Did the Treaty of Versailles make

World War II inevitable?

JANUARY 8, 2008
STUDENT ID: 081404078
ABSTRACT

This essay analyses the origins of the Second World War by briefly summarizing the

events from 1919-1939. However, most emphasis is put on the amount of responsibility

the Treaty of Versailles deserves for the outbreak of war. Other than analysing the

Treaty of Versailles on its own, it also analyses the effects of the 1929 Wall Street

Crash on the world, the rise of Fascism and Nazism, as well as the rise of Adolf Hitler,

the failure of the League of Nations and the appeasement of the Fascist and Nazi

regimes by Britain and France throughout the 1930s. Hence the Treaty of Versailles

plays a substantial but not definitive role in the outbreak of World Ward Two.
The First World War was the bloodiest and the most catastrophic war the human race

had ever suffered prior to 1914. The Peace of Paris ended global warfare but the Treaty

of Versailles created massive bitterness and resentment in Germany. It is therefore

undeniable that this humiliation contributed substantially to the outbreak of the Second

World War. Nevertheless it is crucial to take into account other factors such as the

world economic crisis, the rise of Hitler in Germany, the failure of the League of

Nations and the appeasement of the Nazi and Fascist regimes to evaluate the extent to

which the treaty of Versailles caused World War Two.

The 439 articles in the Treaty of Versailles “mutilated and humiliated Germany

(Khanna, 1996, pg.197).” First of all, according to Article 231, also known as the “War

Guilt Clause,” the Germans were held accountable for the outbreak and the devastation

of the war. This meant that they had to accept full responsibility and pay reparations

which summed up to about 6.6 million pounds. Also, Germany’s military was reduced

significantly. The size of the army was limited to about 100,000 soldiers, they were not

allowed to have an air-force and their navy was considerably small in comparison to

other European powers. In addition to this, the Rhineland had to be demilitarised,

Anschluss was prohibited with Austria and the German colonies were shared between

France and Britain. As historian V. N. Khanna mentions, “the Germans called it a diktat

and could not digest the insult and humiliation. They vowed to take revenge (Khanna,

1996, pg.197).” The Germans did not accept full responsibility for it although they had

no other choice but to sign the Treaty of Versailles. It was considered too harsh, not

only by the Germans, but also by certain groups in Britain and the USA.
World War One had created economic devastation in Europe. Germany owed the Allies

an incredible sum of 6,500 million pounds. In addition, “the massive currency

devaluation which hit Germany in 1923 undermined social stability and caused

widespread social and economic resentment. (Henig, 1985, pg. 9)” In order to pay the

reparations without suffering further social or economic devastation, the USA and

Britain came up with a few money lending schemes. The Dawes Plan was introduced in

1924 and seemed to succeed at the beginning; but Germany still could not cope up with

the astronomical sum of reparations she owed to the Allies. Then, a few years later, in

early 1929 the Young Plan was introduced. This reduced Germany’s debt burden

considerably, but still failed. Also, in 1929 the Wall Street Crash plunged the whole

world into economic depression and the USA was no longer able to economically aid

Germany. Now instead of aiding Germany, the USA pressurized her to pay reparations

on time. Germany was in a critical situation-unemployment in Germany was the

highest in Europe with a large difference. With the benefit of hindsight, even Winston

Churchill realized that “the economic clauses of the Treaty were malignant and silly to

an extent that made them obviously futile (Churchill, 1948, pg 7)” As a result of this

social and economic collapse Nazism emerged in Germany.

“Resentment and fears generated by economic crisis and alleged political injustices

explain mass support for this nationalist and authoritarian party (Parker, 1989, pg.2).”

Adolf Hitler came into power only after 1933 as the head of the Nazi party promising to

reverse the Treaty of Versailles and to create a GrossDeutchland and Lebensraum for

the German race. The Treaty of Versailles had prohibited Anschluss with Austria and

excluded 750,000 Germans from Germany. There was a large German community in

Austria as well as the area of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia and the Polish
Corridor. Hitler had promised the German people to incorporate all the Germans into

the Third Reich and according to Churchill, Hitler “made it clear that the path to power

lay through aggression and violence” (Churchill, 1948, pg.43). He promised the

Germans that he would do anything necessary to achieve his goal.

In addition, Hitler learnt that the League of Nations, itself a creation of the Treaty of

Versailles failed to ensure collective security, and could possibly do nothing to impede

his actions. The most crucial factor is that Woodrow Wilson himself, the creator of the

League of Nations, was not allowed to join it by the Congress. Also, it proved to be

ineffective at various occasions. It was first unsuccessful in 1931 during the Manchurian

Crisis. The League of Nations sent a committee to investigate the situation and

concluded that Japan had violated China’s security. Although they condemned Japan’s

actions, there was not much Britain or France could do. It was a fait-accompli. This

occurred again in 1935/1936 during the Abyssinian Crisis. Clearly, without any

rationale, Italy invaded Ethiopia illegally. The response of the League of Nations this

time was to impose sanctions on Italy. This did not only fail in the sense that Italy did

not heed the League of Nations’ warning, but because this situation brought Hitler and

Mussolini closer. Hitler was “a man with a systematic framework of thought, within

which he adapted his approach to some of the demands and opportunities presented by

events” (Bell, 1986, pg.43). He became powerful in Europe primarily due to military

might. The Treaty of Versailles allowed Germany to maintain an army of only 100,000

men, a limited navy and no air-force. As early as in 1922 Germany signed the Treaty of

Rapallo with the Soviet Union. With this, the Soviet Union granted Hitler the

permission to train his troops under Soviet borders. In 1933, Hitler withdrew Germany

from the League of Nations Security Council because he thought that Germany, as any
other country in Europe has the right to defend herself and shouldn’t be refused it.

France did not agree on disarming after having lived through such a grim warfare

history with Germany. So Hitler took advantage of that and introduced ‘conscription’ in

1935. At that moment it was a legitimate demand, especially after the disastrous

consequences she suffered from the Treaty of Versailles. Therefore “the League was a

total failure in the field of disarmament, peaceful settlement of disputes and collective

security (Khanna, 1996, pg.201).”

Hitler was now well aware that he could possibly do what he wanted without being

checked by Britain, France or the USA. On one hand, he was confident that Britain and

France would not interrupt his agenda as in both countries public opinion remained anti-

war. And on the other hand the USA was currently pursuing a policy of isolationalism.

In 1936, Hitler remilitarised the Rhineland while France lacked a successful leadership.

People thought that he was not doing anything illegitimate as he was just taking control

of the land within his borders. France wanted to act against this as they feared the

German army ever since the Franco-Prussian war of 1871. But “without the assurance

of military support from Britain or Italy, Belgium or an east European ally, France was

not prepared to challenge Hitler in 1936 (Henig, 1985, pg. 26).” Hitler was merely

reversing the harsh dictations from the Treaty of Versailles. Whilst many people still

complied with Hitler’s demands, there were people who read between the lines. “Both

Churchill and Namier were advocates of resistance to Germany from an early date; and

their argument was that at certain points the advance of German power could have been

checked by the threat, or comparatively small scale use, of force (Bell, 1986, pg.41-

42).”
Then again in 1938, Hitler swallowed Austria and the Sudetenland into the Third Reich.

Although it was forbidden by the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler was just seeking a nation-

state. Woodrow Wilson’s 14 points stressed the idea of self-determination. Britain and

France did not and could not do much about Anschluss with Austria. It was again, a fait-

accompli. They also handed over the Sudetenland even though it was a breach to

international law. There was some legitimacy in Hitler’s demands until now. He was

only attempting to create a greater Germany. Many people were sympathetic to his

cause at that moment. He had freed Germany from total socio-economic destruction and

was once more attempting to create a powerful nation-state.

Moreover, in 1936-1937 the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis was formed by the signing of the

Anti-comintern Pact by Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito. As historian Henig said, “British

public were more attracted to the prospect of Hitler’s crusade against communism than

they were to the idea of communist help to contain Hitler (Henig, 1985, pg.21).” In

other words, the British were excited about Hitler aiming eastward, as then the USSR

was seen as a greater threat than Nazi Germany. Only months later, in March 1939

when Hitler then decided to occupy the rest of Czechoslovakia, Britain began to realize

his actual aims. Hitler was taking advantage of the concessions granted by Britain, but

wasn’t aware of the fact that this was the last territorial concession Britain was going to

allow. Therefore in September 1939, when the Luftwaffe crossed the border along with

the Panzer divisions, Britain finally declared war on Nazi Germany.

There are diverse views as to which causes are more fundamental to the outbreak of

World War Two. Revisionist historian A. J. P Taylor for example argues in his book
‘Origins of the Second World War’ that “in principle and in doctrine Hitler was no more

wicked and unscrupulous than many other contemporary statesmen,” its just that “in

wicked acts he outdid them all” (AJP Taylor, 1983, as quoted in Henig, 1985, pg.38).”

One point that clearly contradicts this claim is the fact that Hitler had written his aims in

Mein Kampf while he was in jail and is heavily criticized for it. Churchill on the other

hand faults Neville Chamberlain and ‘appeasement’ as being one of the primary causes

of the outbreak of World War Two: “How the English-speaking peoples through their

unwisdom, carelessness and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm” (Henig, 1985,

pg.37). It is clear that a mono-causal explanation to such a complicated issue is rather

unlikely.

“Peace was made in a hurry and in a temper (King-Hall, 1937, pg.32).” The Peace of

Paris and concretely the Treaty of Versailles was the result of bitterness, fear and

insecurity after the Great War. Decades later we can analyse the situation without being

biased towards one theory of causation. It is clear that the Treaty of Versailles did play

a significant role to set the stage for international relations during the interwar period

although some argue it may not have been the primary cause for the outbreak of war.

According to historian Henig Germany was humiliated but Hitler put hope in the

Germans that “Germany could regain her strength and break loose from the shackles of

Versailles (Henig, 1985, pg.11).” Another historian AW Purdue declares that “it seems

odd to see Versailles as causing World War II when so much of the settlement had been

overturned without war.” (Purdue, 1999, pg ). History is open to interpretations; every

historian has an opinion but there are key facts that no one can ignore.
Taking a step back and analysing the situation, we can see that the Treaty of Versailles

did actually contribute significantly to the outbreak of World War Two. But we must

However we must also take into account that different factors such as the 1929 Wall

Street Crash, Britain’s role of appeasing the Fascist and Nazi regimes, the failure of the

League of Nations in conjunction with the Treaty of Versailles created certain dynamics

that led to the culmination of the tragedy called the World War Two.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Bell, P. M. H, 1986. The Origins of the Second World War in Europe. 3rd edition.

United Kingdom: Pearson Education Unlimited.

Churchill, Winston S, 1948. The Second World War: The Gathering Storm. 1st edition.

London, Toronto, Melbourne, Sydney and Wellington: Cassell and Co. Ltd.

Henig, Ruth, 1985. The Origins of the Second World War. 1st edition. London and New

York: Methuen.

Khanna, V. N., 1996. International Relations. 4th edition. New Dehli: Vikas Publishing

House Pvt. Ltd.

King-Hall, Stephen, 1937. The World Since the War. 1st edition. London, Edinburgh,

Paris, Melbourne, Toronto and New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd.

Parker, R. A. C., 1989. Struggle for Survival: The History of the Second World War.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Purdue, AW, 1999. The Second World War. 1st edition. Houndmills, Basingstoke,

Hampshire and London: Macmillan Press Ltd.