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

[ljadw]

About the Soviet/Czechoslovakian Treaty of 1935, there was a clause which tied a Soviet intervention to a French intervention .
Source : to the brink of war:the Czechoslovakian crisis of 1938 ( Geoffrey Roberts ) .

Absolutely. That's why France's refusal to honour its own bilateral treaty with Czechoslovakia hurt Czechoslovakia interests twice. USSR ambassador to Prague replied to Czechoslovak query if they would help without France, and they tied their possible activity to being signed off by League of Nations, i.e. the system both France and Britain helped to establish after the WW I.

1 France was NOT obliged to help CZ in case of war between CZ and Germany ( I have given the articles of the treaty between France and CZ )
2 Even if France was declaring war,the USSR would do nothing because it could not help CZ,and even if it could,it would not help CZ .
Give me one valid reason why the USSR would help CZ? They did not help Poland in 1939,thus why would they help CZ in 1938 ?
The answer on the OP is very simple : French and British policies would still be the same, because NO ONE wanted,for obvious reasons,an alliance with the Soviets and because the Soviets wanted no alliance with capitalist countries .
For Stalin Hitler ,Daladier and Chamberlain and Benesj were lackeys of the capitalists . Thus, if they were fighting against each other, that was a good thing for Stalin. WHY would he help one of them ?

[ljadw]

Post WWI world was founded on 2 Wilsonian principles
1 Peace : the person who started a war was a bad guy
2 Right on self determination : those who denied people the right on self determination were bad guys .
The problem was what to do if some one (here Hitler ) started a war to have self determination for his people .
As long as Hitler tried to have self determination without fighting, he was a good guy (he had right on his side about the SD Germans ) and the Czechs were the bad guys : CZ existed because the right on self determination : if they had the right to secede from Austria,why would the Germans not have the right to secede from CZ ?
At Versailles there was a policy of two standards : one for the winners and one for the losers .
20 years later this was no longer possible .

[lahoda]

2 Even if France was declaring war,the USSR would do nothing because it could not help CZ,and even if it could,it would not help CZ .

We are discussing the What-if scenario, which would have a common border of USSR and Czechoslovakia, and how this could affect the situation in 1938. Think this removes your "it could not help CZ" part...assuming they have a common border, the troops could be moved freely.

Give me one valid reason why the USSR would help CZ? They did not help Poland in 1939,thus why would they help CZ in 1938 ?

Hm perhaps, unlike the case with Poland, they actually had treaty with Czechoslovakia (and France).

[ljadw]

2 Even if France was declaring war,the USSR would do nothing because it could not help CZ,and even if it could,it would not help CZ .

We are discussing the What-if scenario, which would have a common border of USSR and Czechoslovakia, and how this could affect the situation in 1938. Think this removes your "it could not help CZ" part...assuming they have a common border, the troops could be moved freely.

Give me one valid reason why the USSR would help CZ? They did not help Poland in 1939,thus why would they help CZ in 1938 ?

Hm perhaps, unlike the case with Poland, they actually had treaty with Czechoslovakia (and France).

Do you say that Stalin's foreign policy ( or the policy of an other country ) was influenced, determined by the fact that he had a treaty with a country ????
Britain had no treaty with Poland in 1939,obliging it to declare war on Germany, nor a treaty with Russia, France,or Belgium .
US had no treaty with Britain /France till 1949, but every one knew that a Soviet invasion would result in war with the US .
Treaties are pieces of paper,written by diplomats and signed by politicians who never have the intention to honor their obligations .Their content is that vague that the signatories can do everything they want .
Britain had no treaty with S Korea but still sent forces to S Korea when it was attacked .
It had no treaty with S Vietnam and did not intervene there .
Several countries who intervened in the First Golf War,remained aloof in the Second Golf War .

[ljadw]

2 Even if France was declaring war,the USSR would do nothing because it could not help CZ,and even if it could,it would not help CZ .

We are discussing the What-if scenario, which would have a common border of USSR and Czechoslovakia, and how this could affect the situation in 1938. Think this removes your "it could not help CZ" part...assuming they have a common border, the troops could be moved freely.

Give me one valid reason why the USSR would help CZ? They did not help Poland in 1939,thus why would they help CZ in 1938 ?

Hm perhaps, unlike the case with Poland, they actually had treaty with Czechoslovakia (and France).

1 This IF is impossible, because a common Soviet -CZ border implies a Soviet occupation of parts of Poland/Romania,something these countries would not accept .And ,these countries had treaties with France against the USSR.
2 The Red Army was very weaken after the purges,and was depending for an intervention abroad on the mobilization of reservists,and the number of reservists was very restricted.
3 An intervention from the USSR could/would cause war with Romania and Poland and thus also with France and Germany ,thus Stalin would be faced by a nightmare : a new Western coalition against the USSR.
4 An intervention from the USSR was only possible after a request from CZ,and this would mean a rupture between CZ and France, something Benesj never would provoke .
5 Even a victorious war against Germany with the help of the SU would not resolve the problem of the Sudeten,it would only transform CZ into a Soviet satellite state as happened in 1945 .
6 France would never start a war against Germany with as ally the USSR .
7 France wanted to avoid a war with Germany ,not win a war against Germany with the help of the Soviets : who would stop Stalin if Hitler was defeated ? What would be better for France and Britain : Hitler in Berlin or Stalin on the Rhine ?
8 The USSR had a common border with Poland,but did not help Poland in 1939 .
Conclusion : no one, even not Benesj,wanted the Soviets to go West,and Stalin would not go west .The USSR was not involved in 1938 and could not be involved .

[lahoda]

Give me one valid reason why the USSR would help CZ? They did not help Poland in 1939,thus why would they help CZ in 1938 ?

Do you say that Stalin's foreign policy ( or the policy of an other country ) was influenced, determined by the fact that he had a treaty with a country ????
Britain had no treaty with Poland in 1939,obliging it to declare war on Germany, nor a treaty with Russia, France,or Belgium .
US had no treaty with Britain /France till 1949, but every one knew that a Soviet invasion would result in war with the US .
Treaties are pieces of paper,written by diplomats and signed by politicians who never have the intention to honor their obligations .Their content is that vague that the signatories can do everything they want .
Britain had no treaty with S Korea but still sent forces to S Korea when it was attacked .
It had no treaty with S Vietnam and did not intervene there .
Several countries who intervened in the First Golf War,remained aloof in the Second Golf War .

You repeat your mantra that any international document is worthles piece of paper only quite often, but makes it no more valid. Stalin took his other agreements quite seriously, such as Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, especially his secret part.

You wanted to provide one valid reason, and having an agreement qualifies as such a reason. I won't discuss that matter with you anymore.

[lahoda]

1 This IF is impossible, because a common Soviet -CZ border implies a Soviet occupation of parts of Poland/Romania,something these countries would not accept .And ,these countries had treaties with France against the USSR.
2 The Red Army was very weaken after the purges,and was depending for an intervention abroad on the mobilization of reservists,and the number of reservists was very restricted.
3 An intervention from the USSR could/would cause war with Romania and Poland and thus also with France and Germany ,thus Stalin would be faced by a nightmare : a new Western coalition against the USSR.
4 An intervention from the USSR was only possible after a request from CZ,and this would mean a rupture between CZ and France, something Benesj never would provoke .
5 Even a victorious war against Germany with the help of the SU would not resolve the problem of the Sudeten,it would only transform CZ into a Soviet satellite state as happened in 1945 .
6 France would never start a war against Germany with as ally the USSR .
7 France wanted to avoid a war with Germany ,not win a war against Germany with the help of the Soviets : who would stop Stalin if Hitler was defeated ? What would be better for France and Britain : Hitler in Berlin or Stalin on the Rhine ?
8 The USSR had a common border with Poland,but did not help Poland in 1939 .
Conclusion : no one, even not Benesj,wanted the Soviets to go West,and Stalin would not go west .The USSR was not involved in 1938 and could not be involved .

Haha hilarious - you posting in the What-if scenario for weeks and later you say it is impossible. Please ignore it then, you are not obliged to reply on every thread. I don't care that you think the scenario is impossible and your imagination is very limited. What if the common border with Czechoslovakia was a result of a different outcome of Soviet-Polish war in 1919? Yes, this common border never existed in reality, but it is basis for a discussion, so either accept it or move on, but arguing with it is really weird.

USSR might be relatively weak but still had a massive army and a lots of war material, that might be available for purchase. German army was also very weak in 1938, and lacked the superiority needed to wage a successful offensive war against army that was slightly smaller but well trained and equipped. Even a small aid from USSR might tip the scales tremendously. It is also not given that Czechoslovakia would let regular Soviet forces into its territory - it might be just "volunteers" or just material. It could be just Air Force help - 400 of I-16s and 300 of SB-2s would change the chances of gaining air superiority dramatically.

Common border would eliminate the frequent objection that there was no way how the Soviet help would arrive. It could also alter the policies of many countries involved in the situation - perhaps it would be enough for France not to be so afraid of German army superiority and refrain from forcing Czechoslovakia to cede territory to Germany. Hitler would also be never sure that Soviet troops are not already in the country, so his small war might be even more riskier.

There are so many potential aspects, which makes this such an interesting setup. Yep, it never happened in reality, but who cares?

[ljadw]

Repeating,without proof,that the WM was very weak in 1938,is not convincing .
There is no proof at all that CZ would ask for Soviet help .
Repeating,without proof,that France was forcing CZ to cede the SD to Germany,is not convincing .
Saying that the WM was that weak that it could not wage a successful war against the Czech army and on the other hand saying that CZ needed the help of France and the USSR is not convincing at all .If CZ needed the help from France and Stalin,that means that without this help,it had no chance against the WM,and that the WM was not weak in 1938,and that France neither the USSR had any reason to help the Czechs .
If the Czechs were strong enough,they did not need the help of France or Stalin .
If the Czechs were weak,why would France or Stalin help them ?

[ljadw]

Give me one valid reason why the USSR would help CZ? They did not help Poland in 1939,thus why would they help CZ in 1938 ?

Do you say that Stalin's foreign policy ( or the policy of an other country ) was influenced, determined by the fact that he had a treaty with a country ????
Britain had no treaty with Poland in 1939,obliging it to declare war on Germany, nor a treaty with Russia, France,or Belgium .
US had no treaty with Britain /France till 1949, but every one knew that a Soviet invasion would result in war with the US .
Treaties are pieces of paper,written by diplomats and signed by politicians who never have the intention to honor their obligations .Their content is that vague that the signatories can do everything they want .
Britain had no treaty with S Korea but still sent forces to S Korea when it was attacked .
It had no treaty with S Vietnam and did not intervene there .
Several countries who intervened in the First Golf War,remained aloof in the Second Golf War .

You repeat your mantra that any international document is worthles piece of paper only quite often, but makes it no more valid. Stalin took his other agreements quite seriously, such as Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, especially his secret part.

You wanted to provide one valid reason, and having an agreement qualifies as such a reason. I won't discuss that matter with you anymore.

I see that you are wisely avoiding to reply on point 8 of post 53 ,which is that having a common border with Poland did not result in a Soviet help for Poland in 1939.
Thus,why would your IF ( a common Soviet-Czech border in 1938 ) imply a Soviet help for CZ ? Stalin would only intervene if it was in his interest, not because of a common border .
Stalin was faithful to his pact with Germany,because it was in his interest, NOT because he had a pact . If it was no longer benefiting him,he would abandon the pact .
He had in 1941 a treaty with Japan and in 1945 he attacked Japan .