Does Lloyd George bear the blame for the flawed treaty of Versaille?

Authors Avatar

Does Lloyd George bear the blame for the flawed treaty of Versaille?

Although Lloyd George was reasonably satisfied with the terns of the Versailles Treaty, and was given a hero's welcome on his return from Paris, it gradually emerged that there were many faults with the settlement. The most common charges are that it was too hard on the Germans and that some of the terms - reparations payments and German disarmament - were impossible to carry out. There was much controversy about the size of the reparations bill. J.M.Keynes, a British economic adviser at the conference, argued that £2000 million was a realistic figure which the Germans could afford to pay without bankruptcy. On the other hand, some of the British and French extremists were demanding £24 000 million, so the final figure was kinder to the Germans than it might have been. The settlement had the unfortunate effect of dividing Europe into the states which wanted to revise it (Germany being the main one), and those which wanted to preserve it, and on the whole even they turned out to be lukewarm in their support. The USA failed to ratify the settlement, to the disgust of Woodrow Wilson, and never joined the League of Nations; this in turn left France completely disenchanted with the whole business because the Anglo-American guarantee of her frontiers could not now apply. Italy felt cheated because she had not received the full territory promised her in 1915, and Russia was ignored. All this tended to sabotage the settlement from the beginning, and it became increasingly difficult to apply the terms fully. Worst of all, it ">did<-"> embitter the Germans, yet did not weaken them sufficiently to prevent further aggression. Only 20 years were to pass before Hitler's armies invaded Poland, beginning the Second World War.

`So, it is quite possible to make a case for the Versailles Treaty being flawed, but just how much is Lloyd George to blame for the failings of the settlement? To establish the answer to this question we must examine in detail the course of events and the contributions of the three main players.

`Woodrow Wilson had attempted to determine the broad lines of the peace in advance of the conference by means of his famous Fourteen Points which included such principles as national self-determination, absolute freedom of the seas, the impartial adjustment of colonial claims, and establishment of a League of Nations. Neither Lloyd George nor Clemenceau understood what all this meant, and regarded themselves as entirely uncommitted to the President's grand scheme. A major disagreement arose over the terms on which occupied territory was to be restored. Wilson clearly distinguished between Belgium and France in this respect. The former should receive full compensation for physical damage resulting from the invasion ">and <-">for the costs of resisting it. But since the invasion of France was not an illegal act, Germany was liable only for the physical damage. After his rash commitment to an indemnity at the recent election, Lloyd George was dismayed to find Wilson resolutely committed to his original idea. To represent Britain on the Reparations Commission he had chosen Lord Cunliffe, Mr Justice Sumner, and Billy Hughes, the Australian Premier. This was his first and worst error in the peacemaking. He doubtless calculated that their reputation for toughness would insure him against criticism at home. But when the three adopted a narrow, vindictive approach to German payments and stuck obstinately to it, Lloyd George could not risk provoking their resignations; for as early as February he began to be challenged by MPs who doubted his sincerity over reparations. He could only reply that the commission was at work and the Government would stand by its pledges. Back in Paris he found a complete deadlock over the indemnity by March. With typical ingenuousness he confessed to Colonel House, Wilson's special adviser, that the British claims were absurdly high as a result of an election stunt perpetrated by others. But he could not throw over the claims, and therefore mus

Join now!

`t secure a large sum for Britain, even if its actual collection were to be pushed into the distant future.

`Thus there were two objectives for Lloyd George: to settle on a respectably large sum total for German liability, and to ensure that Britain won a major share of it. The Big Three (Lloyd George, Clemeceau and Wilson) soon settled on a figure of £6 billion, but Cunliffe and his colleagues insisted on <£21 billion. The Big Three went up to £>8 billion, and Cunliffe, with great reluctance, came down to </c>12 billion and stuck. At home rumours of a ...

This is a preview of the whole essay