Why and how were east Brandenburg, Pomerania and Silesia taken away from Germany after WW2?
score:19
Post-World War II Poland was "designed" by the British foreign office, presented by Churchill, and ratified by Roosevelt and Stalin at the Tehran Conference in 1943, as noted in another answer.
After World War I, Britain had planned on the so-called Curzon line for the eastern boundary of Poland (based on the ethnic divisions) but the country crossed that boundary in 1919-20 and seized chunks of Belarus and the Ukraine east of that line from the Soviet Union. The 1939 German-Soviet partition line actually coincided almost exactly with the Curzon line, with minor differences. Hence, it was easy for Britain and the Soviet Union to agree on the final eastern boundary of Poland.
In compensation, Churchill's plan was to restore to Poland land that had been "German" for two or three centuries, but had been Polish earlier in the Middle Ages. These included Silesia and Pomerania. As a practical matter, the new western border was set on the Oder and Neisse rivers, meaning that some small pieces of German (East) Brandenburg east of the line went to Poland, and some small pieces of former Polish Pomerania went to Germany.
Silesia had originally been Polish, was inherited by the heir to the Bohemian crown, and ultimately by Austria, when the Bohemian royal line died out. It was captured by Germany (Brandenburg-Prussia actually), in the War of the Austrian Succession in 1740, which is why it became "German." All this over a period of several centuries.
Pomerania (Polish for on the sea) was originally held by Polish dukes. When they started accruing land west of the Oder in the 12th century, this portion of Pomerania was held as a fiefdom under the Holy Roman Emperor. Eventually, the German influence won out, and all of Pomerania was under the Holy Roman Empire, or one its Electors, that of Brandenburg. During the Middle Ages, there was a certain amount of back-and-forth, but the end result was increasing German settlement and influence on Pomerania, particularly west of the Oder, less so under the east, while nominally under a Polish noble line, the Griffins. When they died out around 1650, Pomerania was divided between Sweden and Brandenburg-Prussia, with the latter eventually absorbing the Swedish portion over the next century or so.
All of the above as justification for the Allies doing what the wanted to do, transfer these lands from Germany (back) to Poland, and the Soviet Union taking back the pieces of Belarus and the Ukraine occupied by Poland.
Upvote:-5
Poland was simply ethnically cleansed by the Russians who force marched entire German families out of Silesia into east Germany.
Before there was any civil authority created in Silesia Polish Jews freed from incarceration created their own Freedom committees. For at least the first six months after Germany's capitulation these were the only real authority. These former Kz inmates took over whatever accommodations they wanted.
Upvote:1
Addition to the answers given so far:
Since the Potsdam treaty (and other agreements between the "Big 3") was not signed by Germany itself, it was not a "real" peace treaty by international law. In fact, it does not declare that the mentioned territories are to be annexed by Poland .. merely occupied until a final peace treaty is signed (with the intention to weaken Germany and create a buffer zone to the Soviet Union, as said in other answers). This probably eased the acceptance of the treaty by the western Allies.
But the issue got a lot more complicated by the fact that two independent German states were founded after the war, one an ally of Poland, and one an enemy. Both sides denied the other the authority to sign a final treaty, delaying this step until 1990, when a reunited Germany could finally close the case once and for all.
Of course, by that time, the territories had been mainly inhabited by Poles for decades (and many former German inhabitants had died), and it was entirely unrealistic that they would be given back. But up until that point, the former German inhabitants of said areas had a reason to claim that they were de jure still German (this point of view was officially supported by the Western German government until 1970). If the Allies had signed a peace treaty with some strawman German representatives straight away in the late fourties, the whole issue would have had much less publicity. But the start of the Cold War got in their way.
Upvote:16
You're right to say that Germany's loss of territory to Poland in 1945 was "harsh" judged by the principle that borders should be delineated according to ethnic and/or historical claims. No one then or since has tried to argue that the areas in question had been anything other than ethnically German for centuries
However Germany in 1945 was not any normal defeated power. It was allowed no voice in the settlement of its borders. Its utter defeat and devastation was of course one reason why it could not contest the settlement. For a long time after May 1945 there simply wasn't a state of Germany either practically or legally. This was one reason why the allied powers dismissed and arrested the Flensburg government (the government which continued to function - after a fashion - after Hitler's death). It emphasised that German statehood was now null and void.
Furthermore, German state or no German state, the victorious powers could justify transferring to Polish control large areas of formerly German territory:
1) Germany was perceived to need weakening so as to limit its capacity to once again renew itself after a defeat and wage aggressive war. In fact still harsher plans had been considered (e.g. the Morganthau plan).
2) The nazi policy of aggressive expansion and the crimes committed against Polish and Soviet civilians eliminated any squeamishness anyone might have had about expelling westwards large German populations.
3) In any case, as the other answer notes, a significant proportion of the local German population had already fled westwards even prior to fixing new borders
4) The idea of "shifting" borders west (the USSR expanding into Poland, Poland being compensated with parts of Germany), in order to create a sizeable safety buffer between the Russian heartland and Germany, was seen as reasonable in the light of Germany's two recent invasions of Russia (1914 and 1941).
You ask which treaties have defined Germany's loss of these territories. Wikipedia's German-Polish 1990 treaty article lists the key ones:
1945: Potsdam agreement
1950: Treaty of Zgorzelec between the DDR and Poland
1970: Treaty of Warsaw
1990: German-Polish Border Treaty
Upvote:17
Borders
Post-war Polish borders were agreed upon in Teheran (1943) and finalized in Yalta (1945) by the "Big 3".
The land was taken from Germany on the grounds of Germany having started the war, to weaken it so that it would never be able to do that again.
Population
The Poles did not do the ethnic cleansing of those lands singlehandedly - at first the Germans ran away themselves, spurred by Goebbels's wildly exaggerated reports of the Red Army's atrocities (the atrocities were real, but the reports were exaggerated; in fact, there are some indications that the Red Army behaved differently in the areas which were to be given to Poland and Russia than in the areas which were to remain German).
Also, don't forget that Poles were also resettled.
Conclusion
I think one has to look at this episode in context: a horrible war just ended and the leaders set to the task of resolving the tensions which led to the war. The major source of tensions was people of one nationality living on the territory controlled by another (e.g., Germans in Sudetenland). So, to prevent those issues from re-appearing, massive population exchanges were undertaken, to ensure countries' ethnic h*m*geneity.
While many people suffered in the process, it was still done nicer than the similar attempt by the Germans during the war, and it did ensure that a similar conflict is now highly unlikely.
More post
- 📝 Were US Navy WWII-era submarine crewmen allowed on deck?
- 📝 Was there a state in history where influence of sport fans on politics was greater than in medieval Byzantine Empire?
- 📝 How many electric light companies operated in New York in 1887?
- 📝 Identification of ship and seaplane type
- 📝 What kind of canoes were used in 19th century Yucatán?
- 📝 Physics of a heavy cavalry charge?
- 📝 Was the American Civil War the first to include multiple multi-day battles?
- 📝 Is there any resource to learn interiors of a house for particular classes in 17th Century in Bohemia?
- 📝 Was it impossible for the Germans to arrange a plane to East Asia for Subhas Bose?
- 📝 How did German unification affect existing sentences for criminal convicts?
- 📝 Why did the Indian National Congress fail to convince Indian minorities to support united India
- 📝 What did the people of the Middle Ages call their period?
- 📝 Maximum speed of communication prior to Trans-Atlantic Cable?
- 📝 Sources for archer vs other unit comparisons?
- 📝 Watergate, the burglars - why bring crisp cash with them to the break-in?
- 📝 What is meant by "state people" in this context? (Governments of new Balkan states post-WWI)
- 📝 Did King George III turn his back on John Adams and Thomas Jefferson?
- 📝 Were there any gunner aces of WW2?
- 📝 What evidence do we have that disabled people became shamans in pre-historic times?
- 📝 How do the kings and important figures in history get the titles?
- 📝 "Madam" in formal titles
- 📝 Did John Wesley pray because he had not been persecuted in three days?
- 📝 Who said "Lafayette we are here!"?
- 📝 Have Paralympics been the specific target of boycotts?
- 📝 What did cataphract units wear under the armour?
- 📝 When (and where) did public polling start taking place on topics other than elections?
- 📝 Who or what were the Nassadista?
- 📝 Does Little Hagia sophia still contain Greek mosaics under the plaster?
- 📝 How was law enforcement handled in large US cities before professional police?
- 📝 Is modern warfare inherently linked to sexual violence?
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 Why and how were east Brandenburg, Pomerania and Silesia taken away from Germany after WW2?
- 📝 Was the danger of Germany bombing the US East Coast taken seriously and were measures taken to address it?
- 📝 How and why was the boundary between West and East Berlin decided to be where it was?
- 📝 How and why did e.g. Chechnya differ in status from entities like Armenia?
- 📝 Were bookshops 'common' in the late 19th century, and how did they differ from modern ones?
- 📝 How were servants to the Kaiser of Imperial Germany treated and where may I find more information on them?
- 📝 How and why did Polish rule over the Ukraine "downwardly deviate" from Lithuanian rule?
- 📝 Why were gravediggers, actors and former gladiators (but not slaves) banned from the Colosseum?
- 📝 How were the Morisco refugees from Europe received in North Africa, given that they were foreigners and Christian?
- 📝 Millions of pictures and countless hours of video were taken during World War II. Why is it so hard to find archives online?
- 📝 Why were Muslims in Western Thrace and Christians in Constantinople excluded from the population exchange?
- 📝 Why did antique guns and swords from the Franco-Prussian War make part of the demilitarization program to which Germany was subjected?
- 📝 What universities existed in Dutch East Indies, and how available were they to the native population?
- 📝 What were the major imports and exports of Germany and France from 1850-1915?
- 📝 How many British prisoners of war were taken by the Wehrmacht and how many died?
- 📝 From how far away could an experienced and skilled archer hit a man?
- 📝 Why were Greek philosophy and sciences taken up by medieval Muslim civilizations, but not contemporary Western Europe?
- 📝 Why were Sri Lanka and Myanmar separated from India under the British Empire?
- 📝 Why and how were the Mongols able to invade Russia successfully?
- 📝 Why were the Istein and Schliengen enclaves transferred from Switzerland to Baden?
- 📝 Why did East Germany fail? And why did DDR need hard currency 1986-1989?
- 📝 How were Mercy Dogs of WWI and WWII trained to know which soldier is from their side and which one isn't?
- 📝 How and why did the progress of Army Group A differ from what the terrain in the Caucasus might suggest?
- 📝 Did people from the cities of Uruk, Ur and Sumer have knowledge/recollection of how old their cities were (say, recollection after 2000 BCE)?
- 📝 How do historians and linguists know how to pronounce the names from non-phonetic scripts?
- 📝 Why were old fortifications shaped like stars and not like circles?
- 📝 Why didn't France and the UK invade Germany in September 1939?
- 📝 Why Were Madagascar and New Zealand Discovered So Late?
- 📝 Why were Spain and Portugal neutral / not invaded in WWII?
- 📝 How did Italy and Germany get rubber in WWII?