Versailles System Research Articles

The World in the XXI Century: the Dilemmas of Polarity

COVID-19 pandemic started one century after Spanish flu epidemic that killed about 40 million people. It ended as unexpectedly as it began, and was followed by the Paris Conference of 1919, which gave start to the Versailles system, planned as a new system of eternal peace, but collapsed 20 years later. The same happened with the Yalta system at the end of XX centure. Today, the configuration of the world is in the process of changes. The USSR disappeared from the political map of the world, and new world centers appeared with different views on global politics. The interests of the United States, Russia, China, and EU-27 do not coincide, and often contradict each other. Today, with a certain degree of probability, one can speak of the formation of a "new bipolarity", where the United States? NATO and the EU enter into an economic, political and potentially a military confrontation with China and Russia. The future of this system will largely depend on both the outcome of economic competition between the West and China and the level of development of relations between China and Russia. The current pandemic, let's hope, will also end someday, and humanity will be able to create a system of bipolar or multipolar interstate relations that will reliably protect the world from epidemics and wars. This article examines the prospects for the formation of a multipolar world and the future role of Russia

Operationalization of Outcome Features from the Versailles System

Operationalization of Outcome Features from the Versailles System

The Treaty of Trianon as a Source of Instability in the Central-Eastern Europe (Part 3)

The article notes that the Trianon Peace Treaty of June 4, 1920 between the Entente countries and Hungary, as a result of the First World War, turned out to be, like all the other six treaties of the Versailles system, mostly unfair. Forcibly the territory of Hungary decreased by 2/3, the population decreased 2,7 times, a third of the Hungarian ethnic group became part of neighboring states.
 It is noted that during 1920-2020. In Hungary, there were no powerful political forces of various trends and trends that would recognize the Trianon Peace Treaty as just. At the same time, the ruling political elites of the neighboring states of Hungary considered and still consider the conditions of the Trianon fair. Such opposite assessments of the consequences of Versailles engendered antagonism, making it impossible to reach a compromise between the countries of Central-Eastern Europe.
 Attention is drawn to the fact that during the domination in Europe of the coalition of countries led by Germany of the Versailles Peace Treaty, including the Trianon, were dismantled, a new order was introduced, in which opponents of Versailles – Germany, Italy, Japan, the USSR, Hungary, Bulgaria. played an active role.
 It is noted that the winners of the World War ІІ restored the borders of the countries of Germany’s allies in Europe, in accordance with their own geopolitical interests, which corresponded by 70% to the borders established by the Entente after the World War І. The Trianon borders were restored over Hungary by the Paris Peace Treaty of February 10, 1947. The USSR, Great Britain, France and the United States acted from a hegemonic position, were guided by the right of the winner and in many respects imposed on the defeated countries the conditions of the Versailles system were discredited, did not draw proper conclusions and did not build international relations on principles close to justice, but preserved the complicated territorial contradictions of the past with the corresponding treaties.
 It is indicated that the threat of assimilation and disappearance of foreign Hungarians is one of the main reasons for the revitalization of modern Hungary. Measures to overcome the syndrome of the dismemberment of the Hungarian nation in Central-Eastern Europe have been going on for centuries with little results; The rate of decline in the number of Hungarians in neighboring states over the past century is the highest, so Budapest believes that there is no time to delay the introduction of autonomy for foreign Hungarians, because in the next 25 years the very need for it will disappear through their disappearance.
 It is emphasized that the level of ensuring the rights of the Hungarian minority in Transcarpathia especially affects the relationship of Hungary with Ukraine. The improvement of relations between Hungary and Ukraine has minimal chances, since the positions of the parties on the procedure for the application of educational and language laws in Transcarpathia do not coincide.
 Taking into account the decisive activity of Hungary and the Hungarian foreign communities in 2020 (the century of the signing of the Trianon Peace Treaty on June 4, 1920), it is concluded that this problem will not lose its relevance, but will significantly increase.

Locarno Treaties (1925) in the Context of the Versailles System Transformation as seen from London

This paper is an attempt to reassess the role of the Locarno Treaties (1925) in terms of the Versailles-Washington system of international relations evolution. The authors argue that the Locarno Treaties represent one of the turning points in the development of the international order after World War I. The Treaties were not a mere add-on to the Versailles system, in fact, they had replaced it and became the main legal instrument for maintaining security in the region. In order to test this hypothesis and provide a better understanding of how the contemporaries themselves assessed these agreements, the authors examine them within a broader context of debates on the European security issues, which took place in the 1920s.The views of the British elites on this matter are of particular interest here, since it was the British diplomacy that was at the origin of the Locarno Conference in 1925. The paper draws on a wide range of recently declassified archival documents, as well as on the materials of the debates in the House of Commons and publications in the leading British newspapers. It allows the authors to trace the evolution of approaches by the main British political parties to security issues in Europe. A systematic comparison of views of the Conservative and the Labour party representatives on the Geneva Protocol and the Rhineland Pact shows that by mid-1920s the British political elites advocated for an in-depth transformation of the Versailles order, particularly, through the development of an effective mechanism for maintaining international security. On that basis a broad political consensus had arisen, which led to the formation of a new two-party structure (Tory-Labour) after World War I.The study begins with an overview of the political situation in Europe and in Great Britain in the early 1920s. Then, it examines the Labour Party’s draft of the Disarmament Protocol, as well as the principal causes of its failure. Finally, the paper covers the preparatory process for and the progress of the Locarno negotiations. Special attention is paid to the debates in the House of Commons on the conference, particularly, on its outcome document - the Rhineland Pact.

The Treaty of Trianon as a Source of Instability in the Central-Eastern Europe (Part 2)

The article notes that the Trianon Peace Treaty of June 4, 1920 between the Entente countries and Hungary, as a result of the First World War, turned out to be, like all the other six treaties of the Versailles system, mostly unfair. Forcibly the territory of Hungary decreased by 2/3, the population decreased 2,7 times, a third of the Hungarian ethnic group became part of neighboring states.
 It is noted that during 1920-2020. In Hungary, there were no powerful political forces of various trends and trends that would recognize the Trianon Peace Treaty as just. At the same time, the ruling political elites of the neighboring states of Hungary considered and still consider the conditions of the Trianon fair. Such opposite assessments of the consequences of Versailles engendered antagonism, making it impossible to reach a compromise between the countries of Central-Eastern Europe.
 Attention is drawn to the fact that during the domination in Europe of the coalition of countries led by Germany of the Versailles Peace Treaty, including the Trianon, were dismantled, a new order was introduced, in which opponents of Versailles – Germany, Italy, Japan, the USSR, Hungary, Bulgaria. played an active role
 It is noted that the winners of the World War ІІ restored the borders of the countries of Germany’s allies in Europe, in accordance with their own geopolitical interests, which corresponded by 70% to the borders established by the Entente after the World War І. The Trianon borders were restored over Hungary by the Paris Peace Treaty of February 10, 1947. The USSR, Great Britain, France and the United States acted from a hegemonic position, were guided by the right of the winner and in many respects imposed on the defeated countries the conditions of the Versailles system were discredited, did not draw proper conclusions and did not build international relations on principles close to justice, but preserved the complicated territorial contradictions of the past with the corresponding treaties.
 It is indicated that the threat of assimilation and disappearance of foreign Hungarians is one of the main reasons for the revitalization of modern Hungary. Measures to overcome the syndrome of the dismemberment of the Hungarian nation in Central-Eastern Europe have been going on for centuries with little results; The rate of decline in the number of Hungarians in neighboring states over the past century is the highest, so Budapest believes that there is no time to delay the introduction of autonomy for foreign Hungarians, because in the next 25 years the very need for it will disappear through their disappearance.
 It is emphasized that the level of ensuring the rights of the Hungarian minority in Transcarpathia especially affects the relationship of Hungary with Ukraine. The improvement of relations between Hungary and Ukraine has minimal chances, since the positions of the parties on the procedure for the application of educational and language laws in Transcarpathia do not coincide.
 Taking into account the decisive activity of Hungary and the Hungarian foreign communities in 2020 (the century of the signing of the Trianon Peace Treaty on June 4, 1920), it is concluded that this problem will not lose its relevance, but will significantly increase.

Regional Alliances between states: historical review and future projections for Ukraine

Following article refl ects political and political military al liances as means to solve defense challenges that threaten sov ereignty and territorial integrity, among other those of Ukraine. The article evaluates several historical examples of such regional alliances, their benefi ts and drawbacks and how these aff ected the dynamics of international politics. Typical alliances established in pre-modern times, were either temporary and of personal nature or tended to develop into actual unions, limiting the sovereignty of its members. In the modern era though, military-political alliances prevailed, initiated either to perceive imperialist intentions or to protect sovereignty and territorial integrity. Such alliances became especially relevant after the First World War, as new independent states emerged under the terms of the Versailles system and a new confi guration of international borders was established. The examples of Little, Balkan and Baltic Ententes demonstrate the prime shortcoming of these alliances being unable to maintain eff ectiveness in the face of changing sources of threat, when former enemies became allies under new international circumstances. Given that the possibility of Ukraine’s membership to NATO still seems to be a distant pros pect and the need to protect Ukraine’s sovereignty from growing Russian aggression when the position of EU leaders is not always consolidated, further ways of countering Russian aggression must be explored, for instance accumulating possible political or even limited military assistance. From this perspective, it could be ef fective to establish close military-political ties with East European countries, which are as well aware of the degree of threat coming from Russia for their own sovereignty. Certain opportunities could be realized based on the ideas known as Intermarium Coalition in East-Central Europe, the Baltic to Black Sea Alliance, or though achieving Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) status for Ukraine.

The First Book about the Czechoslovak Republic in the USSR: “The Modern Czecho-Slovakia” by Pavel N. Mostovenko

The article dwells upon the book “The Modern Czecho-Slovakia” by Pavel N. Mostovenko — the Soviet representative in Prague from June, 1921 till February, 1923. The author of the article supposes that Mostovenko began to work on this book immediately after his return from Czechoslovakia in the spring of 1923 following his fresh impressions and having all the necessary materials. All the chapters of this book embraced a wide range of problems: a brief history of Czechia, the foundation of the Czechoslovak Republic, its social and economic development, the financial system, the constitution of 1920 and the functioning of the state machinery, the leading political parties, the relations among different ethnic groups, home and foreign policy. In the USSR Mostovenko’s book was the first attempt at interpreting the history of the Czechoslovak Republic from the point of view of the communist ideology. At the same time, the author of the article states that in Mostovenko’s book quite a few aspects of the development of Czechoslovakia at the beginning of 1920s are interpreted in a way different from the documents of Comintern and the Soviet press of that period. The author of the article proves that Mostovenko on the basis of the analysis of the international relations in Central Europe after World War I predicted that in case of an essential breach of the balances of powers in the Versailles system of international relations, Czechoslovakia would became its first victim and neither France nor the allies in the Little Entente would help it. Exactly this happened in 1938.

Historia politycznej decyzji o sowietyzacji Polski: maj–sierpień 1920 r.

The article analyses the path leading to the decision about the Sovietisation of Poland between late April and mid-August 1920. Based on archival materials of Political Bureau and Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), correspondence between members of the Politburo as well as documents of the Supreme Command of the Red Army and the commands of the Western and South-West Front from the analysed period, the author presents the internal discussions and dilemmas of the Soviet leadership in relation with the strategic attempt to undermine the entire Versailles system and to advance through Poland into Germany.

THE LOCARNO SYSTEM: DECLINE AND BRITISH ATTEMPTS AT MODIFICATION, 1935-1937 (THROUGH THE LENS OF IVAN MAISKY’S "DIPLOMAT’S DIARY")

The Diary of Ivan Maisky, a diplomat, Soviet Envoy (later Ambassador) to the United Kingdom from 1932 to 1943 is one of the valuable sources on the interwar history of international relations and WWII. Maisky never saw his diaries returned to him after they had been confiscated at the time of his arrest in 1953. It was declassified by the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation and published in 2006-2009 with the commentaries of Russian scholars. The analysis of the Diary which contains unique details about Soviet-British relations casts new light on the roles of Great Britain and the USSR in the pre-war international crises and allows for a re-evaluation of the two powers’ efforts aimed at preventing or delaying the war. When the Diary is juxtaposed with the declassified British archive materials, the degree to which the British officials trusted the Soviet Envoy/Ambassador as well as the level of his awareness of the undercurrents of British politics become clearer. The authors argue that the Versailles System had failed by the mid-1920s and was replaced by the Locarno System based on the guarantees of Germany’s western borders. In the mid-1930s the Locarno System was in disarray despite British efforts to save it through concessions and the appeasement policy. The «Diplomat’s Diary» shows a struggle within the British elite between the supporters and the opponents of the appeasement policy linked with the search for a new configuration of the European system of security.

The Treaty of Trianon as a Source of Instability in the Central-Eastern Europe (Part 1)

The article notes that the Trianon Peace Treaty of June 4, 1920 between the Entente countries and Hungary, as a result of the First World War, turned out to be, like all the other six treaties of the Versailles system, mostly unfair. In the forcibly the territory of Hungary decreased by 2/3, the population decreased 2,7 times, a third of the Hungarian ethnic group became part of neighboring states.
 It is noted that during 1920-2020. In Hungary, there were no powerful political forces of various trends and trends that would recognize the Trianon Peace Treaty as just. At the same time, the ruling political elites of the neighboring states of Hungary considered and still consider the conditions of the Trianon fair. Such opposite assessments of the consequences of Versailles engendered antagonism, making it impossible to reach a compromise between the countries of Central-Eastern Europe.
 Attention is drawn to the fact that during the domination in Europe of the coalition of countries led by Germany of the Versailles Peace Treaty, including the Trianon, were dismantled, a new order was introduced, in which opponents of Versailles – Germany, Italy, Japan, the USSR, played an active role. Hungary, Bulgaria.
 It is noted that the winners of the World War ІІ restored the borders of the countries of Germany’s allies in Europe, in accordance with their own geopolitical interests, which corresponded by 70% to the borders established by the Entente after the World War І. The Trianon borders were restored over Hungary by the Paris Peace Treaty of February 10, 1947. The USSR, Great Britain, France and the United States acted from a hegemonic position, were guided by the right of the winner and in many respects imposed on the defeated countries the conditions of the Versailles system were discredited, did not draw proper conclusions and did not build international relations on principles close to justice, but preserved the complicated territorial contradictions of the past with the corresponding treaties.
 It is indicated that the threat of assimilation and disappearance of foreign Hungarians is one of the main reasons for the revitalization of modern Hungary. Measures to overcome the syndrome of the dismemberment of the Hungarian nation in Central-Eastern Europe have been going on for centuries with little results; The rate of decline in the number of Hungarians in neighboring states over the past century is the highest, so Budapest believes that there is no time to delay the introduction of autonomy for foreign Hungarians, because in the next 25 years the very need for it will disappear through their disappearance.
 It is emphasized that the level of ensuring the rights of the Hungarian minority in Transcarpathia especially affects the relationship of Hungary with Ukraine. The improvement of relations between Hungary and Ukraine has minimal chances, since the positions of the parties on the procedure for the application of educational and language laws in Transcarpathia do not coincide.
 Taking into account the decisive activity of Hungary and the Hungarian foreign communities in 2020 (the century of the signing of the Trianon Peace Treaty on June 4, 1920), it is concluded that this problem will not only not lose its relevance, but will significantly increase.

France and Attempt to Resolve the Italo-Ethiopian Conflict in Late 1935: the Hoare–Laval Plan

The article is devoted to the policy of France towards Italy and Ethiopia at the initial stage of the Italo-Ethiopian war of 1935—1936. It is shown that in the autumn of 1935, the French government took a position aimed at a peaceful settlement of the Italian-Ethiopian conflict at the expense of Ethiopia, since relations with Italy were much more important for France than relations with Ethiopia, and “real policy” required France to reach an agreement primarily with Italy. It is noted that a similar position was taken by the United Kingdom. It is indicated that this resulted in the formation of a plan for the settlement of the conflict, put forward in December 1935 by the head of the French government, Pierre Laval, and the British foreign Minister, Samuel Hoare. It is proved that the Hoare–Laval plan was an early form of the policy of “appeasement of the aggressor,” which became the leading direction of French and British foreign policy during the collapse of the Versailles system of international relations in 1938—1939. The research is based on publications of Soviet, French, Italian and Canadian diplomatic documents, League of Nations documents, memoirs of political figures of that era, as well as unpublished documents from the Archive of Publicistic Activity (Germany).

The Major Cause of the Collapse of the Versailles System

The establishment of the Versailles System was marked with the Paris Peace Conference, which aimed to settle peace for World War I. The peace settlement was an excuse for the allied countries to regain and recover their powers. This, in turn, called for large amount of reparations and punishments on the losing countries. The signing of the Treaty of Versailles heralded the collapse of the volatile system set up afterwards. Countries adopted the policies of appeasement, complied to the race of powers, and abandoned the so-called consensus on “peace”. Indeed, the collapse of the Versailles System had many causes. However, the rise of Nazi was its direct trigger. This article will mainly focus on how the Versailles System led to the rise of the Nazi and what the Nazi did to accelerate the fall of the system.

National Frameworks: Reflections on the Construction of National Interests and Political Agendas in Interwar Europe

This article explores the relationship that exists between ideology and political interest and applies it to the study of the international system that arose in Europe after the First World War. Following Alexander Wendt’s approach to identity as a socializing process, we have underscored the extent to which the principles of the Versailles system affected its member’s identities and goals. Because these assumptions derived from the national narratives that had become widespread in Europe during the previous decades, the new international framework became decisively modelled in accord to nationalist ideas. In turn, this meant that member states were socialised within an environment in which nationalist claims and interests could be perceived as legitimate. By depicting nations as the product of narrative practices, this research tries to shed light on the ways in which the institutionalised logic of national discourse influenced international developments after 1920. To do so, a general examination of some political instability issues in interwar Europe will be provided so as to analyse the degree to which nationalist assumptions shaped them. Finally, we argue that this framework had enormous consequences not just for minority and border populations which became increasingly regarded as factors of instability, but also for the broader objective of the Versailles system of maintaining a specific balance of power in Europe.

УГОРСЬКИЙ ПЛЕБІСЦИТ У ПІДКАРПАТСЬКІЙ РУСІ ЖОВТНЯ 1938 РОКУ (ЗА МАТЕРІАЛАМИ ПРЕСИ КРАЮ)

The main objective of the study is to analyze the materials of periodicals of Subcarpathian Rus' containing information and interpretations of the plebiscite planned by Hungary in Subcarpathian Rus' in October 1938. For the comprehensive analysis of the interstate relations of the countries of Central Europe in the prewar period, the use of the principle of multivariate analysis, system-analytical and synergetic approaches were valuable. The complex of various sources allowed to reveal the process of the previously unknown referendum in Subcarpathia, which did not take place, but was prepared as a planned special operation of the hybrid confrontation. The plebiscite was intended to be an attempt to revise the results of both the Versailles system and a means of pressure on world powers in the context of the Second Czechoslovak Crisis. Hungary was waiting for the right moment to fulfill its intentions, in particular when a coalition government was formed in Subcarpathian Ruthenia with Prime Minister A. Brodiy loyal to Hungary, and in time there was a question of a planned referendum that would change the historical fate of both Ukraine and Hungary. During the study, the plans and actions of the Hungarian authorities in implementing the territorial accession of Ukrainian lands were established. The analysis demonstrated the progress of hybrid policy, which was implemented not only by Hungarian politicians but also by Ukrainian officials attached to them.

Kriegsbeendigung ohne Frieden: Neue Literatur zum Ende des Ersten Weltkriegs und zu den Friedensbemühungen nach 1918/19

The centennial of the end of the First World War has brought forth a number of scholarly contributions which shed new light on some crucial aspects of the well-researched final phase of the Great War and its aftermath. This paper mainly refers to the broadening scope of the literature vis-a-vis the inevitability of the German defeat in 1918 as well as the more and more differentiated view of the merits and failures of the post-war international order established by the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. While the Versailles system has been experiencing a widening perception from a normative and legal as well as a post-colonial perspective in recent years, especially the interpretation of the end of the war in Germany derives considerable benefit from insights from military history and strategic studies.

Foreign policy of the First Czechoslovak Republic in the coverage of Soviet historiography

The goal of this article consists in determination of the key aspects of foreign policy of the First Czechoslovak Republic, described in the Soviet historical science since the end of the World War II until dissolution of the Soviet Union. The subject of this research is the writings of Soviet historians dedicated to examination of foreign policy of interwar Czechoslovakia. The object of this research is the Soviet historiography of the late 1940s – late 1980s. The interest towards foreign policy problematic is substantiated by its crucial importance for the existence of the First Republic, which fully depended on the stability of the Versailles System of international relations that gave rise to it and was eliminated along with it. Analysis the works of Soviet historians allows concluding that the main vectors in examination of foreign policy of the First Czechoslovak Republic and its assessment were formed by the early 1960s, and with no significant changes lasted until dissolution of the Soviet Union. It is worth noting that the national historiography at that time significantly advances in studying various aspects of foreign policy of the First Czechoslovak Republic, namely Czechoslovakia–Soviet Union relations and events preceding the Munich Agreement and liquidation of the First Republic. However, the prevalent in Soviet science class approach, with all its significance, did not allow giving an unbiased assessment to the events of 1938, as well as to foreign policy of the interwar Czechoslovakia overall.

The role of Anglo-German Naval Agreement in escalation of crisis trends of the Versailles system (based on the materials of new archival documents)

This article reviews the role of Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935 in escalation of crisis trends of the Versailles system. Leaning on the British Russian archival documents, which recently became available for the researchers, the author analyzes the reasons and consequences of conclusion of this agreement between the key European democratic power and Nazi Reich. Emphasis is placed on analyzing the moods within the political elite of the United Kingdom. It is proven that the agreement became a significant milestone in escalation of crisis trends in the Versailles model of international relations. It played a substantial role in establishment of the British appeasement policy with regards to revanchist powers in the interbellum; policy that objectively led to disintegration of the created in 1919 systemic mechanism, and thus, the beginning of the World War II. The novelty of this work is substantiated by articulation of the problem. This article is first within the Russian and foreign historiography to analyze execution of the Anglo-German Naval Agreement based on the previously unavailable archival materials. The conclusion is made that this agreement played a crucial role in the process of disintegration of interbellum system of international relations. Having officially sanctioned the violation of the articles of the Versailles Treaty of 1919 by Germany, Great Britain psychologically reconciled to the potential revenge of Germany, which found reflection in the infamous appeasement policy. This launched the mechanism for disruption of status quo that was established after the World War I in Europe. This resulted in collapse of the architecture of international security in the key region of the world, rapid deterioration of relations between the countries, and a new world conflict.

The First World War and emerging of a new regional order in the Balkans: an augmentation of small states' role

The First World War launched a tremendous restructuring of the international system. One of its major outcomes was a transformation of the small states of Central and South-Eastern Europe from objects to subjects of international relations. Having emerged or enlarged their territories in wake of multinational empires’ collapse, the small states became key players on the regional level. Reshaping of the Balkan regional order is of a particular interest to researchers as the Balkan instability triggered destruction of the previous international system. The purpose of the article is to understand how a world conflict, which had broken out in South-Eastern Europe, transformed the region. To do this the author dwells upon three sets of question. The first is the Balkan contribution in the origins of the First World War. The second is an interplay of factors which caused reshaping of the Balkan political space during the war years. The third is a new landscape of the postwar order in South-Eastern Europe. Methodological approaches applied here define new and actual character of this article. The author uses conceptual tools of the theory of international relations to analyze a process of region «building» which took place in circumstances of «tectonic» shifts within the international system in the early decades of the 20th century. Thus, the author applies the analytical model of the regional order as well as key definitions of the theory of international relations – great power, small state (the article focuses on Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria and Greece), principle of self-determination. It is concluded that the regional order emerged in the Balkans in wake of the First World War was a result of multi-dimensional interaction of factors. They are as follows: 1) the military, strategic and foreign policy planning of hostile coalitions of powers (the Entente and the bloc of the Central powers), seeking to win the loyalty of regional allies; 2) demonstrated by the small states understanding that the war had opened a «window of opportunity» to put into life their national interests and programs; 3) the decline of traditional multi-ethnic empires, which had formed political atmosphere in the Balkans. It is stated that a landscape of post-war regional order in the Balkans was determined with cooperation and competition of the local national states in the situation when the multi-ethnic empires had disappeared from the Balkan political space while the architects of the Versailles system – Great Britain and France seemed to be less interested in South-Eastern Europe in after war years. It meant that the new Balkan order enjoyed a relative autonomy compared to the previous one.

Распад Австро-Венгерской монархии и исторические судьбы Трансильвании

Having its own state tradition, Transylvania, one of the Hungarian Crown Lands, was deprived of all the remnants of the former autonomy and integrated into a unitary Hungarian state due to the conclusion in 1867 of an agreement on the transformation of the Austrian Empire into a dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy. At the beginning of the 20th century the Romanian national movement of Transylvania was noticeably strengthened, becoming an important centrifugal factor in the Hungarian half of the Empire. As the crisis of the dual system deepened, it was increasingly oriented towards royal Romania and associated the embodiment of its national ideals with the unification of all Romanian lands, which could only be realized on the ruins of the Habsburg monarchy. Following the results of the First World War, which caused the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, Transylvania, by the will of the victorious powers, became an integral part of Romania. Hungarian political opinion extremely painfully perceived the loss of this region, which was closely connected with Hungary by economic and cultural ties. The policy of the Horthy regime, aimed at the revision of the Treaty of Trianon, including the return of Transylvania, enjoyed the widest support in the society. The Transylvanian dispute between Hungary and Romania took a special place among the permanent conflicts originated in the imperfect Versailles system, fraught with new threats to the fragile balance of forces established in the interwar Europe. The coming of the Nazis to power in Germany in 1933 and the approach of a new war translated the revisionist goals from the field of ideology and propaganda into the sphere of practical politics. With the Anschluss of Austria and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, the Versailles system was blown up, which opened up prospects for revising the Transylvanian problem. Having transferred the Northern Transylvania to Hungary in August 1940 with a promise to compensate for Romania’s loss at the expense of the territory of the USSR, Hitler tied both of his satellites tightly to the Third Reich. Settlement of the Transylvanian question became possible only in the bipolar Yalta-Potsdam system, when both Hungary and Romania entered the sphere of influence of the USSR.

Договор, который так и не был ратифицирован: к столетию подписания Парижского протокола (28 октября 1920 г.)

Romania’s foreign policy during the first decades of the 20th century was not accidental or spontaneous. It was implemented by the leadership of the Kingdom as part of a targeted program for the creation of “Greater Romania.” The foreign policy of Bucharest during the World War and formation of the Versailles system of international relations can be considered as indicative in terms of achieving national interests to gain the regional leader status in the Balkans. The article analyses the struggle around the “Bessarabian question” at the Paris Peace Conference during 1919–1920. This period became decisive for the Romanian Kingdom in the question of the recognition by the international community of its exclusive right to annex Bessarabia. The purposeful work of the Romanian politicians I. Bratianu, A. Vaida-Voevoda, A. Averescu and others in solving the “Bessarabian question” has undoubtedly yielded positive results for Romania. On October 28, 1920, the Paris, or Bessarabian, protocol was signed in Paris to legally recognize the annexation of Bessarabia to the kingdom. Thus, the long and the exhausting struggle of the Romanian diplomacy ended with the victory of Bucharest on the one hand, while on the other, this fateful document was never ratified by the individual participants, which automatically made it legally “incomplete” international act.