Wilson, the Most Idealisitic?

2166 Words9 Pages
To what extent do I agree with the Thesis? The Allied victors following the end of World War I had a job to set the peace terms for the defeated Central Powers following the armistices of 1918. The main countries and leaders involved were France- Clemenceau, Britain- Lloyd George and America- Wilson: the big three. They held Paris peace conferences were they deliberated and discussed their own ideas and views about what should be done; now the war was over. However, all three men were very opinionated and tended not to agree on many things, which concludes why it took a little over five months for the treaty of Versailles to be formed. The thesis formulated here advocates that even though Wilson’s conception was considered idealistic, it was the best approach for sustaining the post-war peace. An issue that Wilson was passionate about was self-determination; he believed that every country should be ruled by their own people. He strongly disagreed with empires and colonies, and believed that the people of the country should choose their leader. But, with the collapse of the Austrian empire it was possible that in the future Austria may look for support from Germany- join forces to become a union. Traditionally, even though they are both German speaking countries these two countries had separate empires, and Austria tended to be the strongest of the pair. So, because Wilson was determined to allow self-determination for all Europeans, to him if Austria wanted to create a union with Germany they should be allowed. However, Clemenceau’s view was very much different. He wanted to keep Germany as weak and small as possible. Consequently, if they were to join forces with Austria- a powerful country- they would be able to rise and be strong once more. Lloyd George was not too concerned regarding this issue, he, himself did not see the problem of the two countries
Open Document