AHC: Draw the Ideal Map of Post-WWI Europe

[SRegan]

I swear to god that half of these maps would have made Nazism ten times more successful.

I would think Gross-Deutschland, Sudetenland, the Polish Corridor, Memelland and South Tyrol would go a fair way to defusing revanchist demands Alsace-Lorraine has changed hands several times already and obsessing about it was a hallmark of the imperial regime. Stripping Germany of its surface navy (only the airforce and submarines were forbidden IOTL) and allowing in observers to actually check they're not breaking the rules is a big deal, but surely no worse than actually breaking up Germany, as appeared in some of the earlier maps on this thread.

In OTL a major factor was French control of the Saar and occupation of the Ruhr - I don't think anyone on this thread's done that for a solution that seeks Germany intact.

 

[TheNordicBrit]

I swear to god that half of these maps would have made Nazism ten times more successful.

The ones with major concessions to Germany even post-war would do the opposite.

 

[Magnificate]

Danzig to become a free city affording Germany access to East Prussia and Poland sea access. Britain, France and Germany all jointly agree to guarantee the eternal inviolability of this territory.

Why include Germany and exclude Poland at the same time? Suppose that in a decade or two Britain and France decide to limit or withdraw their garrison, so that the city stays under de-facto German military control?

Any attempt to re-arm will trigger a clause that breaks Germany up into its constituent states.

Sounds good on paper. However, are there any incentives to uphold this part of the treaty if the political climate in Britain and France is unfavourable?

- A small Carpatho-Ruthenian state is to be created to spike Western Ukrainian claims to Polish territory.

While this 'Ruthenia' is one of my favourite ATL states it might be too small and too poor to function as a separate entity.

- A minimalistic Courland under German protection.

Why separate Courland at all? Note that this solution leaves Lithuania surrounded by Germany on two sides.

- Hungary is to cede Slovak-majority areas, which will be used to create a Slovakian state under Polish protection.

What interest is there for Poland to have the Slovakian protectorate?

 

[Faeelin]

The postwar border settlements were fine. Yes, there are things one can quibble with here and there, but any change creates just as many problems as it solves.

I actually think this has a lot of merit. The flaw of Versailles wasn't in the map per se; it was in the way Germany was treated economically, and in a naive belief that minorities were passe and should all just wither away.

 

[SRegan]

Why include Germany and exclude Poland at the same time? Suppose that in a decade or two Britain and France decide to limit or withdraw their garrison, so that the city stays under de-facto German military control?

The idea was to rope Germany in so the provisions become self-enforcing - unlike OTL where Danzig was administered by the League of Nations, I envisaged it as a city-state dealing freely with both German and Polish concerns; moving troops in violates its neutrality and is subject to military action.

Sounds good on paper. However, are there any incentives to uphold this part of the treaty if the political climate in Britain and France is unfavourable?

Short of taking a scenario where Germany is so absolutely crushed that its constituent states have the right of secession under certain conditions, no It does however provide Britain and France with an ironcast excuse for intervention if Germany does begin expanding its military again. In OTL, Germany first expanded its military, then took Austria, the Sudetenland, Memel, etc. Here they already have those territories, so there's much less room for Britain and France to umm and ah about legitimate revanchism against minor states if Germany starts building up.

While this 'Ruthenia' is one of my favourite ATL states it might be too small and too poor to function as a separate entity.

It might not last, and be absorbed by Hungary or Slovakia. However, its existence acts as a counterpoint to any territorial claims made by the Ukrainian state or attempts to revive a socialist state in the region - those aren't West Ukrainians, they're Ruthenians, and they've got their own country

Why separate Courland at all? Note that this solution leaves Lithuania surrounded by Germany on two sides.

A very good point. The objective was to beef up the Baltic states against Soviet aggression without creating the Yugoslavia of the north. Latvia being something of a movable feast I considered that a Latvia-Estonia comprising Estonia plus the Latgale would prove a fairly formidable roadblock; placing Courland as a German protectorate gives lip-service to the Baltic German population as well as proofing it against aggression; then the OTL Polish border insulates Lithuania from the Bolsheviks. With only one non-German neighbour and no threat to Vilnius, Lithuania should align itself with Poland.

What interest is there for Poland to have the Slovakian protectorate?

It goes towards its historic ambitions for Miedzymorze - Slovakia wouldn't be a formal protectorate, as per Slovenia or Albania, and with Carpatho-Ruthenia separated, Slovakia doesn't really have any natural predators to be defended from.

 

[Dementor]

The problem with a German Baltic state of Courland is that the region has only a very small Baltic German population. And with Latvians of the period possibly preferring the Soviets to the Germans, you would have to use force to make them submit. And how would you prevent the native population from overthrowing the Baltic Germans and rejoining Latvia? And of course you're weakening the Baltic states and making them more receptive to Soviet overtures.

 

[Enigmajones]

Bandits Bandits and Criminals!

Dammit IBC! Now I want to write a White Russia TL with this title.

 

[Sang]

It wouldn't be able to maintain such a territory, given that Hungarians would barely maintain a majority.

After the Treaty of Trianon, Hungarians were severely persecuted from outside the border.
Take a look at this map:

80 years of persecuted and Accelerated Assimilation did have it's effects.

Now, imagine the reverse happening. Hungary assimilating those non-Hungarians. Or deporting them, just like how the Soviets deported the Germans from everywhere after WW2, and how the Ottomans and Greeks mutually deported their minorities to each other's countries after WW1.

 

[Dementor]

After the Treaty of Trianon, Hungarians were severely persecuted from outside the border.
Take a look at this map:

80 years of persecuted and Accelerated Assimilation did have it's effects.

Now, imagine the reverse happening. Hungary assimilating those non-Hungarians. Or deporting them, just like how the Soviets deported the Germans from everywhere after WW2, and how the Ottomans and Greeks mutually deported their minorities to each other's countries after WW1.

Yes, one can imagine it. Though it's a bit difficult for a country to ethnically cleanse its minorities if they are nearly as big as the majority. And if they are supported by other countries bordering Hungary, which they would be.
As for assimilation, Hungary tried that before WWI. This had probably the opposite effect of alienating the minorities. No reason why it would be more successful after 1918.

 

[MSZ]

After the Treaty of Trianon, Hungarians were severely persecuted from outside the border.
Take a look at this map:

80 years of persecuted and Accelerated Assimilation did have it's effects.

Now, imagine the reverse happening. Hungary assimilating those non-Hungarians. Or deporting them, just like how the Soviets deported the Germans from everywhere after WW2, and how the Ottomans and Greeks mutually deported their minorities to each other's countries after WW1.

Do note that the numbers presented in the 1910 map are not so accurate - the Hungarians accounted its own administration/police members and people who were illiterate/not nationally conscious as "ethnic Hungarians" leading to all of those various green and yellow dots all over Slovakia. Most of them either left the country after losing their job, or identified as Slovaks when the Slovaks made their own census. Southern Slovakia however did have a consistent Hungarian majority - and the entire country would be better of independent and without it.

- A small Carpatho-Ruthenian state is to be created to spike Western Ukrainian claims to Polish territory.

Makes just as much sense as a independent Belarussian state - there is next to nobody to support it. Better make it an autonomous province of Hungary, granting it a common border with Poland. The two plus independent Slovakia and Czechia creating a Intermarum mutual protection alliance without any protectorates.

 

[Snake Featherston]

The ideal map would be one without any war at all. After a certain point such a protracted general coalition war will leave more dissatisfied than satisfied. There is no true ideal peace or map drawing, the nature of WWI itself mitigates against any such thing.

 

[I Blame Communism]

This matter of police and officials being counted in censes deserves to be taken note of and kept in mind, but I must ask what the alternative is. After all, the police and officials are people who moved to find jobs. Plenty of people went the other way.

I'm thinking of the Irish example: Irish police couldn't be stationed in their own or their wife's native county. Take away an ethnic dimension and it's people moving for work requirements, which they do all the time, and may go or may stay. One imagines this is a widespread phenomenon. If there hadn't been a subsequent rupture, whose to say the police and officials wouldn't have settled down in their new localities?

I actually think this has a lot of merit. The flaw of Versailles wasn't in the map per se; it was in the way Germany was treated economically, and in a naive belief that minorities were passe and should all just wither away.

I agree. When you ask about territorial fixes, you get precisely opposed solutions, so clearly that's a matter of who people like more. Structural fixes are harder but a lot surer.

Why separate Courland at all? Note that this solution leaves Lithuania surrounded by Germany on two sides.

Not to mention that if there's one way to drive Latvians into the arms of the Bolsheviks, it's to leave them under 'German barons'. And Latvia's German community were quite well-integrated in the interwar, it's not like they were all going to be ethnically cleansed.

Speaking of ethnic cleansing, why so much enthusiasm for Armenian and Greek imperialism? These countries lost their war with the Turks. For them to get that territory means full-scale war against Turkey by Britain and France - which the public certainly did not want.

It might not last, and be absorbed by Hungary or Slovakia. However, its existence acts as a counterpoint to any territorial claims made by the Ukrainian state or attempts to revive a socialist state in the region - those aren't West Ukrainians, they're Ruthenians, and they've got their own country

But this is backwards. The Galicia Ukrainians were a compact community of a couple of millions with a large educated middle class, lots of self-consciousness through their cultural organisations and church, and a political movement that in 1914 had been on the point of achieving its goals. The Ruthenians are a mostly illiterate peasant people with hardly any national consciousness.

Ukrainian Galicians saw their region as the heartland of Ukrainian culture. They're not going to be fobbed off with a sliver of mountain-side.

And of course under Austrian census-taking, 'Ruthenian' was a synonym for 'Ukrainian'.

 

[Magnificate]

The idea was to rope Germany in so the provisions become self-enforcing

Ah, I see the intention. However if you do not extend the same privileges to Poland you risk ending up with Danzig gravitating towards Germany due to its population and paying lip service to Polish interests.

It does however provide Britain and France with an ironcast excuse for intervention if Germany does begin expanding its military again.

Point taken.

With only one non-German neighbour and no threat to Vilnius, Lithuania should align itself with Poland.

Except it is not that easy, since Poland has claims on Vilnius that are especially pronounced if Piłsudski is in charge and Lithuania’s claims are significantly larger than those shown on your map. Unfortunately, those aren’t the times of PLC and the default relations are not those of cooperation.

The objective was to beef up the Baltic states against Soviet aggression without creating the Yugoslavia of the north.

Truth be told, I don’t see the reason not include Courland if you already intend to combine Latvians and Estonians in one state.

It goes towards its historic ambitions for Miedzymorze

IIRC Slovakia is one of the last countries mentioned in that context. Of similar-sized countries Poland would rather aim for ‘protectorate’ over Lithuania.

 

[Dementor]

Not to mention that if there's one way to drive Latvians into the arms of the Bolsheviks, it's to leave them under 'German barons'. And Latvia's German community were quite well-integrated in the interwar, it's not like they were all going to be ethnically cleansed.

Speaking of ethnic cleansing, why so much enthusiasm for Armenian and Greek imperialism? These countries lost their war with the Turks. For them to get that territory means full-scale war against Turkey by Britain and France - which the public certainly did not want.

Yes, I imagine the Soviet propaganda would have a field day with this. One could easily imagine another levy of Latvian Riflemen.

Armenia indeed would have little chance but Greece could easily could hold Eastern Thrace, probably including Constantinople. Of course this would require them to focus on retaining Eastern Thrace from the start and basically abandoning their co-ethnics in Anatolia, which is not very likely.

 

[KACKO]

After the Treaty of Trianon, Hungarians were severely persecuted from outside the border.
Take a look at this map:

80 years of persecuted and Accelerated Assimilation did have it's effects.

Now, imagine the reverse happening. Hungary assimilating those non-Hungarians. Or deporting them, just like how the Soviets deported the Germans from everywhere after WW2, and how the Ottomans and Greeks mutually deported their minorities to each other's countries after WW1.

Well, heavy. Not so badly as Slovaks in Hungary. From around 400 000 in 1920, their numbers dropped to maybe 20 000 now.
Anyway. A lot of Jews were proclaiming themselves during A-H for Hungarians. That's why for example interwar Czechoslovakia provided lover numbers of Hungarians in its censuses. In Czechoslovakia, Jews could claim Jewish nationality. After Vienna award in 1938 to 1945 Hungarians killed or deported almost all Hungarian Jews from what is today southern Slovakia. just for example from town Kassa (today Kosice) around 12-20 000 jes directly from town and close towns were deported by Hungarians. Same is of course true for Slovakia, which deported another 60 000 of Jews. Basically they themselves lowered Hungarian speaking populations levels in today southern Slovakia. And of course, how you can take census from A-H for granted? Other part of the story is, that level of Hungarians in southern Slovakia is on approximately same level since maybe 50-ties, when worst after war prosecutions of Hungarians for treason on Czechoslovakia ended. With today's declining of children in the families this could go even more, but same is true for most east and west European nations.

 

[chris N]

Try this Map

 

[belik339]

Okay, here goes my shot at the "ideal post-WWI Europe" map.

Note that it does not conform to any color-coding schemes (for the most part). I'll name most of the states, and most of you should be able to figure out which is which.

OTTOMAN EMPIRE:
*The bulk of the Ottoman Empire is reformed as Turkey (as in OTL).
*Greece is given lands to have the same borders as OTL's Greece.
*Armenia gains independence and is given much land from OTL's Eastern Turkey.

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY:
*Austria created with the similar borders as in OTL.
*Czechoslovakia gains independence. Same borders as in OTL except for the Sudetenland, which is given to Austria and Bavaria.
*Hungary is created and given the lands from OTL in addition to Southern-Slovak, Carpathian-Ukraine, and the land from OTL's Second Vienna Award.
*Yugoslavia gains independence and is given borders similar to OTL's Yugoslavia.
*Romania gains a significant amount of land from the former Austria-Hungary.
*Italy is given Dalmatia and Vlore.

GERMANY:
*Poland is given independence and is much larger than OTL's Poland. Poland includes much more of Eastern Germany and Danzig.
*To keep Germany weak and effectively nullify their threat (or so the Allies think at this time), Germany is divided into four states: Bavaria, Baden-Wuertennburg, East Prussia, and Northern Germany, each of which is comletely independent of the other.
*The peace treaty ending the war includes a clause that makes union of any or all of the four German States completely forbidden and grounds for Allied attack or occupation.
*France is given Greater Alsace-lorraine.
*Denmark is given much more of Northern Germany than in OTL. It includes the formerly-German city of Kiel.

RUSSIA:
*The three Baltic States of OTL are combined into a "Baltic Republic".
*Due to some intervention in the Russian Revolution, Belarus and Ukraine are given independence and have some lands from OTL's Eastern Poland that share a common language.
*Karelia becomes a part of Finland.

OTHERS:
*Albania becomes an Italian protectorate and receives large portions of Albanian-speaking territories.*Bulgaria is given Macedonia.
*Ireland becomes a commonwealth nation, but the Island is not divided in any way.
*The Kurds are given Northern Iraq and parts of Southeast Turkey and set up an independent state.

I think that about covers it. Sorry for the shoddy map.

 

[Mikestone8]

*The peace treaty ending the war includes a clause that makes union of any or all of the four German States completely forbidden and grounds for Allied attack or occupation.

But what use is that if we know that the attack or occupation won't ever happen?

OTL, the Allies were entitled to occupy the Rhineland until 1935, but had pulled out by 1930. They were desperately eager to get back to normal and stop having to be "policemen". Presumably the same would hold TTL, so those rules forbidding reunion will be dead letters as soon as you get a German government willing to say boo to them.

Apologies to all those who have heard it before, but the problem with Versailles was not the terms but the lack of will to enforce them. For this reason, making the terms more severe is a complete waste of time, since harsher terms will require greater effort to enforce, and that effort will not be forthcoming.

 

[I Blame Communism]

Why does everybody want a united Ireland? It's a nice idea but we were too far gone. The Oranger members of the Belfast working classes were being organised in paramilitaries by their employers in a fashion eerily reminiscent of Italy. Imposing home rule on Ulster will be a disaster for everybody.

I'd comment on the oddity of a Ukraine including Crimea but not, I think, Kiev and certainly not the left-bank; but if it is a creature of the Entente troops I don't suppose I can complain.

 

[Tyr]

Ireland would have been better off had the whole island remained in the union and home rule been accepted.

Hungary- greater Hungary is way too much but certainly more land should have belonged to it. Much of Transylvania for instance.

Germany-Austria: The best would be Bavaria-Austria united and the rest of Germany apart. But whatever.
Poland should have full access to Danzig's port until they get their own setup but the city state should not have been.

And the Soviet Union kicked until a few independant nations fall off. A constitutional monarchy Ukraine for instance would be lovely.