Graduate Course Paper VI : INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS CONTENTS Post-First World War Peace Settlement The Bolshevik Revolution and its Impact on International Politics Rise of Fascism and Nazism in Europe and its Impact on International Relations League of Nations : Its Role; Reasons for Failure Factors Leading to the Second World War and Post-War Settlement Origin and Evolution of the Cold War Decolonization and Emergence of the Third World : Its Impact on International Politics Nonalignment : Objectives, Characteristics and Relevance Detente and the End of the Cold War 10. United Nations : Objectives, Role and Performance 11. Regional Organizations : Arab League, OAS, ASEAN, SAARC, EC and APEC 12. New International Economic Order ypenanns wn e Editor : Dr Parmanand Reader in Political Science SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING UNIVERSITY OF DELHI 5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007LESSON 1 POST-FIRST WORLD WAR PEACE SETTLEMENT Dr Niranjan Barik Reader in Political Science S.B. Women’s College, Cuttack ‘The First World War was the first of its kind in human history. Tt was the first “Total War”, in which all the resources of the countries involved were mobilized. It was the first war tobe marked by the use of the ‘aeroplane, the tank and the poison gas and submarine, In scope and intensity, in the scale of causalities, in the involvement of every national interest and the employment of every society in its service, the First World ‘War was, in fact, unprecedented. The peace conference which followed the conclusions of this great war was also the first world peace conference. ‘The War of 1914-18 was the first global war to cover all continents; Whitemen, Blackman, Yellowmen and American Indians were all in this war. Fighting occurred on nearly every continent, except North- America, and on every ocean, except those surrounding the Poles. Less than 8 per cent of the world Populations, comprising chiefly the Scandinavians, Dutch, Swiss, Spaniards and the Latin-Americans of Argentina, Chile, Mexico and Venezuela avoided the struggle. During the 4 years of the Great War, as World War I was called, approximately 9 million men in uniform were killed and 21 million wounded. ‘The number of dead civilians totalled an additional several millions. Long before the atom bomb, war had already become so costly that the questions about its usability ‘were widespread. The long and extremely costly Great War was the first modern war to raise the issue of the legitimacy and rationality of warfare as an instrument for ‘advancing a nation’s interest. David Thomson has very appropriately remarked that its greatest novelty historically was a remarkable disparity between the end sought, the price paid and results obtained. ‘Years before the first shot was fired in 1914, an acute feeling of insecurity had gripped the nations of Europe. Race for armaments, hatred, suspicion and distrust marked the politics of the day. Excess of nationalism, militarism, economic imperialism and the system of secret alliances were the fundamental ‘causes behind this war. On the eve of the war the continent of Europe was divided into two armed camps the ripe Alliance and the Tripe Entente. The newly unified states like Germany and Italy had also Joined the cut-throat competition for colonial possessions. ‘The murder on June 28, 1914, of the Archduke Francis Ferdinand, the heir apparent of the Habsburg throne, and his wife, in the streets of Serajevo, the Bosnian capital, bya Serbian youth, Gavrilo Princip, was the fatal spark, in the volatile situation to trigger the process for war. While the news of the assassination ‘was received with deep shock in the whole continent, Austria decided to settle her account on the question of Serbia for which Germany promised her full support. On July 28, Austria declared war on Serbia and the next day Germany ordered mobilization. Russia gave similar orders for war preparations. On August 1, Germany declared War and, on August 4, invaded Belgium. On the same day Britain declared war on Germany. On August 3, Germany had declared war on France. On August 1, Russia, Paying no heed to Germany's ultimatum to stay neutral, joined ‘the war. Thus, the war was waged between the Allied Powers and the Central Powers, The Allied Powers were England, France, Italy, Russia, Japan, China, Romania, Greece, Serbia, Montenegro, Belgium, Portugal and the United States. The Central Powers were Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria, After the Bloshevik revolution (1917), and owing to her reverses in the battles, Russia deserted the allies, This was, however, more than compensated by the United States which joined the Allies in April 1917. America’s joining the war, in fact turned the table in favour of the Allies. By September 1918, the Central 1Powers had been completely exhausted, and the German military leaders had informed the Government that war could not be won and demanded immediate armistice. On September 30, after the fall of Austria and Bulgaria, German General Ludendorff advised the Kaiser to conclude peace with the Allies. The terms of the armistice as demanded by President Woodrow Wilson were : (1) Germany should withdraw her troops from the soil of the Allied Powers and (2) She should announce a democratic government in place of the despotic one. On October 20, the German government agreed to these demands, The declaration regarding Kaiser's deposition and the establishment of democratic government came on November 9. On November 11, the armistice was signed between Marshall Foch, the General of the Allied Powers and the German representatives. Germany surrendered almost unconditionally. According to the terms of the Armistice, Germany (1). withdrew her army from the territories of the Allies, (2) declared the Rhineland as a demilitarized zone, (3) surrendered her war materials, submarines, baitleships in large numbers to the Allies, (4) repudiated the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk previously concluded with Russia (1918), and (5) also repudiated the Treaty of Bucharest concluded with Romania previously. Afler the Armistice, it took 5 more years to complete the general peace settlement. In 1919, the Allied and Associated Powers concluded the Treaty of Versailles with Germany (June 28), the Treaty of St. Germain with Austria (September 10), and the Treaty of Neuilly with Bulgaria (November 27); and in 1920, the Treaty of Trianon with Hungary (June 4). The final Treaty of peace was signed with Turkey on July 23, 1923 at Lausanne, and with the coming into force of this treaty on August 6, 1924, peace was at last formally established throughout the world,! The powers interested in the Pacific Ocean had also assembled at Washington in the winter of 1921- 22 and concluded a series of treaties designed to establish a status quo in the Far East. All these treaties, with a host of minor treaties and agreements arising out of them, may be said to constitute the peace settlement? Paris Peace Conference & The Treaty Of Versailles After Germany's surrender, invitations were sent to Allied countries, big and small, to send their delegates to the conference to be opened at Paris to formulate peace terms for the defeated powers. Del- cegates from the defeated countries (i.e. Germany Austria, Hungary, Turkey & Bulgaria) were not invited to participate in the process of peace-making. The conference, which was a more widely representative body than the Congress of Vienna in 1814, consisted of the representatives not only of “the Allies” but also of the “Associated Powers”. During the final stages of the War many countries had become belligerents, largely in order to gain a voice in the final settlement.? So the group of “Allied and Associated” powers was a large one., In January 1919, the conference finally met at Versailles in Paris and started the stupendous task. Architects of Peace Among the diplomats assembled at the Paris Peace Conference, most prominent were President Woodrow Wilson of America, British Prime Minister Lloyd George, French Prime Minister George Clemenceau and, Italian Prime Minister Viutorio Orlando. This group of the diplomats. popalarly known as “Big Four” took all important decisions. The most outstanding figure of the conference was President Wilson of the United States, who on his arrival in Europe, had been accorded rousing welcome by people everywhere. An ex- Professor of Political Philosophy at Princeton soaring high in the heavens, a brilliant orator, an unskilled statesman from the European standards, unaccustomed to rough and tumble bargaining with his, political equals, Wilson is said to be credited with a curious capacity to close his eyes to unpleasant. realities. Wilson, who had brought America to war and declared that the aim of the war was to make the World safe for democracy and formulated the famous 14 points, was not on many points convincing to the European diplomats. His insistence on “Open Covenants of peace openly arrived at” and his advocacy of the principle of self-determination created many thorny problems. for the statesmen of Europe. 2‘Whenever his “idealism” came into sharp conflict with “materialism” at the conference, in most cases “materialism” triumphed.* i Lloyd George, the second personality in the conference headed the British delegation. As the leader of the Liberal party, George was committed in the General Election of 1918 to a ruthless policy towards Ger- many. His slogan was “make Germany pay shilling for shilling and ton for ton”. He was outstanding with regard to wit, humour and cleverness in finding the weak points in an adversary arguments, ‘The most artful diplomat at the conference was Clemenceau, who headed the French delegation, Though suspicious and cynical about everything, he was the ablest diplomat at the Conference on account of his thorough knowledge of world affairs, He criticized both British Premier Lloyd George and American President Wilson, as evident from his remark, “Lloyd George believes himself to be Napolean, but Presi- dent Wilson believes himself to be Christ”. Yet he was prudent enough to show courtesy to them and pay outward respect to American ideals and British aspirations. It was he who never lost sight of the French goal for security at any cost from Germany. As Langsam observes, “the extent of his realism was indicated by his prudence in paying lip service to Wilson’s ideals, while pursuing the goal of exalting and securing France as he weakened Germany”. Thomson has also appropriately remarked, “Clemenceau was the old- fashioned realist, the narrow nationalist filled with hatred of Germany, to whom nothing mattered as compared with the future security of France and lasting destruction of German power” Orlando, the Italian Premier, was another diplomat at the conference who was learned, eloquent and artful but lacked command over English. He had come to the conference with a definite aim the fulfillment of the promises made to Italy in the secret Treaty of London (1915) as the prize of her participation in the First World War on the side of the Allies. When asked to express his views on the proposed League of Nations, he said “Yes, we believe in the League but we want the question of Fiume settled first”. Orlando had to leave Paris in a huff on account of President Wilson's refusal to fake into account such secret treaties made during the times of war, Paris Conference was a big gathering of 32 countries, each represented by a large number of represen tatives, It established more than 50 commissions of various sorts, and a Supreme council to co-ordinate among them. With the departure of Orlando, the Supreme Council virtually came to be a committee of the three — President Wilson of the United States, British Prime Minister Lloyd George and French Prime Minister Clemenceau — being the real architect of peace settlement. Shaping Conditions As just pointed out, the treaties of Peace were made under the direction of three democratic statesmen, cach possessing astonishing prestige. Yet while each of these remarkable men exercised his specific influence on the Treaties, the substance of the settlement was dictated by, inexorable facts, which these men ‘were compelled to accept and which no other set of statesmen, however enlightened, would have been strong enough to vary or disregard.* First of these. shaping conditions was the fact that under the impact of war, the old govemments of Russia, Germany, and Austria-Hungary had_ disappeared and that the Poles, the Czechs, the Romans, and the Serbs were setting up new national governments in their place. If the Allies statesmen in Paris had desired to check nationalist movements, they could have enforced their will only by armed forces. But that force was difficult to find as the French, the British, and the Italians were weary of war. The US.. with whom a fresh army was available, had accomplished the mission and would not employ even a single American division in a campaign to thwart the national aspirations of the Poles or the Czechs. A second. circumstance was the temper which prevailed in the European belligerent countries, which had only by the nearest margin, and at a the eleventh hour, been preserved from destruction. They held Germany responsible for the war. ‘They observed that it was not the Serbs who had invaded Austria, nor the 3Belgians who had attacked the Germans, and that it was the government of the Kaiser which had declared ‘war on Russia, Belgium and France. They were angry, vindictive, unquiet. They wanted redress and safety. No statesman in a democratic age, however independent, can prevail against the clear and passionate wishes of his countrymen? ‘Thirdly, the conference was held in a capital which was still reeling under the tragedies of the war and the shock of bombardment. In the inflamed atmosphere of Paris, the ideals of appeasement fought an unequal battle with those of retribution, The cooler air of a Swiss city, as recommended by the British, ‘would have been more conducive to a happy end.* BASIS OF THE TREATY ‘The Fourteen Points President Wilson had already laid down the conditions of peace in an address to Congress on January 8, 1918. Historic importance is attached to the 14 points, since it was on their basis that Germany agreed to surrender? ‘These fourteen points are as follows: (1) Open covenants of peace openly arrived at after which there shall be no. private international understandings of any kind, but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view. (2) Absolute freedom of navigation upons the seas during peace and war. (3) Free international trade, (4) Reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national security, (5) A just colonial policy. (6) Evacuation of Russian territory and leaving Russia to determine her political system. (7) Evacuation and restoration of Belgium without imposing limits on her sovercignty. (8) Evacuation of invaded French territory and cession of Alsace and Lorraine to France. (9) Readjustment of the frontiers of Italy on the lines of nationality. (10) Autonomous development of the peoples of Austria-Hungary. (11) Evacuation and restoration of Romania, Serbia and Montenegro. Serbia to be accorded free access 10 sea. (12) the Turkish portion of the Ottomans Empire should be guaranteed sovereignty. The nationalities under Turkish Rule to be assured autonomous development. (13) An independent Poland with free access to sea. (14) A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guaran- tees of political independence ‘and territorial integrity to great and small states alike. Main Provisions of the Treaty ‘Alsace and Lorraine were to be restored to France to. redress the wrong done by Germany in’ 1871. ‘The Coal mines of the Saar were to be regarded as property of France in compensation for the destruction of the coal mines in North of France, The Saar was to be admintstered by the League of Nations for 15 years. ‘After this period, a plebiscite was to be held and in case the people of the Saar favoured merger with Germany, France was to get compensation for relinquishing the mines. (In January 1935, 90% of the residents voted for return to Germany and France received 900 million franks as compensation). Most of Posen and West Prussia were ceded to Poland. Morsenet, Malady and Eupen were given to Belgium, as compensation for damage resulting from the German occupation. Silesia was partitioned between Germany and Poland. However, a small bit of upper Silesia was ceded to Czechoslovakia. Danzing, together with 750 square miles of adjacent territory with a population almost wholly German, was made “Free City’, under the protection of the League of Nations, but it was included in Poland to provide the latter acorridor-to sea and Poland, was’ made ‘Free City’, under the protection of the League of Nations, but it was included in Poland to provide’ the latter a corridor to sea and Poland was to take charge of the city’s foreign relations. Germany had to renounce all her rights and titles over her overseas possessions (13,000,000 of people and 9,000,000 sq. miles of territory) in favour of Principal and Associated Powers. These colo- nies were later on distributed among Britain, France, Belgium, Japan, Union of South Africa, Australia and ‘New Zealand as the Mandates of the League of Nations. The islands north of the Equator and all rights of Germany in Kiaochow in China were given to Japan, German New Guinea, Nauru and islands South of 4Equator were mandated to Britain, German Samoa was entrusted to New Zealand as a mandate of the Leauge . The rest of German islands were mandated to Australia. Besides these, Germany's all special rights and privileges in China, Siam, Siberia, Morocco and Egypt were given up. Her entire property and concessions in the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria were forfeited. ‘The unior’ of Germany of Austria was forbidden without the unanimous approval of the Council. of the League of Nations. Germany acknowledged the sovereignty of Austria. The total result was that Germany lost in Europe about 60,00,000 in population and about 25,000 square miles of territory, The total area of German colonies seized by the allies was 10,27,000 square miles... Economic Provisions The economic provisions of the Treaty subjected Germany to the payment of heavy fines. Art. 231 of the treaty said : “The Allied and Associated Governments affirm Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and thgir nationals have: been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Gérmany and her Allies.” Since it was recognized (under Art.232) that the resources of Germany were not adequate to make complete repara- tion for all losses and damages done to the civilian population of the Allies and Associated powers and their property, it was provided that Germany would reimburse Belgium with interest of 5 per cent all the money the latter had borrowed from the Allies Governments during the year of war. A reparation Commission was to be appointed by the Allies Powers to determine the total amount. of reparation and the mode of payment distributed over 30. years beginning from May 1, 1921. Germany agreed to make annual deliveries of coal for 10 years to France, Belgium and Italy. She was to give to the Allies, tar, ammonium sulphare, dyestuffs and chemicals in huge quantities, Military Provisions As a military power, Germany was crippled. Germany had to abolish conscription, i.e. compulsory military service. She was required to adopt a method of voluntary enlistment of at least 12” years for the men and 25_ years for the officers. Military training outside the army was prohibited. The German General Staff was abolished, The total strength of the German Army was fixed at one lakh men including 4,000 officers. These officers were to be devoted exclusively to the maintenance of law and order in Germany. ‘The Rhine was to be demilitarized for SO Kms. east of the river. Its western zone was to be occupied by the Allied Powers for 15 years. the existing fortification of the Rhineland was to be destroyed, No military force was to be maintained in that region and no manoeuvres of the Germany army were to be held in the Rhineland. Germany's navy was reduced to 6 battleships of 1,000 tons, 6 light cruisers, 12 destroyers, 12 torpedo boats and a personne! of 15,000. All submarines were forbidden. Heligoland was to be dismantled and the Baltic and North sea coasts were to be kept free from fortification. The manufacture of armaments and raw materials was limited and such materials could be stored only at points to be notified by the Allied Powers. No war materials were to:be exported imported. Poisonous gases, armored cars and tanks were to be neither made or imported. ‘The Legal Clauses of the Treaty of Versailles ‘The war guilt clause for the Treaty of Versailles imposed on Germany and her allies responsibility for all Allied loss and damage. Kaiser William Il, former German Emperor, was accused of “Supreme offense against international morality and the sanctity of treaties”. But as he had taken shelter in the Netherlands, which refused to extradite him, he could not be brought to trial. Only some dozen “war criminals” were put to trial at Leipzig and they escaped with minor punishment. (Thus the Germans, accused of having committed acts in violation of the laws or war were to be punished before military tribu- nals of the Allies. Out of a list of 100 such criminals, eventually the Allies agreed to 12 being tried in .Germany by German courts. A few were convicted and given mild sentences. Indeed, in 1925, Hindenberg, a war criminal, was elected German President and the incident passed off without any protest.) Political and Miscellaneous Provisions ‘The Treaty of Versailles incorporated the provisions of the League of Nations, whose primary purpose ‘was to ensure the maintenance of peace; of an International Labour Organization for the regulation of labour conditions; and of a mandatory system of govemment for the colonies to be ceded by Germany. ‘These institutions became after 1919 a regular and essential part of the new world order, Treaty of Brest: Litovsk concluded between Germany and Russia as well other treaties concluded before war were abro- gated, Germany had to withdraw her army in the east within her new frontier. Independence of Belgium, Poland, Yogoslavia and Czechslovakia was recognized. Critical Appraisal of the Treaty of Versailles A Dictated Treaty ‘The Treaty of Versailles is one of the most controversial documents that have ever been signed by the nations in the modem’ times! It has been said that the peace conference was not a conference at all but a tribunal before which the central powers were ‘summoned to hear their doom. Professedly the provisions of the Treaty were drafted according to the noble principles enunciated by President Wilson of the United States. But it was in reality a peace imposed by the victor on the vanquished. It was not based on the principle of “reciprocity”, There was no negotiation nor any consultations with uhe Germans. Rather they were given in the draft of the treaty so as to present their “observations” ‘The German delegation submitted to the Allies a detailed memorandum elaborating its criticism of the ‘Treaty. However, all the German ‘objections were turned down, Germany was issued an ultimatum and deadline to either accept the Treaty unconditionally or face invasion. Lloyd George warned Germany, “We ‘say Gentlemen, you must sign. If you do not do it in Paris you will do so in Berlin”. The German delegates had no other options but to put their signatures on it, The German National Assembly after stormy debate approved the treaty by 208 votes to. 115 on June 29, 1919, but the nation held the ‘Treaty to be imposed on them under duress and hence this dictated peace not normally binding on them, ‘Thus the Treaty, as Lipson appropriately comments, “did not assume the form of pact freedly negoti- ated between the belligerents; it was. an instrument imposed by the conquerors upon a crushed and humili- ated foe”. Ordinary courtesies of international intercourse were not observed as the German delegates were treated like captives. they were taken before the peacemakers only on two occasions once for receiving the draft and again for putting their signature upon it. Thus it was an imposed treaty, and not one, negotiated by a process of give and take. While every treaty that brings a war to an end is, in one sense a dictated peace, fora defeated power seldom accepts willingly the consequences ofits defeat, in the Treaty of Versailles the element of dictation was more apparent than any previous treaty of modern times. ‘Since Germany did not participate in drafting the Treaty, the conference was deprived of any ‘opposi- tion which could have moderated some of the extreme provisions that made Germany totally resentful and humiliated: and again, since no German fiad been consulted in drafting the treaty, it was almost impossible to mobilize any opinion in Germany in support of the Treaty. Lip Service to the principle of self-determination ‘The principle of national. self-determination, as contained in the Wilsonian idealism, was not prop- erly honoured, The 14 points were observed only where they were to the advantages of the victors. The principle of self-determination was particularly exploited by the victorious powers to crush Germany in very possible way. The ‘most notable exceptions to this right were the creation of the Free City Danzing, “stemming from President, Wilson's ‘promise to give Poland an access to the sea; the provisional. separation 6of the Saar basin from Germany for the purpose of reparations and the transfer to the newly created State of Czechoslovakia of about 3 million Germans so that she might have a strategic frontier. One-third of the population of Poland belonged by racial test to other states, but these people were placed under Pollish rule in order to give her economic viability and access'to the sea. Harsh and Vindictive treaty When the terms of the draft treaty were made known to the Germans, they were regarded as “Stagger- ing in their severity and impossible of fulfilment”. The Treaty was designed to keep Germany in perpetual subjection. While Germany was stripped of her armaments and left naked before her enemy, the Allied powers were entitled to ask for impossible sums as reparations and to occupy German territory as a guaran- tee of payment. That Germany should be compelled to renounce all the conquests of the Great Frederick was the least easy for their pride to accept. Germany's economy was shattered as a result of the vindictive treaty. Gemany lost a population of 70 lakhs, 15% of arable land, 12% of her livestock and nearly 10% of her manufacturing establishments, Germany suffered the loss of 40% of her coal reserve, two-thirds of her iron ore and much of her other natural resources which dislocated her industry, trade and commerce, All German overseas possessions were ceded as “Mandated Territories” of the League and the victorious powers distributed these mandated territories among themselves. The rich coal mines of the Saar were taken away from Germany and placed under French administration for 15 years. Thus, Germany was militarily humbled, politically segregated ‘and economically crippled. ‘Violation of the principle of Reciprocity : Reciprocity regarding disarmament, transportation, war crimes and punishment of guilty officers and soldiers was not observed. War crimes were not the monopoly of the German officers and the record of the ‘Allied army men was not hundred per cent clean. Similarly with the disarming of Germany, the Allies voluntarily assumed the obligation of reducing their own military establishments. But no disarmamemt ensued among the victors. Fragmentation of Europe : ‘One unfortunate result of the Treaty was the fragmentation of Europe. Before 1914, Europé com- prised 19 states, now after the peace Treaty there were 26 states. Many of them were so small that from the economic point of view they could not sustain themselves. ‘Treaty partly enforced ‘The most serious failure of the Treaty was that it was not fully enforced. Almost as soon as ‘it was signed England and France assumed different attitudes towards Germany. While England felt that Ger- many would take at least 60 years to recover, France was worried over Germany's military potential, ‘These differences with the breach of many provision of the Treaty by the Allies, enabled Germany to bypass the treaty and escape from most of its obligations. Seeds of Second World War “The dissatisfaction caused by the Treaty of Versailles, according to some, contained the seeds of the Second World War. It created new wounds in the process of healing old ones. Germany was the principal aggrieved party as the peace treaty was harsh, vindictive and impossible of fulfilment. “The treaty crippled her economically, segregated her politically, humbled her militarily, humiliated her nationally, and ex- hausted her physically. It registered on the consciousness of the German nation the concept of dictated ‘peace which could be altered only by superior force. Hitler, an aggressive nationalist, for all these reasons, described it as“‘an instrument of anlimited blackmail and shameful humiliation.”Besides Germany, Italy's national aspirations were also not fulfilled, she was dubbed as Jackal on the feast at the Paris Peace conference. She was rebuffed for her desire to get Fiume which was of strategic importance to her. The Allies hurt Italy when they did not meet her territorial demands according to her secret Treaty of London (1915). Her dissatisfaction with the Tresty of Versailles was one of the major causes of rise of totalitarianism in Italy. Other Peace Treaties ‘The Treaties of St. Germain “The Treaty of St. Germain with Austria was signed on September 10, 1919 and was modelled on the. ‘Treaty of Versailles. this Treaty converted Austria, whose Habsuburg rulers had for many centuries enjoyed precedence over other European sovereigns into a small German Republic, The preamble to the Treaty declared that “the former Austro-Hungarian monarchy had ceased to exist and had been replaced by a republican government”. Article 88 of the treaty forbade the reunion of Austria and Germany. The Austri- ans were compelled to change the name of their country from German Austria to the Republic of Austria. As per the terms of the Treaty, she had to accept the responsibility for cuaisng loss and damage to the Allies. Her provinces, in which medley of races had existed in uneasy union-Germans, Majors, Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Ruthenians, Serbs, Croats, Romanians and Italians were divided out among her neighbours. Italy received from Austria the south Tirol, the Trentino, Trieste, Istria and some islands off Dalmatia, Poland obtained Austrian Galicia and Romania was awarded Bukovina, Yogoslavia got Bosnia, Herzegovina and Dalmatian coast and some islands.” A new state of Czechoslovakia consisting of Austrian territory of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia was created. The Austrian army was reduced 10 30,000 men and her navy was decreased to 3 police boats on Danube. She renounced all her rights, privileges and concessions in non-European areas. She assented to blank reparation cheque and acknowledged the right of the Allies to try Austrian was criminals. ‘The articles of the Treaty of Versailles regarding the formation of the League of Nations and the ILO were also included in the Treaty of St. Germain. ‘Thus, Austro-Hungarian empire, her large army and glorious dynasty all disappeared in’ the whirlwind. Austria lost three-fourth of her territory and population to emerge as a small republic of some 6 million people losing her pristine glory. ‘Treaty of Neuilly with Bulgaria This treaty was concluded with Bulgaria on November 27, 1919. According to the provision of this ‘Treaty : (1) the western part of Bulgaria was given to Yugoslavia - though the Bulgars were in a majority there (2) Weslern Thrace and Aegean Coast were transferred to Greece, though Bulgaria was guaranteed across to the Aegean Coast (3) The Bulgarian army was limited to 20,000 and her navy was liquidated, though for police and fishery duties she was allowed to retain 4 torpedo and 6 motor boats and (4) Bulgaria had to accept reparation obligations amounting to 450 million dollars payable in 37 years beginning from 1921. The Treaty rendered Bulgaria the weakest of the Balkans State in area, national resources and military power. ‘Treaty of Trianon with Hungary ‘The peace treaty was signed with Hungary in the magnificent Trianon palace at Versailles on June 4,, 1920. Hungary was separated from Austria. Transylavania was given to Romania, Yogoslovia obtained Croatia-Slavonia, Slovakia became part of the new state of Czechoslovakia. Austria was given west Hun- gary, Hungary's army was reduced to 35,000 men and her navy was reduced to a few patrol boats. These provisions reduced Hungary to one-third of her pre-war territory and to 40% of her population. This Treaty gave rise to most acute racial disturbances ‘and animosities, as it flouted the principle of national self-determination. Hungary under the treaty of Trianon bore witness to the fact that the treaty makers were ‘eager to stretch their principles wherever possible to the advantage of Allied Powers and the detriment of enemy country. ‘Treaty of Serves and the Treaty of Lausanne with Turkey ‘The Treaty of Sevres was imposed upon Turkey on August 10, 1920, But the Treaty never came into force as it was opposed effectively by the nationalists under the leadership of Kemal Pasha. However in this Treaty, Turkey lost all her rights in Egypt, the Sudan, Cyprus, Tripolitania, Morocco and Tunisia. Turkey also renounced her right over Arabia, Palestine, Mesopotamia and Syria. Turkey ceded Smyma and south-east Asia Minor to be temporally administered by Greece which also occupied portion of Turkish land in the Aegean and eastern Thrace. Rhodes and Dodecanese were ceded to Italy. Turkey was allowed to retain Constantinople but the zone of ‘straits was demilitarized and internationalized. France received Syria and England Palestine and Iraq as mandates from the League. Turkey retained only a fraction of her former territories including central Anatolia. She was, however, exempted from reparation payment. ‘The provisional nationalist government established by Kemal Pasha at Ankara demanded Asia Minor and Thrace for Turkey, The Greeks had, in the meanwhile, occupied Smyrna but the nationalists liberated it in September 1992. They deposed the Sultan Muhammad VI in November 1922 and abolished the Caliph- ate. The Allied Powers met the demand of the nationalist government by a separate peace treaty called the ‘Treaty of Lausanne, — ‘The Treaty of Lausanne (1923), which was substituted for the Treaty of Sevres, was unique among the peace treaties since it was the only one to be freely negotiated between parties concemed.'* Turkey aban- doned her claims qn Egypt, Sudan, Cyprus, Palestine, Syfia, Mesopotamia and Arabia, but she retained Constantinople and Easter Thrace as welll as Anatolia together with Smyma. ‘The coveted price of the Byszantine city there remained in Turkey's possession, and she still had a foothold in Europe."* ‘The straits were neutralized, and free passage was granted to the ships of all counties. Minorities Treaties ‘The problems of minorities were created by the boundary adjustments carried out by different treaties which redrew the political map of Europe. In most of the states, important minorities were left whose rights had to be safeguarded. ‘The peace conference, therefore, appointed a committee which recommended a course that would avoid so much autonomy to minorities as to constitute them “a state within states”, but at the same time provide protection for them, so that their position might not become precarious. Guaran- tees for the protection of their political rights, religious freedom, provision of schools and the use of their language were included in the weaties with Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey. The Allies also concluded minority treaties with Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Romania, Greece, Armenia. Several states concluded bilateral treaties to protect one another's minorities. The supervision over the minority guaran- tees was left to the League of Nations, By the consent of a majority of the League Council these guarantees could be modified. Conclusion To conclude safely, one could say that in the post- World War I phase various statesmen of victorious states tried to insticutionalize peace through various peace treaties — the most important being the Treaty of Versailles — and the establishment of the League of Nations. However, the various Provisions of the Treaty relating to Germany had left that state thoroughly frustrated, demoralized and, consequently, immensely angry and revengeful. What followed subsequently is well known to any serious student of international relations.Be ema 2. Foot notes EH, Carr (1977), International Relations between the Two World Wars 1919-1939, London: The Macmillan Press, p.. Ibid., pl. David Thomson (1990), Europe since Napolean, Penguin, p.615, W.C. Langsam (1981), The World Since 1919, Delhi: Surjcet, p-8. D. Thompson, n. 3, 619. HAL. Fisher (1994), A History of Europe, Delhi, Surjeet, p.1257. Tbid., p.1258-59. Ibid., p.1259. E, Lipson (1993), Europe in the 19th & 20th Centuries New Delhi : Allied, p.303. EH. Caryn, ps. M.G. Gupta (1942), Internatioal Relations Since 1919, Allahabad: Chaitanya, p.22. J.C. Johari, (1995), International Relations and Politics - Diplomatic History between Two World Wars, New Delhi: Sterling, 50. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, (\ranslated from German by James Murphy, nyy.,.N. Delhi: Sagar Pub.) p.347. E, Lipson, n.9, p.318. Ibid., p.319. » BIBLIOGRAPHY Carr, EH. (1977), International Relations Between The Two World Wars 1919-1939, London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd. i Dhar, S.N. (1982), International Relations and World Politics Since 1919, New Delhi : Kalyani Publishers. Gupta M.G. (1992), /niernational Relations Since 1919, Allahabad : Chaitanya Publishing House. Johnson, P. (1983), A History of the Modern World from 1917 to the 1980s, London : Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Langsam, W.C. (1981), The World Since 1919, Delhi: Surjeet Publishers, Lipson, E. (1993), Europe in the 19th & 20th Centuries, New Delhi : Allied Publishers Ltd. ‘Schuman, Frederick L. (1969), International Politics, New York: Mc Graw-Hill Book Company, Sen, A.K. (1993), International Relatiosn since World War I, New Delhi: S. Chand & Company Led. Thomson, D. (1990), Europe Since Napoleon, Penguin.LESSON 2 THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION AND ITS IMPACT ON INTERNATIONAL POLITICS Niraj Kumar, Research Scholar, Department of Political Science (University of Dethi) ‘The Russian Bolshevik (literally meaning “majority” in the Russian language) Revolution of 1917 ‘was an event of great significance and consequence,not only on the domestic front, but also for international politics. It heralded a new era in Russia's domestic politics bringing far-reaching changes in the economic, political and social structures. On the éther hand, it reshaped international politics, making Russia, and subsequently its new incamation, the USSR, a great global power. The Revolution also became a dream- goal for many Third World countries in years to follow. ‘The imperialist autocrat regime of the Tsar Was the main cause behind the great Revolution. Serfdom was abolished in 1861; however, even after the abolition of Serfdom there was discontent among the Russian peasantry, because abolition of Serfdom did not bring equitable distribution of land, millions of peasants still remained landless. The lot of the industrial workers, a new class which emerged owing to industrialization, was no better, The Revolution took place because there was no popular government, no elected body with real power to make laws and a total lack of civil rights and political freedom. Marxism was adopted to bring changes in Russia, Russia was the first socialist country which came into existence after the Bolshevik Revolution led by Lenin in 1917. Let us now examine various causes of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, Socio-economic Cause At the beginning of the 20th century,Russia was a poor and backward country. The form of govem- ment at that time in Russia was absolute monarchy. It was an empire which comprised about 1/6th of the total land surface of the world. Russia was ruled by autocratic rulers. The last autocratic ruler of Russia was ‘Tsar Nocholas II, who ruled from 1894 to 1917. He was almost ignorant of his subjects’ problems, Earlier feudalism existed in the country and until 1860, the bulk of the peasants had been serfs, Prior to the revolution of 1917, several revolutionary movements and reforms had already taken place. Feudalism, as mentioned, was abolished by Tsar Alexander II in 1861. Even after the abolition of serfdom, there was discontent among the Russian peasantry. The main cause of this discontent was unequal distribu- tion of land. The Russian nobility and the Church were the owners of vast estates and there were. millions of peasants without any landholdings of their own. ‘The heavy burden of taxation was borne by the poor peasants and the rich peasants or the Kulaks were Privileged. The Kulaks did not have to pay heavy taxes. The peasants were generally not getting adequate wages for their labour to meet their basic needs. On the other hand, Industrial Revolution had not influenced Russia much. The industries in Russia were in a poor state. They usually lacked capital. The conditions of the industrial workers were also miserable. Their living and working places were in very unhygenic condi- tions. The Government was oblivious of the poor conditions of the industrial workers. The working hours were long in Industries. The capalists and the Kulaks fully supported the Tsar, uSocio-Political Cause Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP}: To bring about Socio-economic changes in Rus- sia, Marxism was adopted. In the later part of the 19th century, Socialist groups had been formed. To form the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party in 1898, various socialist groups had joined together. Lenin was the leader of the left wing section of the party. This section secured a majority in the party congress in 1903 and came to be known as the Bolsheviks and the minority section as the Mensheviks. ‘This split gave a new dimension to the party. Both these groups wanted the socialist revolution in Russia to be preceded by a democratic revolution. But the former wanted the working class to lead this democratic phase of the revolution, while the latter wanted the bourgeoisie to lead it. Other groups, like the Legal Marxists wanted the social democrats to work legally as a mass party. With the approval of the state and the economists who wanted the working class and social democrats to take up only the economic struggles. Ultimately, under the leadership of Lenin, the Bolshevik revolution took place in 1917 and succeeded in replacing the existing government, ‘The Revolution of 1905 ‘Armention of what came to be known as the 1905 revolution would be in order here. Russia, after the humiliating defeat by Japan (1904-05), lost Port Arthur, the Liaotung peninsula, half of the island of Sakhalin and all claims to Korea. The war between Russia and Japan ended with the Treaty of Portsmouth, ‘The mighty army of the Tsar was exposed. At the same time the country was suffering from political unrest. The news of the loss of Port Arthur intensified the unrest. Under the leadership of Father George Gapon, a demonstration was organized by the police - sponsored union, the association of factory and mill workers on January 22,1905(called the Bloody Sunday). The demonstration was organized to present a petition to the ‘Tsar, asking for an 8-hour day, a minimum daily wage of one rubble, a repudiation of bungling bureaucrats and a democratically elected Constituent Assembly to introduce representative government into the empire! Many unarmed, peaceful demonstrators were Killed in an open police firing. In retaliation, the revolu- tionaries also killed many prominent persons. A wave of political strikes broke out. Many of Social Demo- rats, more Mensheviks than Bolsheviks, appeared from underground or from exile to give revolutionary direction to these movements. Councils or Soviets of workers were formed in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Trotsky, who was president of the Soviets, became popular. The Soviet pattern did not succeed at that particular time, but it was again adopted in 1917. The Tsar and his advisers succeeded in their intention to divide the opposition by releasing the October Manifesto. The setting up of an elected parliament called the Duma, was promised in the October Manifesto. The Constitutional Democrats, with a Duma promised, allowed themselves to hope that social problems could henceforth be dealt with by parliamentary methods. The liberals set up a party called Cadets to contest the clections. Many revolutionary intellectuals continued to work upon the popular agitation in hope to abolish the Tsarist monarchy and to establish a Socialist Republic.* The Duma The Duma, an elected parliament, was established in 1906 by ‘Tsar Nicholas II. Russia became a semi-constitutional monarchy for ten years, from 1906 to 1916. However, the Tsarist redime did not allow any real participation in government by the public. The landlords, the capitstist and the other rightist ‘would dominate the Duma, because they were the supporters of the Tsar. The Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks, both the wings of the Social Democrats refused to recognize the Duma, urged workers to boycott it, and 12refused to put up any candidate for the election of 1906. ‘The principle of voting was not equitable. The system of voting was indirect in which peasants and workers voted as separate classes, and with proportionately far less representation than was granted to the Iandlords, In the absence of socialist candidates, the workers and peasants yoted for all sorts of people, including the liberal constitutional democrats, who obtained a sweeping majority. The Cadets (the Liberal Constitutional Democrats) demanded true universal suffrage and the responsibility of ministers to a parlia- mentary majority. In response of these demands, the Tsar dissolved the Duma only after two months.’ ‘The 1907, the second Duma was elected, with the government trying to control the elections through suppression of party meetings and newspapers, but since the Social Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks now consented to take part, some 83 socilaists were elected. The victory of the revolutionary left created a kind of fear in the minds of the Cadets. The Cadets were of the view that constitutional progress must br gradual. They showed a willingness to cooperate with the govemment, which, however, denouncing and arresting some 50 socialists as revolutionaries, bent only on destruction, again abruptly put an end to the Duma itself. ‘The third Duma was elected owing to the wishes of the Tsar, It managed to, hold several sessions between 1907 and 1912. It gave an increased representation to the landed propertied class, and guaranteed ~ aconservative majority for the government, The duration of the fourth Duma was from 1912 to 1916, It was. almost similar to the third one. ‘The Bolshevik Revolution : End of Tsarism and the Establishment of the Dictatorship of thee Proletariat The Tsarist autocraty got a severe blow owing to and during the First World war. The crisis that had gripped the Russian state was accentuated by the First World War. When the war began, the contradictions started rising between the feudals and the peasants, the peasants and the capitalist farmers or the Kulaks, the Kulaks and landless agricultural labour, between factory owners and the workers, and between the big bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeoisie, and so on, Russia still was relatively backward in comparison to other imperialist powers, so it could not sustain the enormous cost of the war and the burden borne by the working people and the peasants. Even the soldiers and the workers were up in arms against the state. The result was the Revolution of November 1917. Prince Lvov, chosen by the Duma on March 14,1917, headed the provisional government. The govern- ‘ment tried to maintain law and order, a strong foreign policy, and also called for elections by universal suffrage to a constituent assembly, which was to meet late in the year, and prepare a constitution for the new regime. The decision to continue war with Germany was government's big mistake. The government was lacking the mass support. It was opposed by many of the Bolsheviks. ‘The Petrogard Soviet, mainly domi- nated by the Mensheviks, opposed the provisional government. The Mensheviks were also against a Marx~ ist-type of revolution. The Liberal-dominated government failed to carry out reforms. ‘Meanwhile, the revolution was well advanced when Lenin and the other Bolsheviks arrived in Petrogard in the middle of April. They immediately took side with the Petrogard Soviet against. the provisional government and with similar Soviets that had sprung up in other parts of the country. Lenin had to flee for some time to Finland, when the Bolshevik-led uprinsing in July was put down by the government. Prince Lvov was replaced by Socialist Kerensky, as the head of the Provisional Government. ‘This step was taken by the government to gain the support of the masses. But Kerensky was opposed by the Liberals. The Liberals sent a force of cavalry to Petrogard to restore order under the leadership of General Kornilov, The force led by Komiloy was defeated and thus the liberals were discredited. A govern- ment led by Woderate Socialist Kerensky was formed of non-Bolsheviks socialists only. Meanwhile the soldiers, who had deserted the army were up in arms against the government. The peasants, the workers and 13the soldiers came together and started seizing the lands from the landlords. ‘The revolutionary programme was chalked out by the Bolsheviks. Lenin concentrated on 4 points : ~ first; immediate peace with the central powers; second, redistribution of land to the peasants; third, transfer Of factories,mines and other industrial plants from the capitalists to the committees of workers in each plant; and fourth,recognition of the Soviets as the supreme power instead of the provisional government? Lenin was bold, flexible and a tactician, He deviated himself from the theoretical Marxism, taking into consider- ation the immediate situation in Russia. The need of the hour was to win over soldiers, peasants and workers by promising them peace,land and bread.* Lenin rightly stuck to these programmes. ‘The slogan,”All power to the Soviets”, was raised by Lenin to crush Kerensky, and forestall the coming Constituent Assembly. Kerensky, unable to Wait for the Constituent Assembly, convoked a kind of pre-parliament representing all parties, labour unions dnd zemstvos. By doing this he wanted to broaden the base on which he stood. But Lenin and the Bolsheviks boycotted this pre-parliament, they called an all- Russian Congress of Soviets. Lenin now stressed that the time had cme cor the seizure of power, The Bolsheviks themselves were divided. The move of Lenin was opposed by different quarters. The opposition came from leader like Zinoviev and Kamenev, but at the same time Lenin was backed by Trotsky, Stalin, and a majority of the party central committee. The troops controlled by the Bolsheviks garrisoned in Petrograd and voied to support the Soviets. The Bolshevik Revolution or November Revolution came in action on the night of November 6-7, 1917. ‘The Bolsheviks took over telephone exchanges, railway stations, and electric lighting plants in the city. A warship tured its guns on the Winter Palace, where Kerensky’s government sat. The latter could find almost no one to defend it The hastily-assembled Congress of Soviets pronounced the provisional government defunct, and named in its place of “Council of People's Commissars”, of which Lenin became the head: Trotsky and Stalin became “Commissar for Foreign Affars", and “Commissar for Nationalities” respectively, Kerensky fled and took shelter in the United States, where he lived for many years. ‘Thus were the objectives of the Bolshevik Revolution accomplished. But the long-awaited constituent assembly remained to be dealt with. It met in January 1918. 36 million persons had voted for it. The votes cast in favour of Kerensky’s party outnumbered the votes cast for the Bolsheviks. However, said Lenin, “to hand over power to the constituent assembly would again be compromising with the malignant bourgeoisie”. The Assembly was broken up on the second day of its session as armed sailors dispatched by the people’s commissars simply surrounded it. The dissolution of the constituent assembly was a frank repudiation of majaority rule in fabvour of “class rule” to be exercised for the proletariat by the Bolsheviks. The dictator- ship of the proletariat was now established. ‘Two months later, in March 1918, the Bolsheviks renamed themselves the Russian Communist party (Bolsheviks), In December 1925, the name was again changed to All-union Communist Party Bolsheviks). In 1952, the name was finally changed to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. (CPSU), and the word “Bolsheviks” was deleted. ‘The Impact of the Bolshevik Revolution on International Relations ‘The new Government came into existence after the successful Bolshevik Revolution. It was a chal- Tenge to imperialism. The government was against war and colonization, The government wanted to restore peace, and for that reason it had taken initiatives in the form of peace declarations. Decree on Peace ‘The first initiative of the government, which took over, was adoption of the “Decree on Peace”. The new government denounced the continuing war as the most heinous crime against humanity and delcared its willingness to sign a peace settlement immediately on terms that would be equally fair to all peoples 14wihtout any exceptions. It declared a just and democratic peace as one wihtout annexations and indemni- ties.: The Decree said, “the workers of Germany, France, and Britain will understand the duty imposed upon them to liberate humanity from the horrors and consequences of war; and that these workers, by decisive, ‘energetic and continued action, will help us to bring to a successful conclusion the cause of peace-and at the ‘same time, the cause of the liberation of the exploited working masses from all slavery and all exploitation, The Declaration of Rights of the working and exploited people In the third All-Russian Congress of Soviet in January 1918, “the Declaration of Rights of the working and exploited people” was adopted. The declaration reaffirmed an inflexible determination to deliver man- kind from the most criminal of all wars, to achieve at all costs a democratic peace among nations, without annexation or indemnities, on the principle of self-determination of nations. The declaration proclaimed the Soviet State's “..Complete break with the barbarous policy of bourgeois civilisation, which has built the prosperity of the exploiters belonging to a few chosen nations on the enslavement of hundreds of millions of working people in Asia, in the colonies in general and in the small countries”. ‘The intention of the world powers was quite dissimilar to the Bolsheviks. When the declaration came into existence, the world powers had no intention of establishing a just peace and remaking on demo- cratic lines the system of international relations. The world powers considered the declaration as an alien notion. The Peace Treaty of Brest-Litovsk After the failure to negotiate a general peace settlement with he Entente Powers, Russia signed a peace treaty with Germany in March 1918. In this treaty, Germany humiliated Russia on many accounts. Prior to this treaty, Russia entered into peace talks with Germany, Austria, Hungry, Turkey and Bulgari ‘The Russian proposal included 6 points on forcible annexation of territories occupied during the war : restoration of political independence 10 the nations vanquished during the war; freedom of choice to the national minorities to either remain within a state or become independent through a referendum; safeguard- ing of the rights of the national minorities in a state by special legislation protecting their national culture and whatever possible, administrative autonomy; renunciation of war indemnities; and solutions of colonial problems in accordance with the first four principles, Ultimately, Germans rejected all the proposals and the humiliating treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed by Russia on German's terms. Russia sacrificed for peace, Peaceful coexistence Following the principles of socialism, Russia adopted the policy of peaceful coexistence, The theory of peaceful coexistence was not acceptable to the other imperialist powers of the world. They waged unsuccess- ful war against Russia to restore the prerevolutionary Socio-economic order. The principle of peaceful coexistence was adopted and a new system of international relations in the period of transition from world Capitalism to world socialism was also approved. Peaceful coexistence implies that the superiority of a social system must be determined not by war or preparation of war but by competition on the economic, political, social and spiritual ficlds and mutually beneficial cooperation. The Soviet Government used this term in its official document for the first time in 1920 at the All-Russian central executive committee by foreign minis- ter G.V. Chickerin. » Friendship Treaties | The Russian Revolution gave many countries the inspiration to fight against their colonial masters or aghinst imperialism. Russia aimed at reshaping international relations on democratic lines. Russia enabled fofmally independent small states, colonial and semi-colonial countries to struggle for and defend their sovereignty against oppression and encroachment by imperialist powers. Russia willingly gave friendly assistance in their struggle against imperialism. It gave political as well as economic support to those 15‘countries who were fighting against imperial powers, Russia provided its support to Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran and other countries in the struggle for liberation. It signed a freindship treaty with Iran in February 1921, guarantcering Iran's independence and security of her borders with the Soviet Union. Similar kind of treaty of friendship was signed with Turkey. By this treaty, Russia gave economic, financial and military aids to Turkey. Similarly, Afghanistan also got assistance from Russia by signing'a friendship treaty with her. The Civil war (1918-22) and its Impact ‘The counter~revolutionaries waged a civil war which started in 1918 and continued till 1922. These counter-revolutionaries wanted to overthrow the Communist government formed by the Bolsheviks. The Western powers were supporting them.. Those supporting the civil war known as ‘Whites’ and communists were known as ‘Reds’. The Whites were supported by the Mensheviks, Liberals and other right wingers, The Civil war was crushed by the Red Army, because though the Whites were large in number, they were badly divided and poorly led. At the same time, the Red Army was led by Lenin, a very powerful leader. The successful revolution of 1917 by the Bolsheviks and the establishment of the first Communist country in the world gave sleepless. nights to the Western powers. The Western powers extended their support to the civil war only with hope to keep the world away from Communism, The Western powers like ‘America, Japan, Britain and France, tried their level best to keep the world safe for capitalism. Ultimately, the civil war came to an end in 1922. ‘The Russo-Polish War ‘After the Revolution of 1917, the newly-constituted Lenin government managed to strengthen the eocnomy of the country. It also succeeded in suppressing political opposition. The Red Army grew in strength. The Allies realized the futility of continuing with the intervention. Therefore, in 1920 the United States, Britain and other Western powers lifted the Russian bloackade. In May 1920, Poland waged a war against Russia. At the end of the 18th century, Russia had occupied some parts of erstwhile Poland. The. reunited Poland was constituted with the Polish territories under the control of Russia, Germany and Austria after the First World War. Poland wanted to expand her territory. ‘The war started in May 1920, and continued till October 1920. ‘The pants of earswhile Poland were occupied by the Tsarist Russia. Poland ceased to exist since 1791. ‘The parts of Ukraine and White Russia were at one time part of Poland. After the reunification of Poland, the feudal Lords pressurized the new government to wage a war against Russia to regain their lost land. The Polish Army rushed quickly to Kiev without much resistance. Russia at that time was busy with its civil war and, therefore, it did not offer stiff resistence to begin with. But by the time the Polish Army reached Kiev, the Soviet Army prepared itself and launched a counter offensive which threw the Polish Army out of Ukraine. ‘The Russian Army not only pushed out the Polish Army out of Russia, but they reached almost the outskirts of Warsaw, the polish capital. ‘The European powers saw it as a serious threat of Communist expansion, ‘The British and the French started supplying moral, material and technical support to Poland. ‘The shape of war once again changed. ‘The reunited Polish Army marched towards white Russia instead of Ukraine, Finally, the cease-fire was concluded. In 1921, at Riga, both the countries signed a treaty of peace. Both the countries accepted a compromised boundary. ‘The Communists had been ablé to defeat their enemies both within the country arid without, by the end of 1920. Russia started concentrating on bringing back the lost non-Russian territories. Russia succeeded jn bringing back many lost territories like Georgia, the Asiatic proyinces of erstwhile Russian Empire ef. Thest territories had two options: the first was the restoration of Tsarist system in their territories, and second was to become a part of Communist Russia. They opted for the second, because they thought that 16ae PIM TA BIBLIOGRAPHY Bozeman, Adda B. (1960), Politics and Culture in International History, Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press. Butherfield, Herbert, and Wight, Martin, eds. (1966), Diplomatic Investigation, Harvard Univer- sity Press. Carr, E.H. (1978), Bolshevik Revolution 1917-1923, London, Macmillan Press. Deutsch, Karl (1967), The Analysis of International Relations, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice Hall, Ferro, Mare (1980), October 1917, A Social History of Russian Revolution, London Routledges & Kegan Paul. Morgenthau, Hans J. (1954), Politics Among Nations : The struggle for power and peace. Owen, Roger, and Bob Sutclif, Bub eds. (1975), Studies in the Theory of Imperialism, London. Palmer, R.R. , & Colton, J. (1967), A History of the Modern World, New York: Alfred. A. Knoff. Pethybridge, Roger (1972), The spread of the Russian Revolution : Essays on 1917 Revolution, ‘London, Macmillan. Thomson, David, Meyer, E., and Briggs, A. (1945), Patterns of Peacemaking, London: Kegan Paul.LESSON 3 RISE OF FASCISM AND NAZISM IN EUROPE.AND ITS IMPACT ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Dr Pramod K. Mishra Reader in Political Science, RLA. College & Fulbright Visiting Professor (1999) Introduction "After the devastating First World War, the economies of the major European powers were in a shambles. Liberal democracies all over Europe were facing several challenges. The weak leaders were not able to face the multiple challenges to security and development. Capitalism, while achieving the climax in the form of imperialism, was also facing mounting challenges. Already, during the war itself, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia had thrown a major challenge to the western capitalist system. “The Treaty of Versailles through it insulting provisions had already inflicted a major wound in the ‘minds of the German people. Even the leaders and people of Italy were feeling a sense of betrayal by the prominent Allied powers like Great Britain and France. Along with the genetal reslessness of the people in Tlaly and Germany, there was an apprehension that Communism from Russia might very soon penetrate their political horizons. There was already congenial climate for some sort of revolutions. But the capitalists and liberal democracy in Germany were totally opposed to a socialist revolution, So basically Fascism in Ttaly’and Nazism in Germany emerged as counter-revolution, primarily 10 ‘oppose Communism, on the one hand, and liberal democraey, on the other. With such a backdrop, let us soe how Fascism and Nazism emerged and had their major impact in the inter-war politics of the world. Fascism under Musolini: Its emergence The genetal public blamed the Italian leadership for its failure to secure favourable terms at the Peace Conference and lost faith on their efficacy to handle the situation. ‘The things were made further difficult for the government on account of serious domestic problems confronting the country. As a result of demobilisation of the large army, large number of people were rendered jobless, and the ranks of unemployed {greatly swelled. The government even failed to provide jobs tothe veterans of war, Also, laly's foreign trade considerably declined owing to loss of forcign markets. Thanks to uncertain conditions in the country, the * tourist traffic virtually come to a standstill. On the top of it, the prices of foodstuffs showed a steep rise. In view of allthis, strikes, lock-outs and riots became a common feature. Those who come to power in the post-World War I period in Italy failed to tackle these probleins. This resulted in frequent full of governments, Most of these governments were coalition in character, sind naturally weak. In this aumosphere of political uncertainty, people were eager to have a strong patriotic government which could: manage the things effectively and restore lost prestige to the country. ‘The rising discontent'in the country was fully exploited by Mussolini who formed the Fascist Party and invited all the anti-government forces to join hands. Mussolini's Fascist Party first of all tried 10 capture power through constitutional methods, and’ took part in tho election held in. 1919, However, it suffered a defeat at the hands of the Socialists. During the next two years, Mussolini tried to increase the number of | Fascist supporters. He even tried to wean away the adherents of Socialism 10 his side by organizing syndi- cates. 19‘Major Strategies in Mussolini’s Foreign Policy: Mussolini followed a very vigorous and spirited foreign policy. He openly advocated war as the highest ideal to be pursued to establish Italy's claims for more land and colonies. As early as 1927, he declared: “We must be in a position at a given moment to mobilize five million, men and we must be in a Position to arm them”. The Western Powers were alarmed to know the ulterior motives of Mussolini. That Mussolini had scant respect for the League system of collective security and territorial integrity of small nations is clear from his following acts of high-handness. _ a) The Corfu Incident ‘On August 27, 1923, an Italian General with his staff was killed by Greek bandits while engaged in the work of delimitation of frontier. Mussolini, at once, served Greece with an ultimatum demanding heavy ‘compensation. Italian warships shelled the Greck island of Corfu and occupied it without reference of the League of Nations. His demand for a compensation of 50 million lire was fulfilled by Greece. Mussolini's handling of the affair, from beginning to end, was expressive of the new spirit of boldness. It was an ominous indication of Mussolini’s resolve to do the utmost to strengthen Italy’s position in the Mediterranean, ) Acquistion of Fiume At the Peace Conference (1919), Iualy laid claims on the port Of Fiume but president Wilson was not responsive to Italy's demand. While controversy was going on at the Paris Conference between President Wilson and the Italian delegation, public opinion in Italy was aroused to frenzy on the issue of Fiume, ‘The question was finally settled on January 27, 1924, when an agreement was signed in Rome between the Fascist government of Italy and Yugoslavia. By this agreement, the original solution creating Fiume as a free city was abandoned and greater part of Fiume was incorporated in Ttaly, leaving Yagoslavia in possession of the adjacent port of Baros and provided with satisfactory economic facilities in the main harbour. Albania and Italio-Yugoslav Relations aly and Yugoslavia found a fresh bone of contentiog on the Albanian question. The fate Of Albania ture parody of Balkan politics, In 1912, it waaet up as an independent state by Austri-Hungary and Italy in order to block Serbian expansion. In 1920, Albania was admitted as a member of the League of Nations. But Italy tried to dilute the independence of Albania by various methods. Mussolini advanced large sums of money to Albania for its internal development, and thereby tried to establish financial and military Control over it. This led to deterioration of relations between Albania and Yugoslavia. Italian control over Albania enabled Mussolini to control the Strait of Otranto and this ‘endangered Yugostavia’s access to the Mediterranean. The conclusion of the Tialio-Albanian Treaty on November 27, 1926 angered Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia turned to France for an alliance, On Good Friday of 1939, ltaly in- vaded and annexed Albania, and the King Zog fled from the country with his wife and two-day old son, Franco-Italian Relations during Fascist Regime in Italy Because of rivalry between France and Italy in the Mediterranean, the relations between the two ‘countries were strained. Italy had joined the First World War on the side of the Allied Powers in the hope of ‘getting some rewards as promised to her by them by the sceret Treaty of London. But at Paris Peace Confer- tence, the failed to achieve it on the ground of self-detcrmination. Though France and Britain Supported her case at the Paris Peace Conference, Italy thought that they did not do so strongly enough and her anger on that score was specially directed against France, whose voice had generally prevailed at the Conference, 21