Date: 13/11/2010 Word Count:

Li Chun Ho (Alvin) IB History HL

Essay Question: To what extent did the Locarno Treaties really create a new era of peace in Europe? During the past few years I have led a sometimes hard battle for German foreign policy, Gustav Stresemann, Chancellor and Foreign Minister of Germany. The Treaty of Locarno to some extent, for better or for worse, failed to impose a substantial influence to create a new generation of peace in Europe. It was successful in the sense the western borders of Germany were settled. This was due to the misinterpretation of it from several countries. In the view of the Germans, they perceived this as a first approach in amending the harsh Treaty of Versailles due to their policy of fulfilment, while the clauses made France had a false perception of increased security imposed on her. Many of the agreements made in Locarno left UK, France as well as Germany with very incompatible policy objectives. Furthermore, it was a publicity stunt with very broad agreements that were not specified and had numerous ambiguous interpretations from various countries. This false sense of bipartisan cooperation, known as The Spirit of Locarno, further caused implications and agreements such as the Kellogg and Briand Pact of 1928, Furthermore, its successes were further underestimated by the Wall Street Crash in 1929 which led to a financial crisis as well as an international peril, such as countries going over the line of extreme protectionism. Furthermore, the evacuation of the Rhineland as a compromise for the Young Plan, caused by Locarno, had also contributed to the improvement of the Germany economy. The Locarno treaties in its simplest form assisted in forming new peace by inviting Germany onto the council of the League of Nations. Being the fifth permanent of the council of the League of Nations, Germany was able to be at the same height along her British and French counterparts. This encouraged a more transparent as well as improved treatment and approach towards the Germany reparations, as opposed to what happened during the Ruhr Crisis of 1923. Furthermore, the Locarno treaties was successful in having Belgium, France and Germany accepting the western borders of Germany back in Treaty of Versailles. This further discouraged French and Belgium troops from repeating their forced entry into the Ruhr back in 1923. This agreement also helped confirm the Treaty of Versailles, acting as an echo and enforcement to it. This held a major significance as it showed approval and satisfaction of both France and Germany accepting and being happy with their borders. This has further improved future peace through means of agreement. However, it failed to sustain future peace in Europe because Germanys interpretations of the Locarno treaties were not in line of the same intention as the British or the French. Due to Stresemanns policy of fulfilment in which they pledge to always agree to uphold the Treaty of Versailles however over time to ask for consent to slightly amend its clauses. Because of this, they believed by having a false sense of security as well as better relations with the British and the French, this may eventually lead to a revision of the Treaty, which they hoped for, as well as the withdrawal of the Allied forces in Rhineland, due in 1935. This intention obviously was not intended to create a new era of peace in Europe. Furthermore, it was seen as a failure because many agreements construed from the Locarno Treaties were incompatible and was incompetent for those signatories to fulfil that particular objective. For example, in the absence of an American-Anglo military guarantee to France in the case of German aggression, it was decided Britain, as well as Italy, would be some of the member states promising to uphold the demilitarisation of the Rhineland. However, France continued to be

Date: 13/11/2010 Word Count:

Li Chun Ho (Alvin) IB History HL

Essay Question: To what extent did the Locarno Treaties really create a new era of peace in Europe? concerned about possible German aggression because she was not reassured by Britains guarantee. Britain and France used to be empires that fought against each other centuries back. In addition, Britain did not see herself as part of Europe, hence this conveys to us how interested she was in European affairs, as she was more interested in her colonies, known as Splendid Isolation. On the other hand, Italy was involuntarily asked to sign to be a guarantor of the upholding the DMZ area, simply because France wanted to balance the weight as she was aware Britain was not truly committed to the French cause of fear of insecurity. However Italy was also not interested in the Rhineland, thus was an incompetent forced signatory. It failed to a larger extent to create a new era of peace as the treaty had failed to identify the rise of radical Nazi extremism led by Hitler, who used the economic crisis of 1929 as a ladder to be the leader of Germany. This further led to the collapse of the Treaty of Versailles because the League of Nations could not be effectively supported and to be enforced. The Locarno treaty failed to agree upon a set of member states who would act as military guarantors of the League of Nations when there were disputes from member states of the League that could not be resolved by arbitration and condemnation from the League. Without an army, the League could not forced countries to accept its decision. Without an army, the League would have failed to further maintain peace in Europe. Not only did War erupted a little more than a decade after the signing of the treaty, the Locarno treaty was seen as being extremely broad and failed to specify the duties and roles of various countries. For example, the set of countries who acted as guarantors of the western border were divided into two groups with vague definitions. Britain and Italy would deal with flagrant breaches of the western border, while the League of Nations would deal with alleged breaches of the western border. The definitions were not both broad and irrational as the agreement of the treaty did not specify and define what their interpretations of these two terms were. This meant that there was a possibility of Britain and Italy escaping responsibility of upholding the western border if they suggested the breach was alleged and not flagrant. Therefore as a conclusion not only was it seen to be more unsuccessful in creating a new era of peace in Germany, it had failed to identify broader problems that would enforce the Treaty of Versailles, not only confirming it. Although it was successful in establishing agreement between Belgium, France and Germany about the western border of Germany and of the renewal of treaties with Poland and Czechoslovakia by France, the Locarno treaties were seen to have failed to put a stop towards French insecurity as well as imposing agreements that could not be fulfilled.