chapter nine

Dreams Born and Shattered

I

n , the world was treated to a vivid demonstration of two contrasting

ways of enforcing international law. Th ey could be called the old way and

the new. In both cases, the state of Germany played an unwilling starring role,

as an accused lawbreaker, with the Treaty of Versailles providing the relevant

law in both aff airs. In both, France stood in the accusatory role (with com-

pany). Th ere were some diff erences, too. One of the cases is famous, and the

other virtually unknown (at least to nonlawyers). In one of them, the legal ele-

ment was extremely obvious, and in the other one, much less so.

Th e famous incident was the occupation of the Ruhr Valley by the armed

forces of France and Belgium. To the naked eye, this did not look like a legal

proceeding, but it was. It was a reprisal action— a mea sure short of war— in

response to an alleged legal wrong committed by Germany. As such, it was

a stellar illustration of traditional law enforcement by way of self- help—

although the action was exceptional in being taken against a major power.

Th e alleged wrong was a default in reparations payments. Th e spectacular

consequences are well remembered. A German passive- resistance campaign

began, which included a resort to printing huge amounts of paper currency—

leading to one of history’s most notorious episodes of runaway infl ation,

estimated to have peaked at a rate of about 3.25 million percent per month.

Less prominent in the public eye, by a large margin, was a debate among

international lawyers as to the lawfulness of the French and Belgian action.

It was argued by some that a reprisal against Germany for a violation of the

Versailles Treaty could be taken only by all of the treaty parties collectively,

or at least by all of the principal Allied powers, and not by two of them alone

and self- selected.