Harold Nicolson's and Paul Birdsall's Contradictory views of the Paris Peace Treaty at Versailles
...really for the better of Germany. Nicolson believes that there was not a conscious attempt at hypocrisy but it just occurred that way. Nicolson believes that the desire to resolve matters during the conference, exhaustion, being overworked and simply just to form a resolution resulted in a lack of thinking. Nicolson states “In the dust of controversy, in the rattle of time pressure we lost all contact with our guiding stars” (20). Nicolson and others strayed from their intentions and it was only afterwards that they recognized it was too late. This lack of awareness was simply the cause of the failure of the Peace Treaty at Versailles. Idealism was also the cause of the failure of the conference. Nicolson believes that the Paris negotiators had a considerably difficult time in the comforting of their own democrats and shifting them to the ideas of peace making. This contrast was the main 3 problem of democratic diplomacy; trying to change the ideas of the people to the ideas of the rulers. Nicolson believed that Wilson was only powerful due to the overwhelming amount of powerful backing that he acquired. Wilson was not a man of superiority, he did not consist of any “superhuman” powers, it was only due to the fact that the opportunity arose. Throughout Paul Birdsall’s article there is a more positive account of the Paris Peace Conference and of Woodrow Wilson’s actions. Birdsall believes that idealism is a necessity and it results in a practical realization of what the outcome of a situation will be. Birdsall states “For Idealsim and Justice are the very rudiments of common sense” (24). In particular, in Woodrow Wilson’s case, he represented exactly this. Birdsall believed that Wilson showed reason in a resolution for peace and his image has been misrepresented because he spoke too much of idealism and self-sacrifice where he should of spoke of the interests of the community. This misrepresentation lead others unable to see his true role in the Paris Peace Conference. He believes that writers such as Nicolson and Keynes are disillusioned in seeing that the legend of the “Carthaginian Peace” is actually the works of Woodrow Wilson. Birdsall believes that there were both positive and negative factors in the treaties. There were Carthaginian features such as reparations and Wilsonian features such as the League of Nations. Birdsall believes that Wilson’s self-determination was not the cause of the territorial settlement but rather, beaurocratic 4 difficulties. He believes that other critics have forgotten the difficulties of the tasks that were asked of the expert commissions. He also believes that criticisms of the negotiators at Paris should have forseen the economic and political wants before the separation of Austria-Hungary into succession states. In actuality Austria-Hungary had collapsed before the Peace Conference and the fragments of the old empire were already being ruled by separate nationalist governments. According to Birdsall, because the populations of central Europe are already intermingled, a pure nation state is unattainable. Besides, the strategic value of the new boundaries definitely warranted the dispersion of nationalities across boarders. Another one of Birdsall’s main points is that the Treaty of Versailles was a compromise between French and Anglo-American ideas of a secure continental peace. England and America believed in the progressive idea of European peace through a body of discussion, like the League of Nations which was backed by the promise of Anglo-American military commitment. France, on the other hand stood by its punitive policy of the division and punishment of Germany. Angered by previous German rivalry as well as the need to protect itself, France sought out harsh reparations in the peace settlement. England and America, in order to proceed with their idea of European peace were forced to compromise with France. As such, a constructive idea like the League of Nations was offset by the negative effects of demilitarization of the Rhineland, possession of the Saar valley and reparation payments. Later French occupation of the Ruhr valley also added to the punishing effect of the treaty on Germany. Once the United States retreated into its policy of isolationism, it destroyed the stabilizing effect of the Peace Treaty and gave 5 France more influence in negotiations and administration. The devastating effect of the Treaty of Versailles on Germany, Birdsall contends, drove Germany to Nazism. In Birdsall’s opinion the punitive damages of the Treaty of Versailles specifically hurt the greatest supporters of the German republic, the German middle class. While the English and Americans felt sympathy towards Germany’s plight, Frances’s consistent pursuit of reparations caused the German government to resort to extreme measures to live up to Treaty expectations. The ensuing economic crisis in Germany which was augmen...