It was often the cases of self interest that these two nations resorted too. In Manchuria, Britain and France were unwilling to send their armies nor fleets, in Abyssinia, they did not close the Suez Canal , which could have stopped Mussolini's invasion and they did not ban important war materials such as coal, oil and steel. The USSR was the only country powerful enough to send troops to force the aggressors into accepting the League's wishes, but they weren't in the League. Without the USA, the League was permanently weakened. Had the USA been in the league, Japan wouldn't have conquered Manchuria and Mussolini would have backed off Abyssinia.
Rachel Kay How accurate is it to say Frederick William IV was responsible for the failure of the Frankfurt Parliament? The Frankfurt Parliament was established to create freedom of press, German citizenship for all, fair taxation, equality of political rights and to create a unified Germany. However, countries like Austria greatly opposed it. Frederick William IV could be seen as responsible for the failure of the Frankfurt Parliament because he refused to accept any form of leadership and made it clear he distrusted the ‘gentlemen of Frankfurt’. However, many other factors played a role in the demise of the Parliament such as the fact that they were ill-organised, the lack of popular support and their inability to enforce decisions.
USA is powerful because of our isolationism from other foreign countries and if we joined the League, it would mean that we would be under control of Britain and France and we would be like dummies; doing whatever the puppet master told us to do. That would be like signing a blank cheque to Britain and France and that would mean we would have to do anything they told us to do. Many of the Americans are recent immigrants and are opposed to the Treaty of Versailles. The Legislative doesn’t want to do anything that the US population is against. Also, the Congress believes that the Treaty is unfair and
Mao criticised Khrushchev for his policies such as de-Stalinisation and his secret speech. He was also very critical of the policy of Peaceful Coexistence as he believed it was a way of being friendly with the United States (the enemy) and also Mao saw it abandoning millions of comrades struggling to free themselves of capitalist and imperialist oppression. This, therefore, made the USSR an ‘enemy’. How could two countries work together if they had such differing beliefs about how to run their countries? This problem had a big contribution to the split as they couldn’t agree on anything, and if they did, it was because their national interests were at risk.
Collective security had a better response towards aggression rather than appeasement. This is because a lot more European countries didn’t approve of the decision made during the Munich Conference. Winston Churchill was one person who strong didn’t approve with this decision. He was a British politician who thought, “keeping peace depends on holding back the aggressor” (Document 6). Churchill believed that in order to guarantee the security of Czechoslovakia, Europe should have held Germany back and Britain and France should have worked together as an alliance.
Another reason to why America is to blame is after the success of the atomic bomb the members of the Grand Alliance began to see changes in Truman’s behaviour as he started to control the meetings they had and Stalin refused to be bossed around so arguments between Stalin and Truman started, they started. The USSR is to blame for the breakdown of the Grand Alliance for many reasons. One reason is that the USSR wanted to impose big respirations on Germany but America and Great Britain refused as they knew how it would affect Germany and could cause another war. A second reason is that Stalin wanted most of Europe to become communist, Roosevelt and Churchill didn’t agree. After Truman became Americas new President there was a lot of tension at the Potsdam Conference.
France wasn’t part of the colonies like America was, America was sick of being treated badly, and unfairly so they decided to fight. But as for France they were having trouble with their government and needed to create a new one witch they did. And to me it seems like America had much more at stake. The American and French Revolution both worked out in favor of France and for America they both got what they wanted France got the government they fought for, and America parted ways with Britain. The two revolutions were a big part in both America’s history, and a big part in Frances history.
Peacemaking and the League of Nations 1) The French leader, Clemenceau, saw the oppportunity at the Treaty of Versailles to cripple Germany so it could not attack France again. Describe how the Treaty of Versailles weakened Germany. (4marks) It weakened Germany through the loss of territory, restricted armed forces and economics such as the loss of the Saar and the reparations Germany had to pay. 2) 'I do not suppose that in the history of the Assembly there was ever a more difficult moment for a speech and a discussion. The world is worried about the Abyssinian Crisis and there are strong feelings on both sides.
The owners of the Suez Canal Great Britain and France both attempted to assault Egypt. Both Britain and France believed that the U.s would come to aid and supply oil for them. The U.S never aided this cause because president Eisenhower did not like the fact that Britain and France kept America out of the assault. The United Nations forced to mantain orders. this assault led to the Oil Embargo in
Germany was not invited to the negotiation of the terms which were held at the Château de Versailles, but were present: the “Big Three”: France, Britain and the United States, as well as Italy and Japan. At the time, many people thought this Treaty was too harsh; it was even described as a “Carthaginian peace” by Keynes. However, with hindsight, nowadays people tend to judge it quite fair, arguing that the allied governments were under the pressure of their own public (Mommensen) or that the German thought it was too severe and persuaded others it was (Sally Marks). It therefore seems essential to ask ourselves if the Treaty of Versailles was fair or not. In order to establish its fairness, we will look at the different terms of the Treaty, concerning the War Guilt clause, the reparations owed – or rather, the sum of money Germany had to pay - , the demilitarization of the country as well as the territorial settlement decided by the Allies.