CSR publishes Wilson's 14 Points a hundred years later: how to reinvent the world order.
On January 8, 1918, US President Woodrow Wilson presented to Congress his famous “14 Points” - a draft peace treaty that was supposed to end World War I and prevent future conflicts. This document formulated the basic principles by which humanity has been trying to live ever since. But even the recognition of most of them, unfortunately, did not save the world from wars and conflicts, global inequality and new development imbalances.
The reasons why Wilson's points did not work are curious.
Firstly, the United States never entered the League of Nations due to internal political disagreements between the president and Congress - we still see the conflict between the executive and legislative branches in the United States today. Germany and the USSR were not included in the League of Nations initially, which made the organization, which was global in design, not global enough. The non-involvement of powerful players in the negotiations ultimately led to a new major conflict. This is a lesson for all of humanity, which is more relevant today than ever.
The historical moment of the beginning of 1918 is in many ways similar to the beginning of 2018. Traditional players are weakening, and some are completely becoming a thing of the past, and new ones do not want to play by the old rules. The growth of conflict impedes cooperation in solving common problems and achieving global development goals. They are trying to push Russia away from the institutions of global governance and see it as a constant threat. Geopolitical upheavals and threats make us think about new principles of world order that will make world politics at least somewhat manageable. On the centenary of the 14 Points, we are attempting to rethink them through the lens of the fundamental changes the world is going through today.
Technological, political, economic and social changes force us to take a fresh look at the 14 Points. The obvious inconsistency between the principles of self-determination of nations and the preservation of territorial integrity continues to give rise to new conflicts, including between Russia and the West. The communications revolution was supposed to make diplomacy truly transparent and open, but the most important international decisions are still made behind closed doors.
The UN stops working where there is any discrepancy between the interests of the great powers. The world is not only far from complete free trade - in some parts of the world, leaders are even basing their platforms on protectionism. Freedom of navigation is regularly threatened when disputes over maritime sovereignty come into play. Wilson's call to reduce weapons to a minimum level sounds like a mockery against the backdrop of regional arms races and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction among state and non-state actors.
Almost all countries of the world, without exception, recognize the importance of the principles laid down in the “14 points”. Some reject the “liberal” world order as a concept, linking it closely with the American desire for global dominance, but at the same time recognize the universal significance of the values of this order. The philosophical achievement of this - still current - world order was openness, rationality and normativity. These three pillars of the unspoken world treaty were supposed to create a balance between the universality of human existence and the uniqueness of each.
However, today this agreement has to be rethought. Are numerous non-state actors the same subjects of the world order as states? How will the fourth industrial revolution change approaches to free trade and economic integration? Is it possible to extend national sovereignty to cyberspace? In this report, we tried to approach these and other questions, the answers to which will allow us to get closer to the vision of the world order of the 21st century, capable of ensuring the harmonious development of the world system, taking into account regional specifics and preserving the common heritage of mankind.
In the main part of the report, Andrei Kortunov discusses which of Wilson’s principles turned out to be the most tenacious, and how they can be applied today. The report continues with separate essays devoted to the fate of each of the general principles put forward by Wilson. The authors rethink the meaning of the foundations of world order from the self-determination of nations to the problems of cybersecurity and arms reduction in a new and rapidly changing world.
Programs for exiting the war: Bolshevik peace program (Peace Decree) - US peace program (“14 points” by W. Wilson)
Peace Decree L. first law and diplomat. act of Soviet power; adopted by the 2nd Congress of Soviets Oct 26 1917. Essence: offering peace to all warring countries (part 1 WW) and condemning war as a way to resolve disputes; negotiations for a just and democratic world without annexations and indemnities; renunciation of secret diplomacy and readiness to immediately begin “the full publication of the secret treaties” that led to the war; equality of large and small nations in solving international problems. There was no response from the warring powers.
“14 points” by V.V.- a program for a peaceful settlement and the post-war structure of international life, outlined (28) by the President of the United States in his message to Congress 8.I.1918.(on its basis an armistice was concluded with Germany in November 1918) They were, as it were, a response to the Peace Decree; the goal is to position the United States as a world leader in the new system of defense.
"14 points": 1) open peace treaties (open diplomacy); 2) complete freedom of navigation (“freedom of the seas”); 3)removal of customs barriers (“free trade”); 4) arms reduction; 5) settlement of colonial issues; 6) Germany’s liberation of all Russian territories it occupied and giving Russia the opportunity to determine its political development; 7) liberation and development of Belgium; 8) the return to France of territories occupied by Germany, including Alsace and Lorraine; 9) clarification of the borders of Italy in accordance with national characteristics; 10) granting autonomy to the peoples of Austria-Hungary; 11) Germany’s liberation of the occupied territories of Romania, Serbia, Montenegro, providing Serbia with access to the sea; 12) providing the opportunity for autonomous development to foreign parts of the Ottoman Empire; 13) the creation of a Polish state with access to the Baltic Sea;
opportunities for autonomous development; 14) the organization of the League of Nations with the aim of providing mutual and equal guarantees of the independence and integrity of both large and small states (later the idea of creating an international universal organization was expanded and detailed in the “League of Nations” project).
For reference:
The strength and appeal of Wilson's program lay in its relative moderation compared to the Bolshevik peace program. Wilson proposed a new international order and mechanisms for maintaining it. But he did not attempt to disrupt the socio-political structure of states in the process of creating some kind of global supranational community.
January 8, 1918 US President Woodrow Wilson addressed Congress with a speech. It became a sensation even before it was uttered: Wilson had already spoken to congressmen 4 days ago, and no new speech seemed to be planned. The press froze in anticipation: something extraordinary was clearly expected.
And the president did not disappoint expectations. He spoke for an hour, announcing his 14-point memorandum that outlined the structure of the world after the First World War. The fact that the war was still going on did not bother anyone: it was obvious that Germany and Austria-Hungary with their allies would not be crushed today or tomorrow.
If you read Woodrow Wilson's speech without knowing the context and further actions of the parties concerned, it will seem like a model of peace, humility, openness, reasonableness and justice. One must assume that this is precisely how the members of the Nobel Committee, who in 1919 awarded the 28th President of the United States the Peace Prize, read it - carefully turning a blind eye to all the art of the “peacemaker” that very quickly followed.
Because each of these points has a double bottom. And each - outwardly so honest, logical and aimed at the common benefit - was a brick in the building under construction of the future planetary hegemony of the United States. A power that just yesterday was a deep province, a factory for the production of fat and shoe polish, and now claimed to be an international arbiter. As life has shown, it’s also dishonest.
Let's say, as a rule, the second point causes a lot of positive emotions. “Absolute freedom of navigation on the seas outside territorial waters, both in time of peace and in time of war, unless certain seas are partly or wholly closed internationally for the execution of international treaties.” It would seem, what could be more noble?
And now, as they say, watch your hands.
Great Britain before the outbreak of the First World War was the workshop of the world and the mistress of the seas. An empire on which the sun really never sets. World creditor. The gold-backed pound sterling was the world's reserve currency. Over four years of war, these positions are practically zero. Having started the war as a creditor, England becomes a debtor. Global financial flows are no longer concentrated so much in the City of London as on New York Wall Street. The dollar significantly pushed back against the pound sterling.
In principle, all this could be played back, since England still had its main trump card: the largest fleet, ensuring the safety and uninterrupted operation of global maritime trade.
But Wilson’s “absolute freedom of navigation” deprives England of this trump card. The goal will become clear three years later. The Washington Conference of 1921 would fix the balance of naval forces between the victorious powers: the USA, Great Britain, Japan, France and Italy. It will be 5-5-3-1.75-1.75, respectively. That is, the US navy will be equal to the English one and will surpass all others. Subsequently, this will lead to a “multi-power standard” for the American fleet: it now surpasses the naval forces of all states on the globe.
The situation with Russia, which received a separate point in Wilson’s speech, is even more fun. This item, sixth in the general list, is one of the most extensive and most benevolent. It guarantees the “complete liberation of Russian territory.” He calls on all states of the world to provide Russia with “an unhindered, unimpeded opportunity to independently determine the direction of political development.” He, finally, provides Russia with a “cordial welcome into the society of free states” and even “all kinds of help that she will need and that she herself will desire.”
Oddly enough, there is no need to look for any double bottom here. It simply doesn't exist. For the reason that this point - from beginning to end - is nothing more than a smoke screen. Or a military trick. Or, let's be honest, an ordinary lie. The US President did not understand and was afraid of Soviet Russia and its Bolshevik leaders. To such an extent that very soon all assurances that Russia was free to establish the “direction of political development” itself went to waste. In August 1918, the same Wilson, who had recently spoken of a kind attitude towards Russia, authorizes an American invasion of its territory.
The document justifying the intervention begins elegantly: “Our military intervention in the affairs of Russia will more likely aggravate the current unfortunate turmoil than cure it.” Fair enough, no doubt. But what conclusion can be drawn from this? “Therefore, military action in Russia can only be undertaken in order to support those efforts in organizing self-government in which the Russians themselves will agree to accept our help.”
Wilson slyly refuses to notice the difference between the Reds and the Whites. And there is no need to ask the latter twice: for foreign help in the fight against the “bloody Bolsheviks” they are ready, if not for everything, then for a lot. And so, if you please: “To this end, the US government is currently cooperating with the governments of France and Great Britain in the region of Murmansk and Arkhangelsk.” Translated from diplomatic language into human language, this means that the Americans are doing the same thing there as other interventionists: burning, raping, robbing, killing, creating concentration camps and dividing up territories. But this seems not enough. And therefore Wilson makes a truly “peacekeeping” decision: “The US government turned to the Japanese government with a proposal to send military units to Russia that would cooperate and act together during the occupation of Vladivostok.”
Between “liberate the entire territory of Russia” and “occupy Vladivostok together with the Japanese,” you will agree, the difference is significant. But the Nobel Committee chose to turn a blind eye to her. For the world community, Woodrow Wilson is one of the most prominent peacemakers of all times. In general, this is probably the case, if we take into account the specifics of US peacekeeping operations from 1918 to the present day: to send in our troops and bring the “light of peace and democracy” to the locals with bayonets. In 1918 in the Far East it looked like this: “ Having captured the peasants I. Gonevchuk, S. Gorshkov, P. Oparin and Z. Murashko, the Americans buried them alive for their connection with local partisans. And the wife of partisan E. Boychuk was dealt with in the following way: they stabbed her body with bayonets and drowned her in a garbage pit. The peasant Bochkarev was mutilated beyond recognition with bayonets and knives: his nose, lips, ears were cut off, his jaw was knocked out, his face and eyes were stabbed with bayonets, his whole body was cut up...»1 . Open peace treaties, openly discussed, after which there will be no secret international agreements of any kind, and diplomacy will always operate openly and in full view of everyone.
2 . Absolute freedom of navigation on the seas outside territorial waters, both in time of peace and war, except in cases where certain seas are partially or completely closed internationally for the implementation of international treaties.
3 . The removal, as far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of equal terms of trade for all nations who stand for peace and unite their efforts to maintain it.
4 . Fair guarantees that national armaments will be reduced to the bare minimum consistent with national security.
5 . A free, frank, and absolutely impartial settlement of all colonial disputes, based on strict adherence to the principle that in the determination of all questions relating to sovereignty, the interests of the people must weigh equally against the just claims of the government whose rights are to be determined.
6 . The liberation of all Russian territories and such a resolution of all issues affecting Russia as guarantees to her the fullest and freest cooperation on the part of other nations in obtaining a full and unhindered opportunity to make an independent decision regarding her own political development, her national policy and ensuring her a warm welcome in community of free nations, under the form of government that she herself chooses. And more than welcome, also all the support in everything she needs and what she desires for herself. The attitude towards Russia on the part of her sister nations in the coming months will be a touchstone of their good feelings, their understanding of her needs and ability to separate them from their own interests, as well as an indicator of their wisdom and the unselfishness of their sympathies.
7 . Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys on an equal basis with all other free nations. No other action can serve more than this to restore confidence among peoples in those laws which they themselves have established and determined as a guide for their mutual relations. Without this healing act, the entire structure and entire operation of international law will be forever defeated.
8 . All French territory must be liberated and the occupied parts returned, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in regard to Alsace-Lorraine, which disturbed the world peace for nearly 50 years, must be corrected so that peaceful relations can again be established in the interests of all.
9 . The rectification of Italy's borders must be carried out on the basis of clearly distinguishable national borders.
10 . The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place in the League of Nations we want to see protected and secured, must receive the broadest opportunity for autonomous development.
11 . Romania, Serbia and Montenegro must be evacuated. Occupied territories must be returned. Serbia must be given free and reliable access to the sea. The relations of the various Balkan states must be determined in a friendly manner in accordance with the historically established principles of affiliation and nationality. International guarantees must be established for the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the various Balkan states.
12 . The Turkish parts of the Ottoman Empire, in its present composition, must receive secure and lasting sovereignty, but the other nationalities now under Turkish rule must receive an unequivocal guarantee of existence and absolutely inviolable conditions for autonomous development. The Dardanelles must be constantly open to the free passage of ships and trade of all nations under international guarantees.
13 . An independent Polish state must be created, which must include all territories with an undeniably Polish population, which must be guaranteed free and reliable access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence, as well as territorial integrity, must be guaranteed by an international treaty.
14 . A general association of nations should be formed on the basis of special statutes for the purpose of creating a mutual guarantee of the political independence and territorial integrity of both large and small states.
Wilson's speech caused a mixed reaction, both in the United States and its allies. France wanted reparations from Germany because French industry and agriculture had been destroyed by the war, and Britain, as the most powerful naval power, did not want freedom of navigation. Wilson made compromises with Clemenceau, Lloyd George and other European leaders during the Paris peace negotiations, trying to ensure that Clause 14 was implemented and the League of Nations was created. In the end, the agreement on the League of Nations was defeated by Congress, and in Europe only 4 of the 14 theses were implemented.
The purpose of the Treaty of Versailles was, firstly, the redistribution of the world in favor of the victorious powers and, secondly, the prevention of a possible future military threat from Germany. In general, the articles of the agreement can be divided into several groups.
1. Germany lost part of its lands in Europe:
Alsace and Lorraine were returned to France (within the borders of 1870);
Belgium - the districts of Malmedy and Eupen, as well as the so-called neutral and Prussian parts of the Morenet;
Poland - Poznan, part of Pomerania and other territories of West Prussia;
The city of Danzig (Gdansk) and its district was declared a “free city”;
The city of Memel (Klaipeda) was transferred to the jurisdiction of the victorious powers (in February 1923 it was annexed to Lithuania).
The statehood of Schleswig, the southern part of East Prussia and Upper Silesia was to be determined by a plebiscite (from the Latin plebiscitum: plebs - common people + scitum - decision, resolution - one of the types of popular vote, in international relations it is used when polling the population of a territory about its belonging to a particular state).
Part of Schleswig passed to Denmark (1920);
Part of Upper Silesia - to Poland (1921);
Also, a small section of Silesian territory went to Czechoslovakia;
The southern part of East Prussia remained with Germany.
Germany also retained its original Polish lands - on the right bank of the Oder, Lower Silesia, most of Upper Silesia, etc. The Saarland came under the control of the League of Nations for 15 years, after this period the fate of the Saarland was also to be decided by a plebiscite. During this period, the coal mines of the Saar (the richest coal basin in Europe) were transferred to the ownership of France.
Tanganyika became a British mandate;
The Ruanda-Urundi region is a Belgian mandate;
-- The “Kionga Triangle” (Southeast Africa) was transferred to Portugal (the named territories previously constituted German East Africa); -- Great Britain and France divided Togo and Cameroon; -- South Africa received a mandate for South-West Africa;
France received a protectorate over Morocco;
Germany refused all treaties and agreements with Liberia;
On the Pacific Ocean
The German-owned islands north of the equator were ceded to Japan as mandated territories;
To the Commonwealth of Australia - German New Guinea; - to New Zealand - Samoa Islands.
Germany's rights in relation to Jiaozhou and the entire Shandong province of China were transferred to Japan (as a result of which the Treaty of Versailles was not signed by China);
Germany also renounced all concessions and privileges in China, the rights of consular jurisdiction and all property in Siam.
Germany recognized the independence of all territories that were part of the former Russian Empire by August 1, 1914, as well as the abolition of all treaties concluded by it with the Soviet government (including the Brest-Litovsk Treaty of 1918). Germany pledged to recognize all treaties and agreements of the Allied and Associated Powers with states that were formed or are being formed in all or part of the territories of the former Russian Empire.
3. Germany recognized and pledged to strictly observe the independence of Austria, and also recognized the complete independence of Poland and Czechoslovakia. The entire German part of the left bank of the Rhine and a strip of the right bank 50 km wide were subject to demilitarization, creating the so-called Rhine demilitarized zone.
4. The German armed forces were limited to 100 thousand. land army; Compulsory military service was abolished, and the bulk of the remaining navy was to be transferred to the winners. Germany was obliged to compensate in the form of reparations for losses incurred by the governments and individual citizens of the Entente countries as a result of military actions (the determination of the amount of reparations was entrusted to a special Reparations Commission).
5. Articles relating to the establishment of the League of Nations
Of the states that signed the treaty, the United States, Hijaz and Ecuador refused to ratify it. In particular, the United States Senate refused to do this due to its reluctance to commit itself to participation in the League of Nations, the charter of which was an integral part of the Treaty of Versailles. Instead, the United States concluded a special treaty with Germany in August 1921, almost identical to Versailles, but did not contain articles on the League of Nations.
The refusal of the American Congress to ratify the Treaty of Versailles actually meant a return of the United States to the policy of isolationism. At this time in the USA there was strong opposition to the policies of the Democratic Party and personally to President William Wilson. American conservatives believed that accepting serious political and military obligations to European countries would condemn the United States to unjustified financial costs and (in case of war) human casualties. The benefits of intervention in European problems (facilitated access to the markets of European countries and mandated territories of Africa and Asia, recognition of the United States as the leading power in the world, etc.) did not seem obvious and sufficient to Wilson’s opponents.
The isolationist opposition was led by the leadership of the US Republican Party. The President was accused that the Charter of the League of Nations limited the Congress in some ways in the field of foreign policy. Particularly irritating was the provision on the adoption of collective measures in cases of aggression. Opponents of the League called it an “obligation,” an attack on American independence, and a dictate from Britain and France.
The debate in Congress about the Treaty of Versailles began on July 10, 1919 and lasted more than eight months. After the introduction of 48 amendments and 4 reservations by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the changes made to the treaty turned out to be so serious that they actually began to contradict the agreements reached in Paris. But even this did not change the situation: on March 19, 1920, despite all the amendments made, the Senate rejected the resolution to ratify the Treaty of Versailles. Thus, the United States, which was turning into the strongest country in the world, legally and in many ways actually found itself outside the Versailles order. This circumstance could not but affect the prospects for international development.
January 8, 2017 marks the 99th anniversary of the proclamation of neoliberal principles of world order by the 28th President of the United States
Woodrow Wilson
The First World War continues for the fourth year, weakening the metropolises of the Old World. Against the backdrop of widespread devastation, growth is observed only in debt. So, for example, from 1914 to 1918. England's national debt increased tenfold - from 706 million to 7,481 billion pounds sterling. The Kaiser's Germany overcame the British anti-record - 4,926 billion marks turned into 105,304 billion marks by the end of the war. France did not escape a similar fate: 33 billion francs of public debt increased by the end of the war to 154 billion francs. As for the Russian Empire, by 1917 its budget deficit amounted to 49 billion rubles, internal debt - 37.8 billion rubles, and external debt - 8 billion rubles.
The true winner in the world war is the United States, which supplied the warring parties with 5 billion barrels of oil over the years of the conflict. Considering that the total oil consumption in the First World War amounted to 6 billion barrels, Washington’s influence on the outcome of the conflict is difficult to overestimate. “The country's national wealth, which amounted to $192 billion in 1914, reached $488.7 billion in 1920... The war caused a gigantic increase in industrial production. Total cost of industrial production for 1914 - 1918. grew from 23.9 billion dollars to 69 billion, that is, almost three times,” noted Soviet historian Boris Kotsenko in the book “The US Labor Movement during the First World War” (1964, p. 143).
American magnets and European gold. Caricature
For the first time since the Seven Years' War (1756 - 1763), an international conflict covers the entire planet, turning into a real “starfall of empires” - the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires were forced to cease to exist. Only Moscow will rise from the ashes, but this will happen a little later, during the reign of Joseph Stalin (1922 - 1953). While London, Paris, Vienna and Istanbul are counting economic and military-political losses, and Washington is thinking about investing the billions earned during the war, power changed twice in Petrograd in 1917: the February Revolution, at the origins of which were the noble dynasties of the empire and the new bourgeoisie allied with them , deals with Nicholas II and his legacy; and eight months later, they themselves shared the fate of the Romanovs, ceding power to the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks) led by Vladimir Lenin, who never tired of repeating that “imperialism is the eve of the social revolution of the proletariat.” “This has been confirmed since 1917 on a worldwide scale... Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development when the dominance of monopolies and finance capital has emerged, the export of capital has acquired outstanding importance, the division of the world by international trusts has begun and the division of the entire territory of the earth by the largest capitalist countries has ended...” - wrote the founder of the Soviet state in his essay “Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism,” published in April 1917, when the US Congress officially declared war on Germany. Interesting coincidence, isn't it?
President Woodrow Wilson seeks to convert the financial and economic advantages of American capitalism into a broad diplomatic offensive. On January 8, 1918, he addresses Congress with the “Fourteen Points” for the post-war arrangement of the world. The US President's speech was prepared in a narrow circle of foreign policy advisers led by Colonel Edward House, publicist Walter Lippmann, geographer Isaiah Bowman, philosopher Sidney Meses and lawyer David Miller, who would later develop the charter of the League of Nations. Let us present the “fourteen points”, accompanying them with a small author’s commentary.
Colonel Edward House
1. “Open peace treaties, openly discussed, after which there will be no secret international agreements of any kind, and diplomacy will always operate openly and in full view of everyone.” [Thus, the United States declares the inadmissibility of repeating agreements like Sykes-Picot-Sazon (1916), according to which London, Paris and Petrograd divided the Middle Eastern possessions of the former Ottoman Empire among themselves].
2. “Absolute freedom of navigation on the seas outside territorial waters, both in time of peace and war, except in cases where certain seas will be partly or completely closed internationally for the execution of international treaties.” [Washington strips London of its former shipping monopoly. Britain is no longer "mistress of the seas"].
3. “The removal, as far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of equal conditions of trade for all nations who stand for peace and unite their efforts to maintain it.” [Wilson proclaims the "open door" doctrine in hopes of breaking the grip of British and French colonialism on the markets of Asia, Africa and Latin America].
Wilson's original 14 points
4. “Fair guarantees that national armaments will be reduced to the utmost minimum consistent with national security.” [International disarmament seems to be the only chance for American colonialism to hold on in the Old World, where only at the initial stage the French army numbered 1.5 million people. Until the outbreak of World War II, pacifist and isolationist views regarding America's military involvement in foreign affairs prevailed in Congress.]
5. “The free, frank, and absolutely impartial settlement of all colonial disputes, founded upon the strict observance of the principle that, in the determination of all questions relating to sovereignty, the interests of the people should bear equal weight as compared with the just claims of the government whose rights are to be determined.” [For the first time, the United States is talking about the legal personality of nations rather than states. This principle would subsequently be enshrined in the charter documents of the League of Nations and the UN, opening the way for two waves of decolonization].
6. “The liberation of all Russian territories and such a resolution of all questions affecting Russia as guarantees to her the fullest and freest cooperation on the part of other nations in obtaining a full and unhindered opportunity to take an independent decision regarding her own political development and her national policy and ensuring her a welcoming acceptance into the community of free nations under the form of government which she chooses for herself. And more than welcome, also all the support in everything she needs and what she desires for herself. The attitude towards Russia on the part of the nations, her sisters, in the coming months will be a touchstone of their good feelings, their understanding of her needs and ability to separate them from their own interests, as well as an indicator of their wisdom and the unselfishness of their sympathies. [Wilson saw the support of the Soviet government as a counterbalance to the aggressive claims of Germany in the east, which, as a result of the offensive, forced the Bolsheviks to sign the peace treaty in Brest on March 3, 1918. Therefore, the “fourteen points” were an indirect response to Lenin’s Decree on Peace, adopted on October 26, 1917 during the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers’, Soldiers’ and Peasants’ Deputies. The document not only called on “all warring peoples and their governments to begin immediately negotiations for a just democratic peace,” but also condemned “annexations or seizures of foreign lands,” rejecting “secret diplomacy” and “secret agreements.” It is no coincidence that the Council of People's Commissars, headed by Lenin, addresses in the document “the class-conscious workers of the three most advanced nations of mankind and the largest states participating in the present war, England, France and Germany,” urging them to “bring to completion the cause of peace and at the same time the cause liberation of the working and exploited masses of the population from all slavery and all exploitation.” That is, Wilson and Lenin formed with their speeches an unspoken alliance between the United States and Soviet Russia against Western European colonialism].
7. “Belgium,” the whole world will agree, “must be evacuated and restored, without attempting to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys on an equal basis with all other free nations. No other action can serve more than this to restore confidence among peoples in those laws which they themselves have established and determined as a guide for their mutual relations. Without this healing act, the entire structure and entire operation of international law will be forever defeated.” [As an expert in European diplomacy, Wilson saw in the independence of Belgium the guarantee of deterring Germany from attacking Great Britain and France. Lenin described this phenomenon as follows: “... for imperialism, competition between several major powers in the pursuit of hegemony is essential, that is, to seize lands not so much directly for oneself, but to weaken the enemy and undermine his hegemony (Belgium is especially important for Germany as a stronghold point against England; England Baghdad, as a strong point against Germany, etc.)."].
8. “The whole French territory must be liberated and the occupied parts returned, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in relation to Alsace and Lorraine, which disturbed the world peace for almost 50 years, must be corrected so that peaceful relations can be established in the interests of all " [The United States thus hoped to limit the financial and industrial appetites of France and Germany, as Lenin explicitly wrote in his essay “Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism”: “It is no coincidence that in France the particularly rapid development of financial capital, while weakening industrial capital, caused The 80s of the last century saw an extreme escalation of annexationist (colonial) policies. Imperialism is characterized precisely by the desire to annex not only agricultural areas, but even the most industrial ones (German appetites for Belgium, French appetites for Lorraine)..."].
Bert Rennollof Thomas. Wilson's 14 points. Caricature. 1919
9. “The rectification of Italy's borders must be carried out on the basis of clearly distinguishable national boundaries.”[The Americans make it clear that the imperial model in Western Europe must be replaced by a traditional nation-state that renounces territorial conquests].
10. “The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place in the League of Nations we want to see protected and secured, must receive the broadest opportunity for autonomous development.” [Like Lenin, Wilson addresses directly the Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Serbs, Croats, Poles, Rusyns, Romanians, Slovenes and other peoples, supporting their right to national liberation struggle and self-determination. This was the first call for the "Balkanization" of the region; the second call is the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 1990s].
Map of the collapse of Austria-Hungary
11. “Romania, Serbia and Montenegro must be evacuated. Occupied territories must be returned. Serbia must be given free and reliable access to the sea. The relations of the various Balkan states must be determined in a friendly manner in accordance with the historically established principles of affiliation and nationality. International guarantees must be established for the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the various Balkan states.” [US deprives Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire of rights to Balkan possessions]
12. “The Turkish parts of the Ottoman Empire, in its modern composition, must receive secure and lasting sovereignty, but other nationalities now under Turkish rule must receive an unequivocal guarantee of existence and absolutely inviolable conditions for autonomous development. The Dardanelles must be constantly open to the free passage of ships and trade of all nations under international guarantees.” [Turkey gets rid of the Ottoman inheritance and becomes on a par with post-war Austria, losing its Arab, Kurdish and Armenian possessions].
13. “An independent Polish state must be created, which must include all territories with an indisputably Polish population, which must be provided with free and reliable access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence, as well as territorial integrity, must be guaranteed by international agreement." [Following the precepts of Napoleon Bonaparte, Wilson views an independent Poland as a factor restraining the imperial projects of Russia and Germany, thereby depriving Moscow and Berlin of the chance for a political alliance against Atlanticism. The Treaty of Rapallo, concluded in 1922 between the RSFSR and Germany, will confirm the validity of American fears].
Territorial changes in Europe after World War I
14. “A general association of nations should be formed on the basis of special statutes for the purpose of creating a mutual guarantee of the political independence and territorial integrity of both large and small states.” [Wilson the idealist dreams of a federal world government that should arise from the ruins of former colonial empires . The League of Nations will be the first project of its kind].
In 1919, Wilson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his peacemaking aspirations. But this will not help him convince the isolationists in Congress, who will refuse to ratify the Treaty of Versailles. The treaty will not come into force, and the Nobel committee will pretend that Lenin and the Soviet state he created did not exist in post-war history. Thus, new rules of the game were born, based on urbanism and industrialism - neoliberalism and proletarian internationalism will launch a new wave of decolonization, the power of which is still making itself felt...
Sarkis Tsaturyan