Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-23T02:06:44.145Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Franco-Polish Alliance and the Remilitarization of the Rhineland*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

George Sakwa
George Sakwa
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The reoccupation of the Rhineland, on 7 March 1936, conventionally referred to as its remilitarization, was one of the few real turning points in modern history. It marked the end of the last vestiges of the ‘Versailles System’ and it has been considered a missed opportunity for calling a halt to Hitler's aggressive designs. It was also a problem which affected the very foundations of the Franco-Polish alliance, a relationship which had a chequered history in the interwar period. For France and Poland, Germany's neighbours, most of all, the reoccupation of the Rhineland would on the surface appear to have been the last occasion on which they might have collaborated to contain Hitler's Germany. This article will attempt to show how much more complex the question was in reality. It examines the degree of mutual consultation and encouragement between France and Poland prior to the reoccupation, and their reactions to it. This episode provides an excellent case-study of how the alliance worked in practice and also throws some interesting sidelights on the European diplomatic scene in this period.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 1973 , pp. 125 - 146
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf. Knapp, F. W., ‘The Rhineland crisis of March 1936’ in St Anthony's Papers, no. 5 (London, 1959),Google ScholarJoll, J. (ed.), p. 67; Debicki, Roman, ‘The remilitarization of the Rhineland and the Franco-Polish alliance’, Polish Review, XIV, 4 (New York, Autumn, 1969), 45–55.Google Scholar This article, in spite of its title, deals only somewhat cursorily with the remilitarization itself. It provides, however, an interesting outline of the development of the Franco-Polish alliance. The standard English language account of the origins and early years of the alliance is Wandycz, Piotr S., France and her Eastern Allies 1919–25 (Minneapolis, 1962).Google ScholarThe most exhaustively documented study is Józef Kukutka, Francja a Polska po Traktacie Wersalskim 1919–22 (Warsaw, 1970).Google Scholar

2 For the text of the Treaty, see League of Nations Treaty Series (Geneva, 1923), XVIII, 12–13;Google Scholar for the military convention, see Mazurowa, K., ‘Przymierze Polsko-Francuskie’ in Najnowsze Dzieje Polski (Warsaw, 1967), XI, 212ff.Google Scholar

3 League of Nations Treaty Series (1926–7), LIV, 353–7.Google Scholar

4 Consult Roberts, H. L., ‘The diplomacy of Colonel Beck’ in Craig, G. A. and Gilbert, F. (eds.), The Diplomats (Princeton, 1953).Google Scholar

5 Documents diplomatiques françait (1932–9), 2me ser. 1936–9 (Ministère des Affaires Etrangeres, Paris, 1963ff.), 1, Docs. 62, 455; vol. 11, Docs. 238, 349. (Hereafter referred to as DDF.)Google Scholar

6 The fullest account of Polish developments in this period is Wfadyslaw Pobóg-Malinowski, Najnouksza Historia Polityczna Polski (London, 1956), II, pt. 1, 576–93.Google ScholarA strongly contrasting version is H. and Jedruszczak, T., Ostatnie Lata II Rzeczypospolitej 1935–39 (Warsaw, 1970).Google Scholar

7 Noël, Léon, L'agression allemande contre la Pologne (Flammarion, Paris, 1946), pp. 113–14. These efforts were abetted for a while by Léon Noël, the new French ambassador, who built up contacts with the National Democrats and Catholics and such opposition figures as Sikorski, Auguste Zaleski, the previous Foreign Minister, and Stanislas Stronski. Noël himself had come straight from Prague where he had also been ambassador. The British ambassador in Warsaw, Sir Howard Kennard, rightly described him as ‘an intimate collaborator of M. Laval’, Kennard to Eden, 3 Jan. 1936. F.O. 371/19957. P.R.O.Google Scholar

8 Cameron, Consult E., Prologue to Appeasement (Washington, 1942);Google ScholarCot, P., The Triumph of Treason (Chicago, 1944);Google ScholarGoguel, F., La Politique des Partis sous la 3me République (Paris, 1946);Google ScholarLarmour, P. J., The French Radical Party in the 1930s (Stanford, 1964);Google ScholarMarcus, J. T., French Socialism in the crisis years 1933–36 (New York, 1958);Google ScholarMicaud, C., The French Right and Nazi Germany 1933–39 (North Carolina, 1943);Google ScholarScott, W. E., Alliance against Hitler, The Origins of the Franco-Soviet Pact (North Carolina, 1962);Google ScholarWerth, A., Twilight of France (London, 1942).Google Scholar

9 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Docs. 62, 75, 96, 126, 188, 189.

10 Ibid. Docs. 24, 49. See Léon Noël, op. cit. pp. 125–6.

11 Assemblée Nationale, Rapport fait au nom de la commission chargie d'enquêter sur les événements survenus en France de 1933 ` 1945 (Paris, 1951), IV, 899–920, testimony by General Maurin. (Hereafter referred to as Evénemcnts survenus.)

12 Maurice Gamelin, Servir, II, Le Prologue du Drame 1930-Août 1939 (Plon, Paris, 1946), 197.Google Scholar

13 Paris Embassy report, Chlapowski to Beck, VII/I of 21 Feb. 1936: Polish Foreign Ministry (Ministerstwo Spraw Zagranicznych) files in the Modern History Archive (Archiwum Akt Nowych), Warsaw. (Hereafter referred to as M.S.Z.-A.A.N.)

14 Kennard to Eden, I Jan. 1936, ‘Poland. Annual Report 1935’. F.O. 371/19957.

15 Szembek, Jan, Diariusz i Teki 1935–45, edited by Komarnicki, Tytus (Polish Research Centre, London, 1964ff.), II, 40.Google Scholar

16 Szembek, op. cit. pp. 51–3.

17 Ibid. p. 71.

18 Noël, op. cit. p. 129.

19 Szembek, op. cit. p. 72.

20 Ibid. p. 106.

21 Marian Wojchiechowski, Stosunki polsko-niemieckie 1933–38 (Wydawnictwo Institutu Zachodniego, Poznari, 1965), pp. 271–2.Google Scholar

22 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 106, War Ministry note of 27 Jan. 1936. Compare Gamelin, op. cit. pp. 198–200.

23 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 62.

24 Cabinet meeting of 29 Jan. 1936, Cab. 23/83, P.R.O.

25 Ibid.

26 Cabinet meeting of 12 Feb. 1936, Cab. 23/83, P.R.O.

27 DDF, 2me, vol. I, Doc. 53, 78, 105.

28 DDF, 2me, vol. I, Doc. 143.

29 DDF, 2me, vol. I, Docs. 196, 202.

30 Ibid. Doc. 170.

31 ibid. Doc. 203.

32 Szembek, op. cit. p. 95.

33 Jean Paul-Boncour, Entre deux guerrcs, III, Sur les chcmins de la défaite 1935–40 (Plon, Paris, 1945), p. 28.Google Scholar

34 Noël, op. cit. p. 126.

35 Szembek, op. cit. p. 94.

36 Wojchiechowski, op. cit. pp. 264–5.

37 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Docs. 128, 131.

38 Szembek, op. cit. p. 81.

39 See footnote 13 for source.

40 Szembek, op. cit. pp. 94 and 110.

41 Flandin had already mentioned this theme to Chlapowski on 4 Feb. Chlapowski to M.S.Z., no. VIII of 5 Feb. 1936, M.S.Z.-A.A.N.

42 D(ocuments on) G(erman) F(oreign) P(olicy), ser. c, vol. v, Doc. 189; a memorandum of 23 Mar. 1936 by Reich War Minister, Blomberg, shows how relatively limited the German occupation was to be in terms of troops moved.

43 Beck to Chlapowski, 10 Mar. 1936, Sikorski Institute, London. Although sent after the reoccupation this document had already been prepared well before the event.

44 Szembek, op. cit. p. 97.

45 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 268.

46 Ibid. Docs. 217, 221.

47 See Bullock, Alan, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny (Penguin, London, 1962), p. 343.Google Scholar

48 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 283.

49 Beck's visit to Brussels on 3–4 Mar. was interpreted by some sections of the French press as an attempt to encourage Belgian neutrality. Cf. Le Temps (29 Feb. 1936), p. 8. It was in fact little more than a widening of the field of Polish diplomatic activity. See DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Docs. 263, 282; Szembek, op. cit. p. 109; Józef Beck, Dernier Rapport: Politique Polonaise 1926–39 (La Baconniére, Neuchątel, 1951), pp. 110–12. It was also an expression of Beck's penchant for foreign travel which gained him the soubriquets of the ‘Postman of Europe’ and the ‘Flying Dutchman of European diplomacy’.

50 DGFP, ser. c, vol. v, Docs. 12, 13, 17; DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Docs. 298, 299, 300.

51 DGFP, ser. c, vol. v, Doc. 19; Szembek, op. cit. p. 110.

52 Cialowicz, Jan, Polsko-Francuski sojusz wojskowy 1921–1939 (Warsaw, 1970), p. 217.Google Scholar

53 Alfred Wysocki, Pamieţniki (Memoirs). Unpublished manuscript lodged in the National Library, Warsaw, no date, volume for 1936, section 1, 193. Wysocki was Polish Ambassador in Rome 1933–8, having previously been Ambassador in Berlin. His reminiscences are very valuable as Beck talked freely to him about Polish policy.Google Scholar

54 Noël, in his memoirs, claims that Beck was in agreement with the military leaders on France's reaction. Noël, op. cit. p. 129. This would seem to be, however, an aspect of his wider criticism of the Quai d'orsay for indecision and lack of coherent policy. His immediate impression was the contrary. DDF, 2me, vol. 11, Doc. 71. A good account of the Italian role is Robertson, E., Hitler's pre-war policy (Longmans, 1963), p. 66ff.Google Scholar

55 Szembek, op. cit. p. 110.

56 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 303.

57 Noël, op. cit. p. 125.

58 Szembek, op. cit. p. 113. Cf. U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States (Washington, D.C., date) (1936), 1, 239. (Hereafter referred to as FRUS.)Google Scholar

59 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 302.

60 Ibid. Doc. 307.

61 See Taylor, A. J. P., The Origins of the Second World War (Penguin, London, 1963), pp. 130 ff.;Google ScholarFlandin, Pierre E., Politique Française 1919–40 (Paris, 1947), Pp. 193 ff.; Gamelin, op. cit. pp. 200 ff.;Google Scholar Paul-Boncour, op. cit. III, 30 ff.; Reynaud, Paul, In the thick of the fight (London, 1955), pp. 118–26; Evinéments survenus, iv, 899–920, Maurin testimony. Flandin's and Gamelin's accounts are particularly interesting as exercises in buck-passing. Paul-Boncour's is more accurate but very much a post facto appraisal.Google Scholar

62 Chlapowski to M.S.Z., report IX/I of 18 Mar. 1936, M.S.Z.-A.A.N.

63 Pierre Bressy, the Counsellor of the French Embassy in Warsaw, expressed this view. Szembek, op. cit. pp. 117–18. Gamelin does likewise in his memoirs but limits the blame to Britain and Belgium, Gamelin, op. cit. p. 213. It might be interesting to compare this view with Reynaud's expert demolition of the thesis; Reynaud, op. cit. pp. 124–6.Google Scholar

64 Wojchiechowski, op. cit. p. 277.

65 Gustaw -Lowczowski, ‘Jeszcze o stosunkach polsko-francuskich przed Drugą, Wojną, Swiatową’, Wojskowy Przegląd Historyczny, 4 (Warsaw, 1965), pp. 437–8.Google Scholar

66 Lowczowski, G., ‘Przymierze wojskowe polsko-francuskie widziane z attachatu Paryskiego’, Bellona (London, Jan. 1951), xxx, 46.Google Scholar

67 Gamelin, op. cit. p. 213. Lowczowski is, however, corroborated by the Head of the French Deuxieme Bureau: Gauché, Maurice H., Le Deuxième Bureau au Travail 1935–40 (Paris, 1954), p. 44.Google Scholar

68 Lukasiewicz, Juljusz, ‘Okupacja Nadrenji i Rambouillet’, Wiadomości Polskie (London), xxi (115, 1942).Google Scholar

69 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Docs. 324, 376.

70 The text is in ibid. Doc. 408.

71 Cf. Wojchiechowski, op. cit. pp. 282 ff.

72 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 408.

73 Ibid. Docs. 408, 375.

74 Noël, op. cit. p. 137

75 For a revealing apologia for his role during the remilitarization and the conclusions which he drew from it, see Flandin's speech at his postwar trial for collaboration: Le prcès Flandin devant la Haute Cour de Justice, 23–26 Juillet 1946 (Librairie de Médicis, Paris, 1947), pp. 70–7.

76 Paul-Boncour conversation with Anatole Muhlstein (Counsellor of the Polish Embassy in Paris), Chiapowski to M.S.Z., report of 3 Apr. 1936, M.S.Z.-A.A.N.

77 Szembek, op. cit. p. 113.

78 M.S.Z., Information Bulletin no. 730, 22 Apr. 1936. ‘Londyńska sesja Rady Ligi Narodów’, pp. 212–26, M.S.Z.-A.A.N.

79 Szembek, op. cit. pp. 417–18; Józef Beck, Przemówienie, Deklaracje, Wywiady 1931–39 (Gebethner & Wolff, Warsaw, 1939), pp. 222–4.Google Scholar

80 Flandin to Noël, 23 Mar. 1936. DDF, 2me, vol. I, Doc. 488.

81 Wysocki, op. cit. (1936), 1, 55.

82 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 445.

83 See Szembek, op. cit. pp. 145–6, 408; Beck, Dernier Rapport, p. 117; FRUS (1936), 1, 273–4.

84 DDF, 2me, vol. 1, Doc. 445.

85 Ibid. 2me, vol. 1, Docs. 487, 506

86 Ibid. Doc. 497.

87 Chlapowski to M.S.Z., report 49/F/8 of 28 Mar. 1936. Sikorski Institute.

88 DDF, 2me, vol. 11, Docs. 10, 31; compare Noël, op. cit. p. 138.

89 DDF, 2me, vol. 11, Docs. 118, 163. See Bonnet, Georges, La Défense de la Paix, 1936–40, II, Fin d'une Europe (Geneva, 1948), 135–6.Google Scholar

90 M.S.Z. memorandum, 5 May 1936. Sikorski Institute.

91 See George Sakwa, ‘The “ Renewal ” of the Franco-Polish Alliance in 1936 and the Rambouillet Agreement’, Polish Review, XVI, 2 (Spring 1971), 45–66.