• 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...


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.


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.


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. 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.

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

    The first-past-the-post system ensures that the elected government has a workable majority. The term was coined from a particular type of horse racing wherein the winning horse passes the final "post" and all the others are disqualified. How this translates to an election is that only the votes for the

  2. "William Wilberforce was primarily responsible for the abolition of the Slave Trade in the ...

    Consequently anti-slavery literature by the likes of Thomas Clarkson, John Newton and Equiano became very popular around the country and aided the revolution of thinking in regards to slavery. The Industrial Revolution further added to the demand for abolition. In most industrial towns in the North such as Manchester, people

  1. Why did the Absolute Monarchy Collapse between May and October 1789?

    Had the death not occurred, Louis may have been sharper and prevented the collapse of his position as a despot. But Louis seemed high handed for example when he called the troops in 1789 and when he was subsequently forced to back down he appeared ridiculous.

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

    The boy's actions reassure the audience of the effectiveness of Henry as king. The boy's monologue is spoken still eloquently but not as eloquently as Henry's. The boy uses contrasts puns in order to reaffirm the sort of people Nym, Bardolph and Pistol are.

  1. Explain the factors which shaped the Elizabethan Religious Settlement reached in 1559

    Cecil than Elizabeth, then her religious convictions were obviously not as strong as is previously believed. The influence of Cecil is no doubt evident in the final religious settlement. However, it is important to consider to what extent and how the Privy Council and Cecil had an effect on Elizabeth.

  2. Free essay

    Most of our people have never had it so good (Macmillan) To what extent ...

    Despite the boom however, there were still concerns about inflation and the dilemma to maintain growth and employment. it has been argued: "The key factor in the Conservative victory was that average real pay for industrial workers had risen since Churchill's 1951 victory by over 20 per cent.

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