Treaty of Versailles - Reparation and their "harshness"

[South]

Good afternoon The Ibis,

An apology for not adding your name into reply to points my above post to Sid and SHM. I'm trying to follow a protocol to reply to points and considered your post here specific enough for a dedicated post.

........

I have an official English language copy of the treaty here. Not familiar with "milliard" but, again, my unfamiliarity only means I probably missed the term.

The reparations call for MUCH MORE than 3 series of bonds.

Part VIII, Section 1. Articles 232-244 allows the Reparation Committee to require: ........

"As an additional part of reparation, Germany agrees to build merchant ships for the account of the Allies ..."

"The Reparations Committee is authorized to require Germany to replace the destroyed articles by the delivery of animals, machinery, etc. ... and to manufacture materials required for reconstruction purposes. "

"Germany undertakes to deliver annually for ten years to France coal equivalent to the difference between annual pre-war output of Nord and Pas de Calais mines ..."

............

After the war, France had planned - unrealistically - on German reparations to balance its budget. Thus "...no one expected that they would ever be paid." must be annotated with "except for France". The Wall Street finance houses that loaned funds to the Allies did not care; they did expect back 100% on the dollar ie no discounts.

There's just too much to write so will only mention the 1924 Dawes rescheduling plan and the 1931 Hoover proposed 1 year moratorium on reparations AND ALSO Allied debt repayments. Hoover's plan was accepted by the world financial markets but France "interfered" with the Hoover proposal - and then it was too late.


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

[jluetjen]

Just to chime in on a detail -- by all accounts Germany finally paid off their WWI reparations (principle and interest) in 2010. https://abcnews.go.com/International/ge ... d=11755920

[StrangerHereMyself]

South: ‘The NATION always had a specific political slant.’
Evidence for that assertion for the period c.1918? And which political slant exactly? There is a huge difference between the modern Left and the Fabian socialists of yesteryear—some of the prescriptions of George Bernard Shaw would have him ‘no platformed’ as a hardcore ‘fascist’ by today’s SJWs. Also, what evidence have you of the politics of the article’s author?

South: ‘That's why I say Germany's colonies were beneficial to Germany.’
Without evidence to support that, it is only meaningless, subjective opinion that flies in the face of provided evidence, e.g.

Commercially, the colony [Deutsch-Südwestafrika] was of almost no importance to the German economy. As the land was infertile and unsuitable for tillage, the only profitable activity for the settlers was cattle-raising. The only lucrative enterprises were copper mining (from 1907 onward) and diamond production. The discovery of diamond deposits in 1908 meant that from then onwards, German South-West Africa produced the highest private-sector profits of any of the German colonies; but for the German government, the high levels of expenditure incurred for railway construction and military activities meant it was the biggest loss-maker.

Conrad, 42. [Emphasis added]

I would like to actually learn something, if possible. Data is found in obscure, specialised tomes, government archives are put online, information is declassified; historians vary in quality—a modern historian might have access to sources hitherto denied to us, a forgotten contemporary historian is closer to the events in question and their participants, some historians are simply more diligent. I will be very interested in any historical sources and historians that rebut or even refute Shepherd, Conrad and Henderson; but I’m not interested at all in anyone’s opinions on anything.

[Terry Duncan]

Just to chime in on a detail -- by all accounts Germany finally paid off their WWI reparations (principle and interest) in 2010. https://abcnews.go.com/International/ge ... d=11755920

That is correct, but they had been suspended until such a point Germany was once again unified, so in total it took Germany 20 years from that point to pay off the debt.

[Terry Duncan]

There's just too much to write so will only mention the 1924 Dawes rescheduling plan and the 1931 Hoover proposed 1 year moratorium on reparations AND ALSO Allied debt repayments. Hoover's plan was accepted by the world financial markets but France "interfered" with the Hoover proposal - and then it was too late.


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

Dawes rescheduling plan plus loans to Germany was what saw the depression in Germany hit far worse than anywhere else, as Germany took to borrowing US money to pay reparations with, most of which went to the US in the first place, and it was when the lenders attempted to call in the loans that disaster struck. By the time of Hoover's proposal it was far too late, Germany had effectively paid off almost nothing and had actually increased the debt by borrowing.

[pugsville]

Just to chime in on a detail -- by all accounts Germany finally paid off their WWI reparations (principle and interest) in 2010. https://abcnews.go.com/International/ge ... d=11755920

This was money borrowed in the 1920s NOT reparations.

Calling these payments 2010 reparations payments is completely false.

[pugsville]

There's just too much to write so will only mention the 1924 Dawes rescheduling plan and the 1931 Hoover proposed 1 year moratorium on reparations AND ALSO Allied debt repayments. Hoover's plan was accepted by the world financial markets but France "interfered" with the Hoover proposal - and then it was too late.


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

Dawes rescheduling plan plus loans to Germany was what saw the depression in Germany hit far worse than anywhere else, as Germany took to borrowing US money to pay reparations with, most of which went to the US in the first place, and it was when the lenders attempted to call in the loans that disaster struck. By the time of Hoover's proposal it was far too late, Germany had effectively paid off almost nothing and had actually increased the debt by borrowing.

Depression did not not Germany worse than anywhere else. On what basis do you make that statement? '

Germany was borrowing money not just to pay reparations. German economic decision making had a fair bit to do with effect of depressions to say it was 100% reparations is a distortion.

[South]

Good morning SHM,

Like I did, for the appropriate writing convenience, you do also. It is completely acceptable - and welcome - if the reader gets the inferences. I do. The "modern left" is a large umbrella term. Shaw, Dostoevsky, William Jenings Bryan,many, many, many, get on versions of of "modern left" lists.

You did misquote me. I did not explicitly relate to the German colonies and the German economy. I recall my writing about the new German nation. I did write yesterday that Bismark knew that the African colonies could not self-liquidate.

......

What I did here was to introduce the concept called "intangible assets". Of course, Windhoek was no India. Yesterday I wrote how Bismark leveraged minor African holdings involving European nations - for the benefit of Germany. Did you read any references re my mention of Bismark's changed colonial policy ? Initially he was against colonies. I wrote this yesterday.

......

My points are not meaningless but they are indeed subjective. "provided evidence" is also subjective ... and frequently enough....meaningless. The NATION Magazine has always held an editorial slant based on their position on the political spectrum. NATIONAL REVIEW and the CFR's FOREIGN AFFAIRS does also. Authors do have some restrictions. JANE's and ARMED FORCES JOURNAL: ditto.

......

Returning to the more pressing matter;

What "value" (think of Cameroon) did Gibraltar, BCC have on the British books ?

During the Cold War, what value did Diego Garcia, BIOT, have on the British books ? Recall my mention that Diego Garcia was a small tile on the global petroleum mosaic. Please reflect on the point I'm making even if in disagreement.

Commercially, Aden was like ... well, a good place to to collect artifacts from antiquity for sale to museums. Return to "intangible asset" point.

Recall the 1884-05 French Somaliland with capital Djibouti. Djibouti's chief export was salt. Why would France send even 1 gunboat to French Somaliland unless, perhaps, it's location on the Gulf of Aden was at the entrance to the Red Sea.

Bismark grasped this principle.


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

[The Ibis]

Good afternoon The Ibis,

An apology for not adding your name into reply to points my above post to Sid and SHM. I'm trying to follow a protocol to reply to points and considered your post here specific enough for a dedicated post.

........

I have an official English language copy of the treaty here. Not familiar with "milliard" but, again, my unfamiliarity only means I probably missed the term.

The reparations call for MUCH MORE than 3 series of bonds.

Part VIII, Section 1. Articles 232-244 allows the Reparation Committee to require: ........

"As an additional part of reparation, Germany agrees to build merchant ships for the account of the Allies ..."

"The Reparations Committee is authorized to require Germany to replace the destroyed articles by the delivery of animals, machinery, etc. ... and to manufacture materials required for reconstruction purposes. "

"Germany undertakes to deliver annually for ten years to France coal equivalent to the difference between annual pre-war output of Nord and Pas de Calais mines ..."

............

After the war, France had planned - unrealistically - on German reparations to balance its budget. Thus "...no one expected that they would ever be paid." must be annotated with "except for France". The Wall Street finance houses that loaned funds to the Allies did not care; they did expect back 100% on the dollar ie no discounts.

There's just too much to write so will only mention the 1924 Dawes rescheduling plan and the 1931 Hoover proposed 1 year moratorium on reparations AND ALSO Allied debt repayments. Hoover's plan was accepted by the world financial markets but France "interfered" with the Hoover proposal - and then it was too late.


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

When the OP wrote of 132 billion gold marks, he was referring to the reparations amount set by the commission in 1921, not the treaty language. How that was to be repaid was also set by the commission, not by the treaty.

Also, France planned on a lot of things in the 1920s. But France did not base its assumption on the payment of the C Bonds because the C Bonds weren't to be paid until Germany had the ability to pay and no one had any idea if and when that might be.

[South]

Good morning Terry,

True, but not exclusive in re the Dawes plan and the loans.

Add the earlier environment to the German depression:

- The Nov 1918 Kaisertum by a worker revolt created the worry of a Bolshevik revolution that lasted until the March 1920 Kapp Putch failed.

- The new German government was already weakened in October, 1921 when the Allies annexed Upper Silesia to Poland. Again, the social-economic and political environment that Dawes walked into was volatile.

- When FM Rathenau was assassinated in July, 1922, there was more capital flight and German domestic prices increased.

- France added an additional overall dilemma to the environment that Dawes was drawn into. France wanted a weak Germany that was incapable of another war concurrent with French receipt of reparations. A Dawes rescheduling would conflict with French policy positions and the genesis was the Versailles Treaty requirements.

Meanwhile, Dawes arrived with the rescheduling briefcase after Hitler's beer hall Putch and his attempted march on Berlin on November, 1923.

To quote without a source: "The stage was set".


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

[South]

Good morning Jlluetjen and Pugsville,

To be fair: money is fungible.

The Jiluetjen statement is not - completely - false.

...... Let's all "lighten up" ......

Debt service to "paid off those WWI reparations..." could not be called hire-purchase for a Mercedes 560 SEL when the funds were earmarked for the reparations account.


...

Pugsville, ref your post to Terry nearby;

Can you not calibrate the German depression with, for example, that experienced in the USA and perhaps one of the Nordic nations ?


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

[Terry Duncan]

Depression did not not Germany worse than anywhere else. On what basis do you make that statement? '

Germany was borrowing money not just to pay reparations. German economic decision making had a fair bit to do with effect of depressions to say it was 100% reparations is a distortion.

1. On the basis of various books and TV programs covering the rise of the Nazi party or the after effects of WWI. The key point seems to have been the collapse of the 'mittlestand' who had previously not supported Hitler, but who were directly effected by the market crashes to a greater degree than in other nations.

2. Certainly, I never said it was 100% to do with reparations, indeed I believe that had Germany not made determined efforts not to pay reparations from the outset that they would have been able to do so. However, borrowing money from the US to pay money owed to the US was stupid, it simply increased German debt and tied German fortunes far more directly to the US markets than ever before. As soon as the US markets started to crash and US banks and invertors tried to call in their loans, Germany was very adversely impacted.

[South]

Good morning The Ibis,

Understand; agree.

It is difficult to use these new-fangled J-36 telegraph keys as substitutes for us meeting in a hotel conference room.


~ Bob
eastern Virginia, USA

[DavidFrankenberg]

Germany did not even pay 21 billions of the 132....
Germany could pay but didnt want to.

Francfort's treaty was harder for France, but France had more money in the bank at the time. So they could pay fast enough, and they accepted to pay it unlike the Germans in 1919 who were certain that "they were undefeated".

[Attrition]

[quote="Terry Duncan"][quote="pugsville"]Depression did not not Germany worse than anywhere else. On what basis do you make that statement? '

Germany was borrowing money not just to pay reparations. German economic decision making had a fair bit to do with effect of depressions to say it was 100% reparations is a distortion.[/quote]

1. On the basis of various books and TV programs covering the rise of the Nazi party or the after effects of WWI. The key point seems to have been the collapse of the 'mittlestand' who had previously not supported Hitler, but who were directly effected by the market crashes to a greater degree than in other nations.

2. Certainly, I never said it was 100% to do with reparations, indeed I believe that had Germany not made determined efforts not to pay reparations from the outset that they would have been able to do so. However, borrowing money from the US to pay money owed to the US was stupid, it simply increased German debt and tied German fortunes far more directly to the US markets than ever before. As soon as the US markets started to crash and US banks and invertors tried to call in their loans, Germany was very adversely impacted.[/quote]

What rise? The NSDAP peaked in the election of July 1932 with 37.3% of the votes of 81.4% of the electorate.