CAI
MUN2016
PPC
Ba
ck
gr
ounder
Topi
cA:
Det
er
mi
ni
ng
Ar
mi
s
t
i
ceTer
msandTr
eat
i
es
Committee Overview
The Paris Peace Conference was the meeting of the Allied victors of World War I to
decide the terms of the peace following the end of the war. Meeting in the year of 1919, the
Paris Peace Conference included delegations from 27 sovereign states, as well as five nonstate parties seeking their own interests’ recognition.
1
Introduction to Topic A
“It is not enough to win a war; it is more important to organize the peace.”
– Aristotle [1]
Topic A is determining armistice terms and treaties. This essentially means deciding
what the world will look like after the global conflict has ended and the dust has settled – this
is important since the delegates to the Paris Peace Conference essentially have carte blanche
to make a brand new world, although they would still have to remain in line with traditional
foreign policy.
Timeline [2]
November 1917 – October 1922
Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, followed by Russian Civil War. Russia founds a MarxistLeninist dictatorship after toppling Tsar Nicholas II, but has to fight a war to keep it against
broad coalition of opposition known as the Whites.
January 1918
US President Woodrow Wilson publishes his “Fourteen Points”, a statement of principles for
world peace that were taken skeptically by the other Allied powers.
March 1918
Russia signs a peace with Germany in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, ceding huge swaths of land
and ended Russia’s commitment to the Allies.
November 11th 1918
Allies sign armistice with Germany, after the abdication of the Kaiser. The Germans were
expecting a peace based on Wilson’s Fourteen Points.
January 1919
The Paris Peace Conference begins.
January 4th-15th 1919
Spartacist uprising in Germany by Communists led by Rosa Luxemburg. It was crushed by
the more moderate Social Democratic leader Friedrich Ebert and his Freikorps.
February 1919 – March 1921
Polish-Soviet War over control of modern-day Ukraine and Belarus. Although likely out of
the scope of the committee, it ended with a Polish victory.
May 1919 – October 1922
Turkish War of Independence in response to the Allied partitioning of the former Ottoman
Empire.
2
June 1919
Germany signs Treaty of Versailles.
August 1919
Wilson returns to United States.
September 1919
Austria signs Treaty of St. Germain.
November 1919
Bulgaria signs Treaty of Neuilly.
December 1919
US Senate rejects Treaty of Versailles, thus excluding the United States from the League of
Nations.
January 1920
Paris Peace Conference closes, League of Nations comes into effect.
Historical Analysis
Causes of the First World War
The conflagration that is the First World War did not come out of nowhere.
Historians debate endlessly on the long-term causes of the war, but undoubtedly many of
these issues are important to discuss in the effort of preventing future total wars of a similar
nature.
In the years between roughly 1887 and 1914, Europe became polarized into what are
often called two “armed camps” in contest with one another, known as the Triple Entente and
the Triple Alliance. [3] The formation of these rigid blocs with little potential of diplomacy or
negotiation with the opposite side did not bode well for the balance of power in Europe and
disrupted the global system of the Age of Metternich where each European power took pains
to prevent one single hegemon. In this regard, states began to more and more prioritize the
security of their bloc rather than preserving a general peace.
3
(The Pre-War Alliances and other relationships)
Nationalism and imperialism were issues that plagued both the pre- and post-Great
War worlds. On one hand, major nations exploited nationalist sentiments to create a more
militarized state whose entire focus was to defeat the other. French desire for revenge after the
humiliation of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 and the raw desire to reclaim AlsaceLorraine was a case in point. On the other hand, nationalism was also prevalent in minor
nationalities that were part of major empires like the Ottoman or the Austro-Hungarian to
create friction in places where ethnic boundaries were not at all clear, such as the Balkans.
Likewise, the rise of imperialism created a truly global war, where battle lines were drawn
across Africa, the Middle East, Asia-Pacific, and later also the intervention of the United
States.
Militarization and the Industrial Revolution helped create an environment where
mass slaughter was the order of the day in wartime. This is exacerbated by the fact that
Europe had not had a general, large-scale conflict since the Napoleonic era. There were minor
engagements, like the Boer Wars, the Balkans Wars, and the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, but
these were not enough to put to rest the idea in the minds of European statesmen that the war
that brewed in 1914 would be quick and “over before Christmas.” Everyone went in fully
blind to the enormous killing potential in the industrial weapons like the machine gun and
artillery. Not only that, railways were developed so that military plans had to be correct to the
very minute time differences; small errors could have a huge impact on the course of the war
[4].
4
Course of the First World War
The First World War is of course a colossus of a topic and only a cursory discussion of
it is available in this guide. In essence, after a chain reaction known as the July Crisis, the
Central Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire found
themselves at war with the Allies of Britain, France, Russia, Belgium, Serbia, and other
associated states. [5]
Although Germany pushed deep into French territory at the outset of the war, they
were stopped from taking Paris at the Battle of the Marne, leading to a stalemate due to
construction of massive trenches that are extremely difficult to get across. This became
known as the infamous “Western Front”, which claimed enormous numbers of casualties in
meat-grinder battles like Verdun and the Somme [6].
(Map depicting development of the Western Front)
The Eastern Front was much more fluid and nebulous. Germany and AustriaHungary held the clear initiative after the Battle of Tannenberg, and Russia suffered huge
losses due to overall mediocre leadership. Eventually the dire wartime situation compounded
with popular discontent to lead to a revolution in Russia toppling the Tsar. After a second
revolution, this time based on Marxist principles, the Russian government opted out of the
war and signed a treaty that surrendered huge swaths of land to Germany.
5
Other fronts had major political implications as well. These included: Japan’s seizure
of Germany’s Asia-Pacific territories like small islands and the Chinese colony of Tsingtao; a
disastrous British attempt to control the Dardanelles known as the Battle of Gallipoli; fronts
in East Africa; and successful Allied captures of territories in the Middle East in the Sinai,
Mesopotamia, and Palestine campaigns.
By 1917, both the Allies and the Central Powers were in a rough state. Germany
especially was preparing to use desperate measure to wrap up a quick finish to the war,
including launching the highly controversial policy of unrestricted submarine warfare.
However, this led to the intervention of the United States into the war, which had major
psychological implications. After continuous attempts to break the stalemate in the Western
Front in 1918 failed, Germany’s war-machine was at the breaking point. With the assistance
of the American troops, the Allies forced a Central Powers to concede in November 1918.
Current Situation
The end of World War I was not something that ended with complete closure. At the
time of the armistice, there were several issues left unresolved that were left to the delegates of
the Paris Peace Conference [7]. Obviously, such an immense human catastrophe completely
reshaped the geopolitical landscape of Europe and of the world so that reverting things back
to the status quo ante bellum was impossible. Before the delegates could even begin to try to
reshape the borders and define the new order, however, there were already problems to deal
with.
A huge issue that would shape the German psyche at the time and down the road is
the course of the war itself. Although the war was hugely destructive for both France and
Germany on the all-important Western Front, the occupied and damaged territory was all on
French and Belgian soil. During the entirety of the war, only briefly did Western or Russian
forces ever enter Germany’s own land. With the war never hitting the backyards of ordinary
German citizens, it was hard for the populace to believe that the armies were defeated on the
battlefield. As well, German infrastructure and industry were left mostly intact, meaning that
Germany rearming itself was a very real and tangible possibility. In addition, with the brunt
of the damage of the war being on French land and infrastructure, the French felt desire for
revenge and compensation for what they had lost, and went into the peace tables with this in
mind [8].
It is impossible to overlook the human component of the war. An entire generation
had been scarred by this unprecedented level of bloodshed and conflict, with total deaths
totaling 8 million and total wounded totaling 21 million [9]. This is a staggering number and
the sheer numbness felt impacted the peace negotiations as well. The primary Allied powers the United Kingdom, the United States, and France - were democracies who had to listen and
take into account the wills of their people, so if the people desired a punitive peace, that had
to be taken into consideration. On the other side of the equation, the defeated Central Powers
would find it difficult to comply with a huge economic or industrial burden, given losses in
population. This would be especially difficult given that the majority of lives lost were young
men aged around 18-34. This is the prime age to be working in the industry, and with this
generation decimated it would be much harder to restart the economy. This is only
6
exacerbated by the international pandemic known as the Spanish Flu, which killed 50-100
million worldwide [10], even more than the war itself. On that topic, the war cost immensely,
not only in souls but in cash as well. The global economy was cut completely awry during the
war, and trade that used to be free and uninhibited had to deal with embargoes and sinking of
vessels. Britain alone paid 3.3 billion pounds [11] as well as 9 million tons of merchant
shipping, and all countries involved were hugely in debt. This economic necessity encouraged
the peacemakers to try to seek an economic benefit from the defeated powers to rebuild
things back to a stable state.
Conflict had not ceased solely because the armistice had been signed. A blockade
remained on Germany, crippling the economy and leading to starvation on a huge scale; the
German people found it unjust that this continued even after the war was over. Germany was
also rocked by socialist and Spartacist revolution, which made the concept of a “German
government” indefinite in and of itself. Mirroring this, the revolution and civil war in Russia
caused enormous tumult, a fully-fledged war continuing in parallel to the conference trying to
promote a lasting peace. The key takeaways from this are that the Bolshevik movement was
beginning to spread across Europe and across the globe, a major threat to the established
powers like Britain and France that dominate the Paris Peace Conference. Thus, the
geopolitical situation was far from stable after the supposed general peace.
Overall, the situation was still highly fraught after the armistice was signed and there
were many loose ends necessary for the delegates of the Conference to tie off, and issues
necessary to clear up for the proper peace treaties to deal with. Each country came in with its
own agenda to push and its own priorities, and these need to be balanced throughout the
course of the committee.
Bloc Positions
United Kingdom
Britain had four main aims for the peace settlement. First, Britain desired colonial
expansion at the expense of Germany and the Ottoman Empire. The British Empire on which
the sun never set still coveted more territory from the losers of the war, such as Germany’s
African possessions and Mesopotamia and Palestine in the Middle East. Second, Britain
desired war reparations paid from Germany to cover the costs and damages that the war
inflicted on Britain’s economy. As she is primarily a naval and commercial power, Britain
suffered greatly from disruptions due to the war. Third, Britain sought to retain its global
naval supremacy through naval limitations on the Central Powers. Finally, Britain unlike
some other delegates encouraged Germany to eventually recover economically. This is for
two reasons. On one hand, Britain feared that too paltry of an economic state would lead
communism to hold root in Germany, something completely undesirable. On the other hand,
Britain relied on world trade and needed that to return in Germany so that Britain herself
could recover. In addition to these concrete peace aims, in a general, long-term sense, Britain
was interested in following its typical foreign policy trajectory: to not get involved in any
alliance in Europe, in order to keep a balance of power [12]. This would include not favouring
any French plans to seek domination in Europe.
7
France
France’s desires for the peace terms can generally be categorized in three ways:
territory, reparations, and military considerations. On the territorial side, France desired
Germany to be carved up so that it would never again threaten French security. This entails
returning Alsace-Lorraine to France [13], creating a Polish state from Russian and German
lands, and creating a Rhenish buffer state between France. In addition to this France, like
Britain and Italy, desired colonies from the defeated Ottoman Empire. As well, France wanted
reparations to not only pay for the extensive damages, but also to punish Germany for
causing the war, in their eyes. Militarily, France was interested in limiting the German
military as much as possible [14].
(Map of Alsace-Lorraine)
8
United States
The United States’ plan for peace was generally described in the Fourteen Points,
which are as follows [15]:
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
An end to secret treaties.
Freedom of the seas.
Free trade between nations.
General disarmament.
Settling colonial claims with local populations.
Russia to be allowed an independent determination of political development.
Evacuation and restoration of Belgium.
Return of Alsace-Lorraine to France.
Italian borders adjusted along lines of nationality.
Self-determination for nations of Austria-Hungary.
Balkan borders determined by historical nationalities.
Sovereignty for all nations in Ottoman Empire, including the Turks; free use of
Dardanelles.
XIII. Creation of Polish state with access to the sea.
XIV. Creation of League of Nations.
Italy
Italian goals for the peace were to acquire what was promised to it in the Treaty of
London which enticed her to join the Allies. These territories were Dalmatia, Trieste, and
South Tyrol [16]. However, these territories were not strictly of the Italian nationality,
violating the principle of self-determination. Italy was also interested in a protectorate over
Albania and territories in Southern Asia Minor from the Ottoman Empire.
(Territories promised and granted to Italy in the Treaty of London)
Japan
In the peace settlements, Japan desired recognition for the territory Japan had seized
from the German overseas territories. In addition to these concrete terms, Japan was also
interested in taking its place in the sun alongside the other Western great powers, and pushed
for a statement recognizing racial equality [17].
9
Discussion Questions
Should the defeated powers be allowed to recover economically, politically, or militarily? Why
or why not?
How should the human and economic cost of the war be considered?
How should the various concepts shaping borders - such as national self-determination,
promises in secret treaties, balance of power - be balanced?
Does friction remain between the victorious Allies? In what forms? How should this impact
the negotiations?
Who gets precedence when territorial promises overlap? If one side is prioritized over
another based on some principle, what precedent does this set?
Do the principles of the Fourteen Points represent hopeless idealism, or a genuine plan for a
post-war status quo?
To what extent should the peace treaty be a “Carthaginian peace”?
Further Resources
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/paris-peace
http://www.britannica.com/event/Paris-Peace-Conference
http://www.international.gc.ca/odskelton/macmillan.aspx?lang=eng
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Paris_Peace_Conference,_1919
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/post-world-war-i-peace-conference-begins-inparis
10
Citations
A quote by Aristotle. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2016, from
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/124212-it-is-not-enough-to-win-a-war-it-is
Paris Peace Conference Timeline - IB History. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29, 2016, from
https://sites.google.com/a/centerforants.com/ib-contemporary-history/topics/paris-peacesettlement/library-ppc/paris-peace-conference/paris-peace-conference-timeline
Clark, C. M. (2014). The Sleepwalkers: How Europe went to war in 1914. New York: Harper
Perennial.
Taylor, A. J. P. "War by Timetable: How the First World War Began" (London, 1969)
Strachan, H. (2005). The First World War. New York: Penguin Books.
Churchill, Winston (1938). The World Crisis, 1911-1918. p.558. London
Rundle, R. N. (1979). International affairs, 1890-1939. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Cox, Michael; Ellis, John (2001). The World War I Databook: The Essential Facts and Figures
for all the Combatants. London: Aurum Press. ISBN 1-85410-766-6.
Knobler, S.; Mack, A.; Mahmoud, A.; et al. (eds.). "1: The Story of Influenza". The Threat of
Pandemic Influenza: Are We Ready? Workshop Summary (2005). Washington, D.C.: The
National Academies Press. pp. 60–61.
BBC iWonder. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29, 2016, from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zqhxvcw
Fellows, N. (2012). Peacemaking, peacekeeping: International relations 1918-36. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
"Avalon Project - President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points". avalon.law.yale.edu.
Retrieved 2015-12-20.
Image Citations
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WWIchartX.svg
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stabilization_of_Western_Front_WWI.PNG
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alsace-lorraine.JPG
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TratadoDeLondresTerritoriosParaItalia.svg
11
Endnotes
[1] A quote by Aristotle. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2016, from
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/124212-it-is-not-enough-to-win-a-war-it-is
[2] Paris Peace Conference Timeline - IB History. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29, 2016, from
https://sites.google.com/a/centerforants.com/ib-contemporary-history/topics/paris-peacesettlement/library-ppc/paris-peace-conference/paris-peace-conference-timeline
[3] Clark, C. M. (2014). The Sleepwalkers: How Europe went to war in 1914. New York:
Harper Perennial.
[4] Taylor, A. J. P. "War by Timetable: How the First World War Began" (London, 1969).
[5] Strachan, H. (2005). The First World War. New York: Penguin Books.
[6] Churchill, Winston (1938). The World Crisis, 1911-1918. p.558. London.
[7] Rundle, R. N. (1979). International affairs, 1890-1939. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Cox, Michael; Ellis, John (2001). The World War I Databook: The Essential Facts and
Figures for all the Combatants. London: Aurum Press. ISBN 1-85410-766-6.
[10] Knobler, S.; Mack, A.; Mahmoud, A.; et al. (eds.). "1: The Story of Influenza". The Threat
of Pandemic Influenza: Are We Ready? Workshop Summary (2005). Washington, D.C.: The
National Academies Press. pp. 60–61.
[11] BBC iWonder. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29, 2016, from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zqhxvcw
[12] Fellows, N. (2012). Peacemaking, peacekeeping: International relations 1918-36.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] "Avalon Project - President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points". avalon.law.yale.edu.
Retrieved 2015-12-20.
[16] Fellows, N. (2012). Peacemaking, peacekeeping: International relations 1918-36.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[17] Ibid.
12