Укладення та реалізація домовленостей між Австро-Угорщиною та УНР у Брест-Литовському 1918 р.: уроки дипломатичної боротьби
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2014
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Видавництво Львівської політехніки
Abstract
На основі архівних матеріалів та мемуарів здійнено спробу дослідити політичне значення на наслідки домовленостей між Автро-Угорщиною та УНР 1918 р. у рамках колективного Берестейського мирного договору, розкрити причини ліквідаці Таємного протоколу та зволікання Автро-Угорщини ратифікувати договір, висвітлии позицію української сторони стосовно спірних питань. On the basis of the archived materials and memoirs an attempt to investigate a political value on the consequences of agreements between Austria-Hungary and UNR in 1918 within the framework of the collective Treaty of Brest-Litovsk is carried out in the article, to expose reasons of liquidation of the Secret protocol and delay of Austria-Hungary to ratify an agreement, light up position of the Ukrainian side in relation to the vexed questions. The analysis of tactics of delegation of UNR on negotiations in Brest-Litovsk allows to assert that the young Ukrainian diplomats at first skillfully took advantage of foreign-policy and socio-economic difficulties of the Central Powers with the aim of providing of national interests. They succeeded to fasten in Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and Secret protocol the strategic requirements: confession of UNR by the countries of the Central Powers, transmission of UNR of part of the Province of Cholm and Podljaska, creation in the Cisleitania of the Ukrainian autonomy from the East Galicia and North Bukovina. However delegation of UNR it admits a few serious tactical miscalculations, that leveled the above-mentioned achievements afterwards. In particular, Ukrainians agreed to the conclusion of secret treaty and on the unrealistic volumes of supplying with bread in short spaces, and except it, allowed to delegation of Austria-Hungary to subordinate implementation of these agreements one from other. Reasons of miscalculations were excessive propensity of the Ukrainian diplomats to political hazardous activity, groundless maximalism in requirements and absence of diplomatic experience. Leaning on non-fulfillment by Ukraine of obligation about delivery to the Central Powers of bread by a volume in 1 million ton 31.07.1918 to, Austria-Hungary gave not only up realization of terms of Secret protocol but also from ratification of Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. And this fact put under a doubt completion of World War I at the East front, confession of UNR, as the independent state, and also existence of any state boundaries. After a general consent Germany and Austria-Hungary violated the terms of deposit storage of Secret protocol and his returning the Ukrainian side. Also the Empire resorted to the unprecedented in history of diplomacy step: on the consent of the ally of Germany liquidated the Ukrainian copy of Secret protocol from 8.02.1918, by such method to barrier itself from contingent claims of Ukrainian. Reason of consent of hetman on non-fulfillment it is needed to see Austria-Hungary of terms of protocol in strengthening of military-political dependence of Ukraine from the Central Powers, by absence in international practice of mechanism for realization of collusions. At these terms any public requirement of hetman to Austria-Hungary about fulfilling commitment in relation to creation of the Ukrainian province could not only cause international scandal and blowup and so shaky foreign-policy positions of the Ukrainian state, but also negatively to influence on of home policy.
Description
Keywords
Берестейський мирний договір, таємний протокол, Австро-Угорщина, УНР, дипломатична боротьба, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Secret protocol, Austria-Hungary, UNR, diplomatic fight
Citation
Уська У. Р. Укладення та реалізація домовленостей між Австро-Угорщиною та УНР у Брест-Литовському 1918 р.: уроки дипломатичної боротьби / У. Р. Уська // Вісник Національного університету "Львівська політехніка". – 2014. – № 784 : Держава та армія. – С. 120–127. – Бібліографія : 34 назви.