Abstract: Portugal believed that the Central Powers should be suppressed and punished after the World War. Primarily, Portugal believed that the Central Powers should be devoid of any offensive military. Their justification was that the Central Powers were able to use an extremely outnumbered army with significantly less funds very efficiently and effectively, and were almost able to hold off a multitude of fighting forces from different countries at the same time. Because of this, Portugal reasoned that giving them any offensive capability would be very dangerous. In addition, Portugal believed that they should have been able to receive the German territory in Eastern Africa known as the Kionga Triangle. The Kionga Triangle would be geographically beneficial to Portugal, and Portugal justified this request by their military aid towards the Allied cause and that Portugal was close and fit to rule that area of land. Lastly, Portugal thought that the Central Powers should pay reparations towards the allied cause for the damage that they have incited.
Historical Description: During the year of 1919, Portugal was a newly formed republic that shifted from a monarchy only nine years previously. The early years of the republic was marked by assassinations, and violent rivalries between rival party groups. Political and social unrest marked the country. This political and social unrest also greatly weakened the Portugese economy. Though strengthened by land acquisitions from World War I, the economy was thrown into a large degree of uncertainty due to the political and social unrest of the country. The majority ethnicity in Portugal is Portugese, descendants from Celtic People in the Iberian Peninsula. Portugal was neutral in World War I and tried to maintain a sense of neutrality until 1916, where continuous German aggression forced Portugal to declare war on the Central Powers.
Looking Ahead: Through the years after World War I, Portugal opted not to join the League of Nations, as they did not think that an overseeing group to maintain peace was necessary. The political situation in Portugal from 1919-1929 was followed by even more political unrest and controversies. Divisions in the military began to become apparent and the military fought battles with one another. However, during 1928, an economics professor led the financial crises of Portugal into control and greatly boosted and stabilized the Portugese economy. This economics professor became the prime minister and the head in all departments. During World War II, Portugal was a strictly neutral country during World War II but constantly shipped goods to both the Allies and Germany during the War.
TREATY QUESTIONS:
Should any European territory of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, or the former Ottoman Empire be transferred to any other country?
We strongly believe that the port of Kionga in Eastern Africa, a German territory should be given to us, Portugal, because of our military aid towards the Allied cause in the World War. We helped the war effort both by supplying troops to the Allied Army and by distracting and attacking Germany’s navy.
Should any European territory of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, or the former Ottoman Empire be used to create any new country or countries?
The territories of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire should be broken up to create new countries. By breaking them up the powers that these countries will hold will be much less, and it would be much harder for them to unify again to start another war.
Should any overseas territory of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, or the former Ottoman Empire be transferred to any other country?
Parts of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire should be given to other countries. The Central Powers should pay the price for starting the war and intruding on the peace promised through the Hague Conventions. To prevent such an act from happening again, their land should be dispersed to other nations who fought for the Allies.
What should the new boundary lines for any changes in Europe (provide a map with new national borders to represent the changes suggested)?
Should heavy industry (capable of producing military equipment) be limited in the former Central Powers?
Heavy industry capable of producing military equipment should be limited in the former Central Powers. AS we have all witnessed during the World War, Germany was able to pose such a huge military threat because an immense part of its economy included the making of arms. If we limit this, the offensive threat posed by the Central Powers should decrease.
Should all trade and tariff barriers be eliminated? If so, to what extent?
Trade and tariff barriers should not be eliminated whatsoever. Taxes are an essential component of trade, and trade and tariff barriers are an essential part of the economy or income of a country. Taking this away would be like taking away a country’s right to free trade.
Should reparations be paid by the former Central Powers to the victimized Allies? If so, how much and how long should the former Central Powers have to pay these reparations?
The former Central Powers should help pay for the reparations of victimized Allies, as it is their responsibility to pay for what they did financially. It is only just that those who start the conflict clean it up. However, if they show compliance and cooperation we should also show clemency. They should not pay any more than what they have took, and the financial amount they have paid should not threaten the well-being of their citizens.
Should the former Central Powers be allowed any military capability?
The former Central Powers should not be allowed to have any military capability except for defensive purposes. Considering its actions during the World War, allowing the Central Powers to have an offensive army is simply ridiculous and outlandish.
Should all nations have freedom of the seas?
All nations should have freedom of the seas, or the ability to trade with any other nation at any other time. Trading is an essential part of today’s
Should there be world wide disarmament (no standing armies, no offensive weapons, no future production of weapons of war)?
Worldwide disarmament is an idealistic reality that is not rationally possible in the environment of today’s world. Though in a utopia there would be no need for standing armies, weapons, or production of weapons, an army is needed in today’s world for self-protection against other worldwide threats.
Should there be a world wide supervisory body to enforce terms of this treaty and to serve as a permanent peace keeping body? If so, how should it be structured?
There is no need for a worldwide supervisory body. Countries can govern themselves, and if one is there to create a wrongdoing the others can step in to check the one at fault. If there was a supervising body to execute and enforce “peace”, who is to enforce this supervising body? What is to prevent this body from becoming unilateral, representing the views of the few that do not benefit the well-being or net peace of the world?
Historical Description: During the year of 1919, Portugal was a newly formed republic that shifted from a monarchy only nine years previously. The early years of the republic was marked by assassinations, and violent rivalries between rival party groups. Political and social unrest marked the country. This political and social unrest also greatly weakened the Portugese economy. Though strengthened by land acquisitions from World War I, the economy was thrown into a large degree of uncertainty due to the political and social unrest of the country. The majority ethnicity in Portugal is Portugese, descendants from Celtic People in the Iberian Peninsula. Portugal was neutral in World War I and tried to maintain a sense of neutrality until 1916, where continuous German aggression forced Portugal to declare war on the Central Powers.
Looking Ahead: Through the years after World War I, Portugal opted not to join the League of Nations, as they did not think that an overseeing group to maintain peace was necessary. The political situation in Portugal from 1919-1929 was followed by even more political unrest and controversies. Divisions in the military began to become apparent and the military fought battles with one another. However, during 1928, an economics professor led the financial crises of Portugal into control and greatly boosted and stabilized the Portugese economy. This economics professor became the prime minister and the head in all departments. During World War II, Portugal was a strictly neutral country during World War II but constantly shipped goods to both the Allies and Germany during the War.
TREATY QUESTIONS:
Should any European territory of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, or the former Ottoman Empire be transferred to any other country?
We strongly believe that the port of Kionga in Eastern Africa, a German territory should be given to us, Portugal, because of our military aid towards the Allied cause in the World War. We helped the war effort both by supplying troops to the Allied Army and by distracting and attacking Germany’s navy.
Should any European territory of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, or the former Ottoman Empire be used to create any new country or countries?
The territories of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire should be broken up to create new countries. By breaking them up the powers that these countries will hold will be much less, and it would be much harder for them to unify again to start another war.
Should any overseas territory of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, or the former Ottoman Empire be transferred to any other country?
Parts of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire should be given to other countries. The Central Powers should pay the price for starting the war and intruding on the peace promised through the Hague Conventions. To prevent such an act from happening again, their land should be dispersed to other nations who fought for the Allies.
What should the new boundary lines for any changes in Europe (provide a map with new national borders to represent the changes suggested)?
Should heavy industry (capable of producing military equipment) be limited in the former Central Powers?
Heavy industry capable of producing military equipment should be limited in the former Central Powers. AS we have all witnessed during the World War, Germany was able to pose such a huge military threat because an immense part of its economy included the making of arms. If we limit this, the offensive threat posed by the Central Powers should decrease.
Should all trade and tariff barriers be eliminated? If so, to what extent?
Trade and tariff barriers should not be eliminated whatsoever. Taxes are an essential component of trade, and trade and tariff barriers are an essential part of the economy or income of a country. Taking this away would be like taking away a country’s right to free trade.
Should reparations be paid by the former Central Powers to the victimized Allies? If so, how much and how long should the former Central Powers have to pay these reparations?
The former Central Powers should help pay for the reparations of victimized Allies, as it is their responsibility to pay for what they did financially. It is only just that those who start the conflict clean it up. However, if they show compliance and cooperation we should also show clemency. They should not pay any more than what they have took, and the financial amount they have paid should not threaten the well-being of their citizens.
Should the former Central Powers be allowed any military capability?
The former Central Powers should not be allowed to have any military capability except for defensive purposes. Considering its actions during the World War, allowing the Central Powers to have an offensive army is simply ridiculous and outlandish.
Should all nations have freedom of the seas?
All nations should have freedom of the seas, or the ability to trade with any other nation at any other time. Trading is an essential part of today’s
Should there be world wide disarmament (no standing armies, no offensive weapons, no future production of weapons of war)?
Worldwide disarmament is an idealistic reality that is not rationally possible in the environment of today’s world. Though in a utopia there would be no need for standing armies, weapons, or production of weapons, an army is needed in today’s world for self-protection against other worldwide threats.
Should there be a world wide supervisory body to enforce terms of this treaty and to serve as a permanent peace keeping body? If so, how should it be structured?
There is no need for a worldwide supervisory body. Countries can govern themselves, and if one is there to create a wrongdoing the others can step in to check the one at fault. If there was a supervising body to execute and enforce “peace”, who is to enforce this supervising body? What is to prevent this body from becoming unilateral, representing the views of the few that do not benefit the well-being or net peace of the world?