A 1933 proposal to resolve the Polish Corridor dispute

[Steve]

With nothing to do I was looking at Memel’s history, a place I must confess I have never previously thought about and lo and behold something relevant to the discussion turned up. Article 331 of the Versailles Treaty says that the river Nieman which flows into Memel was declared international. My reading of article 331 is that Poland had the right to use the river as an outlet to the sea. If the Lithuanians had hampered traffic on the Nieman presumably the Poles could have legally taken action. After the illegal Lithuanian seizer of Memel on January 12 1923 the issue became academic. Link to article 331:- https://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/versa/versa11.html

The “Conference of Ambassadors” which had been set up to decide Memel’s status decided after the Lithuanian take over of Memel that Lithuania could retain it under certain conditions. Memel was to have autonomy within Lithuania with guarantees for free trade and free transit to Memel and safeguards for Polish interests. On February 19 Lithuanian troops expelled the Polish delegate and his staff. The Poles launched a diplomatic offensive but nothing came of it. Germany supported Lithuania and the issue became mixed up with Vilnius, the East Prussian border and other border issues. An interesting what if question is what if Poland had secured rights in Memel.

[Futurist]

Why did Germany support Lithuania in this? Merely to hurt and/or spite Poland?

[Futurist]

BTW, I find it interesting that Weimar Germany never actually proposed any sort of compromise(s) that would have allowed it to recover Danzig and a land connection to East Prussia while allowing Poland to keep Gdynia as a Polish exclave combined with an extraterritorial road connecting it to the rest of Poland. Poland wouldn't have accepted this, of course, but it would still been better than what Weimar Germany actually offered Poland.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hardly a "compromise", is it? It would be a land grab.

Besides, Danzig was not in Poland's gift.

Sid.

[Futurist]

Hardly a "compromise", is it? It would be a land grab.

Yep, it certainly would--hence the disincentive for Poland to actually agree to this. It takes a bit of chutzpah for Germany to lose a war only to subsequently insist on territorial revision.

Besides, Danzig was not in Poland's gift.

Sid.

But Poland could fight in order to prevent a reunion of Danzig and Germany, no?

[gebhk]

If I remember the Danzig charter (not sure if that is the correct term), it was Poland that was charged with the military security of Danzig. If Poland chose not to fulfil its obligations to the LoN in this respect, I can't see what the LoN could do even if it wanted to, to shoehorn the Germans out once they were in. So in practical terms it was in Poland's gift even if not in legal ones.

Bestest
K

[Sid Guttridge]

Double post.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi GEBHK,

I can't find a text of the Danzig Charter, but it seems unlikely that Poland would have been charged with its defence. It would be like putting one of the foxes in charge of the hen coop.

As Danzig was part of the Polish customs union, Polish customs officers were stationed on its external border with East Prussia and in the port area, but they were not soldiers.

However, the Poles were allowed to deploy 88 troops in the Westerplatte peninsula at the harbour entrance. They were taken POW when they eventually surrendered.

It eould appear that the Germans didn't think the Poles were entitled to defend the rest of Danzig. They executed the defenders of the Polish post office in the city centre when they surrendered for being illegal combatants.

Cheers,

Sid

[Steve]

The Conference of Ambassadors (formed to enforce the Versailles treaties and mediate disputes) decided in May 1920 that Poland would not have the right to establish a military or naval base in Danzig. In May 1925 Poland was permitted a small garrison at the munitions depot in Westerplatte. In article 102 of the Versailles Treaty it states with regard to the free city “it will be placed under the protection of the League of Nations”. I can find no mention of a right for Poland to militarily intervene in the free city.

Britain seemingly through the League of Nations (or maybe because of the Conference of Ambassadors) had an obligation to defend the status of the free city. During the 1930s British politicians told Hitler that they would have liked to be relieved of their League of Nations responsibilities in the free city. After becoming Foreign Secretary Halifax tried to get the Poles to allow the League to pull out.

It would appear that only the League had the right to militarily intervene in the free city but only a few of its members possessed the means to act on its behalf and probably none of them would have done so. Perhaps the League could have asked Poland to intervene militarily on its behalf in the free city.

[Futurist]

After becoming Foreign Secretary Halifax tried to get the Poles to allow the League to pull out.

To pull out of Danzig and to have Danzig subsequently become part of Nazi Germany?

[Futurist]

The Conference of Ambassadors (formed to enforce the Versailles treaties and mediate disputes) decided in May 1920 that Poland would not have the right to establish a military or naval base in Danzig. In May 1925 Poland was permitted a small garrison at the munitions depot in Westerplatte. In article 102 of the Versailles Treaty it states with regard to the free city “it will be placed under the protection of the League of Nations”. I can find no mention of a right for Poland to militarily intervene in the free city.

Britain seemingly through the League of Nations (or maybe because of the Conference of Ambassadors) had an obligation to defend the status of the free city. During the 1930s British politicians told Hitler that they would have liked to be relieved of their League of Nations responsibilities in the free city. After becoming Foreign Secretary Halifax tried to get the Poles to allow the League to pull out.

It would appear that only the League had the right to militarily intervene in the free city but only a few of its members possessed the means to act on its behalf and probably none of them would have done so. Perhaps the League could have asked Poland to intervene militarily on its behalf in the free city.

Did Poland particularly care for League of Nations approval when it formulated its Danzig policy, though? I mean, Lithuania didn't care about League of Nations approval when it annexed the Memelland in 1923--and neither did Poland when it annexed eastern Galicia after World War I!

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Steve,

That was my impression, too.

The League of Nations was hardly likely to use interested parties, such as Poland, in Danzig.

For example, in the Saar Plebiscite it used British, Italian and Swedish troops to oversee matters, not German or French.

Sid.

[Futurist]

Hi Steve,

That was my impression, too.

The League of Nations was hardly likely to use interested parties, such as Poland, in Danzig.

For example, in the Saar Plebiscite it used British, Italian and Swedish troops to oversee matters, not German or French.

Sid.

I'm presuming that the Americans would have also been used for this had they actually been in the League of Nations?

[Steve]

Yes, I would guess that if the league thought the situation warranted it then it would ask its members to sent military contingents as in the Saar. The British were probably hoping that if there was trouble in Danzig the League would not ask them for troops. There had been units of the British army in Upper Silesia in 1921/22 when Germans and Poles were fighting over the border. The British position seems to have been that Danzig was a nuisance and the best solution would be if the Germans and Poles settled the matter between themselves and the League pulled out. I don’t think they ever supported the idea of Danzig being separated from Germany, Lloyd George certainly did not.

Futurist, with Memel the Lithuanians accepted the Leagues conditions in March 1923 but did not sign till May 1924 and sovereignty of Memel legally passed to them. After much confusion Polish sovereignty over Galicia was also accepted in 1923 subject to Poland accepting guarantees for racial, linguistic or religious minorities. It can probably be said that both countries ignored the conditions. Polish policy was to keep the League in Danzig and maintain the status quo.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Steve,

I am sure everyone prefered that Germany and Poland came to a pacific seal on the issue.

However, the Free City only existed in the first place because they couldn't.

As Danzig is specifically included In the British defensive alliance with Poland in 1939, they clearly agreed that it was an issue they were prepared to risk war over.

However, before Germany occupied Bohemia-Moravia in contravention of the Munich Agreement, they might well not have considered it so important.

Cheers,

Sid.