Best regards, Andrew Stewart - - - Subscribe to the Washington Babylon newsletter via https://washingtonbabylon.com/newsletter/
Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]> > Date: September 24, 2020 at 10:15:08 AM EDT > To: [email protected] > Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Friedman on Williamson, 'The British in > Interwar Germany: The Reluctant Occupiers, 1918-30' > Reply-To: [email protected] > > David G. Williamson. The British in Interwar Germany: The Reluctant > Occupiers, 1918-30. Second Edition. London Bloomsbury Academic, > 2017. Illustrations. 360 pp. $130.00 (cloth), ISBN > 978-1-4725-9582-9. > > Reviewed by Sara Friedman (University of California Berkeley) > Published on H-War (September, 2020) > Commissioned by Margaret Sankey > > David G. Williamson's second edition of _The British in Interwar > Germany: The Reluctant Occupiers, 1918-30_, first published in 1991, > is encyclopedic in scope. It presents an extraordinarily detailed > account of military, administrative, and diplomatic decisions on the > part of British occupiers, as well as the realities within which they > worked. The British, directing their operations first from Cologne > and then from Wiesbaden, were there to enforce the Treaty of > Versailles. As indicated by the subtitle "reluctant occupiers," > Williamson argues that they were pulled into continental politics > and, more pointedly, into a mediator role between France and Germany. > > Reluctance forms the springboard for Williamson's analysis. Britain's > territorial ambitions were global whereas France's were European. The > British were thus forced into an unwanted mediatory position, trying > to soften the harsh French line while enforcing the treaty. Their own > aim was to preserve the balance of power on the continent, fearing > looming Bolshevism in the East and hoping for a stable, peaceful > Germany. This made them more receptive to German attempts to revise > the Treaty of Versailles, as Germany could check both French and > Bolshevik ambitions. On the ground, Williamson argues, this resulted > in a disinterested benevolence on the part of British occupiers, > fostering relatively good relations between troops and civilians. > Although the British failed to keep the peace in the region with the > Ruhr crisis, the crisis proved to be a turning point. When the French > acceded, British goals of German economic recovery and territorial > integrity began to be realized. With the Dawes Plan and the Treaty of > Locarno, Germany's foreign relations slowly began to normalize, yet > enough concern remained about Germany's disarmament that British > troops remained stationed in the Rhineland, the last personnel > leaving in 1930. > > Williamson identifies five distinct phases of the British occupation: > an immediate, assumedly temporary occupation of the Cologne Zone, the > Treaty of Versailles's ratification and the beginnings of Britain's > mediator role, the Ruhr crisis, the Dawes Plan and Treaty of Locarno, > and a prolonged withdrawal. He handles progression through these > phases on a diplomatic level and from a British perspective. As a > result, the book does not explicitly engage with other literature on > the interwar period with a more continental focus. Such classics as > Detlev Peukert's _The Weimar Republic: The Crisis of Classical > Modernity_, published in English in 1992, Eugen Weber's _The Hollow > Years: France in the 1930s _(1994), or more recent scholarship, such > as Annemarie Sammartino's _The Impossible Border: Germany and the > East, 1914-1922 _(2010), might have proved useful interlocuters and > lend crucial German and French interwar perspectives. > > This case study nevertheless hints at larger issues. Williamson > addresses relevant comparisons--Inter-Allied Military Control > Commission policies in Germany outside the Cologne Zone, British > colonial policy in general, and the politics of occupation with an > eye to World War II. The way Germany is treated, certainly by the > military and diplomatic officials in question, but also to some > extent by the author himself, is as a sort of colony. Occupation is > inherently violent--the book acknowledges the occasional deadly > accident--but the overall impression is surprisingly positive. > British occupation troops were well tolerated by the populace because > the geopolitical stakes for Britain were low. Unlike in France's > case, there existed little motivation for revenge on political or > individual levels. > > Williamson's source base runs the gamut from local to geopolitical, > often through an administrative lens. This "history from above" > presents an almost hermetically sealed focus on the case study. It > refrains from speeding ahead to the interwar period's inevitable end > and abstains from foreshadowing, and this is valuable in itself. In > the introduction, Williamson states his intent to integrate social > history into the diplomatic narrative; this perspective is gestured > at through some subaltern sources but not fully included on its own > terms. It would have benefited from dialogue with such scholarship as > Nicoletta Gullace's_ The Blood of Our Sons_, Martin Pugh's _Women and > the Women's Movement in Britain, 1914-1999_, and especially Julia > Roos's article "Women's Rights, Nationalist Anxiety, and the 'Moral' > Agenda in the Early Weimar Republic."[1] However, it is difficult to > criticize the book for limitations so clearly acknowledged by its > stated scope. > > _The British in Interwar Germany _would serve well as a reference for > scholars of the interwar period and of occupations in general. > Williamson gives a blow-by-blow account of the British occupation > with a wealth of information; the sober, calculating, pragmatic > attitude the author ascribes to the occupiers seems to inform his own > writing, which prizes attention to detail over interpretation. > > Note > > [1]. Nicoletta Gullace,_ The Blood of Our Sons: Men, Women and the > Renegotiation of British Citizenship during the Great War_ (New York: > Palgrave Macmillan, 2002); Martin Pugh, _Women and the Women's > Movement in Britain, 1914-1999_ (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000); > and Julia Roos, "Women's Rights, Nationalist Anxiety, and the 'Moral' > Agenda in the Early Weimar Republic: Revisiting the 'Black Horror' > Campaign against France's African Occupation Troops," _Central > European History_ 42, no. 3 (September 2009): 473-508. > > Citation: Sara Friedman. Review of Williamson, David G., _The British > in Interwar Germany: The Reluctant Occupiers, 1918-30_. H-War, H-Net > Reviews. September, 2020. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55186 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1897): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/1897 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/77058197/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
