This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from German–Polish customs war appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 26 November 2011 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
The sentence "when Poland lost its unilateral status as the most favoured nation in trade with Germany" is at best confusing. It makes it sound like Poland was the only country which enjoyed MFN - but the whole point of MFN is that it applies to several countries at once.
Looking below I see that what is probably meant is that the MFN status wasn't reciprocal. In other words, by the Versailles treaty Germany was required not to impose tariffs/trade barriers on Polish goods which were higher than the most favored nation Germany traded with. So if Germany had 5% tariffs on, say, French goods, it could not impose tariffs higher than 5% on Polish goods. But the Entente countries - not just Poland - where allowed to impose higher tariffs on Germany than they did on each other. What happened here is that German decided to single out Polish good for high tariffs in violation/expiration of the MFN clause of the V-treaty. AFAIR they did not raise tariffs, or drop the MFN towards other Entente powers. Volunteer Marek 20:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok, just more generally I think this article could use a more quality source than an article from Wyborcza. I'll try to find some journal articles and dig out a book or too. Volunteer Marek 20:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
This appears to be a primary source. Volunteer Marek 08:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
[1] Please don't remove the tag without clarification. Size of German exports to Poland is only part of the costs of the trade war to Germany. Having to pay higher prices and costs by producing domestically what could be imported cheaply is another. Frankly, a lot of statements cited to this source seem a bit sketchy. Volunteer Marek 08:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The article also lacks any "conclusion" or any description of what happened after 1925/6. Which was basically that the political situation in Poland stabilized, Polish trade diverted to Scandinavia and Great Britain and the restrictions more or less ceased to matter, while Germany continued to insist on political demands as pre-conditions for political agreement. The impact of the trade war on Poland is probably somewhat exaggerated (at least that's the sense I'm getting from the article) - the political situation in Poland was unstable (as it was in Weimar Germany) but that didn't start with the customs war. Germany tried to further destablize Polish politics through the customs war, but after Pilsduski's coup it really didn't have much of an effect.
Interestingly many economic history books/articles on both interwar Germany and Poland only mention this war in passing, mostly as an example of how trade relations deteriorated in the interwar period globally, between all countries. Volunteer Marek 21:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
The article also presented the info as the issues were connected to Germans without informing that it concerned a specific group that rejected Polish citizenship but took German one and were expected to leave Poland for Germany per agreements(so called Optaten). I read Lippelt and he makes that distinction very clearly. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 07:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Why is it dubious and needs discussion? Look here: "Dominujące w mieście górnictwo węgla kamiennego po wojnie celnej z Niemcami w latach dwudziestych oraz upływie ważności umowy o bezcłowym eksporcie węgla górnośląskiego do Niemiec przeżywało okres stagnacji. Kopalnia węgla „Nowa Przemsza”, w dzisiejszej dzielnicy Brzezinka, uległa likwidacji." (source: http://www.myslowice.pl/gospodarka.php?t=kier_roz_02) or here: "Dodatkowo sytuację kopalni pogorszyła wojna celna 1925 roku pomiędzy Polska a Niemcami, która spowodowała odcięcie kopalń dąbrowskich od odbiorców węgla w niemieckiej części Górnego Śląska. Kopalnia "REDEN" w 1925 roku pracuje tylko 3 dni w tygodniu. Ilość dni roboczych utrzymywał się na poziomie 3-5 dni aż do zamknięcia kopalni w 1934 r." (source: http://dabrowa.pl/dg_zaklad-kopalnia_reden.htm). Tymek ( talk) 19:35, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I have doubts if this chapter is necessary. Or perhaps Molobo should stop adding information about German settlers and Germanization to all articles he encounters. This is not related to the topic in any way. Tymek ( talk) 19:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
The information was added by user HerkusMonte not me(although he made false impression that measures were directed against all Germans, rather than just optants), the source provided(Lippelt) and others make connections between the war and issue of optaten.-- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 19:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
And sadly this edit here demonstrates HK has removed information that Polish optants were treated in the same way as German ones [2]. I am very disappointed in this behaviour, first we had misleading information suggesting that all Germans were treated in such way, now we have removal of information that shows Germans weren't singled out. This unfortunately suggests attempts to portray the events in non-neutral way. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 11:50, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
[3] - where do you see this? He says it was partly reaction to German claims and partly response to German nationalism and anti-Polish prejudice ("antipolnischen Vorurteil").
Did you just change "anti-Polish nationalism" to "anti-German nationalism", completely changing the meaning? Volunteer Marek 07:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Just to make the meaning of that passage from Lippelt clear: HerkusMonte's rendering is correct; he is clearly speaking (also) of Polish nationalism at that point. Here's a translation in context: "Under the perspective of German revisionism, the protection of the interests of the German minority in Poland took on the character of a policy for "strengthening the German ethnicity", and was bound to provoke Polish repressive measures against this minority. A speech by prime minister Sikorski of April 1923 is illustrative of this connection. He stated that the process of de-germanization must be pushed ahead through decisive steps on the issue of liquidations and through the expulsion of the optants, so that German nationalists and politicians should be taught the lesson that their view of the preliminary nature of the Polish western border was erroneous. It has to be said that this stance was not purely a reaction to German revisionism. It was also a continuation of the nationalism of the early days, which had been intent on excluding the German element, and this in turn was interconnected to anti-Polish sentiment on the other side." – Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
As mentioned above, this article strays off topic and some stuff should be cut. Here is some passages that I think should be removed so that the article can properly focus on the economic conflict rather than side issues (while at the same time making sure that the relevant parts are mentioned).
So remove: "In addition, the collapse of Austria-Hungary destroyed the 19th century economic ties of Galicia with Austria and Bohemia." - not directly pertinent.
"The Polish government sought to keep the granting of citizenship in tight limits, e.g. people who had left the area in the post-war turmoils were regarded "tacit Optants".[6] According to the Minorities Treaty (also called the "Little Versailles Treaty") signed by Poland, all former citizens of partitioning powers who rejected Polish citizenship had to leave the country by 10 January 1923. This concerned citizens of Russia, Hungary, Austria and Germany, though in the case of Germans opting for German citizenship, there was no precise date established for them to leave." - not directly pertinent.
"but refused to grant most favoured nation status to German goods" - based on an interpretation of a primary source. If a secondary source can be found to corroborate this interpretation, can be put back in.
"Mass unemployment followed, inflation returned, and Warsaw had to print extra quantities of money, which resulted in a budget deficit. In November 1925, the government of Władysław Grabski collapsed." - unsourced and inaccurate. It completely flips the causality. Warsaw ran a budget deficit, it printed money ro cover it then inflation returned. The budget deficit was the cause of inflation not a result (and it certainly wasn't a result of printing money - that makes no sense what so ever). But like I said before, inflation, unemployment, all those things were there before the customs war started. The customs war did not cause any of this. The only thing that happened is that German politicians thought they could use the customs war to FURTHER destabilize the Polish economy - which didn't happen.
Volunteer Marek 23:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on German–Polish customs war. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:07, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from German–Polish customs war appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 26 November 2011 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
The sentence "when Poland lost its unilateral status as the most favoured nation in trade with Germany" is at best confusing. It makes it sound like Poland was the only country which enjoyed MFN - but the whole point of MFN is that it applies to several countries at once.
Looking below I see that what is probably meant is that the MFN status wasn't reciprocal. In other words, by the Versailles treaty Germany was required not to impose tariffs/trade barriers on Polish goods which were higher than the most favored nation Germany traded with. So if Germany had 5% tariffs on, say, French goods, it could not impose tariffs higher than 5% on Polish goods. But the Entente countries - not just Poland - where allowed to impose higher tariffs on Germany than they did on each other. What happened here is that German decided to single out Polish good for high tariffs in violation/expiration of the MFN clause of the V-treaty. AFAIR they did not raise tariffs, or drop the MFN towards other Entente powers. Volunteer Marek 20:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok, just more generally I think this article could use a more quality source than an article from Wyborcza. I'll try to find some journal articles and dig out a book or too. Volunteer Marek 20:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
This appears to be a primary source. Volunteer Marek 08:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
[1] Please don't remove the tag without clarification. Size of German exports to Poland is only part of the costs of the trade war to Germany. Having to pay higher prices and costs by producing domestically what could be imported cheaply is another. Frankly, a lot of statements cited to this source seem a bit sketchy. Volunteer Marek 08:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The article also lacks any "conclusion" or any description of what happened after 1925/6. Which was basically that the political situation in Poland stabilized, Polish trade diverted to Scandinavia and Great Britain and the restrictions more or less ceased to matter, while Germany continued to insist on political demands as pre-conditions for political agreement. The impact of the trade war on Poland is probably somewhat exaggerated (at least that's the sense I'm getting from the article) - the political situation in Poland was unstable (as it was in Weimar Germany) but that didn't start with the customs war. Germany tried to further destablize Polish politics through the customs war, but after Pilsduski's coup it really didn't have much of an effect.
Interestingly many economic history books/articles on both interwar Germany and Poland only mention this war in passing, mostly as an example of how trade relations deteriorated in the interwar period globally, between all countries. Volunteer Marek 21:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
The article also presented the info as the issues were connected to Germans without informing that it concerned a specific group that rejected Polish citizenship but took German one and were expected to leave Poland for Germany per agreements(so called Optaten). I read Lippelt and he makes that distinction very clearly. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 07:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Why is it dubious and needs discussion? Look here: "Dominujące w mieście górnictwo węgla kamiennego po wojnie celnej z Niemcami w latach dwudziestych oraz upływie ważności umowy o bezcłowym eksporcie węgla górnośląskiego do Niemiec przeżywało okres stagnacji. Kopalnia węgla „Nowa Przemsza”, w dzisiejszej dzielnicy Brzezinka, uległa likwidacji." (source: http://www.myslowice.pl/gospodarka.php?t=kier_roz_02) or here: "Dodatkowo sytuację kopalni pogorszyła wojna celna 1925 roku pomiędzy Polska a Niemcami, która spowodowała odcięcie kopalń dąbrowskich od odbiorców węgla w niemieckiej części Górnego Śląska. Kopalnia "REDEN" w 1925 roku pracuje tylko 3 dni w tygodniu. Ilość dni roboczych utrzymywał się na poziomie 3-5 dni aż do zamknięcia kopalni w 1934 r." (source: http://dabrowa.pl/dg_zaklad-kopalnia_reden.htm). Tymek ( talk) 19:35, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I have doubts if this chapter is necessary. Or perhaps Molobo should stop adding information about German settlers and Germanization to all articles he encounters. This is not related to the topic in any way. Tymek ( talk) 19:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
The information was added by user HerkusMonte not me(although he made false impression that measures were directed against all Germans, rather than just optants), the source provided(Lippelt) and others make connections between the war and issue of optaten.-- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 19:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
And sadly this edit here demonstrates HK has removed information that Polish optants were treated in the same way as German ones [2]. I am very disappointed in this behaviour, first we had misleading information suggesting that all Germans were treated in such way, now we have removal of information that shows Germans weren't singled out. This unfortunately suggests attempts to portray the events in non-neutral way. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 11:50, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
[3] - where do you see this? He says it was partly reaction to German claims and partly response to German nationalism and anti-Polish prejudice ("antipolnischen Vorurteil").
Did you just change "anti-Polish nationalism" to "anti-German nationalism", completely changing the meaning? Volunteer Marek 07:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Just to make the meaning of that passage from Lippelt clear: HerkusMonte's rendering is correct; he is clearly speaking (also) of Polish nationalism at that point. Here's a translation in context: "Under the perspective of German revisionism, the protection of the interests of the German minority in Poland took on the character of a policy for "strengthening the German ethnicity", and was bound to provoke Polish repressive measures against this minority. A speech by prime minister Sikorski of April 1923 is illustrative of this connection. He stated that the process of de-germanization must be pushed ahead through decisive steps on the issue of liquidations and through the expulsion of the optants, so that German nationalists and politicians should be taught the lesson that their view of the preliminary nature of the Polish western border was erroneous. It has to be said that this stance was not purely a reaction to German revisionism. It was also a continuation of the nationalism of the early days, which had been intent on excluding the German element, and this in turn was interconnected to anti-Polish sentiment on the other side." – Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
As mentioned above, this article strays off topic and some stuff should be cut. Here is some passages that I think should be removed so that the article can properly focus on the economic conflict rather than side issues (while at the same time making sure that the relevant parts are mentioned).
So remove: "In addition, the collapse of Austria-Hungary destroyed the 19th century economic ties of Galicia with Austria and Bohemia." - not directly pertinent.
"The Polish government sought to keep the granting of citizenship in tight limits, e.g. people who had left the area in the post-war turmoils were regarded "tacit Optants".[6] According to the Minorities Treaty (also called the "Little Versailles Treaty") signed by Poland, all former citizens of partitioning powers who rejected Polish citizenship had to leave the country by 10 January 1923. This concerned citizens of Russia, Hungary, Austria and Germany, though in the case of Germans opting for German citizenship, there was no precise date established for them to leave." - not directly pertinent.
"but refused to grant most favoured nation status to German goods" - based on an interpretation of a primary source. If a secondary source can be found to corroborate this interpretation, can be put back in.
"Mass unemployment followed, inflation returned, and Warsaw had to print extra quantities of money, which resulted in a budget deficit. In November 1925, the government of Władysław Grabski collapsed." - unsourced and inaccurate. It completely flips the causality. Warsaw ran a budget deficit, it printed money ro cover it then inflation returned. The budget deficit was the cause of inflation not a result (and it certainly wasn't a result of printing money - that makes no sense what so ever). But like I said before, inflation, unemployment, all those things were there before the customs war started. The customs war did not cause any of this. The only thing that happened is that German politicians thought they could use the customs war to FURTHER destabilize the Polish economy - which didn't happen.
Volunteer Marek 23:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on German–Polish customs war. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:07, 11 January 2017 (UTC)