What is Annexation? Meaning of the word Annexation in a political dictionary. The meaning of the word "annexation" Annexation definition

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. D.N. Ushakov

annexation

(ane), annexation, w. (from Latin annexo - I tie) (polit.). The forced political annexation of a country or part of it to another country. A world without annexations and indemnities.

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. S.I.Ozhegov, N.Yu.Shvedova.

annexation

And, well. (book). Forcible annexation of a state or part of it to another state.

adj. annexation, -aya, -oe.

New explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, T. F. Efremova.

annexation

and. Forcible annexation, seizure of all or part of the territory belonging to another state or people, as well as forcible retention of someone. people within the borders of a foreign state.

Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998

annexation

ANNEXATION (from Latin annexio - accession) is a type of aggression, the forcible annexation (seizure) of all or part of the territory of another state or people, as well as the forcible retention of a nationality within the borders of a foreign state.

Large legal dictionary

annexation

(from Latin annexio - annexation) - forcible annexation of the territory of another state. International law prohibits A. as a violation of the principles of territorial integrity, inviolability and inviolability of state borders.

Annexation

(Latin annexio, from annexus ≈ annexed), forcible annexation (seizure) of all or part of the territory of another state or people. As a rule, wars in the slave and feudal eras ended; in the era of capitalism, agriculture became the main way to expand the territory of one state at the expense of another. In a number of cases, aggression is considered to be certain types of colonial seizures, and its variety is the creation of states with puppet regimes (for example, the formation of Manchukuo in 1932 by Japan).

In the very first days of its existence, the Soviet state adopted the Decree on Peace, in which it set out its position on the issue of A., defining A. as any annexation of a small or weak nationality without its precise, clear and voluntarily expressed consent, regardless of when it was forcible annexation is committed, how developed or backward is the nation forcibly annexed or forcibly held within the borders of a given state, regardless, finally, of where this nation lives - in Europe or in distant overseas countries (see SU RSFSR, 1917, No. 1, Art. 2).

The USSR consistently opposes the policies of Austria, defending the right of all peoples to self-determination and independence (for example, the protest of the Soviet government in connection with the A. Czech Republic and other regions of Czechoslovakia by Hitler's Germany in 1939, the protest of the Soviet government in connection with Austria by Hitler's Germany in 1938 ).

According to the norms of modern international law, A. is illegal. The UN Charter prohibits any threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (Chapter 1, Articles 1, 2, etc.). Despite the illegality of Africa, the imperialist states continue their policy of expansion in the form of hidden policy (for example, the US extension of statehood to the annexed Hawaiian Islands) or open policy (for example, the annexation of South-West Africa by South Africa).

A. V. Speranskaya.

Wikipedia

Annexation

Annexation(, from - " attached") - the forcible annexation by a state of all or part of the territory of another state unilaterally. According to international law, annexation is one of the types of aggression and currently entails international legal responsibility.

Annexation should be distinguished from occupation, which in itself does not entail a change in the legal identity of the territory. For example, Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was under the occupation of Austria-Hungary since 1878, was annexed by it only in 1908, and before that it was formally considered the territory of the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was proclaimed in 1983 after the entry of Turkish troops in 1974, recognized only by Turkey, but not included in its composition.

Examples of the use of the word annexation in literature.

They didn't lift a finger when King Abdullah declared annexation Judea and Samaria, calling their kingdom Jordan.

In foreign policy, the Provisional Government, in agreement with all the people, rejecting any idea of ​​a separate peace, openly sets as its goal the speedy achievement of universal peace, which has as its goal neither domination over other peoples, nor the deprivation of their national property, nor the forcible seizure of foreign territories - a world without annexations and indemnities, on the basis of self-determination of peoples.

We answer: - When we demand peace without annexations and indemnities, this means that all lands occupied by foreign armed forces must be cleared, including Russian territory occupied by the Germans.

Meanwhile, all German radio stations broadcast Henlein's statement demanding annexation Reich of the Sudetenland.

The prelude to it was the battle in the Balkans between Pan-Germanism and Pan-Slavism, which resulted in annexation Austria-Hungary Bosnia and Herzegovina, reflected in the two Balkan wars and the diplomatic struggle for their results, into the general European arms race and the frantic construction of the fleet by Germany.

They began eavesdropping on other people's thoughts, intercepting the most cerebral concepts, digging under the towers of philosophical and literary opponents, falsifying data, gnawing cables, and even trying to annexation someone else's mental property along with the identity of its owner.

When the Bulgarian delegation spoke out against the agreement of Germany and Austria-Hungary to sign peace without annexations and the indemnity, Kühlmann and Chernin convinced her that the Entente would not agree to such a proposal, and therefore there was nothing to fear.

Between representatives of the British, who had their own interests in Guiana, and London, it seems that negotiations on an official annexation this colony by England.

Soon after annexation Austria by Hitler's Germany in 1933, Gödel loses his place at the University of Vienna, and, even worse, he is called up to military service despite poor health.

The Russian delegation insisted on concluding peace without annexations and indemnities.

Transcaucasia was in opposition to the Brest Peace Treaty back in February 1918, when information reached there about the possible signing of a separate peace between Russia and the countries of the Quadruple Alliance and that Russia, at the request of Germany and Turkey, could give up Transcaucasia for occupation, and some Transcaucasian territories before in total Kare, Ardagan and Batum, under Turkish annexation.

Reversing this statement, we can conclude that annexation did not necessarily mean Germanization.

But neither Luxemburg nor Liebknecht nightmare could not have imagined that Lenin’s peace would turn out to be many times worse: Lenin would sign an anti-democratic peace with the German imperialists, with annexations

But neither Luxemburg nor Liebknecht could have imagined in a nightmare that Lenin’s peace would turn out to be many times worse: Lenin would sign an anti-democratic peace, with annexations, with indemnities, with additional agreements beneficial for the German government.

In this note, Miliukov emphasized that the Provisional Government would fully comply with the obligations undertaken to the allies and unconditionally preserve all the old goals of the war, that is, the program annexations and conquests.

literally – joining). The classic definition of A. was given by V.I. Lenin in the Decree on Peace he wrote (see): “By annexation or seizure of foreign lands, the government understands accordingly legal consciousness democracy in general and the working classes in particular, any annexation to a large or strong state of a small or weak nationality without the precisely, clearly and voluntarily expressed consent and desire of this nationality, regardless of when this forced annexation was made, regardless of how developed or backward is a nation forcibly annexed or forcibly retained within the borders of a given state. Finally, regardless of whether this nation lives in Europe or in distant overseas countries.

If any nation is kept within the borders of a given state by force, if, contrary to its expressed desire, it does not matter whether this desire is expressed in the press, in popular assemblies, in party decisions or indignations and uprisings against national oppression, - If the right to freely vote, with the complete withdrawal of the troops of the annexing or generally stronger nation, is not given the right to decide without the slightest coercion the question of the forms of state existence of this nation, then its annexation is annexation, i.e., seizure and violence” (Och:, vol. 26 , page 218).

Annexationist policy occupies an important place in the life of the bourgeois state, the external function of which is to expand the territories of its ruling class at the expense of the territory of other states.

A. is a typical method for exploiting states, including capitalist states, of annexing foreign territories. A. can be expressed both in the annexation of the entire state territory, i.e. in the seizure of an entire state (for example, Japan of Korea in 1910, Germany of Austria in 1938), and in the annexation of part of another state territory (for example, the seizure of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany in 1870 and 1940, the southern part of Sakhalin by Japan in 1905 and Manchuria in 1932, etc.). Numerous colonial conquests by imperialist states also represent A.

The consequence of A. is the illegal extension of the invader’s power to the annexed territory and the conversion of all inhabitants of this territory into his subjects.

At the heart of the annexationist foreign policy imperialist states lies the basic economic law of modern capitalism. It is the pursuit of maximum profit that pushes monopoly capitalism to such risky steps as the enslavement and robbery of colonial and other countries, the transformation of a number of independent countries into dependent countries, the organization of new wars, which for the tycoons of modern capitalism are the best “business” for extracting maximum profits, and finally, attempts to gain world economic dominance.

During the period of the general crisis of capitalism and the collapse of the colonial system, it becomes increasingly difficult for the imperialists to resort to open forms of democracy. Therefore, in the face of the growth of the national liberation movement in colonial and dependent countries, they are forced to resort to disguised forms of democracy. This is, for example, the mandate system of the League of Nations, which was one of the forms of masking A. territories and colonies belonging to Turkey and Germany, as well as A. by creating puppet governments on the territory of the captured states, concluding enslaving agreements with them, etc. This method was used by the Japanese invaders during A. Manchuria .

IN post-war period This method is widely used by American imperialism. With the help of their armed forces, the American imperialists, violating the right of nations to self-determination, place puppet rulers they like in power in other countries (for example, in South Korea, Greece, West Germany and other countries).

In contrast to capitalist states, colonial conquests and plunder are incompatible with the nature of the Soviet system. The Soviet socialist state, which proclaimed the right of nations to self-determination and the formation of independent states and liberated all the peoples and nationalities of the former Tsarist Russia from colonial oppression, from the very first days of its existence it acted in the field of international relations as an irreconcilable enemy of Azerbaijan and imperialist wars waged by imperialist states for the purpose of attacking foreign countries, enslaving and enslaving foreign peoples.

In the peace decree, the Soviet state declared A. illegal, an action contrary to international law, and gave a precise and comprehensive definition of A. Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

This is the forcible appropriation by one state of part or all of the territory of another state. Annexation involves the effective occupation of the territory in question with the express intention of appropriating it on a permanent basis ( corpus et animus).

Annexation should be distinguished from:

• acquisition of "no man's land" ( terra nullius) through effective occupation accompanied by an intention to appropriate the territory;
• cessions- peaceful transfer of the territory of one state to another as a result of an agreement concluded between them;
• adjudication- transfer of part of the territory of one state to another on the basis of a decision of a judicial or arbitration body;
• acquisition of ownership of a territory by virtue of prescription, i.e. legitimation of long-term, actual, peaceful possession of a certain territory;
• accretion- natural increase in the territory of the state by newly formed land areas.

Under current international law, annexation is no longer a legally permissible method of acquiring territory because it violates the principle of non-use of force or threat of force in international relations.

Historical development of international legal norms.

Annexations in classical international law.

Classical international law did not prohibit states from conducting military actions. Annexation of the territory of another state through a unilateral declaration or the entry into force of a peace treaty was considered a legally valid method of acquiring territory, provided that a number of conditions were met.

In the case of unilateral annexations during or after a state of war, the conquest of the territory in question must be final and the situation irreversible. Thus, until the cessation of hostilities and the conclusion of a peace treaty, the mere fact of conquest was not considered a sufficient legal basis for the transfer of territorial sovereignty. The conquering state could only enjoy the rights of an occupying power granted to it in accordance with the law of war.

The annexation of the territory of another state without a treaty agreement, unless preceded by military action, was considered unlawful, even though the territory in question may already be under the firmly established control of the annexing state. Thus, the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1908 was legally invalid, although this territory was transferred under the control of Austria-Hungary by the Congress of Berlin in 1878.

Most peace treaties concluded before and particularly at the end of the First World War provided for the transfer of the territory of defeated states either to the victorious states or to newly formed states. Although such contracts inevitably included an element of coercion, they were recognized as legally valid.

Annexations after the entry into force of the Charter of the League of Nations.

The first serious challenge to the legitimacy of annexations was the Charter of the League of Nations (1920), in which Art. 10 directly guaranteed the territorial integrity and political independence of states, and in Art. 12–16 the right to start wars was limited.

The next important step was the entry into force of the Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928), which prohibited war as a means of achieving political goals.

Based on such legal changes, wars of aggression increasingly came to be regarded as illegitimate, and the acquisition of territory resulting from such unlawful recourse to force also came to be regarded as illegitimate and invalid under international law.

Annexations after the entry into force of the UN Charter.

The UN Charter, which came into force in 1945, enshrined in international law a general ban on annexation. Clauses 3 and 4 of Art. 2 of the Charter oblige member states to resolve their international disputes exclusively by peaceful means, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

Thus, not only war, but also the use of force in any form has come to be considered an internationally wrongful act from which no rights can be derived. Accordingly, no annexation can be legal.

States are legally obligated not to recognize territorial changes made through annexation. Moreover, even the annexation of the entire territory of a state does not automatically lead to the disappearance of that state as a subject of international law, despite the fact that it is no longer capable of exercising sovereign and effective control over its territory.

Current legal situation.

The principle of the illegality of annexations has been repeatedly confirmed in various resolutions of the General Assembly and the UN Security Council. As early as 1967, Security Council resolution 242 (1967) emphasized “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war.”

The 1970 Declaration of Friendly Relations, within the framework of the principle prohibiting the use of force, declares that “the territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State as a result of the threat or use of force. No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as lawful.”

This is also confirmed by paragraph 3 of Art. 5 Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 1974 of the UN General Assembly on the definition of aggression, which states that “no territorial acquisition obtained as a result of aggression is or can be recognized as legitimate.”

At the regional level, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 recognizes in its principles I – IV sovereign equality of all states, the obligation of states to refrain from the threat or use of force, and the inviolability of the borders and territorial integrity of states and thereby excludes annexation from the legal means of acquiring territory.

The obligation of third states not to recognize as legal any territorial changes caused by annexation may be based on the provisions of paragraph 2 of Art. 41 of the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts. According to this Project Articles States must not recognize as lawful a situation resulting from a serious breach of obligations arising from general international law.

Annexations in the modern world.

Annexation of Tibet.

After the military invasion of Tibet in 1950 and the defeat of the small Tibetan army, the PRC imposed a treaty on the Tibetan government, according to which Tibet was declared part of China, although it received the right to broad autonomy.

Some authors consider the annexation of Tibet to China as an illegal annexation, however, China has consistently stated that Tibet has always been an integral part of China and has never been an independent territory. This situation reflects the fact that the status of Tibet has always been quite controversial.

Despite the question of the compatibility with international law of the 1951 act of incorporation, which is purportedly an act of annexation, the question of whether the act and the subsequent exercise of sovereignty by China over Tibet constitutes a violation of the right of the Tibetan people to self-determination remains open. This problem mostly decided by governments Western states and a number of non-governmental organizations, but has not been the subject of any UN General Assembly resolution since the adoption of Resolution 2079 (XX) in 1965. The Chinese government has always maintained that the principle of self-determination does not apply to Tibet since it has never been subject to colonial rule.

Annexation of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.

According to the UN Partition Plan of 1947, Jerusalem was to become international city. It was not to be included in either the proposed Jewish or Arab states. During the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 West Side Jerusalem was captured by Israel, and East Jerusalem (including the Old City) was captured by Jordan. The war ended with the signing of armistice agreements in 1949.

As a result of the victory in the Six-Day War of 1967, Israel captured East Jerusalem, thus gaining control over the entire territory of the city, after which it declared its sovereignty over a united Jerusalem.

The measures taken by Israel were rejected by the international community as illegal acts of annexation that failed to change the city's status under international law. This is clear from the relevant resolutions adopted by both the General Assembly (see, for example, Resolutions 2253 and 2254 of 1967) and the Security Council (see, in particular, Resolution 252 of 1968). This position is consistently confirmed in subsequent resolutions.

Regarding the annexation of the Golan Heights by Israel under its Golan Heights Law of 14 December 1981, the Security Council in its Resolution 497 (1981) determined that “Israel's decision to establish its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan altitudes is invalid and has no international legal force" (UNSC Resolution 497 of 1981). A similar point of view was expressed by the General Assembly in its Resolution ES-9/1 of 1982.

However, on December 6, 2017, US President D. Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Annexation of Crimea.

The Ukrainian revolution of 2014, initiated by the Euromaidan movement in the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv, had significant consequences in Crimea. The authorities of the peninsula, populated predominantly by ethnic Russians, always strongly supported the pro-Russian policies of then President V. Yanukovych. His expulsion from the country and replacement with a pro-Western provisional government focused on carrying out “forced Ukrainization” gave rise to separatist demands in Crimea.

On March 17, 2014, after a referendum, the Ukrainian Autonomous Republic of Crimea declared its independence and applied for reunification with the Russian Federation. Crimea's application was welcomed by Russia and the next day, President V. Putin and representatives of Crimea signed an accession agreement, in which the Republic of Crimea was officially declared a federal subject of the Russian Federation.

According to Ukraine’s position, the unilateral secession of Crimea from Ukraine is a violation of the principle of territorial integrity. The Constitution of Ukraine does not provide for the right of secession; accordingly, the secession of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea from Ukraine contradicts the Basic Law of Ukraine. According to it, “issues regarding changes in the territory of Ukraine are resolved exclusively by an all-Ukrainian referendum.” Thus, since issues of changing the Ukrainian territorial status quo can only be resolved by a referendum at the national level, Crimea was not authorized to organize and conduct a local referendum on its separation from Ukraine.

The Crimean and Russian authorities, arguing their position, refer to the current international law and, in particular, to the right to secession, arising from the right of peoples to self-determination.

A similar position is held by the International Court of Justice, which in its Advisory Opinion on the compliance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence by the provisional bodies of self-government of Kosovo recognized that the declaration of independence of Kosovo does not violate international law. This decision was widely approved by the international community and primarily by countries such as the USA and Great Britain.

As for the principle of territorial integrity, enshrined in many documents of international law, including Art. 2 of the UN Charter, the International Court of Justice in the said Advisory Opinion concluded that “the principle of territorial integrity is limited to the sphere of relations between states.”

Thus, the territorial integrity of one state can only be violated by another state. Since secession is by definition pursued by entities that are not (yet) states but aspire to become states, unilateral actions aimed at secession are not inconsistent with the principle of territorial integrity.

March 27, 2014 General Assembly The UN adopted Resolution 68/262 on the territorial integrity of Ukraine. The resolution declares the illegality of the referendum held on March 16, 2014 in Crimea and calls on all states and international organizations not to recognize changes in the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.

1) Annexation- (from Latin annexio -) - the forced and unlawful annexation by one state of the territory or part of the territory of another state, and of space that is in common use of the international community (the bottom of the World Ocean beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, etc.). The legality of annexation follows from the UN Charter, which prohibits or threatens the territorial integrity, integrity and political independence of states. Annexation is an aggressive foreign policy of states embracing extremist ideology (- "" Austria, Nazi Germany).

2) Annexation- (Latin annexio) - the forced and legal annexation by one state of the territory or part of the territory of another state, and of space that is in common use of the international community (the bottom of the World Ocean beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, etc.). A. constitutes a gross violation of basic norms of international law. The illegality of A. follows from the fundamental provisions of the UN Charter, according to which threats “against territorial integrity or political independence” are prohibited. Changes to the state border are considered legal if they are carried out on the basis of equal and voluntary agreements between politically sovereign countries.

3) Annexation- Capture, forcible seizure of the territory of a state (or part of it) to another state, which is a gross violation of international law, the principle of national self-determination, violation of the interests and will of the population of the annexed territory.

Annexation

(from Latin annexio - annexation) - the forced and unlawful annexation by one state of the territory or part of the territory of another state, as well as space in common use of the international community (Antarctica, the bottom of the World Ocean beyond national jurisdiction, etc.). The legality of annexation follows from the UN Charter, which prohibits the use or threat of force against the territorial integrity, integrity and political independence of states. Annexation is part of the aggressive foreign policy of states that adopt extremist ideology (a classic example is the “Anschluss” of Austria by Nazi Germany).

(Latin annexio annexation) - the forced and illegal annexation by one state of the territory or part of the territory of another state, as well as space in common use of the international community (Antarctica, the bottom of the World Ocean beyond national jurisdiction, etc.). A. constitutes a gross violation of basic norms of international law. The illegality of A. follows from the fundamental provisions of the UN Charter, according to which the use of force or the threat of force “against territorial integrity or political independence” is prohibited. Changes to the state border are considered legal if they are carried out on the basis of equal and voluntary agreements between politically sovereign countries.

Seizure, forcible annexation of the territory of a state (or part of it) to another state, which is a gross violation of international law, the principle of national self-determination, violation of the interests and will of the population of the annexed territory.

The term "annexation" implies a type of aggression by one country towards another, during which their territories may be united. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish the concept in question with another common term - occupation, which implies the abolition of the legal affiliation of the captured territory.

Examples of annexation

A striking example is the events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where annexation occurred - this is the occupation of these lands by Austria in the 19th century, which could only mean one thing - the weakening of the influence of Austrian supremacy with the subsequent return of certain legal freedoms to them (for example, the return of the right to bear the previous name ). Another example is the US annexation of Hawaii. We must not forget about such an event as the annexation of Czechoslovakia by Germany or the annexation of Crimea by Russia. This concept was the result of the implementation of a policy of aggressive nature by a stronger country in relation to a state that was an order of magnitude weaker.

The history of annexation in Russia

Thus, annexation is, in accordance with international law, the unlawful forcible annexation and seizure by one country of the territory of another. In Russia, this concept was first encountered in the 19th century and it meant the annexation of a region or region to another state. At the same time, there is no at least formally announced act of refusal by the former owner of this territory (the state). Synonyms for this term were “annexation” and “annexation”.

Annexation - a gross violation of rights?

Annexation constitutes a gross violation international rights. The invalidity of such territorial seizures, which are the result of annexation, is indicated by certain international agreements and acts. For example, this is the verdict of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal (1946), as well as the UN Declaration regulating the inadmissibility of interference in the internal affairs of countries, the Declaration designating and relating to areas of cooperation and friendly relations between states (1970). The act (Final Act) also speaks about the inadmissibility of annexation.

Contribution is a related concept

Annexation and indemnity - often these two concepts closely interact with each other. Thus, the second term implies the imposition of certain payments on the defeated country.

In 1918, after the First World War, a “peace without annexations and indemnities” was proposed. However, as for Russia, this state was imposed unfavourable conditions peace, subject to settlement only by 1922. Thus, such a world, based on historical reality, cannot exist. Based on the definition of the word, annexation is a kind of continuation of aggressive actions, although not the same as during the war years.

Occupation concept

Annexation must be distinguished from occupation. Thus, annexation is the implementation of certain actions that do not entail changes in the legal ownership of the territory. As mentioned above, an example is Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was occupied by Austria-Hungary and annexed by it only in 1908. Before this period, this state formally belonged to the Ottoman Empire.

IN AND. Lenin on annexation

Lenin also gave a definition to this concept. In his opinion, annexation is a forced annexation, foreign national oppression, expressed in the annexation of foreign territory.

Negative consequences of indemnity

The concept of indemnity has already been used above, meaning the forced collection of payments or property seizures from the defeated state at the end of hostilities. The basis of indemnity is such a concept as “the right of the winner.” This principle is used regardless of the existence of justice in the conduct of the war by the victorious state. The amount, forms and conditions of payment of indemnity are determined by the winner. This concept arose as a means by which the population of a defeated state or city in a unique way bought off possible plunder.

History provides vivid examples of the use of indemnity. Thus, to ensure restrictions on the unbridled robbery of the population, within the framework of the articles of the Hague Convention in 1907, the amount of collection was limited. However, during the two world wars, these articles were quite grossly violated. which designated the protection of civilians in 1949, did not provide for the collection. The Entente states, in the process of creating the Versailles Peace Treaty, signed in 1919, were also forced to abandon this type of income, but replaced it with reparations. In 1947, principles were established to prevent the use of indemnities. It is being replaced, as mentioned above, by reparations, substitutions, restitutions and other types of material responsibilities of countries.

Annexation of Czechoslovakia by Germany

Turning to the events of World War II, it is necessary to note Hitler’s consistency in achieving his goals. Therefore, if Western politicians had taken his statements seriously, then timely measures could have stopped Hitler much earlier. But facts are an indisputable thing. Thus, after the annexation of the Sudetenland by Hitler, a decision was made to occupy all of Czechoslovakia. This step allowed the German politician, in addition to economic benefits, to also gain a geopolitical advantage in the eastern part of Europe, which contributed to the successful conduct of military operations in Poland and the Balkans.

In order for the seizure of Czechoslovakia to be bloodless, it was necessary to destroy the Czechoslovak statehood. Hitler made more than one statement about the need to prevent a European war. However, after the events in Munich, the German politician began to understand that such a subsequent crisis could only end in war. At the same time, any “flirts” with London also lost their meaning.

Among the latest attempts at diplomacy is the signing of an agreement with France, which guaranteed the inviolability of the relevant borders. This was a kind of addition to the Munich Anglo-German Declaration, designed to ensure short-term peace for Germany on the western flank. And from the position of Paris, these agreements marked the initial stage of a completely new stage in European diplomacy.

However, Hitler was completely occupied with Czechoslovakia. It was Germany that carried out provocations of separatism. The government in Prague made the last attempts to save the remnants of statehood. Thus, he dissolved the Slovak and Rusyn (Transcarpathia) governments, and also introduced martial law on the territory of Slovakia. This situation in this territory completely suited Hitler. Thus, in 1939, Slovak Catholic leaders (Jozef Tiso and Ferdinand Durkansky) were invited to Berlin, where the prepared documents were signed, proclaiming the independence of Slovakia. At the same time, the Reich was called upon to take the new state under its protection. Thus, the annexation of Czechoslovakia by Germany was carried out.