BLOOD, FIRE AND STEEL, 150 YEARS OF EUROPEAN HISTORY, POST WORLD WAR 1 EUROPE

POST WORLD WAR 1 EUROPE

The high casualty rate of World War 1 had left Europe bewildered. In four years of fighting over eight million men had died and over 21 million had been wounded. This was unprecedented. In the conflicts that had ensued in Europe over the whole of the 19^th century up to the Balkan wars of 1912 – 1913, Europe had lost only about 4.5 million men on the battle field.

This staggering rate of loses had even affected the demographic balance with women outnumbering men in demographic counts all over Europe. This of course led to many women taking up jobs in areas of the economy hitherto reserved for men. The bye product was the granting of the right to vote to women in many parts of Europe beginning with Britain in 1920.

The women suffrage campaign now extended to the struggle for equal rights for women and the escalating debates over birth control and the woman’s right to have abortion. This shifting trend in society became the hallmark of European society in the post World War 1 era as technology, innovations and a shift in social behavior became a dominant trend.

The nationalistic aspirations that erupted as a result of the dissolution of the Empire of Germany, Austro – Hungary, Russia, Ottoman Turks also led to an explosion in the number of nation states in Europe that were seeking visibility and rights to self determination.

The rights of ethnic minorities, nationalities and races were vigorously campaigned- for and upheld. The issues in any case that arose in the November armistice of 1918 had to be dealt with in a larger and more complex treaty that was to ensue after the conflict.

A peace conference to thrash out the issues dealt with in the Armistice of November 1918 was called for in Paris and attended by the leaders of the major Allied nations, George Clemenceau of France, Lloyd George of Great Britain, Woodrow Wilson of the U.S.A and Orlando of Italy.

 The one year long conference was designed specifically to put in place a peace and conflict resolution mechanism that was designed to ensure that a conflict on the scale of the Great War as World War 1 was then known, never recurred again.

The Allied delegates embarked on the conference with a spirit of vengeance and a determination to punish Germany; and imposed terms that were both harsh and severe and ultimately difficult to fulfill or even supervise. Whereas the sanctions were specific, the mechanism for enforcement or even supervision was vague as each country was left to fulfill its obligations to the best of its interpretation and conscience.

The French were determined not only to recover Alsace – Lorraine but also to occupy the Saar and detach the Rhineland from Germany. The British were more interested in increasing Germany’s reparations payment and sought terms that were harsh and ultimately difficult to fulfill in the midst of Germany’s own political and economic turmoil.

 Economists like Maynard Keynes had strongly argued for a more accommodating term of reparations for Germany. In any case the treaty was signed on June 28^th 1919. Germany’s Colonies were dismantled and taken over by the victorious Allies; heavy reparations were imposed on her army and fleet.  Parts of the Rhineland, Saar and other parts of the fatherland were put under occupation until the reparations were paid and the terms of the treaty fulfilled.

Woodrow Wilson’s fourteen peace points had dealt with issues such as rights to self determination, determination of the right of nations and minorities, freedom of the seas, trading, reduction of armaments and adjustment of colonial claims.

His proposition concerning the general assembly of nations transposed into the League of Nations which was meant to be a body to ensure peace and tranquility amongst the nations of the world by settling disputes and conflicts amongst the major and minor powers without a resort to armed conflict.

The failure of the US to ratify the treaty setting up the league meant that the same Europeans the league was meant to pacify were the same nation states left to enforce its sanctions and covenants. In the event it was obvious to see why the league failed.

 The European statesmen were anxious to curtail Germany’s position and influence and did not give much thought to the political path and direction, Germany might follow after the war in the wake of such a punitive peace deal.

The 1920s fortunately brought a brief season of flowering economically as Europe and the rest of the world including the U.S.A experienced a season of economic boom that helped to reduce tensions and make payments of reparations easier. The period also saw a boom in the stock exchange as trading in stocks and equities boomed. While the economic boom lasted, the terms of the treaty were somehow enforced and peace seemed to endure.

The futile efforts to give teeth to the decisions of the League of Nations at this time underscored the deficiencies associated with the setting up of the body. In this period also the international Court of Justice at The Hague was set up and the Geneva conventions regulating the conduct of war, prisoners and treatment of civilians were also established.

 The Washington naval conference of 1922 also sought to enforce a treaty of self restraint on the part of the major powers with regards to the building of capital ships.

 GERMANY AND THE ISSUE OF PAYMENT OF REPARATIONS

The challenges of maintaining domestic stability while responding to the demands of the Versailles treaty continued to prove a daunting task to the post- war German governments. The elections that followed the treaty seemed to favor the centre right parties that were in opposition to the treaty. The coalitions cabinets that resulted thereafter felt insecure in their bid to fulfill the treaty whilst placating domestic opposition to the treaty.

This put the government in the centre in Berlin in a weak position, unable to stamp its authority on the country particularly with relations to raising taxes and curbing inflations. This gave the industrial leaders the courage to defy government policies while actively crafting policy by stealth.

The leadership dithered over how to satisfy the electorate without violating the treaty. Some favored rapprochement with Bolshevik Russia in order to pressure the West to ease its demand on Germany for fear of communist inroads into Germany

While the reparation committee dithered over how much to demand from Germany as reparations and also how to share the proceeds amongst the Allies in 1920, a new formula was soon adopted with France taking 52 percent of the reparations while Britain got 22 percent.

After the treaty of Versailles, Great Britain faced further challenges on the home front in the form of Ireland’s agitation for independence. The agitation had been boldly suppressed while World War 1 went on, as Britain could not afford the distraction.

After the signing of the armistice in 1918, Lloyd George finally caved in to the pressure of the Irish Republican movement for independence. After much deliberation in the face of the threatened revolt in Dublin, a compromise was reached in 1921 that established Irish Free State as a British dominion in the South while predominantly protestatant, Northern Ireland remained in the United Kingdom.

The Sinn Fein nationalists however continued to agitate until in 1937, Eire (Ireland) achieved full independence while Northern Ireland (Ulster) remained British.

In (November 1921 – February 1922) US Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes invited the Great Powers to Washington D.C to forge a new order for maritime power and Asian stability. Amongst other agreements including the decision to respect China’s sovereignty; a five-power treaty on naval armaments was put in place to forestall a naval arms race between the US, U.K, Japan, France and Italy. The treaty temporarily put a halt to the escalating naval arms race between the US, U.K, Japan and Italy.

Europe 1922 – 1929

Countries of Europe

European civilizations have, historically, been centers of economic and cultural development. Both the Renaissance (14th century) and the Industrial Revolution (18th century) originated in Europe. Europe’s legacy extends to destructive influences as well, as both world wars began on the continent.

© Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

The period described above was a period of armistice between one season of war and another. It was obvious that the peace settlement of 1919 as comprehensive as it sought to be, did not deal comprehensively with all the issues that had arisen concerning defeated Germany and Russia and the Victorious Powers of Britain, France, Italy and the USA.

French insistence on Germany being weakened, coupled with the harsh reparations policy meant that the feuding parties were still seething with resentment. The US which had argued strongly for equality and self determination amongst nations, had failed to ratify the treaty leaving only Britain and France to enforce the treaty, the best they could.

There were so many loose ends arising from the treaty that were left and handled unsatisfactorily. For instance the dismembering of Germany and handing over of her territories alongside the forbidding of the Anchluss (Union) with Austria meant that a sizeable German minority were left to their fate in a number of countries like Poland, Czechoslovakia, France, Belgium etc.

 The issue of war guilt which was imposed on Germany, Austria and Hungary was one pill too, that the defeated nations found difficult to swallow; as well as the oppressive nature of the reparations payments. The territorial issues that touched on Germany and the newly created nations of Poland especially as it related to the corridor carved out of Germany in favor of Poland, i.e. Danzig was another bone of contention.

 With the over one million German residents trapped there, that proved to be another point of injustice that needed to be dealt with as far as the German people were concerned. The treaty of Versailles was one harsh treaty that was carefully crafted; yet nobody was ready to fully defend it.

 Even the French that had demanded many of the harsh provisions, ironically stood aloof when Hitler’s Nationalist Socialist party came to power and began to openly repudiate the terms of the peace treaty.

In the words of another “The great war failed to solve the German question especially as it related to her role and destiny in Europe’’. Though defeated and shackled by the Versailles treaty, Germany’s strategic position still remained strong because on all sides it was surrounded by weakened and dispirited nations.

 France and Russia had been drained and weakened by the war. Moreover the rest of the newly emerging European countries were hardly in a position to confront a resurgent Germany’’.

The post-war French leaders thought seriously over these issues. There was a momentary resort to an -intra European defense arrangement between France and Belgium in September 1920, a Franco-Polish alliance in February 1921 and a Franco – Czechoslovak entente in January 1924. The strivings of a need for European unity was pulsating, but who was to lead it?

Britain, feeling secure in her strength and the natural barrier of the English Channel, concentrated her energy on her empire and did not see any serious need to commit vigorously to Europe once the treaty had been signed. The strict enforcement of the treaty came to rest on a hesitant France which was all too concerned over its defense than in the provocation of a fresh war with Germany.

The security of France and the entire Europe came to depend on German disarmament and the Allied occupation of the Rhineland. French finances were strained by the cost of rebuilding the war- devastated region of the north, the army and the demands of the colonial holdings as well as the refusal of the French parliament to levy sizeable tax increases until either Germany had paid the reparations or France’s war debts had been forgiven.

As long as Germany was not forth coming in settling its debts, then France would continue to face serious budget deficits that threatened its currency. France also depended on Germany for the coal needed to revive iron and steel production while at the same time bracing up to face the stiff competition from German exports.

To compound matters, France’s war- time Allies, the US and Great Britain quickly distanced each other from the enforcement of the Versailles treaty. Britain meanwhile was facing a post- war economic slump that was due mainly to wartime losses particularly in ships and foreign markets. Unemployment in Britain in the post war years had climbed to 17% in 1921.

Wartime spending and neglect had accelerated the decline of the ageing British industrial plants and the economy generally. Unemployment figures in the 20s generally hovered above 10% and there was pressure on the British government to boost employment by reviving trade.

 British economist Maynard Keynes argued at this time that the recovery of Europe was tied to the recovery of the German economy which was the dominant economy in Europe, and yet the very fabric of the Versailles treaty seemed designed to ensure that Germany never got back on its feet economically as virtually every clause seemed designed to restrain Germany from reviving its natural economic capacity.

As a pragmatic measure Britain needed the reparation debts from Germany to balance her own war debts to the United States. However after the war, British Prime Minister Lloyd George came to support German recovery in the overall interest of trade. The entente with France became strained as early as 1920 over the issues of reparations, Turkey and the coal shortage of that year, from which Britain garnered major profits at the expense of France.

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC SLUMP

Economically, Europe had come out of World War 1 much weakened by the economic effect of the conflict particularly as it related to

BLOOD, FIRE AND STEEL; EFFECT OF THE WAR ON EUROPE IN 1919

EFFECT OF THE WAR ON EUROPE, 1919

The celebrations and jubilation that marked the end of World War 1 testified to the relief  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 itself 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 aggressors. The war also strengthened the nationalistic yearnings of the European colonies and at the same time considerably strengthened the US and Japan vis a 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 served 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 powers, they were not comfortable with certain notions of justice and equality that Wilson proclaimed.

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

Liberal internationalism set the pace for the Paris peace conference, and the European statesmen 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 view 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.

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 groups like Benito Mussolini's party that seemed to be gaining ground politically.

 The proprietary of Wilson's' position also became a subject of intense debate in the Italian parliament in early 1919 culminating in the firm demand that all Italian territorial demands be settled except for the issue 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 side 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 hardened the West against the Communist regime.

His appeal coming in 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 governments 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 Big Three Allies to mediate a ceasefire initiative peace talks between the Russians Bolsheviks (Reds) and the anti – communist forces (the Whites) 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 Sea Lord 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 Communists 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 ; 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.