1
Q
When was the armistice? What was it?
A
- the war had ended with an armistice agreement on 11th 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
2
Q
When were the terms of the treaty decided?
A
- 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 7th May
3
Q
German government’s initial opinion on treaty/ How long did they have to accept it?
A
- the German government suggested changes to the treaty but the Allies agreed to very few and, on 16th June, gave the Germans 7 days to accept the treaty
- this provoked a political crisis in Berlin and led to the formation of a new coalition government
4
Q
When was the the Treaty of Versailles signed
A
- Finally on 28th June, the Versailles Treaty was signed by all powers
- it imposed much harsher conditions on Germany than most Germans had expected or were prepared to accept
5
Q
What did German people consider the Treaty?
A
- 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
6
Q
The terms of the treaty - territorial losses
A
- the treaty removed over 70,000km squared (13%) of German territory
- and all Germany’s overseas colonies
- Alsace Lorraine was returned to France
- Eupen and Malady 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% of its iron ore, 68% of its zinc ore, 26% of its coal and 15% of its arable land
- all of Germany’s oversea colonies in Africa and the Far East were placed under League of Nation’s control (in practice, divided between the allies)
7
Q
the terms of the treaty - disarmament of Germany
A
- 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
- German army limited to a maximum of 100,000 men
- German army forbidden to use tanks or gas
- German navy limited to 15,000 men
- navy allowed a maximum of 6 battleships but no submarines and a small number of coastal defence vessels
- Germany forbidden from having airforce
8
Q
the terms of the treaty - War Guilt
A
- under Article 231 of the treaty, Germany had to accept responsibility for starting the war
- this 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 £6.6billion
- Germany also had to hand over to the Allies most of its merchant shipping fleet, railway locomotives and rolling stock, patents and oversea investments
9
Q
the terms of the treaty - the Rhineland
A
- the left bank of the Rhine (western side) and a 50km 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
10
Q
the terms of the treaty - the Saarland
A
- 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
11
Q
the terms of the treaty - other terms of the treaty
A
- Austria was forbidden from hunting with Germany
- Germany was not allowed to join the League of Nations
- the Kaiser and other Germans were to be put on trial for war crimes
12
Q
Why were the German population shocked when the armistice was signed
A
- until 1914, Germany had been one the greatest military powers in Europe
- for much of the war, 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 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 the subsequent signing of the armistice, therefore, came as a profound shock to millions of Germans
13
Q
What were the main German objections to the treaty?
A
- 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 German were now living in non-German states (Czechoslovakia and Poland). The separation of East Prussia from rest of Germany by Polish corridor was 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 major cause of anger, partly because germans felt that this level was too high and would cripple 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
14
Q
Why were German complaints about the treaty unjustifiable?
A
- Wilsons’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
- 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 Same coalfields and created an independent Rhineland. French wanted to ensure 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
- 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 defeated Allies
- the reparations bill was much lower than demanded by French. Although reparations were a continuing source of friction between Germany and the Allies during life of Weimar republic, it was not beyond Germany’s capacity to pay
15
Q
What did the government do at first when the terms of the treaty were revealed?
A
- when harsh terms of treaty revealed to German government in May 1919, ministers from all parties shred 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
16
Q
the political crisis of June 1919
A
- the German requests for extensive changes to the treaty were rejected and they were demanded to accept the treaty within seven days
- Scheidemann and some of his ministers wanted to reject the treaty, whereas the majority of the cabinet and of the SPD member of the Reichstag believed that Germany had no other choice but to sign the treaty
17
Q
Did Germany sign the treaty? How did they come to this decision
A
- Scheidemann resigned and a new coalition cabinet, led by Gustav Bauer, was formed
- meanwhile, some high-ranking officers in German army, with the tactic support of Field Marshal von Hindenburg, were discussing the possibility of resisting the signing of the treaty through renewed military actions
- 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 that Germany had no alternative but to accept the Treaty
- the Bauer cabinet bowed to the inevitable and signed the treaty
18
Q
did the division over the signing of the treaty of Versailles continue?
A
- the divisions over the signing of the 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 would rebound upon them
- 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
19
Q
What was the policy of fulfilment?
A
- 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
20
Q
Reaction of pro-republican parties
A
- 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 with it were forced to become defensive
- to the public at large, the gains of the revolution seemed unimpressive
21
Q
reaction on the right
A
- right-wing resentment of the Republic was intensified by the signing of the 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 treaty of Versailles
22
Q
Who were the November Criminals?
A
- the politicians who were responsible for the dethroning of the Kaiser, the signing of the armistice and the acceptance of the treaty became labelled the ‘November Criminals’
- their actions of ‘betrayal’ were referred to as ‘the stab in the back’
23
Q
who promoted the ‘stab in the back’ myth
A
- the German army bore no responsibility for the defeat of 1918
- the fact that Ludendorff 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
- it was Ludendorff and his superior von Hindenburg who actively promoted the ‘stab in the back’ myth
24
Q
who did the ‘stab in the back’ myth appeal to? Why?
A
- 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 of 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
25
What groups did ex-soldiers gravitate towards?
- not all 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
26
British public opinion on the whole on the treaty
- when prime minister 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 oversea empire, along with its large fleet, and would be unable to threaten European peace for a generation
27
What did Lloyd George privately think of the treaty?
- 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
28
did the British think that the treaty was unfair on Germany?
- many in Britain saw the French as being greedy and vindictive
- there was a growing feeling in Britain that Germany had been unfairly treated ay Versailles
29
French reaction to the treaty
- 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
30
United States reaction to the treaty
- reactions to the treaty in America were generally negative
- 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
- USA refused to join League of Nations and, in the 1920s, retreated from involvement in European affairs
Germany 1918-1945
flashcards
Decks in class (9)
# Cards
