Suchergebnisse

After Germany introduced the unrestricted submarine warfare at the beginning of February 1917, the United States declared war on 6th April 1917 on Berlin and joined the First World War beside the Allied countries. In response to the declaration of war the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy broke off its diplomatic relations with Washington on the 9th April 1917. The martial law between the two states came into force on the 7th December 1917 with the US's declaration of war. The First World War ended with the victory of the Entente and the peace was dictated by the victors. US President Woodrow Wilson achieved that the victorious powers adopted the League of Nations Covenant in April 1919, which became part of the Paris peace treaties. The US domestic politics was divided over the League of Nations, and as a result of that the US Senate has not ratified neither Germany's nor Austria's and Hungary's peace treaties. The US concluded a separate peace treaty with the losing countries on the basis of the Knox-Porter-resolution. In the history of diplomacy the Knox-Porter-resolution became known as a peace resolution that abolished the state of war between the parties, but the United States has assured all the rights guaranteed by the ceasefire agreement and the peace treaty. The study deals with the preliminaries, the parliamentary debate, details of the ratification, and also describes the most important points of the peace treaty between the United States and Hungary signed on 29th August 1921.

The representative of the Hungarian peace delegation took over the final regulations of the peace conference that closed the I. World War, in the beginning of May 1920. The peace treaty dislocated Hungary and with the disannexed territories millions of Hungarians were forced to live in the neighbouring countries. The Hungarian government could react for this dramatic and significant event in two ways: on one hand accept and undersign, on the other side refuse its signatory. After a long debate, the government and the assembly –notwithstanding the public"s dismissal –were under the necessity of the pressure of the victorious powers, and made up their mind of signature. This study leads on this decisionmaking progress, on the strength of the elaboration and analysis of the reports of the government meetings in May 1920. The first part of the study shows debates in the meetings of the cabinet council and the political circumstances of the decision. The second part, in turn, shows the dramatic progress of the decisionmaking, as a result of which they pointed the representatives, whose task was the signature on the 4th June 1920 in the Castle of Grand Trianon. As a part of this, the study examines the personal decisions, the possible signatories, the ones who previously undertook the task. The study furnishes an answer for the controversial question, that why Dr. Ágost Benárd, welfare and labour minister and Alfréd Drasche-Lázár, extraordinary delegate were chosen by the government for the signature.

The peace treaty that was signed by the representatives of the Hungarian government at the Grand Trianon Palace in Versailles on the 4th June 1920, closed the hostilities between the warring parties, and with its 364 articles, it recorded the severe conditions of peace, striking on the defeated Hungary. The peace agreement has not yet become effective with the signing ceremony. The enactment, ratification and sanction of the signed treaty were just ahead. Since the peace treaty was among the international agreements that came in force only after the ratification – and the implementation could also be demanded after the act – the Hungarian party done all to ensure that the ratification take place as late as possible. They wanted to achieve their limited revisionist goals during this period. However, the victorious powers urged the prompt ratification. It was more than a year process from the beginning of the ratification till the peace agreement entered into force which period can be divided into two major clearly separable phases. The first phase lasted from the signing of the peace treaty on 4 June 1920 till 26 October 1920 with its submission to the National Assembly. The second phase includes parliamentary debates and the ratification itself lasting until 26 July 1921, the exchanging of the ratification documents. The size of the subject made it necessary to present the events of the two periods in two separate studies. Thus, the present study describes and analyzes the events of the first period. The essay gives full details of the ratification as an international norm, covering the codification position of Hungary and the Little Entente states and, relating to the victorious powers efforts. The document gives a detailed analyzes of the great powers's policy which finally forced the Hungarian government to submit the ratification of the Trianon Peace Treaty to the National Assembly.

This study describes the Habsburg officials and commission members appointed to conclude a peace treaty between the Habsburgs and Ottomans between 1627 and 1629 at Szőny (Hungary). Furthermore, by relying on a database of about 2,000 records drawn from diplomatic and administrative sources and utilizing a quantitative approach, it outlines the channels and focal points for communication between the Habsburg appointees, as well as the direction and intensity of the exchange of information. The analysis of the database leads to the conclusion that the Hungarian palatine, Miklós Esterházy had a major role in the negotiations and that the Imperial Court and War Council played an intermediary role between the palatine and the members of the treaty commission. Furthermore, it points out that the palatine maintained contact with the beylerbeyi of Buda, Murteza pasha, which may have had an impact on the negotiations at Szőny.

The Hungarian railway network with the latest and most advanced in the XIX–XX. at the turn of the century. The railway network plays a crucial role not only within the country's borders, but the whole of Europe. The nationalities wanted to create their own state in the Austro - Hungarian monarchy. The Entente validate their own political and economic interests of the Páruzsi peace talks, was used for the national aspirations. The world changes strengthened the political aspirations of the Entente. The strategic interests also justify their decisions. Soviet Russia and the European labor movement organization of great danger to the Entente countries. Politicians of the Entente countries have developed the boundaries of the Central European countries, on the basis of these two reasons. They split up the single railway network in small units. Austria wants now to standardize the components, according to their own interests. Hungary can not promote their own interests in the field of European rail services.

Following the 1948 Bucarest resolution of the COMINFORM, better known as Information Office (TI) the situation between Yugoslavia and the neighbouring peoples" democracies dramatically worsened. However secret data collection and network organisation between the opposing parties started much earlier. Tito was in an advantageous position concerning intelligence because in the framework of the Allied Control Commission he had a military mission working in Hungary. The representatives of the mission had fruitful relationship with important Hungarian political and military personalities. After the acceptance of the Soviet dictate mapping the foreign relationships, internal situation, industrial capacity, stocks of raw materials, and military preparedness of the country led by Tito the "main evil", the "dog of the imperialists" had an important place in the activities of the secret services of the peace camp.

On his two days campaign trip in the territory between the Danube and River Tisza, Count István Bethlen primarily emphasised the reconstitution of national unity, religious peace and reconciliation among social classes. This political campaign aimed at peacefully revising the Treaty of Trianon. And he thought it well: in order to achieve this goal, it was necessary to conceive political realism, that is, the economic, social and cultural reinforcement of die nation. For example, it was expedient for beginning the land reform, the dissemination of intensive forms of agricultural production and the industrialisation supplementing imports. For the intellectual basis to achieve these goals, Bethlen considered Christian liberalism the most appropriate. As a result of this campaign, the nominees of the United Party won 6 out of the 9 electoral districts. And among these 6 constituencies, 3 were eventually taken by the governing party by an intervention through the civil service. Bethlen and the leaders of the United Party often exploited the state apparatus and the civil service - in many cases illegally - to preserve power positions. Thus even the subsequent successes of the Bethlen consolidation cannot overshadow this fact.