Romanian-Hungarian War 1918-1919

I come from a "multinational family" therefore I was preoccupied since young in see the history in a wider framework than a national one! Knowing the way hungarians think and act (and reading a lot about their and also my history) I say that no such danger (a bolshevik country) as we are try to be convinced, was in reality! Only despair and no viable alternative led to the establishment of a bolshevik regime at Budapest, regime that however follow the hungarian national interest and the threatened integrity of the country! I can not imagine this regime evolving similar to the Lenin one in Russia, even if they ally with the Russians to achieve his objectives! Maybe I'm wrong but I see the situation that way!

This post has been edited by aidan zea on November 19, 2012 06:37 pm

Well, Hungary WAS a communist regime after WWII, wasn't it?
Talking about 1919-1920, the real purpose of Lenin was Germany, not even Russia! If Hungary and Poland and Romania needed to be passed through (by the communist steamroller that they styled to be their Red Army), too bad for them! I think it goes without saying that the communist rulers (until Gorbachev) never cared for a second what their people needed or wanted, in relation to the "needs of building the Communist Society"

Well, Hungary WAS a communist regime after WWII, wasn't it?
Talking about 1919-1920, the real purpose of Lenin was Germany, not even Russia! If Hungary and Poland and Romania needed to be passed through (by the communist steamroller that they styled to be their Red Army), too bad for them! I think it goes without saying that the communist rulers (until Gorbachev) never cared for a second what their people needed or wanted, in relation to the "needs of building the Communist Society"

So, "Contras" is right. Because Lenin was not allowed to join the millions of pro-Communism fans from Germany, Poland and Romania were the ones who kept Communism at bay and SAVED Western Europe.

Of course, they fought for their own survival. But they, on these times, were the last strongholds for the survival of western world, the same fight in middle ages who preserved Western civilization.

Isn't it an over dramatic characterization of the situation? The "last stronghold" myth was popular in Ceausescu's historiography, but I like to believe we moved on in quality since those times.

Victor, starting with the end of 1918, Poland, Romania and Finland fought for their survival. It is a fact. And maybe "Contras" did not choose the right words to express his view, but his opinion sounds valid to me.

I don't think so. If you read the memories of Mannerheim or the Polish point of view, they say the same. Finland, Poland and Romania were at those times the last strongholds against bolshevism. They prevailed and no one could say what would happen if one of those falls. No one could imagine how would look the map of Europe if one of those falls.

We have to remember that in the few years following World War One the working class from France and Great Britain was eager to embrace Communism. By 1940, when the next historic turmoil appeared, people in France were divided about it, while the working class in Great Britain was not enthusiastic about it.

This post has been edited by Florin on November 20, 2012 01:44 am

You're absolutely correct. Most soldiers, particularly officers, enrolled in the Red Army only to defend their disintegrating country by the means of arms after the impotent rule of the leftist Karolyi regime. Of course, there were a hardcore of Bolsheviks (some of them not Hungarian ethnics). The poor workers and peasants were lured into believing in the "new world". But they soon woke up to reality.

Fact is, as I highlighted earlier, the the Rumanian Army would have invaded Hungary anyway, regardless of the colour and orientation of the actual government at Budapest. Same situation was with the Czechoslovaks and Serbs, too. It's only a well circulated fashionable, but false statement that the Rumanian Army was fighting in Hungary against Communism.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on November 20, 2012 07:03 am

Let's leave the medieval myths for another topic, which you can start in the appropriate forum section if you wish.

The dream of world revolution in 1918-1919 was just that: a dream. Bolshevik Russia was in chaos and lacked the organization and the means to export the revolution to the Great Powers (read for examples the memoirs of cdor. Virgiliu Dragalina, to see the poor status of the Bolshevik forces he engaged on the Dnestr several times in 1918-1919). In order to "change history" or "change Western civilization", Bolshevik Russia needed much, much more than it actually had.

Germany was also in relative chaos, but the Communist do not seem to have had any real chances to take over. The supposed Soviet intervention could not have taken place as at the time the Soviet Bavarian Republic was liquidated by the Freikorps, the Red Army was struggling against the White Armies, the Polish Army and the Western Powers' intervention. In fact by the time the Red Army had struck back into Poland in 1920, the Weimar Republic was already in place.

Communism in Hungary was just a measure of desperation as it has already been pointed out and never really had any chances of success with so many enemies around, some of which, like Romania, Serbia or Czechoslovakia did not really care what color the power in Budapest had in order to consider Hungary an enemy.

The point is that we should try to look at things with a more objective approach and not succumb to the refurbished myth of "we saved Western civilization". There is no shame in not saving Western civilization, as it was pretty much able to take care of itself throughout the years

Well, i may do that later, i just replied to some other myths (belonging to the other extreme, of the so called "demythization") already posted in this topic by other forumists

I agree that the actions of Romania was first for Romania and in Romanian interests. The blocking of spread of Bolshevism is a secondary "product" of this actions and obviously was not the main reason.
I agree as well that many Hungarians probably didnt liked too much the Bolshevism and that was accepted more like a hope for reviving their power and gaining an ally, the only possible back then, the Soviets.

However, lets not forget that before the involvement of Romanian Army the Hungarian Army already defeated the Czechoslovakia one and split and transformed Slovakia in a Soviet Republic too. Czecks was quite sympathetic to Bolsheviks anyway and without Romania they would be too weak to put any fight there.

Such geo-political situation will link Soviets (USSR) with Bolshevik Hungary and Slovakia and open a better road to Bavaria to receive help (weapons and troops) from Soviets or even Hungarians.

More then that, both Austria and Czeckia was helped to come back to a normal situation (in Viena) or to survive and keep their independece (Prague and Czeckia) by Romanian troops under Iuliu Maniu command, who formed an army of up to 160,000 soldiers in former AH teritories

http://www.romanialibera.ro/exclusiv-rl/do...ism-171304.html

Without this actions from late 1918, Austria would be in chaos and Czeckoslovakia under Austrian-Hungarian control and at least partially bolshevized. This will lead to a much greater help for Soviet Republic of Bavaria in 1919 and who knows was chaotic situation in Austria as well.

It was a chain of events and actions, starting with Iuliu Maniu and Romanian troops of former AH empire puting order in Viena and Prague and helping to preserve the Czekoslovakia independence in late 1918. This and later fights of Romanian Army who eliminated Bolshevik Hungary in 1919 and Poland and Finland (as well as "white Russians" and others Antanta troops including again Romanian ones) who blocked the Soviet Bolshevik in eastern Europe so basically cutting any significant help for German Bolsheviks, Germany being the very important target of Lenin.

This post has been edited by udar on November 21, 2012 11:37 am

The medieval spin off discussion was moved to another section of the forum. Please continue it there.
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=6630

Yes, but in those memories, cdor Virgiliu Dragalina (son of general Dragalina) says about the contamination of French soldiers with Bolsheviks ideas. Do not forget this when we discuss about those times!

Of what is written here: Gottfried Barna -A Székely hadosztály, 1918-1919 (2007) is not actually so! There it is written:
On December 16, Kratochvil was informed that if the demarcation line is crossed by the enemy, his troops are free to take action, if necessary using weapons. Two days later (December 18, 1918) came the command to the contrary, to avoid bloodshed, because the government banned the recruitment of new troops, and the use of arms. The withdrawal beyond the new line of demarcation was analyzed by Fényes László (Government Commissioner for the National Guard), Apáthy István, Colonel Kratochvil Károly and the 38th Division (Székely Division) senior officers, which assessed the situation and concluded that the troops should be withdrawn behind the occupation line leaving behind the major cities (Kolozsvár, Dés). In their opinion, the number of troops, the heavy arms and the disciplinary situation did not allow for effective resistance. Colonel Kratochvil gave orders to the 21. Székely Regiment to march to Oradea from his position at Cluj-west rail line, to the 32. Dési Regiment to retreat to Zsibó (Jibou), and to the Székely Cavalry Squadron to move to Tasnád. The other divisional battalions (artillery, sapper, supply a.o.) moved from the Cluj citadel to Nagyvárad (Oradea) and Szatmárnémeti (Satu Mare).

Was it the government deciding that by its own will? Or was it the peace treaty (Diktat, if one feels warmer...) that followed a lost war?

M, the Trianon peace treaty was not signed until June 1920 and it took effect only a year later.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on January 20, 2013 07:28 am

MMM, to answer you, of course not! Allied pressures were enormous on the Hungarian Government in terms of maintaining a minimum number of active troops, totally insufficient even for covering the demarcation lines in the south (in front of Allied Armies) and north (with Slovakia), being impossible to ensure the necessary supply for the 38. Division (Székely Division) the only major fighting force present in Transylvania those days!