Papers and Documents relating to the Foreign Relations of Hungary, Volume 1, 1919–1920 (Budapest, 1939)
Documents
1920 i6 5 zone, since a strategic frontier of small length would not materially improve the position of Austria, completely surrounded by hostile states. At the next meeting, the British, French and Japanese proposed another frontier whereby the Pozsony-Csorna line would be left to Hungary, but all territory west of it would go to Austria. The Italians maintained the position that the historic frontier alone is justified and would accept the suggestion of the three Great Powers only if the Hungarian frontier would go as far as Pozsony. The American proposed that St. Gotthard should be given to Austria, contrary to the original proposal. The British agreed to this. Vannutelli defended Hungary's interest with an astounding knowledge of facts and very cleverly. He argued in substance as follows: „It is bad enough that Pozsony was alloted to the Czechs, although the majority of the population is Hungarian and the number of Slovaks is small. It would be senseless humiliation if now a bridge-head would be given to the Czechs on the right bank also. Moreover, this was not even contemplated at the previous meeting." The chairman replied that this was not discussed before because the Czechs did not present a claim therefor until they brought forward the idea of the Czech-Yugoslav corridor. The British and French delegates remarked concerning the bridge-head, that in the case of Eszék they followed the same procedure as when they gave a bridge-head to Szeged. Vannutelli'rejoined that the situation of Szeged and of Pozsony is wholly different. The Maros [he apparently confused it with the Tisza] is a small river, whereas the Danube is a great international river and it is therefore unnecessary to give the Czechs a bridge-head on the other side of the river. The problem could be solved by creating an international or neutralized railroad station on the right bank. He pointed to the fact that not a single Slovak can be found on the right bank. Since no one shared the views of the Italian delegate, his proposals were shelved after a brief discussion. The remarks of the British expert and of the presiding French delegate deserve comment. According to them, the strategic consideration is unimportant since the bridge-head at Pozsony would be, in the case of war, of little value. It is
