Essay On Treaty Settlement

To what extent can the treaty settlements at the end of World War I be considered ‘harsh and short-sighted’?

It can be argued that the treaty settlements at the end of World War I were largely short-sighted but only partially harsh. The Treaty of St Germain which dealt with Austria was harsh as it led to severe economic problems in Austria. Not only the treaty of St Germain, but the Treaty of Versailles, dealing with Germany, also imposed harsh military restrictions on Germany. The treaty settlements were short-sighted as it led to the rise of Nazi Germany and resulted in the power vacuum in central Europe. However, it cannot be said that the treaty settlements were completely harsh as the economical and territorial terms of the Treaty of Versailles were reasonable and not impossible for Germany to abide by.

The Treaty of St Germain, signed in 1919 between the Allies and Austria, aimed for the recognition of the split of the Austria-Hungarian Empire into the two separate republics Austria and Hungary. The Allies felt that Austria was, to a certain extent, responsible for the war. As such, Austria was made to take certain responsibility for war damage and was ordered to pay reparations in goods and services. The treaty also involved major reshuffling of Austrian territory such as the loss of Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina (contributing to the formation of Southern Slav kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, renamed Yugoslavia). Austria also lost the territories Galicia, South Tyrol, Istria amongst many others. This redistribution of territories led to Austria’s loss of almost all its industrially rich regions and about 15 million of its population. This huge debt to pay for war damage, accompanied by its inability to pay due to t...

... middle of paper ...

...a part of Germany. Also, for the Saar, the Saar inhabitants were to be offered a plebiscite after 15 years also for them to decide whether they wished to return to Germany, be a part of France, or remain under the supervision of the League of Nations. The residents in these areas were given a chance to choose who they wanted to rule them, in line with the aim of self-determination. This shows that the treaty settlements were not harsh but instead fair on the part that the people were given the right to decide what they wanted politically and were entitled self-determination.

To sum up, the treaty settlements were very short-sighted as it did not bring about long lasting peace in Europe but instead, brewed more unrest and hostility. However, on the part of being harsh, the treaty settlements were only partially harsh as some terms were harsh while others reasonable.