Polish-Romanian alliance

Well:
1. I think Romania stretched as far east as it was for them possible and convenient due to Romanian ethnicity in former Russian territories they gained after Russian collapse. They didn't want any extra Russians/ Ukrainian people.

2. There was later on Polish-Romanian alliance against possible Soviet aggression. In Fall 1939 Poland I believe released Romania from their obligation to the treaty.
 
Stretch them where? The government and king of Romania had no desire to rule over a bunch of Magyars.
Well, Hungary is to the West of Romania. And actually they already rule over bunch of Magyars after WWI, didn't they? ;)
 
Err, oops, read that as West. And it should've been "a bunch more".

Anyway, the same issue applies, except that instead of Magyars it's Ukrainians (and some confused porpoises).
 
Err, oops, read that as West. And it should've been "a bunch more".

Anyway, the same issue applies, except that instead of Magyars it's Ukrainians (and some confused porpoises).
My point. They got as much as was good for them.
 
well, I toyed with the idea of Romanians participating in the war, so alliance should then be sooner, I know in OTL it was signed later. but as far as I see it is probably bad idea anyhow.
 
If Romania did participate in the Polish-Soviet War, I don't think its boundaries would change much than IOTL. Perhaps some minor border adjustments. Instead, they'd be helping the Poles establish the Ukrainian People's Republic of Simon Petlura as an anti-Bolshevik or anti-Russian measure.

If the Polish-Romanian-Ukrainian alliance wins so that an effective Ukrainian state can be formed (perhaps at least reaching to the Dnieper and including Kiev), then Romania's borders change very little. If the alliance fails, then Romania might find itself holding onto Ukrainian land it really doesn't want filled with resentful Ukrainian nationalists. Hopefully, it'd be small enough to not destabilize Romania. If the combined Polish and Romanian areas of Ukraine are large enough, perhaps they are able to create a rump Ukrainian state with a capital at Lvov - but that relies on the Polish government letting Pilsudski "give" that land away to an independent Ukraine instead of ruling it themselves.
 
Stretch them where? The government and king of Romania had no desire to rule over a bunch of Magyars.

Which would be relevant if he said to the West, but he didn't. Romania would likely attempt to claim Odessa. But I doubt Poland would side with Ukraine considering their bickering over Bucovina and the Polish attempt to bring Ukraine into their sphere of influence.
 
If Romania did participate in the Polish-Soviet War, I don't think its boundaries would change much than IOTL. Perhaps some minor border adjustments. Instead, they'd be helping the Poles establish the Ukrainian People's Republic of Simon Petlura as an anti-Bolshevik or anti-Russian measure.

If the Polish-Romanian-Ukrainian alliance wins so that an effective Ukrainian state can be formed (perhaps at least reaching to the Dnieper and including Kiev), then Romania's borders change very little. If the alliance fails, then Romania might find itself holding onto Ukrainian land it really doesn't want filled with resentful Ukrainian nationalists. Hopefully, it'd be small enough to not destabilize Romania. If the combined Polish and Romanian areas of Ukraine are large enough, perhaps they are able to create a rump Ukrainian state with a capital at Lvov - but that relies on the Polish government letting Pilsudski "give" that land away to an independent Ukraine instead of ruling it themselves.

Poland would never have ceded Lvov. It was in many ways the second great city in Poland, after Warsaw. (Lodz was larger, but unlike Lvov it was of little cultural relevance - essentially an overgrown industrial town). But the other parts of southeastern Poland are a different matter. IIRC Poland was willing to agree to a French proposal which would grant them Lvov and leave the areas east of the city to the West Ukrainians. If the Ukrainians see the writing on the wall and learn to live without the city, it becomes easier to build a Ukrainian state even without Kiev. Firstly because there is more territory to create this Ukraine out of, secondly because Poland won't have a large Ukrainian minority, thirdly because Poland won't be actually giving anything away. Assuming the Bolsheviks hold on to Kiev, perhaps Odessa could become the capital of this hypothetical Ukraine.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
If Romania did participate in the Polish-Soviet War, I don't think its boundaries would change much than IOTL. Perhaps some minor border adjustments. Instead, they'd be helping the Poles establish the Ukrainian People's Republic of Simon Petlura as an anti-Bolshevik or anti-Russian measure.

If the Polish-Romanian-Ukrainian alliance wins so that an effective Ukrainian state can be formed (perhaps at least reaching to the Dnieper and including Kiev), then Romania's borders change very little. If the alliance fails, then Romania might find itself holding onto Ukrainian land it really doesn't want filled with resentful Ukrainian nationalists. Hopefully, it'd be small enough to not destabilize Romania. If the combined Polish and Romanian areas of Ukraine are large enough, perhaps they are able to create a rump Ukrainian state with a capital at Lvov - but that relies on the Polish government letting Pilsudski "give" that land away to an independent Ukraine instead of ruling it themselves.
The thing with Poland and Ukraine is, sooner or later their relations will crash due to Poland having alot of Ukrainian speaking territory. While aiding Pelitura is one thing, actually wanting a Ukrainian state to exist is another. As you said there is no way Poland is willing to give up territory, in this scenario they might even have annexed a little more than OTL. Pelitura was a tool Poland used, one they happily would discard, since they never intended to really have him succeed.
 
Originally posted by yourworstnightmare
Pelitura was a tool Poland used, one they happily would discard, since they never intended to really have him succeed.

Poland was divided, as far as Ukraine goes. Nationalists with Dmowski wanted all territories of the old Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, including most of Ukraine. They believed they would later be able to Polonize them. OTOH Piłsudski and his followers prefered an independent Ukraine, allied with Poland against Russia - with Poland as senior partner, of course.
Polish-Soviet peace talks in 1921 were conducted mostly by Dmowski'sfollowers. When the peace was signed Piłsudski could only say to his Ukrainian allies, who had every right to feel betrayed: "Gentlemen, I'm very sorry"
 
Poland was divided, as far as Ukraine goes. Nationalists with Dmowski wanted all territories of the old Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, including most of Ukraine. They believed they would later be able to Polonize them.

Dmowski was no such megalomaniac. He was well aware that the Polonization of all of the former commonwealth was quite impossible, and his maximum demands only slightly exceeded the OTL borders of interwar Poland. They most certainly did not include most of Ukraine.
 
As far as I understand Dmowski was a skeptic towards how feasible Polonization of large territories were.

I suppose it depends upon how you define 'large'. He believed the Ukrainians and Belorussians within the OTL interwar borders to be assimilable, but no more. Dmowski had been for annexing the Minsk region at one point, but by the time the Bolsheviks were ready to cede the city in 1921 he had changed his mind.
 
Top