Talk:Soviet annexation of Transcarpathia

Czecoslovakia

Hi @Azure94, [1]

Part of former Hungarian territories were reverted to Hungary between 1938 and 1941

Could you tell me how possible that you wrote Czecoslovakia lost lands after WW2 to Soviet Union when it was lost already in 1938-39? Morover the article is about the Soviet annexation of Transcarpathia = Soviet Union won, what is your problem with this sentence?

Transcarpathia was annexed by Hungary in 1939. Carpatho-Ukraine The region remained under Hungarian control until the end of World War II in Europe, the Soviet troops entered the region, it was occupied and annexed by the Soviet Union.

Southern Transcarpathia was annexed by the First Vienna Award, (southern Transcarpathia was legally recognized as part of Hungary (Signatories Hungary Czechoslovakia Germany Italy), Czechoslovakia cease to exist after the German occupation. It established a separate Slovak Republic (1939–1945) state and Transcarpathia was not part of it. Soviets occupied Transcarpathia in 1944-45 when Czechoslovakia did not exist at all, how can be Transcarpathia part of Czechoslovakia when it did not exist at at the moment when the Soviets occupied it from Hungarian troops? You can see on international maps, that region is part of Hungary, and the Soviets occupied from Hungary not from Czechoslovakia which did not exist at that time when Soviets entered there. Soviets refused the Czechoslovak claims on that area.

Part of former Hungarian territories were reverted to Hungary between 1938 and 1941

International contemporary maps, Transcarpathia is not part of Czechoslovakia: [4][5][6]

Please check out the infobox of these articles, the consistency between articles:

Carpatho-Ukraine: Preceded by Czechoslovakia / Succeeded by Hungary

Carpathian Ruthenia during World War II: Succeeded by Zakarpattia Oblast

Kingdom of Hungary (1920–1946): Succeeded by Soviet Union (only Transcarpathia can be that part)

OrionNimrod (talk) 15:52, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

"Czechoslovakia cease to exist after the German occupation."

Wrong, Czechoslovakia continued to exist in London, where Edvard Beneš negotiated the restoration of the state of Czechoslovakia with the Soviet Union, with which it had been allied since 1943, in Moscow. On May 8, 1944, Beneš and Stalin signed a treaty of alliance that guaranteed that the former territory of Czechoslovakia would be liberated by the Red Army and returned to Czechoslovak civilian control. In October 1944, Carpathian Ruthenia was occupied by the Red Army of the Soviet Union. A Czechoslovak delegation led by František Němec was sent to the area.

"how can be Transcarpathia part of Czechoslovakia when it did not exist at at the moment when the Soviets occupied it from Hungarian troops?"

By the simple fact that in November 26, 1944, a Soviet People's Committee in Mukachevo proclaimed withdrawal from Czechoslovakia and "unification with its great mother, Soviet Ukraine.". Notice that they did not say anything about Hungary.

You need to learn the difference between de jure and de facto. All those maps you posted are irrelevant, because the Allies did not consider Nazi conquests to be legal when it comes to international law. Czechoslovakia existed de jure, as an occupied territory. This is why the Soviets announced that Transcarpathia was being annexed from Czechoslovakia, and not Hungary, as they did not recognize Hungarian occupation as legal. Azure94 (talk) 16:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Azure94, sorry but I did not know that Transcarpathia was in London :D

Please see: International contemporary maps, Transcarpathia is not part of Czechoslovakia: [4][5][6]

Article says Second Czechoslovak Republic ceased to exist, the emigrant government moved to London. Soviet troops occupied from Hungarian troops when it was part of Hungary, and Soviets do not allowed that Transcarpathia to be again part of Czechoslovakia (btw perhaps minimal Slovak population and not at all any Czech people lived there, any reason why do Czech state wanted a very far region with zero Czech history?). Dont forget southern Transcarpathia was annexed by the First Vienna Award, signed by Czechoslovakia.

Anyway why do you have a problem to say "Soviet Union won land" if the topic is about the Soviet annexation? OrionNimrod (talk) 16:21, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Please read this article before you continue talking nonsense. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Czechoslovak_government-in-exile The maps you obsess over are irrelevant, since Nazi conquests were not considered legal according to international law. Czechoslovakia continued to de jure exist, officially represented by its government-in-exile in London. The Czechoslovak army was also an active participant during the entire war, in fact Czechoslovak troops entered alongside Soviet into Transcarpathia.

So, why do you have a problem to admit that the Soviets outright said that they annexed land not from Hungary, but from Czechoslovakia? Azure94 (talk) 16:33, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Azure94

Southern Transcarpathia was annexed by the First Vienna Award, signed by Czechoslovakia, which means it became legally part of Hungary. So Czechoslovakia lost southern Transcarpathia legally in 1938, mostly Hungarian populated regions. Do you deny this? Also Munich agreement were signed by France and UK. We can see the international maps where full Transcarpathia is part of Hungary which means it was recognized.

"since Nazi conquests were not considered legal according to international law" Perhaps Czech occupation of Hungary was legally after WW1? Borders were recognized by Treaty of Trianon in 1920 when all parties including Hungary signed in.

"So, why do you have a problem to admit that the Soviets outright said that they annexed land not from Hungary, but from Czechoslovakia" Do you have a Soviet source about this?

Sourced content: Hungary had to renounce the territories won in the Vienna Awards in the Armistice Agreement signed in Moscow on January 20, 1945. The renunciation was reconfirmed at the Paris Peace Conference in 1946 and recorded in the Peace Treaty of 1947. As a result, Carpathian Ruthenia no longer belonged to Hungary.

Why do you have a problem instead of "Hungary lost land" or "Czechoclovakia lost land" to say "Soviet Union won"? I suppose this is not a debatable. Or what is your problem with this sentence? This would be a compromise and real info which is fit to the article. Why do you not want a compromise? OrionNimrod (talk) 16:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

"As a result, Carpathian Ruthenia no longer belonged to Hungary."

Yes, because it was decreed that the First Vienna Awards were illegal, due to being singed under violence and threats of further violence. The treaty was annuled and Transcarpathia was considered legally part of Czechoslovakia. This is why the Soviet Union said that they were annexing Transcarpathia from Czechoslovakia, and not from Hungary.

You don't seem to realize that WW2 was fought primarily because all the forceful territorial changes Germany and Hungary did were considered to be crimes and illegal.Azure94 (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Btw Treaty of Trianon was forced by much more threats, crimes, attacks and violence... First Vienna Award was legally, signed by many countries even Czechoslovakia itself, and in the contemporary international maps we can see as part of Hungary, do you see them? I do not know what the Soviet Union said, only you say this, you did not provide any academic sources in any talk page during our conversation however I asked several times. Well it is fact the Soviet Union occupied it from the Hungarian troops and future treaty like 1947 Paris treaty reverted the decision of the First Vienna Award, but it does not mean it overwrote and erased the previous 9 years history of the region. However we do not need mention Hungary or Czechoslovakia just write this: "Soviet Union won land", however I see you do not seek any compromise, which is actually the topic: Soviet annexation. OrionNimrod (talk) 16:21, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

"First Vienna Award was legally, signed by many countries even Czechoslovakia itself"

The only non-Axis country that signed it was Czechoslovakia, and that was only after constant violence and threats of further violence, as was decreed at the Paris Peace Treaty. Which is also why the Award was never accepted in the West and was officially declared null and void. Azure94 (talk) 16:28, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm gonna quote this: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/First_Vienna_Award#Nullification
In terms of international law, the Vienna Award was later ruled to be null and void. Although it was presented as a voluntary act of two sovereign states in arbitration, the Czechoslovak government had accepted arbitration under a presumed threat from both arbiters (Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy) and under heavy influence of the Hungarian demands. According to Deák, under international law, the act is considered to have been illegal, and its result could not be accepted as valid. Just as for the Munich Agreement, which was later nullified, Czechoslovakia's interests were largely ignored, and the arbiters had used their military prowess to pressure those in the agreement. The Vienna Award was also found to be illegal at the end of World War II. From that legal standpoint, the Vienna Award never existed as a valid legal act. Azure94 (talk)

• Deák, Ladislav (1991). Hra o Slovensko [The Game for Slovakia] (in Slovak). Bratislava: Slovak Academy of Sciences. ISBN 80-224-0370-9.

References

This article is about the Soviet annexation of Transcarpathia, nothing more

Please refrain from flooding the page with irrelevant maps. Carpathian Ruthenia would be a better place for that. Likewise, please refrain from removing cited text from the Moscow treaty and the Paris Peace treaty. Azure94 (talk) 15:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@OrionNimrod If you continue to ignore the talk page while engaging in a revert war, I will be forced demand an official dispute resolution. Consider yourself warned. Azure94 (talk) 16:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

WW2 is really relating to the event ot the Soviet annexation.

Hi @Azure94, you already made much more edits than me in several similar articles and engaged in edit war to force your POV. I used much more the talk page to resolve the issue than you, I asked several times academic sources but instead of show anything you started personal insults.

Talk:Hungarian_invasion_of_Carpatho-Ukraine

Talk:Hungarians_in_Ukraine#Borders

Talk:First_Vienna_Award#"Non-violent"

That section is about the "previous history", which mention Hungary and the Treaty of Trianon, so the maps is related, it mention also the Vienna Award, Hungarian occupation of Transcarpathia, the region switched country many times just in short 25 years of history. All contemporary events, conflicts, are really relates to the previous history. Why do you think is not? Also WW2 is really relating to the event ot the Soviet annexation, why do you think is not? Among that maps it presented that the region is part of Czechoslovakia which is same as your map. I see you want not at all show that region was part of Hungary before Czechoslovakia and during WW2, why? However it relates to the topic, especially events during WW2. Transcarpathia was part of Hungary in 1944 as we can see on WW2 maps, and Hungarian troops fight with Soviets, why do say the 1 years later Soviet annexation is not related to the event what happened just 1 year before?

It is clear that you emphasize everywhere "Czechoslovakia" and "Czechoslovakia" and remove Hungarian historical things. Like this: "Soviet annexation of Transcarpathia in 1945" -> "1945–46 land transfer from Czechoslovakia". The topic is about the Soviet annexation as you said, but even you removed "Soviet annexation of Transcarpathia" title and you removed "Soviet union won land" to emphazise again "Czechoslovakia". It would be no debate between us in this case, not need to add the name of Hungary or Czechoslovakia just keep the name of the Soviet Union, because the topic is about that. Why do you have a problem to use the name of the Soviet Union?

Even you erased sourced content:

As a result, Carpathian Ruthenia no longer belonged to Hungary.

You added unsourced content:

"Carpathian Ruthenia was to be reincorporated into Czechoslovakia while maintaining this status." OrionNimrod (talk) 16:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

"I used much more the talk page to resolve the issue than you"

Then why is Mesocarp still waiting for you to respond on another talk page regarding another example of you POV-pushing/edit warring? All he asked is for you to source your claims, yet you're MIA.

"I asked several times academic sources"

I've provided direct quotations from the Moscow Treaty and the Paris Peace treaty, both of them sourced. You proceeded to delete them outright. I'm getting tired of your bad faith arguments.

"That section is about the previous history"

That's not the main core of the article. Your FOUR MAPS are excessively huge and irrelevant to the actual topic, which is the Soviet Union's annexation of Transcarpathia from Czechoslovakia. I told you to move those maps to the article on Carpathian Ruthenia, but you refuse to listen to this compromise. From your other minor edits to the article, like how you consistently incorrectly state that the Soviet Union annexed Transcarpathia from Hungary (despite the fact that the Soviets openly said that they're annexing Czechoslovak territory), it is obvious that you care more about pretending that Transcarpathia is somehow "rightfully" Hungarian. In short, your edits are POV pushing. Specifically, the pushing of Hungarian Irredentism. Azure94 (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Azure94,

The text should be neutral language, it did not use the "righfully" term, however you are using non neutral language and POV pushing, like as writing the Soviet communist narrative "liberation", do you think for the Ukrainians the Russians are "liberators" today? (btw do you think Transcarpathia which belonged 1000 years to Hungary was "righfully" part of the Czech country with zero Czech history and minimal Slovak population?)

1.

"Hungary has accepted the obligation to evacuate all Hungarian troops and officials from the territory of Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Rumania occupied by her within the limits of the frontiers of Hungary existing on December 31, 1937, and also to repeal all legislative and administrative provisions relating to the annexation or incorporation into Hungary of Czechoslovak, Yugoslav and Rumanian territory."

[2]That was made by the Temporary National Assembly of Hungary [3] that temporary assembly was created by Stalin in the occupied Hungarian land and mostly by Hungarian communists, but the official Hungarian government and Hungarian army still fought against the Soviets until the end of the war.

The text clearly say that those regions (Transcarpathia) was incorporated and annexed to Hungary and it was under Hungarian occupation. It is funny that you like to add this sentence which was signed by Temporary National Assembly of Hungary and Soviet Union regarding Transcarpathia but you deny to add maps regarding this things what is in the text... WW2 Hungary map is clearly not irrevelant, because Soviets occupied the region during the war from Hungarian troops. If Paris treaty in 1947 reverted the Vienna Award it does not mean the previous 10 years history did not happen, even the Paris treaty and its text regarding the territorial backchange the testimony the events of that period were happened in the history.

2.

"despite the fact that the Soviets openly said that they're annexing Czechoslovak territory" I do not see, could you show me academic sources about this?

I see only your quote:

"The frontier between Hungary and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, from the point common to the frontier of those two States and Roumania to the point common to the frontier of those two States and Czechoslovakia, is fixed along the former frontier between Hungary and Czechoslovakia as it existed on January 1, 1938"

"fixed along the former frontier between Hungary and Czechoslovakia as it existed on January 1, 1938" With this sentence, the text clearly says the Hungarian borders were different after 1938.

3.

I asked several times questions, you did not answer me. I ask again.

Could you tell me the exact day when Transcarpathia started to belong Czechoslovakia after WW1? I think you should know if you make an edit war to add this number (1918) to the article. You did not provide any exact info, or sources, please provide academic sources in the subject!

If during WW1 it was irredentist plans, and after WW1 Czechoslovakia demanded Hungarian lands and invaded Hungary it does not mean that part of Hungary became automatically part of Czechoslovakia, do you think today the invaded Ukrainian lands by Russians became part of Russia?

Which time the Czech troops entered first in the region? Also Hungarian Soviet Republic expelled the Czech invaders in 1919. For example it was armed conflict between Czech invaders and Hungarians in Balassagyarmat who planned to occupy the Borsod region which is today's Hungary. [4][5] Do you say that this city and Borsod was also part of Czechoslovakia in 1918 because Czechoslovakia demanded that region? At the Paris peace talk (where Hungary was not invited) it was many territorial demands, and the final borders were decided there.

Why do you ignore the international law?

USA Library of Congress: https://countrystudies.us/hungary/30.htm "Hungary's signing of the Treaty of Trianon on June 4, 1920, ratified the country's dismemberment" OrionNimrod (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

"however you are using non neutral language and POV pushing, like as writing the Soviet communist narrative "liberation""

Where's the proof I wrote anything like that?

"The text clearly say that those regions (Transcarpathia) was incorporated and annexed to Hungary and it was under Hungarian occupation.""

And the text also said that Hungary was supposed to return Transcarpathia to Czechoslovak control, something which you repeatedly deny despite all the proof.

"I do not see, could you show me academic sources about this?"

It's the same text as above. The one which said that Hungary is supposed to leave all occupied Czechoslovak territory. This means that the Soviet Union considered Carpatho-Ruthenia to be Czechoslovak territory, which is why all the negotiation about its annexation by the Soviet Union was done by between J. Stalin and E. Benes.

"With this sentence, the text clearly says the Hungarian borders were different after 1938""

The text says that the borders were to return to the state before 1938, which means that Carpatho-Ruthenia was considered legally to be part of Czechoslovakia. Do you have problems with reading comprehension? I've noticed for some time now that your English skills are relatively poor, which makes me believe you're struggling to understand all this text. If you keep going like this, I will be forced to ask for a third opinion here too, since it's becoming clear that you're not listening to anything I'm saying.

"Could you tell me the exact day when Transcarpathia started to belong Czechoslovakia after WW1?""

When the Moscow Treaty was signed and the Paris Peace treaty was signed. Both of them said that Transcarpathia belongs to Czechoslovakia. But you seem to have reading comprehension problems.

The rest of your incoherent rant about "Czech invaders in 1919" is utterly irrelevant to this article and I won't dignify it with a response. Azure94 (talk) 12:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Azure94

The liberation word it was once in the texz (which is ok in the context because Stalin think this was liberation), "and Soviet dictator Josef Stalin signed a treaty of alliance that guaranteed that the former territory of Czechoslovakia would be liberated by the Red Army and returned to Czechoslovak civilian control"

But you increased this "liberation" word 2 more times:

http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Soviet_annexation_of_Transcarpathia&diff=1165611546&oldid=1163197750

"Hungary was supposed to return Transcarpathia to Czechoslovak control" Which means you cannot deny the DIREKT previous history which you want to arbitrary cut off from the topic.

"The one which said that Hungary is supposed to leave all occupied Czechoslovak territory. This means that the Soviet Union considered Carpatho-Ruthenia to be Czechoslovak territory,"

"all occupied Czechoslovak territory" this is not secret that Hungary got it by First Vienna Award + later occupied full Transcarpathia...but you want to arbitrary cut off from the topic. + "fixed along the former frontier between Hungary and Czechoslovakia as it existed on January 1, 1938" which admits the borders were different after 1938.

A treaty in 1945 which made by a temporary communist Hungarians (not by official Hungarian government) did not erase of the events of the previous years.

"Could you tell me the exact day when Transcarpathia started to belong Czechoslovakia after WW1?""

WW1 not WW2

Still I am waiting to the answer, you wrote 1918, please provide academic sources in the subject! I quoted academic source which say from 1920 by international law, why do you deny?

Perhaps Borsod and today's west Hungary was part of Czechoslovakia instantly only 1 day after WW1 because Czechoslovaks and Benes demanded that region too? Please answer. OrionNimrod (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It's obvious from the text that "liberation" was used in the context of the treaties that were signed, that is: "liberated from Hungarian occupation". The fact that you're trying to turn this on its head and claim that I'm subscribing to Soviet narratives is extremely disingenuous of you. You either struggle with reading comprehension, or you're intentionally trying to smear me in order to win an argument.

"A treaty in 1945 which made by a temporary communist Hungarians (not by official Hungarian government) did not erase of the events of the previous years.""

That treaty which you don't like became legally binding, whereas the Vienna Award was nullified. Transcarpathia was officially returned from Hungarian occupation to Czechoslovak control, as was reconfirmed at the Paris Peace treaty, which is legally binding. Only after that did Czechoslovakia and the USSR sign a treaty which officially saw the former hand over Transcarpathia to the latter. This is all already in the text. So stop trying to erase it.

I already quoted the Moscow Treaty and the Paris Peace treaty, and also the treaty signed between Czechoslovakia and the USSR. I've added text from them to the article. You keep ignoring this for absurd and bizarre reasons, while engaging in circular arguments. It's obvious you will not listen to anything I say. We will have to move towards an official dispute resolution. Azure94 (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Azure94 "Transcarpathia was officially returned from Hungarian occupation to Czechoslovak control,"

Yes, I do not deny this, you want to remove these events and the previous events from the page. Future cannot change past. Past happened.

Still I am waiting for your answer about 1918... how many times should I ask this? OrionNimrod (talk) 13:24, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

You're not making any sense and it's now obvious that the only solution will be an official Wikipedia dispute resolution. Azure94 (talk) 13:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Are you willing to answer to my question? OrionNimrod (talk) 13:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

References