Undoubtedly, as both Chamberlain and Kellogg perceived distinctly in the aftermath of the security pact negotiations, Briand and Stresemann harboured different, partly conflicting ideas about what kind of new order was to emerge in ‘the spirit of Locarno’. In particular, they disagreed on how rapidly any further changes of the European status quo ought to proceed, how substantial they were to be and according to what understandings of quid pro quo they were to be brought about. Their ‘visions’ were not least influenced by the struggle that each of them faced in legitimating the accords in their respective countries.

Stresemann saw Germany's ‘security initiative' and signature under the Locarno pact as a substantial German advance to meet the postwar security concerns of the ex-allied powers and especially those of France. He expected them to be rewarded by stepped-up peaceful change or what he called Rückwirkungen (‘consequences’). Most urgently, the German foreign minister sought a swift and complete French withdrawal from the Rhineland. Likewise, he hoped for a greater understanding of the western powers for German demands to end military control. Eventually, even if this became an ever more distant objective, he also sought to create conditions that might permit a peaceful, in his outlook economically ‘rational’ revision of Germany's eastern borders. In his calculation, however, such changes could only be achieved with the consent of the western powers, including France; and they could only materialise if Warsaw could be ‘convinced’, politically and through economic pressure, that such an arrangement was also in Poland's best interest.