How wars ended
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk
In March 1918 the war on the eastern front ended with a treaty dictated by one side. Eight months later it was void
Key points at a glance
- The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk of 3 March 1918 ended the First World War on the Eastern Front between Soviet Russia and the four Central Powers.
- Talks began in December 1917 at the German Eastern headquarters; after Trotsky broke them off, a renewed advance by the Central Powers forced the signature.
- Russia gave up Poland, the Baltic lands, Finland and Ukraine, losing more than a quarter of its European territory.
- After eight months the treaty was void; in 1919 Germany had to recognise its abrogation explicitly.
In numbers
8
months in force
March to November 1918
4
central powers at the table
German Empire, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria
1/3
of the population ceded
along with more than half of industry
- War until the armisticeabout 40 months
- Peace negotiationsjust over 2 months
- Lifetime of the treatyjust over 8 months
- In the ceded territoriesabout 1/3
- In the rest of the countryabout 2/3
- Period
- December 1917 to November 1918
- Place
- Brest-Litovsk, today Brest
- Parties
- Soviet Russia on one side; the German Empire, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria on the other
- Outcome
- A separate peace of 3 March 1918, made void by the armistice of 11 November 1918
- Author
- Johannes Max Harms
What was the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk?
On 3 March 1918 Soviet Russia and the four central powers signed a separate peace at Brest-Litovsk. It ended the First World War on the eastern front while the war in the west continued.
A political upheaval had come first. The government that took power in Petrograd in November 1917 had made an immediate end to the war one of its central aims and, in the Decree on Peace, called for talks without territorial gains or indemnities.
The other side accepted the offer but not the condition. An armistice took effect on 15 December 1917 and talks opened a week later at the headquarters of the German supreme command in the east. The venue itself already reflected the balance of power.
Who negotiated, and under what pressure?
On one side stood the delegations of the German Empire, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria, led in practice by the German supreme command, whose views prevailed over those of the civilian leadership. On the other stood a government that had been in office for a few weeks and whose army was dissolving.
The Russian delegation tried to make time its ally, expecting that revolutionary movements in central Europe would change the situation. Out of that came the formula of 10 February 1918, "neither war nor peace": the talks were broken off, the war declared over and nothing signed.
It did not work. On 18 February the central powers resumed their advance and moved far east within days. The signature of 3 March came on harder terms than the ones refused three weeks earlier.
What was agreed?
Soviet Russia gave up rule over large territories in the west of the former Tsarist empire, among them Poland, the Baltic lands, Finland and Ukraine. Taken together that amounted to roughly a third of the population, more than half of industry and most of the coal reserves.
A second treaty had prepared the ground. On 9 February 1918 the central powers had made their own peace with the Ukrainian People's Republic, meant to secure grain deliveries and known for that reason as the bread peace. It removed a lever from the Russian delegation before the main question was settled.
Economic provisions and a later supplementary agreement on payments were added. The treaty was therefore not a settlement between two sides but the fixing of an imbalance. Contemporaries and historians alike call it a dictated peace.
How long did the peace hold?
Eight months. The armistice of Compiègne of 11 November 1918 obliged the German Empire to renounce the treaty, which made it void before its provisions had been carried out.
Militarily it had served its purpose for the central powers: troops moved from the east to the western front. Politically, occupying the ceded territories continued to tie down large formations, so the relief fell short of what had been hoped for.
For the other side the treaty bought time despite the losses. The government in Moscow had ended the war abroad and could turn to the civil war at home. A treaty can be a defeat and an instrument for the same party at once.
What is there to learn from it?
Among the peace treaties in this series Brest-Litovsk is the counter-case. It shows what a peace treaty is when only one side shapes it: a snapshot of the balance of power. Change that balance and the treaty changes too, not by negotiation but by lapsing.
It also illustrates a distinction familiar in peace research since Johan Galtung. Negative peace is the absence of violence. Positive peace also requires the absence of the conditions violence grows out of. The treaty of 1918 did not even secure the first for long, because it settled nothing both sides had an interest in.
In practice: the question about an agreement is not how good the terms are for the stronger side, but what the weaker side holds in it that it is willing to defend. Without that, the treaty is only a pause until the situation shifts again.
Why did Russia leave the war?
The war sharpened the social, economic and political problems of the Tsarist empire. War weariness and poor supplies to the cities led to large demonstrations in early 1917, which turned into the February Revolution. On 15 March 1917 by today’s calendar Tsar Nicholas II abdicated, and the monarchy came to an end. Power passed to a Provisional Government, which had to share it with the workers’ and soldiers’ councils.
The new government carried on the war alongside its allies and so lost the support of large parts of the population. The Bolsheviks around Vladimir Lenin profited from this. Lenin returned from exile in Switzerland in April 1917, a journey the German government had made possible. His following grew with the promise to end the war at once, to give the land to the peasants and all power to the councils.
With the October Revolution the Bolsheviks took power in November 1917. Leaving the war was among their first measures. The old army was falling apart, opponents were gathering at home, and the new government needed peace to secure the power it had seized. On the German side the end of the Eastern Front raised hopes of deciding the war in the West after all.
How was the treaty judged after the war?
In 1919 the victorious powers demanded an explicit renunciation. In the peace treaty with the Allies, Germany recognised in Article 116 the abrogation of the Brest-Litovsk treaties. Article 292 declared void all agreements Germany had concluded before and during the war with Russia or with states on formerly Russian territory. The treaty was thus finished twice over: militarily by the armistice, and in international law by the peace settlement.
In the Weimar Republic it became an argument in the dispute over the peace of 1919. Hitler complained that many Germans saw that peace as no more than just retribution for Brest-Litovsk, and from 1920 he set the two treaties against each other point by point in his speeches. According to a report on a speech of September 1920, he called the treaty of 1918 child’s play compared with the new peace treaties. According to Baumgart, he repeated this talk dozens of times in ever new versions.
Historians take a more sober view. In 1969 the historian Winfried Baumgart pointed out that dictate is not a term of international law but a political slogan, and that comparing percentages of lost territory is not enough. Soviet and later Russian historiography long followed Lenin’s reading of a heavy but unavoidable sacrifice. More recent work stresses the consequences for East Central Europe and reads the treaty as European history, not merely German and Russian history.
What follows from it
A treaty resting only on the balance of power on the day it is signed ends with that balance.
Sources
- German Federal Archives, history gallery: The Peace of Brest-Litovsk (in German)
- German Historical Museum, LeMO: Peace of Brest-Litovsk 1918 (in German)
- 1000 Key Documents (Bavarian State Library): The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, introduced by Winfried Baumgart
- Austrian State Archives: Peace with Russia, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk 1918
- Deutsches Historisches Museum, LeMO: The Russian Revolution
- Deutsches Historisches Museum, LeMO: Declarations of war 1914 to 1918
- dekoder: The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (Robert Kindler)
- Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk: Signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk
- Winfried Baumgart: Brest-Litovsk and Versailles. A comparison of two peace settlements, University of Mainz
- Yale Law School, Avalon Project: Treaty of Versailles, Part III (Article 116)
How it unfolded
- 8 November 1917The new government in Petrograd issues the Decree on Peace and calls for talks without territorial gains or indemnities.
- 15 December 1917An armistice takes effect. The eastern front falls quiet while the terms are discussed.
- 22 December 1917Talks open at the headquarters of the German supreme command in the east, at Brest-Litovsk.
- 9 February 1918The central powers sign a separate peace with the Ukrainian People's Republic, weakening the Russian position at the table.
- 10 February 1918The Russian delegation breaks off the talks with the formula "neither war nor peace", without signing.
- 18 February 1918The central powers resume their advance and move far to the east within days.
- 3 March 1918The treaty is signed, on harder terms than the ones refused in February.
- 11 November 1918The armistice of Compiègne obliges the German Empire to renounce the treaty. It is void from then on.
More in this series
- The Treaty of VersaillesJanuary 1919 to January 1920On 28 June 1919 the parties signed a treaty in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles that only one side had drafted. How long it could hold was decided by that
- The Peace of TilsitJuly 1807Prussia lost half its state and kept its existence only because a third party at the table wanted it kept
Frequently asked questions
Where is Brest-Litovsk, and what is it called today?
Brest-Litovsk is called Brest today and lies in Belarus. In 1917 the town was the seat of the German Commander-in-Chief East. The armistice and then the peace treaty were negotiated there, and the treaty was signed in the White Palace of Brest Fortress.
Did Russia sign the peace treaty?
Yes, on 3 March 1918. Sokolnikov, Karakhan, Chicherin and Petrovsky signed for the Russian Soviet Republic. Trotsky, who had led the delegation before, had still refused to sign on 10 February. Only the renewed advance of the Central Powers and Lenin’s pressure within his own party led to the signature.
What was Operation Faustschlag?
Operation Faustschlag, German for “Operation Punch”, was the advance of the Central Powers that began after the talks broke down in February 1918. Their troops occupied Ukraine, Belarus and the Baltic lands still under Russian control and came dangerously close to the seat of government in Petrograd. The disintegrating Russian army could not stop them. The advance forced the signature of 3 March.
What role did Lenin and Trotsky play?
Trotsky led the Russian delegation from January 1918. He wanted to drag the talks out because he hoped for revolutions in Central Europe, and he used them as a public stage. Lenin pushed through, against resistance in his own party, the acceptance of even harsh terms. For him peace was the breathing space the revolution needed to survive.
What became of the ceded territories?
The Central Powers planned states under German control there, from Ukraine to the Baltic. The end of the war changed that. Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Finland became independent and remained so, at first, for about two decades. Ukraine and Belarus were turned into Soviet republics from 1919.
From history to a mission of your own
Every one of these treaties was the work of people who thought it could be done. The same stance is what it takes on a small scale: in a neighbourhood, a school, a club.
Find your peace mission