Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslovakia?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 5532
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by wm » 25 Apr 2019 20:33

Well, Germany didn't need that outflanking to defeat Poland easily. Of course, Slovakia should be eventually conquered/vassalized but in this scenario, Hitler is going to be busy fighting France. He really should leave it for later.

France could renege on its obligations by referring the matter to the League of Nations, where it would eventually die suffocated by bureaucracy, ineptness, disagreement, and politics as usual.

lahoda
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by lahoda » 28 Sep 2020 00:08

Futurist wrote:
03 Apr 2019 16:50
The Czechs did mostly vote for Communists in 1946 in real life, no?
Yes they did, but it was a direct result of the nation-wide frustration of being thrown under the bus in Munich 1938. France, as the country signing the mutual treaty pact, was the main culprit. Results of elections in 1946 would never happen without the Munich 1938.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 2654
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by Futurist » 28 Sep 2020 04:36

lahoda wrote:
28 Sep 2020 00:08
Futurist wrote:
03 Apr 2019 16:50
The Czechs did mostly vote for Communists in 1946 in real life, no?
Yes they did, but it was a direct result of the nation-wide frustration of being thrown under the bus in Munich 1938. France, as the country signing the mutual treaty pact, was the main culprit. Results of elections in 1946 would never happen without the Munich 1938.
Gotcha! So, no France discrediting itself = no mass support for Communism in Czechoslovakia, even if the Soviet Union would also be willing to militarily help out Czechoslovakia.

lahoda
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by lahoda » 28 Sep 2020 11:00

Futurist wrote:
28 Sep 2020 04:36
Gotcha! So, no France discrediting itself = no mass support for Communism in Czechoslovakia, even if the Soviet Union would also be willing to militarily help out Czechoslovakia.
Yep. Another important factor was the role of President Beneš. His personal credit took a huge blow as he was the one who orchestrated the pact with France. He took it very personally and changed his orientation entirely. To some extent he acted as Soviet mole the entire war and even post-war before the installation of communist regime.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by ljadw » 29 Sep 2020 17:33

lahoda wrote:
28 Sep 2020 00:08

Yes they did, but it was a direct result of the nation-wide frustration of being thrown under the bus in Munich 1938. France, as the country signing the mutual treaty pact, was the main culprit. Results of elections in 1946 would never happen without the Munich 1938.
This is not correct .
France did not abandon CZ in 1938 : the pact mentioned only one thing, which was that if CZ was attacked, France would help her . The treaty did not say that a French army would invade Germany if CZ was attacked .
Besides:CZ was NOT attacked, thus France had no reason to attack Germany .
If CZ wanted French help ,it had only to say no to Hitler, Hitler would attack CZ and France would declare war on Germany .
The reason why CZ preferred to capitulate to Hitler was that a French DOW would not help her , neither would help a defeat of Germany : the Sudeten Germans would still be there and CZ would become a Soviet satellite .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by ljadw » 29 Sep 2020 17:37

wm wrote:
25 Apr 2019 20:33
Well, Germany didn't need that outflanking to defeat Poland easily. Of course, Slovakia should be eventually conquered/vassalized but in this scenario, Hitler is going to be busy fighting France. He really should leave it for later.

France could renege on its obligations by referring the matter to the League of Nations, where it would eventually die suffocated by bureaucracy, ineptness, disagreement, and politics as usual.
France had no obligations to Poland or to CZ.And the existence of both countries as independent states or as German satellites was totally indifferent for France .They did not exist before WWI ,and this was not threatening the interests of France .

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 5821
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by Terry Duncan » 30 Sep 2020 14:53

ljadw wrote:
29 Sep 2020 17:37
wm wrote:
25 Apr 2019 20:33
Well, Germany didn't need that outflanking to defeat Poland easily. Of course, Slovakia should be eventually conquered/vassalized but in this scenario, Hitler is going to be busy fighting France. He really should leave it for later.

France could renege on its obligations by referring the matter to the League of Nations, where it would eventually die suffocated by bureaucracy, ineptness, disagreement, and politics as usual.
France had no obligations to Poland or to CZ.
France had a mutual defence treaty with Czechoslovakia. Therefore there was some obligation possible.
ljadw wrote:
29 Sep 2020 17:33
lahoda wrote:
28 Sep 2020 00:08

Yes they did, but it was a direct result of the nation-wide frustration of being thrown under the bus in Munich 1938. France, as the country signing the mutual treaty pact, was the main culprit. Results of elections in 1946 would never happen without the Munich 1938.
This is not correct .
France did not abandon CZ in 1938 : the pact mentioned only one thing, which was that if CZ was attacked, France would help her . The treaty did not say that a French army would invade Germany if CZ was attacked .
Besides:CZ was NOT attacked, thus France had no reason to attack Germany .
If CZ wanted French help ,it had only to say no to Hitler, Hitler would attack CZ and France would declare war on Germany .
The reason why CZ preferred to capitulate to Hitler was that a French DOW would not help her , neither would help a defeat of Germany : the Sudeten Germans would still be there and CZ would become a Soviet satellite .
See! You knew it in that post.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by ljadw » 30 Sep 2020 17:58

The treaty did not mention any French obligations : that France would help CZ if it was attacked was totally meaningless : France would decide what this help would be, not CZ. If you read the text of the treaty ,it was only hollow words.The only thing that could help CZ if it was attacked by Germany was a French invasion of Germany,and this was out of the question,because France never promised such thing and France had not the means to do this . Besides, the decision to of building the Maginot line implied that France had given up CZ.
The only thing France and Britain could do was to start a war of revenge, which they did after the attack on Poland,and which resulted in CZ and Poland becoming Soviet satellites .
The reason for the treaty between France and CZ was that France feared in 1924 a German attack and hoped that CZ would fight for France, France had never the intention to fight for CZ,that's why it limited the treaty to a collection of hollow words and decided later that the Maginot Line was better than the Czech army .
Article 2 of the treaty said, in simple words,that both governments would agree together about the measures to be taken to safeguard their common interests if these would be threatened .
France had in 1914 a very detailed military convention with Russia, but abandoned the Russians, because they no longer thought that they needed Russia . Thus why would France fight if they had a treaty that did not mention what they would do if Germany attacked ?
If the French government said that a German attack would not threaten the common interests, but only those of Prague, nothing could compel France to do something .
The French mobilized in 1938,and would have declared war,something that not would help CZ, but this was for another reason = the conviction that a war of aggression was no longer permissible and should be punished , but that had nothing to do with the treaty : France would also declare war if Germany attacked Denmark, with which France had no treaty .It was for Britain the same .
The Czech government never asked how many French divisions would invade Germany,if CZ was attacked by Germany .
Why ? Probably because it was better not to wake up sleeping dogs and to look into an abyss. Thus both continued to do as if both were allies : they were keeping up appearances .
Last edited by ljadw on 30 Sep 2020 18:20, edited 1 time in total.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7724
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 30 Sep 2020 18:01

Four decades ago I sat in on a entire semester of lectures on the interwar years. Dr Kline-Albrandt specialized in early 20th Century Europe and had a mass of detail he covered, including French efforts to build up the Little Entente', and treaty obligations. I ought to search for my notes & the texts we used in that course. Have resisted that material a few times in the past 2-3 decades & my take is at long odds with idea France had no interest or other reasons to act against German revanchism or expansion in adjacent territories.

lahoda
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by lahoda » 30 Sep 2020 22:46

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
30 Sep 2020 18:01
Four decades ago I sat in on a entire semester of lectures on the interwar years. Dr Kline-Albrandt specialized in early 20th Century Europe and had a mass of detail he covered, including French efforts to build up the Little Entente', and treaty obligations. I ought to search for my notes & the texts we used in that course. Have resisted that material a few times in the past 2-3 decades & my take is at long odds with idea France had no interest or other reasons to act against German revanchism or expansion in adjacent territories.
Please do. Any details of this era are very welcome and I'd be interested to hear them. Thanks

lahoda
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by lahoda » 30 Sep 2020 22:49

ljadw wrote:
29 Sep 2020 17:37
France had no obligations to Poland or to CZ.And the existence of both countries as independent states or as German satellites was totally indifferent for France .They did not exist before WWI ,and this was not threatening the interests of France .
France arguments during shaping the treaty of Versailles point to exact opposite.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by ljadw » 01 Oct 2020 08:21

The treaty of Versailles was in 1919; in 1938 the situation had changed .
In 1935 Laval ( yes : Laval ) was going to Moscow to see if an alliance with the USSR was possible . Such alliance implied the abandon of CZ.
In 1929 France decided to build the Maginot line, which meant that in 1929 France had accepted German rearmament and German domination east of the Rhine .
France would only intervene if there was a war ; thus if CZ wanted a French military intervention ,it had only to say no to Hitler . It said yes to Hitler in 1938 and in 1939 because it knew that France had NO offensive power and that the only thing it could hope for was a liberation from the Germans after several years of war ,followed by a domination by the Soviets .
Thus it decided to say yes to Hitler and blamed France for its decision .
Poland was in the same situation : it decided to say no and blamed France for not saving it and it became a Soviet satellite .
A European war with as outcome the defeat of Germany would mean the end of the independence of CZ and Poland, Romania,etc.
If the outcome was a German victory,the result would be the same .
France never was capable of preserving the Treaty of Versailles; besides it was not in its interest.
France could not do after Versailles what Napoleon had failed to do .
Before WWI Germany dominated Europe east of the Rhine and France accepted this .
After Versailles France was willing to accept again such a domination, as long it happened without fighting .
When there was a war, France intervened, not to challenge the German domination, not to help Poland but because it did not accept a war of aggression, while before WWI,it had no objections to a war of aggression,it also started such wars .
France and Britain had told Hitler : bullying : yes;shooting : no .

lahoda
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by lahoda » 01 Oct 2020 10:53

ljadw wrote:
01 Oct 2020 08:21
The treaty of Versailles was in 1919; in 1938 the situation had changed .
In 1935 Laval ( yes : Laval ) was going to Moscow to see if an alliance with the USSR was possible . Such alliance implied the abandon of CZ.
No this is just your interpretation, not based on facts. It was the three-way treaty, consisting of France, USSR and Czechoslovakia. Russian support was implied by the French support, that's one of reasons why USSR didn't wasn't transporting any troops to Czechoslovakia in 1938, as France said it will not honour its part of the treaty in case of German attack.
ljadw wrote:
01 Oct 2020 08:21
France would only intervene if there was a war ; thus if CZ wanted a French military intervention ,it had only to say no to Hitler . It said yes to Hitler in 1938 and in 1939 because it knew that France had NO offensive power and that the only thing it could hope for was a liberation from the Germans after several years of war ,followed by a domination by the Soviets .
Thus it decided to say yes to Hitler and blamed France for its decision
You are really fabricating there. France (and Britain) actively pushed Czechoslovakia to bow to Hitler's demands, and they let Czechoslovakia know that in case of the German attack they will not honour the signed treaty and will consider Czechoslovakia to be an aggressor. This was the reason Czechoslovakia decided not to fight, they were afraid they would lose the war with Germany if they'd fought alone (quite realistic assesment, given the sizes of the countries and their bases) and get swallowed by Germany and this would be a new status quo, accepted by France and Britain as the Czechoslovakia would be found responsible for the war, even if they would be attacked by the Germans, not vice versa. They were pressed by France and this is well documented. You shouldn't ignore facts.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by ljadw » 01 Oct 2020 11:31

lahoda wrote:
01 Oct 2020 10:53
ljadw wrote:
01 Oct 2020 08:21
The treaty of Versailles was in 1919; in 1938 the situation had changed .
In 1935 Laval ( yes : Laval ) was going to Moscow to see if an alliance with the USSR was possible . Such alliance implied the abandon of CZ.
No this is just your interpretation, not based on facts. It was the three-way treaty, consisting of France, USSR and Czechoslovakia. Russian support was implied by the French support, that's one of reasons why USSR didn't wasn't transporting any troops to Czechoslovakia in 1938, as France said it will not honour its part of the treaty in case of German attack.
ljadw wrote:
01 Oct 2020 08:21
France would only intervene if there was a war ; thus if CZ wanted a French military intervention ,it had only to say no to Hitler . It said yes to Hitler in 1938 and in 1939 because it knew that France had NO offensive power and that the only thing it could hope for was a liberation from the Germans after several years of war ,followed by a domination by the Soviets .
Thus it decided to say yes to Hitler and blamed France for its decision
You are really fabricating there. France (and Britain) actively pushed Czechoslovakia to bow to Hitler's demands, and they let Czechoslovakia know that in case of the German attack they will not honour the signed treaty and will consider Czechoslovakia to be an aggressor. This was the reason Czechoslovakia decided not to fight, they were afraid they would lose the war with Germany if they'd fought alone (quite realistic assesment, given the sizes of the countries and their bases) and get swallowed by Germany and this would be a new status quo, accepted by France and Britain as the Czechoslovakia would be found responsible for the war, even if they would be attacked by the Germans, not vice versa. They were pressed by France and this is well documented. You shouldn't ignore facts.
CZ wanted no war ,because it could survive only if there was no war and because it would lose the war even if it had France as ally .
What CZ wanted was that France would prevent a German attack by threatening Germany with war, WITHOUT risking a war .
It was very easy for the Czechs to have a French support in case of war : it could have declared war on Germany when Hitler invaded Austria . This would result in war with Germany and France would be forced to declare war on Germany .
It could also have asked before and even after Munich that France would have sent a regiment to CZ to show Germany that an attack would mean war . CZ did not ask for this because it feared that this symbolic French force would provoke Hitler and create war .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Would Britain's+France's policies in 1938 have still been the same had the USSR had a common border with Czechoslova

Post by ljadw » 01 Oct 2020 13:10

About the loyalty of the Slovaks to the Czechs : on March 9 1939 the Czech government intervened militarily and removed the Slovak government,because it no longer trusted the Slovaks .

Return to “What if”