Trick or Treat? the Anglo-French Alliance, 1919

By Lentin, Antony | History Today, December 1992 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Trick or Treat? the Anglo-French Alliance, 1919

Lentin, Antony, History Today

Signed by Lloyd George and Clemenceau on June 28th, 1919, the same day as the signature of the Treaty of Versailles, the shortlived Anglo-French Alliance seldom receives more than a glance from historians. And yet for the French, at the time, it was an integral part, indeed the pivot, of the Versailles settlement, 'the keystone of European peace', in Clemenceau's words. A leading scholar, L.A.R. Yates, stresses that it 'served as the key factor in making possible the Versailles treaty'. What was the significance of the alliance, stillborn as it proved, in the history of the Paris Peace Conference? What caused the 'keystone' of the Versailles settlement to collapse?

The proposal of alliance arose from inter-Allied differences over France's demand for a strategic frontier on the Rhine. This demand emerged soon after the Armistice. It had never been, like the recovery of Alsace-Lorraine, an agreed Allied war aim, but emanated from France alone. It originated with Marshal Foch, and was adopted by Clemenceau as official French policy early in the Conference. France's object was 'une garantie d'ordre physique'. Only the Rhine, it was argued, could protect France from a repetition of 1870 and 1914. Nothing less could compensate for her grave inferiority, demographic, strategic and geopolitical: her smaller population and lower and declining birthrate, the proven vulnerability of her existing frontier with Germany, and the irreparable loss of Imperial Russia as an ally and counterweight to Germany. Never again, in France's view, should the Rhineland be allowed to serve as a springboard for German aggression.

The French proposals, drafted by Clemenceau's chief confidant and adviser, Andre Tardieu, and officially presented on February 25th, were wholly unacceptable to Wilson and Lloyd George. To detach from Germany the left-bank territory of the Rhine, whether by outright annexation to France, or as some form of autonomous buffer-state, was to fly in the face of that principle of national self-determination which Wilson had often proclaimed should be 'an imperative principle of action' at the Peace Conference, and which the Allies too had agreed (not only among themselves, but also by the pre-Armistice agreement with Germany) would form a fundamental principle of the peace. To separate 5 million Rhinelanders from the Reich would provoke lasting resentment, requiring the long-term presence of American and British troops in Germany, and sowing fresh seeds of tension and conflict between France and Germany.

As Lloyd George graphically and repeatedly put it, it would create new Alsace-Lorraines in reverse, and thus imperil from the start the peace which the Allies were in Paris to reestablish. 'When confronted with the Rhineland question', Clemenceau recalled, 'Mr Wilson shook his head in an unpromising fashion, and Mr Lloyd George assumed a determined air of antagonism'.

The issue of the Rhine dogged the Conference during February and March, the arguments for and against being continually reformulated, without agreement. On March 7th, Clemenceau, demanding 'the permanent detachment of the Rhineland from Germany', roundly denied the primacy of self-determination. 'He said that he did not believe in the principle of self-determination which allowed a man to clutch at your throat the first time it was convenient to him'. An informal committee was set up to work at a solution. Andre Tardieu and Lloyd George's private secretary, Philip Kerr, argued the case for Clemenceau and Lloyd George, but only amplified the basic incompatibility of Anglo-French attitudes.

To the contention that detaching the Rhineland would provoke revanchisme in Germany, Tardieu riposted that Germany's defeat in 1918 made such a reaction inevitable in any event. France was entitled to take preventative measures against German resurgence. Self-determination, he went on, was not an absolute, overriding principle.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Trick or Treat? the Anglo-French Alliance, 1919


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?