The Prague Post
October 7th, 2008
Endowment Fund     Business Listings ONLINE      Reservations      Classifieds    Subscriptions
Real Estate Prague Prague Rentals Prague Apartments Prague Art & Antiques

Home » Archives » News

The Pittsburgh Agreement at 90

In Pennsylvania in 1918, Masaryk and others wrote Czechoslovakia into existence

By Markéta Hulpachová
Staff Writer, The Prague Post
June 18th, 2008 issue

COURTESY PHOTO
A sign in the City of Bridges uses the English spelling of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, whose U.S. visit helped create a country.
Independence, at a glance



A look at events leading to the
formation of Czechoslovakia

1915 Czech and Slovak immigrants sign an agreement in Cleveland, Ohio, establishing a framework for declaring independence from
Austria-Hungary
May 1918 Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk signs Pittsburgh Agreement in Pennsylvania
Oct. 28, 1918 Czechoslovakia declares independence from Austria-Hungary
January 1919 Officials at Paris Peace Conference approve the
establishment of Czechoslovakia

Before inscribing his name on a document that would become the cornerstone of an independent Czechoslovakia in 1918, soon-to-be President Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk traveled far from home. Cautious of the volatile political atmosphere in the Czech and Slovak lands at the conclusion of World War I, Masaryk and his colleagues arranged to meet in a location known for its high concentration of free-thinking compatriots: the U.S. city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Signed by the representatives of Czech and Slovak immigrant organizations in the United States, the so-called Pittsburgh Agreement marked the first significant Slovak initiative to join the Czechs in their struggle to form a joint state and break away from Austria-Hungary.
To commemorate the 90th anniversary of the May 1918 signing, Slovak officials are now showcasing the document in that country’s National Museum until autumn, when it will come to Prague.
With a length of only six sentences, the Pittsburgh Agreement — which built on the framework of a similar agreement signed in Cleveland in 1915 — was not an ambitious treaty. “The agreement itself is vague,” said Zdeněk Zbořil, a political scientist at the Institute for International Relations in Prague. Its main purpose, he added, was to provide the international community with proof that a joint Czech and Slovak initiative to establish a sovereign nation existed.
As the local independence movement thrived, the United States provided those promoting Czechoslovak sovereignty with greater free-speech rights than the disintegrating Austro-Hungarian Empire. “The immigrant community in America had the freedom to express its national demands,” Zbořil said.
In addition to providing a safe zone for the declaration, signing the treaty in Pittsburgh symbolized the United States’ support of Czech and Slovak independence. “From the beginning, Masaryk decided that the question of Czechoslovak sovereignty should be an international issue,” Zbořil said. “American support meant opposition to Austria-Hungary.”
While largely withdrawn from post-World War I development in Europe, the U.S. government hammered a “nail in Austria-Hungary’s coffin” through President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points. “The Points contained a detailed plan for Austria-Hungary and included a theory that its regions should have a right to self-determination,” Zbořil said. “This was fatal for Austria-Hungary, which had been a multi-ethnic state.”
When defining the Pittsburgh Agreement, current politicians such as Slovak Parliament Chairman Pavol Paška tend to emphasize the United States’ role in the formation of Czechoslovakia.
“History proves that we have always known how to fight for freedom and democracy and that we have something to be proud of,” Paška said while presenting the document to the Slovak Parliament May 30. “Ninety years ago, Slovak-Americans were the strongest pillar of Slovak national interests.”
Through this interpretation, the agreement promotes the agendas of pro-Western policymakers in Slovakia and here, namely Prime Minister Mirek Topolánek, Zbořil said.
“This paternalistic approach tries to capitalize on the fact that Czechoslovakia was formed under the patronage of the United States,” he added. “However, it completely disregards the existence of a domestic independence movement, which was much stronger.”
Therefore, it was not the Pittsburgh Agreement — which ultimately represented the interests of several thousand Czech and Slovak immigrants — but this domestic initiative that accomplished the final “revolution,” according to Zbořil.
Dreams of democracy
By promising to found a “republic with a democratic constitution,” the Pittsburgh Agreement embodied Masaryk’s vision to found a state based on the principle of “the American dream of democracy,” Zbořil said.
“Masaryk’s dedication to American-style democracy was important,” he added. “At the time, he knew that establishing such a system here would be difficult, so it was essential to know how to translate these principles into the Czech domain.”
While the idea of a sovereign nation had lurked in the Czech consciousness for centuries, Slovak independence was in 1918 a relatively novel concept. “We have to look at the differences in nationalist thought,” Zbořil said. “As Czech thinkers pondered the question of state and statehood, Slovakia was battling for its language rights — they didn’t even have official grammar at the time.”
Historically, Slovakia was the “Upper Land” of Hungary, although inhabitants had managed to maintain a separate Slovak language and culture.
At the onset of World War I, a wave of nationalism that threatened to dissipate this fragile autonomy swept through Hungary. “It resulted in an oppressive, nationalist atmosphere that encouraged Slovaks to join the Czech effort to found an independent state,” said Zbořil.
As the strongest manifestation of the idea of Slovak statehood, the Pittsburgh Agreement plays a more vital role for Slovaks than for Czechs, he added.
In the years following its signing, the initially celebrated treaty became a point of conflict between the “Czechoslovakists” who advocated a unified government and Slovak politicians pushing for a federalized system, Zbořil said.
While pushed aside amid the supranational political philosophy of communism, this rift would resurface throughout Czechoslovakia’s existence, eventually causing its “Velvet Divorce” in 1993.

Markéta Hulpachová can be reached at mhulpachova@praguepost.com


Other articles in News (18/06/2008):

Browse the Current Issue

If you enjoyed this article, why don't you subscribe to the print version!
We accept secure online transactions provided by PayPal and Moneybookers

Reader's comments:

add your comment
[09:16 21/06/2008] : This article skews the facts and makes everything seem very orderly and patriotic, neither of which were true regarding the Pittsburgh Agreement.
The fact is, that the Pittsburgh Agreement stated that Slovakia would have its own Parliament, judicial system and cultural autonomy.
Precisely these points where never fulfilled by Masaryk -- hence, Czechoslovakia was doomed into non-existence from the very beginning.
This is also why Slovaks even today dislike Masaryk and his creation of the Czechoslovak First Republic.
A politician who does not fulfill his signed agreements is a bad politician. This is the "dirty Czech secret" that no wants to talk about yet on the contrary puts Masaryk on a pedestal and into cult status.
As Pat Buchanan writes, "True nations are not created by treaties, as Czechoslovakia was in 1919 and Bosnia was in 1995. They grow organically, out of a people's history, traditions, faith and culture..."
Even though I am not a Pat Buchanan fan, on this one he is 100 percent correct. The creation of Czechoslovakia was idiotic and the people that did so were naive and ignorant of the realities of Central Europe. From a Czech point of view, the most logical things that should have been done after World War I was: A) Not to give approval of the Versailles treaty. (This treaty was the raping of Germany and only beckoned for another war.) and B) Strive for the federalization and democratization of Austria-Hungary. A large democratic entity in Central Europe would have eliminated the expansionist tendencies of the Germans and the Russians. Even in the late 1880s, Palacky warned that without Austria-Hungary, Russia would be a threat to the Czechs.
This scenario played out exactly as was predicted by him. Of the 70-plus years that Czechoslovakia existed, close to 50 of them were as a non-democratic proxy state to a dictatorial power having absolutely no freedom for its citizens.
Is that a successful establishment?.... By no means, it's something that we Czechs should put behind us as soon as possible. Czechoslovakia was a failure, and its glorification is a mind-boggling stupidity.
Tomas Budesinsky
Prague
Note: Comments that include profanity, personal attacks or any other inappropriate material are prohibited.  

Add your comment


Full Name: *
City: *
E-mail: **
This comment can be published in the print version of The Prague Post
Enter the text on the right:
 visual captcha
Comment: *
* Required field. In order to be approved for display, comments must have a first and last name and a city.
** E-mails are required and will only be used for internal purposes.

Most visited in Business Listings

Hotel booking
The Prague Post Online contains a selection of articles that have been printed in
The Prague Post, a weekly newspaper published in the Czech Republic.
To subscribe to the print paper, click here.
Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited.