Without the Fall of France, do you think that Hungary eventually ends up losing its territorial gains from 1938-1939?

[Futurist]

Without the Fall of France, do you think that Hungary eventually ends up losing its territorial gains from 1938-1939? Specifically southern Slovakia and Subcarpathian Ruthenia? Obviously having Hungary acquire additional territorial gains at Romania's and Yugoslavia's expense won't actually occur in this scenario without the consent of either of those two countries--who might be disinclined to actually agree to this if they will see that France is still holding out and would thus still be capable of eventually saving their skins. But what about the territories that Hungary already got from Czechoslovakia? Are the Anglo-French going to insist that Hungary give up all of these territories, or what? Could Hungary get to keep these territories if it will declare war on Germany at the very last moment? Could the Soviet Union still eventually make a move on Subcarpathian Ruthenia in this scenario, or would that have been too risky?

Any thoughts on all of this?

[wm]

The territories were acquired legally thanks to the Munich Agreement so the fall of France was immaterial. The war with the Soviets was much more important.
Because Beneš handed over his country to the Soviets and for that, his country was rewarded with the lost territories. And that was the only possibility to regain them.

[Futurist]

FWIW, Hungary's territorial gains in late 1938 were legal but were Hungary's territorial gains in early 1939 also legal?

[Peter89]

It doesn't matter what was "legal", the war was lost and Hungary would not get a seat at the table where the borders and changes were decided.

By the way, the Munich Agreement did not cover the Hungarian territorial gains, it was the First Vienna Award, exclusively oversaw by the losing powers.

What we know for sure: the prewar policy of appeasement was seen as a direct contributor to the escalation of the conflict, thus, all agreements were declared null and void after the war.

Also: everything east of the Alps was conquered by the Soviets, so they followed a double policy after the war. First, they wanted to lay their hands on regions they always wanted (Baltic states, East Poland, Bessarabia, and they also wanted to have a bridgehead in the Carpathian Basin). Second, they rewarded those who fought with them and punished those who fought against them.

Based on this, Hungary had some chance to gain a little more favorable judgement, because the Soviet enmities against the Romanians were much bigger and deeper. However, they'd definately annex a corner in the Carpathian Basin, and that corner probably would be Kárpátalja. Also, the Romanians and others reacted quickly and changed sides, thus, the prudent Hungarian choice would be the complete stay away from the eastern war, which was Molotov's expressed wish.

What does the Fall of France has to do with this?

[wm]

By the way, the Munich Agreement did not cover the Hungarian territorial gains, it was the First Vienna Award, exclusively oversaw by the losing powers.

Munich Pact : Annex to the Agreement
His MAJESTY's GOVERNMENT in the United Kingdom and the French Government have entered into the above agreement on the basis that they stand by the offer, contained in paragraph 6 of the Anglo-French proposals of the 19th September, relating to an international guarantee of the new boundaries of the Czechoslovak State against unprovoked aggression.

When the question of the Polish and Hungarian minorities in Czechoslovakia has been settled, Germany and Italy for their part will give a guarantee to Czechoslovakia.

Munich, September 29, 1938.
ADOLF HITLER,
NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN,
EDOUARD DALADIER,
BENITO MUSSOLINI.

[wm]

FWIW Hungary's territorial gains in late 1938 were legal but were Hungary's territorial gains in early 1939 also legal?

I suppose it was legal because both sides accepted it, and it had the support of major powers (i.e., Germany, Italy, the USSR).
Legality had little to do with fairness (for example the transfer was reversed as a reward for switching sides by Romania, one might wonder what would have happened if Hungary had done that earlier); it was rather the result of balance of forces.

[Peter89]

By the way, the Munich Agreement did not cover the Hungarian territorial gains, it was the First Vienna Award, exclusively oversaw by the losing powers.

Munich Pact : Annex to the Agreement
His MAJESTY's GOVERNMENT in the United Kingdom and the French Government have entered into the above agreement on the basis that they stand by the offer, contained in paragraph 6 of the Anglo-French proposals of the 19th September, relating to an international guarantee of the new boundaries of the Czechoslovak State against unprovoked aggression.

When the question of the Polish and Hungarian minorities in Czechoslovakia has been settled, Germany and Italy for their part will give a guarantee to Czechoslovakia.

Munich, September 29, 1938.
ADOLF HITLER,
NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN,
EDOUARD DALADIER,
BENITO MUSSOLINI.

Again, the Munich Agreement did not cover the territorial gains of Hungary.

The Munich Agreement (29.09.1938), and the quote you mentioned, only gave way to the Negotiations of Komárom (9-13.10.1938). However, the parties could not settle. As imminent war was looming, the parties asked the Germans and the Italians, to settle matters (2.11.1938).

[wm]

That's true but arbitration (based on the Hague Conventions) was the way things were settled at that time, arbitration was considered to be reliable and quite successful.
So it's rather certain that at Munich they had such development in mind when they mandated the question to be settled.

[Futurist]

That's true but arbitration (based on the Hague Conventions) was the way things were settled at that time, arbitration was considered to be reliable and quite successful.
So it's rather certain that at Munich they had such development in mind when they mandated the question to be settled.

To be fair, though, one could argue that an arbitration by a Great Power that just ended up being defeated in a Great War should be reconsidered.

[Peter89]

That's true but arbitration (based on the Hague Conventions) was the way things were settled at that time, arbitration was considered to be reliable and quite successful.
So it's rather certain that at Munich they had such development in mind when they mandated the question to be settled.

To be fair, though, one could argue that an arbitration by a Great Power that just ended up being defeated in a Great War should be reconsidered.

The whole arbitration procedure was declared null and void after the war. Hungary did not have any hope to retain any territories ceded to it by the Nazi aggression. Especially so because all the lands in question were occupied by the Soviets.

If the Czechslovak offer at Negotiations of Komárom would be accepted by the Hungarians, I see a little bit of a chance, but not much.

[wm]

The question included "without the fall of France" so presumably without Barbarrosa and the subseqent rearegment of Europe by the Soviets.

[Peter89]

The question included "without the fall of France" so presumably without Barbarrosa and the subseqent rearegment of Europe by the Soviets.

Well, to be honest, I didn't understand how the Fall of France would come into play here?

Maybe Futurist can elaborate?

[Futurist]

The question included "without the fall of France" so presumably without Barbarrosa and the subseqent rearegment of Europe by the Soviets.

Well, to be honest, I didn't understand how the Fall of France would come into play here?

Maybe Futurist can elaborate?

wm is correct here. I was specifically of not having any Operation Barbarossa here. But I was also wondering if a victorious Britain and France would try undoing the injustices that Czechoslovakia suffered at the hands of its neighbors in 1938-1939, either fully or partially.

[Futurist]

The question included "without the fall of France" so presumably without Barbarrosa and the subseqent rearegment of Europe by the Soviets.

Yep, absolutely correct unless the Soviet Union nevertheless eventually decides to enter the war on the Anglo-French side.

[wm]

wm is correct here. I was specifically of not having any Operation Barbarossa here. But I was also wondering if a victorious Britain and France would try undoing the injustices that Czechoslovakia suffered at the hands of its neighbors in 1938-1939, either fully or partially.

The injustice was (at least partially) supported by Britain and France, after all Britain (grudgingly) repudiated the Munich Agreement as late as 1942 - after lots of pressure.
And it wasn't really injustice, Czechoslovakia annexed the territories by force - including the Sudetenland. Czechoslovakia was the predator there, not its neighbors.