European History Essays

Treat of the Weaknesses of the Versaille Settlement, 1919.

There were many problems facing "the Big Four" of Lloyd George, Clemenceau, Wilson and Orlando when they came to settle amonst themselves the fate of the defeated Alliance in 1919. Public opinion at the time demanded that they "make Germany pay" and "hang the Kaiser". The spread of commusism into Eastern Europe, was spreading rapidly to the extent that the red flag was flying in Munich. This too had tobe stopped. Thus the first weakness of hte ssettlement was that it came about too soon after the war when tempers were still running high.

Each of the "Big Four" had their own selfish reasons for being part of the negotiations. Clemenceau had seen France invaded twice by German - in 1870 and in 1914 - and was determined to cripple her to the extent that she could never do this again. Wilson wanted to see his "Fourteen pointplan" intiated and the League of Nations set up. Lloyd George, although not seeking revenge on a personal level, had to cope with opinion at home which demanded that he "make Germany pay". Orlando, who had signed the Treaty of London with the Allies, now hoped to gain "italiano irredente" (unreclaimed Italy) for his county. Thus, peace in Europe was not the only aim of the leaders dominating hte settlement.

Versailles was hardly a suitable choice for the discussion of the terms of the treaty. It was here that in 1871 the German Empire had been declared and the German army had marched victoriously through Paris. The French were still very bitter and Paris being the venue gave Clemenceau a chance to dominate proceedings. Perhaps if the proceedings had taken place in a neutral venue such as Switzerland or even Spain, the would have reached more balanced and realistic conclusions.

The Territorial Clauses of the settlement were some of the first to be settled. Germany lost hte lands of Alsace and Lorraine to France; Schlieswig-Holstein to Denmark and Eupen and Malmedy to Belgium. She also lost some territory to Czechoslovakia. perhaps the avove moves can be justified on the grounds that these were lands that the German's had taken from these countries. However, further territorial settlements included France's controlling of the Saar Coal fields for fifteen years, the creation of a polish corridor, dividing Germany, and the making of Danzig into a free city were hardly necessary and certainly make grounds for hte complaint that this was an unfair settlement.

Clemenceau demanded that Germany's army be curtailed to the degree that she would never attack France again. Thus Germany was allowed to have an army of no more thatn 100,000 volunteers who would serve for a period of twelve years. She could have no aircraft and her navy was to be disbanded. Heavy land artillery was also seriously minimised. Clemenceau also insisted that 50km east of the Rhine be a demilitarised zone. Thus Germany was militaristically crippled and posed, for the time being, no threat to France. However, since the army and the navy were Germany's most prized possession, there was great bitterness at these clauses of the Treaty.

It was also demanded that Germany pay a large fraction of the cost of the reparations incurred by the war. Economists were consulted and a round figure as to the cost of these reparations was demanded. After much bickering and argument, a figure of £6,600 million was concluded on. It was estimated that Germany would have it completely paid off by 1989. It was naive of anyone at the time to believe that Germany had the ability to pay this debt. Her economy and country were in ruins and she had lost all her colonies under territorial settlements in the Treaty. These demands served only to increase German bitterness. Perhaps the most unnecessary but also the most damaging clause of the Versaille Settlement was the War-Guilt' clause no. 231. This stated that Germany, and Germany alone, was solely responsible for the outbreak of the war and that she was responsible for all the damages and deaths caused thereafter. Although Germany was partially responsible for the war's oubreak, all the blame can certainly not be placed at her door. Atustrian expanision thoughts and Serbian nationalism also had a large part to play. The German people never accepted this clause and supported anyone who attempted to have it removed or disgarded.

The German delegation in Versailles were forced to sign the settlement or face reinvasion of Germany and an all-out war in which she would certainly be defeated. Its terms were not negotiated but were dictated to them. However, the German people did not seem to realise this and felt that the army had been sold out by the politicians. Thus the Versailles Treaty "seriously shook the authority of the new republican government". The Weimar republic was never fully accpeted by the people because of the harsh terms of the Treaty they had signed.

Thus the people looked for another leader who would make Germany great once again. This leader came in the form of Adolf Hitler. Hitler used the weaknesses of the Versaille Treaty as fuel for his Nazi campaign. He used them to evoke "Beer hall enthusiansm" amonst his usupporters and to wip up support from former army officers and soldiers. The fact that HItler came to power and remilitarised German in so short a tperiod of time showed how ineffective the Treaty turned out to be and that in destorying further an already destroyed enemy, they had given rise to another more powerful one.

Wilson's fourteen points, chiw were included in all treaties, indlucing the Versailles Treaty, were never really successful and it can perhaps be said that they caused more problems than they solved. 'Self-determination' caused conflicts over borders and breaches thereof, especially in the Balkans and also in Africa. The League of Nations succeeded in solving minor disputes, however as Mussolini pointed out "it fails when Eagles fall out". The League failed to prevent a second World War and was thus later replaced.

With hindsight, it is easy to criticise the Versaille treaty, but it is very difficult to offer an alternative to it, given the conditions at the time. As A.J.P. Taylor points out: "the owrk of the Big Four has been much criticised. Perhaps it is a wonder they managed to settle anything".