# data[].attributes.body
An overview of the end of the First World War

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Closing stages of World War I
 | The 20th century | World history | Khan Academy

# data[].attributes.body
The Peace treaties

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How did the Treaty of Versailles establish peace? - Views of historians

# data[].attributes.body
Terms of the Treaty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The treaty was signed today at Versailles. At 10:30 am Washington time Phillips and I sat in the telegraph room on the 4 th floor of the Dept. and had a direct wire from there to Versailles - with only two relays, one at London and one at Newfoundland, where it went into and came out of the submarine cable.

# data[].attributes.body
Introduction to the Road to World War II

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Peace to War 1919-39 : clear overview aimed specifically at the old AQA GCSE.

# data[].attributes.body
Eight steps to war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Treaty of Versailles had put the Saar under the control of the League of Nations for 15 years. In 1935 the inhabitants of the Saar voted to return to Germany. The Saar plebiscite is cited by many historians as the first step to war.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - The League of Nations - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations and the aims, organisations and powers of the League of Nations

# data[].attributes.body
Summarises in a few minutes the failures of the La

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - The League's successes and failures - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the League of Nations and its successes and failures in the 1920s

# data[].attributes.body
Quick overview of the two main problems the League faced in the 1930s

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - Manchuria and Abyssinia - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the League of Nations and Manchuria and Abyssinia

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1 -  Just years after World War I, Germany and other nations are in an economic depression. Leader approval ratings of Germany, Italy, Japan and Spain are shallow, giving the rise to military dictators along with their parties. Years after Adolf Hitler becomes Chancellor of Germany, he and his generals plot the invasion of Poland.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War II in HD Colour: The Gathering Storm (Part 1/13)

# data[].attributes.body
Part 2 - The Germans develop a new military tactic known as Blitzkrieg. The Nazis use Blitzkrieg, dominating land and air warfare, allowing them to take Poland and conquer France in matters of weeks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War II in HD Colour: Lightning War (Part 2/13)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Germans develop a new military tactic known as Blitzkrieg. The Nazis use Blitzkrieg, dominating land and air warfare, allowing them to take Poland and conquer France in matters of weeks. World War II In HD Colour is a 13-episode television documentary series recounting the major events of World War II narrated by Robert Powell.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - The conference and the Big Three - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the Treaty of Versailles and the 'Big Three'

# data[].attributes.body
Video isn't working, click on picture to watch clip.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - Terms of the Treaty of Versailles - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the Treaty of Versailles and its terms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - Chamberlain and appeasement - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the road to World War Two, Chamberlain and appeasement

# data[].attributes.body
Appeasement

# data[].attributes.body
Appeasement in action

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is it significant that Germans troops entering the Sudetenland were greeted as liberators and heroes?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - The Nazi-Soviet Pact - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the road to World War Two and the Nazi-Soviet pact

# data[].attributes.body
Nazi-Soviet Pact

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939

Germany and Russia agreed to bury the hatchet; they agreed to bury it in Poland.

BBC TV, Why Appeasement?

Links

Basic account

Spartacus site - good documents

Prof Rempel on the Nazi-Soviet Pact

Wikipedia - very difficult
From the British point of view
Russian interpretation

A Nazi-Soviet Pact

On 23 August, 1939, the world was shocked when, suddenly, Russia and Germany signed a 'Non-aggression Pact'.

People would have been even more shocked if they had known at the time that, in addition, the two countries had made a number of a 'secret protocol' agreeing 'spheres of influence' in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Poland. It amounted to an agreement to invade and divide the countries of eastern Europe between them ... with Poland first on the list.

Eastern Europe in 1939. Germany and Russia invade Poland.

◄ Source A

This 1939 cartoon was drawn for the American public by the US cartoonist Herb Block.

Click here for the interpretation

The Story of the Pact

Stalin knew that Hitler's ultimate aim was to attack Russia. In 1939, he invited Lord Halifax, the British Foreign Secretary to go to Russia to discuss an alliance against Germany. The British feared Russian Communism, and they believed that the Russian army was too weak to be of any use against Hitler.

In August 1939, with war in Poland looming, the British eventually sent a minor official called Reginald Ranfurly Plunckett-Ernle-Erle-Drax. He travelled by slow boat, not by plane. He did not have authority to make any decisions, and had to refer every question back to London. The talks dragged on.

The Russians asked if they could send troops into Poland if Hitler invaded. The British refused. The talks broke down.

Why did Anglo-Soviet Talks Fail? [SCAB]

S uspicion

a. Chamberlain did not trust Stalin, who was a Communist and a dictator. In particular, he would not ever have allowed Russia to control Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

b. The Russians thought Britain wanted to trick them into war against Germany.

c. Poland did not trust that the Russians (who wanted to send troops into Poland), once in, would ever leave.

C hoice

a. Britain could not send troops to fight in Poland, so if Stalin supported Britain, he would end up fighting a war in Poland on Britain's behalf.

On the other hand, Hitler was promising him peace, half of Poland and a 'sphere of influence' over eastern Europe.

A ppeasement

After Munich, Stalin was convinced that Britain would break its promise to Poland.He was convinced that Britain would leave Russia fighting Hitler alone.

B ritain delayed

a. At first, Lord Halifax refused Stalin's offer of a meeting.

b. When the British sent an official, he could not make any decisions.Stalin got fed up with British delay.

In August 1939, Hitler sent Ribbentrop, a senior Nazi, to Russia. He offered a Nazi-Soviet alliance - Russia and Germany would not go to war, but would divide Poland between them. Germany would allow Russia to annex Estinia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland.

Stalin knew Hitler was lying, but he did not trust the British either - the Munich Agreement had convinced him that Britain and France would never dare to go to war with Hitler.

Stalin had two choices:

if he made an alliance with Britain, he would end up fighting a war with Hitler over Poland.

if he made an alliance with Germany, he would get half of Poland, and time to prepare for the coming war with Germany.

He chose the latter. On 23 August 1939, he signed the Pact with Hitler.

Why did the Nazi-Soviet Pact Happen? [THUG]

T ime to prepare for war

Stalin said: 'We got peace for our country for 18 months, which let us make military preparations'.

H ope to gain

Stalin was sure that Russia could only gain from a long war in which Britain, France and Germany exhausted themselves.

U nhappy with Britain

Stalin was insulted by Britain's slowness to negotiate, and did not trust Britain. When the Anglo-Soviet alliance failed [ SCAB], he turned to Germany.

G ermany

Hitler wanted the alliance because only Russia could keep Britain's promise to defend Poland. He believed that, if he got a promise of peace with Russia, Britain would be forced to back down over Poland and Danzig.

Activity

1. Write an essay: 'Why did Stalin make a Pact with Hitler rather than an Alliance with Britain?'

Your essay will have TWO sections, each of FOUR paragraphs, each paragraph having
a Point,
some Evidence to support it, then
an Explanation of how this worked so that Stalin made the alliance with Hitler rather than Britain.

The FIRST section will deal - in FOUR paragraphs - with the four reasons that the Anglo-Soviet talks failed.

The SECOND section will deal - in FOUR paragraphs - with the four reasons that the Nazi-Soviet talks succeeded.

The Shock to the System

The British government had know about the Nazi-Soviet negotiations since the bgeinning of August but the Pact came as a complete surprise to the British public, who found it hard to believe that communist, Hitler-hating Russia had made an alliance with nazi, Communist-hating Germany. They judged, correctly, that the Pact was a cynical lie to devour Poland.

The following Low cartoons reflect their amazement and outrage, as well as the hope/feeling that the two liars would get their come-uppance in the end.

◄ Source B

This cartoon by the British cartoonist David Low was published in the Evening Standard newspaper on 20 September 1939. It shows Hitler, who is saying: 'The scum of the earth I believe?' and Stalin, who replies: 'The bloody assassin of the workers, I presume?'

Click here for the interpretation

What elements indicate that they are allied?

What indicates that the alliance is not likely to last?

What do the storm clouds in the background symbolise?

What does the dead figure between them represent?

◄ Source C

This cartoon by the British cartoonist David Low was published in the Evening Standard newspaper on 21 October 1939. Having destroyed Poland, Hitler and Stalin stroll down their now-shared frontier.

Click here for the interpretation

Historians have argued that the Nazi-Soviet Pact was instrumental in causing the Second World War, inasmuch as it:

1. Freed up Hitler to invade Poland - he knew that Britain couldn't do anything to defend Poland (he invaded 9 days later)

.

2. Ended Britain's hopes of an alliance with Russia to stop Hitler - people in Britain realised that nothing would stop Hitler now but war.

3. Improved morale of British people for war - showed Hitler as an opportunist and a trickster, who could never be trusted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939 Germany and Russia agreed to bury the hatchet; they agreed to bury it in Poland. BBC TV, Why Appeasement? Basic account Spartacus site - good documents Prof Rempel on the Nazi-Soviet Pact Wikipedia - very difficult From the British point of view Russian interpretation On 23 August, 1939, the world was shocked when, suddenly, Russia and Germany signed a 'Non-aggression Pact'.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - Who was to blame for WW2? - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the road to World War Two and who was to blame

# data[].attributes.body
Website created by an examiner, has lots of sources, may be worth a look.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The events of the 1930s doomed the League of Nations. By 1936, after the Disarmament Conference had failed, few people looked to Geneva for the answers to Europe's problems. As civil war erupted that summer, Spain was added to Manchuria, Abyssinia and the Rhineland in the roll-call of the League's failures.

# data[].attributes.body
Nice summary of the League, doesn't look impressive but has lots of good information and useful links. Definitely worth a look.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
aims of the League, its strengths and weaknesses in structure and organisation.

# data[].attributes.body
Simple explanation of what the Big 3 wanted as a nice recap

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Treaty of Versailles, What Did the Big Three Want? 1/2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize - History - Opinions of Versailles - Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the Treaty of Versailles and opinions on the Treaty

# data[].attributes.body
Bit wordier but has some good information and some primary sources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
▼ Primary Sources ▼

During the First World War several world leaders such as Woodrow Wilson and Jan Smuts, began advocating the need for an international organization to preserve peace and settle disputes by arbitration. In September, 1916, Robert Cecil, a member of the British government, wrote a memorandum where he argued that civilisation could survive only if it could develop an international system that would insure peace.

When peace negotiations began in October, 1918, Woodrow Wilson insisted that his Fourteen Points should serve as a basis for the signing of the Armistice. This included the formation of the League of Nations.

The constitution of the League of Nations was adopted by the Paris Peace Conference in April, 1919. The League's headquarters were in Geneva and its first secretary-general was Sir Eric Drummond. The Covenant (Constitution) of the League of Nations called for collective security and the peaceful settlement of disputes by arbitration. It was decided that any country that resorted to war would be subjected to economic sanctions.

The main organs of the League of Nations were the General Assembly, the Council and the Secretariat. The General Assembly, which met once a year, consisted of representatives of all the member states and decided on the organization's policy. The Council included four permanent members (Britain, France, Italy and Japan) and four (later nine) others elected by the General Assembly every three years. The Secretariat prepared the agenda and published reports of meetings.

As a result of the decision by the US Congress not to ratify the Versailles Treaty, the United States never joined the League of Nations. Others joined but later left the organization: Brazil (1926), Japan (1933), Italy (1937). Germany was only a member from 1926 to 1933, and the Soviet Union from 1934 to 1940.

The League of Nations had no armed forces and had to rely on boycotts (sanctions) to control the behaviour of member states. In January 1923 France occupied the Ruhr. Six months later Italy bombed the Greek island of Corfu. When the League of Nations discussed these events, the governments of France and Italy threatened to withdraw from the organization. As a result, the League of Nations decided not to take any action. Konni Zilliacus, a member of the Information Section of the League Secretariat, wrote to his friend Norman Angell: "I feel depressed and fed up. Who could have imagined things would turn out as badly as this?"

In 1924 the League of Nations was given a boost when James Ramsay MacDonald, Arthur Henderson and Edouard Herriot, leading politicians in Britain and France, visited Geneva in 1924. Hugh Dalton, wrote enthusiastically, "The League seemed to have come to life again, and to have gained a new significance."

The League of Nations also had success in adverting wars in the border disputes between Bulgaria-Greece (1925), Iraq-Turkey (1925-26) and Poland-Lithuania (1927). The League of Nations also had noticeable success in the areas of drugs control, refugee work and famine relief.

In 1929 foreign ministers of all the main European nations attended meetings of the League of Nations. Mary Hamilton, a Labour Party delegate to the League of Nations wrote: "Geneva in 1929 and 1930 was a genuine International clearing-house of ideas... There was hard work, and there was goodwill."

The League of Nations faced a fresh crisis in September 1931 when the Japanese Army occupied large areas of Manchuria, a province of China. The Chinese government appealed to the League of Nations under Article 11 of the Covenant. China also appealed to the United States as a signatory of the Kellogg Pact.

Robert Cecil, Britain's official delegate to the League of Nations, proposed an inquiry to deal with the dispute. Henry L. Stimson, the US Secretary of State, advised against this as he believed it would upset the Japanese government. However, eventually it was agreed that the League of Nations would establish a commission of inquiry under the chairmanship of Lord Lytton.

In March 1932 Japan renamed Manchuria as Manchukuo ("land of the Manchus"). Only Germany and Italy recognised the new state. The Lytton Report was published six months later. The report acknowledged that Japan had legitimate grievances against the Chinese Government. However, the report condemned the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and refused to recognise Manchukuo as an independent state. When the League adopted the report Japan resigned from the organization.

Konni Zilliacus, an official of the League of Nations, believed that Germany and Italy posed the greatest threat to world peace. He argued for the creation of an "inner ring" of states within the League of Nations, led by Britain, France and the Soviet Union. He also proposed the election by proportional representation of a new international debating chamber of the League of Nations. His views influenced some leading British politicians such as Arthur Henderson, Clement Attlee, Herbert Morrison and Hugh Dalton, but the idea was rejected by the government led by Stanley Baldwin.

In October 1935 Benito Mussolini sent in General Pietro Badoglio and the Italian Army into Ethiopia. The League of Nations condemned Italy's aggression and in November imposed sanctions. This included an attempt to ban countries from selling arms, rubber and some metals to Italy. Some political leaders in France and Britain opposed sanctions arguing that it might persuade Mussolini to form an alliance with Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany.

Over 400,000 Italian troops fought in Ethiopia. The poorly armed Ethiopians were no match for Italy's modern tanks and aeroplanes. The Italians even used mustard gas on the home forces and were able to capture Addis Ababa, the capital of the country, in May 1936, forcing Emperor Haile Selassie to flee to England.

In September 1938, Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, met Adolf Hitler at his home in Berchtesgaden. Hitler threatened to invade Czechoslovakia unless Britain supported Germany's plans to takeover the Sudetenland. After discussing the issue with the Edouard Daladier (France) and Eduard Benes (Czechoslovakia), Chamberlain informed Hitler that his proposals were unacceptable.

Benito Mussolini suggested to Adolf Hitler that one way of solving this issue was to hold a four-power conference of Germany, Britain, France and Italy. This would exclude both Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union, and therefore increasing the possibility of reaching an agreement and undermine the solidarity that was developing against Germany.

The meeting took place in Munich on 29th September, 1938. Desperate to avoid war, and anxious to avoid an alliance with Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union, Neville Chamberlain and Edouard Daladier agreed that Germany could have the Sudetenland. In return, Hitler promised not to make any further territorial demands in Europe. Adolf Hitler, Neville Chamberlain, Edouard Daladier and Benito Mussolini now signed the Munich Agreement which transferred the Sudetenland to Germany. The League of Nations remained silent on the invasion.

Joseph Stalin now became concerned about the Soviet Union being invaded from the West. Stalin argued that Leningrad was only thirty-two kilometres from the Finnish border and its 3.5 million population, were vulnerable to artillery fire from Nazi Germany. After attempts to negotiate the stationing of Soviet troops in Finland failed, Stalin ordered the Red Army to invade on 30th November 1939. This time the League of Nations decided to take action and expelled the Soviet Union.

The League of Nations did not meet during the Second World War. In 1946 the responsibilities of the League of Nations was handed over to the United Nations.

▲ Main Article ▲

Primary Sources

(1) Lee Smith, speech in the House of Commons (21st October 1916)

Security can only be obtained by a scheme by which the nations of Europe and outside agree together that all will guarantee each and each will guarantee all. The purposes of the war will be achieved if there is a League of Nations with an absolute and decisive veto upon any mere aggression, and consideration of any legitimate claims which any of the countries engaged in the War may be able to make good. Go back to the old Liberal tradition and trust yourself boldly to those decent, kindly, humane forces to be found in every man and every nation.

What we demand in this war, therefore, is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealings by the other peoples of the world, as against force and selfish aggression. All the peoples of the world are in effect partners in this interest, and for our own part we see very clearly that unless justice be done to others it will not be done to us.

The program of the world's peace, therefore, is our program, and that program, the only possible program, as we see it, is this:

I. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind, but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.

II. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.

III. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.

IV. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.

V. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the Government whose title is to be determined.

VI. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest co-operation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy, and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire.

VII. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations.

VIII. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.

IX. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.

X. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development.

XI. Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan States to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan States should be entered into.

XII. The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.

XIII. An independent Polish State should be erected which would include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which would be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.

XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

(3) President Woodrow Wi lson, speech on the League of Nations (8th September, 1919)

For the first time in history the counsels of mankind are to be drawn together and concerted for the purpose of defending the rights and improving the conditions of working people - men, women, and children - all over the world. Such a thing as that was never dreamed of before, and what you are asked to discuss in discussing the League of Nations is the matter of seeing that this thing is not interfered with. There is no other way to do it than by a universal league of nations, and what is proposed is a universal league of nations.

Only two nations are for the time being left out. One of them is Germany, because we did not think that Germany was ready to come in, because we felt that she ought to go through a period of probation. She says that she made a mistake. We now want her to prove it by not trying it again. She says that she has abolished all the old forms of government by which little secret councils of men, sitting nobody knew exactly where, determined the fortunes of that

great nation and, incidentally, tried to determine the fortunes of mankind; but we want her to prove that her constitution is

changed and that it is going to stay changed; and then who can, after those proofs are produced, say "No" to a great

people, 60 million strong, if they want to come in on equal terms with the rest of us and do justice in international affairs?

I want to say that I did not find any of my colleagues in Paris disinclined to do justice to Germany. But I hear that this treaty is very hard on Germany. When an individual has committed a criminal act, the punishment is hard, but the punishment is not unjust. This nation permitted itself, through unscrupulous governors to commit a criminal act against mankind, and it is to undergo the punishment, not more than it can endure but up to the point where it can pay it must pay for the wrong that it has done.

But the things prescribed in this treaty will not be fully carried out if any one of the great influences that brought that result about is withheld from its consummation. Every great fighting nation in the world is on the list of those who are to constitute the League of Nations. I say every great nation, because America is going to be included among them, and the only choice my fellow citizens is whether we will go in now or come in later with Germany; whether we will go in as founders of this covenant of freedom or go in as those who are admitted after they have made a mistake and repented.

(4) George Norris, letter to Walter Locke, editor of the Nebraska State Journal, about the formation of the League of Nations (18th March, 1918)

During practically all of my public life, I have been a sincere advocate of an agreement between the leading nations of the world to set up all the necessary international machinery that would bring about a practical abolition of war between civilized nations. I advocated it long before the great world war commenced, and to keep the American government in a position to lead in such a movement, I used it as one of the arguments against our entering into the war. I thought we should be better able to lead if we stayed out. I may have been mistaken in this because subsequent events have determined that we are now in such a position that if we unite upon a fair and honorable plan, the entire civilized world will be disposed to follow. I realize that no such thing can be brought about unless every man and every nation approaches the subject with a willingness to compromise, with a willingness even to sacrifice some of his own cherished opinions, in order to bring the nations together. Nothing has ever happened in my life in which I felt a deeper interest or for which I would make a greater sacrifice. I am willing that somebody else shall get all the honor and all the praise if this cherished thing can be realized.

I think we ought to take the world as it is and not as we would like to have it. It seems, therefore, inadvisable to me to enter into any agreement that would make it necessary for us or, for that matter, for any other nation to maintain standing armies for the support of new and independent governments that it is intended to establish among semi-civilized people. Such a course not only is dangerous and will in my judgment bring failure to that part of the enterprise, but it is in no sense necessary to maintain the peace of the world. The right kind of a league between nations that can be numbered on the fingers of one hand will insure a permanent peace.

Our activities would not be confined to Europe and Asia, but we would have on that theory ample reasons to go into Mexico and other countries located in the western hemisphere. There is not much danger of the smaller nations if the big nations will behave.

We ought to disarm Germany completely. We ought to disarm Turkey completely. We ought to disarm Austria. We ought to destroy every fort along every international boundary line in Europe. This would be an easy thing to do if we and our allies would announce that it must be done. And when it is done, we ought to follow the example by disarming ourselves. No nation ought to keep a navy larger than is necessary to do police duty. If the world is disarmed, and remains disarmed, there will be no more world wars. If these leading nations would agree, in addition to this, that an international court of arbitration should be set up, that no nation should engage in conquest, that no secret treaty would be entered into or recognized, the danger of war would be as completely averted as it is possible for human beings to avert it. The constitution ought to specifically state that every nation is left entirely independent and supreme in its internal affairs, such as regulating emigration and all other similar matters.

(5) Arthur Henderson, speech at the League of Nations (1932)

The world wants disarmament. The world needs disarmament. We have it in our power to help fashion the pattern of future history. Behind all the technical complexities regarding manpower, gun power, tonnage, categories, and the like, is the well-being of mankind, the future of our developing civilisation.

I am bored by this Italian-Abyssinian dispute, and really I fail to see why we should interfere. Though, of course, the League of Nations will stand or fall by it. But I am a little uneasy that the destinies of countless of millions should be in the exquisite hands of Anthony Eden, for whom I have affection, even admiration - but not blind respect. Why should England fight Italy over Abyssinia, when most of our far flung Empire has been won by conquest?

Last September, I alluded to the tragic proof supplied by the youth of Spain, who fall in thousands in the trenches of freedom as the victims of Fascist aeroplanes and of the foreign war material delivered month after month, despite the non-intervention agreement, by those who base their international policy on the systematic breaking of treaties and of their international undertakings. Today, Madrid has become one more irrefutable proof. No one can doubt the validity of this evidence. Every foreign mission which has visited Spain has brought back fresh accusations against this monstrosity: that the capital of a State Member of the League has been reduced to ruins, and that the women and children of this capital have been butchered in hundreds by bombing planes under the orders of rebel generals and supplied by States which have, in fact, begun a war, and which are continuing to make war, while statesmen talk of preserving peace.

The war is there; an international war is raging on Spanish soil. We have seen how, in the last few days, the rebels, after the failure of their Moroccan troops, are now preparing to receive the assistance of fresh forces which they themselves call "blond Moors." Moreover, we must expect that poison gas, which has already been employed these last days, will continue to be used in the attacks against Madrid, and that the parts of the city in which the workers live will be bombed more and more violently in order to try to obtain by panic what the rebels have failed to obtain by other means. It would be both useless and dangerous to continue to ignore the situation. The worst thing that could happen to the League of Nations would be to contribute by its own silence and inaction, to the spread of this war.

Such a peace, it is true, would have cost the lives of millions of men, women and children and would have meant that many capitals would have suffered the fate of Madrid, that hundreds of towns would have known the fate of Cartagena and of Alicante. But, from a formal point of view, peace would not have been disturbed. When the Spanish Government decided that it was its duty to assume the grave responsibility of requesting a meeting of the Council of the League, it did so precisely because it wished, so far as it was concerned, to declare in the most solemn fashion its firm decision to oppose any such paradoxical and murderous "peace policy."

Allow me to recall just what were the reasons that made the Spanish Government feel it was necessary to demand a meeting of the Council. In the first place, the Spanish rebels have just been recognised as a legitimate Government by two great European Powers - Germany and Italy. The moment the rebels had received this recognition their chief threatened to start a blockade of the Government ports in the Mediterranean. At the same time, naval attacks took place at different points on the Spanish coast by warships whose nationality it was impossible to establish. Two Government warships have been attacked by two submarines also of unknown nationality at the entry to the port of Cartagena.

In September 1936 del Vayo had appealed to the League under Article 10 of the Covenant to provide the Spanish Government with the arms it needed to defend its territorial integrity and political independence against Hitler's and Mussolini's aggression. I can still remember that black day in the Assembly, listening to Eden droning away from the rostrum, explaining why it was contrary to the Covenant of the League to interfere in an ideological conflict. What cunning bastards they are, the damned hypocrites, thought I, standing there with death in my heart, light-headed from the stench of catastrophe, feeling a little sick with the "steely taste of defeat" in my mouth.

(9) Vernon Bartlett was in Godesberg working for the Daily Chronicle when Neville Chamberlain met Adolf Hitler on 22nd September 1938. He wrote about it in his book And Now, Tomorrow (1960)

Very late that night we learnt that agreement had been reached. But the people whom it principally concerned - the Czechoslovaks - had not been consulted. When it was all over, and the German journalists who had shown such alarm a week earlier were standing on the tables and toasting everybody in large glasses of beer, I watched the two Czech observers enter Mr. Chamberlain's room on the first floor of the Hotel Regina at 2 a.m. in order to learn the fate of their country. "Two days ago," I wrote in my dispatch, "the British and French governments were prepared to help Czechoslovakia if she were attacked; the same governments are now pledged to hold themselves responsible for the fulfilment of the plan for German occupation." It was clear to the Czechoslovak representatives, and surely to everybody else who was there except the British Prime Minister himself, that the independence of their country had been signed away by statesmen (the word should, perhaps, be printed in inverted commas) whose fear had stifled all sense of honour.

When, with Austria in his possession. Hitler opened his campaign against Czechoslovakia in the late spring of 1938 I was much concerned. I had many friends among the Czech socialists and I also knew Dr. Benes and Jan Masaryk very well. Czechoslovakia was the only real democracy among the Succession States.

I did not believe that Hitler could be argued out of his plan to absorb this key strategic State in the German Reich. We in our Party were violently opposed to Fascism. We had seen with horror the persecution of the Jews and the socialists in Germany.

Chamberlain informed me of his intention to fly to Germany to see Hitler, which he thought was a possible way of averting war. I told him that I had little faith in the venture, but I could not oppose his action provided that he stood firm on principle. He informed the House of his intention just when we were about to debate Foreign Affairs. I said that no chance should be neglected of preserving peace without sacrifice of principle. But it was just this sacrifice which was made. On his return from Munich with a piece of paper we realised that the pass had been sold and we sat silent while the majority of the Tories stood up and cheered.

It was on the 3rd October, 1938, that Chamberlain reported to the House of Commons on his visit to Munich. I recall that before the Prime Minister made his statement. Duff Cooper (later Lord Norwich) made a personal explanation of the reasons that had led him to resign from the Government the previous day. Following immediately after Chamberlain, I spoke at some length and perhaps the line I took can be summed up in a couple of sentences early in my speech: "The events of these last few days constitute one of the greatest defeats that this country and France have ever sustained. There can be no doubt that it is a tremendous victory for Herr Hitler."

Rab (Butler) arrived, looking ridiculously like a Minister, at 7.10 a.m. I met him at the station and rather sleepily escorted him to the hotel. He was a touch aloof, as always when contact has been broken, and his clothes are really tragic. But he has a quiet, strong shyness which is deceiving.

We went to the League building, which is a vast affair, a huge modern, white, dignified, lavish, empty palace, as befits the meeting place of 47 nations. 47 nations in theory, but in reality, the League is now really only an anti-dictator Club. The bars and lobbies of the League's building are full of Russians and Jews who intrigue with and dominate the press, and spend their time spreading rumours of approaching war, but I don't believe them, not with Neville (Chamberlain) at the helm. He will wriggle out somehow.

We all dined gaily again tonight at the Plat d'Argent, and Rab almost embarrassed us once or twice with his high staccato laugh which, when he is amused, becomes veritably soprano, like a pheasant's call. But he charmed, and was charmed by, Diana (Cooper).

Tomorrow the League racket begins.

Russia invaded Finland early yesterday morning, and at once began to try to enforce submission by air attacks.

The Finnish Government resigned early this morning. It is reported from Copenhagen that Dr. Tanner, the Finnish Finance Minister, who was one of the Finnish delegates to Moscow, will form a new Government to open negotiations with Russia.

News of the resignation came after the Russian threat, broadcast from Moscow, that unless Finland surrendered by three o'clock this morning Helsinki would be completely destroyed.

A representative of the United States Legation in Helsinki sent the information of the Government's resignation to the American Embassy in Moscow, which is expected to communicate with the Kremlin.

M. Erkko, the Finnish Foreign Minster, in a broadcast to the United States last night, said "We remain ready to work for a solution of the dispute by conciliation."

The Soviet Government yesterday rejected the United States' offer of its good offices in settling the dispute; the Soviet Government did not think they were needed. Finland accepted the offer.

The invasion of Finland without any declaration of war has cause the greatest indignation throughout the world, especially in other Scandinavian countries and in the United States, Italy, and Spain. In the House of Commons yesterday Mr. Chamberlain made a statement on the invasion.

Subscribe to our Spartacus Newsletter and keep up to date with the latest articles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Read the essential details about the League of Nations. When peace negotiations began in October, 1918, Woodrow Wilson insisted that his Fourteen Points should serve as a basis for the signing of the Armistice. This included the formation of the League of Nations.

# data[].attributes.body
Germany and the treaty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Frederick Scheidemann, the German Chancellor (June 1919)

then he resigned rather than agree to the Treaty

Links

The Berlin Times (pdf) - an excellent pupil assignment

BBCi site - simple statement
Germany humiliated
Podcast:

- Giles Hill on reactions to Versailles

Original Sources
Germany's Reaction - Sources
Brockdorff-Rantzau on the economic articles of the Treaty - difficult but worthwhile

Why was there opposition in Germany to the Treaty of Versailles?

Source A

This cartoon appeared in the German satirical magazine Simplissimus, 3 June 1919.

Click here for the interpretation

German outrage

When the Germans heard about the Treaty of Versailles, they felt 'pain and anger'. They felt it was . It was a ' unfair Diktat' - an IMPOSED settlement. They had not been allowed to take part in the talks - they had just been told to sign.

The German reaction

On 7 May, the victors presented their Treaty to the small German delegation. Count Brockdorff-Rantzau angered the Big Three by giving a long speech criticising the Treaty; then the delegation left and set about countering it. A little later, they sent their counter-proposal based on the Fourteen Points) to the Big Three -- their reply was so good that one of the British delegation said it was much better than the Allies' suggestions, and even Lloyd George wondered for a time if they ought to rethink the treaty . Then the delegation went home. Many Germans wanted to refuse to sign the treaty; some even suggested that they start the war again. So it was with great difficulty that the President got the Reichstag to agree to sign the treaty, and the imperious way the two German representatives were treated when they were forced to sign made things worse.

The Germans HATED the Treaty of Versailles

The Germans hated Clause 231; they said they were not to blame for the war. The soldier sent to sign the Treaty refused to sign it - 'To say such a thing would be a lie,' he said. Clause 231 did not physically harm Germany, but it hurt Germany's pride - and it was this, as much as anything else, that made them want to overturn the treaty.

The Germans hated reparations; they said France and Britain were trying to starve their children to death. At first they refused to pay, and only started paying after France and Britain invaded Germany (January 1921).

The Germans hated their tiny army. They said they were helpless against other countries. At first they refused to reduce the army, and the sailors sank the fleet, rather than hand it over.

The Germans also hated the loss of territory. Germany lost a tenth of its land - they claimed that the treaty was simply an attempt to destroy their economy. Other nations were given self-determination - but the Treaty forced Germans to live in other countries. Germans were also angry that they could not unite with the Austrian Germans.

New Words

Clause 231 : the paragraph blaming Germany for the war.

reparations : the money Germany had to pay for damage done during the war.

Did You Know?

Fritz Haber (the German-Jewish scientist who had invented the use of chlorine gas as a weapon during the First World War) spent many years after the war trying to find a way to extract the gold dissolved in seawater. He hoped it would prove to be a cheap way for Germany to pay off reparations.

Source B

The disgraceful Treaty is being signed today.

Don't forget it!

We will never stop until we win back what we deserve.

From Deutsche Zeitung, a German newspaper, 28 June 1919.

Source C

Those who sign this treaty, will sign the death sentence of many millions of German men, women and children.

Count Brockdorff-Rantzau, leader of the German delegation to Versailles (15 May 1919).

Did You Know?

The Germans - and many British people - railed against the reparations sum of £6.6_billion as if it were a death-blow to the German nation.

But the First World War had cost Britain £6.2 billion, and by the end of the war Britain's national debt stood at £7 billion, of which £1 billion was owed to the USA and had to be repaid.

Yet nobody suggested that Britain's people were going to starve to death.

Source D

A German postcard, produced about the time of the Treaty of Versailles, showing the land where Germans lived. The areas in red are the lands given to other countries by the Treaty of Versailles,( including the land lost by Austria).

Its title is 'Lost but not forgotten land'.

The poem under the map reads:

You must carve in your heart

These words, as in stone -

What we have lost

Will be regained!

Source E

Another German postcard produced about the time of the Treaty of Versailles.

Its title is 'Hands off German Homeland'.

On the stone (bottom left) is written 'd.ö.' standing for Deutsch-österreich (German Austria).

Many similar propaganda postcards were produced

Is Source C different to D?

(Click on the postcards to enlarge)

Germany did not pay off the reparations bill until 2010. Repayment was interrupted by Hitler during his time in power, which delayed the final pay off to 1996.

However, a clause in the agreement said that Germany would have to pay interest on the bill if Germany were ever to reunite, which of course it did in 1990. So the final historic payment of £59m was made on Sunday, 3rd October 2010, ninety-two years after the war ended.

Study the materials, and the webpage on German reactions, then list and explain ALL the reasons why Germans were angry at the Treaty of Versailles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Frederick Scheidemann, the German Chancellor (June 1919) then he resigned rather than agree to the Treaty The Berlin Times (pdf) - an excellent pupil assignment BBCi site - simple statement Germany humiliated Podcast: - Giles Hill on reactions to Versailles Original Sources Germany's Reaction - Sources Brockdorff-Rantzau on the economic articles of the Treaty - difficult but worthwhile Why was there opposition in Germany to the Treaty of Versailles?

# data[].attributes.body
Wilson's 14 points.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points | The 20th century | World history | Khan Academy

# data[].attributes.body
Verdicts on the treaty.

# data[].attributes.body
Paris Peace Conference

# data[].attributes.body
Aims of the Big Three

# data[].attributes.body
Why did the League fail?

# data[].attributes.body
Timeline to war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In March 1939, Britain changed its policy towards Germany. Why?

# data[].attributes.body
Causes of the War

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From the first day that he "seized power," January 30, 1933, Hitler knew that only sudden death awaited him if he failed to restore pride and empire to post-Versailles Germany. His close friend and adjutant Julius Schaub recorded Hitler's jubilant boast to his staff on that evening, as the last celebrating guests left the Berlin Chancellery building: "No power on earth will get me out of this building alive!"

David Irving, Hitler's War: An introduction to the new edition (1989).

Links

Long and short-term causes - an excellent resource from History Learning.
More ideas
The Great Depression as a cause of war

- BBC debate-podcast on what caused the war

Building up German Hegemony in Central Europe, 1933-8 - very detailed and difficult

The four most important causes, therefore, were (click on the yellow pointers to see HOW they helped to cause war):

1. The Treaty of Versailles solved nothing

* Reparations left many people in the victorious nations feeling guilty.

* The loss of all that land to other countries simply made Hitler's early aggression look justified.

* Self-determination surrounded Germany by a lot of small nation states that fell easy prey to Germany.

* Most of all, the Treaty made the Germans angry, just waiting their chance for revenge.

2. The League of Nations failed to keep the peace

3. Appeasement encouraged aggression

* Appeasement encouraged war. It made Hitler think no one dare stop him, which encouraged him to go further and further until in the end he went too far.

* The Sudetenland led Stalin to make theNazi-Soviet Pact, because he believed he could not trust Britain.

This drawing by the British cartoonist David Low (20 March 1935) is titled 'Cause comes before effect'. (Four days earlier Hitler had held his 'Freedom to Rearm' military rally where he denounced the disarmament clauses of the Versailles Treaty and announced the reinstatement of conscription in Germany.)

Click here for the interpretation

4. Hitler was expansionist
* Many historians still think that the Second World War was Hitler's personal war, and that he always intended to fight a war - as a re-run of a First World War he did not believe that German had lost fairly.

This drawing by the British cartoonist Sidney 'George' Strube (2 September 1939) is titled 'Juggernaut'.

Click here for the interpretation

5. Eight Steps to War [SCRAMCUP ]
In addition, the events leading up to the war played a part in starting the fighting. Each event created anger in the allies. This anger grew until Chamberlain declared war on Hitler on 3rd September 1939.

EIGHT events have been identified by historians as being especially significant in causing war (click on the yellow pointers to see HOW they helped to cause war):

Saar Plebsicite, 1935

* It broke the Treaty of Versailles

* It started a rearmament race

* It divided the nations opposing Germany.

Conscription and Re-armament, 1935

* It broke the Treaty of Versailles

* It started a rearmament race

* It divided the nations opposing Germany.

Rhineland, 1936

* It broke the Treaty of Versailles

* It was the first military action by Hitler and it was successful

* France lost the opportunity to stop Hitler once and for all.

Austria, 1938

* It broke the Treaty of Versailles

* It was the first time Hitler had annexed land outside Germany

* It marked the beginning of Mussolini's support for Hitler

* It marked the first time Chamberlain appeased Hitler because Austria was 'too far away to help'.

Munich, 1938

* It was the first time Hitler took land that was not simply redressing the Treaty of Versailles

* It convinced Hitler that Chamberlain and Daladier were 'worms' who could be bullied

* It convinced Stalin that Chamberlain and Daladier would not stand up to Hitler and led him to make the Nazi-Soviet Pact

* The German army, hoping Hitler would be humiliated by the allies, had planned to topple him when he was; his success meant the end of any hope of getting rid of Hitler.

Czechoslovakia, 1939

* It discredited appeasement and demonstrated that Hitler's promises could not be trusted

* It was the first time Hitler had annexed a non-German people; thus it appear to prove that he wanted to dominate the whole world

* Czecholsovakia was a democracy, which worried the other western democracies

* It convinced Chamberlain that Hitler would ot be stopped by negotiation, and led him to make the Polish Guarantee (which was the eventual trigger of the war)

* It outraged the British people, and got them ready for war (where in September 1938 they had been overwhelmingly in favour of peace).

USSR/Nazi Pact, 1939

* It was the agreement which made Hitler brave enough to invade Poland

* It was seen as a disgusting act of political cynicism which convinced British people of the need for a war to stop this evil man.

Poland, 1939

* The Polish Guarantee was the end of appeasement - a 'non-negotiable' which provoked war

* The Polish Guarantee was the promise that prevented Chamberlain cutting another deal with Hitler in August 1939

* The Polish Guarantee was the decision which threw Stalin into the Nazi-Soviet Pact the invasion of Poland was the event which explicitly caused Britain to declare war on 3 September 1939.

Activity:

Look at the first four causes of war. Click on the headings and think about HOW they helped to cause the war.

Which do you think was most important, and why?

Activity:

Look at the seven events which helped to cause the war. Click on the headings and think about HOW they helped to cause the war.

Which do you think was most important, and why?

Extra:

* Write your essay in five paragraphs, as on this webpage.

* Look back through your notes, and include relevant information from your studies.

* Remember to PEE every paragraph, citing evidence, and explaining how each event helped to cause the war

* Include logical connectives such as 'therefore', 'consequently' and 'because of this...'.

Now, can you adapt the information in this essay to write the essay in a slightly different form: ' Was the policy of appeasement the most important reason for the outbreak of the Second World War? Explain your answer. '

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the first day that he "seized power," January 30, 1933, Hitler knew that only sudden death awaited him if he failed to restore pride and empire to post-Versailles Germany. His close friend and adjutant Julius Schaub recorded Hitler's jubilant boast to his staff on that evening, as the last celebrating guests left the Berlin Chancellery building: "No power on earth will get me out of this building alive!"

# data[].attributes.body
When the Great Powers sat down to iron out peace after World War I, they sought vengeance rather than a peaceful world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Paris Peace Conference and Treaty of Versailles | The 20th century | World history | Khan Academy

# data[].attributes.body
Summary of the successes and failures of the League

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Events and outcomes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A secondary school revision resource for GCSE History about modern world history, international relations, the League of Nations and its successes and failures in the 1920s

# data[].attributes.body
Road to war from a British perspective. It's not all useful but it does help explain why we appeased, especially towards the end of the documentary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
andrew marr's the making of modern britain (tv program)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
andrew marr's history of modern britain (award-winning work)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC - Andrew Marr: The Making of Modern Britain 720p (Part 5 of 6)