revenge and a fresh expansionist policy for Germany in
Europe.
The peace of 1918 as the armistice came to be known
played a key role in re-shaping the map of Europe as it is today and in bringing
forth a number of nations in western and Eastern Europe whose very existence
came to depend on the terms of the armistice being honored and upheld.
The latter
challenge of the armistice and its terms of settlements by totalitarian regimes
in Germany, Italy and Russia were to lay a foundation for another round of
discord, wars and privations leading to yet a further redrawing of the map of
Europe in 1945.
The unresolved issues arising from the political
settlement of 1918, persisted till 1945 and continues to be the bedrock for
agitations in Europe up till today, and these center around the legitimacy of
the big powers Great Britain, France, Italy and the United States to determine
the fate, boundaries and political realities of defeated Germany and the
annulment of the treaty of Brest – Litvosk.
Whereas Russia benefited enormously from the Germany
defeat, it took another round of conflict and war with Poland for Russia to
come to terms with the idea of an independent Poland, the respect for the
independent states that made up the USSR and the quest for political
independence for the Slav – succession states that emerged from the Austro –
Hungarian empire.
The defeat of the
Ottoman Turks changed the political power base of the Middle East, Arabia and
Mesopotamia as the British and French gained an upper hand in the region. World
War 1 had truly come to an end but four nations were not entirely satisfied
with the terms of settlements that spawned a whole new set of nations; these were
Germany, Russia, Japan and Italy.
The US the main proponent of the peace proposals that saw
to the end of the conflict and the beginning of this new world order was soon
to retreat to its home base far across the Atlantic after the failure of the US
Senate to ratify Wilson’s proposals concerning the League of Nations which was
Wilson’s main platform for upholding the new order.
It would soon become obvious that Britain and France
alone were not sufficiently powerful enough to defend the new world order and
the world would soon simmer on the verge of conflicts that would soon again
implode into a new world war that severely tested the ability of the existing
world order to withstand the challenges of the dissatisfied nations.
Demonstration Against the
Versailles Treaty
On June 22, 1919, the
government of Weimar Germany, under international pressure, accepted the Treaty
of Versailles. The treaty held Germany solely responsible for World War I, and
accordingly imposed harsh conditions on Germany. A fundamental revision of the
“Dictat of Versailles,” as the peace treaty was referred to in Germany, became
the pressing goal of a wide cross-section of German society. Mass
demonstrations and rallies against the Treaty of Versailles, like this one in
Berlin, were the order of the day.
AFTERMATH OF WORLD
WAR 1 (The Russian Revolution)
The war hit Russia hardest, as by 1917 amongst the comity
of belligerents, Russia lost its will to fight. After three years of warfare,
mobilizing 10% of its population and losing about half of that number in
battle, the home economy stretched to its limit and its internal transportation
and supply system in shambles, food shortages widespread and fuel in short supply,
the patience of the Russian people snapped.
On March 12th 1917, the parliament at
Petrograd and Soviet (workers and soldiers council) came together to form a
provisional government. Three days later Tsar Nicholas II abdicated his
imperial throne and titles. The new regime included two key figures Aleksandra
Kerensky and Pavel Malenkov who as leading ministers and statesmen pledged to
keep Russia in the alliance on the side of Britain and France in the war.
Nicholas II, the Last
Russian Emperor
Nicholas II was an
autocrat but a weak ruler. He was forced to abdicate in 1917. Nicholas is shown
second from the left. Next to him are his four daughters: Tatiana, Olga, Marie,
and Anastasia. At right is his hemophiliac son, Alexis. The family, including
Nicholas’s wife, Alexandra (not pictured), was later killed by Bolsheviks.
The commitment of Russia to remain in the war on the side
of the Allies however met with stiff resistance from the local Soviets and
leftist parties which pressured the government to adopt a policy of a free Russia
renouncing the right to dominate other nations and territories.
When Prince Gorgy
Lvov, the Prime Minster declared his willingness to follow the revolutionary
demand of no annexations, no indemnities, on May 15th Malenkov
stepped down as foreign minister.
Russia’s democratic moves, especially appealed to
President Wilson in his campaign to make the world safe for democracy as
opposed to militarism and imperialism.
Russia’s ability
however, to continue in the war deteriorated rapidly as the morale of its
troops sagged, partly as a result of the political crisis at home. The
Petrograd Soviets had called for the abolishment of court – martial’s and
issued a declaration of soldiers’ rights.
The decision of the new provisional government was a
bitter disappointment to the hopes of the German government that had been
subtly campaigning for Russia’s withdrawal from the war through both a secret
program of internal subversion and collaboration with the Finns, Baltic
peoples, poles, Ukrainians and Georgians and support for Russian’s
revolutionary groups.
As part of the plan, the German government had sought to
collaborate with Lenin the leader of the most radical group of Marxists whose
antiwar disposition was well known, even though Lenin had been arrested and
detained in Kharkov in Poland. The Austrian government was persuaded to release
Lenin on grounds that he was an ally of Austria in the fight against Russia. As
a result he was released into Switzerland.
Lenin Addresses Crowd in
1917
Vladimir Ilich Lenin was
the first dictator of the USSR. Lenin led the Bolshevik takeover of the
provisional Russian government in what was known as the October Revolution of
1917. (The revolution took place on November 6-7 according to the modern
calendar adopted in 1918. According to the Julian Calendar, which was used in
Russia up to that time, the revolution took place in October). The first Soviet
leader hoped the revolution would set off other socialist revolts in Western
countries.
Another Russian émigré and socialist Alexander Helphand
had convinced the German government to invest in the revolutionary movement in
the hope of engendering Russia’s withdrawal from the war. As a result, the
German government set aside a sum of 2 million marks to be spent in internal
subversion in Russia in March 1915.
These efforts had been stepped up particularly shortly
after Germany’s first victories over Russia in order to help ease Russia out of
the war. The communist therefore had German government help in subverting and
undermining the Russian provisional government. After the provisional
government determined to continue with the war, Lenin was released and sent to
Russia aboard a secret special train prepared by the Germans to help to fan the
flames of Bolshevik revolution.
This he achieved as the Russian army was already a
disillusioned bunch of disgruntled men. In a series of deft moves, the leftist
segments of the polity namely the communists and socialists had infiltrated the
army with their propaganda campaign against the unjust capitalist war to a
point of threatening a coup d’état.
This internal disorder so weakened the provisional
government that by the time the government was trying to revalidate its mandate
in a fresh election by December, the communists led an uprising that succeeded
in bringing down the government and transferring power to Lenin. On November 8th
1917, I.V Lenin made a speech denouncing the war and proclaiming a message of
liberation for the working class and peasants calling for an armistice and an
end to the war.
Women's Battalion in
Petrograd
Promising women an equal
share of power in the new government, the Petrograd Soviet formed a women’s battalion.
As part of the military reforms introduced by Soviet military and political
leaders, the battalion played an active role in the October Revolution.
Hulton Deutsch
The trio of Lenin, Leon Trotsky and Karl Radek thereby
hoped to inflame revolutionary passion among the other belligerents but met
with little success. The Bolshevik regime however signed the Brest – Litvosk
armistice terms on Dec. 15 1917 in order to shore up the support base of its
own regime and seek reprieve from the burden of the war.
RUSSIA’S
WITHDRAWAL FROM THE WAR
The Brest Litvosk peace compounded issues for the Allies
as the two front wars had become a one front war in which Germany was expected
to gain an upper hand. Allied assurances had failed to persuade Russia to
remain in the war and the Bolsheviks were determined to maintain their pledge
of peace, bread and land.
In the humiliating treaty signed by a government that was
desperate for peace in order to consolidate its hold on power, the communist
government signed away in real terms, 34% of Russia’s population, 32% of
Russia’s farmland 54% of Russia’s industrial plants, 89% of Russian coal mines
plus almost all of its cotton and oil.
This reversal of Russia’s fortunes in the east raised
German hopes of all–out victory before the United States could make a
significant impact. The impasse in this case forced the Allies to think of the
possibility of intervention in Russia with anti – revolutionary forces
sympathetic to the aspiration of Britain and France.
The Russian
collapse forced the British, French, and Americans and eventually the Japanese
to send small units of troupes called military advisers to liaise with the
white forces (or counter – revolutionary) forces who were opposed to the
Bolshevik government.
As a result a mixed contingent of British, French and
American forces totaling 28,000 men were docked at Murmansk. An Anglo – French
force occupied Arkhangelsk together with 4,500 Americans under British command.
In April 1918, Japanese forces occupied Vladivostok.
American forces
were also stationed in Siberia to keep an eye on the Japanese and make contact
with Czech legionaries who numbering over 30,000 were released by the provisional
Russian government to help fight the cause of Czech independence. The
legionnaires whilst initially declaring neutrality however resisted Bolshevik
attempts to disarm them and eventually sought to take over the control of the
Trans – Siberian railway line 6,000 miles long.
Kerensky Salutes his
Troops
Aleksandr Kerensky (left)
was the socialist leader of the provisional government in Russia after Emperor
Nicholas II was deposed in February 1917. Kerensky’s term as head of government
was short, however. The Bolsheviks, whom he had tried to suppress, seized power
in October, and Kerensky fled to Paris.
The Allies also invariably got tangled in the brewing war
between the Reds and the Whites for the control of Russia with the Reds
controlling Moscow, Petrograd and most of the inner regions while the Whites
under Admiral Aleksandra Kolchak controlled Omsk and General Anton Denikin in
Odessa.
The Versailles Debacle
The Paris peace conference opened on January 18, 1919 on
an optimistic note. Over 27 nations were involved and many of the demands made
proved politically impossible to accomplish and the Great Powers had a hectic
time trying to achieve order out of chaos.
Each of the Great Powers had over ten delegates with an
accompanying team of experts, historians, economists, geographers and
eventually, the conference was bogged down with too many delegates and
contrasting issues. To create sense and order, the five leading powers created
a council of ten, comprising their heads of states and foreign ministers. Even
then, decisions were eventually taken by an informal meeting of the French,
British and American leaders.
Wilson
insisted that issues touching on the League of Nations be addressed first in
order to ensure that the institution gains recognition as a legitimate platform
for settling international disputes as common debates and haggling of personal
interests had became the dominant feature of the conference. The French were
suspicious about the whole basis of the league hoping it would become an
umbrella body for protecting the new European order.
The
British and Americans however were not willing to make any long term commitment
to defending the new order being fashioned out. The British view was not a
league of nations determined to repel an aggressor as much as a league of
nations working to devise strategies to ensure that war never breaks out.
The
league covenant provided for a plenary assembly of all members and a council of
the great powers while outlining a system of sanctions against aggressive
nations. The British view of sanctions tended to be moralistic in view rather
than aggressive. To compound things, participation in military sanctions was
made voluntary. The covenants also made provisions for the settlement of
boundary disputes establishing the peace – making credentials of the league.
With
the rejection of a Franco – Italian initiative far tougher stands on security
alongside an international force equipped to enforce decisions, French
newspapers scorned the league as a toothless debating society. With Germany’s
exclusion from the league for the meantime, German newspapers cast the league
as a league of victors.
The French strongly argued that the league set
up an international force to permanently occupy the Rhineland stressing
that the security of France and Belgium lay in a security fence around the
Rhineland from where German forces hand invaded French four times in the last
hundred years, 1814, 1815, 1870, 1914.
The
duo of Britain and American strongly resisted any attempts to dismember Germany
or detach the Rhineland believing that, that would only be sowing the seeds of
a new conflict in creating a new Alsace Lorraine. An Anglo – American offer to
support France in case of a future German aggression met a muted response in
France when Germany might well have overrun France as indeed happened twenty years later.
Paris Peace Conference
After defeating Germany
in World War I, the victorious parties found it difficult to agree on the price
Germany should pay in war reparations. Leaders from the United States, Britain,
France, and Italy met at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 and drafted the
Treaty of Versailles. The treaty mandated a number of restrictive and
compensatory measures for Germany, including massive demilitarization and
financial reparations. Representatives at the conference included, left to
right, British prime minister Lloyd George, Italian foreign minister Giorgio
Sonnino, French premier Georges Clemenceau, and U.S. president Woodrow Wilson.
UPI/THE BETTMANN ARCHIVE
reserved.
The
French eventually on March 17th, 1919 settled for a mixed bag of
compromise, the guarantee treaties, safeguards involving German disarmament,
demilitarization and Allied occupation of the Rhine.
The
issue of the war debts set an emotional tone to the debates with the French
insisting that Germany and not her victims should pay the cost of reconstruction
and that French debts to the Allies should be waived in the light of her hefty
contribution to the war effort; especially as France was indebted to her
citizens to a tune of 26 billion dollars as against the 3.6 billion dollars
owed to Britain and America.
In the
light of the refusal of the US to forgive British and French war debts, and an
insistence on the part of France that Germany bear all the burden of
reconstruction because the exact figure concerning the damages and German
reparations could not be immediately resolved, a commission to resolve these
issues was set up while Germany was immediately taxed 20 billion gold marks
which was to be paid immediately without any concern for her immediate economic
needs.
The
final draft treaty consigned the Saar to joint control of the Allies for 15
years pending a plebiscite to determine its future, loss of the German
colonies, limited army and navy and no air force and submarines.
Germany was to deliver 20 million tons of coal
per year to France and Belgium. Alsace – Lorraine to France, most of upper
Silesia and West Prussia to Poland including a corridor to the Baltic that
partitioned Germany and league of nations control of the free part of Danzig
(to grant Poland access to the sea).
Prohibition
of an Anchluss (union) between Austria and Germany and abrogation of the treaty
of Brest – Litvosk and finally article 231 demanded that Germany accept full
responsibility for the war as an act of aggression by Germany and her allies.
The
treaty met with stiff opposition from the German people even though its term
were milder than the Brest – Litvosk treaty and left Germany intact and
unoccupied. The German delegation pleaded for the mitigation of the terms
without any success.
Demonstration Against the
Versailles Treaty
On June 22, 1919, the
government of Weimar Germany, under international pressure, accepted the Treaty
of Versailles. The treaty held Germany solely responsible for World War I, and
accordingly imposed harsh conditions on Germany. A fundamental revision of the
“Dictat of Versailles,” as the peace treaty was referred to in Germany, became
the pressing goal of a wide cross-section of German society. Mass
demonstrations and rallies against the Treaty of Versailles, like this one in
Berlin, were the order of the day.
However
to obtain the lifting of the sanctions and blockade and to prevent further
revolutionary upheavals and further allied military advance. The German
delegation made up of mainly suited civilians rather than the military
hierarchy whom the allies had intended to punish on the June 28 1919 affixed
their signatures to the final treaty.
German
extremist groups immediately denounced the treaty and those who signed it as
traitors, conspirators brandishing them as the November criminals. They were
particular irked with the war guilt clause which revisionist historians tended
to see as undermining the legitimacy of the entire Versailles treaty and it
came to be a powerful element in the emergence of the anti-Versailles parties
and politics that was to soon emerge in Germany.
The Allied
delegations in any case were not any happier or even fulfilled concerning the
terms of the treaty. Many were apathetic as to whether the fundamental issues
that touched on peace in Europe had been dealt with. British economist Maynard
Keynes expressed his deep reservations as to the policy of reparations and its
likely effect on the German people and economy.
Marshall
Ferdinand Foch’s comments were the most prophetic in dimension. He was quoted
as saying that “this is not peace but a truce for 20 years. French premier
Clemenceau had to summon his entire political prowess to win its ratification
in the French parliament and even then he lost the presidential election that
followed.
The
most astonishing response came from the United States whose president Wilson single
handedly dictated the peace terms in his fourteen point peace initiative that
became the basis for the conclusion of the armistice with German on Nov 11
1918. He was also singularly responsible for the imposition of the institution
of the League of Nations on the European nations, prescribing its covenants and
structures.
Political
groups in America and in the Congress however felt uncomfortable with the
constraints placed on the US in fulfilling its obligations under the league
covenants for a nation whose foreign policy was fashioned around not intervening
in European affairs, nor allowing European affairs to weigh heavily on American
domestic policy.
Among these groups of isolationists were
nationalists republicans, some democrats, Monroe doctrines exponents,
regionalists, xenophobes and tariff protectionists. The concern of the American
politicians was over the obligations and capacity for foreign interventions the
league would impose on the U.S. The fear was centered on article 10 of the
league covenant and its potentials for getting the US involved in foreign
quarrels.
As a
measure of conciliation, the senate committee on foreign relations led by
Senator Henry Cabot lodge proposed ratification subject to 14 reservations,
which Wilson unwisely rejected insisted on an all or nothing approach without
taking into consideration the strength of Republican opposition.
Woodrow Wilson in the
White House
In the presidential
election of 1912, Theodore Roosevelt, who was unhappy with some of President
William Taft’s policies, entered the presidential race as head of the new
Progressive Party. As a result, the Republican Party vote was split between
Taft and Roosevelt, and Democratic candidate Woodrow Wilson won the election.
During his two terms in office, Wilson carried out significant reforms to laws
governing tariffs, trusts, labor, agriculture, and banking.
To
overcome Senate objections, Wilson embarked on a national speaking tour to
mount support for the treaty only to be brought down by a debilitating stroke
in October 1919 and on November 19, the Senate voted against the treaty.
A
further compromise vote scheduled for March 19 1919 also failed to carry the
day because the president instructed his followers to reject any compromise and
in the event the 49 – 35 vote fell short of the constitutional 2/3 majority
required to ratify the treaty.
The
failure of the United States to ratify the Versailles treaty also meant that
the US had failed to recognize the League of nations which was one of the offspring’s
of the treaty alongside the security guarantee given to France which was the
pillar of the new world political order which the European statesmen had so
skillfully crafted to create a balance of power on the European scene.
The
League of Nations thus became a toothless bulldog imposing sanctions and
penalties that it lacked the muscle to enforce. The result was a feeling of
betrayal on the part of France and a resolve to deal more firmly in issues
concerning Germany.
.
Russia and the West 1919 -1929
No comments:
Post a Comment