Chapter 2

Question 1

Key chronology

Answer 1

.

Question 2

What was the armistice and what was it not?

Answer 2

The war had ended with the armistice agreement on 11 November 1918.
Although Germany was on the brink of defeat, the armistice was not a surrender.
It was an agreement to stop fighting and withdraw German forces from occupied territory, pending a full peace settlement.

Question 3

Drawing up and signing of treaty

Answer 3

A conference to settle the peace terms between the Allied powers and Germany met at the Palace of Versailles, outside Paris, in January 1919. The Germans were not invited to attend or allowed to see the terms of the treaty until 7 May. The German government suggested changes to the treaty but the Allies agreed to very few and, on 16 June, gave the German government seven days to accept the treaty. This provoked a political crisis in Berlin and led to the formation of a new coalition government. Finally, on 28
June, the Versailles Treaty was signed by all the powers. It imposed much harsher conditions on Germany than most Germans had expected or were prepared to accept. Moreover, because Germany had not been allowed to participate in the conference or to negotiate over the terms, the treaty was regarded by Germans of all political viewpoints as a Diktat or dictated peace. Hatred of the treaty, and of the politicians who had signed it, would continue to cause political divisions throughout the life of the Weimar Republic.

Question 4

Who attended the Paris Peace Conference?

Answer 4

The Paris Peace Conference opened on 12 January 1919 and meetings were held at various locations in and around Paris. Leaders representing about 75 per cent of the world’s population attended but the defeated powers were excluded and all the major decisions were taken by the four most influential leaders: US President Woodrow Wilson, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, French Prime Minister and conference chairman Georges Clemenceau and Italian Prime Minister Vittorio Orlando.

Question 5

Areas of Treaty

Answer 5

Territorial losses
Disarmament
War Guilt
Saarland under League control
Rhineland demilitarised
No union with Austria allowed
Germany couldn’t join LON
Kaiser and other Germans to be put on trial for war crimes

Question 6

Territorial losses under treaty

Answer 6

The treaty removed over 70,000 km° (13 per cent) of German territory and all Germany’s overseas colonies: Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France; Eupen and Malmedy were given to Belgium; Northern Schleswig-Holstein was given to Denmark; Most of Posen, West Prussia and part of Pomerania (the Polish Corridor) were given to Poland; Danzig, a city with a majority German population, became a free state under League of Nations protection; Memel was taken by Lithuania; Eastern Silesia was given to Poland, although Western Silesia voted to remain part of Germany. This all meant that Germany lost 75 per cent of its iron ore, 68 per cent of its zinc ore, 26 per cent of its coal and 15 per cent of its arable land.
All of Germany’s overseas colonies in Africa and the Far East were placed under League of Nation’s control (in practice, divided between the Allies).

Question 7

Disarmament under treaty

Answer 7

Germany had to surrender all heavy weapons and dismantle fortifications in the Rhineland and on the island of Heligoland. Conscription to the German armed forces was forbidden and the German army was limited to a maximum of 100,000 men. The German army was forbidden to use tanks or gas. The German navy was limited to 15,000 men. The navy was allowed a maximum of six battleships but no submarines and a small number of coastal defence vessels. Germany was forbidden from having an air force.

Question 8

War Guilt under treaty

Answer 8

Under Article 231 of the treaty, Germany had to accept responsibility for starting the war. This ‘war guilt clause made Germany liable to pay reparations to the Allies to cover the costs of damage suffered in the war. The final amount of reparations was fixed by a commission in 1921 at £6.6 billion; Germany also had to hand over to the Allies most of its merchant shipping fleet, railway locomotives and rolling stock, patents and overseas investments.

Question 9

The Rhineland under treaty

Answer 9

The left bank of the Rhine (western side) and a 50 km strip on the right bank (eastern side) was permanently demilitarised.
An Allied army of occupation was based in the Rhineland to ensure
Germany fulfilled its treaty obligations.

Question 10

The Saarland under treaty

Answer 10

This area of south-western Germany, which contained rich reserves of coal, was separated from Germany and placed under League of Nation’s control for 15 years, so Germany would supply France, Belgium and Italy with free coal as part of the reparations agreement. France was allowed to exploit coal mines in the area.

Question 11

Other terms of the treaty

Answer 11

Austria was forbidden from uniting with Germany; Germany was not allowed to join the new League of Nations; The Kaiser and other Germans were to be put on trial for
war crimes.

Question 12

Overall German reaction to treaty

Answer 12

The terms of the treaty, and the decision by the government to sign it, was greeted with horror and disbelief by the majority of Germans. Until 1914,
Germany had been one of the greatest military powers in Europe, For much of the war, and especially in the early months of 1918, victory in the war seemed to be only a matter of time. This, at least, was the way Germany’s war effort was portrayed in official propaganda, even after the Allies began to force the German army to retreat, after halting its advance in France in the spring of 1918. Neither ordinary soldiers nor the civilian population were told how desperate Germany’s military situation on the Western Front
the had become by the autumn of 1918. Despite the hardship caused by the Allied blockade, support for the war effort was still very strong. The abdication
of the Kaiser and subsequent signing of the armistice, therefore, came as a profound shock to millions of Germans. When followed by the signing of a humiliating and ‘dictated’ peace treaty, there was almost universal resentment at the harsh terms and few Germans would accept moral responsibility for fulfilling the terms of the treaty.

Question 13

German objections to the treaty (5)

Answer 13

•Whilst Wilson’s Fourteen Points stressed the importance of the right of national self-determination as a basis for a just peace, this right was denied to the Germans themselves. Millions of people who spoke German and considered themselves to be German were now living in non-German states such as Czechoslovakia and Poland. The separation of East Prussia from the rest of Germany by the so-called Polish Corridor was a major source of resentment.
•The ‘war guilt clause was seen as an unjust national humiliation since
Germans believed they had been forced into a just war against the Allies, who had attempted to encircle Germany.
•Reparations were a major cause of anger, partly because Germans felt that the level was too high and would cripple the German economy, and they did not accept the ‘war guilt clause, which justified the reparations.
•Allied occupation of parts of western Germany, and French control of the Saarland coal mines, led to continuing friction. German nationalists were outraged by the outlawing of nationalist groups and banning of German patriotic songs and festivals in areas under French control.
•The disarming of Germany and its exclusion from the League of Nations were seen as unjust discrimination against a proud and once-powerful nation.

Question 14

National self-determination meaning

Answer 14

nations being able to decide whether they govern themselves, independent of larger empires or groupings of nations

Question 15

How justified were German complaints about the Treaty of Versailles?

Answer 15

It is possible to sympathise with the German reaction, but in some ways it was based on unrealistic expectations:
•Wilson’s Fourteen Points and the armistice agreement had made it clear that Alsace-Lorraine would have to be returned to France, that a new state of Poland with access to the sea would be created, that Germany would be expected to hand over some of her assets and that considerable German disarmament would be expected.
•The treaty was not as severe as it might have been. Had Clemenceau had his way, he would have extended the French border to the Rhine, or annexed the Saar coalfields and created an independent Rhineland. The French wanted to ensure that Germany could not threaten them again, but the other Allies resisted this as they wanted Germany to remain strong enough to withstand the spread of communism from Russia.
•The treaty did not punish Germany as severely as the Germans had punished Russia in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in March 1918. Then, Germany had broken up the western part of the Russian Empire and annexed large swathes of territory. In the Reichstag debate on that treaty, only the USPD had voted against this action.
•Germany’s war aims of 1914 had included the annexation of territory from its enemies, the expansion of Germany’s colonial empire and a very severe reparations bill to be paid by the defeated Allies. In other words, if Germany had won the war, the peace settlement would have been very harsh on the defeated Allies.
•The reparations bill was much lower than demanded by the French.
Although reparations were a continuing source of friction between
Germany and the Allies during the life of the Weimar Republic, it was not beyond Germany’s capacity to pay.

Question 16

Events of the political crisis of June 1919

Answer 16

When the harsh terms of the treaty were revealed to the German government in May 1919, ministers from all parties shared Chancellor Scheidemann’s view that accepting it would be incompatible with German honour. At that stage, however, it seemed possible to negotiate some amendments to the treaty. In the event, the rejection of German requests for extensive changes and the demand for acceptance of the treaty within seven days caused a political crisis in Germany. Scheidemann and some of his ministers wanted to reject the treaty, whereas the majority of the cabinet and of the SPD members of the Reichstag believed that Germany had no other choice but to sign the treaty.
Scheidemann resigned and a new coalition cabinet, led by Gustav Bauer, was formed. Meanwhile, some high-ranking officers in the German army, with the tacit support of Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg, were discussing the possibility of resisting the signing of the treaty through renewed military action. President Ebert told General Groener that he would support rejection of the treaty if there was any chance that military action could be successful.
Groener was a realist. He informed Ebert that military resistance would be futile and Germany had no alternative but to accept the treaty. The Bauer cabinet bowed to the inevitable and signed the treaty.

Question 17

The reaction of pro-republican parties

Answer 17

The divisions over the signing of the Versailles Treaty continued to dominate German political life throughout the years of the Weimar Republic. The SPD and its allies in government in 1919 were well aware that signing it would rebound upon them. Indeed, they were so concerned that they asked their main opponents in the DNVP, DVP and DDP to state that those who had voted for the treaty were not being unpatriotic. They also took the view that the most sensible course of action in the coming years was to outwardly comply with the terms of the treaty whilst negotiating modifications to it. This became known as the policy of fulfilment.
Even more importantly, however, the treaty turned some (even former supporters) against the Weimar Republic. Its real damage was in alienating moderates who had been happy to accept the new constitution and its promises of a ‘better’ Germany, but who could not stomach politicians who appeared to have betrayed an unbeaten country. The treaty caused political demoralisation at the very centre of government, associating the Republic once again with weakness and failure. The politicians who agreed to it were forced to become defensive. To the public at large, the gains of the revolution seemed unimpressive.

Question 18

Reaction on the Right to the treaty

Answer 18

Right-wing resentment of the Republic was intensified by the signing of the Versailles Treaty. German nationalists could not accept the fact of Germany’s military defeat, nor the establishment of the new republic. The signing of the peace settlement was the final straw and led many to join groups committed to overthrowing the Republic. In the eyes of extreme nationalists, the politicians who now governed Germany lacked any legitimacy because they had betrayed the ‘Fatherland’ several times - in the dethroning of the Kaiser, the signing of the armistice and the acceptance of the Versailles Treaty. These politicians became labelled the November Criminals and their actions of ‘betrayal were referred to as the stab in the back. The German army bore no responsibility for the defeat of 1918. The fact that Ludendorff had advised the Kaiser in late-September 1918 that the army was on the verge of defeat was conveniently forgotten. Indeed, Ludendorff had advised the Kaiser to appoint a new civilian-led government in the hope that better peace terms would be secured and that the high command would avoid responsibility for the defeat and signing of the armistice.

Not all the soldiers who returned to Germany in the wake of the defeat were hostile to the new republic, Many working-class soldiers, who had previously been members of trade unions and supported the SPD, supported the new democratic system. Others gravitated towards the communists. Many, however, could not adjust to civilian life, especially as they had great difficulty in finding employment and yearned for the comradeship and sense of purpose that the war years had given them. These men gravitated towards the Freikorps and right-wing nationalist groups. As a result, in the early years of the Weimar Republic, democratic politics was under continuous threat from violent nationalist groups.

Question 19

Stab in Back myth origin and meaning

Answer 19

It was Ludendorff, and his superior von Hindenburg, who actively promoted the ‘stab in the back myth. This myth was the justification for continued nationalist attacks on the Republic, its political supporters and on the treaty. It was particularly appealing to ex-soldiers who had suffered in fighting for what they regarded as a noble cause and had then experienced insults and humiliation when they returned to a Germany in the throes of revolution.

Question 20

British reaction to treaty

Answer 20

When Prime Minster Lloyd George returned to London after the signing of the treaty, he was given a rapturous reception from a large crowd. On the whole, British public opinion was satisfied that Germany had lost its overseas empire, along with its large fleet, and would be unable to threaten European peace for a generation. Privately, however, Lloyd George believed that Germany should not be so weak that it would be unable to resist the expansion of the USSR westwards, and he wanted Germany to become a strong trading partner with Britain again. Many in Britain saw the French as being greedy and vindictive and there was a growing feeling in Britain that Germany had been unfairly treated at Versailles. One influential view was put forward by the economist, John Maynard Keynes, who argued that the level of reparations was too high. He believed that the level of reparations ‘was one of the most serious acts of political unwisdom for which our statesmen have ever been responsible.’

Question 21

French reaction to the treaty

Answer 21

The French felt they had suffered the most out of all the combatant nations and they were determined to seek revenge at Versailles. The recovery of Alsace-Lorraine, the demilitarisation of the Rhineland and the payment of reparations were key French demands which had been met. Despite this, there were many in France who regarded the treaty as being too lenient on Germany, and Prime Minister Clemenceau, who was blamed for making too many concessions, was defeated at the next election in 1920. Marshal Foch, the wartime military commander, expressed a widely held view in France when he said, “This is not peace. It is an armistice for twenty years.

Question 22

American reaction to the treaty

Answer 22

Reactions to the Treaty in America were generally negative. There was a widespread opinion that the treaty had been unfair on Germany and that Britain and France had used the treaty to enrich themselves at Germany’s expense. The Republicans in the American Congress opposed the treaty and Wilson failed to win the Congressional vote to ratify the treaty, leaving the USA to make a separate peace with Germany in 1921. The USA refused to join the League of Nations and, in the 1920s, retreated from involvement in European affairs.

Question 23

Summary

Answer 23

The Treaty of Versailles stripped Germany of land, people, resources and military power. Although Germany might have suffered even greater losses ifthe demands of the French Prime Minister Clemenceau had been accepted by the other Allies the German people viewed the treaty in wholly negative terms. Its signing by Bauer’s socialist-led government in June 1919 was viewed by many as an act of national betrayal. The circumstances in which the new republic had been founded in November 1918 prompted many Germans to reject its legitimacy, despite the democratic process that later led to the drawing up of the Weimar Constitution. For German nationalists the new republic- and, in particular, the socialist politicians who had taken the lead in its foundation - was permanently tainted by its association with betrayal and the humiliation of an unjust and dictated peace.