ROMANIA'S OPTIONS AT THE DAWN OF WW2, strenghts-wicknesses, alliances, leaders

To all forumists

This topic is meant to be the place for everybody to comment the options Romania had at the dawn of WWII. We have the advantage of knowing the results of the option taken. I think we can dare to point the mistakes and imagine some "what if?" scenarios. BE MY GUESTS!!

-------------------------------------------------------------

I will start by pointing some treaties or alliances signed by Romania between the wars.


1921 - Petite Entente : Romania, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia signed a this treaty to grant the borders established by Trianon Peace.

1921 - an "alliance convention" with Poland, replaced in 1926 by a Warranty Treaty

1926 - Alliance treaty with France
- "friendship and co-operation" treaty with Italy

1928 -Romania joined the "Briand-Kellogg" pact which "prohibited the war as a solution to litigations"
1929 - Romania joined the "Moscow protocol" by which the eastern European states and Soviet Union agreed something similar to Briand-Kellogg pact

1933 - Romania joined the - international convention of defining the aggression
- international pact of non-aggression and conciliation from Rio de Janeiro.
1934 - Pact of the Balkan agreement (intelegere) in which Greece, Romania, Turkey and Yugoslavia guaranteed each-other's frontiers.

1934 - Romania reopened the political relations with Moscow and prepared for 1935-1936 a pact of mutual assistance which could have been a warrant for territorial independence and integrity (!?)

In 1936 the illustrious minister of Foreign Affairs, Nicolae Titulescu was dismissed because he was too identified with the French and Nations League policy. The planned pact with the Soviet Union was abandoned. The Romanian political class was divided between the ones who wanted maintaining the old foreign policy (like Maniu) and the ones who wanted an approach to the totalitarian regimes (like Codreanu).

Cheers,

Barbosu

This post has been edited by Barbosu on March 08, 2005 01:05 pm

Barbosu, I'm currently re-reading Titulescu's book written in '37, "Romania's Foreign Policy". I've also extensively commented on the issue of the proposed pacts with Germany and Russia on another romanian forum. (from international relations perspective, not as an "amateur gamer" )
My personal view was that Titulescu was partly to blame for Romania's isolation, and reading what he understood by "pacts" with Russia and Germany (with both at the same time) clarifies that.

Now, I dont want to re-write my arguments, I want to conserve my time. Could I paste my arguments from that debate? (hopefully translated... )

thanx

take care

If the admins say it's ok, I hardly wait to read your texts.

As for Titulescu. I don't know yet if you are right. I try to establish first the options and than find any guilt if any.

Cheers,

Barbosu



PS About "amateur gamer", as another forumist called you: I don't know if that one in particularly but in general it's hard to know how to express yourself without getting people laugh at you and getting frustrated afterwards.

And one does so with replies like:

- no, I don't think you're right I think it's the other way
- no, your source isn't credible

They both miss the "because" construction to sustain the "NO". They are impulsive, superficial and often WRONG!

Hope we will do better

This post has been edited by Barbosu on March 08, 2005 01:23 pm

Yes please, but of course translated.

Yes please, but of course translated.

Sorry, I gave up that try because the subject is pretty delicate, and I've already been called an extremist. I just dont feel like going into this subject right now, because speaking of options for Romania at that time would be to speak about a strong alliance either with Germany or with the USSR.
Even hypothetically that could draw a lot of angry comments.

take care