Peaceful revision of Germany's Polish border, 1921-1933

It just occured to me that the timeframe is 1921-1933.

In that time Poles have stronger army then Germany, and would win war with it. Also till 1933 Soviets are weak and Poland wouldn't be afraid, additionally because of its alliance with Romania.

I don't think this can be a given. Von Seeckt's Reichswehr was lacking materially, but was ahead of the Poles in terms of doctrine and training. The Polish numerical advantage doesn't give them automatic superiority - if anything they might be evenly matched, although Germany will perhaps be disadvantaged by being the attacker.
 

Olmeka

Banned
I think the question is: would the West care enough? I don't think Britain would; France is an open question, but given the Sitzkrieg of OTL I am leaning towards no.
Considering the timeframe is till 1933 then Poles don't need much support, as they can defend themselfs. If France abandons them(which requires VERY big event to shift French policy in this way) then they could ally with Czechs who have similar problem.
 
Originally posted by Susano
In 1922, they defeated a disorganised, underequipped and undertrained ragtag collection of men. The Red Army of 1922 was NOTHING like the later Red Army, so thats hardly an argument. In a 1v1 Germany vs Poland Germany is definitly much more likely to win. Hell, even if they started with just the Weimar military (+Freikorps and assorted militia) they would most likely win by having the neccessary strategical depth and just so much more industrial capacity.
True, but Polish Army was only little better organized, only little better equipped, only little better trained and grossly outnumbered.

Poles never had any illusions they could win against Germany by themselves. Polish foreign policy was to neutralize that threat by an alliance with France. And France wanted Poland as its ally, to keep Germany in check and as a wall against USSR. So French might have spoken a lot, promised a lot, pressed Poland a lot, but eventually Poles would have said NO, and no foreign pressure would have forced them to change their mind. They simply couldn't afford to loose that land with milions of people and priceless access to the sea. In short, there would have had to be a war. No peaceful correction was possible.
Now the question: were the Germans ready to go to another war against Poland, which in that time in late 1920s and early 1930s had a bigger army that Germany? Remember, Germany would have had to be an aggressor, and it is easier to defend than to attack. Germany had no tanks (so no Blitzkrieg), their artillery was also limited (correct me if I'm wrong) so even with Freikorps and militias Germany would only have had a lot of well trained infantry and cavalry. They probably might have beaten Poland, but losses would have been enormous and war quite long. I don't think German people was ready for such sacrifices so quickly after WWI.
 

Olmeka

Banned
The German army was around 100,000 while the Poles could have around 1,000,000. True Germany would likely mobilize more for war. But such mobilisation would likely change the French neutrality and would take so long that Poles could even take preventive attack or prepare in other ways.

Also as pointed the war would take long and be bloody-this could lead to revolution on Germany or coup, or even intervention by France and Britain, maybe Czechs seeing Germans as future threat ?
 
Trouble was that the Czechs and the Poles had a major dispute regarding a certain piece of territory held by Czechoslovkia but claimed by Poland. The Poles and the Czechs had also problems dating from the end of the First World War. The Cechs refused to allow the shipment of arms through their country during the war with the Soviet Union.
 
Gaining those borders peacefully...your answer is absolutely NEVER. Poland has absolutely no incentive to agree and there is nothing Germany can offer to entice them.

France may have signed off on such an agreement if Germany could get the Poles to agree...Since NO is a given they are not going to welch on their defensive agreements with the Poles. War by Germany will be on two fronts, something the Germans are well aware of so there will be NO War either. The only way this border can be obtained is if it obtained by plebicite at the end of WWI. That requires a completely different ending to that confrontation in the east or different conditions for the plebicites so that the Germans can win.

Under Otl conditions, they cannot win.
 
Poland has pissed off all their neighbours: Lithuania by taking Vilnius, USSR by expanding so far beyond the Curzon-line, Czechoslovakia by claiming several areas, and Germany by taking the West-Prussia an Poznan. So a smart chancellor could form an alliance with all those countries to give the border revision and a possible war a multilateral dimension.
And I don't see why so many belive that France would intervene: IOTL the sold Czechoslovakia which was a) democratic and b) never part of Germany. Poland wasn't democratic and the western parts had been part of Germany so Germany should get the support from France and England for this Border revision
 
Originally posted by Kalan
Poland has pissed off all their neighbours: Lithuania by taking Vilnius, USSR by expanding so far beyond the Curzon-line, Czechoslovakia by claiming several areas, and Germany by taking the West-Prussia an Poznan. So a smart chancellor could form an alliance with all those countries to give the border revision and a possible war a multilateral dimension.
And I don't see why so many belive that France would intervene: IOTL the sold Czechoslovakia which was a) democratic and b) never part of Germany. Poland wasn't democratic and the western parts had been part of Germany so Germany should get the support from France and England for this Border revision
A few corrections, if I may. You're right about Vilnius, although I think Poles were majority in the town itself (not necessarly in territory around it); USSR was angry with Poland because Poland existed and defeated Soviets in 1920; as I mentioned in one of my previous post, Curzon Line wasn't any natural and obvious border between Poland and USSR (which, BTW, wasn't recognized by any goverment at that time, i.e. 1919-1920), only a British proposition based on old Prussian-Russian border from 1797 (after last partition of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), so Poles had no reason to feel obligated to honor that border; as far as Czechoslovakia goes, there was a dispute about Tesin/Cieszyn (or Zaolzie) - there was even a short conflict (started by Czechoslovakians) to be settled by plebiscite, but in 1920 Czechoslovakian prime minister Benes convinced Entente to give the territory to Czechoslovakia: Poland was busy fighting Soviets and couldn't do anything about it; anyway, after 1921 the disputed territory belonged to Czechoslovakia, although it is true Poles still had some claims about it and Polish-Czechoslovakian relations were poisoned by that matter.
And finally, before 1918 there was no Polish state at all - part of Poland was occupied by Russia, part by Austria-Hungary, part by Germany. So the argument that western Poland had been earlier a part of Germany makes no sense at all, because before 1918 every part of Poland had belonged to one of those 3 countries. The same kind of argument could be that Czechoslovakia had been part of Austria, so after Anschluss Germany had every right to conquer Czechoslovakia as well. Notice also, that in the project of revision of borders Poznań is still Polish.
As far as French intervention goes there is difference between Wehrmacht in 1938 (although it wasn't as powerful as many believed) and Reichswehr in 1921-1933. At that time Polish and French army together could easily defeat Germany, and all interested parties knew it.
Now, about coalition you propose: Germany, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, USSR. USSR wasn't trusted by anybody, and the last thing any democratic country wanted was Red Army going west again - who knew where it would stop; Lituanians had their own dispute with Germany about Memel; Czechoslovakia had no territorial claims about Poland and no reason to start the war. Anyway, I don't think France would have watched passively another partition of Poland. Not because of old Polish-French friendship, but because Poland was France's biggest ally in Central Europe, and very useful shield against USSR and Germany.
 
As far as French intervention goes there is difference between Wehrmacht in 1938 (although it wasn't as powerful as many believed) and Reichswehr in 1921-1933. At that time Polish and French army together could easily defeat Germany, and all interested parties knew it.

France also could have stoped Hitler easily when he marched in the Rheinland or when he annexed Austria or even when he went after Czechoslovakia, but the didn't want to. And I don't believe they would have done so over Poland if Hitler went after it before Czechoslovakia.

Now, about coalition you propose: Germany, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, USSR. USSR wasn't trusted by anybody, and the last thing any democratic country wanted was Red Army going west again - who knew where it would stop; Lituanians had their own dispute with Germany about Memel; Czechoslovakia had no territorial claims about Poland and no reason to start the war. Anyway, I don't think France would have watched passively another partition of Poland. Not because of old Polish-French friendship, but because Poland was France's biggest ally in Central Europe, and very useful shield against USSR and Germany.

It don't have to be an direct alliance but it is unlikely that any of those countries is going to help poland against Germany - exept of course germany had behaved very threatening in the past. And I think if Lithuia would be offered Vilnius and the suroundings in exchange for the Memel they would have accepted this offer.
 
Originally posted by Kalan
It don't have to be an direct alliance but it is unlikely that any of those countries is going to help poland against Germany - exept of course germany had behaved very threatening in the past. And I think if Lithuia would be offered Vilnius and the suroundings in exchange for the Memel they would have accepted this offer.
Czechoslovakia wouldn't have attack Poland - no reason to, too much risk. Wealthy democracies don't start wars just for fun. As fas as Lithuania, Memel and Vilnius goes, I think you're right. That makes German-Lithuanian coalition against Poland. USSR is out of the question, every European country was too affraid of it. Gemany in Lithuania by themselves in 1921-1933 are too weak to finish with Poland quickly, and I do not believe they would have been ready for long, bloody war.

France also could have stoped Hitler easily when he marched in the Rheinland or when he annexed Austria or even when he went after Czechoslovakia, but the didn't want to. And I don't believe they would have done so over Poland if Hitler went after it before Czechoslovakia.
We're talking different time period,. In 1936 Wehrmacht was already being rebuild, and Rhineland belonged to Germany anyway - it was simply demilitarized. In 1938 France didn't intervene during Anschluss, because it was over very quickly, and most Austrians seemed quite happy with it. In Munich France and Britain allowed Germany to take Sudetenland, not whole Czechoslovakia. German invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1939 was total surprise for them and costed Hitler or his credibility in the West.
In case of Poland we're not talking about relatively small territory, but about a very big part of well developed land vital to Poland's economy. And Poles would have fought for it, even alone, if necessary. So you can forget about peaceful revision of borders.
Actually in 1920 Poland defeated USSR while Germany and Czechoslovakia were blocking supply transports for Poland. The Germans might have eventually won, but the price to pay would have been very, very high.
 
Originally posted by Vault-Scope
There is a simple solution to that, invasion of Lithuania and Latvia with German support.
So the acess to sea was to be gained by destruction of 2 countries? Somehow I doubt any democratic country would have proposed a solution like tha (although Nazis suggested it). Poland had historical claims to West Prussia and wasn't interested in conquering Lithuania and Latvia. Also, majority of people living in Pomerranian Corridor was Polish or pro-Polish (Kashubians). Occupation of Lithuania and/or Latvia would have resulted with access to sea on very hostile territory. Also, Latvia was one of few Polish neighbours Poland had good relations with.
 
Originally posted by Vault-Scope

So the acess to sea was to be gained by destruction of 2 countries? Somehow I doubt any democratic country would have proposed a solution like tha (although Nazis suggested it). Poland had historical claims to West Prussia and wasn't interested in conquering Lithuania and Latvia. Also, majority of people living in Pomerranian Corridor was Polish or pro-Polish (Kashubians). Occupation of Lithuania and/or Latvia would have resulted with access to sea on very hostile territory. Also, Latvia was one of few Polish neighbours Poland had good relations with.

Actually, Poland had historical claims to Lithuania and Latvia too... ;):p
 
Originally posted by Analytical Engine
Actually, Poland had historical claims to Lithuania and Latvia too...
Yes and no. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was actually federation of 2 states - we Poles tend to forget about it and often use Poland and PLC as it was the same. Besides, there is a difference between claiming a part of someone else's territory (without endangering existence of that nation) and occupying whole country against the will of its inhabitants.
 

Vault-Scope

Banned
Originally posted by Vault-Scope

So the acess to sea was to be gained by destruction of 2 countries? Somehow I doubt any democratic country would have proposed a solution like tha (although Nazis suggested it). Poland had historical claims to West Prussia and wasn't interested in conquering Lithuania and Latvia.

Occupation of Lithuania and/or Latvia would have resulted with access to sea on very hostile territory. Also, Latvia was one of few Polish neighbours Poland had good relations with.


No "western" democracy today would have accepted such solution, hovewer in the 1920s-1930s, mentalities where quiet different.
Polish governement could well decide it have historical claims over Lithuania, since both countries where associated in the past.
Polish gov wasn´t much of a democracy and cared little for good relations, non-violent simply hostility would have been ignored and open hostility would have been dealth with the point of a bayonette.
If Lithuania prooved good enought as an acess to the sea, then Latvia would not have any problem.


Most likely scenario would be a war with the soviet-union going wrong, forcing polish governement to rely on German support to avoid invasion.
 
Originally posted by Vault-Scope
No "western" democracy today would have accepted such solution, hovewer in the 1920s-1930s, mentalities where quiet different.
Polish governement could well decide it have historical claims over Lithuania, since both countries where associated in the past.
Polish gov wasn´t much of a democracy and cared little for good relations, non-violent simply hostility would have been ignored and open hostility would have been dealth with the point of a bayonette.
If Lithuania prooved good enought as an acess to the sea, then Latvia would not have any problem.
Actually, untill 1926 Poland was a democracy. And even later Poles couldn't afford to offend France. Not to mention the fact they very well understood that invasion of Lithuania and/or Latvia could provoke Soviet reaction. Besides, after 1921 Poland was tired of wars and was not interested in starting anymore fighting. Defending - that something else.
And why should Poles start fighting with Lithuanians, when they already had very nice access to sea in Pomerania? Also, the dispute with Germany was not only about Pomerania/West Prussia - there was also a matter of Silesia and western part of Greater Poland. If at the beginning (i.e. in 1919) they were offered a choice between Pomerania and Latvia, they might have hesitated, altough I believe they would have chosen Pomerania (because of Poles and Kashubians living there and much better infrastructure).
 
Top