• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles harsh and short-sighted?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Caroline Sims To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles harsh and short-sighted? The peace treaties of 1919, were an attempt to come to an agreement with the losing powers that they accept their blame and peace would be resolved while they pay the consequences. As Germany was a losing power of the war, she was made to sign the treaties and accept their consequences. This essay will examine the extent to which the Treaty of Versailles was harsh and short-sighted. I will begin with the reasons why the Treaty of Versailles can be justified. Firstly, there were three victorious powers who negotiated the peace treaties; David Lloyd George, for Britain, Woodrow Wilson, for America, and George Clemenceau, for France. The French suffered the most war damage, with the most brutal battles being fort there, including thousands of square miles of trenches dug up and 1.5 million casualties. Therefore, George Clemenceau opted for a considerably higher amount of reparations than the other two winning powers. However this was compromised and ended up at 6.6million, which was substantially lower than Clemenceau's original proposal. ...read more.

Middle

On the other hand the previous point that the allies gave up on implementing the Treaty could aid the opposing view that the terms were short-sighted because the fact that Britain, America and Italy gave up shows the Treaty to be one of which was doomed to fail. Henig argues that 'the victorious alliance, which had defeated Germany and negotiated a set of peace terms, had crumbled away. It was this critical collapse, rather than the provisions of the peace terms themselves, which ensured that the Treaty of Versailles was never fully accepted or enforced. Negotiations at the peace conference exposed the divisions between the victorious powers and opened the rifts.' This agrees with the statement that the Treaty of Versailles was shortsighted as the allies weren't strong enough to initiate it's terms. Furthermore as stated in 'The Treaty of Versailles 80 Years On', 'Britain, the United States and Italy, had little stomach to enforce the resulting settlement on a resentful and protesting Germany.' France was the only power willing to punish Germany fully and Britain was more interested in securing military budget than aiding France. ...read more.

Conclusion

Historian Anthony Wood demonstrates the extend of its impact: 'the fundamental significance of Versailles was emotional rather than rational'. He goes on to state that it indicated the desire to achieve 'national humiliation of Germany' and that Germany must 'alone suffer as a result of the hated Treaty'. From evaluating the works of several historians and my own research, I have discovered that at the time of the Treaty of Versailles, it's terms were seen as emotionally and physically punishing on Germany, who was forced to give up most economic resources, pay mass reparations and lose population. However, I feel that the terms, although already quite harsh, could have been greater. Clemenceau could have had his way in the Conference and Germany as a country would have found it much harder to recover. The Allies could have collectively pushed the terms through so that Germany couldn't limit them, meaning the terms would have had a significantly harsher effect. Then again, unable to effectively enforce this treaty, a harsher one would not have been able to lead Europe any closer to peace. Therefore I feel the Treaty of Versailles was as harsh as it could be given the circumstances of disharmony between the powers, but Germany could have faced much worse. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

4 star(s)

This is a well balanced essay that stays focused on the question asked and uses a good range of available historiography. At times, the author's ideas get lost compared to those of historians. Ensure these are always the driving force of an essay. 4 out of 5 stars.

Marked by teacher Natalya Luck 26/07/2013

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Did Oliver Cromwell achieve his objectives from 1642 to 1658?

    5 star(s)

    Despite it's unpopularity Cromwell did see the 'Reformation of Manners' as successful, he described the work that the major-generals had done as "very effectual towards the discountenancing of vice and settling region, than anything else these 50 years." It has been said that the one legacy Oliver Cromwell left behind

  2. Peer reviewed

    To what extent was British policy in Ireland a success in the years 1868-1886?

    4 star(s)

    It also wouldn't have upset the Church of Ireland much as the existing clergymen and officials were given financial protection for life. It could be seen as a defeat as it gave rise to the idea that home rule could be given and after this much problems were seen as the home rule party really started asking for home rule.

  1. Describe how Cavour, Garibaldi, Mazzini and Victor Emmanuel II helped to bring about the ...

    To avoid civil war, Garibaldi handed over his conquests in the Southern Italy to Victor Emmanuel II when the two met near the Volturno on October 26. Angered at not being named viceroy in Naples, however, Garibaldi retired to his home on Caprera, off Sardinia.

  2. Why was there a revolution in France in 1789

    The financial crisis was a product of two factors, firstly two wars that produced a debt, and secondly, the way in which the problems were dealt with. France had previously been in the seven-year war (1756-63), which produced some debts, and then they got involved in the American War of independence (1778-83).

  1. Asses the most important factors that led to David Lloyd George(TM)s downfall in 1922

    to use the military facilities of the Russians, and thus evade sections of the Versailles Treaty. One aim of the conference was to cancel all war debts and reparations; in order to put pressure on the US, the Balfour Note was issued, stating that Great Britain would only collect debts

  2. Why did Labour win the 1945 election and lose in the 1951 election?

    Most significantly, Labour established the NHS in 1948, they also brought about various other reforms pertaining to welfare. These reforms had a deep effect on Britain, however the electorate evidently felt not enough was done to fulfil the promises of a near "utopian" post-war Britain.

  1. What kind of king does Shakespeare create in Act 3 Scenes 1 and 2? ...

    There is an overall high moral and philosophical content in the scene; there are also numerous definitions of what nationalism and patriotism are. The language Shakespeare uses in Henry's speech that adds to the overall effect of the scene, he uses figurative when referring to the men like greyhounds in the slips.

  2. Constitutional Nationalism succeeded in achieving its aims whereas revolutionary nationalism failed and cultural nationalism ...

    Kee has said that, "The success of Emmet's myth lay in the very need to ennoble failure. For tragic failure was to become part of Ireland's identity." Indeed, Emmet's words at his trial were to spur on a generation of revolutionary nationalists; "Let my memory be left in oblivion and

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work