Ukraine partitioned along Dnieper in 1920

If Pilsudski was in charge of peace negotiations with the USSR, Poland would probably just have annexed the extra parts of Belarus and Ukraine they got.

My understanding is that Pilsudski wanted independent Belarussian and Ukrainian states (but with areas of any significant Polish population included in part of Poland), but reluctantly annexed the rump Belarussian/Ukrainian areas under Polish control once the territory became so small that an independent state was not feasible. I think Pilsudski's preference were independent states allied and cooperative with each other.
 
Actually, Ukrainians will be divided among five nations:

(1) The Ukrainian SSR, soon to become part of the Soviet Union. It contains truly "Ukrainian" areas like the Poltava guberniya, but also heavily Russified areas like the Donets Basin. Unlike OTL, its capital remains in Kharkov after 1934.

(2) The Ukrainian People's Republic.

(3) Eastern Poland--Petliura had to concede eastern Galicia, western Volhynia, etc. to Poland in the Treaty of Warsaw http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Warsaw_(1920) as the price for the military alliance against the Bolsheviks. This was, needless to say, an unpopular decision among many Ukrainians, especially West Ukrainians.

(4) Czechoslovakia (Subcarpathian Ruthenia).

(5) Romania (northern Bukovina and southern Bessarabia).

To complicate matters, Makhno's anarchist forces were still in the field throughout 1919-21 and held a substantial, though shifting, amount of territory. Although they were more concentrated in the SSR area, they were mobile, and more hostile to the Whites, nationalists and foreigners than they were towards the Reds. Petliura's weak position could easily have tempted Makhno to try his luck in West Ukraine.
 
No way would Romania go for any union of any kind at that point, except perhaps allowing King Ferdinand to also become King of Poland if the Poles so wished. Romania was very hyped-up on nationalism at that point to contemplate anything more.

I agree. I think a Polish-Romanian union only becomes possible after Poland stops fighting. Even then, Romania always has the question of "what if the Soviets or the Germans get revanchist, don't wanna be tied to closely to their target".

I still think that a Polish-Romanian union TL would be fascinating.

The National Democrats were a large and well-developed organization. If Dmowski dies, someone else will replace him.

Yes, they'd get a new leader. All I'm saying is that the NDs would be more pro-Pilsudski without Dmowski.

At least during the wars of independence and the Polish-Soviet war. From what I've read the NDs in Poland were very much in favor of forming a unified front, while Dmowski was very much against it. Dmowski had to expend some effort in dissuading them from this path and following his path.

Neither Piłsudski nor the National Democrats considered annexing Ukraine, so it would remain at least de jure independent.

I know. I think that a non-viable Ukraine could end up as an autonomous province of Poland by default, rather than due to anyone WANTING a new Polish-Ukrainian union.

My understanding is that Pilsudski wanted independent Belarussian and Ukrainian states (but with areas of any significant Polish population included in part of Poland), but reluctantly annexed the rump Belarussian/Ukrainian areas under Polish control once the territory became so small that an independent state was not feasible. I think Pilsudski's preference were independent states allied and cooperative with each other.

I thought Pilsudski viewed the Belarussians as Poles who talked funny?

fasquardon
 
If Pilsudski was in charge of peace negotiations with the USSR, Poland would probably just have annexed the extra parts of Belarus and Ukraine they got.

My understanding is that Pilsudski wanted independent Belarussian and Ukrainian states (but with areas of any significant Polish population included in part of Poland), but reluctantly annexed the rump Belarussian/Ukrainian areas under Polish control once the territory became so small that an independent state was not feasible. I think Pilsudski's preference were independent states allied and cooperative with each other.

think that a non-viable Ukraine could end up as an autonomous province of Poland by default, rather than due to anyone WANTING a new Polish-Ukrainian union.

I thought Pilsudski viewed the Belarussians as Poles who talked funny?

Ideally, Piłsudski would have wanted a large independent Ukraine, and some sort of ties with Lithuania and Belarus. Until 1919 he considered re-creating the old Grand Duchy of Lithuania more or less within its 1772 borders, as a Baltic Lithuanian-Polish-Belarusian federation allied with Poland, but he later decided that this particular solution would be unworkable. At the time of the negotiations at Riga it was clear that the Bolsheviks would control the lion's share of Ukraine and Belarus. If any separate Ukrainian or Belarusian states were to be created, they would be very small and weak. Piłsudski was aware that their existence in any form would antagonize the Bolsheviks very much, so he probably wouldn't have wanted them established by that point.
 
Poland has never had anything like "autonomous provinces", you know, and rump Ukraine isn't likely to suddenly become one.
That's more a result of the fact that Poland hasn't been independent for a lot of modern history. Prior to independence in 1918, it had been 150 years since they existed. So, it really is not a precedent. People talk of the USA as being a "new nation-state" when in fact most of Europe's nation-states are much younger.
 
WI Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had been reborn post WW1 incorporating Poland Lithuania Prussia most of modern Belarus and west bank Ukraine.
 
That's more a result of the fact that Poland hasn't been independent for a lot of modern history. Prior to independence in 1918, it had been 150 years since they existed. So, it really is not a precedent. People talk of the USA as being a "new nation-state" when in fact most of Europe's nation-states are much younger.

Didn't the Silesian voivodship have a certain amount of autonomy in interwar Poland?
 
Poland has never had anything like "autonomous provinces", you know, and rump Ukraine isn't likely to suddenly become one.

Prior to independence in 1918, it had been 150 years since they existed.

It wasn't that long. Third Partition was in 1795. So 123 years. But then the Grand Duchy of Warsaw existed from 1807-1813. Congress Poland (which had the Tsar as the head of state, but was separate from Russia with its own Sejm, customs territory, laws and army) existed until 1832 and not officially part of Russia until 1867. Krakow was a Free City until 1846. So depending on how you want to identify independence, it had been less than a hundred years. The Polish memory of having their own state wasn't that long ago.

Lithuania wasn't really autonomous in the old Union, but it did have its own identity, government, laws, army, and treasury. It was technically a federal state. So it seems pretty close. The Treaty of Hadiach in 1658 proposed adding Ruthenia (Ukraine) as an equal member of Poland and Lithuania in the Commonwealth. So there is lots of precedent although many Polish nationalists in 1918-1920 wanted an ethnic state based on centralization and Polonization, and did not want anything like the old Union. But not everyone thought the same.
 
If Pilsudski had managed to created a greater Poland with Dnieper as eastern border how would this effected ww2 or inter war relations with USSR.
 
If Pilsudski had managed to created a greater Poland with Dnieper as eastern border how would this effected ww2 or inter war relations with USSR.

I don't think it would change relations with the SU, Germany, Lithuania or Czechoslovakia much. Poland bigger may make for closer relations with France and Romania though (since Poland is bigger, both may worry less about the country being snuffed out). IF those happen, that should have positive effects on the economy (due to a little more investment money being available).

Much depends on how the Pilsudski arranges this larger Poland politically - personally, I doubt that either the Poles or the Ukrainians would accept a unitary state. As such, we may see a federal Poland (the NDs wouldn't like it, but I bet they'd like it better than Ukrainians deciding who the next Polish government were). Or it may be seen as more important to have a strongly unitary government (as OTL), which means that autonomy would be pushed down to the provincial level...

If Poland is as unstable early on as OTL, or more unstable, then being bigger doesn't help a whole lot, and this "Great Poland" still ends up crushed between Germany and the Soviets somehow.

So much depends on exactly how and why Poland has expanded further. However, since Poland being larger is almost certainly a result of Pilsudski being stronger, I'd say the odds are that Poland gets a more stable political system than OTL, which helps ALOT.

While the new lands in the East won't really be very rich, it'll still make for a more integrated economic unit as well. Combined with a more stable 1920s, it's quite possible that Poland would be a minor great power like Italy come 1939.

Poland being on the same level as the Italians in 1939 is bad news for a Germany that wants to pick a fight. We may see a situation where there is no WW2 as we know it, where a German-Polish war is delayed until the mid-40s or where WW2 starts with a German attack on France.

If Poland is weaker, but still stronger than OTL (and has more space to retreat into when invaded), it would likely be crushed after the Germans and Soviets make nice (if they make nice), but it is likely to hurt the Germans badly enough that if Britain and France are allies as OTL, France and Britain will be able to stomp Germany flat at their leisure. (The invasion of Poland took alot out of Germany and even small things to help Poland make the fall of France impossible for the Germans to achieve.) Of course, in this scenario, the East still becomes Soviet, but millions upon millions of Poles survive the war.

fasquardon
 
Though probably unlikely it would be interesting to see an ATL modern day Poland with at least Odessa gaining access to the Black Sea (if not a Dnieper eastern border), while the remaining parts of Belarus and Ukraine are possibly merged into an almost Belgium-like "Belkrainian" buffer state.
 
Top