Talk:Józef Beck

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

I think the article would be enhanced by a photo of Beck. Logologist 08:06, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning the Minorities Treaty

This paragraph: "The main problem with it was that, while Poland and Czechoslovakia were forced to respect the rights of their respective German minorities, the Polish and Czechoslovak minorities in Germany and Soviet Union were not so protected." is my opinion somewhat flawed. I believe that we should explain the reasons why particular people took particular decisions in history, but we should not justify their actions. Explanation, not justification should be the aim here.

To begin, the Soviet Union did not attend the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, did not sign the Treaty of Versailles, indeed in 1919 did not maintain diplomatic relations with any of the major powers at Versailles peace conference, so to talk about the injustice of the Allies not imposing a Soviet Minorities Treaty is rather ahistorical. Second, there was no such ethnicity as Czechoslovak. Czechoslovak refers to the nationality; in the interwar period there were ethnic Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, Ukrainians, Germans and Poles who traveled on Czechoslovak passports. I presume that was meant by the “Czechoslovak” minority in the Soviet Union are ethnic Czech and Slovak populations. To the best of my knowledge, the vast majority of the ethnic Czech and Slovak populations lived in Czechoslovakia, not the Soviet Union during the interwar period. Third, it true that Germany did not treat its Polish minority particularly well during the interwar period (to say nothing of the Soviet Union which regularly shot and deported members of its Polish minority as “Polish spies”), but to say that this justifies Beck’s rejection of the Minorities Treaty is to take a two wrongs make a right position. Forth, to claim that the Minorities Treaty forced Poland to respect the rights of the German minority is not quite right. The Minorities Treaty imposed that obligation; if any of the minorities felt that Poland was not living up to that obligation, they could complain to the League of Nations's Human Rights Committee. The Committee could hear the case and then rule in favor of the minority group making the complaint or the Polish government. However, the Human Rights Committee had no means of enforcing its rulings. Right up to 1934, various minority groups representing the Ukrainian, Byelorussian, German, Lithuanian, and Jewish minorities did go to Geneva to complain about what they claimed were violations of the Minorities Right. Often the Human Rights Committee did rule in their favor and just as often the Polish government ignored the rulings. As far as I see, it was in large part Beck’s annoyance with these rulings against Poland that motivated his decision to denounce the Minorities Treaty. Third, it is true that after 1926 when Germany joined the League, that the German government did back various ethnic German groups in Poland at the meetings of the Humans Right Committee and it is also true that during Gustav Stresemann's time as Foreign Minister, there was a ulterior motive to these cases; namely to persuade the world that Poland was persecuting its German minority as a way of creating international pressure to force Poland to return the Polish Corridor to Germany. But given that Colonel Beck during his time as Foreign Minister regularly made the status of Polish minorities in Lithuania and Czechoslovakia his business and again he had a ulterior motive at least in regards to Czechoslovakia; namely as way of getting international pressure on Prague to hand over the disputed Teschen/Cieszyn region to Poland. Thus to denounce the Germans for doing the same thing that Colonel Beck was doing seems taking a somewhat POV position. To be fair to Colonel Beck, I don’t think he saw anything as being particularly hypocritical in complaining about Germany championing the cause of the German minority in Poland while he at the same time championed the cause of Polish minorities in Lithuania and Czechoslovakia, but just because he took that view does not necessarily mean his POV should be justified in the article.A.S. Brown 05:40, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

  • There is a good image of Beck here, but I have no idea of its copyright status.
  • Was his name pronounced Bekk or Betsk? Adam 08:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
It is [bek], just as in English. I'll add an ogg file in a matter of minutes. Halibutt 12:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beck's status

I think a some weight could be given to Alan Taylor's ascerbic opinion of Beck. On the strength of the present article it is impossible to reach any other conclusion than that Beck was an unpleasant airhead. Taylor goes further and suggests; "Between two flicks of the ash off his cigarette... the illusory great Poland signed her death warrant." Beck's insane project for MittellEurope, and his refusal to support Czechoslovakia because of Tesin went a long way towards setting the stage for WW2. Maybe his refusal, not to compromise, but even to negotiate over Danzig (Gdansk) actually fired the first shot? At any rate, the guy's commitment was to realpolitik, as the previous entrant points out, not idealism. He just played it unbelievably badly. Regards, DylanThomas 11:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC).

Beck wasn't liked by western diplomats, because he wanted to pursue his own independent policy. I you

would knew POlish, I would recommend you few books on the topic. During the interwar period, most western politicians expected Poland to be obedient client of western Powers and they were enraged by any sign of independence in thinking. Also remember, that Poland offered Czechoslovakia military alliancein 1933, which was refused by Czechs, and it offered French a chance of preventive war against Hitler, which was refused by French.

Also it's false that he refused to negotiate over Danzig. He was perfectly willing to negotiate - he wasn't ready to listen to ultimatums dictated by Germany. Taylor is so pro-German that's even not funny. Szopen (talk) 09:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 The Franco-Polish Alliance of 1938? I am sorry but Britain was the only player in the Real World. A load
of biplanes against ME109s is not a preventative war- it is preventative suicide. The

Czechs refused an alliance that meant the loss of their Ruhr for exactly that reason; and negotiation, by simple definition, involves talking. Beck was too obstinate or stupid or both to talk. Taylor was not pro German, he was possibly the only one on the Labour side to consistently support Churchill; He just happened to think the Poles were led by idiots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DylanThomas (talk • contribs) 17:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Beck played a decisive role in triggering WWII?"

"Beck played a decisive role in the evolution of the rapidly deteriorating political situation in Europe during the months preceding the start of the Second World War, through his refusal of Germany's proposal concerning the Free City of Danzig…"

This is an appalling statement! It reflects and repeats exactly the views of Neville Chamberlain and the British establishment that it would be better if Poland had allowed itself being served on a plate to Germany ("peace in our time"). How ignorant about historical realities one must be to profess that Germany would have been satisfied with moderate concessions from the Polish side? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.212.171.26 (talk) 10:35, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Read Joachim Fest's 'Hitler' and you'll understand. -- Ishikawa Minoru (talk) 21:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)