A Blunted Sickle - Thread II

Poland has claims to Silesia, sure. And the southeastern part had a largely Polish population not too long ago. However, the Czech claim is quite a lot more recent, so if the Germans are to be deported anyway, I can see Silesia being divided between Poland and Czechoslovakia.
 
Poland has claims to Silesia, sure. And the southeastern part had a largely Polish population not too long ago. However, the Czech claim is quite a lot more recent, so if the Germans are to be deported anyway, I can see Silesia being divided between Poland and Czechoslovakia.
Would the Czechs really press for it? IOTL they had a very hard time repopulating the Sudentenland after expelling the Germans.
 
Would the Czechs really press for it? IOTL they had a very hard time repopulating the Sudentenland after expelling the Germans.
The problem is that the German population of the Sudetenland was the reason given for the German annexation, and as I understand it it's also the most defensible terrain on the border with Germany. In the circumstances, I can only think that they'd prefer a depopulated wasteland to having Germans present.
It's worth remembering that this is being settled in the immediate aftermath of a war where the Germans occupied most of Czechoslovakia, and committed major war crimes (even ITTL). Calm economic analysis isn't going to come into it - this is driven by thoughts of revenge and future security, not lebensraum.
 
Yeah, measured analysis of relative birthrate isn't going to cut it given the circumstances. The Sudeten Germans were a Fifth column, that led to dismemberment, annexation, and all manner of other iniquities, up to and including war crimes.

They'll be out, toot sweet, and lucky to keep the belongings they can carry.

Just in case it needs said, this isn't me endorsing such ethnic cleansing. It is my opinion on what's likely to happen in this TL.
 
I agree any land taken away from Germany will suffer population transfer. That is sadly unavoidable and still seen acceptable in that era.
 
The problem is that the German population of the Sudetenland was the reason given for the German annexation, and as I understand it it's also the most defensible terrain on the border with Germany. In the circumstances, I can only think that they'd prefer a depopulated wasteland to having Germans present.
It's worth remembering that this is being settled in the immediate aftermath of a war where the Germans occupied most of Czechoslovakia, and committed major war crimes (even ITTL). Calm economic analysis isn't going to come into it - this is driven by thoughts of revenge and future security, not lebensraum.
Yes, the Sudetenland. The post I was responding to was about the Czechs annexing Silesia.

Surely there's a pretty big difference between expelling a 5th column from your own territory, and annexing new territory simply to depopulate it.
 
Yes, the Sudetenland. The post I was responding to was about the Czechs annexing Silesia.

Surely there's a pretty big difference between expelling a 5th column from your own territory, and annexing new territory simply to depopulate it.
Also, Silesia is on the other side of the mountains and has no easily defended borders. It would be more of a strategic liability than an asset.
 
Another question about the lands that Poland will take from Germany... iOTL, I believe that Stalin was fine with Poles (Catholics only???) who had lived in pre-war Polish area East of the Curzon line moving to the lands that Poland took from Germany. This greatly reduced the number of Poles in the Soviet Union and they moved to a nation was a fellow Communist state. What does Stalin do with them iTTL.

Some numbers. According to a US State Department map on Wikipedia, the area eas tof the Curzon line (which is more or less the border iTTL) had 10.6 Million people as of the Polish Census of 1931. (the last Prewar). Let us assume that anyone in the Polish Census of 1931 who lists Ukrainian, Belarussia, Russian or Ruthenian lives east of the Curzon line. That's about 5M in total. So that leaves about 5M who either had Polish *or* Yiddish/Hebrew as their first language. Assumption, anyone with Yiddish or Hebrew as their first language is a Jew. Jews were about 2.6M nationwide in 1931 and were closer to 3M by 1939. I figure the Soviets got about half, so 1.5M Jews, which leaves roughly 3.5-4M Polish non-Jews (assume all Roman Catholic).

So now let's flip over to the Population of the Soviet Union. Yes, the Demographics of the Soviet Union are going to significantly different iTTL, so this is really only of use as a guide to *relative* populations (adjusted due to some countries getting hit more by the war).
1.3
In the 1959 Census (the first post war), only *one* nationality with more than 3.5M people didn't have their own SSR: the Tartars at about 5M. The following nationalities had less than 3.5M people and *did* have their own SSRs: Lithuanians, Moldovans, Latvians, Tajik, Turkmen, Estonians and Kyrgyz. (and yes there were 1.3M Poles in the USSR in 1959, so even iOTL they apparently didn't allow all of them to move.

So Stalin has the following choices for the Ethnic Poles (non-Jews).
1) Allow to leave/Expel them. This is what he did in the war with Finland, I believe. I'm not sure he would do this as every able bodied man who is expelled can be back on the Soviet border in two years wearing a uniform woven in Birmingham, boots made in Toronto, and driving a tank made in Orleans.
2) Split them among Belorussia and Ukraine as iOTL, fairly likely, they'd be a minority in a nation which is a minority in the USSR. Still makes politics, especially in Belorussia trickier
3) People's Republic of Poland (AKA, East Poland), unlikely, the Russians considered the Poles living in the areas that they gained after the Polish-Soviet War to be colonizers and I *think* at this point the Soviets are the only independent nation which is communist (existing puppet states - Maybe Tanna-Tuva?, Mongolia?)
4) Polish SSR. Some of the same problems as the PRP.
5) Kill them all, would take a lot of work, but may be doable.

Also, if Stalin expels the Ethnic Polish Catholics, the Polish Jews would likely get similar treatment. The problem is, they'd be expelled into a country which has more or less been cleansed of Jews. If the choice for a Jew from Vilno is trying to rebuild the Jewish area of Warsaw or heading for Palestine, a good number would try to head for Palestine. And by a good number, I mean enough to make the area west of the Jordan a Jewish Majority by 1947.

(I know this keeps flipping from describing Jews as a Religious group and describing them as an Ethnic Group. That really does reflect the situation in Eastern Europe prior to WWII and to some degree beyond. Both my paternal grandparents were Polish Jews, though from West of the Curzon line)
 
1) Allow to leave/Expel them. This is what he did in the war with Finland, I believe.

Not exactly the case with Finland, as the Finns evacuated the areas under threat already before the Red Army took them. This applies to both 1939-40 and 1943-44. Stalin was not in a position of allowing the civilians to leave or expelling them, given that they had already left, but rather he could have demanded them to return if that was his goal.

(The Ingrian people are a case in point. In 1943-44 most of them still in German-occupied Ingria were evacuated to Finland. The majority of the Ingrians were after the Finno-Soviet armistice returned to the USSR, under pressure from the Soviet government. True to form, Stalin then resettled the Ingrians into inner Russia far away from their prewar homes. This policy, arguably a continuation of targeting the Ingrians through mass transfers, purges and cultural repression in the 1930s, led to the decimation of the Ingrian area, with 140 000 people resettled and the traditional communities in the area broken up.)

Given the above, I think the most likely solution to USSR's "Polish problem" ITTL, at least as long as Stalin is alive, will be mainly based on mass transfers and resettlement of ethnically Polish citizens into different far-flung corners of the great land that is the Soviet Union, diluting the Polish population among the other ethnicities of the USSR.
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Sudetenland. The post I was responding to was about the Czechs annexing Silesia.

Surely there's a pretty big difference between expelling a 5th column from your own territory, and annexing new territory simply to depopulate it.
Not in 1945 currently, I live in Wroclaw in Poland (Silisea to be exact) up until 1945 it was known as Breslau and was in Germany and had a German population of 98% between 1945 and 49 the entire German population was evicted and nowadays less than 2% of the population is German. Before 1945 Wroclaw had only briefly been owned by Poland. It was founded by the Czechs and named after Vratislav I of Bohemia it briefly became part of Poland in the 12th Century during a period when the Kingdom of Bohemia was in a personal union with Poland before the Kingdom of Hungary took it and it was incorporated into the Hapsburg Empire along with the Kingdom of Bohemia who then held it for several hundred years before losing it to the Prussians in the War of Austrian Succession with whom it pretty much stayed until 1945. The Czechs through historical links going back 1000 years would have had no second thoughts about annexing the place and expelling the local population just like Poland did IRL
 
Last edited:
Not in 1945 currently, I live in Wroclaw in Poland (Silisea to be exact) up until 1945 it was known as Breslau and was in Germany and had a German population of 98% between 1945 and 49 the entire German population was evicted and nowadays less than 2% of the population is German. Before 1945 Wroclaw had only briefly been owned by Poland. It was founded by the Czechs and named after Vratislav I of Bohemia it briefly became part of Poland in the 12th Century during a period when the Kingdom of Bohemia was in a personal union with Poland before the Kingdom of Hungary took it and it was incorporated into the Hapsburg Empire along with the Kingdom of Bohemia who then held it for several hundred years before losing it to the Prussians in the War of Austrian Succession with whom it pretty much stayed until 1945. The Czechs through historical links going back 1000 years would have had no second thoughts about annexing the place and expelling the local population just like Poland did IRL
Poland had millions of displaced people and was missing about half its country. Eastern bits of Germany were given to Poland by the Soviets as compensation for their loss of territory, and there were a large number of Poles ready and willing (if still not particularly happy) to move in.

Unless Hungary's getting to keep its annexations there's little reason for the allies to even consider giving the land to the Czechs rather than Poland.
 
Personally, I'm not convinced Silesia is going to be parceled out by the British and French to either Poland or Czechoslovakia (aside from some debatable border regions). They have no motivation to "compensate" for Soviet annexations when they're not even nominally aligned with the latter in the first place. Giving legitimacy to the Piast Concept that the Polish homeland is further west than the borders of the Polish Second Republic only serves to justify the Soviet annexations. Now, East Prussia on the other hand is more likely to be annexed to Poland in full given the Allies' well-documented prussophobia and the stronger Polish claim on the region, but that doesn't mean they would expel the entire German population rather than attempting to Polonize them (as was planned for parts of Silesia IOTL). The "Recovered Territories" east of the Oder were quite underpopulated after they were cleared of Germans, and it took not only the refugee population within postwar Poland but also large numbers of Poles and other ethnic minorities deported from the USSR in order to repopulate them. That's not even taking into account the large numbers of Germans that had fled west to escape the Soviet advance and did a lot of their relocation work for them, whereas ITTL most would have no reason to do so unless they lived in an area with significant Polish resistance activity. As far as I can tell, most of the population transfers that occurred after WWII simply won't happen in this timeline.
 
Well, to put a *tiny* fig leaf over the entire thing. According to Wikipedia The Treaty of Oliva in 1660 which made Prussia no longer a Polish Fief apparently include the clause "If the Hohenzollern dynasty became extinct in the male line in Prussia, the territory was to revert to the Polish crown." Given that all of the German Nobility lost everything in WWI, shouldn't Prussia have *theoretically* reverted anyway? Note, I don't know what language the treaty was in (Swedish, German, Polish) and I'm probably stretching it in a way in which it doesn't mean in the original language of the treaty, but *maybe*?
 
Well, to put a *tiny* fig leaf over the entire thing. According to Wikipedia The Treaty of Oliva in 1660 which made Prussia no longer a Polish Fief apparently include the clause "If the Hohenzollern dynasty became extinct in the male line in Prussia, the territory was to revert to the Polish crown." Given that all of the German Nobility lost everything in WWI, shouldn't Prussia have *theoretically* reverted anyway?
1) The Hohenzollerns are still in power in Romania
2) there isn't a Polish Crown for Prussia to revert to...
 
1) The Hohenzollerns are still in power in Romania
2) there isn't a Polish Crown for Prussia to revert to...
1) True, I'm not sure whether Carol (He is still King of Romania iTTL?) would get in the way. And it does say "In Prussia"
2) The Polish state is the legal successor to the Polish Crown.

Yes, the fig leaf does require an electron microscope to see. :)
 

Orry

Donor
Monthly Donor
Well, to put a *tiny* fig leaf over the entire thing. According to Wikipedia The Treaty of Oliva in 1660 which made Prussia no longer a Polish Fief apparently include the clause "If the Hohenzollern dynasty became extinct in the male line in Prussia, the territory was to revert to the Polish crown." Given that all of the German Nobility lost everything in WWI, shouldn't Prussia have *theoretically* reverted anyway? Note, I don't know what language the treaty was in (Swedish, German, Polish) and I'm probably stretching it in a way in which it doesn't mean in the original language of the treaty, but *maybe*?

If the people with power think the fig leaf is good enough - it will be good enough
 
I am pretty sure Poland is guaranteed to get East Prussia (the fig leaf above is more than enough at the now, though Poland becoming a constitutional monarchy again would be interesting) and at least a chunk of upper Silesia. In my previous post, which I clearly was not so clear in, I was more suggesting that since the Czech historic claim to Silesia is much stronger, if Poland is getting a piece it makes a certain amount of sense that the Czechs do as well. I did not intend to suggest that all of Silesia go to the Czechs. I had not considered the issue of mountains, admittedly.
 
I am pretty sure Poland is guaranteed to get East Prussia (the fig leaf above is more than enough at the now, though Poland becoming a constitutional monarchy again would be interesting) and at least a chunk of upper Silesia. In my previous post, which I clearly was not so clear in, I was more suggesting that since the Czech historic claim to Silesia is much stronger, if Poland is getting a piece it makes a certain amount of sense that the Czechs do as well. I did not intend to suggest that all of Silesia go to the Czechs. I had not considered the issue of mountains, admittedly.
(Lower) Silesia was Polish for 350 years, and after that it remained ethnically Polish for further couple centuries. Czech historical claim is not much stronger, and their ethnic claim is even weaker than Polish (that is, it is practically not existing, outside of part of Tesin Silesia and bits and pieces here and there)
Not in 1945 currently, I live in Wroclaw in Poland (Silisea to be exact) up until 1945 it was known as Breslau and was in Germany and had a German population of 98% between 1945 and 49 the entire German population was evicted and nowadays less than 2% of the population is German. Before 1945 Wroclaw had only briefly been owned by Poland. It was founded by the Czechs and named after Vratislav I of Bohemia it briefly became part of Poland in the 12th Century during a period when the Kingdom of Bohemia was in a personal union with Poland before the Kingdom of Hungary took it and it was incorporated into the Hapsburg Empire along with the Kingdom of Bohemia who then held it for several hundred years before losing it to the Prussians in the War of Austrian Succession with whom it pretty much stayed until 1945. The Czechs through historical links going back 1000 years would have had no second thoughts about annexing the place and expelling the local population just like Poland did IRL
Czechs gained Wrocław from a Polish duke in 1335
 
Top