Why did the treaty of versailles provoke widespread hostility among Germans?

 The treaty also provoked hostility within Germany as the Germans also believed the terms of the treaty were not compatible with Wilson’s Fourteen Points as Germany lost 13% of her territory and 6 million subjects and received nothing in return. However, according to the historian J.W. Hiden, it could be argued that the only outright violation of Wilson’s professed ideal of self-determination over the German territorial settlement was the refusal of the Allies to permit the joining of Austria and Germany.

        The Germans were very angry and bitter about the loss of people and territory. They bitterly resented the fact German minorities would be ruled by the Poles. East Prussia was cut off from the Reich in order to give Poland an outlet to the sea. This area became known as the Polish Corridor. As J.W. Hiden stated in “The Weimar Republic” the Germans were: “incensed in particular by the shock of being forced to treat the long-dominated and partitioned Poland as a great power.” Further to the east, the German city of Memel was ceded to Lithuania. The left bank of the Rhine and the thirty-mile-wide strip of land on the right bank were permanently demilitarised. Also, the Saar was to be administered by the League for fifteen years, after which a plebiscite would determine its fate. In the West, Alsace-Lorraine was restored to France. This was the industrial heartland of Germany and with it gone it would prove more difficult for the Germans to supply iron and coal to their industry and armed forces, as the main product of the Saarland was iron and coal. As Keynes says: “The German Empire had been built more truly on coal and iron than on blood and iron.” This clause had a duel effect as it made German rearmament less likely; it also made repayments of reparartions less likely. This therefore caused anger amongst Germans. Germany also lost all her colonies, which were distributed to the victors under the overall authority of the League of Nations.

        The Germans themselves were refused entry to the new peace organization, the League of Nations and this was another reason why the treaty provoked hostility amongst many Germans. This exclusion made the Germans feeling isolated and resentful. Brock-dorf Rantzau had already warned the Allies against treating Germany like a ship kept in quarantine as a plague risk. As stated in “Weimar and The Rise of Hitler,” the Germans were not given equality of status with the victor powers. The Germans were still excluded from the League even after they had shown enthusiasm for it and for the new spirit of democracy. However, it could be argued that this was not very sincere and was only intended to impress the Americans and to encourage them to persuade Britain and France to make a more lenient peace. It is necessary to note, as J.W. Hiden argues, Germany’s exclusion from the League of Nations underlined the arguments of German nationalists against the Diktat of Versailles. This disillusionment made it easier for Germans to accept the false notion propagated by right wing and nationalist circles that such an “unjust” peace need never have been signed in the first place.

        The Germans were also angry as they had been denied the rights of self determination that had been granted to other nations.  This frustrated many Germans and as Alan Sharp points out in “Versailles 1919: ‘A tragedy of Dissapointment’ many Germans asked:” Why were the Germans of Austria, the Sudetenland, the Polish corridor and Danzig, even of Alsace-Lorraine and Schelswig, denied the rights of self-determination?”  This was an important reason why the Germans found the treaty unjust and felt their enemies had great advantages over them.

        The Treaty of Versailles was devastating to German national security and thus was another reason why the treaty provoked widespread hostility within Germany. The treaty demilitarised the Rhineland, reduced the German navy and army to 15,000 sea men and 100,000 soldiers. The Germans were also to possess no air force, secret service, tanks or submarines. This left Germany vulnerable from the even the weakest of enemies and made them feel very unsafe and insecure. Germans were further angered when they discovered that much of their navy was to be given to the British. The German navy had almost defeated the British navy, which had seemed invincible until the Great War. So the insecurity and frustration felt by these military restrictions made many Germans angry. The military terms were designed to make sure Germany had no way of making war again. Germany was humiliated by the emasculation of her armed services and saw this as an insult to her proud military tradition.

        The German economy was in ruins by 1919 and the Treaty was seen as a deliberate attempt by the Allies to prevent a German economic recovery. They felt the treaty gave unfair economic advantages to her enemies. A.J. Nicholls stated: “The Allies established commissions to supervise reparations and the disarmament clauses, so that the Germans could feel that their country was being controlled and exploited by her enemies.” He also argues that there is no doubt that the reparation clauses in the treaty were among the least felicitous elements in the peace settlement. He claims: “Whatever the justice of the Allied claims, the manner in which they were presented was bound to cause trouble in the future.”  By forcing the Republic to agree to such a large amount the Allies condemned the Republic to be an economic corpse. In 1921, the total amount for the German reparations stood at a grand total of £6,600,000 or 132 billion Marks. Keynes argues that the reparations Germany were forced to pay in 1921 were excessive and beyond Germany’s ability to pay. This massive sum also undoubtedly made Germans very unhappy as many were living in poverty and were angry that German money was being used to rebuild a foreign country and not their own.

        Article 231 ‘the war guilt clause’ held Germany responsible for all the losses and costs incurred during World War One. A.J. Nicholls points out that the German Government had to take responsibility for starting the war, although Germany did not start the war directly. Kaiser Wilhelm II’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the unrest in Austrian and Russian Empires, which led to the beginning of the Great War. Many Germans asked why the German people should suffer for past mistakes of the government. The German people resented and reacted badly to this part of the treaty , they were no more guilt of starting the war  than any other great European power.  It made the Germans furious as they felt they were fighting a defensive war. The Germans felt as if they had been betrayed, they had not started the war, and it was clear that both sides had fought and killed soldiers during the war. This clause created a great deal of anger and hatred amongst the ordinary Germans. It seemed, to many, to show the Allies true feelings towards them – distrust and hatred.

        However, it is important to note that there were several problems that faced the Allied Peacemakers. They had to re-establish the balance of power in Europe whilst taking account of the collapse of the old Empires of Russia and Austria-Hungary and had to do so without allowing Germany to emerge in any way stronger or powerful than before. They had to find a way of guaranteeing France’s future security. They had to make Germany pay reparations or face a future where her virtually undamaged industrial base would ensure that her economy would quickly outstrip that of the victorious powers. A.J. Nicholls stated in “Weimar and the Rise of Hitler,” that: “In many cases there were good reasons why conditions which the Germans described as unacceptable should have been imposed on them.”

        Also, it is important to emphasize that when asked to consider the German reaction to the terms of the Treaty of Versailles the harsh terms Germany imposed on Russia should be mentioned. Under the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk Russia lost 34% of her population, 32% of her agricultural land, 54% of her factories and 89% of her coal mines. As Alan Sharp argued in Versailles 1919: ‘A Tragedy of Disappointment’ : “Set against this, however, must be the settlement a victorious Germany might have imposed, if her treaties with Rumania (Bucharest) and Russia (Brest-Litovsk) were accurate previews.”

        In conclusion, it is probably fair to say that although all the great major European powers and America suffered from the war, the effects of the war were made much worse in Germany because of her defeat. As A.J. Nicholls argued certainly no atmosphere of peace descended on Germany with the signing of the treaty; if anything hostility to the victor powers became more marked, and was reinforced by hatred for those at home regarded as tools of the enemy. The Germans felt the treaty was a Diktat, they felt very bitter about the loss of people and territory, angry about the denied rights of self-determination, humiliated by their reduced military powers, resented the reparations and did not accept that they were solely responsible for the war. The harshness of the treaty was such that widespread hostility in Germany hardened in many people into a solemn resolve to see the terms of the treaty overturned and to see Germany revenged for her treatment at the hands of the Allies by a future, successful, war. As stated by Alan Sharp: “The settlement neither crippled Germany nor reconciled her to the new order; instead it left her with grievances and the latent potential to make trouble.” Only a great victory would satisfy the hostile and angered Germans, who thus, after economic collapse in 1929, and the failure of the Weimar republic, began to support the ideas of Hitler and the Nazis.