Ruler of France during the First World War. French soldier of World War I

Page 45 of 50

French involvement in the intervention

Recall that France called under its banner 8.5 million soldiers - the color of the population of the metropolis, of which one million three hundred thousand died. 2.8 million were seriously injured. The most industrially developed northeastern zone of the country was under long-term German occupation. 230 thousand enterprises were completely destroyed, and 350 thousand - partially. In 1919, French industrial production was 60% of its 1913 level. The total economic loss (which included loans lost in Russia) amounted to approximately 160 billion gold francs.

All this gave grounds for Clemenceau's admission that France had won a Pyrrhic victory in the First World War. Strictly speaking, Germany was not destroyed. Her industry stood untouched, ready for a new surge.

In the Russian question, France took the toughest position. After the armistice at Compiègne, she turned her back on Russia. Paris vitally needed a counterbalance to its Rhine neighbor. Russia at the moment could not claim this role, and in this sense, it was losing its significance for France. With the restoration of Poland, French diplomacy began to resolutely bet on Warsaw. Firstly, as a stronghold in the strategic confrontation with Germany and, secondly, as a barrier to the restoration of German economic and political influence in Russia. It was in connection with these circumstances that France was ready to support Polish claims against Germany, Lithuania, Ukraine and Russia, she needed the strongest possible Poland as an outpost of French influence in Eastern Europe.

After the signing of the armistice with the Germans, Premier Clemenceau was not worried about the fight against Bolshevism as a political doctrine, but about the real possibility of Germany filling the power vacuum that had formed in Russia. Clemenceau categorically disagreed with the thesis about the invincibility of the offensive of the communist East to Europe: this, in his opinion, was German propaganda, a trick designed to make the Western allies "tremble in their sleep." As early as November 1918, he predicted that the Germans would play on the West's fear of Bolshevik Russia. Even the mere demand addressed to Germany - not to have diplomatic relations with Soviet Russia - allowed German diplomacy to present Germany as the only lasting shield of the West - the Germans immediately began to use this circumstance as their trump card in the new alignment of world forces.

There was fear in the French political environment about the "eternal nightmare" of the Russian-German agreement. The parties of the Center and the Right Center felt this danger especially keenly. Here, Bolshevism was often seen as simply a hidden German means to assert its hegemony in the Eastern half of Europe. And no matter how independent Russian Bolshevism was (they argued in Paris), Berlin could seize leadership at the right moment. The French believed that German President Ebert had the necessary free hand and, in the event of a crisis, would be able to find a common language with Lenin. The Germans can enter and establish themselves in Eastern Europe under the pretext of protecting the West from Bolshevism.

Fear and hatred of the Germans made for the French, as well as for other nations affected by the occupation, unacceptable the delay in the disarmament of the German forces, the slowdown in their withdrawal from the occupied territories. The French - unlike the British and Americans - were in favor of the speedy return of German troops to national borders. But they could not really resist the combined pressure of the Anglo-Saxons in this matter. Despite the protests of the French, Article 12 of the armistice agreement signed on November 11, 1918, provided (as already mentioned above) the evacuation of German troops from the East only after the Western Allies “deem the moment appropriate, given the internal situation in these countries” .

In mid-November 1918, Clemenceau instructed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to study the possibilities of France during the Civil War in Russia - while interacting with the allies, one should try to maintain the leading position of the French (owners of the largest continental army), modifying in a favorable spirit their respective agreement of December 17, 1917 London received the appropriate explanations: France had already provided Denikin with 100 million francs, and she was undertaking to lead the cause of the West here. England can receive compensation in the Caucasus and Armenia, but she was asked to release for the French the territory of the Don Cossacks previously designated as controlled by the British.

The French leadership made significant efforts not to introduce Russia into a new "European concert" precisely because Clemenceau was not sure that he would meet in the face of the new Russia at least some semblance of that ally ready for anything, which Russia was between 1892-1917. Generally speaking, Paris was dominated by the same fears and hopes as during the period of blind support for Russia on the eve of the war. And even when Clemenceau claimed that Russia, by her betrayal in Brest-Litovsk, had deprived herself of the rights of an alliance, he could not cross out in his mind the memories of decades of alliance, of the 3-year cruelest joint war, of the courage and sacrifices of Russians for the sake of France and the common cause. Human victims of Russia in 1914-1917. outnumbered the casualties of all her allies put together in the entire war. This memory made it difficult to launch a full-scale campaign against Russia in order to change its political regime.

The allies, led in this respect by France, did not accept the Bolshevik regime, and most allied diplomats considered it a purely temporary phenomenon. But they had to think about who would replace the social radicals, what would be the political claims of other political forces in Russia. A restored tsarism would require not only the entire imperial heritage, but also Constantinople. Constitutional monarchists would stand up for a unitary state. Republicans would have come out no less harshly in defense of the former borders with minimal concessions to the autonomists. Social Democrats like Kerensky would have given more rights to the separatists, but there was no doubt that they were ready to use force against major changes. Even they looked at the borders of the former Russia as sacred.

It is only in the light of these reflections that the doubts of Paris are understandable when it began to weigh the pros and cons of fortifying Russia's new neighbors. Poland, Romania and the three Baltic states eventually received Western sanction to break away from Russia - but all this was done in the spirit of an implied caveat: if the former Russia rebuilds itself, the changes will be subject to revision. This tacit insurance is a historical truth. Spontaneous formations stood out as a shield on the path of Bolshevism to Europe, but by no means as part of the final map of Russia in the event that she finds the strength to be reborn in her former capacity.

In the course of debates in the National Assembly, important for the destinies of Russia and the West, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Franklin-Bouillon, argued that in the light of the fact that France was closer to Russia than others in the pre-war period, it has a special obligation to return Russia to the civilized world. Franklin-Bouillon, he said, was not pleased that France had to support the Russian separatists. France simply has no choice. In order to gain a counterweight to Germany in the East, she must support the separatists in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine. The nationalism of these states will serve against German penetration, if the Russians in Moscow have forgotten their national history and become imbued with such an internationalist spirit. Particular attention should be paid to the strengthening of Poland and Ukraine. This view reflected the opinion of the majority of the National Assembly.

Even before the signing of the armistice, on October 28, 1918, the commander of the Eastern Army (Balkans), Franchet d'Espere, decided to turn his focus from the fading Central Powers and their Balkan satellites to the East Russian direction. Franchet d'Espere drew up a plan for the South Russian campaign, he corrected his planning with General Berthelot, commander of the Western troops on the Romanian front. The next step of the French was their meeting with a wide range of anti-Bolshevik forces (from monarchists to Mensheviks) in Iasi on November 17-24, 1918. At it, Milyukov asked for sending 150 thousand Allied troops. At that time, the French army was in direct contact with the army of General Denikin in the Russian south - Clemenceau sent several military missions to Denikin, he began to receive French ammunition through the British-controlled Novorossiysk. But, deciding on direct intervention, Clemenceau had to make a decisive choice between the Poles and Ukrainian nationalists who hated each other, to make a decision allowing the division of the territory of the former closest - Russian - ally.

England and France shared the spheres of "responsibility" in the process of supporting forces ready to fight the Germans. England took over the more southeastern part of European Russia: the Cossack lands of the North Caucasus, Transcaucasia. The French zone was located to the west - Bessarabia. The French were most interested in the key port of southern Russia - Odessa. French troops landed in Odessa, they were mostly Algerians and Senegalese. On November 23, the allied squadron entered Novorossiysk. Clemenceau, after contacts with white officers in Thessaloniki, managed to establish a working relationship with Denikin. A few days later, the French settled in Krasnodar, the capital of Denikin, and began the methodical supply of the southern White Army. Clemenceau's policy clearly showed a desire to prevent Britain from occupying a dominant position in southern Russia. On December 22, 1918, he began to create French naval bases in Odessa, Nikolaev and Sevastopol. After strengthening in these enclaves and consolidating nearby territories, it was necessary to start moving in the direction of Kyiv and Kharkov. By February 1919, 12 thousand troops under the command of General d'Anselm (French plus 3.5 thousand Poles and 2 thousand Greeks) occupied the Crimea and almost the entire northern coast of the Black Sea.

Helping the white armies, Paris had to think about what would happen if the white government reigned in Moscow. Such a turn of events will require the refusal of assistance to the states that have formed on the outskirts of Russia. Perhaps the French would have suffered the most agony, for in that case they would have had to again choose Russia (rather than Poland) as their main ally against Germany (since an unsatisfied Poland would be a lesser evil for Paris than a disappointed Russia turning to Germany). But Russia fought in the dark and it was difficult to rely on it even purely hypothetically. Only fear of Germany made the French position (first among others in the West) “pro-Polish”, since the Russian giant was still bound by internal struggles, and the prime minister Clemenceau was most worried about the eastern border of Germany. Based on purely geopolitical considerations, Prime Minister Clemenceau supported the maximalist plans of a revived Poland for Ukraine and Lithuania (as well as Germany and Austria-Hungary). With the direct assistance of France, Poland and Romania received excellent geographical outlines in all directions, their eastern border became a very convenient springboard for the invasion of central Russia. In Paris, the idea of ​​relying on Poland began to envisage the Dnieper as the western border of Russia; in the “worst case” it could be the rivers Bug and Dniester.

Paris turns to Poland. The difficulty was created by the fact that the restored Poland simultaneously claimed the areas disputed with Germany and Ukraine with Western Belarus. The French, however, in the first days of 1919 finally came to the conclusion that a long wait for a consolidated Russia was dangerous, which, consequently, should be bet on Poland.
Ultimately, Clemenceau and his entourage, expecting anti-Bolshevik forces to unite and not waiting for it, had to make a geopolitical choice, and they did it in favor of Poland. It was with these ideas that Clemenceau and his associates came to the opening Paris Peace Conference. Paris puts forward the idea of ​​a "cordon sanitaire" against Russia - this position strengthened the position of Poland and Romania at the expense of Russia. As a result, the French blocked attempts by Wilson and Lloyd George to put the Bolsheviks at the negotiating table with white generals.

On January 2, 1919, Marshal Foch asked the American General Bliss about the possibility of "sending 70,000 troops to Poland in order to stop the flow of the Red Terror." The Americans were not so impetuous; Wilson had a different strategic scheme.

Russia in the period after the end of the war was partially saved by the suspicion with which France and England treated each other immediately after the end of hostilities on the Western Front. The French saw that the most convenient springboard for the capture of Petrograd was Finland and the states that had just been created in the Baltic states. But Clemenceau and his colleagues saw in the offensive from these territories an increase in the importance of the British fleet, which automatically made England a senior partner in the enterprise. To make a direct offer to armored England meant for Clemenceau to lose influence among Yudenich and Denikin, in the Baltic and the Black Sea. Clemenceau clearly feared British competition. Paris was afraid that the Russian North and South would become the sphere of predominant influence of England. If London adds Baku's oil to the wealth of the Persian Gulf, it will consolidate its role as a world monopoly in the field of oil production.

Moral and ideological factors were felt. The fatigue of the French troops, their susceptibility to Bolshevik ideas, weakened France's position in obtaining a zone of influence in the South of Russia. Clemenceau could only send a few instructors to Kolchak. On the Black Sea, it was about a maximum of three French and three Greek divisions. The number of French involved in occupation activities in Russia has never been very large.
There were several hundred French in Murmansk, and they played a subordinate role in the British-led enterprise. More significant was the French presence in Odessa - several regiments between December 1918 and April 1919.

History France in the 20th century

Third French Republic[ | ]

The elections to the Chamber of Deputies, which took place in the spring of 1902, created a radical majority in the Chamber of Deputies. The government no longer needed the support of various elements from different republican parties: the policy of the Waldeck-Rousseau cabinet was justified by the voters. Nevertheless, on May 20, Waldeck-Rousseau, quite unexpectedly both for opponents and even for supporters, announced that his cabinet was resigning, considering its duties to appease France fulfilled. The attempts of the cabinet's enemies to explain this resignation as strife in the cabinet itself turned out to be groundless. With even less right, one could look for the reason for the resignation in the outcome of the elections; in the chamber of 589 deputies there were 233 radicals and radical socialists, 62 government republicans and 43 socialists who did not refuse the cabinet their support. Thus the government majority was secured and the resignation of the Cabinet - for the first and only time in the history of the third republic - was unconditionally voluntary. In the same May, the trip of the President of the Republic, Lube, to St. Petersburg took place. At the end of May, the French colony of Martinique was struck by a terrible volcanic eruption, which was considered extinct, and a strong earthquake that destroyed almost all the settlements of the island. Up to 40 thousand people died. On June 1, the summer session of Parliament was opened. The Chamber of Deputies elected the radical Léon Bourgeois as President by a majority of 303 votes. against 267 filed for the former president, the opportunist Deschanel. The formation of a new cabinet was entrusted to the radical Kombu. He took over the portfolio of internal affairs, and from the old cabinet he retained only the Minister of War, General. André and Foreign Minister Delcasset. The remaining members of the Cabinet: Minister of Justice - Vallee, Minister of Marine - Camille Peltan, Minister of Trade - Truglio, Agriculture - Muzho, Colonies - Doumergue (all five are radicals, or radical socialists), Minister of Education - Chaumier, Public Works - Maruezhul, Minister Finance - Rouvier (the last three are Republicans). Delcasset and Rouvier represented the right wing of the Republican Party in the cabinet. The socialists, to whom Millerand and Bodin belonged in the cabinet of Waldeck-Rousseau, were not represented in the new cabinet; nevertheless, they were part of the bloc of parliamentary parties that supported Combe's cabinet and during the entire period of the cabinet's activity was a special parliamentary organization of parties, built on a federal basis, with a permanent general committee.

The ministerial declaration promised the repeal of the Falloux Act, income tax, two years of military service, insurance for workers against old age and sickness. It declared war on nationalists and clerics, but did not deal with the separation of church and state, but expressed only the intention to strictly apply the Waldeck-Rousseau law on congregations. However, the Catholic Church understood the ministry's declaration as a challenge and immediately began to mobilize its forces against the government. In turn, the government already during June announced the closure of 135 schools of various congregations. Congregations did not always submit voluntarily; sometimes they had to close their schools with the help of armed force. Later, similar measures were taken with greater caution, but still caused opposition and discontent. Members of the congregations emigrated to Italy, Belgium and especially Spain. The government did not hesitate to dismiss officials for participating in manifestations hostile to it; at the beginning of 1903, several generals and colonels were dismissed, whose wives and daughters took a demonstrative part in charity bazaars organized by spiritual congregations. The French ambassador to St. Petersburg, Montebello, who was clerically inclined, was recalled and replaced by Bompard, a supporter of the cabinet's policy. The debates in the House more than once took on an extremely stormy character, but as a result, the government always received approval by a majority of 70-120 votes in the House and 50-70 votes in the Senate.

In November 1902, the north of France was engulfed in a huge strike in the coal mines, but the government, through peaceful intervention, managed to persuade both sides to make concessions and thereby stop the strike. At the end of 1902, the ministry submitted to the Chamber of Deputies a draft law on teaching that repealed the Fallou law. The right to open educational institutions was granted only to persons with a higher secular education (according to Fallu's law, secondary education was enough, it doesn't matter - secular or spiritual); control over teaching was given to secular authorities, who received the right to close educational institutions. Persons opening an educational institution were required to declare that they did not belong to unauthorized congregations. By virtue of the new law, up to 10,000 schools maintained by the clergy were to be closed, with a total number of students: boys - 350,000 and girls - 580,000. To fill the gap thus created, the government had to attend to the immediate opening of 1921 completely new schools and the expansion of several thousand old ones. This placed a burden of 50 million francs on taxpayers. at a time and over 9 million annually, while previously the corresponding costs fell on the church and monasteries. In November 1903, Waldeck-Rousseau spoke out against the government in the Senate, arguing that it was too harsh, regardless of the circumstances, to pass the law on congregations. This speech enthralled the opponents of the cabinet, but did not have much influence; the government retained its majority in both chambers after it. In July 1904 the Teaching Act passed through both houses and came into force; Fallu's law finally fell. In January 1905 the government passed through the chambers a ban on teaching the Law of God in Breton. However, the government did not dare to cancel the concordat, finding that the religious consciousness of the people was not yet at the proper level. In September 1903, the opening of a monument to Renan in Treguier gave rise to clerical demonstrations: the troops were forced to drive away a significant crowd of people from the place of celebration. In April 1904 crucifixes and other religious emblems were removed from the courts.

Although Delcasset, an ardent supporter of the Franco-Russian alliance, remained Minister of Foreign Affairs, Franco-Russian friendship cooled somewhat during the activity of Combe's cabinet. France moved closer to England and Italy. During 1903 the kings of England and Italy visited Paris; Loubet gave them a visit in London and Rome. Loubet's trip to Rome (April 1904) was an act not only of international but also of ecclesiastical policy: he did not consider it necessary to visit the pope, and could not have done so in view of the statement of the Roman curia that the simultaneous visit of the head of the church and the head of state, depriving the pope of his rights, is possible only for an infidel sovereign. In the visit of the King of Italy, in Rome, by the President of the French Republic, the Curia saw an insult to itself and expressed its protest officially. The French government responded by recalling its ambassador from the Vatican (May 1904). However, the pope hesitated to recall his nuncio from Paris. In July 1904, the pope dismissed two French bishops without obtaining the consent of the French. government. Then the entire staff of the French embassy was recalled from Rome, and the papal nuncio was informed that his stay in Paris no longer had any purpose. Diplomatic relations between France and the Holy See were severed. A number of episcopal and priestly chairs that became vacant could not be replaced due to the impossibility of an agreement between the French. government and curia. - Political rapprochement with Italy and England was completed by agreements on peaceful arbitration of disputes between them; similar treaties were concluded with Spain, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands. Another agreement between France and England dealt with colonial issues. France pledged not to demand the evacuation of Egypt by the British; England recognized that France had the right to maintain peace and order in Morocco and to provide the Moroccan sultan with the necessary military and financial assistance; for the next 30 years, France and England must enjoy the same trading position in Egypt and Morocco; to ensure freedom of navigation through the Strait of Gibraltar in a certain part of Morocco, no seaside fortifications should be erected; in relation to fishing near Newfoundland, France renounced the privileges granted to her by the Treaty of Utrecht; in Senegambia, on the other hand, the borders between French and English possessions were corrected in favor of France, and England ceded to France a group of islands at the mouth of the Niger; in Siam, the Menam river is recognized as the boundary between the spheres of influence of England and France, and both powers pledged not to annex Siam; England refused to influence the customs legislation of Madagascar. On October 6, 1904, Spain recognized the Franco-British agreement regarding Morocco. In the agreement with England, no attention was paid to the interests of Germany, which has certain claims to Morocco. At the end of 1904, as a result, squabbles began between France and Germany, which somewhat shook Delcasset's position. Meanwhile, the latter greatly valued rapprochement with Germany: he allowed the expulsion from France of the Alsatian Delsor, who came to Paris to organize meetings and lecture on the Alsatian question. The movement of the question of income tax was slowed down by the Minister of Finance himself, who did not deviate in any way from the financial policy of previous cabinets; ransom roads by the state, he declared untimely. In 1903 the Dreyfus affair was reopened. His additional investigation was completed only in July 1906: the Court of Cassation annulled the verdict of the Rennes Court, recognized Esterhazy as the author of the notorious bordereau and found it unnecessary to re-trial the case, in view of which, by a special law passed through the chambers, Dreyfus and his supporter Colonel Piccard were restored to all their official rights. This outcome of the case did not cause the former irritation of passions: French nationalism, in the form in which it manifested itself in the Dreyfus affair, no longer existed by this time.

In order to overthrow the government, Combe's son, who acted as a private secretary under his father, was slanderously charged with bribery. A systematic campaign was waged against Minister of Marine Pelltan, led by one of his predecessors in the ministry, also a radical (but with a brightly nationalist tinge), Locroix. In this struggle, partly two opposing views on naval affairs were expressed: Pelltan was a supporter of small warships (destroyers and counter-destroyers), Locroix - armadillos and cruisers (the Russo-Japanese War irrefutably proved that Locroix was right in this dispute). Locroix argued that Pelltan weakened the navy both by spending disproportionately on small ships and by recruiting employees in which he considered the political opinions of the appointees more than their suitability for the job. Of the same kind was the campaign against the Minister of War Andre, who undoubtedly contributed to the development of political denunciation among the army. He was replaced by the radical socialist Berto. The former minister in the cabinet of Waldeck-Rousseau, the socialist Millerand, also took part in agitation against the cabinet, accusing the government of forgetting social politics because of ecclesiastical policy. From the combination of clerics and nationalists with socialists and radicals, a close-knit and strong opposition was formed. At the opening of the parliamentary session in January 1905, part of the radicals nominated Paul Doumer, who belonged to the radical party but participated in agitation against the cabinet, as a candidate for the presidency of the chamber. Doumer was selected 265 goals. against 240 given to the ministry candidate, Brisson. A few days later, when discussing the general policy of the cabinet, he received an expression of approval by a majority of 289 votes to 279. Dissatisfied with such an insignificant majority, Combe resigned (January 14, 1905), having held power for 2 years and 7 months.

On January 24, 1905, a new cabinet was formed. It was led by Rouvier, who remained finance minister. From the former cabinet, they entered the new still Chaumier, who changed the portfolio of public education to justice, the Minister of Foreign Affairs Delcasset, and the Minister of War Berto. The new ministers were: Etienne, Minister of Interior. cases; Thomson, Secretary of the Navy; Bienvenue Martin, Minister of Education and Cults; Dubief, Minister of Commerce, Posts and Telegraphs; Klumentel, Minister of the Colonies; Ryuo, Minister of Agriculture; Gauthier, Minister of Public Works. Persons with a pronounced radical coloration (Combe, Pelltan, Valle, Doumergue), all except Berto, left the office; its left side was strengthened by the socialist radicals Dubief and Bienvenue-Martin and the radicals Ryuault and Klumentel, but the most important portfolios were not in their hands. In its first declaration, the Rouvier cabinet promised to continue Combe's policy in all essentials. The ecclesiastical policy of the government has changed very little, perhaps becoming somewhat softer. The project of the separation of church and state introduced by the ministry differed only slightly from the project proposed even earlier by Briand. The essence of the law, promulgated at the end of 1905, is this: the republic does not recognize, pay for or subsidize any church. Starting from January 1, 1906, the state budget for cults is destroyed, as well as the expenses of departments and communities on them. During the year, the movable and immovable property of the church, with all the obligations that lie on them, are transferred to religious associations of believers. Property formerly owned by the state, departments or communities is returned to them according to their ownership, with an obligation within a certain period to rent them out to associations of believers. Church ministers who have served for at least 30 years and have reached the age of 60 are provided with a lifetime annual pension from state funds, in the amount of 3/4 of their previous salary; at a lower age and with a smaller number of years of service, a reduced pension is assigned. Believers are allowed to organize associations enjoying the freedom of worship. The separation of church and state provoked attacks from two sides. On the right, the clerics attacked him for taking away from the church a privileged position in the state; in ending the dependence of the church on the state, they saw a violation of freedom of conscience; clericals considered church property to be the inalienable property of the church and an encroachment on them was called robbery. On the left, from the socialist camp, the government was reproached for its lack of decisiveness and consistency; it was pointed out that the so-called church property was acquired by the church thanks to the state, and therefore, can and should be considered public property. - The law on the insurance of persons living by earnings was not carried out under the cabinet of Rouvier; the income tax bill was not introduced by this cabinet at all. The composition of the fleet was significantly increased, in view of the fact that in 1898 the German fleet was only 1/4 of the French, by 1908 it should already be 3/4, and in 1917 - to surpass it if France does not build 24 large combat vessel. - In February 1905, an international court sat in Paris to hear the case of the sinking of English ships by the Russian squadron (see the Hull Incident). At the end of April, the English king again visited Paris, at the end of May and the beginning of June - the Spanish king, on whose life an attempt was made by a Spanish anarchist who threw a bomb into his carriage. The Tsushima disaster (May 15, 1905), having undermined Russian power at sea, turned out to be unprofitable for supporters of the Russophile policy. On June 6, 1905, Rouvier took Delcasset's place, relinquishing the financial portfolio to Merle. Rouvier's task as min. in. cases, it was to settle the dispute with Germany. A conference convened for this purpose met in Algeciras (in Spain) and in April 1906 drafted an act recognizing the sovereignty of the Moroccan sultan, the inviolability of his possessions and the economic equality of the powers in Morocco. In reality, however, the entire internal administration of Morocco was placed under the strictest control of the European powers. The sultan must appoint as chief of police an officer recommended to him by the Swiss government. - Dissatisfaction with the measures taken by the cabinet against the formation of syndicates by officials was expressed in the resignation of Minister of War Berto. Etienne took his place; the portfolio of Minister of the Interior passed to Dubief, Minister of Commerce, who was replaced by Trullo, a moderate Republican. On February 19, 1906, Loubet's seven-year presidential term expired, and he resolutely refused a secondary candidacy. On January 17, President of the Senate Fallier was elected President of the Republic, having received 449 votes against 379 given to the right-wing candidate, President of the Chamber of Deputies Dumer. Not only all left-wing republicans and radicals (by the way, Brisson and Bourgeois, by the way), but also socialists, with Jaurès at the head, voted for Fallier.

On March 7, 1906, Rouvier retired; his place was taken by the cabinet of the radical Sarrien. From the old cabinet moved to the new Minister of War Etienne, Minister of Marine Thomson and Min. Ryuo agriculture. The color of the cabinet was given by the new Minister of the Interior, the radical socialist Clemenceau, the famous destroyer of ministries, who for the first time accepted the ministerial portfolio, the Minister of Public Education - the independent socialist Aristide Briand (the main fighter for the separation of church and state); the Minister of Foreign Affairs - the radical Bourgeois; Minister of Commerce - Radical Doumergue (should not be confused with Doumer). Sarrien himself, who took over the portfolio of justice, stood politically, as it were, in the center of the cabinet. On the right side, among the new members of the Cabinet, stood the Minister of Finance, Poincaré, the Minister of the Colonies, Leig, and the Minister of Public Works, Barthou. The Cabinet included the most prominent people of the French Parliament: it was often called the Cabinet of Chefs. The formation of this cabinet was as much a move to the left as the choice of Fallier. His main business was to pass the law on Sunday rest, which at enterprises that do not allow it, can be replaced by rest on another day of the week. This law aroused strong dissatisfaction among the bourgeoisie; nevertheless, he entered into life, although in some places he was violated. When the Russian government applied for permission to place a new loan in France, there was a disagreement in the cabinet: Clemenceau was a resolute opponent of the loan, but Poincaré and Bourgeois stood for him, and the issuance of a loan on the French money market was allowed in April 1906 May 6, 1906 Elections to the Chamber of Deputies took place, which shifted the center of parliamentary life significantly to the left. Of the 8,900,000 votes cast, 970,000 fell to the Party Socialists, 160,000 Independent Socialists, 3,100,000 Radical Socialists, and 850,000 Radicals, in total the Left received 5,080,000 votes; the right, counting the progressives, did not collect 3,600,000 of them. The united socialists received 53 seats in the chamber, the radicals and radical socialists - 360. All the leaders of the left returned to the chamber, including Jules Guesde, who was voted out in 1898 and 1902. ; only Paul Lafargue failed again (against the independent socialist Millerand). The Right and the nationalists lost many of their leaders (eg Flurans, Rocha, Piu). On 19 June the session of Parliament opened; Brisson was elected President of the Chamber of Deputies. The position of the right-wing cabinet members was becoming difficult. In October, Sarrien, unable to reconcile differences in the cabinet, resigned. The new cabinet was formed by Clemenceau on October 26, 1906. Clemenceau, Thomson, Barthou, Ruo and Briand moved from the old cabinet to the new one with the same portfolios. The portfolio of justice was given to Guyot Dessen, the portfolio of foreign affairs - Pichon, finance - Callo, trade - Doumergue, colonies - Millies Lacroix (not to be confused with Ed. parliamentary life, known for his role in the Dreyfus affair. A special Ministry of Labor and Social Measures was again created, headed by Viviani. In the cabinet there were thus two independent socialists (Briand and Viviani), three radical socialists (Clemenceau, Pichon and Doumergue), five radicals (Dessen, Callot, Piccard, Lacroix, Ruault) and two republicans (Thomson and Barthou). In the declaration of the ministry read in the chambers on November 5, it was said that the government would guard peace, not forgetting, however, that peace among civilized peoples rested on military force. In domestic politics, the government will strengthen democracy; this will lead to the fact that individual cases of manifestation of state power will take more moderate forms. A draft reform of the military courts will be introduced: the consideration of crimes against the common law will be transferred to the general courts, and disciplinary proceedings will be furnished with all the necessary guarantees. The government intends to put into effect the workers' insurance law, improve the laws on trade unions, and establish a progressive income tax. In January 1907, Deputy Flandin introduced a draft law on freedom of public assembly, which abolishes the obligation to make a preliminary statement about a meeting to the police authorities; this project met with government support. The efforts of the Russian government to conclude a new loan in France were opposed by Clemenceau and Callot; the latter directly stated in the Chamber of Deputies that a Russian loan not approved by the State Duma was out of the question in France. During the strikes, the cabinet at first showed an impartiality rare in France, but in 1907 it followed the path of its predecessors in this respect. The desire to form syndicates among the officials seemed to the cabinet dangerous for the proper course of the state machine; finding that the strikes of officials could not be equated with the strikes of workers, he began to persecute the syndicates of officials, especially teachers. As a result, there was a strong cooling between the cabinet and the socialists, who at the end of April 1907 went into direct opposition to the cabinet; strong dissatisfaction was also found among the radical socialists and radicals.

France in World War I[ | ]

France was almost completely occupied with her own internal problems and paid very little attention to the threat of war. True, the Moroccan crises of 1905 and 1911 nevertheless caused alarm, and in 1913 representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the General Staff, confident that Germany was preparing for war, hardly persuaded the Chamber of Deputies to adopt a law on three-year military service. This law was opposed by the whole bloc of the left, especially the socialists, who, under the leadership of the famous Jean Jaurès, were ready to call for a general strike to prevent mobilization. They were sure that the German socialists would do the same (although reports from Germany did not confirm this).

Meanwhile, the new president of the French Republic, Raymond Poincaré, was doing everything he could to strengthen France's position, and especially insisted on an alliance with Russia. When the international situation became more complicated in the summer of 1914, he paid an official visit to Tsar Nicholas II. Despite this, for the majority of the population, the outbreak of war was a complete surprise.

France was saved from complete defeat during a massive German offensive thanks to the courage of the French troops during the retreat to the Marne and the advance of the Russian army into East Prussia. After that, both sides switched to positional forms of war. This trench warfare went on for four years. In 1917, after the entry of the United States into the war, the German army made a last desperate attempt to achieve victory with the last major offensive in France. She achieved success, but the arrival of American troops, ammunition and food in Europe stopped the German offensive and weakened the morale of the German army. The famous Marshal Ferdinand Foch, with the support of the Clemenceau government, led the troops of the Entente in a brilliant campaign that culminated in the expulsion of the Germans from French territory. In Germany, close to the exhaustion of its resources, a revolution began and it requested an armistice, which was concluded on November 11, 1918.

Bath-car of the French army WWI



Shell of the French heavy gun PMV caliber 400 mm

France between the two wars (1918-1939)[ | ]

The internal policy of France in the 1920s was largely determined by the unresolved problems that arose after the end of the war. Two main directions were connected with the financial and foreign policy of the country, which was led by Raymond Poincaré and Aristide Briand. High military spending was covered by France through loans, which inevitably led to inflation. Poincaré counted on German reparations to keep the franc at least at the level of 1/10 of its pre-war value, to cover the costs of rebuilding the destroyed areas and to pay interest on loans to Great Britain and the United States. However, the Germans did not want to fulfill their obligations. Many even doubted the possibility of Germany paying large reparations. Poincaré, who did not share these doubts, sent troops into the Ruhr region in 1923. The Germans resisted and capitulated only after the introduction of emergency measures. British and American experts put forward the Dawes plan to finance reparation payments, mainly through American loans to Germany.

In the first half of the 1920s, Poincare enjoyed the support of the nationalist-minded parliament elected in 1920. But in the next elections of 1924, despite the split of the left forces into warring communist and socialist parties (1920), the coalition of radical socialists and socialists (the union of the left) was able to get the most seats. The new chamber rejected Poincare's line, along with his firm monetary policy in France, and, in order to improve relations with Germany, brought first Édouard Herriot and then Briand to power. Briand's plans to secure peace in Europe met with an apparently favorable response from Gustav Stresemann, Reich Chancellor and German Foreign Minister. Stresemann was the initiator of the conclusion of a guarantee pact on the inviolability of state borders in the Rhine region and on the preservation of the demilitarization of the Rhine region, which was reflected in the Locarno Treaties of 1925.

From the mid-1920s until his death in 1932, Briand directed French foreign policy. He made skilful and indefatigable attempts to establish relations with Germany as a basis for maintaining peace under the auspices of the League of Nations, although he knew that Germany was rearming. Briand was convinced that France would never be able to confront Germany on her own without the support of her former allies or the League of Nations.

In the early 1930s, France was gripped by a deep economic crisis. A mass labor movement developed in the country, and at the same time the threat from Nazi Germany increased. Both the program of equal social security, which the working class insisted on, and the policy of effective rearmament to eliminate the threat from a remilitarized Germany, rested on the need for an effective recovery of the French economy. Moreover, in the 1930s, when production was falling all over the world, France would hardly have been able to achieve genuine international cooperation, which alone could save the country's economy from collapse.

The world crisis and its worst consequence - unemployment - appeared in France in mid-1934. In the 1936 elections, the Popular Front won a decisive victory, partly because it seemed the only defense in the face of the totalitarian right-wing forces, but mainly because of the promise to improve the economic situation and carry out social reforms (similar to the New Deal in the USA). Socialist leader Leon Blum formed a new government.

Hitler's rise to power initially had little effect on events in France. However, his call for rearmament (1935) and the capture of the Rhineland (1936) represented a direct military threat. This radically changed the attitude of the French to foreign policy. The left could no longer support the policy of rapprochement between the two states, and the right did not believe in the possibility of military resistance. One of the few specific foreign policy measures of this period was the mutual assistance pact with the USSR, concluded by Pierre Laval in 1935. Unfortunately, such an attempt to revive the old Franco-Russian alliance to curb Germany was not successful.

After the annexation of Austria (1938), Hitler demanded that Czechoslovakia transfer the Sudetenland to Germany. At the Munich Conference, France agreed to the partition of Czechoslovakia. The French could take a decisive position at the conference, since it had non-aggression agreements with both Czechoslovakia and the USSR. However, the representative of France, Edouard Daladier, took a position similar to that of the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain.

France during World War II[ | ]

In 1939 England began to rearm the army, however, when Chamberlain spoke out against the German invasion of Poland and declared war on the aggressor (September 3, 1939), Daladier followed his example. In the period from September 1939 to the German occupation of Norway in April 1940, France was inactive, so the confrontation with Germany acquired the character of the so-called. "strange war". Morally and militarily, France was completely unprepared to repel the German attack in May 1940. Within six fateful weeks, the Netherlands, Belgium and France were defeated, and British troops were expelled from mainland Europe. Despite the military power of France, the defeat of this country was so sudden and complete that it defied any rational explanation.

Vichy regime (1940-1944)[ | ]

The armistice agreement concluded on June 22, 1940, put an end to the fighting in France. At the same time, French General Charles de Gaulle spoke on the radio from London and called on all the French to unite to fight the invaders. On July 11, the deputies of parliament gathered in Vichy and handed over power to Marshal Philippe Pétain. The Vichy government held control over 2/5 of the country's territory (central and southern regions), while German troops occupied the entire north and the Atlantic coast. The Vichy government lasted until the Anglo-American invasion of North Africa in November 1942. After that, the Germans completely occupied France.

The Germans pursued a cruel policy in the occupied territory. The resistance movement, initially weak, intensified significantly when the Germans began to take the French for forced labor in Germany. Although the Resistance contributed to the liberation of France, the main role was played by the combat operations of the Allies, who landed in Normandy in June 1944 and on the Riviera in August 1944 and reached the Rhine by the end of the summer. The reconstruction of the country began under the leadership of General de Gaulle and the leaders of the Resistance, especially Georges Bidault and Guy Mollet, who represented respectively the liberal Catholic and socialist organizations.

The leaders of the Resistance called for the creation of a new society based on brotherhood and general economic equality, with the guarantee of genuine individual freedom. The Provisional Government embarked on a program of social development based on a significant expansion of state property. The implementation of all these principles greatly complicated the unstable financial system of the country. To support it, it was necessary to restore, systematically develop and expand the industrial base of the economy. The corresponding plans were developed by a group of experts led by Jean Monnet.

Fourth Republic (1946-1958)[ | ]

In 1946, the Constituent Assembly adopted a draft of a new constitution, which eliminated a number of shortcomings of the Third Republic. General de Gaulle advocated the establishment of an authoritarian presidential regime. The Communists (who, thanks to their active participation in the Resistance, now played an important role in the government) introduced a proposal for a single Legislative Assembly. However, the majority of voters felt that the plan harbored the threat of a communist conspiracy and did not pass it in a general referendum. A compromise constitution was adopted in a second referendum, which complemented a weak president and deliberative advisory upper house with a powerful National Assembly to oversee government activities. The similarities between the Fourth and Third Republics were obvious.

In 1947 the USA proclaimed an extensive program of economic assistance (the Marshall Plan) in order to prevent the disintegration of the economic and political structure of Europe and to speed up the reconstruction of its industry. The United States provided assistance on the condition that the Organization for European Economic Cooperation, which was being created, would lay the foundation for the integration of European states.

Meanwhile, the Cold War begins, and in 1949 the United States created the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to strengthen its position in Western Europe. France took part in the general activities under the treaty, although this weighed heavily on the country's budget and drained its military resources. Thus, an irresolvable conflict arose between the fulfillment of treaty obligations to NATO and the financial possibilities of France.

After World War II, the national liberation movement intensified in the countries of Southeast Asia, including the French protectorate of Indochina. Although de Gaulle's provisional government promised to grant political rights to all subjects, which was confirmed by the constitution of 1946, France supported the reactionary regime in Indochina, which opposed the forces of Vietnam, which had previously fought for the liberation of the country from the Japanese occupiers, and then received the support of China. After the armistice in Korea, it became clear that France would have to evacuate its troops from Vietnam.

During this period, in France itself, communist attempts to discredit American assistance or refuse it intensified, and de Gaulle's party, the Rally of the French People (RPF), wanting to save the country from communism, strove for power and a change in the political system. In the general elections of 1951, the party-political struggle reached its climax. The Communists and Gaullists won a significant number of votes. However, thanks to a change in the electoral law (abandoning the proportional electoral system and introducing a majoritarian system), the Republican parties, united before the elections in a bloc called the Third Force, were able to win almost two-thirds of the seats in the National Assembly. This allowed them to form a coalition government.

Shortly after the complete defeat of the French army in Indochina, in the large-scale battle of Dien Bien Phu, Pierre Mendès-France was appointed the new prime minister. In the past, a financial expert with strong anti-colonialist views, he held peace negotiations and in July 1954 signed the Geneva Accords to end the war in Indochina. Although Mendes-France had his own program, he immediately became involved in the struggle for the approval of the treaty on the organization of the European Defense Community (EDC) and for the inclusion of the Federal Republic of Germany in it. In France, the opponents of the revival of the German army were so influential that this US-inspired treaty was never ratified. The failure of Mendès-France, who supported the EOC project, aroused hostility towards him from the People's Republican Movement led by Georges Bidault. As a result, the government was forced to resign.

In the mid-1950s, unrest began in North Africa - Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria (the first two were considered French protectorates, and the last - an overseas department of France). Tunisia gained independence in 1956 and Morocco in 1957. An army that had just returned from Indochina was deployed to Algiers to repel terrorist attacks by National Liberation Front (FLN) rebels. Although during the election campaign Mollet promised to negotiate peace with the rebels, in the spring of 1956 he announced a general mobilization in the country in order to pacify Algeria by force. Because Egypt supported the FLN, France sent troops in retaliation to help England in its campaign in the Suez Canal Zone in the autumn of 1956. By getting involved in this conflict, the French government lost the confidence of the people and political prestige, and also significantly depleted the treasury. The French army in Algeria, with the instigation and support of the Europeans, who made up 10% of the total population of this country, actually ceased to obey the government.

Although the major cities of Algeria were pacified, a wave of discontent was rising in France itself. The fact that the army clearly exceeded its authority did not relieve the government of moral responsibility. However, in the case of restoring order in the army, the country would lose effective strength and lose hope of victory. Incited by the Gaullist leaders, the army and the French colonists were in open defiance of the government. The stormy rallies and demonstrations that unfolded in Algeria spread to Corsica, the metropolis was under the threat of civil war or a military coup. On June 2, 1958, the Fourth Republic, torn by contradictions, transferred emergency powers to Charles de Gaulle, the only person who could save France.

Fifth Republic In 1961, an armed conflict broke out between Tunisia and France due to Bourguiba's demands for the immediate withdrawal of French troops from the base in Bizerte. As a result, Franco-Tunisian negotiations began on the evacuation of the French from Bizerte and the gradual withdrawal of French troops from the base. The French navy finally left Bizerte on October 15, 1963.

In July 2008, President Sarkozy put forward a draft constitutional reform, which received the support of Parliament. This reform of the Constitution was the most significant during the existence of the Fifth Republic: amendments were made to 47 of the 89 articles of the document.

Literature [ | ]

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

France during World War I

Plan

Introduction

1. The cause of the first world war is an ambitious Germany

2. The beginning of the first world war

3. France against Germany in the early days of the war

4. Russian intervention changed the war

5. Turning point in World War I

6. Surrender of Germany

Conclusion

Introduction

By the end of the 19th century, the world was almost completely divided between the leading European powers. The only exceptions were the United States, which managed to defend its independence from England. China, into which European monsters did not consider it necessary to go deep, and Japan, which is of little interest in colonial terms. Actually, the section ended at the beginning of the century.

But a lot has changed since then. In Europe, after centuries of oblivion, a great power, Germany, was reborn. Germany did not have colonies, due to which England, France or Holland was enriched, she did not have time to divide the world. The power traditionally striving for expansion was categorically not satisfied with its modest position.

For the first time, the new Germany (then Prussia) showed its teeth in 1870, when, during the Franco-Prussian war, France was completely defeated and lost the most important economically provinces - Alsace and Lorraine.

The victory over France allowed Prussia to complete the unification of Germany under the scepter of Wilhelm I. Under the rule of the Prussian kings, and after the victory in the war - the German emperors - was the largest Western European country with a multimillion hardworking population.

1. Cause of World War I - ambitious Germany

The economy of the united Germany grew rapidly. The coal mines and iron mines of the Ruhr, Saar, Silesia, Alsace-Lorraine provided primary strategic resources. By the beginning of the twentieth century, Germany in coal mining, iron and steel production more than one and a half times surpassed the "workshop of the world" - England.

In the domestic market of the growing industry of Germany, it was crowded, and by the beginning of the twentieth century, German goods began to seriously compete with English goods on the world market.

Germany was denounced as a deadly rival to British global dominance, first by journalists and then by official politicians, including Prime Minister Rosebery.

They had reasons for this. The main competitor of the British magnates for the gold and diamonds of South Africa was the Deutsche Bank. In China, Germany occupied the strategically important Shandong Peninsula. Exports of German goods to China grew rapidly, threatening British economic interests.

And the construction of the Baghdad railway by Germany, the territory of which had a special status in the Turkish Empire, created a direct threat to British communications with India, the most important British colony.

The relations between Germany and France were explosive. The German occupation of Togo and Cameroon posed a threat to French West Africa.

German banks were becoming dangerous competitors to French financial circles. The loss of Alsace and Lorraine sat like a painful thorn in the mass consciousness of the French. Revanchist sentiments in France dominated all sectors of society.

Knowing this, the German ruling circles were looking for any excuse to inflict another blow on France and break her power forever. Minor colonial conflicts in Morocco in 1905 and 1911 nearly sparked a war between the two powers.

Relations between Germany and Russia were not the best. Germany was Russia's main economic partner, a consumer of its grain and timber. Again, Germany was the main supplier of machinery and equipment for the Russian economy, since the British imposed a number of important restrictions on their exports to Russia.

Taking advantage of this, the Germans by all means underestimated the prices of Russian export goods and overestimated imports. An extensive campaign was waged in the Russian press for a radical revision of relations with Germany; it was supported by many Duma deputies and a number of ministers.

The situation in the Balkans was tense. Austria-Hungary sought territorial expansion in the region, while Russia declared itself the protector of all Slavs and opposed all Austrian plans.

Large-scale armed conflict was almost inevitable. Understanding this, Germany in 1882 signed an agreement on mutual assistance with Austria-Hungary, which was looking for an ally against Russia, and Italy, which sought to oust France from Tunisia (Triple Alliance). At the same time, the previously existing "Union of Three Emperors" (Russia, Germany, Austria-Hungary) collapsed.

In the face of a clearly opposed new alliance, Russia hastened to ally itself with France. The signing of the Anglo-French agreements in 1904 and the Anglo-Russian agreements in 1907 completed the formation of a new military-economic bloc - the Entente (Entente - French consent).

2. The beginning of the first world war

The war broke out in the summer of 1914. The reason was the assassination in Bosnia by a certain young radical of the heir to the Austrian throne, Franz Ferdinand. On July 28, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia.

Russia declared that it would not allow the occupation of Serbia and announced a general mobilization.

In response, Germany declared war on Russia on August 1, France and Belgium on August 3, England entered the war against Germany on August 4, and Austria-Hungary declared war on Russia on August 6.

In terms of its scale, the war had no equal in the entire previous history of mankind.

It was attended by 38 states, where more than 1.5 billion people, or three-quarters of the world's population, lived. The total number of mobilized reached 73.5 million people. The death toll exceeded 10 million - as many as died in all European wars in the previous thousand years.

3. France against Germany in the early days of the war

france colony war expansion

From the first days of the war, the French theater of operations acquired the main importance. It was here that the largest military groupings of the opposing sides were concentrated, and decisive battles unfolded here.

By the beginning of the war, the strength of the German army here was 1,600,000 people with 5,000 guns, the French - 1,300,000 people with 4,000 guns.

The allied forces of England and Belgium were relatively small - respectively 87 and 117 thousand people. During the hostilities, the forces of both sides more than doubled.

In the potential direction of the main German attack, France had two powerful defensive lines. The first were the fortresses of Verdun-Belfort-Toul-Epinal, the second - Dijon-Reims-Laon.

Considering the French fortifications as practically invincible, the Germans were guided by the so-called "Schlieffen plan", according to which the offensive was carried out bypassing the fortresses and the main French forces, through the territory of Belgium.

The rapid defeat of France was declared a paramount task. French plans called for an offensive in the first place in Alsace and Lorraine, in order to deprive Germany of the most important industrial areas.

The coordinated actions of the German troops in Belgium allowed them to reach the French border by August 20. During the Battle of the Border, in which more than 2 million people participated on both sides, three French armies and an English corps were defeated.

The French offensive in Alsace and Lorraine also ended in defeat. The Germans were rapidly moving inland, towards Paris, covering the main French forces from the flanks. The French government moved to Bordeaux, not sure of the ability to defend the capital.

However, at the end of August the situation changed. The French formed two new armies and advanced them to a new line of defense along the Marne River.

At the same time, all means were used for the rapid transfer of troops, including Parisian taxis. At the same time, the commander-in-chief, General Joffre, replaced 30% of the generals.

Personnel changes had the most favorable consequences.

4. Russian intervention changed the war

An important role in the turning point was played by the actions of the Russian troops who invaded East Prussia. Germany was forced to transfer two corps to the east, which allowed the French and British to gain a numerical advantage at the front.

Fresh French armies hit the flank of the advancing Germans. During the week-long battle on the Marne, the German troops were completely defeated and rolled back 50-100 km. It was a turning point in the course of the war. Until then, the Anglo-French troops had been incessantly retreating, but now the moral advantage has passed to the allies.

In addition, this was the first victory of the French over the Germans after the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-1871, which had tremendous moral significance. The German plan for the lightning defeat of France failed, the war took on a positional character

In 1915, the front practically did not move, despite attempts by both sides to resume the offensive. Defense in depth - several lines of trenches, barbed wire, pillboxes and dugouts - made it possible to successfully resist any attacks. The use of the latest means of attack - aviation, poison gases - also proved to be ineffective.

Even heavy artillery was powerless against the dug-in troops, despite their incredible power at that time. So, the famous German "Big Bertha" had a caliber of 420 mm, the weight of the projectile was 900 kg. The attacking efforts of the opposing sides led only to slight shifts in the front line (no more than 10 km.) And were accompanied by huge casualties.

The relative calm on the French front was explained by the fact that Germany shifted its focus to the east, deciding to withdraw Russia from the war. The Russian army suffered a number of defeats and gave up significant territories, but then the front stabilized.

The combat power of the Russian troops was greatly undermined, but still they were a formidable force. The German offensive stalled. Therefore, the German command again put forward the defeat of France as the main goal of the 1916 campaign, going on the defensive on the Eastern Front.

It was in 1916 that the most bloody battles of the First World War took place - the battle of Verdun (Verdun meat grinder) and the battle on the Somme. During these battles, tanks and flamethrowers were used for the first time.

The results of the battles were very limited, the German offensive was stopped, the losses were huge - the German army lost up to a million people, the Allies - about 1,300,000.

The battles of 1916 were one of the last powerful German efforts to wrest victory. Germany and its allies - Austria-Hungary, Turkey and Bulgaria - lost the economic battle to the Entente. The fuel crisis, devastation, food shortages - France also suffered from all this. But the more significant economic power of the Entente, as well as significant assistance from America, made the crisis much less acute than in Germany.

Eventually, at the end of 1916, Germany sued for peace. Many politicians in France favored ending the war. But these conversations were quickly stopped by the new Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau, a supporter of continuing the war to a victorious end, a firm and resolute person. If he had been at the helm of France in 1939, World War II might not have taken place. But every time has its heroes.

By the way, once in his youth, Clemenceau challenged the famous duelist Dantes. To the very same. But Dantes did not accept the challenge, and the possible revenge for Pushkin did not take place.

5. Turning point in the first world war

1917 was the year of the final turning point in the war. The offensive power of Germany was broken. The balance of power has changed radically. After the February Revolution, Russia practically stopped active hostilities.

However, in April, America declared war on Germany, whose transport ships were regularly sunk by German submarines. By early 1918, the number of American troops in France exceeded one million. Fought in France and the Russian expeditionary force of up to 400 thousand people.

In March 1918, the German army made its last offensive attempt in Picardy, and the German forces were inferior to the Entente in all respects: in terms of numbers - 4 million people against 5 million among the Allies, in artillery - 15 thousand guns against 16,000, in aviation - 3000 aircraft against 3800, for tanks - 10 against 800.

Nevertheless, at first, Germany was successful. The first blow fell on the British troops, who, after stubborn battles, began to retreat.

Only after this did the French army begin active operations, commanded by General Petain, the hero of Verdun and the future traitor to the motherland, the head of the Vichy puppet government in Nazi-occupied France.

But the French did not immediately stop the enemy advance. The German units were approaching the forward lines of the defensive area of ​​Paris. The capital of France was subjected to shelling from long-range guns and night raids by bombers.

However, as they approached Paris, the stubbornness of the French grew.

In the end, the offensive of the German army was stopped at the turn of the Marne, in the same place as in 1914. And on August 8, the Allies launched a counteroffensive. The German line of defense was broken through, the losses of the German troops only on the first day of the offensive amounted to 27,000 people, 400 guns, 62 aircraft. Germany could not continue the war.

Famine raged in the country, mass demonstrations of soldiers, workers, sailors began, which grew into armed uprisings and, ultimately, a revolution. Wilhelm II fled to Holland, after which the new German government accepted the terms of the French ultimatum and signed the surrender on November 11, 1918. Germany's allies surrendered even earlier.

6. Surrender of Germany

The act of surrender was signed in the forest of Compiègne, in the staff car of Marshal Foch. Under the terms of the surrender, Germany was obliged to give the Allies a large number of warships, cannons, mortars, machine guns, cars, locomotives and wagons.

The country pledged to pay huge reparations - 269 billion gold marks, which is equivalent to about 100,000 tons of gold. Subsequently, the amount was reduced to 132 billion. By the way, Germany completed the payment of reparations for the First World War only on October 3, 2010, transferring the last tranche of 70 million euros.

The entire German navy was to be disarmed. The left bank of the Rhine was occupied by the Allied troops, and a demilitarized zone was created on the right bank.

Later, during the Paris Peace Conference, territorial changes were formalized. France got back the coveted Alsace and Lorraine, the coal mines of the Saar basin, in Asia - Syria and Lebanon, in Africa - part of Cameroon and Togo.

The French delegation insisted on the dismemberment of Germany in order to permanently deprive her of the opportunity to threaten France. However, the allies opposed this demand in a united front - the dominance of France in continental Europe did not suit them in any way.

It is interesting that in 1940 the wagon in the museum, in which Marshal Foch accepted the surrender, was brought to Compiègne Forest by order of Hitler. And already the Fuhrer himself, sitting on the same chair as Foch in the 18th, signed the act of capitulation of France. When in 1945 it became clear that the defeat of Germany was inevitable, the SS destroyed the car, and buried its remains. Hitler was afraid that Germany would again be forced to sign a surrender in the famous carriage.

However, France could not take full advantage of the fruits of victory. Yesterday's allies - Britain and the USA - insisted in 1924 on the adoption of the so-called "Dawes Plan", supposedly designed to ensure the payment of German reparations to France.

Under this plan, French troops were withdrawn from Germany (France was losing Saar coal), and Germany received significant loans from the United States and England - up to 400 billion dollars at the 1999 exchange rate. At the same time, there were no restrictions on the sale of the latest industrial technologies. All this allowed Germany to quickly restore its industry and prepare for revenge - the Second World War.

Conclusion

France was the most affected side among all the participants in the war. On the territory of its most developed industrial regions, military operations were conducted for 4 years. The scale of destruction was colossal. The losses of the French army in killed amounted to about 1300,000 people - twice as many as all the other allies on the Western Front combined.

The First World War created new international tensions. In Europe and the Middle East, the old Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires were destroyed. The clash of political or economic interests of people led to the emergence of new power conflicts.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

The main consequences of the First World War for France. Government of the "National Bloc", its foreign and domestic policy. French public debt. The economic crisis and its main consequences. The uprising of the Nazis and the creation of the Popular Front.

presentation, added 03/03/2013


The development of German armored forces in the pre-war (after the First World War) period. Prohibitions of the Treaty of Versailles on the production of armored vehicles in Germany. The evolution of the Panzerwaffe of the Wehrmacht. Improvement of tanks during the Second World War.

report, added 10/14/2015


The origin of the outbreaks of the Second World War. German attack on Poland. Expansion of fascist aggression and preparation for war against the USSR. The beginning of the war of Germany against the USSR. The collapse of Hitler's "Lightning War" strategy. Creation of the anti-Hitler coalition.

abstract, added 05/05/2011


Features of the domestic policy of France after the Second World War and during the Fourth Republic. The rise of the workers' and peasants' movement, the fall of the Fourth and the crisis of the Fifth Republic. The role and influence of France on Western European history and culture.

thesis, added 07/12/2009


The study of political events, trends in the economic development of the United States and France in the first half of the 20th century. Characteristic of the era of economic prosperity of America - "Prosperity". The failure of Blum's reforms in France, especially participation in the Second World War.

abstract, added 01/25/2010


The collapse of the colonial empire and the relationship of France with the former colonial powers. The relationship of the state with world powers. The formation of the political, economic, military integration of France with the states of the Euro-Atlantic region.

term paper, added 05/11/2016


France during the restoration. Restoration of the Bourbons. July Revolution of 1830. Second Republic. Second empire. Historical background on the development of the constitutional process in France after World War II. The French Constitution of 1958.

term paper, added 08/03/2002


General characteristics and features of the military equipment of Germany and the USSR in 1943, their artillery and tanks. The neglect of the artillery of France, England and Russia, and its results during the First World War. The development of tank building during the Patriotic War.

abstract, added 04/25/2009


Economic consequences of the First World War. The economy of Germany in the 20s. Economy of Germany during the world economic crisis (1929-1933). The coming to power of the Nazis and their economic policy. German militarism.

abstract, added 11/28/2003


Formation of authorities in liberated France after the Second World War. Temporary regime, constitutional and legal design of the Fourth Republic. Political life in the 50s, Gaullism and the formation of the Fifth Republic. Elections and departure of de Gaulle.

French historian Nicolas Offenstadt and his German colleague Gerd Krümeich discuss the need for France to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the start of the "Great War".

La Croix: Is the memory of the First World War still strong in France?

Nicolas Offenstadt: The First World War is one of those historical periods that left the biggest mark on people's memory. This period concerns everyone, and not just some scholars. This is a massive and amazing phenomenon. It manifests itself in several moments.

In some families, this can be seen, for example, in a respectful attitude to the memories of the ancestors who fought: they carefully store documents (letters, diaries) and personal belongings, take care of the graves and monuments to the dead.

In addition, the presence of the First World War is still felt in all forms of art, whether it be cinema (think of the success of Jean-Pierre Jeunet's The Long Engagement and Christian Carion's Merry several novels about World War I did not appear), comics, songs, or even rock music.

Gerd Krümeich: The French are really attached to the memory of the First World War. This period still causes them lively emotions. Even the smallest Frenchman knows that it is a fundamental element of national identity. Do not forget that a significant part of this conflict unfolded in France. In Germany, there is no such passionate desire to honor the memory of the First World War.

Why do the French have such strong memories of the First World War even 100 years later?

Gerd Krümeich: It seems to me that this is due to the collective need to muffle the memories of the Second World War. The French, of course, suffered during the second conflict, but not in the same way as during the first. During the Second World War, France had a Vichy government, and the Germans awakened not the best instincts in the French, although, of course, this did not affect everyone. It took France a while to realize that not all of this was brought in from outside. So there is an underlying desire in France to move away from this more recent history and plunge into a slightly more distant past. The First World War is called the “Great War” here, although in terms of the number of participants and the scale of the consequences, it was far from the second.

- That is, the French so glorify the victory of 1918 in order to find solace in it after the defeat in 1940?

Gerd Krümeich: Partly. For France, World War II was, in many ways, a rout. Nobody likes to be reminded of this. In addition, fewer French people died in the second conflict than in the first: military and civilian cemeteries of the victims of the 1939-1945 war are much rarer here than, for example, in Germany and Russia.

Nicolas Offenstadt: I don't quite agree with this kind of psychoanalytic analysis. It seems to me that there are two other explanations for this. The first is quite general: today we live in a country that, like Germany, needs a past (remote or not) and consumes it in a variety of forms, from literary works to historical reconstructions. We live in a time when the past becomes a resource, a kind of sedative, because the future is vague, and various cultural landmarks (both spiritual and political) have weakened.

- Why did the First World War become for the French one of the main historical periods to which they love to return so much?

Nicolas Offenstadt: It represents a shared collective experience. Almost all families in France or the former colonies keep the memory of an ancestor who happened to live through this experience.

Gerd Krümeich: It should also be added that the First World War was mainly fought in France.

Nicolas Offenstadt: The First World War almost automatically entails a single associative series for all the French. Anyone can touch this experience through material reflections of family memories that exist in the form of documents (letters, diaries, photographs) and objects brought from the trenches (cartridge cases, pipes, sculptures, etc.). Finally, the positive image of a front-line soldier that has formed today displaces everything.

- That is, the front-line soldier has an extremely positive image?

Nicolas Offenstadt: A World War I front-line soldier is one of the key characters in the history of France, no matter how you look at it. In addition, he is a victim of the arbitrariness of commanders and the horrors of war, a stubborn or rebellious fighter driven by faith in victory or despair. Any person can imagine himself in his place, whether he is a militarist or an anti-militarist, a Christian, a communist or someone else. Everyone has their own leader. No other French historical figure offers so many positive models to the people. Including during the Second World War.

Gerd Krümeich: Now the memory of the French front-line soldiers is equally shared by the whole nation, although during the war the attitude towards them was uneven: for example, in the south of France it was more indifferent. This point raises the following question: how, then, was this unity formed? All Frenchmen fit for service have been in the army and endured military experience for themselves. The Battle of Verdun under the command of Pétain served as the basis for the subsequent process of idealization of the front-line soldier.

Nicolas Offenstadt: We certainly exaggerate the unity of the soldiers in the trenches. Relations between representatives of different classes could be very strained: it was very difficult for intellectuals to find a common language with ordinary soldiers. Disagreements between immigrants from different regions were also not always overcome. Be that as it may, this does not negate the fact that all the soldiers sitting in the trenches shared a common fate, went on the attack together and sat out the shelling.

Gerd Krümeich: This unity of the experiences of the front-line soldiers became all the stronger because, from a dialectical point of view, it arose after tension.

Nicolas Offenstadt: After the war, this experience formed the basis for the formation of various veterans' associations, which successfully fought for the provision of pensions and benefits. This became one of the largest "civil society" association movements in France in the 20th century.

Gerd Krümeich: In addition, all parties, both left and right, declared with one voice: "This must not happen again!"

- Is it possible to say that the image of a front-line soldier has acquired a sacred connotation?

Nicolas Offenstadt: Yes. The front-line soldier has become a sacred historical figure. His legend was formed gradually. In the 2000s, she rallied around the few surviving veterans, and in particular the last of them, Lazare Ponticelli, who died in 2008.

Gerd Krümeich: This legend was formed all the more simply because in almost every French commune there are monuments to those who died during the First World War, a symbol of their sacrifice.

— Were there any changes in the process of formation of this legend? In the 1960s and 1970s, the front-line soldier did not enjoy the best reputation among the younger generations ...

Nicolas Offenstadt: Yes, there has indeed been a shift in collective memory. Today, the front-line soldier comes to the fore again, because we need the past. In the 1960s and 1970s, people looked more to the future, those were the days of the Glorious 30th Anniversary, part of the youth aspired to a world revolution and a new society, third world countries declared themselves publicly: at that moment, the image of a front-line soldier became part of outdated patriotism.

What time did this turn take?

Gerd Krümeich: I would place it in 1978 and the publication of Carnets de guerre de Louis Barthas, tonnelier (1914-1918), which made a lot of noise at that time. During this period, the younger generations in France, as in Germany, began to be more interested in the life and suffering of soldiers than in the causes and consequences of the conflict. People wanted to know why so many soldiers died in 1914.

Nicolas Offenstadt: This process reached its climax in 1998, on the 80th anniversary of the armistice, when the writer Jean-Pierre Guéno and the journalist Yves Laplume published a collection of letters and notes, "Words of the front-line soldiers" (Paroles de poilus). In addition, this year the representative of the highest state power, namely Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, for the first time openly raised the issue of rioters shot in wartime.

But where did such a need come from in the past? Is France so afraid of the future, of globalization? Does she have problems with self-awareness?

Nicolas Offenstadt: This return to the past certainly means that French society has doubts about its future. There are thousands of memorial projects in departments and regions. The First World War became a resource because the memory of it is accompanied by a mystification of the social bond, which at that moment allowed society to remain united, despite the difficulties and divisions.

Gerd Krümeich: Exactly. For the French, the First World War is the Great War, because it has a special meaning in their eyes. This does not apply to World War II.

- Is there the same attitude towards the First World War in Germany as in France?

Gerd Krümeich: In Germany, everything is exactly the opposite. In all my almost half a century of work on this topic, I have not yet seen such a serious divergence between our countries. We do not remember the First World War at all. This does not concern us, this is not our history.

Nicolas Offenstadt: A German friend once told me that in Germany the interest in the "Great War" is equal to the interest in France in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. In other words, it is almost non-existent!

Gerd Krümeich: It is very important to understand that for us Germans, our history begins, so to speak, in 1945. When I was young, we were only interested in World War I in terms of comparing the Weimar Republic, Nazism, Hitler, and World War II. By itself, we practically did not analyze the First World War. Although everyone agrees that it was the first great disaster of the 20th century, the Germans do not consider it as such for their history. And this applies to Germans from both the FRG and the GDR.

- In Germany, they don't read Ernst Jünger's "In Steel Thunderstorms" or Erich Maria Remarque's "All Quiet on the Western Front"?

Gerd Krümeich: Unlike France, these books are rarely read in our country. All Quiet on the Western Front was re-released in 2007, but it did not attract much attention. When I suggested to a publishing house that they publish a collection of novels about the First World War published in the 1920s and 1930s, they told me that such a project would not have an audience. Another sign of our indifference is the attitude towards the monuments to the dead. In France, they are given a central place. In Germany, they often do not remember where they are at all.

Nicolas Offenstadt: Nevertheless, there is still interest in Germany in this period, as evidenced by the success of the Europeana program, which includes the digitization of family archives from the First World War and should start in France in November.

Gerd Krümeich: Yes, but this interest is still shown only by individuals. It should not be seen as a collective effort to re-make World War I an important part of our history.

- In France and Germany, the First World War causes completely different emotions. Does each country treat this war differently?

Nicolas Offenstadt: Memories of the First World War and its role in the formation of self-consciousness vary greatly depending on the country. For some, it has become part of a long history, as, for example, in France. For others, it served as the basis for the formation of the nation and occupies an important place in history. This applies, for example, to Australia, Canada and the European countries that emerged after the war.

Gerd Krümeich: One cannot fail to note the growing interest in the First World War in the countries of Eastern Europe, such as Poland, Bulgaria and Serbia. In the days of communism in Poland, it was generally forbidden to talk about it. Do you know that the Poles lost 70,000 soldiers at Verdun? Half of them died fighting for the French, and the other half for the Germans.

Nicolas Offenstadt: In the countries of the former communist bloc, there is now a process of renationalization of the past. Interest in the First World War becomes part of the rise of national movements. Putin's Russia is also characterized by this trend. One of the main points in the commemorative events on the occasion of the centenary of the First World War is the role of war in the formation of national and regional self-consciousness.

The materials of InoSMI contain only assessments of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the editors of InoSMI.

France was one of the victorious countries in World War I. However, this victory was won by France at the cost of heavy losses. For example, 1.4 million French people died in this war, 750 thousand people were wounded and maimed. As a result of hostilities, industrialized areas were destroyed. 3 million 250 thousand hectares of arable land became unusable. France has changed from a creditor to a debtor. By 1920, the public debt of France amounted to 300 billion francs. (It was estimated at the time that it owed the US $300 billion and the UK £650 million.)

At the same time, the war turned France into one of the most powerful countries in Western Europe. The return of Alsace and Lorraine to her, as well as the establishment of French control over the Ruhr area, had a great positive impact on further development. The new economic power of Francia made it possible to increase the capacity of the metallurgical industry by 75%.

In addition, the government of France paid serious attention to the restoration of the national economy. Compensation in J00 million marks

made it possible to restructure the industry in terms of technology. All this served as a powerful factor in industrialization. As a result, France turned from an agro-industrial into an industrial-agrarian country.

In terms of the production of iron ore, France came out on top in Europe. Powerful banks appeared (Mirabo, the Rothschild families, the Lazar brothers and Malle), companies like Renault, Citroen, Peugeot, Simka appeared in the leading sectors of the country.

Along with this, small enterprises have survived in large numbers in the country. They produced more than 50% of the products. Fundamental changes have also taken place in agriculture. For example, the number of land owners has increased. For example, in 3.3% of all households owning plots of land over 40 ra, the area under crops was 45.6%, while before the war they were 2.6%.

Thanks to the war, the French colonial empire increased. France took control of Lebanon and Syria. (Earlier they belonged to Turkey). In addition, France partially crossed the German colonies of Togo and Cameroon.

In the inner life of French society, the mood of chauvinism intensified. The temporary press widely promoted materials under the slogan "The Germans must pay for the VSS." The nationalist forces of the country tried to weaken Germany.

At the same time, France was one of the most active accomplices of the intervention of foreign imperialism against Soviet Russia, since it was very much concerned about the fate of the debt issued to Russia.

The main goal of the ruling circles of France was to turn France into the most powerful power on the European continent, able to impose its policy on other European countries.

You can download ready-made answers for the exam, cheat sheets and other study materials in Word format at

Use the search form

Effects of World War I on France

relevant scientific sources:

• Answers to the exam on the history of the state and the law of foreign countries

  | Answers for the test / exam | 2017 | Foreign countries| docx | 0.68 MB

  The subject of science is the history of the state and the law of foreign countries. The place of science in the system of legal sciences. Theoretical and practical significance of studying the history of the state and the law of foreign countries.

• International law

  Vylegzhanin A.N. | Under. ed. Vylegzhanina A.N. M.: - 1012 p. | Tutorial | 2009 | pdf | 7.36 MB

• Answers to exam questions on the New History of Europe and America

  | Answers for the test / exam | 2016 | Europe and America| docx | 0.26 MB

  Questions 1 Question. Second period of modern history. The chronological problem. Soviet historiography: Sadovaya and Kozenko propose the following periodization of modern times: 2. General processes

• Answers to the exam in the subject of General History

  | Answers to the state exam| 2014 | docx | 0.64 MB

  1. INDIA IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE XX CENTURY 2. Features of the development of Asian feudalism ("Asian mode of production"). 3.France of the era of Napoleon Bonaparte. "Codes" of Napoleon. Code of Napoleon 1804.

• Exam Answers - Economic History

  | Answers for the test / exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.37 MB

  1. Subject and method of the history of economics. Periodization. 2. The economy of the ancient Eastern Slavs. Decomposition of the tribal community. 3. Socio-economic development of Kievan Rus (X-XII centuries). 4. The economy of Rus' in

• Answers to the exam on the subject of the History of State and Law of Russia

  | Answers for the test / exam| 2017 | Russia | docx | 0.31 MB

  1. Formation of the Old Russian state. Main steps. The early state of Kievan Rus, 9th c. The heyday of Kievan Rus in the 10th-12th centuries. 2. Social system in Kievan Rus 3. State system

• History of the economy

  | Answers for the test / exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.07 Mb