Notes on Postwar Europe: Paris Peace Conference, Poland, and early interwar state-building
Logistics and context of today’s class
Handouts: six handouts should be in your possession; extra copies available at the end of class if you’re missing any. Hard-copy distribution only; extras kept on hand and brought to each class.
If you miss a handout, you can pick it up from the desk after class.
The instructor will cover as much as possible today and continue in future classes if needed.
Today’s focus is the transition from World War I to the postwar order, with a specific emphasis on Poland and its borders.
Reading strategy: readings complement rather than duplicate lectures; some overlap is possible. A recommended reading on Poland (initially listed for Thursday) is relevant background for today. Recommended readings are intended to reinforce material rather than overwhelm students.
The geography reading for today is the same as for next Thursday’s asynchronous lecture; you’ll have time to think about it before the geography quiz. The geography of Eastern Europe is dynamic and maps shift over time, affecting identities, politics, and experiences.
The map of Poland at the end of World War I is not the same as today’s Poland; borders changed significantly after WWII as well (e.g., western shifts, eastern losses). The eastern border of Poland had not been fully determined by the Paris Peace Conference.
Context: from armistice to the peace conference
The armistice of November 1918 ended fighting on the Western Front; the peace conference began in 1919 in Paris.
The Paris Peace Conference decided postwar borders and the terms of peace, with several notable features:
The defeated powers were not present at the negotiations. This was a decision by the victors, not a negotiation with the defeated.
Wilson’s Fourteen Points shaped the peace, including the dissolution of empires (German, Habsburg, Ottoman) and the principle of national self-determination for certain nations (not universally applied, but prioritized for some groups).
National self-determination was to be limited and selective; Poland and Czechoslovakia were among those explicitly mentioned.
The victors would not gain territory from the defeated powers in Europe; empires would dissolve into nation-states. However, the language around “not taking territory” was murky for non-European territories (mandates under the League of Nations would be administered by European powers).
Mandates (Ottoman Empire, German overseas holdings) would be under the League of Nations in theory, but in practice administered by European empires.
Wilson’s support for national self-determination reflected a broader aim to redraw Europe, especially Central and Eastern Europe, but the process encountered serious practical limits due to:
A diverse, multilingual, and politically complex Eastern Europe with many nationalities not well understood by Western diplomats.
Western powers’ desire to create stable, economically viable, and militarily capable states that could act as buffers against Bolshevik Russia and as allies against German resurgence.
Skepticism about creating too many small states; many delegations were ignored or not recognized in Paris.
The peace conference’s approach worked unevenly outside Europe and contributed to anti-colonial movements elsewhere as a byproduct of neglecting non-European national movements.
Poland’s borders and the immediate postwar context
The map in the packet shows the uncertainty of the Eastern border before the Conference finalized borders; the Eastern border of Poland was not yet decided at Paris.
Immediate postwar developments and fights continued in Eastern Europe after the Western Front ceasefire:
The peace talks focused on Europe; fighting continued in the East through 1921 between Poland, Bolshevik Russia, and Lithuania.
A key early war was the Polish–Soviet War (1919–1921), where Poland advanced to the edge of Kiev, then was pushed back, and finally checked at the Vistula by August 1920.
The conflict between Poland and Bolshevik Russia led to the famous “Miracle on the Vistula” (August 1920), where Poland repelled the Bolshevik advance toward Warsaw.
The border between Poland and Bolshevik Russia was ultimately settled by the Treaty of Riga in 1921.
Poland’s borders also involved contentious issues with Lithuania and the issue of access to the sea, as well as the fate of the city of Danzig (Gdańsk).
Poland sought access to the sea; the path to this involved a corridor that separated parts of Germany (East Prussia) and created a potential geopolitical friction with Germany.
The Paris Peace Conference created the status of the Free City of Danzig (Gdańsk) to grant Poland access to the sea while not transferring full sovereignty to either country; the Free City would be under the League of Nations and would have shared rights between Poland and Germany.
The borders debate: key players and ideological contrasts in Poland
Domestic political leadership in Poland emerged soon after independence (1919). The main figures and tensions included:
Roman Dmowski (National Democracy party, Endecja): advocated a nation-state that primarily represents the Polish nation; favored expanding Polish control to include broader populations but keeping Polish political dominance.
Józef Piłsudski (often labeled in lectures as the other major figure, associated with the PPS and federal ideas): favored a federated approach, with centralized government and significant minority autonomy within a broader Polish state; argued for incorporating non-Polish populations through a federal structure.
The Paris Peace Conference sought neat borders, but Dmowski and Piłsudski had different ideas about what Poland should look like, especially in terms of eastern borders and minority inclusion.
Piłsudski’s vision included extending the eastern border toward the historical border of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, arguing for a federation that could accommodate non-Polish populations.
Dmowski favored a more expansive Polish state that would largely represent Poles, with concerns about incorporating large numbers of non-Polish populations that might not identify as Polish.
The two visions had practical implications for borders with Lithuania and for how Poland would interact with neighboring states.
Poland’s access to the sea required a corridor between Germany and a German region that would become East Germany; the port city of Gdańsk (Danzig) would be a Free City under League of Nations supervision, allowing access while avoiding direct ownership by either Poland or Germany.
Other border issues and regional dynamics
The postwar border landscape included ongoing border disputes beyond Paris’ formal boundaries:
Poland–Czechoslovakia border disagreements persisted for a time.
Eastern borders with Lithuania and Bolshevik Russia remained unsettled despite the peace conference.
The western border of Bolshevik Russia had been previously set by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (March 1918), which attempted to define the western frontiers; after armistice, Bolshevik Russia annulled Brest-Litovsk and tried to push west, prompting Polish resistance and the Miracle on the Vistula.
The conclusion of the Polish–Soviet War with the Riga Treaty (March 1921) established the eastern border of Poland for the interwar period and created a substantial minority population inside Poland.
The 1921 Polish state and its constitutional structure
The new Polish state established a centralized government, but with a deliberately weak executive in order to curb the potential power of strong leaders (a response to a history of autocratic tendencies).
The first president was Gabriel Narutowicz, elected in December 1922; the government had formed earlier, with the military leadership led by Piłsudski’s allies guiding policy.
The early government also included a minister of war and a strong army leadership; Piłsudski’s influence remained significant, which contributed to concerns about potential presidential power concentration.
Narutowicz’s presidency was short; he was assassinated five days after taking office by a right-wing extremist who had been influenced by anti-Semitic propaganda and the claim that his reliance on minority votes undermined the Polish majority.
After Narutowicz, the political landscape remained fragile, with minority representation in government and ongoing tensions around minority rights.
The 1920s saw the emergence of minority-majority politics, with ongoing debates about how to integrate various national groups into the Polish state.
The Jewish minority in Poland and political options
The Jewish population in Poland around this period accounted for about of the population (roughly Jews out of about total people in the country). In Warsaw, Jews comprised about one-third of the city’s population.
Jewish political life was diverse, with multiple parties and ideological orientations:
Bund (General Jewish Labour Bund) – Jewish socialist, largely secular; advocated for defending Jewish culture within Europe while participating in broader Polish politics; did not advocate for a separate Jewish state.
Agudah Israel – a more religious faction, focused on defending Jewish rights within the country; supported autonomy for Jewish communities but not necessarily a separate state.
Zionists – argued that Jews needed national self-determination and, in some cases, a separate Jewish state; their goals were tied to the broader Zionist project that transcended Poland, though they were sometimes supported by Polish nationalists who saw benefits in training Jewish groups for potential defense or autonomy movements.
The Jewish political landscape ranged from left to right in Poland, with decisions about language (Yiddish, Hebrew, or Polish) and strategy (participation in Polish politics vs. separate Jewish political structures).
The emergence of national states after the war spurred debates about Jewish self-determination and the possibility of national entities for Jews outside or alongside Poland.
The fate and status of Jewish communities in Eastern Europe would be a major topic in subsequent classes.
The 1920s and 1930s: consolidation, challenge, and the decline of democracy
After initial years of decentralized parliamentary democracy, Józef Piłsudski returned to politics in May 1926 and launched a restrained military coup (the Sanation regime). This move was framed as a way to heal the democratic experiment, but it effectively centralized power and limited political freedoms.
The Sanation regime featured controlled elections, restrictions on voting rights for certain groups, arrests of political opponents, and suppression of minority political participation.
The regime reflected a tension between democratic ideals and the practical requirement of maintaining order in a highly fragmented political landscape.
The Great Depression of the 1930s further destabilized Poland, complicating efforts to sustain democracy and contributing to the rise of nationalist and authoritarian currents in Central Europe.
The League of Nations and the Free City of Danzig
The Paris Peace Conference established the League of Nations as an international body intended to provide a platform for equal voices among all states and to prevent empires from reasserting dominance.
The Free City of Danzig (Gdańsk) was created as a compromise to ensure Polish access to the sea while avoiding sovereignty disputes with Germany. It would be overseen by the League of Nations and would not be fully owned by either Poland or Germany, though both would have rights within the city.
This governance arrangement illustrates how the postwar order attempted to balance competing national and economic interests while avoiding direct annexation or ceding of sovereignty on sensitive coastal regions.
Connections to broader themes and real-world relevance
Borders treated as moving targets in the aftermath of empire dissolution; maps and identities shifted as new states formed.
The principle of national self-determination produced inclusive and exclusive outcomes; for some groups it opened doors to sovereignty, for others it left minority communities without their own states, leading to debates about minority protections and later political conflicts.
The intersection of domestic politics and international diplomacy shaped state-building, especially in newly formed states with multiethnic populations (e.g., Poland with millions of Ukrainians, Jews, Russians, and Germans within its borders).
The fate of minority groups (Jews, Ukrainians, Germans, etc.) within Poland and other successor states would have lasting implications for interwar politics and the later history of the region.
The period highlights the tension between democratic ideals (universal suffrage, minority inclusion) and the reality of geopolitical pressures, economic crisis, and radical movements in the 1930s.
Key terms and figures to remember
Paris Peace Conference (1919): venue for redrawing Europe’s borders after WWI; key outcome for Poland and Central Europe.
Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points: principles guiding postwar settlement, including national self-determination and dissolution of empires. The Polish and Czechoslovak implications are particularly noted here. The statement that victors would not acquire territory in Europe was a guiding but ambiguous promise.
National Democracy (Endecja) – led by Roman Dmowski; favored a nation-state oriented around Polish identity and significant territorial claims.
Polish Socialist Party (PPS) – associated with Józef Piłsudski and a more federal, multiethnic approach to state-building.
Free City of Danzig (Gdańsk) – a special status under the League of Nations to secure Poland’s sea access while maintaining German-Silesian relations.
Treaty of Riga (1921) – established the eastern Polish border after the Polish–Soviet War (1919–1921).
Polish–Soviet War (1919–1921) – struggle for control over Eastern Poland; featured the Miracle on the Vistula (Polish victory near Warsaw in 1920).
Narutowicz (Gabriel Narutowicz) – first President of Poland, assassinated five days after taking office (December 1922).
Sanation (after May 1926) – Piłsudski’s regime aiming to “heal” democracy; established a centralized, controlled political system with limitations on pluralism and minority rights.
Minority politics in interwar Poland – the presence of substantial Ukrainian, Jewish, Russian, and German populations; debates about representation, language, and political inclusion.
The League of Nations – international body intended to provide equal representation and oversight for territories like the Free City of Danzig.
Quick summary: why this matters for the broader course
Postwar Europe did not simply “reset” to stable borders; the new states faced internal and external pressures, minority rights questions, and balancing acts between democratic ideals and geopolitical realities.
Poland’s interwar experience illustrates the challenges of creating a multiethnic, centrally governed state in a region with contested borders and powerful neighboring powers.
The discussions about borders, sovereignty, and minority rights in Poland foreshadow many of the tensions experienced in Central and Eastern Europe in the 20th century, including the fragility of democracies in the interwar period and the appeal of strongman rule in crisis periods.
Questions you can ask yourself to study this period
How did the Fourteen Points influence the expectations of different national groups in Eastern Europe, and why did those expectations diverge from actual practice in Paris? points; what were the limits in terms of non-European self-determination?
Why was the Free City of Danzig created, and what were the implications for Polish access to the sea and German sovereignty?
What were the main differences between Dmowski’s national-democratic approach and Piłsudski’s federative approach to state-building? How would each approach affect borders and minority treatment?
How did the Polish–Soviet War shape Poland’s eastern borders and its relations with neighboring states?
In what ways did the assassination of Narutowicz reflect the fragility of early Polish democracy and the role of minority politics in the country?
How did the Sanation regime try to balance democratic ideals with the perceived need for stability in a multiethnic, politically fractured state?
Note on sources and context for future classes
We will continue with the next topics: Czechoslovakia, Germany, and Russia; then move to broader discussions of minority experiences and the rise of nationalism and fascism in the 1930s. Expect more on how different state-building models fared under economic stress and rising extremist movements.