Is Treaty of Versailles Considered Harsh?

457 Words2 Pages
Is Treaty of Versailles considered harsh? After the war, victorious nations and defeated nations signed a several treaties which are the Treaty of Versailles, the treaty of St German, the Treaty of Trianon, the Treaty of Neuilly and the Treaty of Sevres. In my opinion, the treaty settlements are definitely harsh and shortsighted. The information Clause 231, or what later became known as the “war guilt clause”, lay at the heart of the treaty. It allowed moral justification for the other term of the war imposed upon Germany, which I considered harsh and unreasonable. I think all the countries involved in WWI should take responsibility. Secondly, I want to argue about the disarmament clause which forbad Germany to have submarines, an air force, armoured cars or tanks. Instead, Germany was only allowed to keep six battleships and an army of 100,000 men to provide internal security. For me, it is truly another unjustifiable clause. An army of 100,000 was apparently too small for a country of Germany’s size and Germany was so proud of its army. Such clause is definitely too harsh to Germany. In addition, the treaty also required Germany to give out its certain reparations and some key resources and to change it territorial in some area. In general, I think all these reparations are required for a lost side but not in such a harsh way. In another hand, the Treaty of Versaille is shortsighted somehow. First, the “war guilt” clause becomes specially hated by Germans, who felt that all countries should bear responsibility for the outbreak of WWI in1914. This resentment and anger later helped Hitler to gain support from most Germans to rebuild a stronger and more powerful German which finally led to a even more destructive war. What’s more, the reparation has led to destruction of the economic life of German while in the long term, it actually threatened the health and
Open Document