Your Versailles treaty

[RedRalph]

We all know the terms of the versailles treaty were a mojor contributor to the rise of Nazism and WW2. Considering the national desires to punish Germany in the UK, and especially France, but with the knowledge of what the treaty caused IRL, what would the terms of your Versailles be?

 

[Adler17]

I am very biased. A treaty based upon Wilson's 14 points. And with a Kaiser ruling. Simply because he would never ever had appointed Hitler!

So I would say this:

1. Referendum in Alsace Lorraine. Most likely French.

2. Poland with Posen, but without the Corridore. Union with Lithunia perhaps.

3. Washington Naval treaty, but with Germany equal to Japan (5:3:1,75)

4. No war Guilt

5. No exorbitant reparations

Adler

 

[~Corsair#01~]

-Demobilisation of German military to 100,000 limit - perhaps higher temporarily to deal with the unrest. To be followed eventually with less restrictions and a Europe-wide disarmament agreement. No airforce, tiny navy clauses retained.
-Plebiscites on a province-by-province basis in the German and Hungarian territories, with presumably a resulting frontier identical to the historic one except with Germany keeping Eupen-Malmedy, Memel and more of western Poland than they did historically. Most of North Transylvania would end up in Hungary rather than Romania to reduce Balkan tensions.
-Creation of Czechoslovakia as historically, same with Yugoslavia and Austria.
-Danzig under temporary LON administration, to be returned to Germany if Germany and Poland can come to an agreement on administration.
-Reparations as historical. France needs to be thrown some sort of bone or else they'll take a hissy fit. They can of course be renegotiated later.
-Kaiser abdicates, establishment of Weimar republic as historically, hopefully with a better territorial settlement and diplomatic front they'll fare better.
-Creation of LON as historically, with Germany included after a set period. Hopefully the US will be coaxed into more active involvement by:
-Establishment of a World Trade Organisation, with a mandate to promote trade by agreeing on maximum tariff levels, holding conferences to reduce tariffs and imposing tariff-based sanctions on anyone raising tariffs.

This last measure is the most ambitious and by far the most important in acheiving a lasting peace. The benefits to Germany, America and Japan should be obvious and hopefully the US could use it's economic leverage to make the two great empires toe the line.

Also, I would favour active intervention in Turkey (by Britain) to save the Greeks and Armenians and strengthen the Middle East VS the Bear.

 

[innonimatu]

Nice idea for a thread!

I don't know much about the situation right after WW2 inside the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but would it have been possible to not split it up, only remove some territory for the re-creation of Poland?
Perhaps even give it some more german land, from the catholic south. The purpose would be to play the AH as a counterweight to the Germans. Germany would never manage to annex a large AH, and AH would have cause to be way, first and foremost, of Germany - they would not be natural allies.

Any chance of this working, of even of the AH remaining united in the first place?

 

[RedRalph]

Nice idea for a thread!

I don't know much about the situation right after WW2 inside the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but would it have been possible to not split it up, only remove some territory for the re-creation of Poland?
Perhaps even give it some more german land, from the catholic south. The purpose would be to play the AH as a counterweight to the Germans. Germany would never manage to annex a large AH, and AH would have cause to be way, first and foremost, of Germany - they would not be natural allies.

Any chance of this working, of even of the AH remaining united in the first place?

I really odnt think so. the Czechs were dead set on leaving, and even before Versailles slovenis and I think Croatia had left... hard to see it happening. Its vaguely possible austria and hungary would have stayed tiogether but hard to see why.

 

[RedRalph]

Corsaid are you serious about reparations? That was the single worst clause in the entire treaty, I think if most historians could identify one clause that was so completely disaterous it was that one.

 

[say1988]

Ideally, either very light (generally following Wilson's points).
Or the complete destruction of the German State. After territorial concessions, split up the remains into small countries. Next to no military allowed.

And most importantly: some guarantees that it will be enforced.
Allied armies established to intervene if they don't follow the treaty. Parties established to regularily inspect the German states. etc... In fact, add this to Versailles, and it isn't that bad, but whatever the treaty says, it MUST be enforced.

 

[Arwon]

Austria-Hungary actually collapsed before the armistice (I think) and treaty conference, and so I assume Versailles didn't get to draw those borders.

 

[say1988]

Yep Austria-Hungary broke up before the end of the war, and each Austria and Hungary had separate treaties with the Allies, anyways, Versailles dealt with Germany only.

 

[chad187]

What happens with the former ottoman empire?

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Corsaid are you serious about reparations? That was the single worst clause in the entire treaty, I think if most historians could identify one clause that was so completely disaterous it was that one.

Germany had the capacity to pay those reparations if it's economy was set back in working order. If it can't pay them, it can always just do as it did historically and have them renegotiated. Also I don't see how France could possibly be made to agree with a treaty which doesn't include huge reparations. They had a loan to repay and the treaty I stipulated already has the French giving away a hell of a lot more than they did historically- no occupation of the Rhineland, the inclusion of Germany as a key part of the new LoN, better German borders, the WTO with it's long-term potential of flooding their sheltered market with US and German goods...

The main idea behind my treaty isn't to avoid "punishing" the Germans- they were the losing side after all, but to keep them inside the established international diplomatic system by offering them access to foreign markets (a key issue to a power without an empire) and ensuring that they have no major territorial grievances with their neighbours. The US would provide the same financial assistance as they did historically (why wouldn't they?) so Germany should be able to function well economically in the long term, even if they have the same crash as they did historically.

I really can't imagine the Germany in this scenario going to war, since only Austria and Czechoslovakia will have large German populations, both are under reasonably moderate governments and were never part of the old Germany. Also, the Ruhr crisis would not have occurred since there was no Rhineland occupation. The French and Germans would simply be forced to work out some sort of agreement (possibly postponement of payments), which would be much better for Germany's government and economy.

I'm not saying Germany wouldn't have an economic disaster in 1929 with millions unemployed in this scenario, because they would and this treaty can't affect that. But the improved diplomatic and long-term economic situation for Germany in this scenario, should give the Weimar government a much greater hope of weathering the storm.

 

[innonimatu]

Yep Austria-Hungary broke up before the end of the war, and each Austria and Hungary had separate treaties with the Allies, anyways, Versailles dealt with Germany only.

The hungarians and the austrains, at least, were willing to continue united, the allies intervened to prevent that.
But I can see that with the czechs wanting to leave, a much smaller AH would not be able to act as a counterweight to Germany.

 

[GinandTonic]

The WTO thing is the kicker for me. Give Germany access to markets and they will make more money building trade goods than tanks.

 

[Sofista]

But I can see that with the czechs wanting to leave, a much smaller AH would not be able to act as a counterweight to Germany.

Question: were the Austrian and Hungarian armies limited as the German one was? Because in that case, even a smaller AH would have done the trick.

 

[Disenfrancised]

The WTO thing is the kicker for me. Give Germany access to markets and they will make more money building trade goods than tanks.

Pity absolutely no one would have agreed to it unfortunately.

But yeah, to have a a Versailles that works you either need to let germany off more lightly or grind it into the dust.

@Adler: Poland wouldn't have agreed to exchanging the corridor for Lithunia without a truly enormous amount of money and technical assistence as rerouting your entire national infrastructure isn't something that can be done at the snap of treaty.

 

[aronnax]

I will focus seriously on disanarment.
Hitler had built an army by using the loopholes and blackholes in the TOV to build them
So a treaty specifying excatly what units he can keep, how many they are, how much weopens they can keep.
Personally, for maybe the first five years, ill hand over the German Army to the Allies to control.
Reparartion should be less cruel or at least have them VERY slowly repay back the original sums

 

[innonimatu]

Question: were the Austrian and Hungarian armies limited as the German one was? Because in that case, even a smaller AH would have done the trick.

Yes, I guess that military it could help balance the Germans. I'm just not sure that a small AH would resist annexation into a larger Germany, as it happened with Austria. Or would not ally with it to recover some of its old provinces back - starting with Czechoslovakia.
Whereas a larger AH would be more confident in opposing Germany, have conflicting interests along its border (especially if it had received part of Silesia), and oppose any Italian-German alliance (if it also kept Slovenia). But I really don't see Austria-Hungary managing to keep even these territories after August 1818.

But I do think that the complete breakup of Austria-Hungary did more to set the stage for WW2 that the Versailles provisions imposed on Germany. And I'm not even considering the likely different fate of the damn austrian who started it.

 

[Squonk]

We all know the terms of the versailles treaty were a mojor contributor to the rise of Nazism and WW2. Considering the national desires to punish Germany in the UK, and especially France, but with the knowledge of what the treaty caused IRL, what would the terms of your Versailles be?

I strongly disagree with the fundament of this thread, that is a conviction that Versailles treaty was too harsh on Germany. It was not. It was a conviction that it was too harsh for them that led to the war.

My Versailles treaty:

- no war guilt - perhaps.
- Germany gains Austria
- Germany gains Sudetenland (perhaps - if we accept that ethnicity is the most important factor)
- Germany loses Posen (apart from majorly german parts), Masuria, southern Warmia, entire Upper Silesia but majorly german Glubczyce region, and majorly polish parts of Western Prussia. I'm hesitant about Gdansk/Danzig, but I'd either leave it to Poland or to Germany with polish special rights. Germany, on the other hand, gets special rights when it comes to transport through polish Pomerania. Polish Silesia (as it did) gets autonomical status, but so does Masuria. Germany could be second official language there.
- Germany loses Klajpeda (Memel), but it gets autonomic status.
- Germany does not lose Euden and Malmedy or whatever
- no demilitarisation of Rheinland
- no army restrictions, but solemn promise not to re-draw the borders and a much stronger league of nations
- Hungary does not lose majorly hungarian parts of southern Slovakia, transsilvania and Voivodina.
- Poland gets Zaolzie region.
- autonomy for Sorbs

perhaps some more.

 

[Squonk]

-Plebiscites on a province-by-province basis in the German and Hungarian territories, with presumably a resulting frontier identical to the historic one except with Germany keeping Eupen-Malmedy, Memel and more of western Poland than they did historically.

or less. Also, a plebiscite is not such a simple sollution. Do You rule by entire province, or by separate municipalities? If by municipalities, what do You do with exclaves? If by entire provinces, how do You establish their border?
Who is gonna keep peace there, especially since the administration and police are german and will act on german behalf (as they did historically?

 

[Godwynn]

We all know the terms of the versailles treaty were a mojor contributor to the rise of Nazism and WW2. Considering the national desires to punish Germany in the UK, and especially France, but with the knowledge of what the treaty caused IRL, what would the terms of your Versailles be?

Europe today would look something like this: