You are on page 1of 21

Security and Diplomacy Master

Romanian Institutions of National Security - Seminar


16th December 2015
Dragomir-Groza Timea-Beatrice
Giunca Georgiana
Gîfei Alexandra
Hobu Elena-Ramona
Tutuianu Miruna

NATIONAL SECURITY IN ROMANIA


DURING 1919 – 1944

INTRODUCTION
The Great War resulted in the death of empires, the birth of nations, and in national boundaries
being redrawn around the world, including for the Romanian nation. The consequences of World
War I, the analysis and measures taken by all parties involved in the Great War prepared the
ground for World War II.
But how Romania played its cards in this strategic game? Which were the security choices,
actions and contexts which led to diplomatic isolation and internal weakness for Romania when
World War II started knocking at its doors?
In my opinion, the biggest mistake made by all big European states was their lack of reaction to
the Germany`s rearming which led to WWII and its consequences.

I. THE INTERWAR PERIOD (1919 – 1939)

PARTICULARITIES OF THE INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ENVIRONMENT


After WWI politicians and senior military commanders did not make any illusions about peace in
Europe and throughout the world, all of them being aware that the end of the war meant a
provisional solution and other struggles will start in the future.
World War I stimulated the development of courses in international organization, international
relations, and international politics.
Following its defeat, the Austro-Hungarian Empire broke up into several independent states, the
most prominent being Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Hungary, and Austria.
The Ottoman Empire also split apart. Portions of the former empire were placed under the
control of France and Great Britain, such as Syria and Palestine, while the bulk of the empire
emerged as the Republic of Turkey.
In North-Eastern Europe, new states emerged that had formerly been a part of the Russian
Empire. Among them were Estonia, Finland, Latvia, and Lithuania.
The United States emerged from World War I as the world superpower. Because of U.S.
intervention and President Woodrow Wilson's diplomatic leadership, America became the
“savior of Europe” and left World War I with a major confidence boost.
The events between the first and second world wars resulted in a profound transformation
process of the security’s environment, generating consequences which deeply affected the
international community on long term. The end of World War I represented a temporary
solution, all involved parties being aware that a new military conflagration will take place in the
following years.
If France praised its army and had a self-confident, conservatory attitude, in Germany a dynamic
campaign of rearming was strongly developed with the aim of revenge.
Military strategists of that period, especially Germans, came up with different ideas and solutions
for a future war, underlining the importance of mobility, aviation and tanks, all these being taken
into account by Germany. On the other hand, even if the French strategist Charles de Gaulle had
close theories, these were not taken into account by the French decision makers.
Even if at the end of World War I tough measures were taken against Germany, which was
banned to develop its army, this was not respected, leading to a dynamic rearming resulting in
disastrous consequences – World War II.
The analysis of WWI`s consequences represented a major concern for all military commanders,
as well for military theorists, who established lessons learnt and future strategies.
Each fighting party tried to use its own war experience, to improve its experience, to introduce
the best methods in training troops and preparing staff, increasing and mobilizing all possible
resources. Defeated countries tried to establish all means in order to take revenge and based on
the experience of WWI, it has been accredited the idea of the armed nation as an essential
modality to get revenge.
Between the two world wars theoretical preoccupations in the military field were based on
reform, studying WWI generating an international debate. If in France the strategic thinking was
conservatory, in Germany dynamism prevailed.

PARTICULARITIES OF THE DOMESTIC SECURITY ENVIRONMENT


Due to the final outcome of World War I, Romania found itself in the winners` side, being
awarded with additional territories, increasing its active and mobilized army, becoming a
significant state in the South-Eastern Europe.
Before WWI the Kingdom of Romania gained independence from Ottoman Empire in 1881,
after several centuries of Ottoman rule. During WWI Romania joined the side of the Allies, but
were quickly overrun by Germany and Austria. Romania was occupied throughout most of the
war, although continually resisted.
After WWI Romania regained sovereignty when Germany and Austria were defeated, and were
forced to withdraw forces. Significant additional territories were awarded to Romania, including
Transylvania (long under Austria-Hungary rule), which nearly doubled the size of Romania, and
Bessarabia (eastern half of modern Moldova), which elected to join Romania during Russian
Civil War.
Towards the end of the First World War during the collapse of big empires Romania found itself
in the center of ethno-unifying processes.
In the first two years of the Great War, Romania was neutral and after that entered the war. Due
to Russia`s war exit, Romania recognized its defeat, but due to the war final outcome, Romania
was placed on the winners side and due to favorable environment and some smart actions
realized the National Unity.

“The setting up of the (Romanian) unitary national state was a brilliant historic victory of the
long heroic struggle of the masses for creating the Romanian nation and the coming true of the
age old dream of all Romanians to live in unity within the borders of the same country, in one
free and independent state” (Nicolae Ceausescu – 1983).

The Romanian diplomats, especially Nicolae Titulescu (1882-1941) had a special activity in the
frame of Nations League to maintain the peace and to assure the territorial integrity and national
suzerainty of Romania.

Romanian State was close to France between the two world wars. Therefore, Romanian strategic
thinking and military reforms were produced according to the French model.
Factors taken into account in Romania`s defense strategy after 1918:
-
the new political-state configuration of Center and South-East Europe closing the process
of state unification;
-
changing the geopolitical and geostrategic status;
-
WWI experience;
-
the evolution of means of war and strategic and tactical concepts;
-
changes occurred in the European and world powers.
Romania`s surface, population and economic potential was increased due to the unifying process
of Bessarabia, Bucovina, Transylvania and Banat. The active army was of about 750,000 –
800,000 persons, mobilized staff being 3.4 - 3.5 million persons, almost double than before
WWI.
If in 1914 Romania was caught between two rival empires, Austro- Hungarian and Russian,
strategic directions on which Romania could be attacked were most probably East, West and
South, a difficult situation for the Romanian military specialists being created.
After 1918, Romania changed its geopolitical and geostrategic status, becoming an important
actor of Central Europe.
The Romanian diplomacy was concerned with organization of some regional alliances to
guarantee the existent borders. So on 1921, from the initiative of Romania it formed the Little
Agreement (Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia) and on 1934 ''The Balkanic Agreement''
(Romania, Greece, Yugoslavia, Turkey).
Romanian Army performed its campaign plans taking into account the evolution of the
international situation, directions and objectives of Bucharest’s external politics, Romania`s
external agreements and mainly bilateral and multilateral agreements, Romania`s threats,
national military potential and so on. These documents were produced and improved yearly for
all the above mentioned fronts.
In 1930, Romania`s democracy was changed towards fascist dictatorship. Iron Guard, supported
by Germany committed many political assassinations.
After 1931, based on political orientations, West Front became the first priority, Hungarian
attack supported by Germany being considered probable. That`s why all resources were directed
towards the Western Front.
In 1933, liberal prime-minister Ion Duca dissolved the Iron Guard, arrested thousands and a few
days later he was assassinated by Iron Guard legionnaires.
Till 1935, the East Front was considered as the main one. Soviet Union was perceived as the
most dangerous enemy. East frontier was protected by the Romanian-Polish alliance performed
in 1921 and renewed in 1926 and 1931.
King Carol met Adolf Hitler in 1937, the German chancellor`s wish being to see a Romanian
Government led by the pro-Nazi Iron Guard.
In April 1938, king Carol arrested Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, the Iron Guard`s leader, imprisoned
him. A few months later Codreanu was killed along with other legionnaires.
Military factor followed the directives given by political authorities.
South Front was considered as a secondary front.
Bulgaria had a difficult situation being less probable to attack Romania, taking into account the
Danube River and the agreement between Romania and Yugoslavia.
The conclusion was that Hungary and Bulgaria could act only within alliances, being inferior of
Romania.
After Hitler and his party took power in Germany, the Romanian Big Major State considered the
West Front the most exposed one. As a consequence, a special plan has been elaborated in 1933-
1934. The Big Major State concluded that regarding the 3 potential enemies, and the importance
of the problems they can put, the order was Soviet Union, Hungary and Bulgaria. As an
emergency order in solving the problems, hierarchy was: Hungary, Soviet Union and Bulgaria.
The Romanian Big Major State took into account the hypothesis of generalized conflict,
Romania being attacked by 3 of the above mentioned states.
As a strategy, the Big Major State predicted on the South Front the defensive approach the main
attention being given to Dobrogea. In 1938-1939, Romania was surrounded strategically.

The German and Russian influences over Romania were clear and the two powers took decisions
related to Romania.

The signing of pact Ribbentrop-Molotov at 23rd August 1939, at Moscow instituted the
supremacy of the two powers (Germany and Russia) over South-Eastern Europe. In this context
it accentuated Romania's isolation and provoked to it grave territorial loses.
STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN ROMANIAN SECURITY
Military dimension of the political and territorial unification process of the Romanian state
The political and territorial unification of the historical regions in 1918 determined the necessity
of establishing of the national structures and also the foundation of the future developing. This
was the most difficult task that Romania had to accomplish in the first decade after the First
World War and it was highly debated in the national parties (National Liberal Party, Romanian
National Party, People’s Party etc.). The liberals were seen in that period like the creators of the
national union, so their opinion concerning the future steps that Romania should take was very
important. They promoted the idea that Romania should develop itself through its own potential,
focusing on the national capital (,,prin noi înșine”). On the other side, the National-Pleasants’
Party promoted the foreign capital oriented policy, which was supposed to enhance the
developing possibilities of Romania.
In that period, we were witnessing a new Romanian state that was not consolidated enough. The
military dimension had a very important role in maintaining the unification non-affected. Also, it
needed a strategic reform updated to the new national context. In theory, the debate about this
subject came up with a lot of solutions, but the real problem was that Romania did not have the
financial resources to put them in practice. Romania had to go back mostly to the pre-war model,
keeping similar amounts for the military spending.

Strengthening military structures in the early postwar years


Despite this situation, the experience of the First World War and the new political realities
imposed a series of measures to improve military structures. In June 1919, the Higher Army
Council was created and it was define like "permanent body for the organization, preparation and
management of the military war".
Another major change is that in 1920 it was founded the Communication Troops Headquarter
subordinated to the Engineering Troops Inspectorate. On 18 March 1920 the army was disbanded
and the General Headquarter was abolished, remaining active just the troops from the West
(Transylvania) and East (Bessarabia). As a result of this measure, corps and divisions received
tasks for peacetime.
A very important moment from this period was the adoption of the Constitution on 28 March
1923 which grounded the Romanian military policy guidelines, the overall structure of the armed
forces and the military obligations of all citizens. Title V of the Basic Law refers to the
organization of the armed forces. Head of State (King) was "the head of the armed forces". The
Constitution stipulated that all Romanian citizens, irrespective of ethnic origin, language or
religion are part of one of the elements of the armed forces. The last ones consists of active
military, reserve and militia.
Based on the constitutional provisions governing structures adopted a series of laws, decrees,
ministerial decisions, instructions and regulations in order to solve all the issues regarding the
country's military power. In 1924 it was created the Superior Council of National Defense vested
with the politico-military leadership of the national defense system. Its chairman was the Prime
Minister and as it had members the ministers of: National Defense, Interior, Foreign Affairs,
Finance, Public Works, Industry and Trade, Agriculture and Fields, Labor, Health and Social
Welfare. Chief of Staff was secretary of the council. The Higher Army Council had an advisory
role. The law also stipulated that the Superior Council of National Defense operate a permanent
secretariat headed by an officer appointed by royal decree.
What were the problems with this new military structure?
Its first composition could be easily confused with the government, lacking only a few ministers
- Public Instruction, Justice. Also, the implementation of the projects had no natural continuity
due to frequent changes of government, which led to the abandonment of many of them. Despite
these failures, the Superior Council of National Defense had a positive role, adopting it,
especially in the fourth decade, a series of measures to strengthen the defense capacity.
Legislative steps taken in the military and security problems
On the basis of constitutional provisions, the Parliament adopted on 23 June 1924 the Law for
the Organization of the Army, a document that was the basis of interwar Romanian military
system. According to this law, military service was compulsory for all male citizens of the
country who had at least 21 years. The soldiers under the age of 41 formed the active army,
which act on the front.
This law expresses complex structure that Romania had comprising commands, units,
formations, services etc. There were divided the active headquarters and the territorial ones,
giving the latter more developed attributions. The national territory was divided into seven
military regions corresponding army corps (missions in peacetime: recruitment, mobilization and
requisitions).
Romania adopted three major laws during the interwar period regarding the military dimension.
The one already discussed is the one from 1924 followed by the ones from 1930 and 1932
(which brought minor changes in the structure of the Romanian army). Overall, the three military
organization laws represented steps in enhancing the power of the military structures.
Another important legislative step that can be considered is the establishment of the National
Aviation Fund on 1 May 1931, which aimed to provide funds for the purchase of aircraft and
armament. In April 1932 the Senate and Chamber of Deputies adopted the Law on the
Organization and Establishment of the Aeronautics. According to this document, the Ministry of
Defence shall establish an undersecretary of State for Air, which aimed to lead and manage in a
uniform manner all the aircraft and anti-aircraft defense means.
Materializing the concept of "armed nation", the Parliament adopted in April 1933 the Law on
the Organization and Planning for the Nation and Territory in Wartime. It supported same main
ideas: the organization of the military; orientation of public opinion; development of industry,
agriculture and trade related with the needs of national defense; organization and development of
all means of communication and transport; preparing young people from age 19 to 21; defensive
organization of the territory.
In November 1936 the Ministry of Air and Navy was created through the merger of the Air
Department and the State Department of the Navy. On 27 May 1937 was created Inter-
Ministerial Delegation for Equipping the Army", an institution headed by the Prime Minister.
This complicated bureaucratic structure intended to enhance the modernization of the Romanian
army, by partitioning more rigorously circumscribed areas of national defense. In reality, all
these measures were, in fact, anti-reformist because they increased considerably the number of
staff management and the related expenses, creating, moreover, difficulties of leadership.
What was the main inspiration for the Romanian military law?
It is very important to mention that French Army Regulation became in 1924 the basic document
for the organization and training of Romanian military forces, other items being restructured on
the basis of the stipulations thereof. This generated some debate within domestic military
thinking. In general, until the third decade the unification of the military structures ended. In
terms of design, the Romanian army remained attached to the French model, the links established
during the war being maintained and developed.

MAJOR SECURITY POLICY ORIENTATIONS


Debate within the military theorists reform
At the forefront of military theoretical work there were issues of principles and the means of
defense. The idea quasi-unanimous developed at that time was that the Romanian state could not
subsist only by appealing to the "armed nation principle". According to Romanian military
thinkers, defensive capacity supposed two main elements: a standing army strong and equipped
with everything necessary; thorough organization of the nation to obtain the full potential of
human and material resources to defend the country in the face of a potential aggressor. This
involves adopting a comprehensive plan with specific objectives, milestones and deadlines for
completion, funding sources and so on. The most significant contributions were grouped around
national defense industry, which many Romanian military thinkers thought it is a vital necessity
for our country.
Already known is that at the end of World War Romanian army officially adopted the French
doctrine, because belonged to the Allied armies, victorious in war. Also, France and Romania
were in the same camp, those who fought for the preservation of the territorial status quo. Many
theorists were not satisfied with the adoption or adaptation of French doctrine and they
campaigned for a national doctrine. They argued that each state must develop national doctrine.
All these opinions influenced the actual military reforms.
The Liberals wanted to focus more on developing the modern military ways of fighting,
proposing the provision of the army with full arms and modern technology, the development of
military industries, equipping the military aviation, preparation for chemical war.
The People’s Party (Alexandru Averescu) was more interested in reorganization of the military
bases in order to give the country's needed military strength. It proposed to reduce the duration of
military service to ensure adequate training and a solid national education and soldierly.
The Conservative Party, led by Grigore Filipescu had reformist provisions, saying that national
defense should be organized from the fact that future wars will not only represent clashes
between armies, but between nations. Therefore, the standing army was intended to make school
instruction and education of the nation.
The Pleasants’ Party focused more on the principle of the armed nation, expressing it like an
integral vision of the way schools, barracks and the church act as one organism, for a full
education, which will lead to the formation of good soldiers, but also good citizens. The party
wanted a military model, not a militaristic one. They did not believe that Romania should
maintain a very strong military capability and be prepared anytime to use it aggressively.
All the programs of these political parties see the army as the main priority for Romania. In most
of the documents there is the promise of allocating sufficient funding for training, equipment,
food and initiation of measures to transform it into an institution of integral education of the
nation. Political programs mentioned also the principle of the armed nation as a priority for a
better organization of the Romanian state.

SECURITY THREATS, VULNERABILITIES, OPPORTUNITIES AND RISKS


The Kingdom of Romania in the interwar period meant the largest territory, population and
economic potential of the Romanians, as a unified nation, in history. Therefore there was a great
opportunity to use all the benefits of this union in order to build a strong country. Unfortunately,
the vulnerabilities and threats were more powerful than the positive aspects of this historical
status and, in the break of World War II, the Kingdom of Romania found itself in a delicate
geopolitical and geostrategic position.
In terms of vulnerabilities, internal/structural factors that can affect the national security, there
can be identified a series of major issues as follows:
- Military sector
o Opacity of the national military doctrine
o Non-linear and unproductive military reforms
o Excessive politicization of the army
o High level of bureaucracy
o Corruption within the armed forces
o Lack of financial resources for training, logistics and equipment acquisitions
o Old military technique
- Economic sector
o The Great Depression of the 30s highly affected the entire national economy
o With a modest state budged, the multitude of priorities led to insufficient
budgetary allocations for important sectors
o Undeveloped national industry, including poor defense industry
- Political sector
o High level of corruption within the political parties
o Frequent political scandals and political instability
o Carol II`s authoritarian tendencies
- Social sector
o Ethnical heterogeneity
o Increased social differences
o High level of poverty
o Low quality of education
o Poor infrastructure
The threats, coming from outside the borders, can have the power to undermine the national
security. In the Interbellum Romania, the major threats and risk are classified as follows:
- Military sector
o A possible Soviet attack from the East
o A possible Hungarian and German attack from the West
o A possible Bulgarian attack from the South
o The development of modern heavy fighting machinery and weapons
- Economic sector
o The dependency on import, especially for military equipment
- Political sector
o The Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact from 1939 isolated the country politically and
diplomatically
- Social sector
o The revisionist tendencies of Romania`s neighbors
ROMANIA`S MAIN OBJECTIVES
The Constitution from 1923 stated the “The Kingdom of Romania was a united and indivisible
national state”, and its territory was non alienable.
After the Great Union, the main national interest of the reunited country was to maintain its
status-quo and, as I.G. Duca, Minister of Foreign Affairs, stated, the most important task was to
“consolidate this unity inside and outside”.
The integration of all the provinces under a unitary state structure was a difficult task for the
politicians of that time. The mission became more complicated as it faces two major ideological
controversies: the Liberals pledged for development “through ourselves”, based on national
capital, while the National Peasants` Party promoted open gates for foreign capital.
Overall, with constitutional rights and responsibilities to ensure and fulfill, the Interbellum
Romanian state struggled to formulate and implement reforms which, along with the strategic
choices, would unify on different levels the society and would guarantee the independence and
territorial integrity.

STRATEGIC CHOICES MADE BY ROMANIA


Between the two World Wars, the Kingdom of Romania was dominantly influenced by the
alliances system of France. As a consequence, the strategic thinking of this period was French-
inspired, including the military reform.
The new geopolitical and geostrategic status of Romania after the World War I was favored by
the fact that the country was no longer trapped between two opposing great powers – the Austro-
Hungarian Empire and the Russian Empire.
Still, the military strategists took into account that there was the possibility for the frontier to be
attacked from three different directions – East, West and South.
In order to protect the East boundary from a possible Soviet attack, considered to be the most
likely and dangerous, Romania signed a defensive alliance with Poland (The Second Polish
Republic) in 1921.
The West boundary was threatened by the Hungarian revisionism, with possible German support
in the background, so Romania chose to join the Little Entente (1920), a regional security
alliance with Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, supported by France.
As a consequence of the Franco-Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance signed in 1935 and the same
behavior adopted by Czechoslovakia, Romania followed the same pro-soviet policy, with the
price of losing the Polish alliance.
Another strategic choice made by Romania was signing the Balkan Pact, in 1934, along with
Greece, Turkey and Yugoslavia, a treaty whose purpose was to recognize the status quo of its
members and avoid eventual territorial demands between each other.
In addition to the regional security alliances, Romania counted especially on France. But, in the
eve of the World War II, Romania lost all these alliances and found itself alone, with insufficient
resources to face all attacks. Strategically isolated, Romania was powerless in dealing with the
Soviet ultimatum in 1940 and gave away significant territories (Bessarabia, north Bucovina,
north-east Transylvania and south Dobrogea).
Internally, Romania underestimated the importance of a coherent and efficient military strategy.
The economical restrains and wrong management of resources let the country with no strong
armor in facing the external dangers, failing to preserve the territorial integrity.

ALTERNATIVE POLICY OPTIONS


The accomplishment of this desiderate to consolidate the Romanian unity inside and outside
would have been the best alternative policy. While the Great Powers used the interwar period to
prepare themselves for an imminent new conflagration, Romania`s internal weaknesses made it
incapable to keep up with the fast changing times and the volatile international climate
An alternative option could have been a sustainable military reform, including building a strong
national defense industry.
On the other hand, a versatile diplomacy could have positioned Romania as a key state in the
Balkans and a trustful ally.

I. WORLD WAR II PERIOD (1940 - 1944)

1. INTRODUCTION

World War II, also called Second World War, during the years 1939–1945 was in many respects
a continuation of the disputes left unsettled by World War I.

The principal belligerents were the Axis powers: Germany, Italy, and Japan and the Allies:
France, Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union and China.

During this period, each and every country involved had to improve their military force in order
to be victorious at the end.
If we make the aftermath, we can easily see the consequences which occured, such as
banckrupcy, ruins, decolonization, lost empires, new borders of Europe, etc. The End of World
War II resulted in milions of deaths which make it the bloodiest conflict, as well as the largest
war, in history.

At the beginning of war the romanian army was poorly formed, during this time, Marshal Ion
Antonescu`s important goal of his government was to reform the military force.

2. PARTICULARITIES OF THE INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ENVIRONMENT

The onset of the XX-century has been marked by profound changes of the security environment.
The world has become ever more complex, and globalization has asserted itself as an irreversible
process.

Some of the World War II causes were Italian fascism in the 1920s, Japanese militarism and
invasions of China in the 1930s, and the political takeover in 1933 of Germany by Hitler and his
Nazi Party and its aggressive foreign policy. Because Germany was defeated along with its
allies, Germany was stripped of one sixth of its territory and forced to pay huge reparations.

The war in Europe began with Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939. The immediate cause was
Britain and France declaring war on Germany after it invaded Poland on 1 September 1939.
Within a month, Poland was defeated by a combination of German and Soviet forces and was
partitioned between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Until December 1941, United States of
America did not enter the war, but once it did, it took a leadership role.

World War II gave hope that a revised League of Nations, supported by the United States and the
Soviet Union and profiting from the lessons of the 1930s, might serve as the basis for a new
international order.

Because the League of Nations had become discredited, in the eyes of the Soviet Union, expelled
from the league in 1940 because attacked Finland, it was necessary to create a new world
organization. The United Nations was officially established in 1945 after earlier conferences and
discussions.

The United Nations it differed in some particulars from the League of Nations but reflected the
same basic philosophy of collective security. It placed more power in the hands of the five major
states, which had veto powers and permanent representation, the Security Council, which had
exclusive jurisdiction in security matters. The permanent members were the United States, the
Soviet Union, China, France, and the United Kingdom.

Collective security may be defined as a plan for maintaining peace through an organization of
sovereign states, whose members pledge themselves to defend each other against attack.

As Clausewitz said : World War II was a continuation of World War I by the same means.

3. PARTICULARITIES OF THE DOMESTIC SECURITY ENVIRONMENT

In order to analyze the Romanian military reform between 1940 and 1945 we must acknowledge
that the army reform was absolutely neccesary from multiple reasons that we will exhibit in the
following.

In 1940 the army had to retreat without a fight from Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina, northeastern
Transylvania, Southern Dobrogea, which amounted to a major military defeat.

In this matter, the ruptures in the summer of 1940 led to the dismantling of the military system,
erected after World War I.

Fist of all, the Romanian State was stripped of essential stability, large units, population and
economic potential has diminished, there have been significant losses of men, weapons, fighting
technique, the moral state of the soldiers of all ranks had much to suffer. All this required a
redesign of the national military body, so as to become an instrument of war more effectively.

Also, the military reform was required because of the experience brought by the first year of the
New World Conflagration. The war had changed their physiognomy, he became one of
movement, the great alianiamente defense, such as the "Maginot line" was outdated. Based on
the French model, it quickly collapsed because of the german "blitzkrieg", which has
successfully used tanker aircraft. binomial tank-plane.

In the other hand, the military reform was also required by the new external orientation of the
country. To power, Ion Antonescu declared that Romania will join the Axis system, which
resulted in joining the Tripartite Pact in 23 November 1940 and in the arrival of a German
Military Mission in Romania, requested by King Carol II.

The German Military Mission in Romania had to train the Romanian army, according to new
techniques and methods of warfare. Unofficially, the mission was to ensure the protection of oil
fields and to pursue a discreete control regime on the Bucharest regime, in anticipation of future
conflict with the Soviet Union, although the two great totalitarian powers were allied, at that
time.

4. STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN ROMANIAN SECURITY

On September 14, 1940, Romania was proclaimed 'National State-legionary'. Ion Antonescu,
self-proclaimed 'leader of state', he established full control over the military.

Therefore, the concept of reforming the army or its reorganization, belonged to Ion Antonescu,
assisted by a team of soldiers led by chiefs of the General Staff of the period, Alexandru Ioaniţiu,
Joseph Jacobici, Ilie Steflea and Gen. Constantin Pantazi.

Military strategy and tactics are essential to the conduct of warfare. Strategy is the planning,
coordination, and general direction of military operations to meet overall political and military
objectives. As it is the situation of General Ion Antonescu who stressed that the reform of
military forces represent one of the most important goals of his government.

The most urgent task of the new government installed on September 14, 1940 was
deconcentration and military demobilization.

The program was extremely ambitious military, he materialized in the formula 'a small army, but
strong' with discipline and instruction, which must be appropriate with the 'Romanian realities
and modern technical conditions'.

Between September 1940 and August 1944 military reform has undergone three major stages:
• September 6, 1940 - June 22, 1941;
• December 1941-September 1942;
• January 1943 - February 1944.

In the first stage, the conception that guided the military reform was based on a complex of
factors of which we retain:

• the international situation; Romania's Axis system;


• diminishing territory, population and military potential of the country as a result of
territorial Rapture in the summer of 1940;
• conclusions and lessons learned from the conduct of operations in the first year of the
war;
• General Ion Antonescu views on the state and prospects of development of national
military forces;
• the ideas of the German military mission etc.

The army reorganization plan was outlined in September November 1940 with the German side,
in the government debates, in the Ministry of National Defense and in the General Staff.

The program established in these discussions had the idea of creating an army with reduced
effectives but well equipped, trained and highly mobile.
In particular it would consider the following measures:
• establish the Peace framework and the mobilization of the army in accordance with
demographic and material resources of the country;
• adequacy the organizational structures to the state's financial resources
• equipping large units with modern combat means and in particular with armored anti-
aircrafts means, anti-tank etc;
• conducting recruitment;
• abolition of all existing commandments to peace and no utility in wartime;
• creation of large homogeneous units which has a good mobility on the field;
• reduction of units with special recruitment in order to enhance the quality and the
recruitment conditions of the operative army, particularly the infantry.

For aviation and marine main objectives were:


• to reduce to a minimum the command structures,
• the homogenization of the material;
• completing the material for the protection of air and water navigation;
• creating deposits with maintenance materials, spare parts, fuel, raw materials;
• improvement of the equipment by purchasing or producing advanced materials;
• the creation of a naval base etc.
One of the priorities was the military education reform.
The army reorganisation was a gradual process, developed throughout the military hierarchy
scale, from group, gun, plane and ship to the great peak operating unit of government and
military structures.
In the first stage, the reorganization should include:
• massive deconcentration of staff deployed in June 1940;
• destruction of commands, units and formations of services;
• uniform organizational large units of infantry and cavalry;
• reorganization of services by introducing motorized means;
• development of aviation bombing etc.
In the second phase was to act on structures of struggle and goals include:
• the establishment of the light division, with seven battalions;
• enhancing the engine services;
• improving the equippent of units.

There were several new components in this reform process:


• The basic weapon was the infantery which suffered modification.
• The cavalery diminished its importance during the 1939-1940 operations.
• The frontier troops suffered organizational modifications by repealing the division,
brigade groups, but maintaining the body.
• The tank troops had an important role in the fizionomy of the World War II.
• A new weapon was the paratroopers.
• The services were a sensitive component in this process.
• The aeronautics had an important role for Antonescu, this is why he tried the
mobilization of this weapon.
Also, the Romanian army endowment was a sensitive area in this period, Antonescu wanted to
eliminate the large gaps accumulated between the wars. In this matter Antonescu tried to obtain
army endowment from Hitler, from Kurt von Tippelskirch, from Italy and from France.
In conclusion, the major organizational restructuring was initiated in the force land whereas in
the navy and in the aeronautics, the restructuration was modest. Many of the institutional-
organizational projects were postponed.
During the second stage, Romania engaged in war on June 22, 1941 along with Germany, the
purpose of its being the recovery of the two provinces, Besarabia and Northern Bukovina, taken
a year ago by the Soviet Union.
After the battle in Odessa, the structure of the division must have been the same. The concept
was broadly similar to that in September-October 1940, Antonescu said that wants "a small
army, but strong, with perfect framing, equipment, discipline and training" because in his
opinion a well-equipped army has a higher value than a large, poorly framed one.
In order to study all these issues relating to the reorganization and mobilization of the army, the
Great Major State met in November 1941.
On this basis, the Commission determined:
• Switching to a radical reorganization and preparation for war;
• Organizing and equipping of the large units to be based on existing material and on the
one that will be certainly bought, both transactions shall be held in successive stages;
• Adopting the model of organization and doctrine of the German army, taking into
account the organization of the neighboring armies, primarily the Hungarian;
• Drafting a new outreach plan, which takes effect on April 1, 1942.
Reorganization after the new conception had to take place in two phases:
• The first was staggered from January 1 to June 15, 1942 which refered to making changes
within units that did not involve actual transfers.
• The second began in mid-June, which refered to the introduction of recruits in the
mobilization works.
In conclusion, we can say that in this period, Marshal Ion Antonescu and the Great Major State
tried to take a number of organizational measures, which aimed at a thorough reform of the
Romanian military body, but political and military events led to an unreformed institution.
Due to massive employment decision on the Eastern Front, mobilization plan remained
essentially unchanged, so that the number of armed corps remained the same.
The army components in this second stage suffered little modifications:
• The army kept its old organization, but received a training center for the army, a
firefighters company and services formations, especially the one refeared to health;
• The army troops lso kept theis structural organization, but It was established, however,
the 6th Army Corps Command, as an organ of peace;
• The infantert division suffered few oranizational changes, such as a divisional
headquarters infantry and artillery, which controlled the infantry regiments and artillery, and also
a recovery and rehabilitation company.
• Mountain Troops Troops suffered significant organizational mutations, such as: mixed
mountain brigades were transformed into divisions and received a throwers company.
• The cavalry troops has undergone change: csavalry brigades were transformed into
divisions
• The Armoured Division suffered serious losses in July and August 1941 battle, that have
significantly affected the combative capacity.
• The genius and transmission troops have undergone significant changes
In conclusion, it can be appreciated that in late 1941 and early 1942, the Great Major State did
not operate fundamental changes in the organizational structure of the army. The measures taken
where a priority, because they wanted to eliminate the malfunctions that occurred during
operations in the summer and fall of 1941. The solutions adopted only partially met the pursued
goals, the political and military events did not allowed to carry out a radical reform of the
military body, expected, by Marshal Ion Antonescu.
The last stage of the military reform, is influenced by the military defeat in the great military
battles in Stalingrad and Stepa Calmuca.
In the first stage of the reorganization, held until April 15, 1943, they were filled with equipment
and personnel the four divisions which remained inside and had recovered five divisions from
the front. Also, continued the large operation of organizatising the units left in the operative area.
In the second stage, which took place from 15 April to 1 August 1943, the remaining six
divisions were merged into inside with other six divisions coming from the front.
The cavalry troops suffered the biggest changes, the number of large units decreased from six to
three.
To conclude, the romanian army continued to have the same features until then:
• many employees,
• insufficient equipment,
• more and inefficient services,
• numerous commands
• good soldiers
• uneven frames etc.
However, Romania was capable of an important military effort for more than three years, which
is a performance in itself.

5. MAJOR SECURITY POLICY ORIENTATIONS


During this period of time the main policy orientations of Antonescu was to reform the army and
to reorganize it.
An important role in this matter returned to the General Secratary of the Ministry of Defence
who became the organ through which Ion Antonescu, as Minister of National Defence, could
prepare, direct and control, executing works for the military and national defense .
Also, the Great Major State had its previous responsibilities. It had to manage the operative-
strategic training and to operative equip the army. There was two Major States, one for the navy
and one for the aviation, which were subordonated to the chief of the Great Major State. The
position of Chief of the Great Major State was accomplished in this period by the generals
Alexandru Ioanitiu, Iosif Iacobici and Ilie Steflea.
In order to achieve a profound reform of the Romanian army, Romania, in 1940 was integrated
in the Third Reich sphere of influence. The German Military Mission had the task to train the
Romanian army with new methods and procedures.
In conclusion, for Ion Antonescu the army was the main priority for Romania. There were
several external steps in order to obtain army endowment, but also there were internal steps.
Thus, in 1940 it was created the Ministry of Economic Coordination and Great Major State, the
Subsecretaries Stare of Army Endowment, the General Commissariat for metallurgy and
armament. All these measures have resulted in an increased in the process of equipping the army.
Ion Antonescu, taking into account the experience of the First World War, has retained the
control of the national military forces, except those on the front, which came under German
command. The reforms that we applied in this area did not have the suficient breadth and depth
in order to transform the Romanian army as it aimed at beginning Governance.

6. SECURITY THREATS
In terms of vulnerabilities, internal/structural factors that can affect the national security, there
can be identified a series of major issues as follows:
- to stop the border threats from Hungary, Romania organized regional army which had the
mission to secure the actions of the enemy from this side of the border
- a possible Soviet attack from the East
- a possible Hungarian attack (backed up by Germany) from the West
- the dependency on import, especially for military equipment
7. VULNERABILITIES
- Germany was the main supplier of the armament in Romania in 1940, so that Romania
was vulnerable because Germany wasn`t interested to supply the Romanian army in case
of a war between the two parties
- Romania was weakly endowned with modern technology of war in 1940, because of the
fact that they we`re only partially supplied by the Germans and the Italians and in case of
war they we`re far from the requirements they needed to fulfill
- Germany trained the Romanian air force, but in their advantage and not Romania`s ,
because the Germans we`re highly interested in protecting the petroliferous region
- the lack of tanks represented to Romania in 1941 a deficiency , although improvised
solutions we`re applied, but the effects we`re not as positively as expected
8. OPPORTUNITIES
- Germany and Italy (30 August 1940 - Dictate of Vienna) assured the border of Romania,
which relaxed the external situation of the country
- the possibility of accommodating the German army experience with the Romanian
armament and methods
- the decision of General Ion Antonescu, taken in 1941, that Romania shouldn`t pe part of
the war for a long period, is an opportunity for the Romanian army to reorganize and
prepare for a future war
RISKS
- USSR was feeling threatened by the imposed Dictate, he feels that Romania is assuring
the border from them, seeing them as the enemies.

ROMANIA`S MAIN OBJECTIVES


Romania`s main objective in this period was the military force reform. The military force needed
to be reformed also because of the new external orientation of the country. A German military
mission was send to Romania, in order to teach the Romanian army with the new war methods,
but off the record, this Mission had the job to protect the oil tanks and to have control over the
regime from Bucharest, in case of a conflict with the USSR.
This military force reform had following purposes: to reduce the military structures to the strictly
necessary parts, endownment of the units with modern methods of fighting and so on. The
military education was the most important objective to watch in this reform. This military
education had to become more practical and less theoretical.
General Ion Antonescu, during a session of the Council of Ministers (sept. 1940) stated that the
army need to be rebuilt and consolidated. After WWI the Romanian military system was
disjuncted, because of the huge loss of people, munition and the pessimistic state of mind of the
soldiers.
Another main objective of Romania was to increase the level of motorization in the army units,
by training drivers. The efficiency of the training activity of the drivers was suspended because
of the lack of time and financial resources.
After the fight from Odessa, General Ion Antonescu came to the conclusion that the Romanian
army should be reorganized by having a homogeneity of structure and the number of the big
units will be proportional with the existent material.
Equipping the army was necessary during the 1942 also, because the war against USSR couldn`t
be postponed and the army had to be well equipped and prepared.
STRATEGIC CHOICES MADE BY ROMANIA
The military program during the period of 1940-1941 was based on the fact that Romania needs
a small, but powerful army. This principle had at its basis many factors, like: the evolution of the
international system, the decrease of the territory, of the population and of the military force of
the country, but also the opinions of General Ion Antonescu regarding the evolution perspectives
of the national military force.
General Ion Antonescu was pursuant to the fact that Germany wanted to be ready in case of a
future conflict with the USSR , but he also gave his permission so that the Romanian army
should participate to this future campaign, in order to recover Bessarabia and the north of
Bucovina. The General Ion Antonescu asked for help from the Germans to improve the
endowment of the Romanian army. Although, the first time he was refused by the Germans, the
second time he achieved to close an economical contract between the Romanians and the
Germans, in which the Germans assure to restore the economy of Romania in the next 10 years.
In 1944, Romania`s priority was strengthening the defense on the eastern part of the country,
leaving the military reform on the second plan. Meanwhile, on a political plan, Romania was
having negotiations with his allies, hoping to find a solution to leave the war they have beside
Germany.

9. ALTERNATIVE POLICY OPTIONS


An alternative policy option for Romania could be building a strong national defense industry,
in order to be independent in case of war. This alternative policy option could have solved the
multiple defeats which Romania been trough and it also creates new jobs, helps the economic
development of the state by exporting armament.
10. CONCLUSIONS
Romania was not able to ensure its security, neither internally nor internationally in the Interwar
period and during World War II.
During the period of 1940-1944, the military reform in Romania had 3 stages: September 1940 -
June 1941; December 1941-September 1942; January 1943 - February 1944. The established,
ambitious reform of Ion Antonescu remained in a phase of intention, from various reasons. As
so the radical reform initially announced, was replaced one by one with series of
reorganizations, meant to satisfy the strategic demanding. These facts determined the
Romanian military organism to remain, in essence, unreformed.
The Romanian army continued to have the same characteristics as before - insufficient
endowment, many quarters, good soldiers, but unequal frameworks and so on. Although,
Romania was capable of a major military effort for over 3 years, which represents a remarkable
performance.
REFERENCES
1. Petre Out - Reforma militară şi societatea in românia (1878-2008). Relaţionări externe și
determinări naţionale, Editura Militară, Bucureşti, 2009
2. Barry Buzan - People, States and Fear: The National Security Problem în International
Relations, 1983
3. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/world_war_2.htm
4. http://www.genevaenvironmentnetwork.org/?q=en/events/long-shadows-examples-
environmental-impacts-world-war-ii
5. http://www.history.co.uk/study-topics/history-of-ww2
6. http://www.worldwar2.ro/
7. http://www.britannica.com/event/World-War-II
8. http://www.worldology.com/Europe/interwar.htm
9. http://study.com/academy/lesson/economic-social-political-consequences-of-the-great-
war.html
10. http://rohistory.ici.ro/eng08.htm
11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Romania
12. http://territoryterror.org.ua/en/history/1919-1939/romania/
13. Volodymyr Kubijovyč, Arkadii Zhukovsky, Bukovyna, in "Encyclopedia of Ukraine",
Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, 2001
14. Sherman David Spector, "Rumania at the Paris Peace Conference: A Study of the
Diplomacy of Ioan I. C. Brătianu", Bookman Associates, 1962, p. 70
15. Irina Livezeanu (2000). Cultural Politics in Greater Romania: Regionalism, Nation
Building, and Ethnic Struggle, 1918–1930. Cornell University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-
8014-8688-3
16. Donald Peckham, Christina Bratt Paulston, "Linguistic Minorities in Central and Eastern
Europe"), Multilingual Matters, 1998, p. 190
17. Dennis P. Hupchick (1995). Conflict and chaos in Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
p. 83. ISBN 978-0-312-12116-7.
18. “Text of the Treaty of Trianon”. World War I Document Archive. Retrieved 31 August
2008.
19. Konrad Hugo Jarausch, Thomas Lindenberger, Annelie Ramsbrock, Conflicted
Memories: Europeanizing Contemporary Histories, Berghahn Books, 2007, pp. 39-42.
20. http://rohistory.ici.ro/eng08.html
21. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Romania

You might also like