Alternative post-ww1 peace treaties

[MalinBot]

There should have been referendum in Transylvania to be fair. Btw, do you think Serbia didn't have minorities ? Look at the map, entire Kosovo was in Serbia, as well as Macedonia, and half of Bosnia wasn't Serb (ww1 started because of Bosnia).

I don't support ethnic borders because they change, I support historical borders.

The purpose excuses the means.
Romanians ,as far as i know, held majority on those lands since the beginning.

[The Illyrian Warrior]

Because we were forced to Yugoslavia (Great Serbia) and Italy occupied Croatian coast.

If Franz Ferdinand wasn't assasinated, trialism would happend and entire Bosnia would end up in South Slavic (read Croatian) federal Unit.

I'd see Croatia in much better position, Serbs with fewer influence, Austro-Hungarians will hand you over more advantages in Bosnia too due common religion, there will be no agrarian reform/serb settlers in other republics/regions, Albanians in Kosovo and outside of Albania would also benefit from the epilogue, we would have more political power, no mass migration to Turkey and bigger population than we have now......In bigger scale, the region would be more balanced and healthier as greater serbia project will start to wane.

[Stears]

You were forced into Yugoslavia by your own leaders. I agree that that state was artificial, but it would have been difficult to establish the correct borders between South Slavs.

Trianon was against Wilson's self-determination theory,because it WASN'T based on democratic referendums (general equal&secret ballots). It was not a wonder that Czech, Romanian and Serbian politicians PROTESTED against the very idea of democratic referendums about the borders. Czech politicians didn't trust in Slovaks, because only very few Slovaks joined to the so-called "Czechoslovak"army against the Hungarians in 1919 (and Slovaks represented only 48% ratio in Northen parts of Hungary). Romanian politicians didn't trust in Transylvanian Romanians, perhabs they didn't want to join to backward & poor Romania (the ratio of romanians were only 53% in Transylvania). Serbs were small minority (22% !!!) in Voivodine. Similar to Romania, Serbia was also a very backward Orthodox country without serious urbanization or industrialization.


Due to the lack of democratic plebiscites (the very essence of self-determination), the USA and president Wilson did not signed this anti-democratic dictate.


There were only one democratic referendum about the borders between Hungary and Austria: The Sopron area referendum in Western Hungary in 1921, where Entente officers were the leaders of the voting districts, there were general equal and secret ballots with electoral registers (or poll books) of the LOCAL residents, and every local citizen could take part in the elections over 18year, regardless the ethnicity, social status or sex)




The "national councils" were brutal mockery and caricature of democracy.


1. Only the Romanians/Czechoslovaks/Serbs were allowed to vote, and only men were allowed to vote. Hungarians were not allowed to participate in the elections.


2. The elections of the envoys of "national" councils were not even locally documented, only the decision of the self-appointed and locally established "national" councils.


3.There weren't secret ballot systems in that "elections", the elections were held as public open ballot/voting, with the simple raise of their hands.


4. There were not so-called "minimal voter turnout", it means that even few gathered people of a (single ethnicity "voters") in a very small pub/bar (as it often happened) could decide the future/fate of whole huge cities.....


5. These so-called "elections" didn't use any ELECTORAL REGISTERS (or POLL BOOKS) of the LOCAL RESIDENTS,
thus it made the gerrymandering directly possible. Like the participation of foreign voters from other countries and from foreign settlements were common, thus many people take part in the "elections" who had not any relationship with the area of the actual voting districts. So without electoral registers, even foreign stranger "voters" could participate in the elections (An open possibility for brutal gerrymandery) T The participation of foreign Serbian soldiers in the elections was usual in Southern Hungary Voivodine too. Without electoral registers of local residents, a single voter could vote in many many districts, thus a single man could vote in many many times in many places and voting districts without any problems...

[Carpatz]

Listen here you Armenoid, the 1920 Trianon Treaty did nothing more but record the expressed will of the nations and ratified the boundaries of the areas inhabited by those nationalities. Transylvania was not "ceded" to Romania by the 1920 Trianon Treaty, as the revisionist Hungarians claim; it became part of Romania as a result of the will of its inhabitants expressed at the Great National Assembly of December 1, 1918, in Alba Iulia, on the basis of their right to self-determination. Before the Great National Assembly convened at Alba Iulia, on October 12, 1918, Vaida Voevod, the political representative of all Romanians of Transylvania, spoke in the Hungarian Parliament of Budapest, announcing the decision of the Transylvanians to deny the Hungarian government and the Hungarian Parliament the right to represent the Romanians at the Peace Conference.

Five weeks after the Great National Assembly of the Romanians, namely on January 9, 1919, the Transylvanian Saxons had their own Great National Assembly at Mediaș, where they too made known their will to be ruled no longer by Hungary, but to become part of Romania. The Transylvanian Saxons drew up a resolution stating that they declare and acknowledge Transylvania as belonging to Romania and the Romanian government of Romania as their government.

Thus, through democratic vote expressing the will of the people, 76.3% of the population of Transylvania chose that Transylvania be part of Romania, based on the right of self-determination formulated by American president Woodrow Wilson.

[Böri]

Turkey would have taken Rodhope region of modern Bulgaria-Greece border area and half of western Thrace.
Bulgaria would have gotten remaining of western Thrace and parts of Macedonia and southeastern Serbia.
Hungary would have taken half of Romania, the Transylvanian region.
Turkey would also get most of Aegean islands.

[TheForeigner]

Turkey would have taken Rodhope region of modern Bulgaria-Greece border area and half of western Thrace.
Bulgaria would have gotten remaining of western Thrace and parts of Macedonia and southeastern Serbia.
Hungary would have taken half of Romania, the Transylvanian region.
Turkey would also get most of Aegean islands.

This is based more on "right of conquest" and not on self determination of majority populations, except for the Bulgarians in Macedonia.

[Jana]

Also, I think Italy only annexed some small areas peopled in large part by Italians.

There was no single town, village or island in Dalmatia which had any kind of Italian majority or relevant population, except one city , Zadar.

Italians wanted to grab Dalmatia not based on any ethnic crieterium, but simply because it was part of Venice once, and it population was almost completely Slavic (Croat and Serb).

[Jana]

A referendum in Transylvania would have given a majority for Romania. What do you think Croatia should have looked like on the map? What lands should it include?

Nothing special, i support Croatian borders as they have been in Austro-Hungary (triune Kingdom) and indipendent Bosnia and Herzegovina.

PS on what right should Szekely Land be part of Romania ? Neither ethnic or historic one.

If Germany could keep its ethnic enclave on baltic coast (east Prussia), Hungary should have be given the same with eastern Transylvania.

[Jana]

Listen here you Armenoid, the 1920 Trianon Treaty did nothing more but record the expressed will of the nations and ratified the boundaries of the areas inhabited by those nationalities. Transylvania was not "ceded " to Romania by the 1920 Trianon Treaty, as the revisionist Hungarians claim; it became part of Romania as a result of the will of its inhabitants expressed at the Great National Assembly of December 1, 1918, in Alba Iulia, on the basis of their right to self-determination. Before the Great National Assembly convened at Alba Iulia, on October 12, 1918, Vaida Voevod, the delegate of the National Romanian Party, that was the political representative of all Romanians of Transylvania, spoke in the Hungarian Parliament of Budapest, announcing the decision of the Transylvanians to deny the Hungarian government and the Hungarian Parliament the right to represent the Romanians at the Peace Conference.

Five weeks after the Great National Assembly of the Romanians, namely on January 9, 1919, the Transylvanian Saxons had their own Great National Assembly at Mediaș, where they too made known their will to be ruled no longer by Hungary, but to become part of Romania. The Transylvanian Saxons drew up a resolution stating that they declare and acknowledge Transylvania as belonging to Romania and the Romanian government of Romania as their government.

Thus, through democratic vote expressing the will of the people, 76.3% of the population of Transylvania chose that Transylvania be part of Romania, based on the right of self-determination formulated by United States president Woodrow Wilson.

What kind of fantasy is this ? He has nothing to do with Armenians.

[TheForeigner]

Nothing special, i support Croatian borders as they have been in Austro-Hungary (triune Kingdom) and indipendent Bosnia and Herzegovina.

PS on what right should Szekely Land be part of Romania ? Neither ethnic or historic one.

If Germany could keep its ethnic enclave on baltic coast (east Prussia), Hungary should have be given the same with eastern Transylvania.

No, it would have been a right mess to have a Hungarian state enclave in the middle of Romania. It would not work. And being part of Transylvania, where Romanians are indigenous people is enough reason to have Szekely Land in Romania.