A better Treaty of Versailles

Anderman

Donor
Another possibility is that the former Kingdom of Hannover declares its independence from Prussia and becomes a free state in the Weimar republic and Frankfurt again a free city. IIRC even Adenauer wanted to split the Rhineland from Prussia .....
 
Originally posted by Wendell


At the time of Versailles Gdynia was a small port, absolutely not enough as a main port of relatively big country. It was Poland that build a big, modern port there. It took quite some time and a lot of money.
Besides, I'd like to remind you, that Danzig/Gdańsk was NOT given to Poland.

It was a League of Nations jurisdiction under Polish control, and Poland actively opposed a change in its status, so it was effectively Polish. Furthermore, I allowed for an interim situation in my proposal until the Poles expand Gdynia.
 
There were some things that could have been done at the margins to make the treaty better a little better: (1) Settle the Polish/German boundaries in Silesia early and definitely, with none of the plebiscites and less of the irregular warfare that went on historically. Make the settlement generous to Poland. Silesia contained most of Germany's supply of several key minerals, especially nickel, so giving it to Poland cuts into Germany's ability to rebuild a military machine. (2) Settle the border issues between Poland and Czechoslovakia early and decisively, so it doesn't fester and ruin relations between natural allies. (3) Give Danzig cleanly to Poland so there isn't the need for them to spend all of the money to build up an alternate port. (4) Guard more effectively against German scuttling of their High Seas fleet. That would help substantially with the cost of reparations. Battleships are expensive, even as scrap. (5) In exchange for giving the Poles what they wanted in issues 1 thru 3, force them to accept boundaries in Galicia that allowed for a viable Western Ukrainian state. That hopefully turns a running sore of Ukrainian nationalism in eastern Poland into a Ukrainian buffer state that helps keep the Soviets off of Poland. At least part of Eastern Ukraine would probably end up in Soviet hands anyway, but hopefully the west would be independent. (6) There was considerable latitude to screw up the Middle East less than was done historically, and while that wouldn't have stopped World War II, it could have helped in the postwar.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Another possibility is that the former Kingdom of Hannover declares its independence from Prussia and becomes a free state in the Weimar republic and Frankfurt again a free city. IIRC even Adenauer wanted to split the Rhineland from Prussia .....
That could break the power of the Junkers, so it would be a good thing.
 
There were some things that could have been done at the margins to make the treaty better a little better: (1) Settle the Polish/German boundaries in Silesia early and definitely, with none of the plebiscites and less of the irregular warfare that went on historically. Make the settlement generous to Poland. Silesia contained most of Germany's supply of several key minerals, especially nickel, so giving it to Poland cuts into Germany's ability to rebuild a military machine. (2) Settle the border issues between Poland and Czechoslovakia early and decisively, so it doesn't fester and ruin relations between natural allies. (3) Give Danzig cleanly to Poland so there isn't the need for them to spend all of the money to build up an alternate port. (4) Guard more effectively against German scuttling of their High Seas fleet. That would help substantially with the cost of reparations. Battleships are expensive, even as scrap. (5) In exchange for giving the Poles what they wanted in issues 1 thru 3, force them to accept boundaries in Galicia that allowed for a viable Western Ukrainian state. That hopefully turns a running sore of Ukrainian nationalism in eastern Poland into a Ukrainian buffer state that helps keep the Soviets off of Poland. At least part of Eastern Ukraine would probably end up in Soviet hands anyway, but hopefully the west would be independent. (6) There was considerable latitude to screw up the Middle East less than was done historically, and while that wouldn't have stopped World War II, it could have helped in the postwar.


Trouble is, none of this stops Germany rearming and challenging the ToV. Even losing more of Upper Silesia has only a marginal effect.

And the basic problem remains. The ex-allies, looking back in horror to the carnage of WW1, still won't be willing to take up arms in support of the treaty they imposed. So Appeasement still happens much as we remember it.

I don't see how the Polish/Ukrainian changes make much difference. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is just modified slightly, to "I take Poland, you take West Ukraine" and things go on much as OTL.
 
That could break the power of the Junkers, so it would be a good thing.

I'm not sure how. There were never many Junkers in Hanover or Frankfurt.

Incidentally, Prussia had a Social Democratic Government until 1932. OTOH a separate Hanover, being more rural, probably goes National Socialist earlier than that, as did its smaller neighbour, Brunswick. If the Catholic and industrial Rhenish Provinces are also chopped off, then the reduced Prussia is also likely to fall into Nazi hands sooner.
 
Yes, I know that France is the main obstacle for such plan. Maybe France will be more willing to accede on 4) if they get that right about coalmines in Saarland and if they get their 50 km demilitarised zone ( essentially all of Alsace- Lorene would be demilitarised area )?

Yes, I know that it isn't reunification- my bad.

Honestly, there is simply no way France can be made to accept 4). At this point, the return of Alsace-Lorraine is a sacred credo. And as a consequence, there could be no talk of demilitarizing Alsace-Lorraine either.
 
How much more stable will postwar Europe be with a Treaty of Versailles that doesn't end up screwing Germany's economy and being one of the causes of WWII? To accomplish this, I'm thinking of killing off Woodrow Wilson before his presidency and Clemenceau, along with Hitler early in his childhood. If this is enough for a better Treaty of Versailles, what will the new terms be? If not, what else can I do to accomplish this?

Treaty of Versailles was just fine. The problem was that the Allies DIDN'T stick together and enforce it post 1919. If they had there would have been peace in Europe.
 
Treaty of Versailles was just fine. The problem was that the Allies DIDN'T stick together and enforce it post 1919. If they had there would have been peace in Europe.

Unfortunately, the memory of WW1 made it all but inevitable that they wouldn't.

Like I said before, people in 1919 wanted two incompatible things. They were bitter against Germany, so wanted a stern peace, but they didn't want to make the efforts neded to enforce it. And the rest, as they say, is history.
 
Top