In the early days of WW1, President Wilson asked the US public to remain impartial in stance and action to the two sides of the war. It was his intention to exemplify the ideal democratic peaceful nation and maintain the USAs policy of isolationism throughout this European war. However, this aim was not met, due to the a number of reasons, these being, the allies debt, the safety of US shipping, the Zimmermann telegraph, general dislike of Germany and Wilson’s desire to be involved in the creation of peace in the conclusion of the war. These contributing factors lead to the USA entering WWI associated with the allied powers in April 1917. Throughout the early to mid 1900s it was widely accepted that Wilson was pushed to enter the war purely based on his business interests, being the trade and debt aspects the his relationship with the allies lead to as suggested by C. Beard.
“Between 1933 and 1937, the British public’s hostility to the confrontation of foreign powers left the National Government with no alternative to a policy of appeasing Hitler and Mussolini.” – How far do you agree with this judgement? Due to the aftermath of the First World War and the oncoming threat of further war, the general public opinion was to avoid war at all costs during the time between 1933 and 1937. It was in British interests to maintain peace because of similar reasons, and because of the state of the British economy. The British public were therefore not hostile to confrontation of foreign powers, but wanted to avoid the conflict, meaning there was a strong influence on the National Government to please the general public, and appeasement was a better option than to use violence. The public opinion of wanting to be peaceful was the main reason why the National Government felt as if there was no alternative to appeasing Hitler and Mussolini.
The Kellogg-Briand Pact which was signed in 1928, was a measure attempted between 1925 and 1929 to preserve peace and security in Europe because the main objective was to renounce war. Briand, the French foreign minister produced the plan to France and USA stating that they should sign. Kellogg, the American secretary of state was enthusiastic and then did it become, the Kellogg-Briand Pact. Overall, 65 countries signed including the Japanese and Russians to which they were agreeing that countries were allowed to fight only in self-defence. This was an attempt at preserving peace because it did not live up to its aim of ending war and it made no immediate contribution to international peace.
However, the U.S. was never to sign the treaty or join the League of Nations Woodrow Wilson's ideas for peace were well rooted in thought, but in politically applying his ideas, he made unchangeable mistakes. In heading up the peace conference, Wilson made a serious mistake by not included World War One introduced the terrifying new concept of total war to an unsuspecting world. Nationalism and delusions of world conquest turned civilians into soldiers. Before the war, humans were developing technology at the fastest rate in history. After the war ended, President Wilson and the rest of the Allied leaders were responsible for the challenge of putting Europe back together the way one might piece together a jigsaw puzzle.
According to Lafore the French ambassador went far beyond his diplomatic solidarity. Also Paleologue’s “actions and influences offer a precise counterpart to those of Tschirschky in Vienna. Lafore states that different ambassador might have made different decision, which might lessen, the probability of war. Another significant man to discus then talking about mistakes in World War one is Sir Edward Grey. A British Liberal statesman according to Lafore could have taken a clearer viewpoint, which might have saved the peace in the world.
Weltpolitik could be argued to be a factor relating to the breakout of the First World War in August 1914. Although, it could be said that the war was avoidable and not inevitable, supported by Geiss in source 2 and Mombauer in source 3. On the other hand there are a two other main views which the sources suggest could be accountable for the outbreak of the war, with Deist source 1 mainly pushing for the political decision makers in the Kaiser and his military cabinet, such as Molkte and Tiripitz. The final factor that all three sources partially suggest is the impact of the tensions in the Balkans, mainly between the Austro-Hungarians and the Russians. Altogether, the idea that Weltpolitik made the First World War inevitable by August 1914 is short sighted as this is not entirely accountable for the war but was a contribution.
Serbia accepted all but one point of the ultimatum. Consequently war was announced. If given more time Serbia could have discussed the issue further in a conference. The British foreign minister, Grey suggested a conference, but this was rejected by Germany and Austria-Hungary, suggesting that they had deliberate aims for war during the Balkan Crisis, rather than the Balkan Crisis being mismanaged. There was a long-standing rivalry between Austria-Hungary and Russia due to their interests in the Balkans.
Many European countries were pleased by this document because it helped deal with the economic problems in Latin America and Caribbean and stopped the need for European help. Once the US paid of the debts of the countries, it created stability. In 1907 the U.S intervened with Nicaragua by using dollar diplomacy when a revolt broke out in Nicaragua in 1912, so the Taft administration quickly sent U.S. troops into the country to seize the customs houses! The Castill-Knox Treaty of 1914 was as well between Nicaragua and the U.S. and stated that the US would be allowed to create a canal across Nicaragua. This allowed the US to enter Nicaragua whenever they wanted.
Jorge Luna February 23, 2013 Period: 1 U.S Foreign Policy Change between 1920-1941 From 1920-1941 the United States foreign policy changed from being a strict isolation and neutrality policy to a more liberal policy because of the circumstances and tensions of the future world war two. This new change in the policy allowed America to help its allies and keep America safe from the totalitarian dictators of its time. In 1918 after the First World War ended, the United States created a foreign policy in which they stated that they weren’t going to help in any way any nation at war. Many of the reasons were because of the economic depression that was going on also, because the people of America didn’t want to go to war again. For a few years America tried to isolate itself from the rest of the world trying to ignore the fight leading up to World War Two.
It was provoked into entering the war, however, when Germany announced that it would attack any United States submarines bringing supplies to its allies. Indeed, Zinn points out very clearly that, “It was unrealistic to expect that the Germans should treat the United States as neutral in the war when the U.S. had been shipping great amounts of war materials to Germany’s enemies,” (Zinn 362) and I think that statement summarizes very nicely the attitude that most everyone had during WWI. My reaction to this chapter is that it was very short, but had good meaning and a good lesson that can still be applied. I see this point in history as the United States focusing very intently on the war it was thrust into, while the people were still unsettled and demanding changes in freedom of speech and automatic military enrollment. Also, again there was that subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) push for socialism to take over, and the war allowed the government to destroy the IWW (Industrial Workers of the World), a force they had fought with internally for many years.