The treaty of
Versailles is thought to be one of the single greatest contributing factors that lead to the outbreak of the Second World War. At the conclusion of World War One the three main allied powers; France, Britain and the United States had drawn up a resolution that would outline numerous points of acquiescence expected of the German government. This was to ensure that another imperial drive for domination of Europe and her resources would never drag the world into armed conflict again. However, many claim that certain clauses included within the treaty are responsible for the collapse of the intended lasting peace. In this essay I will attempt to argue the opposite; that the treaty of Versailles did not cause the Second World War, for two reasons in particular.
The Treaty was not without its deficiencies; however, the true failure leading to the Second World War was not the treaty itself but the inability of the allied governments and the
League of Nations to enforce the treaty as they had sworn to do. The lack of aggressive policing of the Treaty led to a gradual decay of public opinion and general disenchantment towards the commitment from the League of Nations.
The first case in point which deals directly with the handling of Germany as the main aggressor of World War One and the war reparations clause in the treaty. This was the invasion of the Ruhr valley – an important German industrial sector - by France and Belgium in 1922.The invasion took place because the German governing body had claimed to be unable to pay war reparations, for that particular year, to the Allies. Due to the anti-German sentiment at the time France decided to act with force. This particular move had stripped Germany of the resources needed to continue future payments. The war reparations were not only made as a monetary payment but resources such as timber, coal and steel were used in lieu of gold or currency. The resource rich Ruhr was to be the backbone of this payment scheme until this incident occurred. This was seen as a crucial failure internationally, as two senior members of the League of Nations were overtly breaking League rules in such a manner to further punish their former aggressor needlessly.
This led to massive decreases in jobs and a dramatic loss of property for German workers in the area. Extensive strikes and passive resistance toward the invaders followed which eventually steered the German
economy into a downward spiral. The outcome of this economic downturn was the hyperinflation of the 1920s, some of the worst inflation in recorded history. Money held almost less value than the paper on which it was printed.This series of events greatly tempered the German feeling of distrust for the allied nations and frustration with the shortcomings of their own government.
The next case in point were the Political alterations which occurred in Germany during the 1930s in which the Weimar republic had become defunct and a radical new social ideal gripped Germany in the form of Nazism or National Socialism.
The new leadership portrayed the treaty as a symbol of oppression against the “noble” German people. From this a strain of propaganda was created which they used to solidify the opinion of the common citizenry against the Treaty as a legally binding document. Thus the idea that a newly unified Germany under the Nazi party was the only chance for a brighter future without outside interference was born. This turned into a powerful tool as it allowed the
Nazi party to gain control of every facet of government within a relatively short span of time. Using the treaty in this manner also allowed Hitler to begin rearmament of military forces and to station soldiers in the previously demilitarized Rhineland, both of which were contrary to articles agreed upon in the treaty.
Seeing Germany's disregard for the Treaties articles of militarisation, but still seeking to maintain the current state of peace in Europe the Prime Minister of England Neville Chamberlain opted for a stance of
appeasement. This allowed Germany to continue moving toward a martial status hitherto unknown. The eventual conclusion would become the so called anschluss or political reunification with Austria, the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia in 1938. What would follow was the German invasion of Poland in 1939 to reclaim territory and to initiate the division of the country according to the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact. Because Hitler used appeasement as an excuse to achieve these goals, he did not perceive a serious threat from the allies as they had seemingly allowed this chain of events to take place without hindering his efforts. Thus, triggering the event which would ultimately lead to the outbreak of the Second World War.
In conclusion, the Treaty of Versailles was a legally valid document and is considered to be much less severe than the allies could have justifiably made it. As history shows however the tangibility of this document was subverted by both sides, used to bolster a point of view and to validate their own political ends. France punishing Germany by invading the Ruhr is one example and the German political and military pressure leading to anschluss is another. With this in mind the document itself and the reasons it was written are not to blame for having a hand in starting the Second World War. The true failures and causes rest with the governing powers at the time. An example of this was the act of appeasement towards Hitler by England. As were explained in the essay these reasons were far more culpable than the right for an allied government to punish those who would wage war for selfish and inexcusable reasons and to defend against a continuation of hostilities.
Image:5
http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/33d/projects/1920s/CarlosTreaty.htm
