The Second World War and the Political-System Status of European Monarchs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Pobrane z czasopisma Studia Iuridica Lublinensia http://studiaiuridica.umcs.pl Data: 03/10/2021 06:10:24 Articles Studia Iuridica Lublinensia vol. XXIX, 4, 2020 DOI: 10.17951/sil.2020.29.4.251-278 Maciej Rakowski University of Lodz, Poland ORCID: 0000-0001-7378-9311 [email protected] The Second World War and the Political-System Status of European Monarchs Druga wojna światowa a pozycja ustrojowa europejskich monarchów SUMMARY The Second World War brought significant political changes to European monarchies. Imme- diately after the war, six kingdoms ceased to exist and became republics. This concerned Eastern European countries in the Soviet sphere of influence, as well as Italy, where Victor Emmanuel III had to pay for years of cooperation with the fascist regime. Before the outbreak of the war, at least three European monarchies had considerable power, holding the most important prerogatives in their hands: this was the case in Romania, Bulgaria and Albania. Such a political model failed to survive the war, as after 1945 the kings and princes of the Old Continent only “reigned, but did not rule” (only Louis II, UMCSPrince of Monaco kept a stronger position until the end of the 1950s). It used to happen during the war that in countries with an established parliamentary system the monarch played a greater role than during the years of peace (the most prominent example being Wilhelmina, the Queen of the Netherlands). The article also presents other issues important to the royal authority – the functioning of monarchs in exile, the threat to their lives, the exercise of sover- eignty (usually only in a ceremonial capacity) over the armed forces, and abdications forced by the circumstances. Keywords: the Second World War; political changes; European monarchies; kingdoms; republics INTRODUCTION The Second World War is one of the most important events of the recent cen- turies. It was of particular importance for the European continent. It affected the demographics, economy, national borders, and political systems of the countries of the Old Continent. There were seventeen monarchies in Europe before the war, Pobrane z czasopisma Studia Iuridica Lublinensia http://studiaiuridica.umcs.pl Data: 03/10/2021 06:10:24 252 Maciej Rakowski although two of them (Andorra and Hungary) were deprived of rulers1. Fourteen of these monarchies took part in the war. Only one of these countries, the United Kingdom, has avoided occupation by foreign troops. It is apparent at first sight that the Second World War brought major changes to the political systems in European monarchies. The study is intended to present this impact and to identify the factors that were decisive for the progressive change in political systems. It is not easy to grasp them, the influence of many events was only indirect, and historians do not always agree on the facts and the relationships between them. It is, therefore, even more appropriate to attempt a synthetic comparison between the processes and phenomena taking place in various countries. For the purpose of this study, we approach World War a little more broadly than would be the result of a widely accepted time frame. Such an approach is necessary in order to include the Italian aggression against Albania and, above all, to address the effects of the war that emerged after the surrender of Germany (and even Japan). It should be kept in mind that it is not for every European country that the war began on 1 September 1939. Many countries had been affected by it yet before they became a party to the conflict. As the starting point, it is worthwhile to name the rulers in power during the war years, combined with the brief characteristics of their political position. We further pointed to external factors affecting the monarchs: forced exile and direct threat to their lives. In the following paragraphs, we discussed cases in which the position of the ruler has been strengthened or weakened, or there have been no significant changes in their authority. We further pointed to abdications (usually forced) and presented the circumstances of the liquidation of several monarchies of the Old Continent.UMCS EUROPEAN MONARCHS WHO RULED IN THE PERIOD 1939–1945 AND THEIR PRE-WAR POSITION IN POLITICAL SYSTEMS Pre-war European monarchies can be divided into two groups. The first one is made up of countries to the west and north of the continent, which, at least since the First World War, had parliamentary system. In these systems, the monarch no longer had any significant influence on the current politics and the composition of the government, which was a result of the balance of power in the parliament. 1 The study does not include Tomislav II, King of Croatia (Duke Aimone di Spoleto, a relative of Victor Emmanuel), who was only a German puppet ruler. See W. Felczak, T. Wasilewski, Historia Jugosławii, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk–Łódź 1985, p. 483; M. Tanty, Bałkany w XX wieku. Dzieje polityczne, Warszawa 2003, p. 238. Pobrane z czasopisma Studia Iuridica Lublinensia http://studiaiuridica.umcs.pl Data: 03/10/2021 06:10:24 The Second World War and the Political-System Status of European Monarchs 253 This was usually due to political practice, as the constitutions still did not provide for the political responsibility of ministers before the parliament2. The second group includes the countries of Eastern and Southern Europe (including Monaco), where the position of the ruler usually remained strong or very strong. We begin the presentation with the first group. George VI was born in 1895, and sat on the British throne on 14 December 1936 after the abdication of his brother, Edward VIII. For nearly a century the English monarchs had “reigned, but did not rule”, so his role basically boiled down to rep- resentational functions. George became the monarch of a country participating in the war as early as 3 September 1939, when the United Kingdom declared war on Germany3. However, when discussing the monarch’s attitude, one must not forget how enthusiastically he greeted Neville Chamberlain returning from the Munich conference, to whose policy he gave his full support4. From 1934, Belgium was ruled by Leopold III (born 1901) of the Coburg dynasty, who took the throne after the death of his father, Albert I. He reigned in a country where the parliamentary system was already established and the ruler had no significant influence on internal politics (although Leopold himself tried to strengthen the position of the ruler). Before the war broke out, he was a supporter (in particular at the government meeting of 14 October 1936) of sufficiently high spending on national defence in order to “dissuade each of the […] neighbours from using Belgian territory to attack another country”5. He was committed to defending peace: on 23 August 1939, on behalf of the countries of the so-called Oslo Group (formed by the Scandinavian and Benelux countries), he appealed to world public opinion to preserve peace and respect the rights of all nations. Five days later, together with the Dutch Queen Wilhelmina, he declared their readiness for so-called good officesUMCS towards the governments of Germany, Poland, France, Great Britain and Italy6. When the Second World War broke out, the Dutch ruler Wilhelmina was the longest reigning of European monarchs. She inherited the crown in 1890 after the death of her father, William III. She was only 10 years old at that time, so the 2 M. Rakowski, System parlamentarno-gabinetowy do I wojny światowej, Warszawa 2016, p. 402. 3 P. Howarth, George VI: A New Biography, London 1987, pp. 65–71; S. Bradford, The Reluc- tant King: The Life & Reign of George VI 1895–1952, New York 1989, pp. 153–204. As George VI was the head of state for the British Dominions, the war on Germany was also declared by Australia, New Zealand, India, the Union of South Africa and Canada. See P. Townsend, The Last Emperor: Decline and Fall of the British Empire, London 1975, pp. 103–116. 4 P. Howarth, op. cit., pp. 83–84; R. Rhodes James, A Spirit Undaunted: The Political Role of George VI, London 1998, pp. 143–149. 5 As cited in: J. Łaptos, Historia Belgii, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków 1995, p. 216. See also K. Biskupski, Ustrój polityczny Belgii. Studium o różnicach między ustrojem konstytucyjnym a rze- czywistością, Toruń 1964, pp. 40–54; M. Rakowski, op. cit., pp. 217–221. 6 J. Łaptos, Historia Belgii, p. 230. Pobrane z czasopisma Studia Iuridica Lublinensia http://studiaiuridica.umcs.pl Data: 03/10/2021 06:10:24 254 Maciej Rakowski regency of her mother, Queen Emma, was necessary. During the First World War, the Netherlands maintained its neutrality, but Wilhelmina became known as a rul- er with a strong commitment to military affairs and to ensuring the state’s ability to defend itself. Amendments to the constitution introduced in 1922 limited the monarch’s powers (among other things, by depriving the monarch of the right to declare war without the consent of the States General)7. Until 1890, Luxembourg was united with the Netherlands by a personal union. From 1919, the ruler of the Principality was Duchess Charlotte (born 1896). She took over the crown after the abdication of her sister, Maria Adelaide, who was made to resign by accusing her of being too friendly towards the Germans occupying the country during the First World War8. Norway, since 1905, i.e. gaining the independence, had been ruled by Haakon VII (born 1872) from the Danish royal family. He accepted the restrictions in royal authority resulting from the functioning of the parliamentary system and did not actively participate in the political life of the state9.