What would you do differently at Versailles in 1919?

Also, re: submarines, USW was a far greater horror to that era than we can imagine now. It was seen as little better than state sanctioned piracy with a murderous, rather than avaracious, bent.

Didn't the US practise unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan in WW2?
 
Just quickly scrolling through the thread I’m surprised so many of you would allow the Anschluss, along with Alsace-Lorraine. I mean, it’s the nice thing to do for sure, but what this would mean that France creates an absolute juggernaut in Europe in exchange for Alsace-Lorraine. The French have been seeing the writing on the wall for quite a while now: they were outnumbered and outproduced by Germany. Even the Versailles-Germany had way more population than France. They know that if they unite with Austria, they will get back on their feet in no time and there will be no way to enforce anything on them. In 20 years they could probably just enforce plebiscites in Danzig by their sheer weight. They will have all of Central Europe in their sphere of influence, along with Scandinavia. They enforced Versailles exactly in fear of this. We, in 2017 know it was a bad idea, and France should instead try reapproachment, but the France in 1918 did not have such foresight.
 
Last edited:
I mean, it’s the nice thing to do for sure, but what this would mean that France creates an absolute juggernaut in Europe in exchange for Sudetenland.
Oh, for sure. One has to remember that while Germany was weakened during WWI, their entire eastern flank was weakened more.
 
Treaty of Versailles was absolutely fair for a losing nation. If you want an example of an unfair treaty, look at Trianon or Sevres. The only thing wrong with the ToV was that the Allies didn't enforce it. France should have invaded Germany the moment the Rhineland was remilitarized.

For the Treaty of Saint-Germain, Austria should have kept Slovenia and the Southern Sudetenland.

Fair.

Right.

" This is not peace. It is an armistice for 20 years." --- Ferdinand Foch
 
Foch wanted an even less fair peace, for what that's worth.

Well, yeah, that's kind of my point. If you're going to grind someone into the dirt, then actually grind them into the dirt. Make it beyond unthinkable that they would ever look in your direction again.

Or make nice, shake hands, and go home. No middle of the road nonsense.
 
Well, yeah, that's kind of my point. If you're going to grind someone into the dirt, then actually grind them into the dirt. Make it beyond unthinkable that they would ever look in your direction again.

Or make nice, shake hands, and go home. No middle of the road nonsense.

Well, let me respond with one of my old posts on the subject:

You know, this concept of "Holding Germany down indefinitely" actually seems weird when you think about it. When has a Great Power decided to use a momentary advantage over another to hobble it? All the damn time, but when, without the winning power resorting to ethnic cleansing or comparable brutality, has the expectation been a permanent end to the rivalry? Didn't happen to France after 1815, didn't happen to Russia losing the Crimean War, it's not something that's usually attempted. The only time it was done and stuck was WW2 with the arrival of a superpower that dwarfed all others, and only with some degree of consent from the occupied. It's just such an ahistorical and unrealistic expectation that to think the Versailles state of affairs could hold indefinitely sounds silly. No Great Power was ever destroyed by a piece of paper.

Bottom line, you're asking too much if you take the "war to end all wars" bit so literally. And seeing how most previous wars didn't end in white peace either, maybe middle of the road can be lived with if you manage your expectations a little better. Certainly better than "Go genocide or go home", which is what would really be demanded for the goals you want.
 
Plebiscites everywhere. If you're going to use a vote to determine borders in any place it's only fair to do it everywhere. If it's a village by village situation, either go by county or pay people (fairly) to move around. I'm serious, if you want peace you want to eliminate all of the ethnic reasons for nations to declare war.

EDIT: also reduced reparations, occupation of German areas is fine but none indefinitely.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
I believe that the Treaty should be the same, but the war guilt clause would be shifted to Austria, Polish lands would be decided by plebiscites, and German reparations would be limited to 1913 German military budget, or higher if a Western European free trade zone is created. Meanwhile, Austria would be allowed for Anchsluss after 10 years. Finally, Italy and Japan must receive more territories.
 
Something else to consider is that reparations should have been able to be made in kind as well as hard money.

I agree with Austria getting the war guilt clause or sharing it with Germany.
 
Well, yeah, that's kind of my point. If you're going to grind someone into the dirt, then actually grind them into the dirt. Make it beyond unthinkable that they would ever look in your direction again.

Or make nice, shake hands, and go home. No middle of the road nonsense.


And since the first option would take more effort to enforce than the victor's war-weary populations will ever be up for, what does that leave?
 
First thing, make sure the German war guilt crisis is well traduced - they are paying for the destruction wrecked upon Northern France, Belgium and Coastal England.
Second thing, fix the amount of reparations in the treaty. Doesn't have to be large, just get it fixed.
Third thing, have France and Belgium occupy say the Rhineland and the Ruhr, at Germany's expense, for an indefinite duration, with the Ruhr being evacuated at half the reparations having been paid for and the Rhineland when all is paid.
Fourth thing, don't link German disarmament to disarmament of other nations but to the size of the closest enforcer, in this case France, and maintain their army as a conscript army and not a professional one which can easily expand.
And fifth thing, allow the possibility for France to sacrifice part of her reparations in exchange for a comprehensive trade agreement with Germany.

Otherwise, from the territory POV, it's OK.
 
If I was responsible for imposing the peace treaties after the First World War I would do the following:

GERMANY:

1. I would've dissolved the German Empire and given all the various territories that made up the former German Empire their independence.
2. Alsace-Lorraine would've gone back to France.
3. Poland would've been handed the Memel region and the east Prussian province of Gumbinnen thus ensuring there would be no vulnerable "Polish Corridor" while still keeping the promise to give Poland access to the sea.
4. Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia would have their independence recognised.
5. The German colonies would be carved up among the Allies as in our time line EXCEPT that China would get Tsingtao and all of German East Africa including what is now Burundi and Rwanda would be annexed by the British.
6. Political unification of Germany would not be permitted until at least 1970.
7. No restrictions would be placed on the size of the military forces held by the various German states except Prussia which would be confined to a military force no larger than the total number of soldiers under arms in all the other German states combined.

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY:

1. The dual monarchy would be abolished.
2. Hungary would lose southern Transylvania to Romania.
3. The Dalmatian coast, southern Tyrol, Fiume and Trieste would be handed to Italy.
4. Croatia and Slavonia would become the independent Republic of Croatia.
5. Bohemia and Moravia would become the independent state of Bohemia-Moravia.
6. Austrian Galicia would be handed to Poland.
7. Bosnia and Herzegovina to be partitioned between Serbia and Croatia along ethnic lines.
8. Slovakia would become an independent state.
9. Southern Sudetenland would be annexed by Bavaria.
10. Northern Sudetenland would be annexed by Saxony.

BULGARIA:

Bulgaria would lose the Thrace region to Greece.

OTTOMAN EMPIRE:

1. Jerusalem, Haifa and Tel Aviv would become independent city states.
2. Jordan and Hejaz would become the Kingdom of Hejaz-Jordan
3. The parts of Palestine that aren't part of the city states and Lebanon would become the Republic of Palestine.
4. Syria and Iraq would become the Kingdom of Mesopotamia.
 
!.Send coalition forces to Berlin and show them who is the boss.
2.Don't mess with the Middle East.Don't support the Al-Saud family. Keep peace with the Hashemite family.
3.Placate Japan and provide it with German ports in China.
4.Reduce reparations on Germany and symbolically humiliate it rather than economically.
5.If possible separate Bavaria from rest of Germany to start the opposite of German unification.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
Well, yeah, that's kind of my point. If you're going to grind someone into the dirt, then actually grind them into the dirt. Make it beyond unthinkable that they would ever look in your direction again.

Or make nice, shake hands, and go home. No middle of the road nonsense.
It would have been enough if they had ACTUALLY enforced it, by invading Germany the moment they remilitarized the Rhineland.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
If I was responsible for imposing the peace treaties after the First World War I would do the following:

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY:

1. The dual monarchy would be abolished.
2. Hungary would lose southern Transylvania to Romania.
3. The Dalmatian coast, southern Tyrol, Fiume and Trieste would be handed to Italy.
4. Croatia and Slavonia would become the independent Republic of Croatia.
5. Bohemia and Moravia would become the independent state of Bohemia-Moravia.
6. Austrian Galicia would be handed to Poland.
7. Bosnia and Herzegovina to be partitioned between Serbia and Croatia along ethnic lines.
8. Slovakia would become an independent state.
9. Southern Sudetenland would be annexed by Bavaria.
10. Northern Sudetenland would be annexed by Saxony.

OTTOMAN EMPIRE:

1. Jerusalem, Haifa and Tel Aviv would become independent city states.
2. Jordan and Hejaz would become the Kingdom of Hejaz-Jordan
3. The parts of Palestine that aren't part of the city states and Lebanon would become the Republic of Palestine.
4. Syria and Iraq would become the Kingdom of Mesopotamia.

Why on Earth would you give the Southern Sudetenland to Bavaria? If you won't give it to the Czechs, why not let the Austrians keep it? Also, your proposed Kingdom of Mesopotamia sounds just as unstable as the OTL Iraq and Syria, given the mix of Sunnis and Shiites.
 
Top