To what extent was Germany responsible for the failure of the Versailles Treaty under the Weimar government until Hitler seized power in 1933, and was it a result of inefficient implementation from the League of Nations?

Germany’s current state at that time was anything but favorable. The Weimar government did, however, successfully implement significant aspects of the Versailles Treaty, and showed willingness to respect the treaty, as was underlined by the Locarno Treaty. The Rhineland was indeed demilitarized, and other territorial concessions were met (Lowe; page 36). But as the Danish historian, Freddy Svane says: “[The Weimar Government] intentionally challenged the Treaty, and not just for the reason that it wasn’t able to satisfy all the restrictions, which might have been possible.” In the public of Germany flourished conspiracy theories, such as the “stab in the back myth” which placed the responsibility of the war on the German government and not the army. Hence, Germany didn’t truly accept the “war-guilt.” When Germany failed to pay its reparations on time in 1923 due to massive hyperinflation, it introduced a new lending scheme (Dawes and Young Plan), in which Germany borrowed enough money from the USA to account for the payments to Britain and France. The reality of who actually paid changed when Hitler seized power and stopped the lending scheme: US had paid for all the reparations and Weimar Germany had only paid for the rent. Militaristically, the Weimar republic found loopholes in the Versailles Treaty that contradicted the spirit of it. Despite the long compulsory service, a large reserve that exceeded 100 000 men did exist. Potential pilots for the air force, which was not permitted, were trained in the civil service and abroad as passenger pilots, which could be easily re-school into the military. Secondly, submarine crews, a part of the navy, were trained, and thus went directly against the spirit of the Versailles Treaty (HistoryLearningSite.com; GermanyandRearmament).        

It could be argued that when Germany and USSR signed the Treaty of Rapallo in 1922, conceding the claims made in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Weimar broke the Versailles Treaty, since the latter treaty was one of the foundations for the harsh treatment of Germany. On the other hand, it removed a reason to treat Germany that strictly.

Indubitably, Hitler made a joke out the Versailles Treaty when he consistently went against it; the weakness of the League of Nations was a main factor in not preventing this. Hitler had not, however, been able to do so at such a great extent if the potential for expansion hadn’t existed. The Weimar government ensured an economically and militaristically solid foundation, and made Hitler’s extreme views legitimate, when they allowed him to speak in court after the Beer Hall Putsch in 1924.

In the meantime, the League of Nations was unable to combine efforts and interests, with Britain and France going in opposite directions concerning the treatment of Germany. (Montgomery; Page 23).

        EVALUATION OF SOURCES

The publisher of Norman Lowe’s Mastering Modern World History (published in 1997), Palgrave MacMillan is an English based institution, which has provided high quality textbooks for high schools all across the world for the last 150 years. Its philosophy is based on an aim to provide high quality, creative, and yet an efficient tool for learning. In the author’s opening remarks it is stated that the purpose of this book is to establish a solid background for in depth studies into the world war- and post eras. Hence the value of the book lies with the fact that it gives the reader an excellent entrance to a topic that will be assessed in detail using other sources. In the foreword to the book, Keith Foreman Points out that the book could potentially be limited by the narrow goal to prepare candidates for their examinations.  However, it does meet the syllabus requirements of all post-Dearing MVHC and includes topics that go beyond what similar books covers. It is a very reliable book, which is underlined by its awareness of human errors, as the author says: “Whatever errors and faults remain are entirely my own.”        History Learning Site is an internet based source of information that covers primarily international relations and politics within a rather select range of European history. It is compiled by Chris Trueman, who has taught advanced level history, and politics at a major secondary school in England. The foundation of the web site stems from what the author calls a lack of “easily accessible and comprehensive website on world history on the web.” It is a very useful source of information since it provides a more detailed picture on the topic discussed in this report. Generally, the internet is perceived as unreliable, since it can be made subject to many flaws, and is based on a wish to entertain, which can bias the authors. Other non-internet based sources, however, supports the web site’s information, and therefore there seems to be some truth in Chris Trueman’s claim that “every effort has been made to be as unbiased and objective as possible in presenting the facts and interpreting events.”

ANALYSIS

It is no secret that the Treaty of Versailles never was a great success. The willingness to enforce it wasn’t strong from either the League of Nations’ side, or from Germany’s. It is often argued that the Treaty indeed was one of the main causes of WWII, since Hitler could use it as an argument to rise to power. And indeed, it is the basis of Hitler’s course to his position as Der Fuhrer, which brings the flaws of the Weimar government into the picture.

Hitler made a joke of countries initially favoring the implementation of the Versailles Treaty. To mention one instance, Hitler was appeased with the Sudetenland in 1938, but soon continued to invade Czechoslovakia. It is therefore indirectly also the fault of those who lay out the course for Hitler, and supported him with a firm ground.

Although Weimar Germany led a country during the most successful time of the Versailles Treaty, with territorial and militaristic concessions met, as underlined by the Locarno Treaty, it did intentionally break parts of the agreement as well as to go against its spirit. “War guilt” was never truly accepted, with prevalent conspiracy theories placing the responsibility on other groups. Neither was the acknowledgement of militaristic limitations unquestionable: ways were found to train pilots and submarine crews, which could be used for offensive purposes, and the Treaty of Rapallo was signed with USSR, in which German military development was accepted. Financially, the treaty requirements were also not met. The Dawes and Young Plan outlined how the reparations should be paid by Germany through a lending program with the US. In reality, Germany never paid much because Hitler canceled the program. Thus, Weimar neither fulfilled those requirements.

Indeed, Weimar broke several parts of the Versailles Treaty, but what is more important is how they laid the foundation for Hitler: their responsibility for the failure of the Versailles Treaty. Weimar’s circumventing of the treaty was not fatal, but when they allowed Hitler to speak out his views in court after the 1924 Beer Hall Putsch, they gave way for a man of consequences. The failure of the Versailles Treaty and the responsibility can be placed partially on Weimar, because they laid out a foundation for Hitler, and in effect made his actions legitimate. Saying that, the League of Nations should logically also be held up for blame. They were established with a purpose of enforcing the treaty but were not able to do so effectively.

In a historical context, it is important to place the blame of the failure of the Versailles Treaty, so that we can learn from our mistakes, and avoid similar severe consequences in the future. In retrospect, WWII might have been avoided if Weimar’s foundation for Hitler had seen some inhibitive measures. But that is just speculation.

        

        CONCLUSION

Ultimately, it is indisputable that Hitler smashed the Versailles Treaty, by rearming, refusing the responsibility of WW1 and canceling any reparation payments, among other things. He would not, however, have been able to do so if the premises for the actions had not existed. It is in this context that the Weimar government’s and the League of Nations’ partial responsibility for the ineffective Versailles Treaty are to be found. It is clear that the precursor to the UN, the League of Nations never had much power to enforce its decisions, leaving the individual countries to direct its given policies against Germany. That left a Weimar Germany that was able to evade parts of the Versailles Treaty, and lay the groundwork for a destructive leader. The option of a readable expansionary military existed and economically Weimar, so to say, pinioned the bird in the form of the Dawes and Young Plan, making it a subject for a kill by Hitler. Combined with the public refusal of “war guilt” and the acceptance of Hitler’s views when he was permitted to speak in court after the Beer Hall Putsch, Weimar was to some extent responsible.

Word count: 1889

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_____________________________________________________________

Textbook sources:

Lowe, Norman. Modern World History. 3rd Ed. Great Britain: Palgrave, 1997. 1-522.

Montgomery, Dan. The World Wars: Causes, Practices, Effects. Tokyo: St. Mary's International School. 1-87.

Internet sources:

1. Trueman, Chris. "Germany and Rearmament." Historylearningsite. 29 Sept. 2007 <http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/germany_and_rearmament.htm>.

2. Trueman, Chris. "The Treaty of Versailles." Historylearningsite. 29 Sept. 2007 <http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/treaty_of_versailles.htm>.

Oral sources:

.

Svane, Freddy. Personal interview. 29 Sept. 2007.

_____________________________________________________________

---