BLOOD, FIRE AND STEEL ; 150 YEARS OF EUROPEAN HISTORY ; RUSSIA AND THE WEST 1919-1929

Russia and the West 1919 -1929

France had always seen Russia as its hedge in the East against German expansionist policies and for that reason, the defeat of Russia in 1917 left France predictably worried about its long term safety where Germany was concerned and this was evident in French policy towards Germany while the discussions concerning the Versailles treaty went on.

After the Brest Litvosk treaty Anglo – French opinions turned sharply against Russia’s communist rulers who were seen as parleying with Germany. There was a consensus on the part of the Allies on the need to cage both Germany and Russia and to stop them from colluding in future conflicts.

 The denunciation of Russia’s debts from the Tsarist era by the new Bolshevik rulers too did not help matters as it gave Britain and France the opportunity to solidify their anti – Bolshevik stand. President Wilson on the other hand still believed that the Russian people possessed an innate desire for democracy that they could still achieve and therefore sought a policy of accommodation for both Reds and Whites.

The Bolsheviks on the other hand adopted a two-track policy towards the west. On the one hand they continued their anti – capitalist rhetoric which included both Germany and the west and on the other hand, they sought to define policies and issues that will help to stabilize their regime and ensure the survival of their ideology.

The communists engaged in policies and pursuits with a view to encouraging the west to isolate the white regime, encourage a policy of non-interference in Russia’s affairs especially as the view was already popular among British and French workers and soldiers.

The wholesale execution of the Romanovs, Russia’s Royal family in 1918 coupled with a policy of red terror, wholesale slaughter of Czech prisoners of war and other repression policies of the communist regime turned the west decidedly against it. In fact the then US Secretary of State Robert Lansing described Bolshevism as the most hideous and the most monstrous thing that the human mind has ever conceived.

The arrest of 200 British and French citizens in Moscow coupled with the vandalisation of their consular offices and murder of the British naval attaché only helped to strengthen public opinion against the Bolsheviks and conclusion that they were thugs and agents of the German government. In the autumn of that year, the Allies imposed a blockade on the regime in Moscow and broke the last contacts with them.

The communist regime in Moscow therefore set out to defeat the white forces and a host of other counter- revolutionary forces that included the Cossacks of Genera Anton Denikin in the south supported by the French from Odessa, the Ukrainian separatist, General Nikolayev Yudenich's army, a puppet government in the north supported by the Anglo – French from Kolchak at Omsk in Siberia; American and Japanese forces occupying Vladivostok on the pacific.

Red Army Cavalry

Red Army forces such as this cavalry defended the new Bolshevik (Communist) state against the White armies during the Russian Civil War (1918-1921).

.

Against these uncoordinated diverse forces, the Bolsheviks sought to rally support under Leon Trotsky for their experiments with a people's army which did not award ranks and left the choice of officers to the popular choice of soldiers, soon gave way to a policy of traditional military practice and even the recruitment of officers and men from the Tsarist era

Lenin also sought to detach the United States from the Allies by sending his commissioner for foreign affairs George Chizhenin to negotiate with the Americans and seek their understanding. His notes and memos addressed to the US government appealed for a policy of non intervention and recourse to the Wilson fourteen points a s a basis of relationship.

EFFECT OF THE WAR ON EUROPE, 1919

The celebrations and jubilation that marked the end of World War 1 testified to the relief of Europeans felt about the end of the most costly and destructive conflict ever on the European continent. That the war ended with the defeat of Germany and the other central powers did not in it extinguish all the flash points of conflicts that then existed.

The total remaking of the political and economic landscape that ensued with the collapse of four dynasties; the Romanovs, the Hapsburg Empire, the Kaiser of Germany and the Ottoman Turks dynasty was so widespread that not a single peace conference could set Europe back on its feet.

The drastic change in the power equation particularly in Central and Eastern Europe left many pondering as to what the future will be like. The revolutionary terror in Russia was threatening to spill to other parts of Europe and the old order was greatly threatened with change.

With over 8.5 million people dead, over 21 million wounded and property damage exceeding $236 billion dollars, the impetus for a lasting peace was fragile as nations sought to recover or exact vengeance as the case maybe against their perceived aggressive. The war also strengthened the nationalistic yearnings of the European colonies and at the same time considerably strengthened the US and Japan visa Vis Europe.

The Paris peace conference ultimately produced five treaties, each named after the locality and city in which it was signed. The treaty of Versailles with Germany, June 28^th 1919, the treaty of Saint German with Austria September 10^th 1919, the treaty of Trianon with Hungary, June 4^th 1920 in addition to the Washington naval conference and limitations treaty signed by the great powers to curb a naval arms race in 1921 -22.

The Wilsonian vision captured in the fourteen peace points saved   to give direction to a new world order subtly superintended by the U.S the greatest economic beneficiary of the  now over conflict and whose honest brokerage sewed to lessen tensions and create promise of a more just emerging world order.

The British and French had reservations about Wilson's grand vision for a new world order founded on the tenets of democracy, the rule of law and equality of nations. Being colonial power, they were not comfortable with certain notions of justice and equality that Wilson proclaimed.

Wilson Addresses Congress

On April 2, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson addressed a joint session of the Congress of the United States and asked them to declare war on Germany, precipitating the American entry into World War I.

Culver Pictures

That Wilson's ideals and dreams did not resonate with his own home turf, the US which rewarded him with the loss of the US Senate to Republican control took the moral and political platform from Wilson's unilateralist’s approached but the reality did not yet dawn on him.

Liberal internationalism set the pace for the Paris peace conference and the European statesman borrowing from Wilson's example quickly learned to proclaim the justice of their cause rather than the political benefit accruing from it.

In the words of encyclopedia Britannica “yet Wilson's principles proved one by one to be inappropriate irrelevant, or insufficient in the eyes of European governments, while the idealistic gloss they placed on the treaty undermined their legitimacy for anyone claiming that 'justice” had not been served.

Wilson's personality must bear some of the blame for this disillusionment, He was a proud man, confident of his objectivity and prestige and he insisted on being the first US president to sail to Europe and to conduct negotiations himself. He had visited Europe only twice before as a tourist and now delayed the peace conference in order to make a triumphant tour of European capitals.

Moreover the democrats lost their majority in the elections of November 1918, yet Wilson's refusal to include prominent republicans in his delegation. This allowed Theodore Roosevelt to declare that Wilson had “absolutely no authority to speak for the American people”. Wilson's flaws exacerbated the difficulty of promoting his ideals in Paris and at Rome. Still he was a prophet in world politics both as law giver and seer. Only a peace between equals he said can last.

For the French, President George Clemenceau at 77 who began his political career in 1871 during the German Siege at Paris, his assessment of the situation and Wilson's grandeur and opulent vision was at best cynical. He recognized France as the leading arbiter and enforcer as well as victim of whatever went right or wrong at the peace conference considering its territorial congruity with Germany.

Having suffered the most damage, the greatest casualties and biggest financial burden any vision that pointed to a resurrected Germany did not stand at par with France's situation and it therefore watched with mild consternation, the attempts of Wilson to recreate an equal and a just world in which France could easily become the victim of a resurrected Germany.

Working Women in World War I

During World War I (1914-1918) in France a labor shortage developed as many French men were called to serve in the military. To fill the gap, many women began doing industrial work that previously had been done only by men. Shown here, French women work in an ammunition factory during the war.

France's vision lay around reconstructing a new world order in which Germany could no longer threaten her especially as her old ally Russia was no longer available, the need to reconstruct her devastated regions and the need to pay off her war debts. Knowing that ultimately France would have to bear the immediate responsibility for enforcing the peace, her economic recovery from the war had to be accomplished quickly either with the help of Britain and America or a harsher treatment of Germany.

Britain on the other hand was a moderating force between the United States and France but was also pursuing a liberal approach to the issues of international relations. On the one hand while endeavoring to protect the balance of power in favor of both Britain and France; British Prime Minister Lloyd George also sought to ensure the recovery of a united and healthy Germany to counterbalance the emergent status of France as the dominant power in Europe.

In-deference to a stern demand by British public opinion for harsh treatment of the Kaiser and of Germany as a whole Lloyd George's government took the toughest stand on the issue of German reparations in order to cushion Britain's' own financial difficulties and at the same time pushed for a ban on German naval rearmament and partition of her colonies.

Italy also a financially exhausted power was more concerned with securing favorable terms concerning all its land borders as well as securing the stability of the government that was under threat from extremists group like Benito Mussolini party that seemed to be gaining ground politically.

 The proprietary of Wilson's' position also became as subject of intense debate in the Italian parliament in early 1919 culminating in the form demand that all Italian territorial demands be settled excepts for the issues of the entire Dalmatian constituency.

Russia after World War 1

Meanwhile Russia after the war was slipping into a civil was pitting the Lenin's Bolshevik regime against the anticommunist, pro status quo whites who were bent on restoring the Monarchy to Russia. The allies meanwhile reacting to the war policies of the Bolshevik government particularly the ill fated Brest – Litvosk treaty and the summary execution of the Romanov royal family had pitched their tents on the sides of the whites hoping that the communist insurrection could be reversed.

To compound matters, IV Lenin’s revolutionary appeals to communists all over Europe and beyond to work together to overthrow the existing political orders in his appeal to European socialists to form the third international communist (Comintern) movement.

His appeal coming to January 1919 at a time the Paris peace conference was in full swing and an attempt was being made to reach out to Soviet Russia left a bad taste in the mouth of the Allied governments. To appeal for the overthrow of government with whom you desire normal relations was antithetical or best an irony. Fortunately the European socialists, deploring the soviet Bolshevik s' violent style shunned the call.

An attempt by the three to mediate a ceasefire initiative peace talks between the Russians Bolsheviks (reds) and the anti – communist forces (the reds) was sabotaged by the refusal of both parties to turn up for the requested meeting or even honor the truce demanded by the American president.

Pressure was also mounted on Wilson by Winston Churchill the erstwhile first lord of the sea and now a member of Lloyd George's   war cabinet for a vigorous allied operation against the Reds. The war-weary allies inevitably declined the request.

President Wilson then mandated his special aide on Russian affairs colonel house to appoint an aide to travel to Russia to hold direct talks with Lenin. For this purpose a young American liberal, William Bullit was thus appointed. Bullit reached Petrograd on march 8^th 1919, had a direct meeting with Chechen and Litvinov and from there proceeded to Moscow where he held talks with Lenin.

IV Lenin offered an immediate ceasefire and negotiations in return for the cessation of allied occupation, support for the whites and the lifting of the blockade on the Bolsheviks regime. In addition the Bolsheviks offered amnesty to all Russians who had collaborated with the allies. Bullit returned to Paris excited about the breakthroughs he had only to be denied access to Wilson and to find the conference bogged down over the issue of the Rhineland.

At the same time, Lloyd George was under pressure from his party men. The party was not in a mood to make any conciliatory gestures to Lenin particularly after the Hungarian communists launched a coup in Bela and communists in Bavaria declared a Soviet style Republic. The Bavarian communist were later deposed by the German Federal army and the Romanian army chased Kan’s government in Bela away when they entered Hungary on May 1^st 1919.

In retrospect many have sought to see whether the Bullit mission could have given the Allies a line of escape from the crises in Russia considering the fact that the reds won eventually. The fact remained that the Allies still balked at any move that was to be translated as direct support for the Bolsheviks and to compound matters when summoned before the US senate committee on foreign affairs testified against the Versailles treaty against the backdrop of his non-reception by Wilson after his arduous trip to Russia.

The only other direct intervention of the allies in Russia followed the appeal by Herbert Hoover the director of the Europe food relief project for urgent allied intervention in providing food for millions of Russians in distress. The failure of the Bolshevik government to grant allied terms of intervention namely access to Russia’s internal transportation did not ultimately defer the program from a massive intervention that saved many Russian lives.

The failure of the peace conference to make peace amongst Russia’s warring groups meant that the crises were going to be settled militarily. By May 1919 Admiral Kolchak’s White army reached the peak of its offensive power as it drove back the reds and was soon close to Moscow. At this point the Western Allies solidified their support for the group with President Wilson calling on Kolchak to pledge the democratization of Russia, should he win.

In the vent, the Reds turned back the Whites in the summer while the Allies withdrew from their positions in Arkhangelsk in the north on September 30^th 1919 after a few clashes with Red army soldiers and also from Murmansk on October 12^th 1919.

The battles of the Russian civil war involved armies fighting on a very big territory with hundreds of miles to travel and it therefore    became a question of who could control the internal communication lines, particularly the railways which the Reds proved adept at managing.

 With their famous passion for discipline and sacrifice, the communists were able to improvise supplies that outlasted their opponents and thus were able to sustain a counter offensive that soon saw them overrunning Kiev which had been occupied by White forces under Denikin.

Kolchak’s forces were forced into a retreat that culminated in the capture of his base at Omsk in November 1919. In the meantime Poland under the rule of Marshal Josef Pilsudski view a grand dream of creating a polish Lithuanian – Ukrainian empire declared war on Russia in April 25^th 1920 and succeeded in capturing Kier on May 7^th. The Soviets however turned the tables on him in June 11^th 1920 and even went on to capture Vilnius July 15^th and was soon almost overrunning Warsaw itself.

However with the tactical advice of French General Maxime Weygand, the Poles drove back the overextended Reds and captured over 66,000 prisoners along with a huge swathe of Belorussian land. The resulting treaty with Russia fixed the Russian border just to the west of Minsk and for to the east of the Curzon line.

With the constraints of war with Poland removed, the Red army now turned round to free the … from the Whites under Wrangell on November 14 1921. Soviet forces then drove deep into the Caucasus setting up satellite regimes in Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan contrast to their initial anti – imperialist stand.

The Soviets thus sought to subjugate all the former Russian territories that had been freed in the aftermath of the October 1917 Revolution. The Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics was thus inaugurated on December 30^th 1921.

The new Soviet Russia that arose had shed the Tsarist Russian territories of Poland, Finland, the Baltic States and Bessarabia, but the rest of Russia remained intact under the new communist rulers who now in turn faced a West that was decidedly hostile to its ideologies and strategies of dominion.

BLOOD, FIRE AND STEEL; 150 YEARS OF EUROPEAN HISTORY, THE ARMISTICE OF 1918

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 12^th 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 15^th 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 8^th 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 17^th, 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

France had always seen Russia as its hedge in the East against German expansionist policies and for that reason, the defeat of Russia in 1917 left France predictably worried about its long term safety where Germany was concerned and this was evident in French policy towards Germany while the disc