Do you agree that Indian desires for Independence from Britain were caused mainly by the impact of the First World War Indian desires for independence originate from a variety occurrences from the same period, both Pre and Post World War One, however it can be argued that no event had the same impact on both the British ability to rule India, and the Indian desires for independence from the British Raj. The Sources that agree with the impact of the world war caused the desires for independence are 2 and source 3, both referencing to the Indian war effort during the Great War, hoe their contribution would bring great benefits. In source 2, Gandhi said that fighting for the British was the right thing to do as they were fighting for civilisation, and that all those who live in the Empire are British, if they fought for Britain, then they would be accepted as true citizens. Source 3, is explaining that the British did not reward the Indians enough for their extreme courage during the war, and that the gradual process of ‘Indianisation’ was not good enough for the Indians, they wanted a faster system, and even Gandhi has decided that the British had to go. An agreement to the question is found in source 2, in a speech from early 1915, Gandhi expresses the opinion that everyone is a member of the British Empire, meaning that if they could prove their resourcefulness and ability to support the Empire, the Indians would be rewarded with something like independence or a faster system of Indianisation.
Also the document presents the triumphs and tragedies of the epic struggle on a continent placing them in a larger context in France and Great Britain global conflict. The book also offers an insight on the nature of Native Americans opposition in the evolution of American Independence. As soon as French presence disappeared, white colonists started moving aggressively in Indian territory creating even more instability in the region for Britain. The wars were so weak fought inside and outside the American continent. It created social, economic along with cultural and ethnic borders and relations reshaping its state borders due to the American Independence War fought by the Spanish, British or France.
After The World War 1 had ended America was finally beginning to return to normalcy. The idea of Isolationism and the outlaw of War with wall nations began to shape the foreign policy for the United States. Although the world was as peace during the 1920’s it was not soon enough that Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union would spark another World War. Due to Political, social and economic changes during 1920-1941 the foreign policy of the United States would dramatically change. Isolationism , the made idea in the early 1920’s was changed after the course of World War 2, and urge to engage in world affairs made America the leading power in the world.
As demonstrated by Wilson’s League of Nations, Hitler’s reign, and the start of World War II, America gradually changed its foreign policy from avoiding foreign issues to becoming involved in global affairs, which in fact, was inevitable. During this period of time, many Americans still held an isolationist view. They were too arrogant at the time to not only become more aware but also more active in foreign affairs. With the presidency of Harding and Coolidge, the popular view of the time was the return to “normalcy”. In 1920, Harding made a speech opposing Wilson’s plan for the League of Nations (Doc A).
Do you agree with the view that the Great War resulted in a revolution in the art of warfare for the British army? Throughout the First World War, there were numerous technological and tactical advances, many of which had not been seen or used by military forces before. Between the start of the war in 1914 and the end of the war in 1918, the changes in tactics and technology was huge, thus creating a new never before seen type of warfare. From looking at the sources, we can see both sources 7 and 8 agree with the view that the Great war resulted in a revolution in the art of warfare, whereas source 9 disagrees. As we see in source 7, Captain D. Kelly states ‘The attack gave a striking proof of the also make mentions of the advancements of the British army’.
How successful was David Lloyd George and the British Government in dealing with the Irish question in 1918 – 1922? David Lloyd George and the British Government faced many issues during the years between 1918 – 1922. After having to postpone the Irish Home Rule Bill 1912 due to WW1, it left DLG and the British Government in a sticky situation once the war ended. Ireland was on the verge of a huge Civil War and they knew that it had to be resolved very soon. Despite this issue, DLG and the British Government set in place a range of Acts and treaty’s in order to successfully resolve this issue.
I believe that the British did only make concessions to strengthen their power and control over India. However there are arguments suggesting that these concessions were made purely to benefit India and to increase Indian participation and decision making within the government. The argument that supports this statement is demonstrated through source 13. In Source 13 it tells us that ‘these concessions can be seen as a way of strengthening the Raj and their control within India’, it then continues to say that this opinion is exemplified within the Rowlatt Acts. From my own knowledge I know that these acts, passed by the Imperial Legislative Council in London on the 10th march 1919, gave authorization to imprison people for up to two years without trial, anybody living within the Raj suspected of terrorism.
There are many reasons as to why war broke out in August of 1914. Sources 1 and 2 agree with the statement that it was due to decisions made by the German military. Source 1 states it was the military who mobilised and made Germany appear to the rest of the world to be gearing up for war whilst source 2 uses the schlieffen plan as the reason for why the German military caused the outbreak of war. Source 3 however disagrees with the statement arguing all other countries carefully thought about the risks of war before entering into it, implying it was up to the Kaiser and Bethmann Hollweg. Source 2, even though it agrees with the statement also disagrees to an extent as well and supports source 3, blaming the immobilisation of Russia for the outbreak of war, linking to source 3 as Russia would have carefully thought out the plan to immobilise and rearm.
3. The Rowlatt Act gave British imperial authorities power to deal with revolutionary activities. Circumstances leading to Khilafat and non cooperation movement: a. The caliph of Turkey was the temporal and spiritual leader of the Muslims all over the World. During the First World War the British had promised the the caliph would not be deprived of his powers and that the Turkey would not be partitioned.
More than 300,000 American troops had been killed or wounded in the overseas battle ("the claim"). The country had plummeted into debt to cover its own military costs and then, post-war, was forced to forgive other countries their debts to the United States. This unloaded a tremendous burden of debt onto America and thus sent the country into the Great