Paris Peace Conf. 184.01102/342
Professor A. C. Coolidge to the Commission to Negotiate Peace
[Received April 14.]
Sirs: I have the honor to report that in connection with the establishment of future boundaries for Hungary, I wish to take up again one particular question which I have previously treated, namely that of the Ruthenian territory in northern Hungary. The question is discussed at some length and in its various aspects in memoranda by Major Martin and Lieutenant Goodwin enclosed in my Reports 139, 145 and 158 [Page 435] and their report No. 11218 of March 9th sent direct to Paris, to which I respectfully refer.
It seems to be well established that the Ruthenians of northern Hungary are for the most part a backward, ignorant people who have not been liberally governed in the past and have not developed any strong feeling of nationality or desired independence or separation from Hungary. During the last few months they have been living in a state of disorderly confusion, solicited from various sides and uncertain as to what they wanted, perhaps even incapable of knowing.
There are three obvious possible solutions to the problem of the future of their territory. I reject union with Rumania for which there is no reason. It might be left to Hungary with provision for the national language and autonomy such as have been offered by the new Hungarian law. It might be annexed to or constitute an autonomous state connected with Czecho-Slovakia or it might be part of a new Ukrainian republic.
The third solution conforms best with the ordinary theory of nationality. The Ruthenians of North Hungary are an offshoot of the people across the mountains. On the other hand it must be remembered that the barrier of the Carpathians is a considerable one, much more considerable for instance than that between Northern Bohemia and Saxony, which is regarded as a good reason for keeping them under different jurisdictions, and the economic interests of the people on the two sides of it have little in common. There is a certain feeling between them of belonging to the same nationality, but it has only recently been awakened and has penetrated but little. In religion they differ, the Ruthenians south of the range belonging to the Roman-Catholic Church, those north to the so-called United-Greeks, who are in community with the Roman-Catholics but have a different rite.
The second solution, a union of the Hungarian Slovaks with Czechoslovakia is supposed to conform to their desires as expressed by their members in the United States and by delegates to Prague, which in its turn adopts the attitude of gracious consent rather than ardent longing. These desires, however, have not been expressed in such a way as to prove them to be general or profound. In the present state of chaos people can be found in northern Hungary and delegations can be sent from there to express a wish for any imaginable solution, incorporation into Czecho-Slovakia, Rumania, Ukrainia and even restored Russia, as well as for complete independence or the continuance of the former political relations. The real truth I believe is that [Page 436] most of the people are not in a position to know what they do want except peace, order and a certain respect for their individuality.
The Czecho-Slovaks on their side, besides being moved by a feeling of kinship and a dislike of the Hungarians, would like a boundary in the northeast that shall be coterminous with that of Rumania. This is not unreasonable from the point of view of their political interests and ambitions, but it is no more so than the wish of the Poles to be the direct neighbors of the Rumanians, or of a similar wish on the part of the Poles and the Hungarians, or of the Ukrainians and the Hungarians. Such considerations are natural in themselves, but do not affect the real merits of the question. At bottom the desire of the Czecho-Slovaks to obtain the Hungarian Ruthenian territory is based not so much on racial relationship as on imperialism, and we may doubt whether in the long run its satisfaction would not add to the dangers to which the new Czecho-Slovak state is exposed.
There are several strong reasons which may be urged in favor of leaving the Ruthenian territory to Hungary. In the first place, the mere fact that there is no other solution that is obviously more advantageous is a strong argument against breaking up a political connection that has lasted for a thousand years, and this by no mere accident but because it has been in the nature of things. Secondly, there is no shadow of doubt that geographically the region belongs with the territory south of it, not with that to the north-east or west. On the north it ends in a lofty natural barrier. It is itself a region of mountains and valleys, all its communications tending to be with the plain below and not with the hilly country on the two sides of it. Economically the connection is every bit as obvious as is that of Northern with Central Bohemia. Union with Czecho-Slovakia would add to the wealth of the Czech State, for Hungarian Ruthenia is not without valuable resources, but for the Ruthenians themselves political connection with the plains below is, as it always has been, the obvious and natural thing. Finally, at this time when, albeit for good reasons, the Hungarian State is doomed to partition and seems likely to be left weak, exposed and deprived of much the greater part of its former wealth and resources as well as territory, it seems to me that in a case where the reason is by no means evident and the chances of a crying injustice very considerable, the Hungarians have every claim to be given the benefit of the doubt. These and other arguments on the same side are capable of much further development, but here I wish to indicate them only to express my strong personal opinion that they should be taken into most serious consideration.
I have [etc.]