The Meaning of Boundaries. the Making of Romano-Hungarian Frontier After the First World War Giuseppe Motta*

Semestrale di Studi e Ricerche di Geografia DOI: 10.13133/1125-5218.16348 XXXI, 2, 2019, ISSN 1125-5218 pp. 131-148 The Meaning of Boundaries. The Making of Romano-Hungarian Frontier after the First World War Giuseppe Motta* Key words: Transylvania, boundary commissions, World War I 1. Introduction. The European Settlement after World War I The concepts of «boundary» and «boundary-making» include an activity of delimitation and demarcation that is neither the result of geography nor of historical processes and has instead a definite political aspect. Boundaries, considered as imaginary lines dividing two pieces of land from one another, do not always coincide with frontiers, but have to be observed through an interdisciplinary approach, as processes, symbols and social institutions (Oye Cukwurah, 1967; Tambassi, 2018). At the same time, the meaning of borders changes and becomes mobile. Even in a unified Europe, borders are a part of everyday life for more people than even before. Today as well as in the past, borders are both territorial markings of the ambit of State sovereignty or other rule, and an object and a result of continuing social processes as well as the cause of specific social processes (Boesen, 2017, pp. 1-3). Political boundaries are normally defined by way of diplomatic agreements, often following a phase of conflict, for example the Napoleonic Wars or the First World War. After World War I, in particular, the collapse of the multina- tional Empires gave way to a complex re-definition of the European boundaries, especially in Central-Eastern Europe, where many existing States were enlarged with new territories (Romania, Serbia, Greece), while others gained their independence according to the principle of national self-determination (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia). But the transformation was not simply a geopolitical one. As remarked by Isaiah Bowman, a profound change took place in the spiritual and mental attitudes of the people that composed this new world. There came into being a critical spirit of inquiry into causes, of chal- lenge to a world inherited from the past, of profound distrust of many * Roma, Università Sapienza, Italia. 131 Semestrale di Studi e Ricerche di Geografia XXXI, Fascicolo 2, luglio-dicembre 2019 existing institutions. The effects of the war were so far-reaching that it was indeed a new world in which men found themselves. In some countries the whole structure of social and political life was altered. People everywhere had to create or adopt new ideas and make new material arrangements. Men were moved to inquire so intensely about the causes of the war and about just modes of settlement that they went on to look deeply into the social, political, and economic systems from which war had sprung… It is not the position of the line alone, whether on this side or that of a mountain range or stream, that is important; it is a whole group of economic, racial, ethnic, and religious factors that relate themselves to boundary location (Bowman, 1928, 31). The treaties of Versailles, Saint Germain, Neuilly, Trianon and Sèvres were the result of a strange combination of American idealism and European prag- matism, of national self-determination, ethnicity, accomplished facts, distinc- tions between victorious and vanquished powers. The new status quo generat- ed a whole of different controversies and clashes in many contested regions, including some local conflicts that exacerbated the relationships among the States and the ethnic groups of Central-Eastern Europe1. In the difficult context of 1919-1920, the role of the army proved to be essential. Military representatives played an outstanding peace-keeping role, accurately informed the conference about the conditions of many problematic zones, and their presence assured stability in some regions that were danger- ously subjected to angry disputes between the new authorities and the local communities. Military commissions were engaged in the control of the military (the army, the navy and the aviation forces) in the vanquished countries, and were called to intervene in the concrete and detailed definition of the new frontiers, as happened after the Congress of Berlin (1878). The peace treaties provided only the general indications about the layout of the boundaries, which had to be further implemented in the following phase. The treaty of Trianon, for example, defined the frontier with Romania in art. 27, while article 29 was dedicated to the establishment of the Boundary Commission, whose composition was to be fixed by the Principal Allied and Associated Pow- ers and the interested States. Considering the traditional role that geographical analysis had always played within the military structure, and the consolidated cooperation that many geographical societies had established with the different armies, the allies thought convenient to entrust to military personnel also the activity of boundary delimitation. Military commissions, thus, continued the work that had begun during the conflict with the creation of special scientific consultive units, such as the American Peace Bureau Inquiry or the Comité d’études. The contribution of French geographers, in particular, has been extensively analysed by Taline Ter Minassian, Jacques Bariety, and Emmanuelle Boulineau: these authors focused attention on the work of the Comité d’études, and Ter 1 For example, the Polish-Ukrainian conflict in Eastern Galicia, the conflict between Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Hungary, the Russo-Polish War, the Polish occupation of Vilnius, the uprisings in Silesia, the Greco-Turkish war. 132 G. Motta The Meaning of Boundaries. The Making of Romano-Hungarian Frontier after the First World War Minassian, in particular on the new boundaries in the Balkans, which reflected the strategic and political conceptions of that context, while Boulineau fully described the work of the geographer Emmanuelle De Martonne in the case of Romanian boundaries. In this context, «territory met geography and geography intersected with the geopolitics of nations states, geographers limped along 1918-19 as frustrated border crossers and treaty arbiters in motion» (Seegel, 2018, p. 6). Except for the rich literature existing in Hungarian language, on the con- trary, the role of the boundary commissions has rarely been analysed, nor did the socio-economic consequences of the new settlement have been fully studied in order to understand the post-1919 political scenario, and the complex reality of many European regions. The findings of the boundary commissions in East-Central Europe seemed to be not very attractive, especially when com- pared to the attention that scholarship devoted to many other boundaries outside Europe, as in the case of the American-Mexican frontier, which has been exhaustively studied and debated in the «American Journal of Interna- tional Law»2. Similarly, the activities of the different boundary commissions in Africa and in South America have been investigated in many studies, for example by Ronald Bruce St. John, but also by geographers who were interested in areas that were still unknown and mysterious to the eyes of Western observers (Parodi, 2002; Bruce St. John, 1994; id., 1999). It is worth remind- ing, however, that many Eastern European regions were not less mysterious to the international public, for example under the ethnographic point of view, as it was correctly realized by the American president Woodrow Wilson, who created the well-known Peace Bureau Inquiry just to ascertain the ethnic conditions in this part of Europe. The experts of the Inquiry worked together with the analogous teams such as the Comité d’études of the French Foreign Affairs Ministry and benefit- ed from the expertise of multidisciplinary scholars such as Paul Vidal de la Blache, Emmanuelle de Martonne, Jovan Cvijić, Charles Seymour, Douglas Johnson, J.E. Pichon (Kitsikis, 1972; Foucher, 1984). The negotiators wished to give peace treaties a scientific approach and consequently history, geography and ethnography played an important role during the peace negotiations at Versailles (Dell’Agnese, 2016, p. 112). But at the same time, it was inevitable that particular political interests were destined to prevail: scientific findings, as mentioned before, were used and «re-adapted» by the various delegations struggling for the annexation of some regions that were considered as an in- tegral part of their historical, ethnic and cultural space. These contested regions engaged international diplomacy in long and complex negotiations, which were strongly conditioned by the political interests of the different delegations. From this perspective, the documents of the boundary commissions can represent a further source of study and research to overcome the «national» point of view prevailing in diplomatic documents and to prove the evident cleavage between the political decisions and the local conditions of many East-Central European regions. While the negotiations of 2 See for example Rebert, 2001. 133 Semestrale di Studi e Ricerche di Geografia XXXI, Fascicolo 2, luglio-dicembre 2019 the peace-conference were inevitably influenced by their political implications or by military strategies, the reports of the boundary commissions gave a first- hand account of the most troubled areas, and focused on the material conditions of the different zones, their social, economic and ethnic structure. As a consequence these documents indirectly emphasized the distance existing between the proclamation of the national self-determination principle in the treaties, and its implementation on the ground. Many regions of East-Central Europe such as Transylvania were far from representing solid blocs of national communities, each with their own well-defined identity, habits, traditions and language. From this perspective, the purpose of this article is not only to shed new light on a rather well-researched region, but it is also to take some further steps towards overcoming the persistent nationalist conceptualization of boundaries, analysing Transylvania beyond the simplistic perspective of Ro- mano-Hungarian controversies.

Load more