Paper 2›World History›World Wars

The World Wars

“We muddled into water".”

David Lloyd George (1934)

Immediately after the war the victorious nations agreed that Germany was the cause of the war.

Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles - the famous 'war guilt' clause - said so.

The same idea that Germany, or rather German militarism was the root cause of the WW 1 remained popular in the aftermath of WW 2.

British historian A.J.P. Taylor in 'The Struggle for Mastery in Europe (1954)' claimed that 'The German bid for continental supremacy was certainly decisive in bringing on the European War ...' German historian Fritz Fischer (1960 s) argued that: there was a 'will to war' amongst the leaders of Germany.

The German government wanted events to slide into war in 1914.
German leaders (Junkers) were particularly aggressive in the years before 1914, and that this destabilized international politics.

Although most modern historians allocate some of the blame to Germany, there was just as much 'will to war' in other countries, and among masses.

The issue is one nation's militarism is other nation's defence.
Moreover, the militarism of certain people cannot be blamed on the entire nation.
It was not just Germans who were militaristic, but the idea of glory of war was quite popular among Europeans in 1914.

So, the real causes go much deeper

The First World War was the culmination of Nationalism, Militarism and Imperialism, while mutual distrust acted as a catalyst. Although the war started on the issue of Sarajevo massacre, various factors economic, political, social and intellectual were accountable for it.

(A) Political, economic and diplomatic causes:

Rabid Nationalism

By the opening years of 20 th century, an extreme form of nationalism had emerged in Balkan peninsula. It was practically impossible to satisfy the mutually contradictory national aspirations of all the groups in the Balkan.

These unfulfilled national aspirations were behind the murder of Austrian French Ferdinand in June 1914 which triggered the war.

Industrial Revolution and economic competition

The Industrial Revolution created multi-polar power centres in Europe, which complicated the balance of power.

German and British capitalists were competing against each other for market share in Europe.

▪ Britain was interested in maintaining her economic domination and Germans were determined to establish their economicdominance in Europe.

▪ This intense competition was also responsiblefor the creation of a fragile environment in Europe.

Imperial rivalry in Asia and Africa

The aggressive expansionist policy adopted by German king Kaisar William II had triggered a new phase of imperial expansion in Europe. It affected the power equation among European countries, leading to the collision of interests and created the situation for future war.

▪ The 1 st and 2 nd Moroccan crisis were the outcome of the same.

However, for the time being, it was the imperialistic expansion in Asia and Africa that diverted the continental tension outwards. By the end of the 19 th century, the whole world was partitioned among European powers. Thus started the return to the continent,which vitiated the problem more as they fell into the trap of the Balkan question which led to the war.

▪ The Annexation of Bosniaby Austria in 1908 wasanotherblatantexample of imperialism. It was this Bosman issue that triggered the war in the immediate sense.

The treaty of Frankfurt (1871) and the alliance system developed by Bismarck is supposed to be a major factor behind WWI.

By the beginning of the 20 th century, there was the creation of two big military alliances such as the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente in Europe. Tragedy of Miscalculation Belgium as a threatened child, and the stereotyped figure of Germany, as an aggressive military man.

However, these were defensive alliances. So, these alliances are not directly accountable for the war. WWI was started after the Sarajevo massacre, and not due to the clauses of the treaty.

Simultaneously,the roleof the alliances cannotbe undermined.Infact,due tothe presence of the two military alliances, any local conflict became an all-European question.

Militarism and Arms Race: Furthermore, the presence of military alliances led to military rivalry and the manufacturing of weapons.

By the opening years of the 20 th century, an extremely intense arms race started in Europe.Therewasunrestricted military preparedness situation.

This measure created mutual distrust among European powers. Every nation was searching for peace in the strength of arms.

As a result of this, massive military infrastructurehaddevelopedin Europe. In the course of the militarypreparation,the power of policymaking slipped out from the hand of civil authority to the military authority.

Apart from that, it polluted public opinion as well.
Now, only a spark was required to trigger a catastrophic crises and this spark was provided by the murder of Austrian prince French Ferdinand.

Italian journalist Luigi Albertini (The origins of the War of 1914) believed that the primary responsibility for the war lay with Germany's plan of mobilisation. Unlike other countries' mobilisation plans, the Schlieffen Plan was offensive, and meant that, when Germany mobilised, Germany went to war.

Schlieffen Plan (1905)

An ambitious plan to avert two-front war situation for Germany.

Invade France first, defeat in 42 days, capture Paris and re-rout the troops to Russian front before the Russians could completely mobilize.

It relied on three things: German Speed, Russian mobilization (6 weeks), British neutrality.

Diplomatic Humiliations: Almost all the major powers in European had tofare diplomatic humiliations in one way or other during the opening decade of 20 th century.

Germany felt humiliated in Algeciras conference (1 st Moroccan crisis, 1906) when her demand was not supported by any other power except Austria Hungary.

“Dreadnoughts" (massive”

battleships)

Serbia and Russia felt humiliated when Bosnia was annexed by Austria Hungary in 1908.

France felt humiliated when she was made to surrender a part of French Congo to Germany in 1911.

Breakdown of the diplomatic process in Europe.

There were two military alliances/blocks, but simultaneously, the diplomatic channel was not open. Due to the dearth of diplomatic channels, a single incident at Sarajevo could result in a world war.

Social Imperialism

The aggressive foreign policies of many nations were guided by the need to divert the attention of people from domestic problems. ▪ E.g.General Tirpitzadvised Emperor Williamthatthebetter wayto control the activities of SDP is to allow the army to move further, promote imperialist expansion.

So, every major power shares a part of blame.

(B) Socio-cultural causes: Before 1914, there was a general cultural belief that the war was seen as glorious.

J. M. Roberts in History of World War One (1978) writes: 'There was a deliberate cultivation of values and qualities directly opposed to those of the liberal civilization of the day. One spectacular example was the French engineer-turned-philosopher, Georges Sorel. His work, Reflections on Violence (1908), attributed all great achievements to violence. It is not, therefore, in the diplomatic documents, or the plans of the war offices that the whole story of the origins of the war can be found, but in mass psychology.'

Social Darwinism

Harvard Spencer, a radical individualist, promoted Social Darwinism, which idealized war and conflict. If a nation is fighting a war, it will emerge as stronger.

Militaristic society ▪ Traditionalelites stillsawthemselvesasawarrior caste.Emperorsand Kingsoften appeared in military uniforms. For them, war was regarded as a legitimate tool of statecraft.

▪ War was also regarded as natural and inevitable. Every state in Europe had been forged and sustained on the battlefield.

Role of Public Media

▪ The press and Newspaper also played a very important role in creating the extremely volatile environment in Europe leading to the outbreak of WWI. The press in every country was pushing the government to the maximum possible extent.

As a result of this, the Governments in Europe were not in a position to pursue a conciliatory approach. Any effort to settle the issues peacefully was being interpreted as a weakness on the part of the governments.

Popular level ▪ In popular European mentality, the war was perceived as a progressive phenomenon.

So, when WWI started the European people enthusiastically welcomed the war.

Winston Churchill's argued that war came in 1914 becauseofageneralrestlessnessthroughout Europe,in which everybody was turning to violence as a way of sorting out their dissatisfactions.

Could WWI be averted, or was it inevitable?

“Very few countries wanted to take part in World War, but very few believed that they could”

stay away from the war. This dichotomy played that most important role important role in bringing the war nearer."

Germany: There were no German interests involved in war.

German king was pursuing a policy of brinkmanship (1 st and 2 nd Moroccan crisis) but on both the occasions Germany withdrew.

German capitalist believed that in one more decade of peace, German economy would be far ahead of Britain.

Russia: Had no capacity to fight war because in 1905, Russia was decisively defeated by Japan Russia was got to come out of that shock.

Britain never pushed for war. The British government always tried to resolve the issue peacefully.

France had just come out of a long international isolation & French government had no intention to risk another such punishment.

Italy was not a very Big power to think of war.
Turkey was the sick man of Europe. It was finding it difficult to maintain its existence.
Serbia and Austria-Hungary were the only 2 states in Europe that believed that their problems could be resolved only through a war.

Serbia knew very well that her demands would not reach the years of big powers of Europe all the time peace war prevailing and only the outbreak of a war would draw international attention towards Serbia.

All over Europe, people greeted war with tremendous joy and enthusiasm. 'These people are very anxious to send our soldiers to face death', Lloyd George.

Austria-Hungary believed that Serbia would not listen to Austria peacefully, Serbian challenge could be wiped out on a permanent basis only through a war.

Thus,the question arises, had the assassination of Archduke Ferdinandnothappened - would it have averted the war?

The assassination of a king and a prince wasnot such a major incident in itself that should have resulted in a war. Even before this incident, the king of Italy and that of Portugal

were assassinated in 1900 and 1909 respectively. But the incidents did not result in the world war. So, the actual reason for the war was different.

Behind WWI, the basic interest of the European powers was involved.

For Austrian Empire, it was a last-ditch attempt for preventing its collapse.
For Russia, the question was to maintain its credibility and to secure its interest in the Balkan region.

For Germany, it was a means for gaining the market.

Also,if Russiawastoenterthewar from Serbiaside,itwasimpossible for Germany to stay away because disintegration of Austria-Hungary empire would have resulted in German isolation in Europe.

For Britain, WWI was a better means for maintaining the balance of power in Europe.
For France, there was a question for the restoration of her old power and prestige, which she had maintained before the battle of Sedan.

For Italy, WWI was the extension of the unification of Italy. Through it, she would fulfill the unfinished agenda of unification.

Inlightofthebasicclashofinterestof Europeanpowers,wecometotheconclusion that WWI was almost inevitable.

Total War Why is the First World War characterized as a Total War?

The Conceptoftotalwarwasdevelopedby German General Ludendorffin 1935 inhisbook 'The Total war.' It is identified by some attributes related to its nature, intensity and impact.

The first world war proved to be different from earlier wars in all these respects.

Total commitment of national resources is the most important feature.

The nations involved in it invest their entire resources to win the war because a victory is essential for their survival.

The war efforts proved very taxing on belligerent nations. Apart from being a war of soldiers, it proved to be a war of resources as well.

Total participation of all sections.

This war was not fought only by soldiers, but the civilians also participated in it indirectly.

▪ The political leaders and diplomats participate by forming alliances and counter alliances.

▪ The industrialists participate by producing war goods.

▪ The workers participate by offering their labour unconditionally.

▪ The cultural groups participate by motivating soldiers & civilians.

During world wars, unified HQ and central command and communication n/ws were created to mobilise the forces effectively.

Governmentpropagandaposterswereusedtodivert allattentiontothe war on the home front.

Since it blurred the distinction betweenthe armyand civilians,it involvedheavy casualties of civilians as well. The civilian targets are deliberately selected to cause maximum possible damage to enemy and destroy their fighting resolve.

It stretched for a long time period.

When Austria had invaded Serbia, she was confident about finishing it within limited time, but it could not happen. Both sides were almost evenly matched so the war did not conclude quickly.

It had a wider geographical reach.

It isfoughtsimultaneouslyathundredsoffontsacross the globe.Thefightisnot limited to any particular geographical region.

Total participation

It involves most of the important nations of the world either directly or indirectly. Apart from Europe, it expanded to other continents as well involving Asian and African colonies of European powers. (Total of around 30 countries)

It was all devastating, using the latest technology.

Airplane, submarines, maxin machine gun
Weapons of mass destruction: ▪ Even chemical and biological weapons came into use.

The first world war even involved genocide in course of war - Turkey causes Armenian genocides.

It is awar of attrition because it involvesthe slow degeneration of the fightingcapa city of the nations involved.

Trench warfare
Naval blockades

Total Victory

The objective of the total war is to completely destroy the adversary's capacity to resist and inflict unacceptable level of destruction. The destruction of the enemy regime is intended to get total unconditional surrender, and no negotiated peace.

Eric Hobsbawm argues that the war was a turning point in modern history, marking the end of the "long 19 th century" and the beginning of a new era of conflict and instability.

Political impact of WW 1

Decline of four powerful old dynasties and formation of elected governments in some regions

Russia Romanoff dynasty Monarchy was first replaced by Bourgeoise government and then by a communist government.

Austria Hapsburg dynasty Division Germany Hohenzollern dynasty Weimar Republic West Asia Ottoman Dynasty Division

It resulted in the emergence of many new independent nations:

Austria, Hungary
Latvia, Lithuania & Estonia
Poland
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia
Independence of Albania and Finland was recognized

WWI was responsible for revolutions in Russia (1917) and Turkey (1921).

It led to changes in the borders and territories of several European countries.

For example, Romania was granted control over Transylvania, which had previously been part of Hungary.

Germany lost significant territory. ▪ Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France.

▪ West Prussia and Posen were given to Poland.

WWI gave a boost to democracy in Europe because the totalitarian regimes were replaced by democratically elected governments.

WWI gave a boost to nationalism in Europe.

The principle of self-determination used by the peacemakers of Paris intensified nationalist sentiments.

The humiliation of Germany, Italy and Japan also resulted in the emergence of radical nationalist force in these countries.

Socialism and communism gained popularity in Europe as a result of the devastation left behind by WWI. The concept of welfare state gained popularity because of the need for massive reconstruction.

Thus, there were growing elements of democratization on one hand, while on the other hand, due to challenge of economic reconstruction in nations, the existing governments assumed more power. So, both these opposing trends are visible simultaneously.

It also led to the breakup of several empires. Many new nations were created from the former territories of the empires.

The German was also dissolved, and its colonies were divided among the Allied Powers.

There was a creation of new mandates in the Ottoman territory. These territories were placed under Allied Powers and were intended to be governed until they were ready for independence.

There was an emergence of a new balance of power in the world.

USA, Britain, Japan, and France emerged as big powers due to direct and indirect effects of WWI.

Restoring the balance of power to pre-1870 was a major challenge for the peacemakers.

Secondly, European powers were concerned due to that fact that the first world war was won with the support of two major outside powers - USA and Japan. So, there was the question of rebalancing Europe as well.

However, for the Americans, it was not the European balance of power, but the rise of Bolsheviks in Russia was a major concern. So, he was interested in the right to self judgement for the ethnic minorities.

There was a wave of nationalism that emerged in the colonies, as a consequence of forced participation of colonies in the world war as well as experience of the returning soldiers from the warfront.

Economic impact of WW 1

WWI left behind a trial of devastation.

The total economic cost of the war was more than 400 billion dollars.
The European economy was badly ruined by the war.

It changed the direction of international trade.

Europe became an importer. The industrial supremacy of Europe was no more. Business in Europe fell to 25% of the pre-war period.

The war pushed Europe into a trap of hyperinflation.

This was the outcome of the policy of pump priming. As a result of this, the life of common masses became extremely difficult.

The war pushed Europe into an extremely serious debt crisis. When America demanded the return on loans, there was no money to pay.

Thewar-timedemand crashed leadingto recession and within onedecadeof thewar, the worst type of depression visited the world, popularly characterized as World Economic

Depression of 1929-30.

Socio-cultural Impact of WW 1 World War 1 hadaprofoundimpactonthesocio-culturalfabricofthesocietiesinvolved,with lasting effects that continue to be felt today. The war shattered traditional values and attitudes,aswellassocialstructuresandhierarchies.Historianshaveanalyzedthesechanges from various perspectives, considering both the short-term and long-term consequences of the war.

WWI resulted in an extremely serious demographic crisis in Europe

More than 8.5 m lives were lost lives, more than 21 m were wounded and millions could never be traced.

In some of the countries like Bulgaria & Britain almost whole of young generation had got wiped out.

Death of millions had a profound impact on families and communities.
Significant changes in migration patterns and social mobility.
Psychological consequences on survivors: Shellshocked soldiers

Significant changes in gender roles and the emergence of women's rights movements.

The male members went on the border and thus women took new responsibilities in the absence of men, such as working in factories, hospitals, and other essential roles.

This experience challenged traditional gender norms, leading to increased demands for women's suffrage and greater gender equality.

Suffrage: ▪ Germany 1918, Austria 1919, US 1920, Britain 1928 ▪ Later (post WW 2): France 1944, Italy 1946, Belgium 1948

Impact on working class

Success of a nation depended to a large extent on the domestic industrial front where working class participation was crucial. It led to the empowerment of the working class as well.

The working class gained social status as a result of war because the economic significance of workers increased enormously due to massive loss of life.

Impact on Education

The war disrupted schooling in almost all the combatant nations. ▪ The armies requisitioned schoolhouses for hospitals, and young male teachersentered the military en masse. The shortage of personnel made it difficult to carry out a normal school regime.

World War I altered education through curriculum changes.

▪ There was a strong focus on patriotism in education during the war.

▪ In the post-war era, the larger focus shifted on international peace.

Erosion of trust in traditional authority figures, such as political leaders,the military, and the church.

The war exposed the shortcomings of these institutions, as they failed to prevent the outbreak of hostilities, and then struggled to manage the conflict.

This loss of faith in authority figures led to a widespread sense of disillusionment, which contributed to the rise of new political movements and ideologies,such as fascism and communism.

It resulted in a strong anti-war attitude in Europe.

Peoplefailedtounderstand the efficacyofwarasa part ofnationalpolicy because they failed to find any positives impact of war.

Belief in science

Culturally, WWI gave a serious jolt to the idea of progress, and humanism, and encouraged a sense of skepticism. ▪ Before WWI, it was emphasized by European scholars that European culture had reached up to the highest stage of civilization.

▪ But WWI rejected such a perception and rather tried to prove that human beings are still savaged or uncivilized and they could use weapons of mass destruction even against their fellow human beings.

The war also had a profound impact on art and culture

Many writers and artists were deeply affected by the war and its aftermath, and sought to express the traumas and sense of dislocation and uncertainty in their work.

Modernist movement, which emerged during this period, rejected traditional values and a focused on experimentation and individual expression.

Theywere influenced bytheworkof philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzscheand Sigmund Freud, who questioned traditional notions of truth, morality, and the self.

Examples: ▪ James Joyce, Virginia Woolf, and T.S. Eliot in literature.

▪ Pablo Picasso, Wassily Kandinsky, and Henri Matisse in Painting.

The war also gave rise to new forms of popular culture, such as jazz music and film, which shaped the cultural landscape of the remaining century.

UPSC CSE PYQs - Paris Peace Treaties

"The international situation that confronted the peacemakers in Paris was in the brutal realities of history, the result of a temporary redistribution of the balance of power in the world." Comment. [1987, 60 Marks]

The treaties made at the Paris Peace conference in 1919-20 were replete with unstable compromises, reflecting more materialism than idealism. Elucidate. [1990, 60 Marks]

"The Treaty of Versailles was merely an armistice for twenty years." Comment. [1993, 20 Marks]

Analyze the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles of 1919 and examine the validity of Germany's objections to the Treaty. [2000, 60 Marks]

"The most important single factor …in the year following 1919 wasthe French demand for security." Comment. [2004, 10 Marks]

"Treaty of Versailles contained the seeds of future conflicts." Comment. [2006, 10 Marks]

"Acleverconquererwillalwaysimposehisdemandsontheconqueredbyinstallments." Comment. [2006, 10 Marks]

"Therewasnot only a difference of principles at Paris (Peace Conference)but a clash of personalities." Comment. [2001, 20 Marks]

"The peace of Versailles lacked moral validityfrom the start." Critically evaluate.[2011, 20 Marks]

Doyouagreewiththeviewthat the Treatyof Versailleswasabadcompromise between a treaty based upon force and a treaty based on ideas? [2016, 20 Marks]

"18 January, 1871 had been a day of triumph for the strength and pride of Germany and 28 June, 1919 was the day of chastisement." Critically examine. [2017, 10 Marks]

Europewasat warwith itself in thefirst halfofthetwentieth centurywithalongcease- fire. Comment. [2021, 20 Marks]

The Treatyof Versaillescontainedinitselftheseedsof the Second World War.Examine. [2023, 10 Marks]

Wison's 14 Points and Paris Peace Treaties In January 1918, Wilson proposed hisfamous 14 Points. It was supposed to be a blueprint for world peace and used for peace negotiations after WW 1.

8 points treated specific territorial issues among the combatant nations. (Russia, Belgium, France, Italy,

Austria-Hungary, Serbia, Turkey, Poland)

5 points concerned general principles for a peaceful world:

Open covenants (i.e. treaties or agreements) openly arrived at

Freedom of navigation on seas
Free trade
Reduction of armaments
Adjustment of colonial claims based on the principles of self-determination.

Onepointproposedwhatwastobecome the Leagueof Nationstoguarantee the"political independence and territorial integrity [of] great and small states alike."

In his speech, he said, "It is the principle of justice to all peoples and nationalities, and their right to live on equal terms of liberty and safety with one another, whether they be strong or weak. Unless this principle be made its foundation no part of the structure of international justice can stand." This idea of absolute justice to all, meted out to victorsand defeated party both was a ray of hope for Germany as well. Germany thought of surrendering after the assurance from USA about it.

Thewarcametoanend,when Kaiser Wilhelmabdicatedthethroneandtookpoliticalasylum in Holland. Thus, with the surrender of Germany on 11 th November 1918, WWI came to an end. On the sameday, there wasthe signingofthe Armisticeof Compiègne.The termsof the armistice required Germany to withdraw from occupied territories and to disarm.

However, the problem was that the German Army was very arrogant/adamant and it refused to surrender. On the other hand, the allied powers were not willing to talk to the Army. They insisted on making a deal with a civilian government. Thus, there was a requirement of elections in Germany.

Apart from elections in Germany, even France, Britain etc preferred to hold elections to gauge people's mood and get proper moral authority to negotiate in the Paris Peace Conference.

In January 1919, the Paris Peace Conference began. The victor powers assembled at Paris to decide the terms of peace.

It was called as Paris Peace Conference (PPC). The four main leaders of the conference (Big Four) were:

US - President Woodrow Wilson
British - PM David Lloyd George
France - Premier Georges Clemenceau
Italy - Premier Vittorio Orlando The objectives of the Paris Peace Conference were:

The settlement of the defeated powers

Treaty of Versailles - Germany
Treaty of St. Germain - Austria
Treaty of Trianon - Hungary
Treaty of Neuilly - Bulgaria
Treaty of Sevres - Ottomans

To protect the interest of the minorities in Europe
To decide the future of the colonies of defeated powers
To ensure collective peace through formation of an international organization. Treaty of Versailles (28 June 1919)

“The statement had not been equal to the grandeur of events. They had made a peace”

which was no peace."

JM Keynes Was the treaty of Versailles an unjust treaty?

It was a dictated peace.

Germany surrendered in WWI after the assurance that there would be proper justice even to the defeated party but against the earlier assurance, Germany was penalized.

German representatives were not allowed to participate in the discussions. All the provisions were decided by the victor power on their own and the German representatives were made to sign this treaty with the threat of war.

It was humiliating as well because:

German representatives were made to sign treaty in same hall of mirrors of the placeof Versailleswheretheunificationof Germanywasproclaimed 50 years ago.

The German representatives were not allowed to sit and were not allowed to express their displeasure of terms of the treaty.

Thus,noteventheminimumcourtesyofinternationaldiplomacywasmaintained, and German representatives were treated as criminals.

War guilt clause (Article 231)

Article 231: "The Allied and Associated Governments affirm, and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and their nationals have been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her allies."

▪ There was a debate whether Germany should be held solely responsible forthewarorwhethertheblameshouldbesharedamongallthecountries involved.

▪ The German delegation at the Paris Peace Conference objected to the War Guilt Clause

They argued that Germany was not the sole aggressor and that other countries had played a role in causing the war.

They also argued that the clause would place an unfair burden of reparations on Germany.

▪ However, the Allied Powers, particularly France, insisted on it.

It was a way of punishing Germany and preventing future wars. ▪ Historians' opinions

Fritz Fischer: Germanybore primaryresponsibility for the outbreak of World War I,duetoitsaggressiveforeignpolicyandexpansionist aims.

A.J.P. Taylor: War Guilt Clause was a mistake, as it led to a sense of resentment among Germans and paved the way for the rise of Hitler.

It was an extremely harsh treaty.

Significant Territorial Losses: ▪ Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France.

▪ Poland needed access to sea -

a corridor was created.

Due to this factor, East Prussia was separated from Germany.

Danzigwasmadeafree city.

▪ Rhineland was also demilitarized and placed under Allied occupation.

▪ Saar coal mines were placed under the control of the League of Nations for 15 years, after which a plebiscite was to be held to determine the region's future.

The plebiscite was eventually held in 1935, and the Saar was returned to Germany.

▪ All the German colonies were converted into mandates and were put under League of Nations. The League transferred these territories to Britain and France.

Germany was also subject to significant military restrictions. ▪ German army was limited to 100,000 troops.

▪ Conscription was abolished.

▪ Production of military equipment and submarines was strictly limited.

Punitive Reparations/Indemnity: ▪ The burden of payment was huge - 132 billion gold marks.

▪ This treaty was unjust even for the fact that before the Paris Peace Conference, the defeated party was supposed to give compensation but now the defeated party was expected to give reparations/indemnity. It was unprecedented and not possible to do practically.

However, the treaty is highly criticized because:

Unduly harsh and vindictive

The Treaty was unduly harsh to a Republican Germany. Having overthrown the Imperialist Government, she deserved milder terms. But the provisions gave the indication as if peace-makers were fighting a war with Germany in peace conference.

It was revengeful in nature as France made every effort to take revenge of 1870-

The attitude of the allies, particularly of France, was rather vindictive as was

shown by her demand of the Rhine frontier and heavy reparation.

The treaty was economically devastating to Germany.

Ifthetermsofthetreatywereimplementedintotality,thenthe Germaneconomy would have been completely destroyed. While, on one hand more than 10% of German Industrial area were given to newly created nations, on the other hand, a huge war indemnity was imposed on Germany.

JM Keynes wrote a book called 'The Economic Consequences of Peace' in 1919. Keynes criticized the harsh terms imposed on Germany and argued that the treaty would have negative economic consequences for Europe as a whole.

The prophecy of Keynes came true when, in the ▪ Ruhr was occupied by French and Belgian forces in 1923 in response to Germany's failure to meet its reparations obligations.

The occupation was met with passive resistance by the German workers, which had a devastating effect on the region's economy.

The occupation ended in 1925 as a result of the Dawes Plan. ▪ Dawes Plan of 1924, it was reduced to 50 billion gold marks.

▪ Lausanne Conference of 1932 allied powers were compelled to waive off 66% amount of compensation from Germany.

It was a morally defective treaty:

The Principle of self-determination was used very selectively. While non-Germans were given the right to decide their fate, the same right was denied to Germans. More than 1 m Germans were left in Poland and more than 3 m were left in Sudetenland given to Czechoslovakia.

Till the time war was going on, the entente powers expressed their faith in 14 points of President Wilson. But with the end of war, these 14 points were breached.

Arguments in the favour of the treaty

It has been told that even Germany had adopted such tough approach to Russia and Romania when they sought the separate peace while withdrawing from WWI. So, Germany deserved it.

Eventhegovernmentofalliedpowershadto workunderthe acutepublicpressure which was anti-German in its approach.

Inthecourseofthe war,Germanycausedsuchdevastationthatthepublicopinion in Britain and France was staunchly anti-Germany. There was a slogan-shouting

“Hang William Kaiser".”

Margaret Mac Millan in "Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World" argued that the public opinion/mood in France and Britain was strongly in favor of punishing Germany for its role in the war, and made it difficult for negotiators to find a more balanced and reasonable solution.

Georges-Henri Soutou has pointed out that France's security concerns were the primary driver in the conference. France wanted a lasting peace to ensure its security against

Germany. Thus, it supported massive reparationspayments and territorial concessions to weaken Germany's economic and military power.

Final Verdict

Whatever may be the ground, we can't justify the treaty.
Although it was called a peace conference it proved the worst type of judicial court in which neither any pleading nor witness was permitted, and the decisions were taken arbitrarily.

This treaty was an imposed treaty on Germany without any moral content and the after- effect of the treaty proved a hard lesson to almost every victor party involved in the future.

Assessment of Paris Peace Conference The declared objective of the Paris Peace conference was to provide the right to self-

judgment and absolute justice to every party on the basis of the 14-Point program of President Wilson. But due to certain compulsions and material conditions, the peacemakers diverted from the main objective on many occasions.

Those material compulsions were:

The existence of secret treaties between Britain, France, Italy and Japan for the future territorial division. These were in contravention of the principle of the right to self- judgment in the 14-Point Program.

Southern Tyrol(Germanpopulated region)wasgiven to Italy(London Conference)
Region of Shantung in China was given to Japan.

To put a check over the future upsurge of

Germany: It is said that the international situation which the peacemakers in Paris had to confront, in the brutal realities of history, was the result of temporary readjustment of the balance of power.

In other words, in the Paris Peace Conference, one of the objectives of the allied power was to emasculate the power of Germany and simultaneously to strengthen the neighbouring countries of Germany.

To fulfillthisobjective,they were readyto sideline Wilson's 14-Point program. For example, ▪ Poland was given access to the sea while going across German region.

▪ But simultaneously Germany was not permitted to merge with Austria.

▪ The German populated region of Sudetenland was given to Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovakia itself was put together by combining two nations just to check Germany's power in the neighborhood.

▪ Yugoslavia was made larger by including other populations into it, again contravening right to self judgement.

Eric Hobsbawm was critical of the Paris Peace Conference's approach to redrawing the map of Europe, arguing that it was driven more by political expediency and the interests of the Great Powers than by a genuine commitment to self-determination and national sovereignty.

To put a check over the spread of Communism: With this purpose in the Russian region, taken from Germany, the Independent nations were created, which had to work as a

buffer region between Soviet Russia and western Europe. Here also Wilson's 14-Point program was neglected.

Four separate nations were created - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Finland.
David Thomson: As Jacobinism had threatened peacemakers at Vienna, so did communism to peacemakers at Paris.

In order to maintain the economic balance and to maintain the transport and communication lines in Europe, the issue of the right to self-judgment was undermined.

Eg Railway line integrity

Creation of Mandates

Wilson's 14 points were not applicable to the colonies of victor powers.

Mandate system designed to govern former colonies of defeated powers (Germany, Ottoman etc), and placed under the control of the victorious Allied Powers.

▪ It was expected to be a temporary solution to the question of how to govern these territories until they were deemed ready for self-

government.

▪ Itwasaformofimperialism,asitperpetuatedthesubjugationofcolonized peoples. The system would give the victors the right to control and exploit the resources of these territories without any regard for the wishes of the local populations.

Merits of the Treaty

The establishment of national states in Central and South-Eastern Europe on the principle of 'self-determination' was a grand achievement and fulfilled the aspirations or the subject races of the Emperor and the Porte.

The holding of plebiscites in disputed areas was a welcome device to adjust frontiers according to the wishes of the people.

The introduction of the Mandatory System wasa greatimprovementonthepastpractice of out-right annexation by the victors. It caused less heartburn among the vanquished statesandensuredthedevelopmentofcoloniesintheinterestsofthepeoplethemselves.

Minoritiesinstateslike Czechoslovakia and Polandwereguaranteedprotectionbyspecial treaties.

Theestablishmentof the Leagueof Nations,tosettleinternationaldisputes,mightensure peace in the future provided the small and great Powersworked in a spirit of cooperation and amity.

Clash of personalities in Paris Margaret Mac Millaninherbook"Paris 1919:Six Months That Changedthe World" focuses on the personalities of the leaders involved in the negotiations.

Wilson George Clemenceau Personalities

Wilson was idealistic and believed in the power diplomacy to resolve the problems.

He was a strong believed in internationalism.

He was free from prejudices/malice and historical baggage as he came from another continent.

Wilson was inexperienced in foreign

affairs and had limited knowledge of European politics and ground reality of Europe. His ideas lacked practical touch. eg. Access to sea for Poland.

Wilson had to return from Europe. His own

Senate vetoed his proposals, and he was compelled to make exit from Europe.

Lloyd George was aware of the ground situation. He was a skilled negotiator, but his tendency to make contradictory statements and promises made it difficult for other leaders to trust him.

Much more aware about the European condition.

Clemenceau was known for his sharp tongue and uncompromising nature. His was a revengeful personality and aggressive approach. He wanted peace but by destroying Germany.

Interests

Interested in ensuring the continuity of

American influence on European politics.

Wanted territorial gains by capturing German colonies.

Need to ensure French National security against any possible German aggressive in future

Wanted to safeguard American Economic interest in Europe.

Was interested in curtailing British Naval Supremacy.

Wanted to weaken Germany but was against complete German interest because Germany was by market for British products.

Wanted to maintain Balance of power in Europe.

Wanted to maintain British Naval supremacy.

which was the biggest concert.

Wanted expansion of French territories on banks of Rhine.

Wanted complete destruction of Germany both economically and military.

These differences led to several clashes and disagreements between the three leaders, particularly over the issue of Germany's punishment and the establishment of a League of Nations. Ultimately, compromise was necessary to reach an agreement, and the Treaty of Versailles reflected a balance of the different priorities and perspectives of the three leaders.

However, to a considerable extent, the Paris Peace was dominated by French interests.

Idealism vs.

Realism Woodrow Wilson was an idealistic leader who came to Paris with a vision for a new world order based on collective security, democracy, absolute justice and human rights. (14 points program).

He believed in the idea of lasting peace. He initiated collective security efforts in form of League of Nations.

Clemenceau and Lloyd Georgeweremorepragmatic and focused on protecting their countries' interests and preserving the balance of power in Europe.

Punishment vs.

Rehabilitation Wilson was more interested in rehabilitating Germany and creating a stable peace in Europe.

Clemenceau was focused on punishing Germany for the damage done during the war.

Self

determination vs.

Imperialism Wilson's emphasis on self-determination for small nations.

His emphasis inspired nationalist movements around the world.

Clemenceau and Lloyd George were concerned about the impact of nationalist movements on their empires and colonies.

Was Wilson successful in his objective?

Niall Ferguson in "Colossus" says that Wilson's vision of a new world order was ultimately flawed. His emphasis on self-determination, democracy and human rights was naïve.

The open agenda was to implement the program of the right to self-judgment and absolute justice in Europe. Definitely, in this program, he failed.

But, certainly, in his hidden agenda, he was successful. Hishidden agenda was having following objectives:

His 14 Points program had a greater propaganda value than its actual value. There, he definitely had success; as in the peace conference, both Lloyd George and Clemenceau were overshadowed by his personality.

To search for a big market for American products. Here also, he made a success as many European countries were attracted to U.S.A.

To give too much emphasis on nationalism to counterbalance the internationalism of Lenin. Even here his objective was fulfilled. Armistice of 20 years The To V failed to provide lasting peace to Europe because of many serious limitations.

EH Carr argued in "The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919-1939" that the Treaty of Versailles ultimately contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War. He called the Treaty as

'20 years armistice.' It contained the germs of another war.

Eric Hobsbawm also takes the Second world war as a continuation of the first world war
30 years' war. (1914-45)

Reasons

Germany suffered during peace than in the war.

The reparationsand territorialexchangesimposed on Germanyinthe Treatywere tooharshon Germanyandledtofutureconflict.Germaneconomywascompletely destroyed by peace makers of Paris.

The Provisions of Paris peace pushed Germany into a serious crisis as result of which the democratic forces could not stabilize in Germany.

The Political instability and deep sense of humiliation in Germany resulted in emergence of extreme German Nationalism.

Theriseof Adolfhitlesswastheout come.Whenhestartedviolatingtheprovisions of Paris, clouds of another started gathering on horizons of Europe.

On the other hand,

The 'peacemakers' of Paris were too focused on their own national interests and lacked the vision to create a truly international system of collective security. On the other heand, the concept of collective security of the League of Nations was

idealistic and impractical and instead perpetuated the old balance-of-power politics.

Thetreatyfailedto addresstheunderlyingeconomicand social issuesthathad led to the war. All of it contributed to the instability and conflict that characterized the interwar period.

Thus, Carr believed that the failure of the Paris Peace Conference was a missed opportunity.

All of this set the stage for another war.

The Second World War lasted for nearly 6 years and came to an end in Europe with the unconditional surrender of Germany on 7 th May 1945 and in Asia with that of rout of Japan on 14 th August 1945. It led to various consequences which of great significance for the future history of mankind.

Unprecedented loss of life and property:

The war caused unparallel destruction of life and property. ▪ It is estimated at least 17 million men died on the battle fields and 18 million noncombatants were killed because of bombing, starvation and disease.

▪ The cities in which the battles were fought lay in ruins.

No country escaped the effects of war in its economic spheres. ▪ The war caused acute scarcity of food stuffs, commodities, goods, petrol, matchboxes, salt, cement etc. which led to runaway inflation.

▪ People had to fore go even the basic necessities of life. The standard of life went down wiping out all the previous prosperity.

▪ Every country was faced with gigantic problem of recovery and reconstruction.

Morale degradation:

Men killed their own species on such a large scale without any guilt conscious. ▪ The atrocities committed by the Nazis of Germany, the Fascists of Italy and the militarist regime of Japan were unforgivable.

The fault lay with the Allies as well.

▪ The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, whatever the consideration that might have been behind the decision, exposed the naked truth that the so-called civilised men could sink to the levels of barbarians.

Race for accumulation of nuclear weapons:

The invention of atom bomb had introduced an element of mistrust between the

United States and the Soviet Union. After the end of the Second World War, a race for acquisition of nuclear arms began between the two countries and this added new dimensions to the balance of power in the world.

Destruction of the Axis Powers:

The Axis powers Germany, Italy and Japan were destroyed. Germany which was the main architect of the war was utterly humiliated and destroyed.

The Allies imposed their terms of peace on Axis powers.
According to Potsdam agreement Germany was militarily and economically crippled.

At San Francisco Conference (September 1951), a peace treaty with Japan was signed.

England and France as a Second-Rate Power

England emerged from the war as a second-rate world power. ▪ If the United States had not come to the rescue of Britain, the latter would have been annihilated by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.

Unlike Britain,Francehadbeenoccupiedby the Germansduringthewarasaresult of which she had to face great destruction.

Rise of Two Superpowers the USA and the USSR:

During the course of the war, USA industrialists made tremendous profits, increasing her prosperity, her prestige shot up in the world because she assumed the role of a creditor and aid giving power.

▪ The First World war had broken her isolation for a while, but she had thereafter retreated into her isolationist shell. The Second World War once again shattered this isolation and enabled her to take interest in world affairs, making sure that a second retreat into the isolationist shell would be impossible now as she had financial, political, and diplomatic stakes all over the world.

The U.S.S.R. was the other country to emerge as a superpower in the post-World

War II period. Through clever negotiations Stalin was able to extract maximum concession from the Allies. At the end of the war Russian influence extended to practically whole of Eastern Europe making her a superpower.

Cold War:

The Second World War facilitated great opportunities to Communism. It spread rapidly under Soviet Union to Eastern Europe. About One-third of the world

became red. The USA with the help of other democracy like Britain and France tried to combat this surge. The whole world came to be divided into two power blocs diametrically opposed to each other viz, the capitalist Bloc of the USA and her Allies and the Communist Blocof Russia and her satellites. Countries like India, however, did not joined the Blocs and stayed non-aligned leading to the formation of third Bloc, the Non-Aligned Bloc.

Greater Importance to Middle East and Far East:

Post World War II, the Middle East, and Far East in the constituent of Asia became of prime importance in international politics.

Thediscoveryofrichoildepositsmadethemiddle Eastimportantaswellasconflict zone in world politics.

The emergence of India is as an important democratic and non-aligned nation and the development of Communist China as a great power made the Far-East one of the most important regions in the World.

Birth of New Nations:

World War II gave an opportunity to many countries in Africa and Asia to get themselves free from imperialist powers. Many countries like India, Ceylon, Libya, Syria, Lebanon,Malaya, Indochina and Indonesia secured complete independence after the World War II.

Weakening of the Spirit of Nationalism:

The nations began to organise themselves into various groups. ▪ After World War II, the East European nations which followed the Communist ideology decided to form a bloc under the patronage of Soviet Union.

▪ Similarly, the Western European nations which stood for democracy decided to join into a group to avert communism.

Philosophy of Humanism:

After the Second World War, Humanism has prime place. The constant goal of all political activities is the freedom and welfare of mankind.

The world realised the need for averting any future war of such magnitude which had caused annihilation.

Discussion on human rights had continued even during the war and Universal Declaration of Huma Rights by the United Nations Organisation (U.N.O.) was a significant step in thus direction.

Establishment of the United Nations Organisation (U.N.O.):

The World War II made the statesmen of the world to realize the need for an international organisation to safeguard peace and save mankind from any future

war of such magnitude. After the World War I, the League of Nations was established but it had failed. Now they were determined to avoid the defects of the League of Nations and set up a new organisation for which efforts in this direction had already started while the war was still going on.

The outline of its organisation and constitution were prepared and given a final shape in San Francisco Conference June 1945. The charter of the UN is committed to the maintenance of world peace and international cooperation.

The 51 states which signed the charter in San Francisco Conference were considered the founder member of the U.N.O. Today, the number is 193.

Development of Regional Organisations:

The U.N.O. also became a platform of the Cold War between U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. Consequently, to ensure their future security, both the power blocs facilitated the formation of Regional Organisation.

The U.S.A. led countries organised themselves to restrict the onward march of

Communism. Among the Security Organisations of the western countries prominent being North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (N.A.T.O.) and South- East Asia Treaty Organisation (S.E.A.T.O) and the Baghdad pact.

On the other hand, U.S.S.R. created Communist government between herself and western nations to strengthen her security. Among the Communist security organisation, the Warsaw Pact was the most prominent.

New Shape of the British Commonwealth of Nations:

After the Second World War, many countries in Africa and Asia which were former British colonies attained freedom, wanted to be the member of the British Commonwealth of Nations.

Itisnota militarygroup,butitisdesigned topromote internationalunderstanding