регистрация / вход

Review Of The Treaty Of Versailles Essay

, Research Paper Studying the Treaty of Versailles form the side of the winning group may seem quite easy. Can a benefactor of the allied efforts actually review the fairness of the treaty in just and unbiased way ? This is what I hope to accomplish with my paper reviewing the treaty, and reparations held within.

, Research Paper

Studying the Treaty of Versailles form the side of the winning group may seem quite easy. Can a benefactor of the allied efforts actually review the fairness of the treaty in just and unbiased way ? This is what I hope to accomplish with my paper reviewing the treaty, and reparations held within. To start, I would like to review the sources I am currently using and their general ideas:

The Treaty of Versailles: A Reassessment After 75 Years

Boerneke, Manfred F.,

New York University Press, New York USA

c. 1996

Mr. Boerneke starts his book with a straight review of the articles in the treaty and explains what each one of them means in general terms. After this review he gives yet another overview of the historical events which would later be affected by these articles; such as the massive increase in German nationalism under the Nazi regime and the German people?s anger towards the loss of the ?corridor lands? along the border with France. As well, Boerneke talks about the ill effects of the treaty on Italy, after they lost land along the north they were promised in 1915. Overall this is a great book, and will be the primary source for my paper.

The Failure of World War I Peace

Blahut, Joseph,

UNC Press, Chapel Hill, N.C. USA

c. 1992

Mr. Blahut?s review starts off with the general post-war standing of each nation , and the type of punishment they wish upon Germany. He talks more about Woodrow

Wilson more than the rest of the allied leaders, discussing Wilson?s poor efforts to find a point of compromise in the treaty, which in turn led to the massive emotional eruption in World War II. Most of his review covers the negativity which plagued Wilson throughout his journeys to and from Europe. His conclusion states that it was the American inability to find compromise in the treaty that eventually led to WWII through the increase of tension in Europe caused by the unfairness of Versailles.

Frankfurt, Brest-Litovsk, Versailles: A Never Ending Story

Broening, Michel

Dusseldorf, Germany

c.1992

Mr. Broening?s paper reviews and compares the three major treaties in Europe involving Germany up until the beginning of World War II. The first two being treaties that Germany imposed upon other nations, and the latter of course being the major one imposed on Germany. Mr. Broening (a German) believes that the Treaty of Versailles was no more unfair to Germany (as passed down by the Allies) as the Treaty of Frankfurt was to France, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was to Russia (as passed down by Germany). He also goes on to discuss how one must take into account the disappointment of the German people who were in most cases uninformed of the war due a de facto military dictatorship since 1917. Overall another source which supplies the necessary review of the ?justice? of Versailles,, but allows the reader to also understand how the roles were reversed for decades earlier.

Treaty of Versailles: A Blue Print For War

Anonymous – www.qt.org/worldwar/prelude/prelude1.html

Although i was unable to find the author of this paper listed anywhere on the page, it still gave enough of an overview that I felt it was necessary to include. It is broken down into two sections. The first discussing the implications of the articles as they relate to Germany?s ?war guilt? , which was a new idea there. Breaking down the reparations into statistics, this paper offered a purely economic and geographic review of what was gained and lost by both sides. It discussed the sacrifice of land, people, moneys, and pride (which of course isn?t really a statistic, but still had a major role in affairs afterwards). The second section talked about the affects these reparation had on the Allied nations like France and England, and the possible effects on the Communist battle raging in the Soviet Union at the time. Overall, a fairly good source for statistical information, however on an instructional basis, it is quite weak.

The Politics and Diplomacy of Peacekeeping: Containment and Counter-revolution at Versailles 1918-1919

Mayer, Arno J.

Harcourt Press, New York, USA

c. 1967

Out of all the books I have read through, this one is probably the most underhanded (if that is the right word). Most of the other sources deal with the Treaty of Versailles as seen up front. This book focuses more on the leaders involved as opposed to the countries involved. This book consists of conversations with the leaders

from texts that were taken in private. The author refuses throughout the book to reveal how these were acquired, but uses them to expose the true emotions and ideas involved in the creation of this treaty. Many conversations include Woodrow Wilson and David Lloyd George, who did not see eye to eye on the forms and amounts of punishment (which is duly documented). As well, these conversations are a candid testimonial of how these elected officials view how the war affected their people on the whole. Overall this is quite a useful source in that it gives these candid testimonials on how each of the nations, dejected, triumphant, sad, and elated feel as to how to draw the war to an end.

The Struggle With Guilt: Versailles as a Guillotine

Adams, Tony G.

Eagle Street Press, London UK

c. 1976

This paper by a British school teacher attempts to absolve Germany of causing the war by bringing into account other events that, while occurring at the same time, helped biol over emotions in Europe. There are several events which pile on top of already seething attitudes; like the assassination of Franz Ferdinand (arch-duke of the Austro-Hungarian Empire), the many military alliances being formed in Europe, the Austro-Hungarian, French, German, and British expansion throughout Europe, Asia, and Africa. Most importantly, no one can forget the ?Balkan Powder Keg?. With their claws dug into the Balkans, every power in Europe had their toes stepped on in the

Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913. So, needless to say, Mr. Adams believes that Germany cannot take sole blame for the happenings leading up to and including the first World War. This is a great source due to it?s extensive detail regarding that events leading up to the beginning of the war, and how it discusses, through a seemingly unbiased ?straight with the facts? way that there should be no way that the Germans should have ever been blamed totally for World War II.

These are the main sources that I am drawing my information from and I have so far found them to be very in depth and ,for all intents and purposes, perfect as far as my paper has gone thus far.

At his point I find myself favouring the idea that the treaty was in fact very unfair towards Germany. Growing up, and having relatives who served in the war passing down stories of the atrocities, I had always harboured great unhappiness towards those whom we believed to be enemies in the war. I had always looked upon Germany in the same way growing up, that many American kids felt about the great evil of Communism in the USSR. This is now my attempt to rectify that unfounded bias, by researching through as many different sources the truth as to who was wronged in the end.

When looking at what Germany had to face coming out of the treaty negotiations, and to have to take the entire blame for the start and outcome of the war, it seems ridiculous to think that there was any fairness to the treaty at all. On top of the initial knock that Germany took, there was also the sense of humility involved; not only had Germany been grossly defeated come the last months of the war, but they were

kicked while down by these Allied ?practitioners of justice?. I can understand the Allied point that a lesson needed to be taught, but they failed to realize that all they were doing during ll their squabbling was giving Germany the ammunition to rise up once again as the evil in Europe twenty years later.

Aside from my predisposed bias against the Germans, there have been no significant obstacles to my writing of this paper. Sources are somewhat plentiful if not in book form then as published articles, papers, theses, and the like. I feel very confident that my paper will not only reflect the unjustness of the Treaty of Versailles, but will finally open my eyes to the real history involved in this very turbulent time.

72e

of Sources

Adams, Tony G.

The Struggle With Guilt: Versailles As a Guillotine

Eagle Street Press, London UK

c. 1976

Blahut, Joseph

The Failure of World War I Peace

University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill NC, USA

c. 1992

Boerneke, Manfred F.

The Treaty of Versailles: A Reassessment After 75 Years

New York University Press, New York, USA

c. 1996

Broening, Michel

Frankfurt, Brest-Litovsk, Versailles: A Never Ending Story

Unknown Press, Dusseldorf, Germany

c. 1992

Mayer, Arno J.

The Politics and Diplomacy of Peacekeeping: Containment and Counter-revolution at Versailles 1918-1919

Harcourt Press, New York, USA

c. 1967

WEBSITES VISITED

www.people.virginia.edu/~sas4u/versailles.html

www.worldwar1.com/wwwboard/messages/6001.htm

www.nobleweb.org/cp4/TKBalbonisp.html

209.235.102.9/aer23655/versailles.htm

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий