Talk:Soviet–Polish Non-Aggression Pact

Polish invasion of Czechoslovakia
The Soviet Union might have cautioned Poland against attacking Czechoslovakia. Nevertheless, afterwards the pact was renewed on November 26, 1938. (see, etc). Let me quote:

November 26, 1938 Poland and Russia Renew Non-Aggression Pact The Polish government, exposed to German eastward expansion, sought closer relations with the Soviet Union by renewing the Soviet-Polish Non-Aggression Pact. The Polish government made efforts to build up a barrier of Baltic and Balkan states to help maintain the status quo in Eastern Europe. Balcer 14:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I will not revert right away because that would break the 3RR rule. I am saddened to see that except for me and Halibutt no other editors have cared to provide any references. My searches on the web regarding the supposed breaking of the pact by the Soviet Union in 1938 have yielded little. From this it certainly appears that it was not a very notable event, if it ever happened.


 * Why, you and Hali are not alone. There is also Molobo. I shudder to think what "reading" of history you three propagate in your Polish Wiki. --Ghirla | talk 07:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Well Ghirlandajo you are always welcomed to prove your theories-such as the one that Katyn was a CIA plot...You are welcomed to it. --Molobo 07:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, it appears that some editors' sole purpose is to play up the "Polish invasion of Czechoslovakia". Fortunately, there was no such thing in 1938. A search of books on Google Print yields precisely zero hits for that term (see ) Balcer 23:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * It took me 3 minutes of googling to find confirmation, including a piece of Wikipedia itself: see the very end of Occupation of Czechoslovakia. Of course, the red-linked article remains to be written, but here you have another quotation from elsewhere: "On October 1st 1938, the Czech frontier guards left their posts and German troops occupied the Sudetenland. Very shortly afterwards, Polish and Hungarian troops took areas of Czechoslovakia which contained a majority of Poles and Magyars".


 * Wikipedia (exercice: find where written): Poland acquired the town of Těšín with the surrounding area (some 906 km2, some 250,000 inhabitants, mostly Poles) and two minor border areas in northern Slovakia, more precisely in the regions Spiš and Orava. (226 km2, 4,280 inhabitants, only 0.3 % Poles).


 * FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, obviously I am well aware that Poland took part of Czechoslovakia (namely Cieszyn) in 1938. What I do dispute is the use of extreme POV term Polish Invasion of Czechoslovakia which is not used anywhere in English sources.


 * Since your internet search is going so well, please find some information about the USSR breaking the nonagression pact with Poland in October 1938. Somehow I cannot find anything.Balcer 07:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure I am going to cry loud. Why didn't you do what you did now earlier, instead of this silly revert war with ghirla? The best defense against POV is solid fact (since you claim you knew about the event in question, and the issue was only how to name it). As for breaking the pact, I guess it is in ghirlandajo's Russian texts. Why don't you ask him for quotation politely? mikka (t) 08:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Just to let you know, for crying out loud is just an expression of amazement in English, like wow or good grief. Anyway, here is precisely the problem: Ghirlandajo has provided no sources.  All the sources so far have been put in by me and Halibutt. BTW, I have asked Ghirlandajo for sources, very nicely, a number of times before, but he has not provided any. So I guess I gave up on that project.


 * Anyway, it is emerging that the USSR did not renounce the nonaggression pact in October 1938, as Ghirlandajo was alleging. Hence my reverts of him were entirely correct.  What did happen was that the USSR made some noises that the pact would be renounced if Polish troops entered Czechoslovakia.  Well, the Polish troops did enter Cieszyn, and the Soviets did not carry out their threat and a few weeks later reaffirmed that the pact was still in full force (31.10.1938 	нарком иностранных дел СССР в беседе с польским послом подтвердил, что пакт о ненападении между СССР и Польшей "сохраняет полностью свою силу".) Now I am not entirely sure whether this little diplomatic dance even deserves to be discussed so prominently in the lead of the article.  If no one offers any good reasons for keeping it, I will remove it. Balcer 09:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Balcer, your threats of revert warring are boring. Please find something more useful to do. Deletion of stuff that you don't like and revert warring are not valid ways to propagate your nationalist agenda. Take care, Ghirla | talk 11:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo believes Katyn is a CIA plot and uses Soviet encyclopedia as reference-his sources seem to be questionable. --Molobo 09:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Its nothing new-everybody knows Poland moved into territories Czechs took during Polish-Bolshevik war to protect Poles from German control. --Molobo 07:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I removed unsourced allegations. I suggest giving a quote or online sources confirming allegations that Soviets denounced the Pact after Poland took back territories annexed by Czechoslovakia during Bolshevik invasion of Poland. --Molobo 07:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I reinserted the fact that the Soviet Union did indeed threaten to denounce the pact if the Polish troops entered Czechoslovakia. Nothing came of it, and the pact remained in force even after Poland took Cieszyn. Balcer 07:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ghirlandajo, nobody's threatening you here. We simply ask you to provide sources for your claims. Unsourced claims are removed not by our nationalist and anti-Russian agenda, but by the rules of wikipedia. Of course, you can also claim that wikipedia is anti-Russian and nationalistically-Polish, but first please provide sources. Halibutt 11:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Since Ghirlandajo asked why I have reverted him, I'd like to annouce here that I agree with reasoning of Balcer and Halibutt.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Total dispute?
I see that Ghirlandajo added the total dispute tag, which means that he disputes both the neutrality and factual accuracy of the entire article. Are there any specific concerns he has or is every single word wrong here? Halibutt 11:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I left the mention of Poland and Czechoslovakia futher down (using the word occupation), but removed the sentence being fought over from the lead. Given that the pact remained in force throughout 1938 after all, the episode does not need to be discussed in the first few sentences.  Does this resolve the dispute?  Balcer 13:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Clarification needed

 * '' The pact was considered at the time as a major success of the Polish diplomacy, much weakened by the toll war with Germany, renouncement of parts of the Treaty of Versailles and loosened links with France.

Does this mean Poland was much weakened, or Polish diplomacy was? Was it weakened by the toll war, and the renouncement (whose?), and the loosened links? What kind of links—diplomatic, economic?

How about this: "At the time, the non-aggression pact was considered a major diplomatic success for Poland, which had been weakened by the Toll War with Germany, by Germany's renouncement of part of the Treaty of Versailles, and by the loosening of diplomatic ties with France"? Be patient with me; I don't know the history, just trying to tighten up the wording. —Michael Z. 2006-02-03 17:43 Z 
 * It was Polish economy which was weakned due to the toll war. I'd expect the renoucement was Germany's but it is uncler, and the links with France were diplomatic.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 03:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Both Poland and Germany renounced the treaty at the time. In fact Poland officially renounced only a part of the treaty, called the minorities treaty, which allowed the Germans to interfere in Polish internal politics (protests were filed with the League of Nations every time the police arrested someone with a German surname in Poland, which was a serious problem for the Poles). This renouncement became quite a problem for Polish diplomacy as well. At the same time Germany started the rearmament (and in 1935 Hitler made it official). Halibutt 14:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)