Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Modern Europe - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Dilapidated social regime
      - Physical deterioration from war
  - - - 6 Feb 1934
      - revealed fraud
      - facist accused of attempted coup
      - riots = 14 dead 136 hurt
  - - - riot, anti-parliament, Nationalist
  - - - Downplay
        
        France ‘allergic to fascism’ (Serge Bernstein)
        
        Croix de Feu (CF) ‘boy-scouting for adults’ (René Rémond)
        
        French don't want to ever admit french Facism
      - Significant
        
        Zeev Sternhell:
        
        Fascism originates in France in 1880s
        
        Exported to Germany and Italy
    - - Left or Right Wing?
        
        First School
        
        Origins of Fascism on left
        
        Rémond, Ernst Nolte, Sternhell
        
        Left wing but CF was conservative therefore french facism = weak
        
        Second School
        
        Fascism compatible with conservatism
        
        William Irvine, Robert Soucy
        
        Conservative and CF = conservative so facism was strong
  - - - Formed the popular front and win election May 1936
  - - - Daladier replaces Blum, June 1938
      - Munich accords divide left and right
- - - - anti-german
      - early 30's masive economic fall out
      - There were some sympathisers in B&F
    - - Challenge of war
      - over reliance of continuous war = insufficent
      - hand in hand
      - 1940 = inability to prepare
      - It was a military defeat first and foremost but military generals blamed everyone but themselves
        
        Mcmillan
    - - Social histos said military defeat of France may-june 40 can only be understood in terms of cocial and political crises
        
        J. Blatt
    - - To what extent did the French military defeat of 1940 have its roots in the political crises of the 1930s?
    - - Invasion through Ardennes unexpected
      - Failure of intelligence
      - Not prepared for short war
    - - Decadence’ school
      - Poor military and civilian morale
      - Political divisions
  - - - Timing of outbreak of war determined by British action
      - Germany geared for war in mid-1940s
      - Invasion of Poland
    - - Regaining former tsarist territories
      - Hopes for war between capitalists
      - Biding time:
        
        10% of officers, 80% high-ranking generals removed in purges, 1938-9
        
        Rearmament
  - - - assumption that invasion plan was similar to 1914
        
        but plans were chnaged after a plane crash with the plans
    - - proposed weep through Alden and up to Dunkirk (and trap)
  - - - Piccolo spazio – space for Italian ‘race’
      - Grande spazio - other populations under Italy
  - - - Millions more after invasion of USSR
    - - By early 1942, use of gas vans and death camps
      - Wannsee Conference, 20 January 1942
      - Murder of the Jews takes on its mechanised, systematic form
      - Role of local collaborators
    - - Intentionalist
        
        Conscious, pre-meditated, Hitler as instigator
        
        Eberhard Jackel, Lucy Dawidowicz, Andreas Hillgruber
        
        Importance of ideology
      - Functionalists/Structuraloists
        
        Unplanned, gradual, minimal role of Hitler
        
        Result of chaotic structure
        
        Karl Schleunes, Martin Broszat, Hans Mommsen
  - - - Italian entry to war
      - Change to focus on ideological goals
      - Involvement of US and Japan, Dec 1941
  - - - ties Germans up and enables Western allied advance and takes over a year
- - - - Opportunist v Intentionalist
    - - Rivalries
      - Mussolini: Austria be free vs Hitler: Wants austria
      - Play on fear of the left and communism
      - Nazi and Mussolini propoganda use
      - Tensions replaced with French tension
    - - German and Soviet
      - Alliance of convinience
      - Treaty of appolo
  - - - Political system
      - Industrial base
      - Workforce
      - Civil service
      - Banking system
      - Larger cities 50% destroyed
      - Roads, bridges destroyed
      - 130 towns and cities up to 75%
  - - - Zones of Occupation
        
        France: Germany divided
        
        USSR: extract large reparations
        
        Britain: German economic recovery
        
        US: Germany needed for European recovery
  - - - Impact of trials on public mind: focus on human rights
  - - - Soviet demands $10 billion
        Soviets started dismantling factories
      - British costs for Occupation zone
      - Allocation of reparations became problematic
  - - - Germany benefit from CW
        
        Germany received 11%
      - For Marshall plan to work, Germany to be treated as an economic unit
        
        US and UK merged their zones: one economic area - Bizone.
      - Needed currency reform: Reichmark worthless - black market
        
        New currency Deutschmark
      - MARSHALL PLAN DEBATE
        
        Agree
        
        No economic breakthrough could have taken place without US wishes.
        
        No Impact
        
        Reconstruction had already started.
        
        Impact
        
        Crucial for economic recovery
        
        .
        Primed German economy
  - - - Social Democrats SPD
      - Christian Democrats CDU
      - Communists
    - - Christian Democratic Union (CDU) - 31% = colition
        Social Democrats (SPD) - 29.2% = not enough
    - - Elected as the nation’s first Chancellor
      - Policies
        
        Consolidating WG market economy
        
        Integrating WG into the western camp
        
        Adenauer aware that the western powers needed Germany on their side.
  - - - west Germany joins Western Club
        
        September 1950: Americans propose WG rearmament
        
        British and French misgivings
        
        WG potential needed in Cold War climate
        
        Adenauer's price = soverignty
        
        May 1955: WG join NATO as soverign state
- - - - Structuralist
        
        Mommsen, Broszat
        
        Unclear aims, improvisation and opportunism
      - Intentionalists
        
        Stufenplan (Hillgruber)
        
        Primacy of ideology in shaping foreign policy
    - - Contientalist
        
        Trevor-Roper, Eberhard Jäckel
      - globalist
        
        Hillgruber, Klaus Hildebrand
        
        Weltanschauung (world view)
        
        world domination
    - - Agreement with conservative elites over reassertion of German status
      - Rupture
        
        Hitler not interested in west
        
        Hitler seeks closer relations with Britain
        
        so no need to humiliate Britain
        
        Breaks with pro-Russia, anti-Poland policy
        
        Non-aggressive measure
        
        Racial dimensions
  - - - German speaking 95% vote to rejoin Germany
    - - showed Hitler position
  - - - Economy weakened, empire overstretched
      - Reluctance to increase military spending
        
        5.5% GDP 1937; 12.5% GDP 1939
        
        But – 1/3 level of German expenditure
      - Reliance on economy and empire in long war
      - Misunderstanding of German aims
  - - - Mussolini-Laval accords, Jan 1935
      - Hoare-Laval pact, Dec 1935
      - Moves towards Germany – Pact of Steel (1939)
  - - - Churchill – France could have stopped Hitler and brought downfall
      - But – France constrained by public opinion
        
        Constrained by Britain and Locarno terms
        
        Would have needed general mobilisation and risk of war
  - - - Relief that war avoided
      - Public opinion hardens against appeasement
      - Britain and France guarantee Polish borders, March 1939
- - - - Ideological or security conflict?
      - Wartime co-operation: summits
      - Wartime rivalry: planning for peace
      - Globalism vs. spheres of influence
      - Responsibility: USA (wealth, A-bomb) or USSR (insecure, Marxist); UK?
      - Regional instability: Europe, Far East
      - 1945 Yalta Conference (February)
        
        War in Europe near end, Post-War settlement discussed Differing and contrasting aims
        
        results
        
        Stalin – uncompromising
        
        Agreement on European split + ‘zones’ in Germany
        
        ‘Betrayal’ of Poland (and E. Europe)
        
        April.. Roosevelt dies and replaced with Truman
        
        Truman – guided by advisors less willing to give into demands and ‘baby’ the Soviets
    - - Truman Doctrine
        
        March 47
        
        Ideological
      - Marshall Plan
        
        June 47
        
        Not Ideological
        
        ‘Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos.’
    - - Big Three meet for first time - (after Stalin avoided previous meetings)
        
        UK/USA to open up front in 1944
        
        Promise over future of Poland
        
        Promise over Soviet future ‘control’ over East and Central Europe
        
        Stalin – ‘now the fate of Europe is settled, we shall do as we like, with the Allies’ consent’
    - - Background - Changes in leadership (Truman and Attlee), Soviet troops across Europe, US nuke tested in New Mexico (Stalin aware)
      - Open disagreements: Annoyance at level of reparations
      - Results  German division and Soviet reparations agreed.
    - - George Kennan, DCM, Moscow 1944-46
      - Long Telegram, Feb 1946; head of PPS
      - X’ article, Foreign Affairs, July 1947
      - Soviets expansionist, based on Marxist ideology and Russian fear of outsiders
      - But Soviets will try to avoid war
      - US must use ‘long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment’
  - - - Security zone in Eastern Europe
      - Insecure
      - Marxist
    - - wealth
      - A-bomb, Aug/Sept Japan
  - - - old powers = devestated eg Britain and France devestated
      - new superpower = USSS-US
  - - - Schlesinger, Feis
      - Breakdown in relations the result of a totalitarian expansionist Soviet Union.
      - Soviet communist ideology
      - Totalitarian dictatorship
      - Critical of Soviet
      - Ideology = key
    - - American Economic empire
      - Atomic diplomacy
      - Peak 60's
      - US responsibility
        
        self interest and policy
        
        eon crisis fears = political influence
    - - Beyond bi-polar interpretations
      - European nations played their role
      - Gaddis
        
        1997
        
        blame soviets
        
        CW = good and evil struggle
        
        US win = inevitable
      - more than blame
- - - - Brand Pact 1929 = tried and failed
    - - Post 1945 = move away and favour integration
    - - Possible french anglo unity but 1940 = full union is rejected
  - - - 1946 Churchil Zurich Speech
        
        : called upon France and Germany to enter into a partnership as the first step in building ‘a kind of United States of Europe.’
        
        Brit link and support but unite not neccessarliy
      - Issues
        
        personal and ideological differences
    - - Unionists Vs Fedarlists
        
        Unionists
        
        Opposed to anything which might limit state sovereignty. Preferred to establish relations and international alliances.
        
        Federalists
        
        Creation of a federation vested with its own powers.
      - Conference at The Hague in 1948
      - 1949 Council of Europe: intergovernmental organisation.
      - Strengthen democracy, support human rights and the rule of law
      - European Convention of Human Rights (1950), Commission on Human Rights, Court of Human Rights
  - - - 16 Marshall Aid recipients establish Committee for European Economic Co-operation to administer funds.
        
        CEEC becomes Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC)
    - - Britain want no formal links
      - climate not ready and only set for intergovernmental
      - France welfare policy is not entirely free market
  - - - NATO structure
        
        military and economy alliance and keep US in and also west germans
        
        promote working
        
        keep soverignty
    - - Plans may 1950
        
        Schuman plan to pool coal and steel
        
        surrender soverignty to high authority
        
        impossible war btwn Germany and france
        
        Jean Monnet - economic planning
        
        national interest
      - Unity = crucial to peace
  - - - France, Federal Republic of Germany, Belgium, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands.
      - High Authority and Commitee
        
        responsible for taxes, production control and prices
      - common assembly
      - special court of justice and a special council of ministers
  - - - Takes 5yrs 1955 to join NATO
        
        Why 5yrs?
        
        French concerns: German rearmament could threaten the Coal and Steel Community.
        
        So proppose alternative plan by René Pleven in 1950: European Army
    - - US initially reluctant but converted to the idea.
      - British unwilling to become involved in supranational organisation.
      - West Germany welcomed it
      - Benelux could not afford to stay out of it
    - - End of EDC Treaty at French National Assembly August 1954
        
        Lengthy and controversial negotiations
        
        EDC treaty was signed but not ratified
        
        Too soon to accept surrender of national sovereignty on defence
  - - - Want to achieve
        
        Economic integration,
        
        Development of common institutions,
        
        Creation of a common market,
        
        Progressive harmonisation of social policies
        
        Establishment of an organisation for the peaceful use of atomic energy
    - - creation of a Common Market and the founding of an Atomic Energy Community
    - - Establish Euroatom
      - Establish EEC
        
        March 1957 - Treaties of Rome were signed: the New drive combined the ECSC approach with the idea of a common European market
        
        January 1958 entered into force.
        
        EEC was designed to open national markets by removing tariffs and promote free trade
        
        Free movement of capital and labour, elimination of trade barriers, a common investment policy, co-ordination of welfare policies
        
        Agricultural policies
        
        Britain did not join immediately but applied in 1963 and 1967.
- - - - Weak dictator’
      - Hans Mommsen, Martin Broszat
    - - Master in the thid republic
      - Andreas Hillgruber, K. D. Bracher
    - - held together by Hitler myth
      - Arbitration rather than micro-management
      - Authority strenghened by.... plebiscites and personal oaths
  - - - Authoritarian
      - Totalitarian
      - Fascist
      - Socialist
      - Unique?
  - - - Blamed for defeat
      - Peace terms, reparations
      - Political turmoil 1919-20 (murder of Liebknecht and Rosemburg, Kapp putsch)
    - - 1923 Depression
      - Hyperinflation
    - - Failure to deal with political or economic crises
        
        Causes crisis in legitimacy of state by 1930
  - - - Volkspartei = support from different classes
  - - - Enabling Act (March 1933)
      - Death of Hindenburg – Hitler becomes Führer
  - - - Original or building upon existing mentalities?
      - Revolutionary or counterrevolutionary?
      - Gleichschaltung (coordination)
  - - - Boycotts (1933)
      - Nuremberg Laws (1935)
      - ‘Kristallnacht’ (1938)
      - ‘Aryanisation’ of German economy
  - - - Manipulation from below
      - Self-policing // Surveillance Soiety
- - - - Supranational
        
        Key differences
        
        Body above nation state
      - Europe requires the elimination of the age-old opposition of France and Germany.
  - - - attempts to integrate monetary and financial policies
  - - - Full circulation of capital and fixed exchange rate
  - - - Standard monetary unit of measurement of the market value/cost of goods, services, or assets
      - Hopes that it would constitute the basis for future common European currency
      - Supported by West Germany, France, Benelux countries, Denmark, Italy and Ireland
- - - - Question of consent
      - Richard Bosworth: critical of achievements of the regime – historiography dominated by Italian political controversies
      - Orthodox school, before 1945: Italians rejected the brutal regime
      - Federico Chabod
      - Revisionist school, 1960s: large sections of Italian population agreed with the regime
      - De Felice 1970s and 1980s – benevolent regime
        
        reaction in Italy and abroad
        
        1 = defelice support
        
        2 = De felice rejectors
        
        Denis Mack Smith – disagreed with De Felice, his interpretation and use of evidence
      - MOST RECENT HISTO
        
        Emilio Gentile: Fascism as a ‘civil religion’, created myths that resonated with most Italians
        
        Macgregor Knox criticises historiographical appeasement of Fascist Italy
        
        John Gooch: Italy’s expansion plans formed in 1920s – alliance with Hitler instrumental to breaking European status quo
  - - - not all equal
        
        pecking order
    - - “The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone” - Mussolini, Italian Encyclopaedia, 1932
        
        'useful , 'harmful', 'freedom'
        
        idea of totalitarian state
        
        encroaching and all controlling
    - - Life as duty and struggle and conquest” Mussolini
  - - - manifesto of facist movement, Milan 1919
      - aim at wide political working
      - nationalist and internationalist programme
    - - no trappings of tradition, no heirarchy
      - claimed to be pragmatic
      - despised parliament and liberal government
        
        Fascist revolution would bury the old-style corrupted parliamentary democracy
    - - exacerbated
        
        politics, economy and society
      - Reconverting Industry
        
        Growing inflation
        
        growing un-employment
        
        militant unions
    - - Language barrier
      - lacking a stable government coolition
      - agarian south v industrial north
  - - - Acerbo Law – shift from proportional representation to majority of votes = 2/3 seats in parliament
  - - - Curbing political opposition
      - Creation of a strong state
      - Was Italy a ‘totalitarian state’?
      - Centralise control over information
      - Propaganda
        
        persuasion and influence
      - local authorities
        
        prefects and podesta
      - Syndicates [unions] and corporations: the third way
      - self sufficency
        
        battle for grain’
        
        production of wheat to decrease dependency from imports) and ‘battle for the lira’ – fixed exchange 90 lira to £1
      - Battle for births = increasing birth rates
    - - Elements that shaped Mussolini’s foreign policy
      - Mussolini felt that Italy was ‘imprisoned’ within the Mediterranean
      - The ‘mission’ of Italy’s foreign policy was that of breaking ‘the bars of the prison
      - The creation of an empire would echo the glory of ancient Rome
      - The ‘mutilated victory’ – post – WWI territorial settlements
      - Restore Italy’s prestige: carving out spheres of influence in the Balkans and acquiring an empire in Africa
      - raw materials
      - surplus of population absorbed by the colonies
      - Abyssinian crisis – turning point in international relations
      - Clash between Italy Britain and France
      - The crisis undermined the work and credibility of the League of Nations
      - Strengthened the relationship with Germany
      - The beginning of a clearer and more ambitious imperial policy
      - Dates
        
        1936: Rome-Berlin Axis
        
        1936-1939: Italy and Germany intervene to support Franco in Spain
        
        1938: Italy did not intervene in the Anschluss
        
        1938: Italy supports Germany’s claims in Czechoslovakia
        
        1939: Pact of Steel
        
        June 1940: Italy entered the war
        
        September 1943: Italy signs armistice with Allies
        
        April 1945: liberation
- - - - Collective Security - all powers work together
      - New concert of Europe
      - Wilsonian International Order
      - Defender of ToV
    - - key powers not members
        
        America
        
        USSR (until 1934)
        
        Germany (until 1926, after 1933)
        
        Japan (after 1933)
      - minorities are upheld
      - Brit and French Domination
        
        Extend global power through mandates
        
        But – oppose intervention in their affairs
        
        Damages moral authority of League
    - - LoN ignored by some major powers
      - Challenged by have not states - Mussolini
      - International law dependent on political will
      - Shrinks to a co-olition of likeminded states
    - - Does not shape international relations
  - - - Locarno Treaties (1925)
        
        Agreement btwn german, brit, French, Italian
        
        Assure France - following rhuar crisi. French politican took a more European idea of working togethrt border btwn Italian and germany
        
        It had econ considerations
      - Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928)
        
        initative of US and French proposed by France to agree to renounce war in policy and only use in defence was agreed by many and shows didn’t envision new war
  - - - no-one wants to buy or invest which diminishes industry
    - - Econ crisis causes backlash against liberal internationalism
- - - - 1921
        
        NEP: private trade and commerce
        
        open market = open to peasent
        
        state = monopolised foreign trade and enterprise
      - 1926
        
        Problems emerge
        
        ‘scissors crises’: peasants unwilling to sell food to the countryside due to shortages of consumer goods (Suny);
        
        unease about reintroduction of capitalism (Fitzpatrick);
        
        constraints of the global economy (Sanches-Sibony)
      - Fears NEP could not support rapid industrialization Trotsky and Zinoviev form so-called ‘Left opposition.
  - - - 1929: First Five-Year Plan: rapid industrialisation for war industry, ‘catch up with the West’. ‘Shock workers’ and productivity
      - Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works declared closed city in 1937. welfare provision and facilities for inhabitants
    - - Collectivization of agriculture: creation of collective farms (kolkhoz)
      - De-kulakization of ‘rich’ peasants (kulaks). 1929: Stalin decided to destroy kulaks as a class kulaks and their families had property confiscated, arrested, exiled or sent to labour camps (GULAG)
      - collectivization and famine
        
        Massive restruction
        
        famine 1931-33, mass starvation (5-7 million die)
        
        Historiography
        
        was famine deliberate policy // genocide targeting ukraine
        
        destruction of rural life, a violent process
        1930s, concessions to peasants: allowed to cultivate small private plots
    - - 1920 = encouraged artists, expression, support, propaganda
      - 1930 (Stalin)
        
        Censored, Realism
  - - - No
        
        left wing histo
      - yes
        
        revisionist = Fitzpatrick
        
        totalitarian school = pipes
  - - - 1937-38
        
        peak of Great Terror
        
        1.6 mill arrested and 700,000 shot
      - Aug 36
        
        : Show trials of Old Bolsheviks: Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukhari accused of espionage, shot
      - March-June 1937
        
        army purges, 70% officer corps eliminated
      - 30 July 1937
        
        NKVD Order No 00447: repression of former kulaks, criminals, ‘anti-Soviet elements’.
- - - - No, But once the cogs started spinning there was no stopping
  - - - No one innocent
      - Germany were guilty but other nations had motives and escalated situation to = war
        
        Gordon Martel
        
        If the war-guilt controversy had any result, it was to give the impression that responsibility was somehow shared by all, that every one of the great powers before 1914 was militaristic and imperialistic, that each had made secret arrangements to come to the aid of friends and allies at a moment of crisis, and that each had drawn up elaborate war plans, mobilization schedules and railway timetables which had to be adhered to in 1914.
  - - - Fisher Controversy 1961
        
        Split debate
        
        primacy of domestic = war better than politics
        
        Industrial and land
        
        foreign policy = external
        
        external factors
      - Modern View
        
        foreign policy = external
        
        modern = international/overall perspective
      - Clark
        
        European leaders = Sleepwalkers
        
        Blind to horrors
        
        Outbreak = chain of decisions by continuos politican
      - Gordon Martel
        
        'Nationalism, militarism and imperialism are the most prominent of the ‘underlying’ causes of war that historians have investigated in their attempts to go beneath the surface of the events that led to war in 1914.'
        
        No one, not even the Austrians, went to war for the sake of Franz Ferdinand, and yet a direct line can be drawn between his murder, the diplomatic crisis that followed, the mobilizations of the European armies and the ofﬁcial declarations of war.
  - - - Germany grows
        
        Austro and hungry, Unification, Ottoman Empire
        
        1815 = empire, by 1914 German size and different powers
      - Diserali = opposition in West Minister
        
        'The balance of power has been entirely destroyed, and the country which suffers most, and feels the effects of this great change most, is England.'
    - - Heart of europe 2 main powers locked in hostility
      - German peace terms = harsh
        
        German annexation of Alsace Lorraine
  - - - Aim = isolate france, neutralise threat of Russia and Austria-hungary
        
        Strategy = Treaties
        
        Problem = contradicting alliances
        
        Imperial rivalries
      - Balance of alliances
        
        assets, liabilities, tangiable and intangiable assets
    - - Kaiser Wilhem 2 = impusive and easily influenced
        
        Development of authoritarian nationalism
      - Naval rilvary
        
        Germany v Britain
    - - External and Internal Threats
    - - Failure of Diplomacy
        
        Germany encourages Austria (Blank Checque 1914) to deal with serbia once and for all
        
        Russia support Serbia
- - - - De Gaulle seen as leader
        
        During war De Gaulle clashes with US/Britv = excluded from War Time conference
        
        Hard to rebuild
  - - - Vichy and collaboration
      - Purges – legal and illegal
      - Desire to forget collaboration period
      - Myth of ‘résistance’
    - - Homelessness: Towns damaged or destroyed
      - Infrastructure destroyed
      - Population fell 3%
      - Food rationing
      - 210,000 casualties in military action and 250,000 civilian deaths.
      - Inflation reached 63% in 1946
      - Nationalisation – Coal, gas, electricity
      - Welfare system
        
        Gov intervention post-war
        
        Pension, sick pay
        
        aim = expand production
      - A solution?
        
        State control vs no more strict control
        
        De Gaulle chose not totally rigid but with a needed plan
    - - A constirution?
        
        Constituent Assembly 21 October 1945
        Tripartism
        
        PCF: Communists – part of provisional gov.
        
        membership 800,000 in 1946
        
        MRP: Mouvement Republicain Populaire – Christian democratic coalition
        
        SFIO: Socialists
        
        weaker than comunist
      - Political divisions
        
        MRP and Communist favoured constitution with strong assembly
        
        De Gaulle favoured strong powers for the executive.
        
        20 Jan 46: de Gaulle resigned- favoured more presidential style
        
        MPR wanted to maintain the President and the Senate
      - Fourth Republic
        
        Fourth Republic constitution November 1946
        
        National Assembly and Council of the Republic
        
        Ministerial instability 20 governments in ten years
        
        1947 Tripartisme ends
        
        Impact of Cold War: Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan
        
        PCF ministers forced out
        
        De Gaulle forms RPF – Rally of French People: right wing
        
        Socialist and MRP form Third Force: middle ground
  - - - Alliance West-Europe
    - - US Department of State 1948
        
        French democracy, at least since 1870, has been handicapped by the multitude of splinter parties and instability within larger parties. Since the First World War the French have been devitalised, since the Second World War they have been demoralised and exhausted, and for the last year they have been in a state of acute jitters’
    - - Schuman Plan May 1950
        
        Breaks Tradition of foreign policy
        
        war no longer possible
        
        european coal and steel community
        
        US agree and like
        
        aim = close integration
  - - - Ho Chi Minh: Vietnam Independence League
      - France using the Cold War for the national interest
      - France fighting communists / nationalists to retain colony
    - - Despite huge US help, French defeated in 1954
      - Mendès France took France out of Indochina
      - Settled Tunisian dispute
    - - Confrontation 1954-1962
        
        Front de Libération Nationale (FNL) fighting for Algerian independence but strong colonial lobby
        
        Population of over 10 million, included 1 million French settlers
      - Algeria & End of the Fourth Republic?
        
        Algerian war threatened French Republic
        
        Fourth Republic appeared too weak to confront problem
        
        Prospect of military insurrection
        
        De Gaulle brought in to resolve crisis
        
        1958 End of Fourth Republic
  - - - Economic growth and played important part in process of European integration.
- - - - Rhineland
    - - Caution of British to maintain vs pure French upset and want
      - • Germany should pay reparations, but the payments should cease, if possible, with the passing of the generation responsible for the war.
        • Germany must be allowed equal access to world markets and resources: 'We cannot both cripple her and expect her to pay' Lloyd George wished to apply Wilson's doctrine of national self-determination as far as was possible in establishing new European boundaries, but he was 'strongly averse to transfer-ring more Germans from German rule to the rule of some other nation than can possibly be helped'.
        • He favoured an all-round limitation of armaments under the aegis of the League of Nations, although he accepted that the initial disarmament of the Central Powers must be unilateral.
        • The treaty should be one that the Germans themselves would enforce: 'A large army of occupation for an indefinite period is out of the question.
  - - - Discuss American objectives at the Paris Peace Conference
        
        Itself
        
        League of Nations
        
        Zara Steiner
        
        The main aim of the economic peace, from the American viewpoint, was that the Europeans should be encouraged to reconstruct their economies and restore world trade as quickly as possible, so that there would be sufﬁcient sums to pay back their debts to the United States and to buy American exports.
      - France (Clemenceau = realistic man)
        
        Main issue = security
        
        Aim = alsace-lorraine, saar and rhineland
      - US (Woodrow Wilson)
        
        14 point programme, Inc, LoN
        
        Financial Power
      - GB (Llyod George)
        
        Aim = stability and security. naval supremacy
        
        Expectations: Public want germany to pay
        
        Caution: with Germany as important trading partner
      - Italy (Orlando)
        
        Lesser role in ToV proces and during conferene
        
        Expectations: territorial demands
    - - Council of 10 -> 4
      - Strategic consideration but all want something
    - - Still a Russian Fear
      - Destruction, land and transport
      - Task = rebuild economy and society and produce peace framework
      - Political dislocation, Empire end
    - - Redraw European Map
      - LoN, Jan 1920
        
        Collective security, no secret treaties
        
        Omits big powers
      - ToV 1921
        
        Interlocking terms - alone fine but together harsh?
        
        concerned Germany
        
        Failure? WW2
- - - - Assess the significance of the European powers in causing the Cold War.
    - - America was strongest post-war
        
        policies
        
        ideology
    - - Stability and security
        
        Guarantee of help
        
        reperation
      - Some possible exansion
        
        Buffer zone
      - Living standards
      - Red Army
    - - Perceptions and views
      - Truman Doctrine
        
        Is it trying to help?
        
        Benivelent Aims: No Europe issue
        
        Contain communism
        
        Ensures no spread
        
        Don't loose Greece as if go comunist = spread
        
        Marshal Aid = financial Europe Help
    - - unknown soviets
      - Settlement
      - Don't appease totalitarian