3 neler öğrendik? bölüm özeti History of

Editors

Dr. Volkan ŞEYŞANE Evan P. PHEIFFER

Authors

Asst.Prof. Dr. Murat DEMİREL Dr. Umut YUKARUÇ CHAPTER 1 Prof.Dr. Burak Samih GÜLBOY Caner KUR CHAPTER 2, 3 Asst.Prof.Dr. Seçkin Barış GÜLMEZ CHAPTER 4 Assoc.Prof.Dr. Pınar ŞENIŞIK ÖZDABAK CHAPTER 5 Asst.Prof.Dr. İlhan SAĞSEN Res.Asst. Ali BERKUL Evan P. PHEIFFER CHAPTER 6 Dr. Çağla MAVRUK CAVLAK CHAPTER 7 Prof. Dr. Lerna K. YANIK Dr. Volkan ŞEYŞANE CHAPTER 8 T.C. ANADOLU UNIVERSITY PUBLICATION NO: 3920 OPEN EDUCATION FACULTY PUBLICATION NO: 2715

Copyright © 2019 by Anadolu University All rights reserved. This publication is designed and produced based on “Distance Teaching” techniques. No part of this book may be reproduced or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means of mechanical, electronic, photocopy, magnetic tape, or otherwise, without the written permission of Anadolu University.

Instructional Designer Lecturer Orkun Şen

Graphic and Cover Design Prof.Dr. Halit Turgay Ünalan

Proof Reading Lecturer Gökhan Öztürk

Assessment Editor Lecturer Sıdıka Şen Gürbüz

Graphic Designers Gülşah Karabulut

Typesetting and Composition Halil Kaya Dilek Özbek Gül Kaya Murat Tambova Beyhan Demircioğlu Handan Atman Kader Abpak Arul

HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

E-ISBN 978-975-06-3603-5

All rights reserved to Anadolu University. Eskişehir, Republic of , October 2019 3328-0-0-0-1909-V01 Contents

The Emergence The International of the Modern System During CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 2 th International the Long 19 System Century Introduction...... 3 Introduction ...... 29 History of the State System: From The and the International System ... 29 The Impact of the Industrial Ancient Era to the Renaissance...... 3 upon the International System ...... 29 The Impact of the Renaissance and the The Impact of the Reformation on the Emergence of the upon the International System ...... 31 Modern State System ...... 5 The Impact of the upon the International System ...... 32 The Renaissance...... 5 The End of Napoleonic Europe: The The Reformation...... 7 Congress of ...... 35 The Birth of the Modern International The Metternich System and the Concert of System: The Peace of Westphalia ...... 9 Europe ...... 36 Challenges to the ...... 39 International Law and Diplomacy...... 11 The Revolutions of 1830-1848 and their The International System During the 17th impact upon the international system ... 39 and 18th Century...... 13 The Foreign Policy of III and its impact on the European System .... 41 Mercantilism and Colonialism...... 14 The Unification of ...... 42 Absolute Monarchies...... 15 The Unification of ...... 43 The War of the Spanish Succession...... 18 The Bismarck System and Its Downfall ...... 44 1713 Utrecht Peace...... 18 The Bismarck System: A Second Concert of Europe? ...... 44 The Downfall of the Bismarck System .... 46

World Politics The First World CHAPTER 3 CHAPTER 4 in The Interwar War 1914-1918 Years 1919-1939 Introduction...... 55 Introduction ...... 87 The Causes and Origins of the First The Rise and Fall of The League of World War ...... 55 Nations ...... 87 The First World War as a Failure Peace Conference ...... 87 of the European States System...... 55 The ...... 89 Other Main Causes of the First Peace Treaties ...... 91 World War...... 62 The Implementation of the Peace in The Outbreak of the First World War and the 1920s ...... 92 Its Development ...... 64 The Great Depression and Its Impact on The Impact of the First World War Upon World Politics ...... 95 the International System ...... 68 The Rise of Revisionist Powers in the The End of the First World War and International System ...... 98 Peace Treaties ...... 69 Nazi Germany ...... 98 Fascist Italy ...... 101 Imperial ...... 102 The Soviet Union ...... 103 The Spanish ...... 105

iii The Second The Cold CHAPTER 5 World War CHAPTER 6 War: Global 1939-1945 Developments Introduction ...... 117 Introduction ...... 149 The Outbreak of the Second World War .... 118 The Emergence of the Cold War ...... 149 The Invasion of ...... 118 Origins and Causes of Cold War ...... 149 The Invasion of Finland, , The Strategy of Containment and the and ...... 120 Formation of the Western Alliance .... 151 The German Attack on Western The formation of the Eastern bloc: The Europe ...... 121 Soviet Union and Eastern Europe ...... 155 The Battle of Britain ...... 122 The Cold War in the 1950s: The Axis Invasion of the Balkans ...... 125 Institutionalization and Confrontation ...... 157 From European War to Global War ...... 126 The Communist Victory in ...... 158 The German Invasion of the Soviet The Korean War ...... 158 Union ...... 126 The Death of Stalin and The Policy of The War in Asia-Pacific and the US Peaceful Coexistence ...... 158 Entry into the War ...... 132 Containment in Asia-Pacific ...... 159 The War in North Africa ...... 134 The Baghdad Pact ...... 159 Inter-Allied Conferences During The 1956 Suez Crisis ...... 160 the War and the Establishment The Eisenhower Doctrine ...... 160 of the ...... 135 The Cold War in the 1960s and 1970s: From The Establishment of the United Confrontation to Détente ...... 161 Nations ...... 137 U-2 Spy Plane Incident: The End of the The End of the Second World War ...... 138 Peaceful Coexistence ...... 161 The Defeat of Germany in April and The Berlin Wall ...... 161 May of 1945 ...... 138 The Cuban Missile Crisis: the Edge of The Potsdam Conference Nuclear War? ...... 162 (July 17-August 2, 1945) ...... 138 The Détente Era ...... 163 The Use of the Atomic Bomb and The Vietnam War: a Crisis to Upend the Japanese Surrender ...... 139 Détente ...... 164 A General Assessment of the Ostpolitik and Détente .. 164 Second World War and Its Legacy ...... 140 The “Second” Cold War and its End ...... 167 A Last Attempt to Save the Union: Glasnost and Perestroika, and the Second Détente ...... 168 The End of the Cold War: The Collapse of the Communist Regimes in Eastern Europe and the Disintegration of the Soviet Union ...... 169

iv The Cold War The World Since 1945-1989: the End of the CHAPTER 7 CHAPTER 8 Regional Cold War 1989- Developments 2019 Introduction...... 179 Introduction ...... 207 The Era of Decolonization...... 179 The End of the Cold War and “a New World The Bandung Conference and Non- Order” ...... 207 Aligned Movement...... 182 The Dissolution of the Soviet Union ... 207 The Cold War and European Integration..... 186 The Collapse of the Communist Effects of the Cold War on Developing Regimes in Eastern Europe and the Regions...... 189 Fall of the Berlin Wall ...... 209 The Cold War in the ...... 189 Debating the Nature of the Post-Cold The Cold War in the Balkans...... 195 War Order ...... 210 The Cold War in Latin America...... 196 The Era of Liberal Internationalism: the US-led International Order of the 1990s ..... 211 The Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait and the First Gulf War (1990-1991) ...... 211 The Breakup of and NATO Interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo .. 212 Rwandan Genocide ...... 214 The Oslo Accords—a Momentary Lull in the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict ...... 215 Us - Relations in the 1990s ...... 216 Further Globalization and its Limits: NAFTA, the EU, and the Rise of Asia ...... 217 Europe: From the European Community to ...... 217 The Americas: NAFTA and Beyond ..... 217 Asia After the End of the Cold War ..... 218 East Asian Crisis of 1997-1998 ...... 219 The US-led International Order Under Challenge: the End of America’s Unipolar Moment ...... 220 The September 11th Attacks and the War on Terror ...... 220 The War on ...... 221 The Invasion of ...... 222 Obama’s War ...... 223 2008 Global Financial Crisis ...... 223 Challengers to the US Hegemony ...... 223 The “” ...... 225 Brexit, Trump, and the Rise of Populism: Globalization in Crisis? ...... 227

v Preface

Dear Students, History and International Relations are closely discuss the major events that shaped the intertwined. Diplomatic history is traditionally international system in the long nineteenth one of the main branches of the discipline of century, such as the Industrial, American, and International Relations. Studying the history of French Revolutions, the Congress of Vienna, relations between sovereign states interacting and the Bismarck system. Later, it moves on within the international system is integral to a to analyze the international history of the better understanding of international affairs. twentieth century. The book then explores As such, the study of history offers students of the major developments and transformations International Relations greater opportunities in the international system during the early for the analysis of international developments. twentieth century, such as the First World Indeed, only with a rich historical perspective War, the Interwar Period, and the Second can we fully understand contemporary world World War. It also devotes two chapters to politics. Second, the past is a tremendous the discussion of the Cold War between the depository of examples through which we and Soviet Union and their can illustrate, clarify, and test our theoretical respective allies—one of which discusses the arguments. Finally, knowledge of history Cold War in its global context, the other in its helps us unravel the complexities of today’s regional one. Finally, the book addresses how international politics. In this regard, this new world politics have transformed since the end edited volume seeks to be a bridge between of the Cold War and provides glimpses of the the study of international relations and effects of more recent events on international historical research. relations. This textbook will introduce you to the We would like to express our gratitude to modern history of International Relations. It the authors for their contributions to this will provide you with the necessary knowledge project. We also would like to thank the staff of the major historical events that have of Anadolu University for their support in shaped international history from the late writing this book. We hope it gives you the fifteenth century to the present. After a brief historical perspective you need to understand discussion on the history of the state system the workings of the modern international in the pre-modern world, this book starts system. with the emergence and development of the international system in the early modern era. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 is considered the starting point of the international Editors system, since modern international relations Dr. Volkan ŞEYŞANE derived its main characteristics from this peace settlement. Then, the book turns to Evan P. PHEIFFER

vi vii The Emergence of the Modern Chapter 1 International System After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Assess the impact of the Renaissance Summarize the history of the state system and Reformation on the emergence of the 1 from the ancient era to the Renaissance 2 modern state system

Evaluate the importance of the Peace of Characterize the major events that shaped Westphalia and its principles on the birth of the international system during the 17th and 3 the modern international system 4 18th centuries

Learning Outcomes Chapter Outline Key Terms Introduction International System History of the State System: from the Ancient States System Era to the Renaissance Renaissance The Impact of the Renaissance and the Reformation Reformation on the Emergence of the Modern Peace of Westphalia State System International Law The Birth of the Modern International System: Diplomacy The Peace of Westphalia State Sovereignty The International System during the 17th and Balance of Power 18th Centuries Mercantilism Colonialism

2 History of International Relations 1 INTRODUCTION and the Peace of Utrecht in terms of the emergence The modern international system is based of the modern international system? on nation-states. People live in sovereign states, Four sections frame this chapter. The first which are the main actors in international politics. focuses on the historical background of the state Throughout history, however, sovereign states were system in the pre-modern world from the ancient hardly the only actors in the international system. era to the Renaissance. The second discusses the The ancient world was awash in various competing impact of the Renaissance and the Reformation Greek city-states, while the Holy Roman Empire, on the emergence of the modern state system. which ruled over vast territories of Central and The third section examines the emergence of the Western Europe for 1,000 years (roughly 800- modern international system following the Peace of 1806) was a patchwork of hundreds of kingdoms, Westphalia. The fourth and final section addresses th th principalities, duchies, and free imperial cities. the international system during the 17 and 18 centuries. Prior to the 16th century, emperors, kings, and princes predominated far more than sovereign nation states, while the Catholic Church was also HISTORY OF THE STATE central to determining the European feudal SYSTEM: FROM THE ANCIENT order. Indeed, ideas such as state sovereignty, ERA TO THE RENAISSANCE independence, or international law were not This section briefly examines the evolution of established concepts before the 17th century. th th the ‘international’ state system in the pre-modern In the 17 and 18 centuries, however, a world. It seeks to address the following questions: combination of mercantilism and colonialism what is the state system? What did it consist of boosted the power and number of absolute before the Peace of Westphalia? What characterized monarchies. As absolute monarchies competed the system in the Middle Ages? with one another, a new ‘balance of power’ policy emerged, which called for increasingly sophisticated In the field of International Relations, state system practices of diplomacy and international law to the concept of the refers to the regulate the continent’s emerging state system. This relationships between politically organized groups helped consolidate the structure of the modern that have distinctive territories, are not influenced international system until the First World War. by higher authorities, and exercise a measure of independence from one another (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 12). According to Hedley Bull attention (2012: 9), “a system of states (or international system) is formed when two or more states have For further information on the First World sufficient contact between them, and have sufficient War, please refer to Chapter 3. impact on one another’s decisions, to cause them to behave—at least in some measure—as parts of In this framework, this chapter seeks to answer a whole.” More recently, International Relations the following questions: When did sovereign states have become relations between those politically become the main instrument in international organized independent groups, that is, modern relations? When was the modern state system sovereign states. established? What did the ‘international’ state According to Paul Hirst, the modern state system look like before the Westphalian order? has three additional characteristics: How did the policies and practices of the balance • First territory of power, international law, and diplomacy evolve , a modern state has a definite after 1648? How did mercantilism and colonialism with boundaries. contribute to the concentration of authority in • Second, a modern state has exclusive control state power, especially in absolute monarchies over that territory (sovereignty). such as the reign of Louis XIV? What was the • Third, a modern state is the superior political significance of the War of the Spanish Succession actor (hierarchy) (Hirst, 2001: 45).

3 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 North Africa, and the Middle East. During this time no international system could be said to exist Sovereignty is “a condition necessary for outside the dictates of Rome. Although many states in that they are not subject to any political groups or at least peoples still existed, higher authority… Internally governments there only options were submission to Rome or have been subject to conventional standards, revolt (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 13). After the and externally conditions may mean that separation of the empire into Western and Eastern governments are more or less free to act (Byzantine) halves, the empire was attacked independently. A sovereign government by the northern tribes, and at this point many is free to choose within the framework of communities such as the Celts of Britain revolted. these conventions and standards” (Taylor The center could not hold, and Rome itself was and Curtis, 2006: 420). eventually invaded and sacked by Visigoths in 476 AD (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 13). However, it was not possible to talk about After the defeat of the Western Roman Empire, sovereign states before the 17th century, since a feudal state system came to dominate Western no state met these criteria of modern statehood. Europe until the 16th century. The traditional As such, it is worth taking a look at earlier tribute-taking empire based on coercive means international systems to see how much they differ and devoted more to expansion than governance, from later models. so typical of or China, finally gave Ancient (500 BC-100 BC) way to a system of divided authority characterized demonstrated an early example of a state system, by feudal relations, city-states with much when many small Greek city-states such as Athens, independence, and urban alliances in which the Sparta, Corinth, or Ephesus established extensive Papacy played a leading role (Held, 1995: 78-79). relations and an informal means of discussing the This system was embodied in the Holy Roman major issues of the day. With small populations Empire for centuries. and territories and a lack of institutions such as To be sure, states existed in the Middle Ages, international law, diplomacy, or international but their power was determined by different organization, the Greek state system was instead characteristics than modern states. For one, they based on a shared language, culture, and common had neither sovereignty nor independence in the religion (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 12). These modern term of the word because two kinds of are the basic features that most distinguish it from hierarchy prevailed—the the modern international system established after as temporal authority and the Pope as spiritual the Peace of Westphalia. authority (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 14; Hirst, 2001: 46). In addition to these, there were also semi-autonomous local rulers such as lords and knights who were not fully independent either. As such, there was a distinct lack of political organization that led to potential disorder. With a distinctive caste of armed knights that might fight for the Pope, the emperor, the king, their leader, or merely themselves, there was hardly a monopoly on violence (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 14). This prevented kings from being the sole political actors who could wage wars, which essentially put a deep limitation on their sovereignty in the Middle Ages. Figure 1.1 Acropolis, Athens. Second, Medieval Europe was a mixed society of different political entities, and there was no clear The Greek state system was ended with the line between domestic and international politics conquest of Greece by the Roman Empire, which (Hirst, 2001: 45). Territories and boundaries eventually subjected most of the people of Europe,

4 History of International Relations 1 were ill defined, and kings and leading nobles freeing kings to do as they like and achieve a much continuously disputed one another’s right over a greater extent of internal and external sovereignty. given piece of land. As a result, there was virtually Moreover, after the Thirty Years’ War, another no distinction between domestic (civil) and huge conflict brought about in large part due to international wars. Rather, Medieval wars were the Reformation, led to the Peace of Westphalia, a likely to be fought in order to defend the faith series of treaties that helped create an international (the Crusades), to resolve conflicts over dynastic system of principalities, kingdoms, and increasingly inheritance (the Hundred Years’ War), or to punish sovereign states that gradually came to exclude the outlaws or social banditry (Jackson and Sorensen, papacy. This also established a mutual recognition 2013: 15). There was no such thing as thenational of each signatory’s sovereignty, a development that interest or exclusive control over territory. As such, will be explained in the pages to come. “territorial political independence as we know it today was not present” in the Middle Ages (Jackson and Sorensen: 2013: 14). Indeed, Medieval Europe was a complex 1 political and social system. Within this system, What differentiates the modern security was provided by local rulers and their state system from earlier ones? knights, who lived in fortified towns and strong castles. Freedom was given by feudal rulers to THE IMPACT OF THE their followers and clients to the degree that they determined, while keeping the general order RENAISSANCE AND THE was the responsibility of the emperor, albeit in REFORMATION ON THE a limited way. Justice was ensured by political EMERGENCE OF THE MODERN and religious rulers alike, but also in an unequal STATE SYSTEM way, being far more skewed in favor of the upper This section discusses the impact of the classes. The Pope, for his part, was not only the Renaissance and the Reformation on the emergence highest religious authority over the clergy but and development of the modern state system. also a political figure who often had to deal with political disputes between kings and other rulers. On the other hand, members of the clergy such The Renaissance as bishops and cardinals were advisors to kings The Renaissance, which means rebirth, is one of and had great influence on kings and knights in the most important developments in Europe when matters both temporal and spiritual. The economy, it comes to understanding the changing nature of of course, relied upon peasants more often than not the state system. Beginning in the city-states of the tied to feudal landlords from the clergy or nobility in the 15th century, the Renaissance and were bound to the land they farmed (Jackson had a crucial role in the emergence of modern state and Sorensen, 2013: 15; Hirst, 2001: 46-47). As because it brought about a hugely renewed interest such, the kingdoms and principalities of Western in classical political ideas such as Athenian democracy Christendom during this time were not states and Roman law and stoked a passion for learning because they possessed neither internal sovereignty, that spawned numerous cultural and technological i.e. they were not supreme within the territory they breakthroughs (Held, 1995: 83). ruled, nor external sovereignty, since they were not In the beginning of the 13th century, there were independent of the papacy or the Holy Roman hundreds of city-states on the Italian peninsula. Empire (Bull, 2012: 9). Gradually absorbed by the more powerful ones, Indeed, it was only after a series of very by the 14th century more than twenty cities had important developments that the modern state populations over 20,000 people (Merriman, 2010: system would emerge: the Renaissance, the 45). Since urban areas were far more prone to the Reformation, and the Peace of Westphalia. The spread of ideas, the Renaissance kicked off in cities first two were hugely important because they such as Florence, Venice, Siena, and Milan. What broke the back of the papacy’s temporal authority, made it possible was the economic prosperity and

5 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 social dynamism of city-states, polities that had grown rich and independent from trade in the Mediterranean and Black Sea since the 11th century (Merriman, 2010: 46). These trade routes increased international trade in the region and helped city- states create small-scale manufacturing. As a result, Italian merchants grew very wealthy. This also helped develop a sophisticated banking system in the city-states in the 14th and 15th centuries, thus further financing internal trade and international commerce (Merriman, 2010: 46). The most prominent among them, such as Florence, soon became central to financing monarchies and even the papacy (Merriman, 2010: 46). These developments led to increasing urbanization, eroded the power of the nobility, and increased the influence of townsmen. Before long, urban merchants enriched by commerce had become important to local political life and soon joined the Figure 1.2 Portrait of Dante Alighieri (1265-1321), Italian ruling elite (Merriman, 2010: 49). These dynamic Philosopher best known for his monumental epic poem urban societies and new urban elites were more La divina commedia (The Divine Comedy). open to new ideas because of traders and immigrants. People from different regions came together in the Italian city-states to exchange culture, ideas, beliefs, Politics, as such, became a hotly disputed subject and intellectual accumulation. Another critical link of study during the Renaissance. Before long, many in this development was the conquest of Istanbul came to believe that states should be autonomous in 1453, which encouraged many Eastern scholars and independent of outside powers, and that peace to flee to the Italian peninsula, bringing with them within states and between different factions and vast collections of ancient books and manuscripts. individuals must be maintained. During this time This in turn led to the rediscovery of ancient Greek many political thinkers counseled local political and Roman political and philosophical approaches leaders, of which Niccolò Machiavelli was one of (Merriman, 2010: 56). the most prominent. A new class of urban patriarch also came to Machiavelli, who has often been dubbed dominate these cities with power and patronage. “the first truly modern political thinker,” was Rather than invade neighboring states and amass a bureaucrat and diplomat who served in the new territories, however, they used their wealth government of Florence (Wolin, 2004: 179-180). to encourage new arts, technologies, and political A great interpreter of Roman ideas about civic theories. There were many consequences of this virtue and citizenship, he believed politics was approach: first, the city-states struggled to establish based on human action, rather than religious their independence from both the papacy and the conviction or sentiment and did much to revive Holy Roman Empire from the 13th through the the Roman idea of virtue (Wolin, 2004: 180-181). 16th centuries; second, Italian political philosophers According to him, religion and religious morals such as Marsiglio of Padua and Dante rediscovered were fine insofar as they helped bolster a common many of the old Roman and Greek texts. These texts moral code and keep the social peace. However, helped them intellectually undermine the power of religion and religious morals should not prevent the papacy by arguing that the secular authorities a prince (i.e. sovereign or ruler) from exercising not only ought to be separate from spiritual ones, his authority or acting in the interests of the state. but also reign supreme (Hinsley, 1986: 82-88; Though he prescribed religion for the masses as a Skinner, 1978: 8-22). healthy thing, he proscribed it for princes.

6 History of International Relations 1 It has often been said, then, that Machiavelli’s thoughts on politics and government were distinctly secular, and offered an alternative approach to maintaining power by excluding medieval religion and tradition. He put mankind and reason to the center of his ideas, rather than religion or morals. And thanks to the printing press, invented but decades before Machiavelli’s birth, his and other Renaissance thinkers’ thoughts soon spread throughout the entire continent, influencing leaders and common folk alike. It was not long before both the church and Holy Roman Empire were facing dissent from multiple quarters.

Figure 1.3 An illustration of Martin Luther nailing his 95 The Reformation theses in Wittenberg in 1517. The Reformation was a religious, political, and To many of these practices, Martin that shattered the Catholic world Luther nailed his ‘95 Theses’ to the door of the th in the 16 century. It first started in the German University of Wittenberg. These included the lands in 1517 when Martin Luther, a student following arguments: of the Renaissance, published his ‘95 Theses,’ a 1. Because of the direct relationship between series of critiques of Catholic doctrine which soon God and the individual, there was no need spread to the rest of much of Europe. Though the for intermediaries (i.e. the clergy). theological doctrines he proposed would later be known as “Lutheranism” in much of Germany 2. The Bible was the only source of faith, in (and Scandinavia and eventually North America), contrast to the belief of the Church that other Protestant doctrines opposed to Catholic tradition was also necessary. teaching soon emerged in the form of Calvinism 3. Salvation was entirely in the hands of in , , Holland, , and God, against which the ‘good works’ of Scotland, among others, and Anglicanism in individuals were meaningless (Alcock, England (Cameron, 2006: 152-153). 2002: 125). If it spread so quickly, why did it emerge in Luther also translated the Bible into German, Germany? For starters, Germany had long been which also helped rapidly spread his ideas given dissatisfied with the church because the lack of the huge recent gains in the development of the central political power in German lands had printing press (Alcock, 2002: 126), which rapidly given the papacy an economic advantage in its led to further divisions. Between 1517 and relations with the Germans (Alcock, 2002: 124). 1520, Luther’s followers printed over 300,000 There was additional resentment among Germans of his writings, and his pamphlets were read in at the Catholic Church’s appointment of senior universities and by clerics who went on to spread French and Italian clergy who functioned as feudal his ideas to even larger audiences across Germany fiefs but were not only theologically ignorant but (Philpott, 2000: 226). By the mid-16th century, unwilling to fulfill their religious duties (Alcock, Lutheranism was firmly established in northern 2002: 124). On top of this, much of the church and eastern Germany (Alcock, 2002: 127). and clergy had grown corrupt and indolent, with Another important reformer was the Frenchman widespread unscrupulous practices such as the sale John Calvin, who organized the first ‘reformed’ of indulgences, in which a sinner can reduce the church, later known as Calvinist, in in amount of punishment he receives in the afterlife 1536. Calvin believed that the sovereignty of through contributions to the church in this one people was supreme and that they had a right to (Alcock, 2002: 124). revolt against bad government (Alcock, 2002:

7 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 129). Yet his reformation was considerably more After certain German principalities began to radical than Luther’s and soon spread across France, officially adopt Protestant doctrines, it was not the , a number of German states, long before they had to muster armed forces to Hungary, Transylvania, Poland, and Scotland protect them from the Holy Roman Empire, (Merriman, 2010: 110). Both reformers demanded still a majority Catholic polity. Not surprisingly, a separation between the political and religious the following decades were wracked by civil wars spheres, believing that “the pastors of the church between the Catholic Church, the empire, and were not to perform the duties of public order, just newly Protestant German principalities. This as magistrates, princes, and kings would not preach conflict ended with the Peace of Augsburg in or perform the sacraments. In separating the two 1555 and the principle of cuius regio, eius religio realms, Reformation political theology essentially (“whose realm, his religion”) was first mentioned prescribed sovereignty” (Philpott, 2000: 223). (Carvalho et al., 2011: 741).

cuius regio, eius religio means “the religion of the ruler of each of the empire’s states would be the religion of the state. Protestants living in states with a Catholic ruler were free to emigrate, as were Catholics in the same situation” (Merriman, 2010: 103).

However, it was a temporary truce between the parties (Philpott, 2000: 232). Although some scholars believe that state sovereignty became a part of international politics since the Peace of Augsburg (Carvalho et al. 2011: 740), the sovereignty of German principalities was challenged until the Peace of Westphalia a century later (Philpott, 2000: 232). That being said, the Treaty of Augsburg still shaped the territorial and political history of Germany by giving each prince the right to determine Figure 1.4 Jean Calvin (1509-1564), a portrait by Konrad the religion of his state (Merriman, 2010: 103). Meyer. In most of the German states and Scandinavia, Lutheranism became the state church, while in As such, it can be said the Reformation helped England from the 1530s onward, Anglicanism divide governance into two different separate became the state religion. In Protestant countries, spheres: the spiritual and the temporal (Hurd, the church was subordinated to the state, which 2004: 248). While the spiritual sphere was led by was not quite yet the case in the Catholic parts of the Church, the temporal one was governed by the the Holy Roman Empire, where a fragile duality state. The reformists made this separation “much still lingered (Merriman, 2010: 124). more fundamental by claiming that God had instituted two kingdoms on earth, one spiritual to be ruled by the church, and the other temporal to be ruled by a civil sovereign” (Hurd, 2004: 248). As a result, they granted the civil sovereign a kind of 2 God-given right to rule, an approach to government How did the Renaissance affect that completely severed the sovereignty of the state the Reformation? from that of the church.

8 History of International Relations 1 THE BIRTH OF THE MODERN INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM: THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA The Peace of Augsburg did not end the rivalry between Catholics and Protestants, and a series of vicious religious wars broke out again in 1618 in the German states. These religious wars were called the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), which devastated Central Europe. Almost every European power took part, including the German principalities, France, Sweden, Spain, , and the Holy Roman Empire. Though they began as a religious conflict, they soon morphed into larger economic and territorial struggles, regardless of religious affiliation (Philpott, 2000: 240). The Thirty Years’ War started in Bohemia as an uprising of Protestants against the Spanish authorities. However, underlying these were non-religious issues, such as “the relationship between the Holy Roman Emperor and the electors, princes, free cities, and other political units of the Empire; the struggle for independence by the United Provinces against Spanish rule; the extent and shape of Sweden’s Baltic Empire; and the search for hegemony throughout Europe by the Habsburg family complex” (Holsti, 1991: 26-27). Major political actors in continental Europe, mainly France and Sweden, felt threatened by the Holy Roman Empire, then led by Ferdinand II, and the Habsburgs, then led by Philip IV of Spain (Holsti, 1991: 27). The Protestant king of Sweden,Gustav Adolph, took up the cause of the Protestants in continental Europe against the Habsburgs, whom he suspected of seeking to establish a universal monarchy in the continent (Holsti, 1991: 27). Yet things would soon take a twist: what began as a civil war between the Protestant Union of northern Germany and Bohemia and the Catholic League led by the Holy Roman Empire soon morphed into a broader continental war. Catholic Spain began aiding French Huguenots and Catholic France sided with Protestant Sweden in her battle against Spain (Holsti, 1991: 27-28).

Table 1.1 States directly and indirectly involved in the Thirty Years’ War. Within the empire Outside the empire Holy Roman Empire Dutch Bavaria Denmark Saxony Sweden Palatinate Russia Hesse-Kassel France Brandenburg England Savoy Transylvania Spain Papacy Poland Source: Parker, 1997: 139.

The war came to an end when the belligerents finally exhausted themselves. “By the 1630s Europe’s populations had borne an unprecedented burden of excessive taxes, a decline in food production, and the more direct costs of injury and death” (Holsti, 1991: 29). Under the guidance of Gustav Adolph, Cardinal Richelieu, and Jules Mazarin, a peace was finally negotiated. Thecongresses of Münster and Osnabrück, the first of their kind, led to the signing of the Treaties of Westphalia (Holsti, 1991: 25; Merriman, 2010: 145), the first multilateral diplomatic gathering in Europe to end a regional war and build a new order. Among those present were “145 delegates representing 55 jurisdictions, including the Holy Roman Empire and all the major kingdoms except Great Britain, as well as significant duchies, margraves, landgraves, bishoprics, free cities, and imperial cities” (Holsti, 1991: 25).

9 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 conduct of foreign policy, or even make alliances, important without the consent of the individual members of the Empire” (Holsti, 1991: 35). These formed the The Peace of Westphalia is not a single bedrock of European diplomacy until the French peace treaty. It is rather a general term that Revolution (Holsti, 1991: 38; Merriman, 2010: 145). includes two separate peace treaties—namely the Treaty of Münster and the Treaty of Osnabrück—signed in 1648. Three important principles of the Peace of Westphalia are as follows: 1. “Rex est imperator in regno suo: the king is emperor in his own realm. 2. Cuius regio, eius religio: the ruler determines the religion of his realm. 3. Balance of power: prevent any hegemon from arising and dominating everybody else” (Jackson and Owens, 2006: 54).

important

The Peace of Westphalia is considered the Figure 1.5 The Peace of Westphalia, 1648. starting point of the international system Source: https://www.cnas.org/press/in-the-news/back- because modern International Relations derived to-1648-the-treaty-of-westphalia its core principles from the peace settlements that ended the Thirty Years’ War in 1648. What did Westphalia result in? How did it influence the international political system? First, it led to a modicum of religious toleration by What made the Peace of Westphalia so crucial reiterating the principle of cuius regio, eius religio, was that it legitimized notions of sovereignty first annunciated at the Peace of Augsburg in 1555. and dynastic autonomy from the hierarchical Principalities and other states now had jurisdiction control of the Holy Roman Empire. As one scholar over issues related to religion, and no longer took noted, “[d]uring the next three hundred years, their cues from the Holy Roman Empire on these European states repeatedly invoked the principles matters (Holsti, 1991: 34). More importantly, of Westphalia to safeguard themselves against Europe’s internal wars of religion were by and large those who had different visions of European order” over (excepting those against the ) (Holsti, 1991: 38). Moreover, (Holsti, 1991: 38). “The [Westphalian] model covers the period Second, and more importantly, the Habsburg of international law from 1648 to 1945 (and family which united Spain, the Holy Roman some would say it still holds today). It depicts Empire, and many territories in Italy was now the emergence of a world community consisting divided, as the emperor renounced his right to of sovereign states which settle their differences provide support to Spain (Holsti, 1991: 34-35). It privately and often by force; which engage in also spelled the end of the Holy Roman Empire as diplomatic relations, but otherwise have minimal a foreign policy-making body. According to these cooperation; which seek to place their own treaties, “the pattern of international relations in national interest above all others; and which accept Europe was drastically changed: over three hundred the logic of the principle of effectiveness, that is, political entities were now entitled to conduct the principle that might eventually makes right foreign relations (make alliances), and the Holy in the international world—where appropriation Roman Emperor could not employ force in the becomes legitimation” (Held, 1995: 86).

10 History of International Relations 1 Consequently, the Peace of Westphalia changed Common practices of international law, such as the nature of the international state system and can the signing of treaties, dated back to ancient times. be regarded as “the symbolic origin of the society For instance, the world’s first recorded international of states” (Armstrong, 1993: 33). This new system peace treaty is generally accepted to be the Treaty of introduced new features: first, it consisted of states Kadesh, signed in the 13th century BC between the whose legitimacy and independence were mutually Egyptians and the Anatolian-based Hittites, a replica recognized (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 17). of which stands on the wall of the United Nations Although the idea of sovereignty had been exercised in New York today (Kerrigan, 2019; Ministry of by larger states, Westphalia extended this idea and Culture, 2019; UN News & Media, 2018). right to smaller European states for the first time. No matter its size, the state was now the source of all legitimate authority rather than the church or empire (Armstrong, 1993: 33). The parties to Westphalia recognized “each other’s right to rule their own territories free from outside interference” (McGrew, 2006: 29). Second, the recognition of mutual legitimacy was only for European powers; it did not extend to outside the European continent, whose systems were seen as alien and open to subordination by European powers (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 17). Third, international law and diplomatic practices started to be used. It was Figure 1.6 A Replica of the Kadesh Peace Treaty acknowledged that the concept of international presented to , the UN Secretary-General, by law was accepted “as a set of voluntarily accepted İhsan Sabri Çağlayangil, Minister for Foreign Affairs of guidelines and rules of international conduct Turkey on September 24, 1970 at the UN Headquarters that were appropriate to a society of sovereign in New York. states” to “establish the freedom of states as the supreme law” (Armstrong, 1993: 37-38; Jackson Source: www.unmultimedia.org/s/photo/ and Sorensen, 2013: 17). Fourth, the balance of detail/239/0239282.html power was a key result of Westphalia. Since states accepted no higher authority, achieving a balance Modern international law seems to have begun of power between member states was only natural developing in Europe during the 17th century. to preventing any one state from establishing its With the emergence of independent, powerful, hegemony (Armstrong, 1993: 34; Jackson and rival nation-states that tended toward territorial Sorensen, 2013: 17). expansion, Europe had a powerful need to legally demarcate each country’s rights and duties, International Law and Diplomacy especially when it came to the practice of war (Evans and Newnham, 1998: 261-63). As stated in previous sections, the Peace of Hugo Grotius played a major role in this process, Augsburg and Peace of Westphalia helped establish especially with his book, The Law of War and Peace an international order defined by international (De Jure Belli ac Pacis) in 1625, in which he argues law. When signing these multilateral treaties, that international law was based not on theology, emerging European states committed to respecting but on secular reason (Evans and Newnham, 1998: one another’s sovereignty, establishing resident 263). This masterpiece is considered by many one diplomatic missions, and generally sustaining the of the greatest contributions to the development of balance of power. Indeed, these would become international law. A Dutch statesman, jurist, and the main instruments of the modern international diplomat, Grotius has also been called the ‘father system in the coming decades and centuries, as of international law” (Onuma, 2019). can be seen in the Peace of Utrecht of 1713, for example, among others.

11 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1

Balance of power: “Traditionally, it refers to a state of affairs in which no one state predominates over others. Prescriptively, it refers to a policy of promoting a power equilibrium on the assumption that unbalanced power is dangerous. Prudent states that are at a disadvantage in the balance of power will (or at least should) form an alliance against a potentially hegemonic state or take other measures to enhance their ability to restrain a possible aggressor. Also, one state may opt for a self-conscious balancing role, changing sides as necessary to preserve the equilibrium. A balance of Figure 1.7 Hugo Grotious (1583-1645), Dutch Statesman power policy requires that a state moderate and Philosopher. its independent quest for power, since too much power for one state may bring about Hedley Bull explains international law as the body self-defeating reactions of fear and hostility of binding rules between states and other actors in from other states”(Griffiths and Callaghan, world politics (Bull, 2012: 122). However, without 2002: 12). any sanctions or coercive power, international law is often suspected of not being effective. As Thomas Hobbes argued, “[w]here there is no common power, there is no law” (Hobbes, 1998: Most states tend to obey the rules of international 63). A huge question in international relations, law. According to Bull, any state which has engaged then, is the extent to which international law can in a peaceful relationship with another has the develop without an enforcement mechanism. In propensity to obey the rules of international law, this context, the international system will remain such as carrying out diplomatic relations, exchanging anarchic in essence to prevent the concentration of money, goods, and visitors. While these rules can power. While the law within the modern state is readily be temporarily violated, that does not mean enforced by the state authority, international law a total collapse of the international legal system. lacks such kind of practice (Bull, 2012:125). The practices in international relations indicate that However, international law does in some obedience to the international law does not grow out ways have its own sanctions and enforcement of only willingness to preserve the system but also interests mechanisms. In the decentralized system, a certain out of a calculation for maintaining the of ‘self-help’ tool exists in which individual members each state (Bull, 2012: 131-34). of ‘international society,’ states, can make reprisals, Similarly, diplomacy evolves throughout wage war, or put sanctions on a given country that history with practices dating back to ancient has acted against certain international norms (Bull, times. The emergence of the modern state system 2012:125). Within this framework, the balance after the Peace of Westphalia gave impetus to the of power plays a major role for the functioning of institutionalization of diplomacy. Diplomacy international law. “It is only if power, and the will simply means the conduct of relations between to use it, are distributed in international society in states by official agents through peaceful means such a way that states can uphold at least certain (Bull, 2012: 157). It provides essential dialogue rights when they are infringed, that respect for and negotiation. Diplomacy has been an active rules of international law can be maintained” (Bull, system for an organized and coherent system 2012: 127). for permanent relations among states since the emergence of the state-system in Europe in the 15th century.

12 History of International Relations 1 The establishment of resident diplomatic missions was a milestone in the evolution of diplomacy and occurred in the 15th century in the Italian city-states. During the Renaissance, professional diplomatic 3 networks were formulated with the purpose of Why did Cardinal Richelieu “obtaining information, interpreting policies and and Jules Mazarin support trends, safeguarding military and political interests, the Protestants in the Thirty and promoting commerce and trade links.” In this Years War although France phase, diplomatic structures were concentrated as was a Catholic state? a central part of economic activities, such as the Venetian diplomatic service, along with its political and military functions (Evans and Newnham, THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM 1998: 129). DURING THE 17th AND 18th Diplomacy means the conduct of affairs CENTURY between states by official agents through peaceful The international system in the 17th and means with several ends in mind: 18th centuries followed upon gains made in • First, it facilitates communication between previous centuries. These were the increasing political leaders or states and other entities importance of state sovereignty and authority, the of world politics. emergence of mechanisms such as the permanent • Second, it facilitates the negotiation of diplomatic representation, an increasing reference agreements. to international law, and the idea of striking a • Third, it serves to gather intelligence or ‘balance of power’. In these centuries, the modern information from host countries. state system of today was being consolidated, and • Fourth, it minimizes the effects of frictions states tended not only to engage in conflicts but in international relations. also to cooperate through increasing trade or by allying against common threats. • Fifth, it symbolizes the concrete existence of international society (Bull, 2012: 163-66). In these centuries, it could be said that states lived in a society which they shaped and by which Diplomatic relations became institutionalized they were shaped (Buzan, 2014: 12-13). According with these functions, along with the emergence to Bull, this “society of states (or ‘international and consolidation of the modern state system. society’) exists when a group of states, conscious The resident embassies of the Italian city-states of certain common interests and values, conceive in the 15th century soon spread to the rest of themselves to be bound by a common set of rules Europe in the 16th, a trend that was strengthened in their relations with one another” (2012: 13). In by the recognition of the extraterritoriality this sense, “European international society”, along of ambassadors in foreign services during the with its key practices and norms of behavior such reign of Louis XIV. In the 18th century, the as diplomacy and international law, then expanded diplomatic corps emerged as a crucial actor in to the rest of the planet through colonization and international relations. In 1815, the Congress trade networks. Thus, it consolidated the frame- of Vienna underlined the equality of states and work for the modern state system, i.e. international consolidated the precedence of diplomacy. As a society (Bull and Watson, 1984: 1-9). contemporary reference to the evolution of this diplomatic mechanism, the Vienna Convention With the Westphalian order, the conception of of 1961 codified these practices for the rest of the ‘state’ as an independent actor in international the world (Bull, 2012: 158-60). relations grew to enjoy legal supremacy over all other actors. This also assumed the legal equality of states and promoted the principle of non- intervention by external forces in the domestic

13 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 affairs of states. Within this framework, three factors ning of the 16th century; while England founded have been effective in consolidating international the Muscovy Company in 1553 after the discovery society: diplomacy, international law, and the of the Arctic Ocean in order to monopolize English- balance of power (Armstrong, 2013: 40-41). These Russian trade, which it did until the end of the 17th characteristics could be observed during the War of century. English merchants also founded the Levant the Spanish Succession and the Peace of Utrecht, Company in 1592 (by merging of Turkey Company which will be further elaborated upon. of 1581 with the Venice Company of 1583), which These constitutive mechanisms of European granted sole rights to trade between England and international society evolved over the centuries. The the Ottoman Empire (Epstein, 1908: 1-40). biggest milestone, of course, was the emergence of the modern state, which began with the rise of absolute monarchs competing against one another and challenging actors such as the Pope or local aristocrats. Power struggles among royal houses and the perpetual external threat from the Ottoman Empire gave impetus to their search for better tools of statecraft. In this process, centralized and efficient military power prevailed with the help of “a professional diplomatic service; an ability to manipulate balance of power; and the evolution of treaties from essentially interpersonal contracts between monarchs, sanctioned by religion, [which led] to agreements between states that had the status of ‘law’” (Armstrong, 2013: 41). Two other hugely important developments, mercantilism and Figure 1.8 Reception of a French ambassador by the colonialism, also helped consolidate monarchical Ottoman Grand Vizier in İstanbul, Painting by Antoine power, especially for Louis XIV of France. de Favray. Mercantilism and Colonialism Source: commons.wikimedia.org Mercantilism refers to an “economic theory For its part, the English East Company was and practice common in Europe from the 16th th designed to trade with East, South, and Southeast to the 18 century that promoted governmental Asia, regions where French and Dutch companies regulation of a nation’s economy for the purpose already performed similar functions. Thanks to these of augmenting state power at the expense of rival companies, northern European states abolished the national powers” (“Mercantilism,” 2019). As a monopoly of Portugal and Spain in the East and policy, it was developed in Western Europe between the Americas. Each of these policies paved the the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution and way for new and more powerful colonial empires holds that states should increase their exports and (Sander, 2001: 94), and created a framework that decrease their imports. It was closely related to the strengthened state authorities and facilitated the evolution of the state-system of Europe insofar as it rise of political absolutism (“Mercantilism,” 2019), advanced a state-centered structure of international which only further increased the tendency toward relations (Evans and Newnham, 1998: 321). further colonial expansion. Wallerstein argues that mercantilism in the In its simplest sense, colonialism means “control 17th century was a policy of economic nationalism by one power over a dependent area or people. centered on strong trade balances and the acquisition The purposes of colonialism include economic of bullion (Wallerstein, 2011: 37-38). Implemented to establish strong and self-sufficient economies, exploitation of the colony’s natural resources, the the goal was to maximize exports and minimize the creation of new markets for the colonizer, and the import of raw materials (Sander,2001: 94). extension of the colonizer’s way of life beyond its national borders” (“Colonialism,” 2006: 434). In line with this policy, France signed trade ag- Similarly, Beaule explains colonization as a state- reements with the Ottoman Empire at the begin-

14 History of International Relations 1 driven process with the goal of exploiting foreign an absolutist system is that the ruling power is not labor, collecting foreign tribute, and extracting subject to regularized challenges or checks by any resources. Once these motions have been set in other agency, be it judicial, legislative, religious, place, the colonizing power then needs to administer economic, or electoral” (“Absolutism,” 2019). distant territories and conquered populations to The age of absolutism is generally between 1660 keep the ship in place (Beaule, 2017:6). and 1789, starting with the restoration of the The concept of ‘colonialism’ is mostly associated English monarchy after the English Civil War with the history of Europe, particularly from and the personal rule of Louis XIV of France the 15th-19th centuries when Portugal, Spain, until the French Revolution (Coffin and Stacey, Holland, France, and Britain came to rule much 2005: 535). of the planet (Evans and Newnham, 1998: 79). This centralization of power and sovereignty Indeed, between 1500 and 1900, European powers in Europe also reflects a gradual change in the colonized the whole of North and South America feudal system. The transition fromfeudalism to and , most of Africa, and much of Asia. absolutism changed many of the dynamics of This became possible when it did (around 1500) the state system, while also being influenced by after the Portuguese and Spanish discovery of a it. Pierson notes that, as neither traditional nor sea route around Africa’s southern coast (1488) modern, absolutist states should be classified as and to the Americas (1492). With these events transitional state-forms that began to emerge in sea power soon shifted from the Mediterranean to the 16th century and to dominate the system in the Atlantic and to the emerging nation-states of the 17th century. Only in the 18th century and Portugal, Spain, the Dutch Republic, France, and beyond would they assume “more recognizably England. By discovery, conquest, and settlement, modern state forms” (Pierson, 2011: 34). This these nations expanded and set up colonies across underlines the fact that absolutism helped pave the the planet, bringing European institutions and way for the modern state system and contemporary culture with them each step of the way (Nowell International Relations. et.al, 2019). They also settled many of these places Feudalism, as discussed previously, represents with their own people, taking control of local a pyramidal social formation built upon personal governments in the process. ties of loyalty in which power-holders at any level Spain and Portugal were the first colonizers in depend on their capacity to mobilize resources, the Western Hemisphere in the 15th and 16th cen- including military power. This model does not turies, but they were soon followed by Holland, concentrate power on a single monarch but on which colonized and parts of America a diversified hierarchy of lesser powers, such as in the 16th century. Britain was not far behind, set- nobles. Indeed, “an important part of the coming ting up shop in North America and India in the of the modern state was the move away from this 17th and 18th centuries, before expanding to Aust- multi-centered and pluralist structure of powers ralia and New Zealand not long after. By the end of towards a single (absolutist) center of power” the 19th century, European colonialism had spread (Pierson, 2011: 9). to all of Africa, a state of affairs that ended only The process of absolutism changed the status of after World War II. both local power-holders and religious authorities. For instance, “[i]n most Protestant countries, the attention independent power of the church had already been subordinated to the interests of the state when For further information on the process of the age of absolutism began. In France, Spain, decolonization, please refer to Chapter 7. and Austria, however, where Roman Catholicism had remained the state religion, absolutist Absolute Monarchies monarchs now devoted concerted attention to nationalizing Absolutism refers to a “political doctrine and “ ” the church and its clergy within the practice of unlimited centralized authority and their territories,” (Coffin and Stacey, 2005: 536). absolute sovereignty of a monarch. The essence of

15 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 bureaucracies with strong allegiances to their monarchs (Coffin and Stacey, 2005: 531 and 536). How absolute monarchy co-opted the nobles: As a result, an absolute ruler or monarch in the 17th “Louis XIV deprived the French nobility of and 18th century could make “law, dispense justice, political power in the provinces while increasing create and direct a bureaucracy, declare war, and levy their social prestige by requiring them to reside taxation according to his or her own will, without at his own lavish court at Versailles. Peter the needing the formal approval of any other governing Great of Russia (1689-1725) forced all his authorities” (Coffin and Stacey, 2005: 535). As French nobles into lifelong government service. Later King Louis XIV (1643-1715), the symbolic figure of in the century, Catherine II of Russia (1762- absolutism, famously put it, “I am the state.” 1796) struck a bargain whereby in return for vast estates and a variety of social and economic privileges (including exemption from taxation) Louis XIV of France the Russian nobility virtually surrendered When Louis XIV assumed the throne in the administrative and political power of the March 1661, European rivalries helped him state into the empress’s hands. In Prussia, the consolidate his own power. Spain was aiming to army was staffed by nobles, as was generally recover Portugal; England and the Dutch were the case in Spain, France, and England. But engaged in commercial competition; Sweden and in eighteenth-century Austria, the emperor Denmark were relatively weak after a recent war; Joseph II (1765-1790) adopted a policy of the Habsburgs had problems with Hungary and confrontation rather than accommodation by Transylvania after the revival of Ottoman power; denying the nobility exemption from taxation and Poland was exerting efforts to confront and deliberately blurring the distinctions Muscovite and Swedish aggression. Taking these between nobles and commoners” (Coffin and into account, French diplomacy under Louis Stacey, 2005: 536-38). XIV tried to play the Portuguese off Spain, the Magyars, Turks, and German princes off This centralization of power was also sustained Austria, and the English off the Dutch, each of by mercantilism and colonialism. Indeed, the age which helped him consolidate his rule at home of absolutism had become an era of empires. By (Kennedy, 1989: 100-01). 1660, the French, Spanish, English, Portuguese, and Dutch all had colonies in the Americas and Asia, a competition that was very fierce. The European wars of the late 17th century had clear colonial aspects. By the 18th century, the lines between wars waged for trade interests and those for colonial ones became entirely blurred. Before long, these were also fought on a consistently larger scale, as the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763) was one of the examples (Coffin and Stacey, 2005: 535). In the 17th and 18th centuries, Europe was shaped by commerce, war, and a steadily growing population. These factors only encouraged further overseas colonization, worldwide trade, and the establishment of new markets for European industry. Even agricultural output was boosted. With larger armies, European governments could also wage more war. With full control over the state’s armed forces, legal system, and the right to collect and spend the state’s financial resources, Figure 1.9 Louis XIV of France. absolute rulers also created centralized and efficient

16 History of International Relations 1 and Madagascar, founded colonial settlements in Canada, penetrated the Great Lakes and Initial Statements of Louis XIV to his Mississippi valley, set up plantations in the West Chancellor and statesmen: “Monsieur, I have Indies, expanded their ancient commerce with called you, together with my secretaries and the Levant, enlarged their mercantile marine, ministers of state, to tell you that up to this and for a time had the leading navy of Europe” moment I have been pleased to entrust the (Palmer et. al, 2007: 170). He also increased the government of my affairs to the late Cardinal. size of the French army from 100,000 to 400,000 It is now time that I govern them myself. You and built a large-scale civilian administration to will assist me with your counsels when I ask for run a functioning government. He also initiated them. Outside of the regular business of justice the first organized war ministry, replete with which I do not intend to change, Monsieur the a minister and his related assistants, officials, Chancellor, I request and order you to seal no inspectors, and clerks (Palmer et. al, 2007: 176). orders except by my command, or after having The period of Louis XIV also involved major discussed them with me, or at least not unless wars: the War of Devolution (1667-68), the Franco- a secretary brings them to you on my behalf. Dutch War (1672-78), the War of the League of And you, Messieurs, my secretaries of state, Augsburg (1688-97), and the War of the Spanish I order you not to sign anything, not even a Succession (1702-1713) (Nolan, 2008: 513-14, passport, without my command; to render 119-129, 320-330, 516-527). Louis XIV did account to me personally each day and to favor little if not wage war. Doing so, he had two goals no one,”(Wilkinson, 1993: 12). in mind: “to lessen the threat posed to France by the Habsburg powers that surrounded it in Spain, the Spanish Netherlands, and the Holy Roman French power under the absolute rule of Louis empire, and to promote the dynastic interests of XIV thus began to threaten the interests of other his own family” (Coffin and Stacey, 2005: 546). European powers, posing a challenge to Spanish In 1667-1668 he attacked the Spanish possessions, the English parliamentary revolution, Netherlands and captured the city of Lille. In and the independence of Holland. At this point, 1672, he attacked Holland and its new leader, France had certain key advantages, particularly its William of Orange. When the Franco-Dutch wealth and population, which was 19 million in War ended in 1678-1679 with the Treaty of 1700—three times as populous as England and Nijmegen, he had the territory of France- twice that of Spain (Palmer et. al, 2007: 170). Comte to his realm. Keen to expand eastward, During the reign of Louis XIV, royal government he conquered the city of Strasbourg in 1681, became more centralized and bureaucratic. All Luxemburg in 1684, and Cologne in 1688. As departments of government were relocated to a reaction, William of Orange called the League Versailles, which became the headquarters of state of Augsburg, which united Holland, England, administration, thus replacing Paris. The palace Spain, Sweden, Bavaria, Saxony, the Rhine there became the center of Louis XIV’s absolutist Palatinate, and Austrian Habsburgs against empire (Wilkinson, 1993: 15). To be sure, Louis Louis. The consequences of the Nine Years’ War XIV, the Sun King, was invested not only in state (1689-1697) were extremely destructive. Its power but also in French society, which many agreed battles were carried out in present-day Belgium, represented the forefront of civilization at the time. the Netherlands, and Luxemburg, i.e. across the Seen as a continuation of Italy’s Renaissance, French Low Countries. In 1697, however, Louis XIV was artists and scientists were as effective and popular as obliged to return most of the territories France Louis XIV’s armies, and the French language and had gained, with the exception of Strasbourg thought were transmitted to every corner of the and the surrounding territory of Alsace (Coffin continent (Palmer et. al, 2007: 170). and Stacey, 2005: 546). His final conflict, the Louis XIV also gave impetus to various French War of Spanish Succession, was just as crucial to colonial policies. He began “trading in India the future of Western Europe.

17 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 The War of the Spanish XIV faced severe criticism. The following famines Succession and tax increases led to peasant uprisings that were brutally suppressed, a development that in turn led to King Carlos II of Spain’s death in 1700 was a revival of parliamentary and aristocratic opposition followed by thirteen long years of war, involving at one that curbed the absolutism of the era. In short, the point or another France, England, Spain, Holland, war strengthened the idea of creating and maintaining Austria, Portugal, Bavaria, and Savoy (Falkner, 2016: a balance of power in the continent (Kamen, 1969: 213). Lasting from 1702-1713, it soon took on a 9-25; Scott, 2006: 12; Palmer et. al., 2007: 183-85). global dimension (Palmer et. al, 2007: 183). The Peace of Utrecht (1713) formally ended the war and codified this “just equilibrium of power” as the “best and most solid basis of mutual friendship and durable harmony” (Armstrong, 2013: 43).

1713 Utrecht Peace Signatory states of the peace agreed to respect one another’s sovereignty and accepted each other as members of a European state-system ordered by the principle of finding a balance of power. All the same, the treaty left France and Great Britain as the two leading imperial powers of Europe, who then exported European institutions and ideas to Figure 1.10 The Battle of Blenheim during the War of the rest of the world (Palmer et. al, 2007: 188). the Spanish Succession, 13 August 1704.y. Source: www.britannica.com The Peace of Utrecht refers to a series of treaties that ended the War of the Spanish Following the death of the Spanish King, Louis Succession. These were: XIV’s grandson Philip V entered Madrid and Utrecht ascended the throne on February 18, 1701 as Spain’s first Bourbon king, a development that changed the 11 April 1713 – Treaty between France, Great dynamics of European politics. Fifteen months later, Britain, Holland, Prussia, Portugal, and Savoy in May 1702, the Grand Alliance, a body including 13 July 1713 – Treaty between Spain and Britain, Holland, and the Austrian Emperor that was Great Britain supported by Brandenburg, Portugal, and the Italian 13 August 1713 – Treaty between Spain and Savoy duchy of Savoy declared war on Spain and France. 26 June 1714 – Treaty between Spain and The allies won significant battles in Bavaria (1704), at Holland Ramillies (1706), Oudenarde (1708), and Malplaquet (1709) in the Spanish Netherlands. Louis XIV asked for Rastad and Baden peace but could not agree with the Alliance’s demands. 6 March / 7 September 1714 – Treaty between Apart from defending the two Bourbon monarchies, France and Austria France sought to conquer Belgium and protect the trade of French merchants in Spanish America against Dutch and English naval forces. And not merely there: Madrid English and Portuguese attempts to seize Gibraltar 6 February 1715 – Treaty between Spain and and the Austrian invasion of Catalonia also wracked Portugal havoc in the Bourbon domains. As a result, Spain 15 November 1715 – Barrier Treaty between lost territory to Britain (Gibraltar), but retained its Holland, France and Austria overseas possessions, and the French lost some of their mastery of the continent. Poverty, misery, and (Spain and Austria finally concluded a treaty at The depopulation were widespread in France, and Louis Hague in February 1720) (Falkner, 2016: 220).

18 History of International Relations 1 In partitioning much of the Spanish Empire, Britain stood to gain the most from the treaty, starting with the annexation of Gibraltar and the island of Minorca, but also strengthening its own constitutional system and ensuring only a Protestant would take the throne in the process. Spain lost the Spanish Netherlands (now Belgium) as well as Milan, , and Naples to the Austrian Habsburgs. The Dutch guaranteed there remained a ‘Dutch Barrier’ in Belgium pointing toward France, the Duke of Savoy gained the island of . Likewise, two small states that sided with the victors were also recognized as ‘kings’: the Duke of Savoy would become the King of Sicily (and Savoy), while the Princes of Brandenburg became the King of Prussia. Philip V of Spain, the grandson of Louis XIV, was allowed to remain the king of Spain provided the crowns of France and Spain never united (Palmer et. al, 2007: 184-86; Kennedy, 105-06).

Table 1.2 The Main Terms of the Treaties of Utrecht, Baden, Rastad, and Madrid (1713-1715). 1. King Philip V was recognized as King of Spain and the Indies. The crowns of France and Spain to always remain separate. 2. Naples, the Milanese region, Sardinia, and the southern Netherlands to be under Austrian rule. The Dutch Barrier in the southern Netherlands, in revised form, to be re-established. 3. France to surrender the fortresses of Kehl, Freiburg, and Breisach on the right bank of the river Rhine, but to retain Strasburg and Alsace. The fortifications and harbor mole at the port of Dunkirk to be demolished. 4. The Elector of Bavaria, and the Elector-Bishops of Liege and Cologne to be restored to their domains and properties. 5. The Protestant succession to the throne in London, on the death of Queen Anne, to be assured. James Stuart, the “Old Pretender” and would-be James III, to be expelled from France. 6. Great Britain to retain Minorca, Gibraltar, Newfoundland, Hudson’s Bay, Arcadia (Nova Scotia), and St Kitts. 7. Holland and Great Britain to receive exclusive access to trade with certain Spanish ports and territories, to the exclusion of the French. 8. The Kingdom of Prussia (previously Brandenburg) to be recognized and to receive Upper Guelderland. The Duke of Savoy to be recognized as King of Sicily and to receive a portion of the Milanese territories (Falkner, 2016: 219-20).

4 Why was the War of the Spanish Succession, which ended with the Peace of Utrecht, seen as a European dynastic war rather than being a domestic issue of Spanish political history?

19 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 Summarize the history of the state system from the ancient era LO 1 to the Renaissance.

The term ‘state system’ refers to the relations between politically organized groups with distinctive territories that are not influenced by higher authorities, and exercise a measure of independence from each other. In historical terms, this is a very recent development. While the Greek city-states did have a system of their own, it was shaped more by a common culture, language, and religion than any sense of international law or diplomacy as we currently understand them. After the Greek system was destroyed by the Roman Empire, the latter established an empire and subordinated peoples within its territories until the 5th century AD. During its reign, it is nearly impossible to speak of a state system as such. After the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, a feudal state system emerged, finding its most perfect expression in the Holy Roman Empire for hundreds of years. This system was different from more recent ones in terms of sovereignty, hierarchy, and interdependence: on the one hand was the Pope, the great spiritual authority, and on the other was the Emperor, the temporal one. But temporal authority was Summary never completely free during the Middle Ages; it always had to contend with the power of the papacy. Moreover, with many different competing political entities, there was no clear line between domestic and international politics. Territories and boundaries were ill-defined, and there was no distinction between domestic (civil) wars and international wars.

Assess the impact of the Renaissance and LO 2 Reformation on the emergence of the modern state system.

The Renaissance and Reformation were hugely important developments that helped pave the way to the Peace of Westphalia. During the Renaissance, a great deal of culture, ideas, and beliefs were exchanged thanks to the international trade based in the Italian peninsula, which led to a huge intellectual accumulation in this region. Old Greek and Roman texts were rediscovered, and political thinkers such as Niccolò Machiavelli helped change the political culture of Europe in a distinctly secular direction. During the Reformation, the ideas of men such as Martin Luther and John Calvin also became influential. Demanding the separation of the political and religious spheres, they believed the sovereign had a right to rule. This new approach to government helped sovereigns gain a great deal of sovereignty from the church.

Evaluate the importance of the Peace of LO 3 Westphalia and its principles on the birth of the modern international system.

The Peace of Westphalia changed the nature of the international state system by legitimizing the idea of sovereignty and dynastic autonomy. After the Peace of Westphalia, leaders became sovereign in their own realm and determined the religion of their territory. The balance of power became the leading policy in Europe, a trend that lasted until the 20th century. Moreover, The Peace of Westphalia dictated that sovereigns be free from outside interference. A notion of international law was also accepted for the first time, along with many of the diplomatic practices we now take for granted. Moreover, the Peace of Westphalia did a great deal to prevent future religious conflicts in Europe by rendering sovereigns the sole authority in their territory and greatly reducing the power of the papacy and the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.

20 History of International Relations 1

Characterize the major events that shaped the LO 4 international system during the 17th and 18th centuries.

During this time, states began to stabilize by adopting certain behaviors toward one another. They used diplomacy and international law inherited from previous centuries within the framework of striking a balance of power. Being a signatory of an international treaty and establishing resident embassies were central to this. States also now interacted with one another on a more permanent basis—and waging war

if need be—to maintain this balance of power. The War of the Spanish Succession and Peace of Utrecht Summary are but two cases in point. In addition to the above, three factors in particular helped drive the development of the European state system: mercantilism, colonialism, and absolutism. Mercantilism, for its part, was a state-driven policy of economic nationalism in which each country sought to maximize its balance of trade by maximizing the export of end products and minimizing the export of one’s own raw materials, or an overreliance on others’. In the process, the control mechanisms needed to enforce these regulations only further enhanced the power of the state. Though colonialism began with the goal of economically exploiting a foreign country’s natural resources and creating of new markets for the home country, it was not long before countries were also exporting their way of life to the colonies in the form of merchants, soldiers, and civil servants (for starters). Though economic goals were primary, the need to administer vast foreign holdings soon took on a political life of its own, with states investing far more in controlling local political frameworks, not merely exploiting labor and extracting resources—the original aims of colonialism. Rapid population increases also forced European states to further centralize power, first by enlarging and strengthening their control over the army and second by extending the legal domain of the state. The latter included raising further taxes and creating a more efficient bureaucracy whose allegiance was first to the monarchy. In this sense, absolutism functioned as a political doctrine that aspired to unlimited centralized authority and the monarch’s absolute sovereignty, a trend that soon swept all of Europe. In this system, the ruling authority was not subjected to judicial, legislative, religious, economic, or electoral checks. The absolute monarch could make law, dispense justice, manage the bureaucracy, declare war, and raise taxes according to their heart’s delight without seeking approval from any governmental agency. As a result, the autonomy of local power-holders (usually aristocrats) was greatly curbed, and the churches were nationalized. Indeed, the combined effects of commerce, war, and a steadily growing population each helped to enlarge these countries’ armies and extend their mercantilist colonial efforts to establish new markets for European industry. European states also increased their agricultural production and waged war more frequently. In doing so, however, they also increasingly stressed the importance of diplomacy and a budding notion of international law that would prove hugely influential on the European state system in the 17th and 18th centuries.

21 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1

1 Which of the following is not one of the 6 Which of the following is considered as the characteristics of the modern state? ‘father of international law’? a. A definite territory a. Martin Luther b. Sovereignty b. Cardinal Richelieu c. Hierarchy c. Niccolò Machiavelli d. Subject to religious authority d. Dante Alighieri e. Independence e. Hugo Grotius

2 Which of the following statements about the 7 Which of the following concepts refers feudal state system is not correct? to ‘a state of affairs in which none ot the states predominates over others’?

Test Yourself Test a. The papacy played a leading role. b. States had neither sovereignty nor independence a. Balance of power in modern sense. b. International law c. There was an international order defined by c. Hegemony international law. d. Local rulers such as lords and knights were semi- d. Isolationism autonomous. e. Rationalism e. There was no clear line between domestic and international politics. 8 Which of the following was not one of the major wars that took place during the reign of 3 Which of the following ended the Thirty Louis XIV? Years’ War in 1648? a. TheWar of the Spanish Succession (1702-1713) a. The eaceP of Augsburg b. The utchD War (1672-78) b. The eaceP of Utrecht c. The Seven Years War (1756-1763) c. TheTreaty of Kadesh d. TheWar of Devolution (1667-68) d. The eaceP of Westphalia e. TheWar of the League of Augsburg (1688-97) e. TheTreaty of Nijmegen 9 Which of the following states did not take 4 Despite being a Catholic country, which of part in the War of the Spanish Succession? the following supported the Protestants in the Thirty Years’ War? a. France a. France b. Ottoman Empire b. Sweden c. England c. Spain d. Spain d. Russia e. Holland e. Papacy 10 Which of the following was ended by the 5 Which of the following principles did not Peace of Utrecht? result from the Peace of Westphalia? a. The Dutch War a. A balance of power policy between European b. The Seven Years’ War powers c. TheWar of the League of Augsburg b. Equality between European and non-European systems d. TheWar of the Spanish Succession c. The acceptance of nternationalI law e. The Thirty Years’ War d. State sovereignty e. Diplomatic practices conducted by sovereign states

22 History of International Relations 1

If your answer is not correct, review the If your answer is not correct, review the section 1. d 6. e section on “History of State System: from on “The Birth of the Modern International the Ancient Era to the Renaissance” section. System: The Peace of Westphalia” section. Answer Key for “Test Yourself” 2. c If your answer is not correct, review the 7. a If your answer is not correct, review the section section on “History of State System: from on “The Birth of the Modern International the Ancient Era to the Renaissance” section. System: The Peace of Westphalia” section.

If your answer is not correct, review the section 3. d 8. c If your answer is not correct, review the on “The Birth of the Modern International section on “The International System System: The Peace of Westphalia” section. during the 17th and 18th centuries” section.

If your answer is not correct, review the section If your answer is not correct, review the a b 4. on “The Birth of the Modern International 9. section on “The International System System: The Peace of Westphalia” section. during the 17th and 18th centuries” section.

If your answer is not correct, review the section If your answer is not correct, review the 5. b 10. d on “The Birth of the Modern International section on “The International System System: The Peace of Westphalia” section. during the 17th and 18th centuries” section. Suggested answers for “Your T urn” What differentiates the modern state system from earlier ones?

In the modern state system, states have sovereignty, which means they have exclusive control over their territory, and governments are the superior political actors that determine the actions of the state. The modern international your turn 1 system is composed of various independent and sovereign states that act within the framework of international law. In earlier centuries, of course, this was not the case, when supranational actors such as the papacy and the Holy Roman emperor also enjoyed a measure of political rights.

23 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1

How did the Renaissance affect the Reformation?

During the Renaissance, Italian city-states saw rapid urbanization, the power of the nobility eroded, and the influence of townsmen increased as a result of extensive international trade and banking. Before long, urban merchants enriched by commerce had become an important part of daily political life and joined the ruling elite. The new urban societies they helped forge were your turn 2 more open to new ideas because of merchants and immigrants, and the culture, ideas, beliefs, and intellectual accumulation of many different regions and cities were bound together in the same small urban confines. This led to rediscovery of ancient Greek and Roman ideas, which bent the arc of European political thought in a markedly more secular direction. From the Italian Peninsula these ideas then spread to the rest of the European continent, influencing both the Renaissance and even the Reformation.

Why did Cardinal Richelieu and Jules Mazarin support the Protestants in the Thirty Years War although France was a Catholic state?

Cardinal Richelieu and Jules Mazarin were the two most important French statesmen during the Thirty Years’ War and the Peace of Westphalia. Both were advisors to the King of France and supported the demands of Protestants

Suggested answers for “Your T urn” Suggested answers for “Your against the Holy Roman Empire and the papacy, despite the fact that France was Catholic. This can be explained by one of the results and principles of the your turn 3 Peace of Westphalia: the balance of power. Since France did not want a powerful Holy Roman Empire dominant across the continent and was at war with Spain at that time, it supported the Protestants. Moreover, by supporting hundreds of Protestant German principalities, France perpetuated the fragmentation of Germany, thus protecting its own eastern territories.

Why was the War of the Spanish Succession, which ended with the Peace of Utrecht, seen as a European dynastic war rather than being a domestic issue of Spanish political history?

The War of the Spanish Succession was not a domestic struggle, but a European dynastic war that brought about thirteen years of conflict across Europe, dragging a huge swathe of the major players of the day into its orbit—France, England, Spain, Holland, Austria, Portugal, Bavaria, and Savoy. When King Carlos II of Spain died in 1700, competition broke out your turn 4 between the Bourbons of France and the Habsburgs of Austria to determine who would succeed him. This led to a series of battles that ended with the Peace of Utrecht (1713), which established a new ‘balance of power’ in Europe, formally recognizing this principle in the process as a fundamental element of the European state-system. By the end of the war, each European power in theory respected everyone else’s sovereignty and membership in the European state-system. France and Great Britain prevailed as the two most powerful actors by the conflict’s e

24 History of International Relations 1

References

Books and Articles Falkner, J. (2016). The War of the Spanish Succession 1701-1714, Barnsley; South Yorkshire: Pen and Alcock, A. (2002). A Short History of Europe: From the Sword Books Ltd. Greeks and Romans to the Present Day, Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2nd ed. Griffiths, M. and Callaghan, T. (2002). International relations: the key concepts, London, New York: Armstrong, D. (1993). Revolution and World Order: Routledge. The State in International Society, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. Held. D. (1995). ‘The Development of the Modern State’ in Formations of Modernity, Edited by Stuart Armstrong, D. (2013). ‘The Evolution of International Hall and Bram Giebe, Cambridge, Oxford: Polity Society’ in The Globalization of World Politics: An Press, pp. 71-126. Introduction to International Relations, Edited by John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens, 3rd ed., Hinsley, F. H. (1986). Sovereignty, Cambridge: pp. 35-49. Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed. Beaule, D. Christian (2017). Frontiers of Colonialism, Hirst, P. (2001). War and Power in the 21st Century: Gainesville: University Press of Florida. The State, Military Conflict and the International System, UK, US: Polity Press. Bull, H. (2012). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics, New York: Palgrave Hobbes, T. (1998) (Org.1651). Leviathan, (Ed. by J. Macmillan, 4th ed. C. A. Gaskin), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bull, H. and A. Watson (1984). The Expansion of Holsti, K. J. (1991). Peace and War: Armed Conflicts International Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press. and International Order 1648-1989, Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Buzan, B. (2014). An Introduction to the English School of International Relations: The Societal Approach, Hurd, E. S. (2004). ‘The Political Authority of Cambridge, UK: Polity. Secularism in International Relations’, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 10 (2), pp. Cameron, E. (2006). ‘The Turmoil of Faith’ inThe 235-262. Short Oxford History of Europe: The Sixteenth Century, Edited by Euan Cameron, Oxford, New Jackson, R. H. and Owens, P. (2006). ‘The Evolution York: Oxford University Press. of International Society’ in The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Carvalho, B., Leira, H. and Hobson, J. M. (2011). Relations, Edited by John Baylis and Steve Smith, ‘The Big Bangs of IR: The Myths That Your 3rd ed., pp. 45-62. Teachers Still Tell You about 1648 and 1919’, Millennium - Journal of International Studies, Vol. Jackson, R. and Sorensen, G. (2013). Introduction to 39 (3), pp. 735-758. International Relations: Theories and Approaches, Fifth Edition, UK: Oxford University Press. Coffin, G. Judith and R. C. Stacey (2005). Western Civilizations: Their History and Their Culture, 15th Kamen, H. (1969). The War of Succession in Spain, ed., New York: W.W. Norton. 1700-15, Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Dunne, T. and Little, R. (2014). ‘The International Kennedy, Paul M. (1989). The Rise and Fall of the Great System – International Society Distinction’, Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict in Guide to the English School in International from 1500-2000, New York: Vintage Books. Studies, ed. Cornelia Navari and Daniel M. McGrew, A. (2006). ‘Globalization and Global Politics’ Green, Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell, in The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction pp. 91-108. to International Relations, Edited by John Baylis and Epstein, M. (1908). The Early History of the Levant Steve Smith, 3rd Edition, pp. 19-40. Company, London: Georger Routledge & Sons Merriman, J. (2010). A History of Modern Europe: Ltd. / New York: E.P. Dutton & Co. From the Renaissance to the Present, Third Edition, Evans, G. and Newnham, J. (1998). Dictionary of New York; London: W.W. Norton & Company. International Relations, London: Penguin Books.

25 The Emergence of the Modern International System 1 Nolan, C. (2008). Wars of the Age of Louis XIV, 1650- Websites: 1715: an Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Kerrigan, M. (2019). ‘Battle of Kadesh’ in Encyclopedia Civilization, Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. Britannica, viewed 19.05.2019, https://www. Palmer, R R., Joel Colton, and Lloyd S. Kramer britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Kadesh (2007). A History of the Modern World, 10th ed., Onuma, Y. (2019). ‘Hugo Grotius’ in Encyclopedia Boston: McGraw-Hill. Britannica, viewed 19.05.2019, https://www. Parker, G. (1997). The Thirty Years’ War, London; New britannica.com/biography/Hugo-Grotius York: Routledge, 2nd ed. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Philpott, D. (2000). ‘The Religious Roots of Modern Tourism- Çorum Provincial Directorate of International Relations’, World Politics, Vol. 52. Culture and Tourism (2019). Kadesh War and January, pp. 206-245. Peace Treaty, viewed 19.05.2019, http://www. corumkulturturizm.gov.tr/EN-61494/kadesh- Pierson, C. (2011). The Modern State, London: war-and-peace-treaty.html Routledge, 3rd ed. United Nations (UN) News & Media (2018). Replica Sander, O. (2001). Siyasi Tarih: İlk Çağlardan 1918’e, of Oldest Known Peace Treaty Presented to UN Ankara: İmge Kitabevi. Ed. by Turkey, viewed 19.05.2019, https://www. Scott, H. M. (2006). The Birth of a System, unmultimedia.org/s/photo/detail/111/0111527. 1740-1815, Harlow, England: Pearson/Longman. html Skinner, Q. (1978). The Foundations of Modern United Nations (UN) News & Media (2018). Replica Political Thought Volume One: The Renaissance, of Oldest Known Peace Treaty Presented to UN Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University by Turkey, viewed 19.05.2019, https://www. Press. unmultimedia.org/s/photo/detail/111/0111527. Taylor, P. and Curtis, D. (2006). ‘The United html Nations’ in The Globalization of World Politics: --, (2019). ‘Mercantilism’ in Encyclopedia Britannica, An Introduction to International Relations, Edited viewed 19.05.2019, https://www.britannica.com/ by John Baylis and Steve Smith, 3rd Edition, pp. topic/mercantilism 405-424. --, (2019). ‘Muscovy Company’ in Encyclopedia Wallerstein, I. (2011). Mercantilism and the Britannica, viewed 19.05.2019, consolidation of the European world-economy, 1600- https://www.britannica.com/topic/Muscovy- 1750. Berkeley: University of California Press. Company Wilkinson, R. (1993). Louis XIV, France and Europe, --, (2019). ‘East India Company’ in Encyclopedia 1661-1715, London: Hodder & Stoughton. Britannica, viewed 19.05.2019, https://www. Wolin, S. S. (2004). Politics and Vision: Continuity and britannica.com/topic/East-India-Company Innovation in Western Political Thought, Expanded --, (2019). ‘Absolutism’ in in Encyclopedia Britannica, Edition, Princeton; New York: Princeton viewed 19.05.2019, University Press. https://www.britannica.com/topic/absolutism- --- (2006). ‘Colonialism’ in Britannica Concise political-system Encyclopedia, Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. Nowell, C. E., R. A. Webster, and H. Magdoff (2019). --- (2006). Britannica Concise Encyclopedia, Chicago: ‘Western Colonialism’ in Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopaedia Britannica. viewed 19.05.2019, https://www.britannica.com/ topic/Western-colonialism

26 History of International Relations 1

Further Reading

Bull, H. and Watson, A. (1985). The Expansion of Neff, C. S. ed. (2012). Hugo Grotius On the Law of International Society, Oxford: Clarendon Press. War and Peace, New York: Cambridge University Press. Bull, H., B. Kingsbury and A. Roberts (2015). Hugo Grotius ve Uluslararası İlişkiler, İstanbul: Parker, G. (2017). Cambridge Savaş Tarihi, İstanbul: Uluslararası İlişkiler Kütüphanesi. Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, 3rd ed. Grotius, H. (2011). Savaş ve Barış Hukuku, İstanbul: Watson, A. (1987). ‘Hedley Bull, States Systems and Say Yayınları. International Societies’, Review of International Studies, 13, no. 2, pp. 147-53.

27 The International System During Chapter 2 the Long 19th Century

After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Analyze the dynamics of European diplomacy Assess the impact of the Industrial, American, and after the Congress of Vienna and characterize 1 French Revolutions upon the international system. 2 the main features of the Concert of Europe. Identify the main challenges to the concert system such as the Revolutions of 1830 and Recognize the main aspects of Bismarck’s 3 1848 and the rise of Napoleon III. 4 system and discuss its downfall. Learning Outcomes Chapter Outline Key Terms Introduction Industrial Revolution Revolutions and the International System American Revolution The Metternich System and the Concert of Europe French Revolution Challenges to the Concert System The Bismarck System and Its Downfall Restoration Congress of Vienna Concert of Europe Revolutions of 1830 and 1848 Unification of Italy Unification of Germany Congress of Berlin Franco-Russian Alliance Russo-Japanese War

28 History of International Relations

INTRODUCTION The Impact of the Industrial This chapter introduces major events Revolution Upon the International and developments that shaped the course of System international politics during the 19th century, one Though it is not easy to simplify the dynamics of of the most important episodes in the evolution the changes wrought by the Industrial Revolution, of the international system. Usually labelled as historians agree upon its main outcome, which was th the ‘long’ 19 century, this era has significant a shift from an agrarian economy that had prevailed characteristics to mention. First, while the world for centuries to an industrial one through the usage had been geographically integrated into a single of new means of production and manufacturing. map by the end of the 18th century, the center of It is also agreed that the pace of industrialization the international system appeared to be Europe started in England in the 18th century and slowly (Hobsbawm, 1962:7). In this sense the major but consistently spread throughout the world in actors of the system were all European powers. the following centuries. Though regarded as an Second, there was a tension between rulers and important component in a state’s modernization, ruled throughout most of the century, which led the Industrial Revolution itself laid the foundation to numerous mass movements, uprisings, and for a globalized capitalist system. revolutions. Third, the century witnessed the rise The cornerstones that the Industrial Revolution liberalism nationalism of ideologies such as , , stood on can be summarized into three main socialism and that reshaped the geographical and topics: technological advance, improved production, political borders of the European system. Fourth, and the redistribution of labor. These topics can be the gap between absolutism and constitutionalism explained as: was a constant rivalry that challenged governments’ • Technological advance sovereignty. Nonetheless, the European system : The introduction endured as its components found the best ways of new materials like iron and steel enabled to cooperate until the turn of the new century. people to build new machinery, and new That is, European politics created new models and powerful energy resources like coal and of cooperation among its members, such as the petrol made it possible to push the limits balance of power and the concert system. of mechanics. There was an ever-growing interest in science and its productive uses, Against this background, four sections frame this especially in daily life. As had already chapter. happened, these novelties widened the The first evaluates the impact of revolutions vision of the human mind and encouraged on the international system and focuses on the people to push the limits of nature. Industrial Revolution, the American Revolution, • Improved production: The pre-industrial and the French Revolution. The second examines world rested solely on the labor of humans the emergence of the Concert of Europe and the and thus production depended on the size Metternich System following the Congress of of the population. The new machinery not Vienna. The third discusses the main challenges only decreased the need for human labor, that rose against the Concert System, particularly by th but also increased the material produced the mid-19 century. The fourth and final section and shortened production times. The assesses the Bismarck System and its downfall. simple outcome was mass production, which eventually made globalized trading REVOLUTIONS AND THE networks possible. INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM • Redistribution of labor: The shift This section considers how three major from agrarian to industrial society was revolutions, namely the Industrial Revolution, the accompanied by a wave of urbanization that American Revolution, and the French Revolution, caused a massive migration from rural to influenced the international system in the late 18th urban areas. However, the new machinery and early 19th centuries. and developing technology needed labor. As such, simple farmers who moved to

29 The International System During the Long 19th Century

the city were before long transformed into Though the 18th century was the belle époque skilled workers. This division of labor not of absolute monarchy-dominated state relations, only made it possible to employ workers the Industrial Revolution brought about ever- with the necessary skills, but for the latter growing tensions in the structure of traditional to also organize themselves in a highly societies. As the flow of capital shifted from a land- sophisticated fashion. based nobility to industrialists and merchants, the However, the spreading tide of Industrial notion of a traditional aristocracy based on nobility Revolution also transformed the dynamics of deteriorated. Moreover, the emergence of a capital- the traditional state and the society it governed. based bourgeoisie rapidly boosted the monarchy’s Growing numbers of tradable merchandise created resources, helping sustain traditional international a class of investors and merchants, which weakened power structures, or even enhance them. As a result, the older landed aristocracy’s hold on power. Yet the king had first of all to organize a balance between apart from this new moneyed aristocracy, a new the old landed nobility and the rising capitalists, working class was also emerging. Though the which was never easy. In the second English Civil traditional absolutist rule of kings still prevailed, War (1648) and the Glorious Revolution (1648), society was dynamically changing. Initially, higher for example, the rising bourgeoisie brought down revenues from both domestic and international two kings in England, while the France of Louis trade and taxes from increasing production XIV gradually disempowered the old aristocracy in increased kings’ capacity to arm themselves, better favor of the new during his reign. govern their realm, and fight wars of territorial acquisition. In the short run, therefore, the Industrial Revolution rocketed the economies English Civil Wars (1642–51), also called of traditional states and transformed them into Great , refers to the series of armed highly centralized ones. As monarchs made use of conflicts between supporters of the monarchy their recently acquired means of power for more of Charles I and his son and successor, Charles centralized models of government, the first image II and supporters of the Parliament. For further of the nation-state in history began to emerge information, please see Jane H. Ohlmeyer, (2019, (Hobsbawm, 1962:27-53). August 08). “English Civil War”, https://www. britannica.com/event/English-Civil-Wars. As stated above, states were a major beneficiary of the Industrial Revolution. As state sovereignty rested on the absolute monarchy, the Industrial Revolution gave monarchs advanced tools to The Glorious Revolution is the event in English enhance their state’s power. These were increased history that involved the overthrown of King James state revenues from centralized taxation, rising II and replacement of him with his protestant domestic and foreign trade, and higher military daughter Mary II and her husband, William spending, which all increased military and naval III, prince of Orange and stadtholder of the might. With such an accumulation of power, Netherlands. The Glorious Revolution ultimately monarchs linked their personality with the state established the supremacy of parliament over the itself. As Louis XIV of France, the Sun King, monarchy, (www.britannica.com). said: “I am the state”. As such, in the late 17th and the early 18th century, the monarchies of Europe established an international structure that Regardless of domestic politics, the kings of rested solely on monarchial ties and traditions. Europe reigned supreme in foreign relations. As th th Diplomacy rested on dynastic kinship between such, the wars between states in the 17 and 18 European monarchies and even war was presumed century were mostly related to dynastic issues to be a dynastic challenge of succession, as in the and alliances. Given its aristocratic origins, war case of the War of the Spanish Succession (1701- took a softer line and aimed at problem solving 1714) or Austrian Wars of Succession (1740-1748 by force, rather than destroying an opponent. and 1756-1763). Though costly in terms of men and material and often needlessly long, wars ended in compromise

30 History of International Relations

between belligerents, usually in a congress in which each monarchy was represented. This was the case of the Congress of Utrecht (1713) and the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748), among others. By the end of the 18th century, the European system was determined by its monarchies.

The Impact of the American Revolution Upon the International System When the American Revolution, also known as the United States War of Independence, began in 1775, it was seen by continental Europe as an internal conflict between Britain and her North American colonies. However, from its onset, the thirteen colonies’ struggle for freedom was based on the legacy of the Industrial Revolution. Their insurrection was triggered by King George III’s taxation of the colonies without their consent. Having developed a degree of political autonomy Figure 2.1 George Washington, Founding Father and and almost full economic autonomy, they were the First President of the US (Term of Office: 1789-1797). still part of the British Empire, whose crown was growing suspicious of their weakening ties. Though The reaction of the continental states to the regarded as an internal affair of the British Empire, American Revolution is noteworthy. In allying the War of Independence of the American colonies themselves with the insurgent colonies, both was a well-organized uprising of subjects against France and Spain welcomed the opportunity to their sovereign, which succeeded in overthrowing even their odds with their archenemy, Britain. It the king’s authority. should be noted, then, that neither France nor The tension between the crown and the colonies Spain or any other state in Europe saw the events in rose constantly from 1764 until 1775, through North America as revolutionary. TheDeclaration which it transformed into a civil war. Though the of Independence in 1776 was merely assumed as initial campaigns were in favor of the Royal Army, a crack in the politics of the British Empire, not the colonial and later Continental Army, led a social upheaval of subjects against their kings; by George Washington, effectively countered the the role of the American bourgeoisie was neglected. royal threat. By 1779, France and Spain were also Ratifying its constitution by 1791, the United involved in the conflict as allies of the colonies that States of America was declared as a federal republic, would soon become the United States. After the announcing a new type of sovereignty based upon final surrender of the British forces in Yorktown the people rather than an absolute monarch. In the in 1781, Britain had no other option but to accept sight of cautious philosophers like Immanuel Kant, the independence of the colonies and recognize the this was a promising achievement of humanity to newborn United States of America. determine his/her own will. In the sight of Europe’s bureaucratic monarchies, it was merely a welcomed blow to Britain’s might.

31 The International System During the Long 19th Century

The Impact of the French Revolution marriage to Marie Antoinette, a Habsburg princess. Upon the International System However, the high expenditures of the wars France The echoes of the American Revolution arrived had fought since the 1750s had taken their toll on in Europe merely eight years later and struck at the the state’s treasury, and France was on the brink heart of the continent. France had long been the of bankruptcy. Louis XVI needed a new fiscal signature absolute monarchy in Europe and styled policy to raise new taxes, and he called a meeting the customs and the traditions of almost every of the Les Etats Généraux (the Estates General), other continental monarchy. the general assembly of the French estates. Yet attempts to do so failed to win the compromise It should be noted that it is essential to separate of the aristocracy (the second estate), and to a the French Revolution into three respective lesser degree, the clergy (the first estate), and so- periods: the revolutionary phase of 1789-1793; called tiers-état (third estate), which included the the revolutionary wars of 1793-1802; and the bourgeoisie and lower classes. On the contrary, Napoleonic Wars of 1802-1815. after talks continuously broke down, in June 1789, the third estate, most of which belonged to the The Revolutionary Phase of bourgeoisie, staged a declared itself as the National 1789-1793 Assembly calling for a constitution that limited the The throne of Louis XVI seemed impregnable, sovereignty of the king. As the masses in Paris rose as he was not only the King of France but also the up in the summer of 1789, the king dully accepted brother-in-law of the Austrian Emperor since his the new constitution.

Figure 2.2 Painting depicting Parisians storming the Bastille Prison on July 14, 1789.

What happened in France did not immediately shake Europe. The uprising did result in a new government in which Louis XVI accepted to share power with a national assembly claiming to represent the French people. However, the following months witnessed a sharp increase in tension between the king and National Assembly, as neither could reach a lasting agreement on how to govern in tandem. After the king attempted to flee to Austria to seek political and military aid, there was no turning back: he was arrested before reaching the border, put on trial, and eventually executed. The National Assembly drew up the second constitution now declaring France a Republic.

32 History of International Relations

The Revolutionary Wars of 1793-1802 of coalitions against France easy. As such, the Proclaimed a republic, France now stood in firm Revolutionary Wars are usually divided into two contrast to the monarchies of Europe. Antithetical periods in which two coalitions stood against to the traditions of the European political France. While the First Coalition was led by system, the monarchies initially failed to establish Austria and Prussia, which fought against France diplomatic ties with France. In 1792, both Austria between 1793-1797, the second was led by Britain, and Prussia, which also had a distant kinship with Russia, and Austria, and the Ottoman Empire Louis XVI, intervened against the revolution. from 1798-1802. Despite small victories, the However, both were soundly beaten by the new wars of the first two coalitions were inconclusive republic and even lost a great deal of territory. for the monarchical powers. On the contrary, the By 1795 the new French Republic had not only French Republic established a balance in which she proved her survivability, but also her capability to could determine the tip of the scale. This would bid for mastery of the European system. In that be done with great force by a young military cadre sense, France was able to carve a new map in which who would rise up the ranks of battle to become, she maintained her mastery of Western Europe initially, First Council of the Republic, and later under her new political system. the Emperor of France: Napoleon Bonaparte. It could be argued that the Revolutionary Wars effectively ended the era in which the European political system was based on monarchical values. As the French Republic introduced new values like social equality, citizenship, and above all nationalism, any victory that the republic achieved meant a deeper penetration of such values within Europe. In other words, the period of the Revolutionary Wars was a clash of ideologies between revolution and monarchy. The French Republic was not only strong in disseminating ideas and values; it was also capable of organizing the necessary force to defend them. With the introduction of levée en masse, or national conscription, the French Republic was able to bring almost five million people under arms between 1793-1799. National armies did not only replace the old system of professional armies, but also socialized the concept of war by forcing it out of the absolute monarch’s realm through Figure 2.3 Napoleon Bonaparte, a portrait by David the introduction of the simple citizen-soldier. As Jacques Louis. European monarchies were slow to react to French military revolution, the French Republic widened its borders through a series of victories that enabled The Napoleonic Wars of 1802-1815 French armies to spread the ideas of revolution to Proclaimed as the Consul of the French Republic the rest of the continent. Each battle won enabled for life in 1802 and coronated as Emperor of the Republic to sign peace treaties, which also France in 1804, Napoleon was the key figure in the brought recognition. By the end of 1795, the final phase of the French Revolution. Owing both French Republic had not only proved itself, but his military and political career to the fluctuating forced the monarchies to recognize her as an equal. environment of the revolutionary republic, he was Yet the old system resisted the Republic’s determined to alter Europe’s system by imposing intrusion with all its might. The monarchical values the ideas of the French Revolution and employing of the European system made the establishment the military might of France. In such a sense, he was regarded as a usurper by the European monarchies, 33 The International System During the Long 19th Century

which refused to recognize him as a legitimate The first period, the rise of Napoleon, was sovereign. As diplomacy failed to achieve any kind dominated by successful wars that brought victory of improvement between the rivalries, war seemed and domination. After major victories at Austerlitz the only way of contact between the emperor and (1805) and Jena (1806), Napoleon not only other monarchs. Therefore, Napoleon sought neutralized Austria and Prussia, but also managed military victories to force his rivals to recognize his to create a European hegemony by bending the international status as the legitimate sovereign of will of Tsar Alexander I of Russia at the Treaty France (Lee, 1982: 18). of Tilsit (1807). In such a dominant position, Both Napoleon’s domestic reforms and foreign Napoleon began to design a new map of Europe ventures gave France high esteem, transforming that favored France and was based on the values the republic into an empire which dominated of the French Revolution. By 1809, continental continental Europe. However, this domination Europe was transformed into a new political map was costly in both economic and military terms— in which older monarchs were dethroned and and could only last if both were materialized. In the relatives of Napoleon were given power as his early reign, Napoleon was lucky to inherit the sovereigns in Spain and in Holland. New political best military machine in Europe. The French Army units were established such as the Confederation was a seasoned fighting force after continuous wars of Rhine, the , and the Duchy from 1793-1802, and the population of France of . A continental economy was also provided more than enough conscripts motivated established in which every Napoleonic client state, by a revolutionary spirit. France’s geographical and as well as Austria and Russia, was forced to respect. historical ties also enabled alliances with smaller Napoleon’s greatest failure, it must said, remained states that actively provided men and resources to Britain, which refused to bend the knee. Remaining Napoleon’s campaigns (Schneid, 2008: 571-604). outside of the continent, Britain effectively fought As such, the Napoleonic era can be interpreted both Napoleon’s political ventures and economic in three periods: rise, stall, and fall. model.

Figure 2.4 Napoleonic Europe in 1812. Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Europe_1812_map_en.png

34 History of International Relations

The second period presents Napoleon’s efforts The End of Napoleonic Europe: The to reinforce the continental system, which was Congress of Vienna harder than it seemed. Napoleon’s hegemony in It took seven coalitions to beat back the French Europe was clearly dependent on force, though his Empire born of the Revolution. By the end of political and military skills in organizing France’s 1814, four major powers (Britain, Russia, Austria, assets did much to support his bid for France’s and Prussia) had joined an alliance to fight until mastery of Europe. Nevertheless, the pressure he Napoleon was defeated. The Treaty of Chaumont, put on the major actors of the European system signed in March 1814, was the major achievement created an opposition that accelerated slowly but of the anti-Napoleonic coalitions and paved the constantly. By 1809, peace was a forgotten concept, way for the conference in which post-revolutionary and Napoleonic armies were fighting Europe would be forged. When Napoleon finally all around Europe. Spain and Portugal, which abdicated in May 1814, the Bourbon monarchy were actively backed up by Britain, had risen up was restored with the Peace Treaty of Paris. against the French domination, and Austria went However, it was the Congress that met in Vienna to war with France yet again. While these dangers in November 1814 that laid the foundations of the were averted by another series of military victories, post-war European system. keeping French power at its peak, it was becoming evident that Napoleon’s hegemony could not be The Congress of Vienna aimed to redraw the protected by force alone. To bestow upon himself map that Napoleon had redesigned on national a higher degree of legitimacy, he married the terms. Its intention was to redraw the European Habsburg Princess Marie Louise and sought an heir map in ways that would benefit the major powers that would bring a higher degree of recognition. and bind them against any further attempt at hegemony over Europe. However, Napoleon’s important escape from Elba and his hundred-day campaign in early 1815 proved the spirit of nationalism and Aiming to weaken the British economy, revolution were still very much alive. Thus, after the continental system was the strategy of the final defeat of Napoleon, the Holy Alliance Napoleon that prohibited the British trade and later the Quadruple Alliance were created. with neutral states and French allies. Signed on September 18, 1815, the Holy Alliance was a compact crowned by an extremely conservative spirit whose motivating factor All the same, it was the failure and bankruptcy was to isolate France and the nationalist and of the continental economy that encouraged the revolutionary ideas she had unleashed. It was the European states to rise against Napoleon’s yoke. product of the Habsburg, Hohenzollern, and By 1811, Sweden and Prussia were cracking under Romanov monarchies (Austria, Prussia, and Russia pressure from the continental economy’s burdens. respectively). Its scheme was proposed by Alexander When Russia decided to break out of the continental I of Russia and became a manifesto of absolute system not much later, it helped lead to the disastrous monarchy—from the divine right of the kings that Napoleonic invasion of Russia in 1812. appears in Holy Scripture to Christianity’s value The third and the final period is the slow but system, in which a king should rule with justice and steady decline and Napoleon’s final fall in 1815. love his subjects as the shepherd does his flock or Though Napoleon reacted to Russia’s withdrawal the father his family (Mowatt, 1922: 23-24). The with a show of force, his invasion was a disaster. alliance was also proposed as a spiritual bonding of Russia’s eventual victory and the success of the the three sects of Christianity, Catholic, Protestant, British in Spain encouraged Europe’s other and Orthodox, in which all three monarchs unhappy states to turn. When Napoleon faced accepted each other as brothers and equals and a final coalition of adversaries in 1813, the odds promised to rule their subjects through Christian were not in his favor. By 1814, Napoleon’s armies charity, justice, and peace, and help one another were back within France’s borders, and the French fulfill the role given to them by God. Empire was no more but a dream.

35 The International System During the Long 19th Century

The Holy Alliance was clearly a manifesto of the Talleyrand, obtained assurances from Alexander I legitimacy of absolute monarchy’s sovereignty over that her nation was not responsible for the deeds people who had lived a radically different experience of Napoleon. The second threat was more abstract since 1789. Almost every European power had but no less dangerous: the newfound sense of been forced to muster huge armies to fight against nationalism and self-determination bubbling up the French Republic and later Napoleonic Empire’s beneath the surface of so many European streets. citizens-in-arms. If not into modern citizens per se, this had transformed the submissive subjects of monarchical regimes into people a higher consciousness of liberty and sense of nationality. It was in that sense that the members of the Holy 1 Alliance found common ground against a common What did the term “restoration” represent in the enemy forged more by ideas than military realities post-Napoleonic period? on the ground (Kissinger, 1957: 176). As such, peace could only be established by building an anti-liberal and anti-nationalist bloc against any attempt by THE METTERNICH SYSTEM AND subject peoples to organize along national or liberal THE CONCERT OF EUROPE principles. With Russia, Austria, and Prussia at the The fundamentals of peace laid down in Vienna helm, every European state was called to adhere to were not merely a matter of diminishing the echoes the principals of the Holy Alliance and in doing so of the French Revolution and Napoleon; there was be accepted as equals. With the exception of Britain, also the problem of creating a status quo to suit the of course, which remained a liberal monarchy. After territorial changes in the map of Europe. Contrary the restoration of the French monarchy, Britain to the individual interests of other Concert powers, was brought into the new order in the form of the Austria’s interests laid in the maintenance of the Quadruple Alliance signed on November 20, 1815 post-Vienna status quo. Her central position on between Austria, Britain, Prussia, and Russia, which the map, which made her multinational population labelled France as a ‘rogue state’. Peace had been vulnerable to nationalist claims, was clearly fragile. restored to Europe. Moreover, the had developed Even though the leaders of the old system took a stratified structure within her borders based on charge in the fight against an enemy threatening to feudal rather than national terms. On the one transform Europe, it could not undo the damage hand, any territorial gains she made would bring wrought by the French Revolution or Napoleon. In further problems, but on the other, she needed Vienna, big and small powers sought to draw a new to check and where possible oppress both liberal map with a new and more governable community. and national claims in bordering areas. On these In other words, revolution remained the principal terms, she was willing to design and prosecute the threat to Europe, and a stronger one than a large- post-Vienna peace. But such a burden was beyond scale European war. This led the major powers to her limited powers, and Austria alone could not form the Concert of Europe, an outgrowth of the pretend to bear it. To materialize the new structure, Holy and Quadruple alliances that saw two threats the European powers needed a higher degree of facing Europe. The first was the material threat cooperation where individual interests were set aside for a common one (Dwyer, 2008: 605-632). of France, a newly restored power for whom the famed French statesman, Charles-Maurice de

36 History of International Relations

is a strong tendency to observe Britain in the 19th century as the balancer of the post-Napoleonic period, despite disagreements about precisely what kind of ‘balance’ this was. Though there is much evidence that British foreign policy was continuously successful in doing just that, the system was also based on consensus. Indeed, it was both Metternich’s success and perhaps only choice to lay the burden for finding such a consensus on Austria’s back. In this sense, it can be argued that the Concert of Europe rested on a set of Austrian responsibilities within a defined geography: Austria was the central political and geographical actor who was supposed to check Prussia’s ambitions to unite the German states; ’s ambitions to unite Italy; and France’s continental ambitions. Austria was the only European state who could put forth Figure 2.5 Portrait of , the a set of interests actually shared by other powers, Austrian Chancellor (1821-1848) and Foreign Minister whether in a positive or a negative sense. The (1809-1848), by Thomas Lawrence. major powers were keen in keeping central Europe Source: www.rct.uk under control while their imperial ambitions rested on other horizons; if Austria intended to sustain It is usually stated that Klemens von such an environment, it was rational for them to Metternich of Austria was the architect of the support Vienna. Even though French and Prussian Concert of Europe. But one must also analyze the ambitions clashed with Austria’s, these were the Concert as an enterprise of European powers who weakest links in the early days of the Concert. found themselves in an atomized state of interests. Not only did Austrian interests align with those The Congress of Vienna showed that every state, of the system; Metternich was well aware that the even France, had got at least part of what they concert was the only chance of Austria’s survival as wanted, and the collaboration that had united the a great power. So he tailored a careful design and anti-French bloc was no longer necessary. Britain abstract set of values to which every member of the and Russia had other interests elsewhere, and the hierarchy could in some way ascribe. central European states were finally settled in a The problem facing Metternich was the lack new uneasy peace. As such, the problem rested on of a common cause among European powers. building a consensus which would appease major To counter this, he developed a two-tiered powers focused on their own interests without value system based on anti-liberalism and anti- creating conflict while maintaining a hierarchy nationalism, each of which was to be bolstered by that dictated each state’s role within the system. To absolutism. The first two served Russia’s point of solve this puzzle one must look at the post-Vienna view and third latter Britain’s. Though London map of Europe with a different analysis. opposed broadsides against liberalism, it was also Most balance of power theorists find it essential ambitious to take part in the European hierarchy that there should be a ‘balancer’ or ‘holder of by accepting the endurance of monarchy. Indeed, the balance’ within the European balance of Metternich did well to align British and Russian power. This actor needs to be a strong player and with Austrian interests. It was also his genius to be able to counter any single threatening actor or sustain interests of Austria that seemed to collide coalition of actors that try to establish hegemony with those of lesser members of the hierarchy. over the continent. In other words, peace should To press smaller players into the consensus, be constructed by the guidance of a hegemonic Metternich designed a new map and set of alliances. actor to initiate a system of values with reference A German Confederation was established that to a common interest. With these in mind, there would rest on an Austrian-Prussian balance of

37 The International System During the Long 19th Century

power to serve as a barrier against German unification or French ambitions over the Catholic German States. Austria would also prevent any northern Italian state from attempts to unify Italy (Bridge and Bullen, 1980:27-28). Yet these responsibilities were too much for a single state to bear, especially one whose powers had been greatly weakened in all but diplomacy. Hence the Quadruple Alliance. With the conference of Aix- la-Chappelle in 1818, France was also brought into the group, thus establishing the Quintuple Alliance.

Figure 2.6 Europe after the Congress of Vienna (1815). Source: www.britannica.com

At this point, Paul Schroeder’s arguments over the structure of the Concert of Europe gains importance. Schroeder rejects the claims of balance of power theorists, referring to this period instead as a state of “political equilibrium” among great powers (Schroeder, 1989: 135-153). If the Concert of Europe is taken into consideration, distinguishing between ‘great powers’ and the overall ‘balance of powers’ is difficult. Though the Concert appears at first glance to be a balance, there is also a strong argument for a state of bipolarity between Britain and Russia. However, they were collaborators rather than antagonists. Nor was there multipolarity, as the hierarchy was not flexible enough for states to seek individual gains within its domain. Instead, he argues, the Concert was a unipolarity in which every state accepted a common value and rigid hierarchy. Regardless of their relative capacities, each state was a great power in its own right, a status mutually acceptable because of the “great power” status they bestowed on one another. Likewise, for new entrants to be recognized in this hierarchy, a state of consensus was needed at the top. What were the main characteristics of the post-Vienna political system of Europe? 1. Initially, at the Congress of Vienna, the fundamentals of peace were determined by agreement among the four major powers, be it the Holy or Quadruple Alliance. These were Austria, Britain, Russia, and Prussia. In 1818, France was also granted a great power status and accepted into the European Concert. 2. TheNapoleonic map was redesigned as much as possible to pre-1789 borders by the dissolution of Napoleonic states and the restoration of European monarchies. No state was to be reformed in a nationalistic fashion.

38 History of International Relations

3. Monarchism, anti-nationalism, and anti- action against any attempt to target the common liberalism were the main fundamentals interest. In that sense, the peace had an intrastate of the post-Vienna peace, while wars of dynamic that guaranteed each member maintain conquest within Europe were now assumed her regime. To sustain her place and identity in to be a hostile action by the major actors the group, each member had to help preserve the and the great powers now countered the Concert. aggressive use of force to redraw borders. It was evident that any change of regime If war became inevitable with the failure in Europe was assumed as a threat to peace by of diplomacy, any power would first have the major powers. Yet by 1820, the unhappy to collectively to quarantine the belligerent populations of Europe who had experienced a form power with the other Concert members. of liberalism began to raise their voices against the 4. The major powers agreed to reconcile absolutist rules forced upon them. Uprisings broke matters among themselves rather than take out in Naples and in Spain in 1820. To counter individual action. Diplomacy was always to these, the major powers convened meetings (the take precedence over the use of force, a last conferences of Troppau, Laibach, and Verona) resort. that settled upon international intervention. The 5. Preserving the peace by acting in concert uprisings ended with the Austrian intervention in became the major powers’ common goal, Naples and French intervention in Spain, and the for which diplomacy became an effective restoration of monarchy in both. instrument of action. These were internal crises of the European 6. Among the great powers, Austria stood out Concert. However, when the Greeks rose up against as both the organizer and balancer of the the Ottoman rule, the major powers were unaware system. of what collective action to take. It was evident that the Ottoman Empire was not included in the domain of the European Concert. Moreover, each of the major powers sought different outcomes from the Greek uprising. By 1826 it 2 had transformed into a revolution in which Greek What did “the Concert of Europe” mean? insurgents sought a free state, which the Ottomans were mostly successful in suppressing. Though Austria stood firmly against any intervention on the side of Greeks, Russia, the , CHALLENGES TO THE CONCERT and France intervened against the Ottomans with OF EUROPE an uninformed strike at the battle of Navarino This section introduces the major challenges in October 1827. Russia took further action and that threatened the Concert of Europe in the 19th forced the Ottoman Empire to war in 1828. At century. the Treaty of Adrianople in September 1829, the freedom of Greece was guaranteed. Yet not only The Revolutions of 1830-1848 and did Greece demonstrate the weakness of the post- Vienna European system; it revealed it was also not Their Impact Upon the International valid east of Vienna. System The concert was further damaged in 1830 The post-Vienna peace that developed as the when Europe saw a wave of revolutions. Though basis of international cooperation of the Concert the main event started in France in July 1830, this of Europe was based on preserving the regimes that merely replaced the Bourbon with the Orleans had initiated it. Therefore, references to absolutism monarchy. Despite a fragile peace in France, were intentionally made to form a cohesive group concurrent uprisings started in Belgium, Italy, and and maintain a spirit of common values and Poland. All three were nationalist in character and interests. In such an understanding, international demanded states of their own. While Austria and conflict was to be prevented through collective Russia were successful in suppressing the uprisings

39 The International System During the Long 19th Century

in their domains, Italy and Poland, respectively, the case of Belgium became a problem for the Concert. Since the Britain and France intervened on the side of Belgians against the Netherlands, this led the establishment of the new state of Belgium. Though its independence was accepted by all the major powers with the London Accord in 1832, the eastern members of the Concert were disappointed that the anti-nationalist sentiment of the Concert had been overruled by Anglo-French action. It could be said that the independence of Belgium effectively divided the Concert of Europe into two: Britain and France representing the liberal western bloc, and Russia, Austria, and Prussia its conservative eastern bloc. It was clear the level of cooperation between the major states was Figure 2.7 “Barricade bei der Universität am 26ten in decline (Schroeder,1994: 668). Mai 1848 in Wien” (1848), a painting depicting the 1848 The major powers enjoyed a short era of Revolution in Vienna. cooperation in the late 1830s when they jointly Source: Prints, Drawings and Watercolors from the intervened against the governor of , Anne S.K. Brown Military Collection, Brown Digital Muhammed Ali Pasha, then in revolt against Repository, Brown University Library. Ottoman rule. The outcome was the 1841 London Convention, which not only regulated the status TheRevolutions of 1848 clearly demonstrated of the Turkish straits and the Black Sea, but also that the fundamentals of peace that had been established a temporary solution to the so-called accepted in 1815 were no longer valid. Neither Eastern Question. the signatories of the Holy nor Quintuple Alliance were in power. Nor did the absolute monarchical In February 1848, the Concert faced a huge regimes restored make it past 1853. Though the set of challenges from a series of revolutions which major powers had somehow survived this wave of sprung up almost everywhere in Europe. Every revolutions, eventually they structurally changed major power except Britain and Russia saw regime to a degree that none of them could oversee the change. France once again became a republic, development of a new concert. On the contrary, while Prussia was transformed into a constitutional regime change unleashed the repressed ambitions monarchy. It was Austria that experienced the of France for a bid of mastery in Europe, while worst of the 1848 revolutions. For almost three Prussia would soon unite the German provinces years, Austria came to the brink of disintegration, into a single state. The demonstrated weakness as almost every major nationality revolted against of Austria encouraged these states to fulfill their the outmoded Habsburg Monarchy. It was the ambitions. That being said, Russia’s intervention military and the civil bureaucracy that saved the in the Hungarian revolt to maintain Austria’s day for the aging empire by fighting a war with integrity demonstrated that she was still tied to the Piedmont in Italy, suppressing the uprising of monarchical principles of the Holy Alliance and Czechs, and finally placing a new king on the willing to maintain the status quo. throne who was forced to ask for Russian help to suppress the Hungarian revolt. Though liberalism was triumphant around Europe, the Concert spent its last bullet on Austria.

40 History of International Relations

To summarize the effects of the revolutions of 1815. Though France once again proclaimed to be 1848 upon the Concert of Europe, it can be a republic, the nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, argued that: Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, staged a coup d’état • The effectively in 1851 and made himself the Emperor of France. destroyed the absolutist regimes in Europe Now known as Napoleon III, he initiated a new (except in Russia), thus ending the very strategy to bring down the remnants of the concert basis upon which the Holy Alliance was and establish hegemony in Europe. built. As such, monarchist, anti-liberal, and anti-nationalist characteristics became obsolete as almost every European state was transformed into a . • As Metternich was taken out of office, the last political figure from the Congress of Vienna had departed. The signatories of the Holy Alliance and founders of the Concert system eventually ceased to exist. • The revolutions in Austria demonstrated the weakness of the Habsburg monarchy as its empire came to the brink of dissolution. Her role as manager and balancer of the Concert system could no longer be fulfilled. • The rise of liberalism and nationalism with the revolutionary movements and their success in establishing constitutional Figure 2.8 Napoleon III, the first President of the regimes affected the policy-making of the second French Republic (1848-1852) and the Emperor of states. Unlike absolute monarchies, the new France (1850-1870). governments were responsible to people for legitimizing their policies. Therefore, Though France was one of the greatest military cooperation among actors under these new powers of Europe, Napoleon III knew well that circumstances was not as easy. he needed to tailor a delicate strategy to overcome • The major powers found themselves in an the obstacles that stood in France’s way. The main atomized state in which each state shifted obstacle was the precarious concert whose structure to its own individual interest rather than had weakened after the revolutions. Well aware compromise on a common interest that that he needed to follow careful steps in order to promised mutual gains from the existing bring down the concert, he first worked to weaken status quo. Russian-Austrian cooperation. With Austria The Concert system’s days were running out fast. deprived of Russian assistance, the second step would be to diminish Austria’s might and position of surveillance in Italy and Germany. However, The Foreign Policy of Napoleon Napoleon III was well aware that in order to III and its Impact on the European materialize these two steps, Britain’s consent, and System if possible, cooperation, were needed. It is possible to claim that the revolutions of 1848 were best for France, both restoring The Crimean War her revolutionary energy by overthrowing the monarchy and breaking the coalition which had Napoleon III’s strategy was put into action the Crimean stood against her revolutionary values since the in 1854 when he was involved in War signature of the Holy and Quadruple Alliances in . His careful diplomacy encouraged Britain to

41 The International System During the Long 19th Century

intervene with France on the side of the Ottomans • a set of nationalist ideas that reflected in a successful military campaign that eventually historical realities in places like Italy, the forced Russia to sue for peace in 1856. However, it Rhine, and Poland; was the Austrian diplomatic note to Russia in which • a perfect military machine to support any she threatened to break her neutrality if Russia did venture; not end fighting that finalized the conflict. The • an atomized great power structure unable Crimean War was a huge success for Napoleon III, to coalesce against any attempt to dominate who not only weakened Austria’s cooperation with Europe. Russia and isolated both of them, but also got the necessary British support in doing so. While it was The most promising strategy seemed to establish Britain who designed the new status quo of the satellite states in Italy and the Rhine at the expense East at the Congress of Paris convened to end the of Austria. Crimean War in 1856, it was France who benefited It was Piedmont’s request for military assistance the most from the war. against Austria that brought the idea of the The Treaty of Paris signed in March 1856 unification of Italy into Napoleon III’s political demilitarized the Black Sea and secured the agenda. Austria had been present in northern territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire, all Italy since 1815, a presence supported by the strategies put forward by Britain at the expense smaller Habsburg client monarchies of central of Russia. It was clear that the treaty effectively Italy. However, since 1848, the small kingdom subdued Russia’s position as a great power and of Piedmont (and Sardinia) employed an anti- diminished her role. Russia also felt betrayed by Austrian policy, even going to war in 1848, in Austria, who but a few years earlier had relied on which she was soundly beaten. Her deployment in Russian help putting down the Hungarian Revolt. the Crimean War as an ally of the Anglo-French It was evident that the cooperation between Austria coalition and her attendance in the Congress and Russia was over. of Paris enabled Piedmont to establish political contact with the great powers and further present On the other hand, France was the greater her plans to Napoleon III. In July 1858, Napoleon beneficiary of both the war and the peace. III and Piedmont’s chancellor, Count Cavour, Throughout the former, she found the chance to met in Plombières to make a secret pact for the demonstrate both her military and naval might. At succession of the unification of Italy (Rich, the end of the war, France appeared as the most 1992:130). Here they decided to lure Austria powerful state in Europe. Though playing on the into a war with Piedmont, after which France British desire to design the new status quo of would intervene on the side of Piedmont to expel Europe, Napoleon III also knew the concert was the Austrian influence in Italy once and for all. quickly disintegrating from the diffusion of great After extensive political maneuvers, the Franco- power cooperation (Rich, 1992:121-122). Piedmont pact was successful in pushing Austria into open hostilities in April 1859. Shortly after The Unification of Italy the Austrian ultimatum for the declaration of war, As for the European system, it was evident that the French military intervened. After successive from 1856 onwards maintaining the status quo battles at Solferino and Magenta, the Austrians became all the harder for even the great powers. were utterly defeated. However, it was at this point Indeed, any power who wished to do so could that Napoleon III realized his strategy was yielding attempt to change it. Among the great powers, contrary results to what he had planned. France was the most ambitious to alter the status The primary consequence of the French military quo. As Russian dominance over Europe was campaign was that Austria was so perfectly beaten checked by Britain at the end of the Paris Congress, that a power vacuum was generated in the Italian Napoleon III saw his chance to make a bid for peninsula. As Austria was expelled from Northern primacy in Europe. Italy, a wave of nationalist uprisings brought down Napoleon III was well aware that France needed to the smaller Hapsburg governments in central act according to three strategies: Italy. Unwittingly, Napoleon III had also revealed

42 History of International Relations

Austria’s military weakness and diplomatic isolation of Vienna. It was to be composed of 39 German to such an extent that Prussia was encouraged to states organized on the basis of a loose political make its bid for German unification. association and mutual defense pact. Though there Losing control over his Italian strategy was no strong central authority, the members were and realizing that his moves had triggered a to gather in a federal assembly to resolve any issues transformation in Europe he was unable to control, concerning all the members. Prussia’s ambitions Napoleon III offered peace to Austria with the hope to unify Germany, and Austria’s to prevent just of restoring its position and winning her support in that from happening, were well known. This is his future scenarios. Immediately after the Battles why the Congress of Vienna gave the presidency of Solferino and Magenta, the Peace of Villafranca of the federal assembly to Austria in 1815 in the (1859) was signed, which allowed the Austrians to hope that with the support of major Catholic states save some face after a succession of military defeats. like Bavaria, Baden, and Württemberg, Austria Though Napoleon III had found a compromise could exert pressure on any attempt at German with the Austrians, he had utterly failed to force unification. Piedmont to yield to his policy for Italy. As smaller The first call for a united Germany came from revolutionary governments chose to unite under a self-constituted committee of German liberals the Piedmont monarchy, all Napoleon could carve in 1848, who called for the convention of a out from the Italian campaigns was the annexation preliminary parliament in which all Germans would of the provinces of Nice and Caen—an outcome be represented, regardless of their government. that would antagonize France and Italy for decades. These liberals were calling for a new constitution that would hold elections in every German state The Unification of Germany and form a national parliament to serve as the basis of a united Germany. Once the elections Though the French Revolution had spread the were held, the parliament convened in Frankfurt idea of nationalism throughout Europe, these had (which had a free city status within the federation). comparatively less impact on the German masses, This parliament was not a strong political entity, many of who were still in the throes of feudalism. as it could not form a proper administrative body. Most German-speaking provinces were virtually Though started with patriotic initiative, the so- divided into two sections based on religion: a called Frankfurt Parliament was quickly divided smaller set of Protestant states dominated by by the interference of Austrian supporters. Before Prussia and a slightly larger one dominated by long, disillusioned nationalists felt the need of a Austria. As such, the struggle for German mastery leading state to back up the movement and offered between Prussia and Austria became known as the the crown of a united Germany to Frederick German Dualism. William IV, the King of Prussia. Though Frederick It was Napoleon I who sorted out an early kind William IV immediately rejected the offer, Austria of German integration when he dissolved the so- threatened Prussia not to involve itself any further. called Holy Roman Empire and established the Faced with threats of war, Prussia gave into Austria Confederation of the Rhine (Rheinbund) after his at Olmutz in November 1850, thus accepting victory over Austria at Austerlitz in 1805. Under Austria’s presidency of the German Confederacy. Napoleon’s aegis, 16 German states were organized It seemed that with the so-called “humiliation of into a confederation from which Austria and Olmutz,” all was lost for Prussia’s attempt to unify Prussia were omitted. Until its dissolution in 1813, Germany. the Rhinebund project proved that apart from the Yet all was not lost. On the contrary, after so-called German Dualism, France was the third Olmutz, Prussia became aware that in order to power that could generate a united German state unite Germany, a set of assets was needed and under her influence. a series of obstacles had to be overcome. First, As the monarchies of Europe were restored Prussia needed a much more efficient army to force after the fall of Napoleon, the German provinces her claims. Second, she needed a young generation were organized into a new political structure, of bureaucrats to implement new policies where the German Confederation, at the Congress the older ones had proved too weak. On the other

43 The International System During the Long 19th Century

hand, it was obvious that the main short-term In this sense, it was Napoleon III’s Italian obstacle to unification was Austria, and the main venture that initiated the right circumstances for long-term one, France. From a broader perspective, Prussia to go into action. By 1860, Austria was however, the consent of both Britain and Russia too weak to defend her position on the German would also be needed. Prussia was in a precarious question and had grown isolated after losing state in which she needed to develop the proper Russian support following the Crimean War. means and chose the best time to employ them to With such an advantage on the side of Prussia, achieve her goal. Bismarck cautiously developed a policy of winning From 1853 onwards, Prussia struggled with Russia over by reference to a common conservative domestic political crises, but from the beginning project that Russia was keen to hear. Britain also of the 1860s onward, she had developed both an favored Bismarck’s foreign policy, as there had efficient military organization and civil-military been a growing suspicion that Napoleon III was bureaucracy. Within the latter, two names stood consciously undermining the status quo. As such, out: Chancellor Otto von Bismarck and the Britain remained neutral in theory, but in reality Chief of the Staff of the Imperial Army, Helmuth gave tacit support to Bismarck’s efforts to become von Moltke. Fueled by their motivation to unite the new trendsetter of the status quo of Europe Germany, Bismarck took the responsibility to (Seaman, 1955: 96-119). organize both domestic and foreign policy, while In this context Bismarck waged three successive Moltke stood ready to employ the army as needed. wars. The first was with Denmark in 1864 in order to test the new Prussian military machine. The second was with Austria in 1866 and took Austria out of the German Confederation. The third, and perhaps most important, was with France in 1870. As a preemptive move against Napoleon III’s bid for mastery of Europe, especially in the wake of Austria’s demise, it also greatly boosted his position back home. Apart from formally ending the Franco- Prussian War, the Treaty of Frankfurt in May 1871 would also proclaim the unification of Germany.

3 Do some research on the life of Otto von Bismarck.

Figure 2.9 Otto von Bismarck, the founder and first Chancellor (1871-1890) of the . THE BISMARCK SYSTEM AND ITS DOWNFALL Though Austria’s bullying was a constant This section examines the emergence of the problem, Prussia had developed a sphere of its Bismarck system following the German unification influence within the Protestant states of the German and its downfall after Bismarck’s resignation in 1890. Confederation since 1831. Called Zollverein, they also established a customs union in 1834 under The Bismarck System: A Second Prussian leadership, and by late 1850s, almost every member of the Confederation had become a Concert of Europe? member, except Austria. In economic terms, then, While the unification of Germany was the final integration had already been achieved to some outcome of the dissolution of the concert system of degree. The struggle for unification would thus be 1815, it was also the beginning of a new European more of a political and military venture for Prussia. system. Contrary to Napoleon III’s ambitions,

44 History of International Relations

Bismarck was cautious in his approach to do so. enterprise when France and Germany fell into a With Germany now the most powerful state in border dispute in 1875; here Bismarck agonizingly Europe, Bismarck had to choose carefully between saw that neither Russia nor Austria-Hungary were a strategy of domination or reconciliation for this willing to support an aggressive Germany in their new European system. backyards (Taylor, 1953: 271). As Bismarck felt The conditions that Bismarck faced in 1871 can more strongly that he was losing the initiative in be summarized as: European diplomacy, he seized upon an eastern crisis to make his mark. • The distribution of power in Europe was equalized in a sense as France and Signed in March 1878 to finalize the Russo- Austria were subdued by Germany. And Turkish War of 1877-78, the Treaty of San though Russia and Britain stood keeping Stefano, which put much of the Balkans in the their distance, both supported Germany. Russian , was cause for concern The system, as such, was open for the among both Britain and Austria. When both construction of a new concert. called for the great powers to give their consent to the treaty, Russia found herself in an uncertain • The main problems that stood in the way position. As the crisis escalated, Bismarck seized the of Bismarck were the antagonism between opportunity to call for a congress in Berlin in which Germany and France, and Austria’s he would serve as a mediator. A strong success, he relatively weakening position and proximity achieved a measure of compromise in the Balkans to Germany. As a result, Bismarck thought that was to be sustained with the close cooperation he could best protect Germany’s position of both Russia and Austria-Hungary. With Britain by isolating France and closely monitoring appeased and France once again isolated, Bismarck Austria. was able to get Austria-Hungary and Russia to • To control both, Bismarck was aware that come to terms on their positions in the Balkans. Germany’s whole energy needed to be He also set about creating a framework in which oriented to Europe; he needed not only to Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Germany would direct German foreign policy, but European cooperate under the latter’s control. Bismarck felt politics as a whole. this was essential because Germany’s position did • All of the above necessitated that Bismarck not allow for neutrality in the case of a conflict should tailor the map of Europe in a way between her eastern neighbors over the Balkans. that each unit within the system should On account of his superior diplomatic skills, at the fulfill the role that Bismarck ascribed Congress of Berlin he persuaded the major powers to it. That being said, he envisioned his to accept a model of great power dualism between strategy as a reconciliatory rather than an Austria-Hungary and Russia in the Balkans. Yet expansionary mastery of Europe. This was he knew better than any that shows of good faith opposed to the foreign policy of someone were worth little without binding treaties (Gülboy, like Napoleon III, who if he managed to 2014: 7-36). restore France’s fortunes, they would likely It was evident that with the crisis of 1875, the come at Germany’s expense. Three Emperors’ League was over. Yet the Congress Bismarck’s first diplomatic attempt aimed once of Berlin paved way for the formation of a new again at the galvanization of the conservative bloc. conservative front in the east. Bismarck took the Hence he convened the first Three Emperors’ chance and guaranteed an alliance with Austria in League (Dreikaisrbund) in 1872 in which the 1879 in which both parties agreed to support each emperors of Germany, Russia, and Austria-Hungary other in case of a war against a third party. Though agreed to collaborate under nearly the same terms the was of a defensive nature, it as the Holy Alliance of 1815. The league was not gave a concrete guarantee to Austria-Hungary that an alliance, but enjoyed the enthusiastic consent Germany was willing to support her position in of both Russia and Austria-Hungary. As Bismarck’s the Balkans. To Bismarck, the alliance meant two primary aim was to isolate France, the league was things: forcing Austria-Hungary to bandwagon off to a good start. However, it proved to be a weak with Germany, and isolating France.

45 The International System During the Long 19th Century

After securing Austria-Hungary’s cooperation, The Downfall of the Bismarck System Bismarck moved to add Russia to the Austro- Perhaps the weakest side of Bismarck’s complex German cooperation. Though he failed to extract alliance system was Bismarck himself. He had a formal alliance (which also seemed unnatural), generated such a degree of control over both he succeeded in reforming a second Three German domestic and foreign policy that only Emperors’ League in 1881. This time, the accord he knew the ties that bound such an intricate and was strengthened by official guarantees and secret delicate structure. His absence, it should have been clauses in which both Austria-Hungary and Russia evident, would be problematic to put it lightly. agreed to cooperate on Balkan issues and accept Nevertheless, he was in perfect union with the Germany as the mediator in the case of conflict. emperor Wilhelm I and felt his position as German In 1882, Bismarck included Italy in the Dual Chancellor to be safe. While Wilhelm died in Alliance between Germany and Austria-Hungary, 1888, Bismarck readied himself to work with his thus transforming the accord into the Triple heir, Frederick III. Yet the latter succumbed to a Alliance. The inclusion of Italy gave a double mortal illness three months later. His son, 29 years advantage to Germany, as Italy’s antagonism with old, soon became Emperor Wilhelm II. Before France was skillfully transformed into an anti- long it was evident that Bismarck was too old and French bloc and further isolated France. By these the emperor too young to work together. After a means Bismarck also greatly reduced the chance series of misunderstandings, Bismarck resigned in of an Austro-Italian war, an event not unlikely 1890. given their multiple border disputes. Though it now seems a small achievement, these were huge steps in the right direction for Bismarck’s delicate transformation of the European concert. However, Bismarck’s worst fears materialized when a conflict between and broke out in 1885 that severely strained Austro- Hungarian and Russian cooperation. Moreover, it was then that Bismarck understood that German foreign policy had grown too beholden to Austria- Hungary. He therefore brokered the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia in 1887, in which both sides agreed to remain neutral if either should go to war with a third party. Notably, however, German aggression against France and Russian aggression against Austria-Hungary were both omitted from this treaty—and Bismarck made it known to Russia that Germany’s alliance with Austria-Hungary was strictly defensive. Whatever the case, the Figure 2.10 Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany. Reinsurance Treaty was to be renewed every three Source: commons.wikimedia.org years. With its signature, Bismarck had achieved what he most hoped for: a new concert of Europe in which Germany, and above all, Bismarck, was in the driver’s seat.

46 History of International Relations

The first crack appeared in Bismarck’s system in In the case of Russia, Britain followed another 1890, immediately after his resignation, when the path that eventually succeeded in neutralizing it. Reassurance Treaty was not renewed by Germany. To counter Russian activity in Asia where British This action was detrimental to the fundamentals interests were exposed, Britain allied with Japan in of Bismarck’s strategy: the isolation of France, as 1902. With the British diplomatic back up, Japan without the treaty, Russia would likely seek new forced Russia out of China and Manchuria in the assurances elsewhere. Which is precisely what Russo-Japanese War of 1905. As had previously happened in 1894, when Russia and France formed happened, Britain chose the way of reconciliation an alliance; much of Bismarck’s life work had been with another treaty in 1907 in which Britain and lain to waste. Russia came to agreements over various colonial That being said, the Franco-Russian Alliance disputes in Iran, India, and the Far East. did not overly alarm Germany, as she still felt secure Just as Britain seemed to benefit from the downfall in the Triple Alliance and her cooperation with of Bismarck’s European system, Germany began to Britain. It was evident, however, that Germany’s feel it had come at her expense. As such, German control over the European system was on the foreign policy became more aggressive against Britain decline. Still, it was Britain that was feeling the and her entente partners, France and Russia. pressure of the Franco-Russian Alliance, as both Fueled by the naval arms race, which has also France and Russia were busy at work expanding been labeled the Dreadnought Race, the antagonism their empires in places that often ran up against the between Germany and Britain became the major British Empire. By 1895, Britain was the only state obstacle to European cooperation. From 1905 isolated within the European system. In this sense, onward, Europe was polarized between the Triple British foreign policy became more aggressive, as Entente –Britain, France, and Russia- and Triple it sought confrontations with rivals to reinforce its Alliance – Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Italy-, position within Europe (Taylor, 1953: 335-336). each of which confronted each other diplomatically For example, in 1898 Britain forced France to or with the threat of war. These mutually aggressive yield to diplomatic pressure by threatening war in policies did much to destroy the common values the Fashoda Crisis. Though a problem stemming of European diplomacy that had generated such from a small village in Sudan, Britain proved she effective understanding and compromise since would not be pacified by the Franco-Russian 1815. As the long 19th century came to a close, Alliance. And she was right: Russian inactivity Europe was drifting toward war. during the crisis showed that the alliance between France and Russia was weaker than it seemed. As Britain got the upper hand over France, a compromise became possible. In 1904, the so-called 4 Entente Cordiale was signed between Britain and What was Bismarck’s intention in building a set of France to preclude any colonial disputes in Africa. alliances during the 1880s?

47 The International System During the Long 19th Century

Assess the impact of the Industrial, American, and French Revolutions LO 1 upon the international system.

It can be argued that by introducing advanced economic dynamics into rural economies and societies, the Industrial Revolution profoundly transformed traditional societies and began the long slow emergence of the nation-state. On the other hand, the American and French revolutions showed that the emerging- nation state could not be organized along older models of governance. All three paved the way for the domestic and international politics that would do so much to modernize societies and their governing regimes in the 19th century and beyond.

Analyze the dynamics of European diplomacy after the Congress of Vienna and characterize LO 2 the main features of the Concert of Europe. Summary The dynamics of the European diplomacy after 1815 rested on the experiences of the pre-Napoleonic era. That being said, the outcome of the Napoleonic wars still dictated the peace wrought by the European monarchies, which was fragile and rested on voluntary cooperation between participating states. As Napoleon introduced liberalism and constitutionalism into continental Europe, the older major monarchies of Europe faced an existential threat, with war and revolution ever present at their door, even after 1815. As such, the major European states formed a strict hierarchical structure during their negotiations between 1815 and 1818, in which five European states took the lead. This Concert embodied the motives and efforts of all five to prevent another major European war and cooperate closely to stave off the threat of revolution on the continent.

Identify the main challenges to the Concert System, such as the revolutions of LO 3 1830 and 1848 and the rise of Napoleon III.

For a system founded upon the restitution and protection of monarchy, the major powers of Europe were successfully in intervening to put down liberal revolts through 1822. The revolutions of 1830 and 1848, however, stretched the Concert to breaking point. It could be said that the liberation of Belgium in 1830 and Hungarian Revolution of 1848-1849 divided the concert into two camps, namely liberal and conservative. As the concert weakened, France also renewed its hegemonic ambitions with the ascent of Napoleon III. By this point, the Concert System rested on an aging structure of governance, and it was becoming clear that if governments failed to introduce reforms, revolution would be nigh. That said, by 1850, such pressures had replaced absolute monarchies with constitutional regimes in practically every state. To find a balance in this new mold, many have argued that war was only natural: hence the series of conflicts that broke out between 1854 and 1871.

Recognize the main aspects of the Bismarck system and discuss its LO 4 downfall.

The unification of Germany was a consequence of the deterioration of the Concert System. That being said, German Chancellor Bismarck took the opportunity to restore the concert with a new sense of cooperation. Forging a series of pacts and alliances, he transformed the older loose coalitions between the major states into bonded ties. Bismarck aimed at forging a European security system in which Germany was arbiter of each of her neighbor’s external relations. However, the system had a fatal flaw: only Bismarck could manage it. In his absence, it would collapse. In that sense, the coronation of the young Emperor Wilhelm II was quickly followed by the breakdown of Bismarck’s intricate alliance system. It is widely argued that this failure was a major cause of the First World War.

48 History of International Relations

1 I. Technological advances 5 Which of the following cannot be considered II. Improved production as a consequence of Napoleon III’s foreign policy? Test Yourself III. Redistribution of labor a. The ndependenceI of Belgium in 1832 b. The nificationU of Italy in 1859 IV. Discovery of gunpowder c. The rimeanC War in 1856 Which of the above developments can be d. The nificationU of Germany considered among the cornerstones of Industrial e. The ranco-PrussianF War in 1870 Revolution? a. Only I 6 Which of the following was the strategy b. I and II of Napoleon that prohibited neutral states and c. II and III French allies from trading with Britain in order to d. I, II and III weaken the British economy? e. I, II, III and IV a. Balance of power b. Concert of Europe 2 Which one of the following states is not a c. Alliance System member of the Concert of Europe? d. Continental System a. Russia e. Triple Entente b. Prussia c. Austria 7 Which of the following statements about d. Britain Bismarck’s alliance system is not correct? e. Japan a. It was based on diplomatically isolating France. b. Bismarck aimed at making alliances which he 3 Which three states created the First Three could control. Emperors’ League in 1872? c. Bismarck sought a strict policy of isolating a. Britain, France, and Russia Britain. b. Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary d. The alliance system was essentially defensive. c. Germany, Austria-Hungary, and France e. Bismarck prioritized cooperation with Austria- Hungary and Russia. d. Britain, Germany, and France e. Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia 8 Which of the following states assumed the role of the organizer and balancer of the Concert 4 Klemens von Metternich was the chancellor of. of Europe? Which of the following options correctly completes a. France the sentence above? b. Austria a. Austria c. Prussia b. Prussia d. Russia c. Russia e. Ottoman Empire d. Britain e. France

49 The International System During the Long 19th Century

9 Which of the following is not a consequence 10 Which of the following cannot be considered of the 1848 revolutions in Europe? as an achievement of Bismarck? a. Metternich was taken out of the office. a. The Three Emperors’ League of 1872 b. The olyH Alliance was destroyed. b. The ualD Alliance of 1879 c. Liberalism and nationalism triumphed over c. The ranco-RussianF Alliance of 1894 absolutism. d. The eassuranceR Treaty of 1887 d. Austria became the strongest state in Europe. e. TheTriple Alliance of 1882 e. The major powers found themselves in an atomized state. Test Yourself Test

50 History of International Relations

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review the 1. d 6. d “Revolutions and the International System” “Revolutions and the International System”

section. section. Answer Key for “Test Yourself”

2. e If your answer is wrong, please review the 7. c If your answer is wrong, please review the “The Metternich System and the Concert of “The Bismarck System and Its Downfall” Europe” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review the 3. e 8. b “The Bismarck System and Its Downfall” “The Metternich System and the Concert of section. Europe” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the a d If your answer is wrong, please review the 4. “The Metternich System and the Concert of 9. “Challenges to the Concert System” section. Europe” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the 5. a If your answer is wrong, please review the 10. c “The Bismarck System and Its Downfall” “Challenges to the Concert System” section. section. Suggested answers for “Your Turn” What did the term “restoration” represent in the post-Napoleonic period?

“Restoration” refers to the Congress of Vienna and the restoration of the French monarchy (on two occasions) after the abdication of Napoleon. In fact, apart from France, many other monarchies brought down by Napoleon were also restored. It should be noted that though Napoleon was an important anti-hero for European monarchists and monarchies, his title as your turn 1 well as himself were the primary threats to the system. As “Emperor” of the “people”—rather than a king of subjects—he led a crusade against the ‘holy’ monarchies and transformed two-thirds of Europe in the process. In the same sense, the European monarchies fought back against what was clearly a man of the Revolution against the ancien régime (old regime), rather than against a revolutionary state.

51 The International System During the Long 19th Century

What did “the Concert of Europe” mean?

The Concert of Europe represents an era of the 19th century in which major European states cooperated to resolve their conflicts through negotiation rather than arms. IR theories usually consider this era as the triumph of diplomacy over war and give special interest to the interaction of major powers in organizing meetings to solve problems between them. The Concert was basically a hierarchy your turn 2 in which five major powers form the core of the European political system; the other European states were of secondary importance. The realist school in particular is keen to find models of conflict prevention through the balance of power. Indeed, the Concert rested on delicate checks and balances of interests between the great powers of post-Napoleonic Europe. Although subject to academic debate, the Holy and Quadruple Alliance (which became the Quintet in 1818) were the basis of this system.

Do some research on the life of Otto von Bismarck. Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your “Otto Eduard Leopold von Bismarck was born into an aristocratic family at Schönhausen, northwest of Berlin, on 1 April 1815. He attended a prestigious school in Berlin followed by the University of Göttingen. He then entered the Prussian civil service but was bored by his job and in 1838 resigned. For nearly a decade, he helped his father manage the family estates. In 1847, Bismarck married Johanna von Puttkamer, who provided him with stability. It was a year of significant change in his life, when he also embraced the Christian tradition of Lutheranism, and began his political career in the Prussian legislature, where he gained a reputation as an ultra-conservative royalist. In 1851, King Frederick Wilhelm IV appointed Bismarck as Prussian representative to the German Confederation. He then served as ambassador to Russia and France. In 1862, he returned to Prussia and was appointed as the prime minister by the new king, Wilhelm I. Bismarck was now determined to unite the German states into a single empire, with Prussia at its your turn 3 core. With Austrian support, he used the expanded Prussian army to capture the provinces of Schleswig and Holstein from Denmark. He then escalated a quarrel with Austria and its German allies over the administration of these provinces into a war, in which Prussia was the victor. Prussia then annexed further territory in Germany. Unable to persuade the southern German states to join with his North German Confederation, he provoked hostilities with France as a way of uniting the German states together. The German victory in the Franco-Prussian War won over the southern German states, and in 1871 they agreed to join a German empire. Wilhelm I of Prussia became emperor. As ‘chancellor’ of the new Germany, Bismarck concentrated on building a powerful state with a unified national identity... Abroad, Bismarck aimed to make the German empire the most powerful in Europe.... In 1890, Bismarck resigned after disagreeing with the new emperor, Wilhelm II. He retired to his estate near Hamburg and died there on 30 July 1898,” (www.bbc.co.uk/ history/historic_figures/bismarck_otto_von.shtml).

52 History of International Relations

What was Bismarck’s intention in building a set of alliances in the 1880’s? Suggested answers for “Your Turn”

Bismarck knew too well that Germany’s unification was achieved with several costs. Firstly, the defeat France suffered and the loss of Alsace-Lorraine would generate the danger of French revenge. Secondly, Bismarck was also aware that political unification had hardly created a closely-knit pan-German state; it was still derivative of the German Confederation under Prussian administration. your turn 4 As such, he thought the new Germany needed time to strengthen itself. In this sense, Bismarck knew Germany’s uneasy eastern neighbors (Austria-Hungary and Russia) were restless and, in the case of sudden conflict, could squeeze Germany to take sides. To stay out of such entanglements, Bismarck did his best to establish a network of alliances to both isolate France and generate a measure of control over his neighbors to buy time to strengthen the newly united Germany.

References

Bridge, F.R. and Bullen, R. (1980). The Great Powers Rich, N. (1992). Great Power Diplomacy, New York, and the European System, London, Longman. McGraw-Hill. Dwyer, P. (2008). “Self Interest versus Common Schneid, Friedrich C. (2008). “Kings Clients and Cause: Austria, Prussia and Russia against the Satellites in the Napoleonic Imperium”, The Napoleon”, The Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol 31, Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol 31, No. 4, pp 571- No. 4, pp 571- 604. 604. Hobsbawm, E. (1962). The , New Schroeder, Paul W. (1989). “The Nineteenth York, Abacus. Century System: Balance of Power or Political Equilibrium?, Review of International Studies, Vol. Gülboy, Burak S. (2014). “Bandwagoning vs Chain 15, No. 2, Special Issue on Balance of Power, pp Ganging: the Failure of Great Power Diplomacy 135-153. in the Balkans before the First World War”, International Journal of Turchologia, Vol 9, No:17, Schroeder, Paul W. (1994). The Transformation of pp. 7-36. European Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Kissinger, H. (1957). A World Restored Restored, London, Phoenix Press. Seaman, L.C.B. (1955). From Vienna to Versailles, London, Methuen and Co. Ltd. Lee, Stephen J. (1982). Aspects of European History, London, Routledge. Taylor, A.J.P. (1953). The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848-1918, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Mowatt, Robert B. (1922). A History of European Diplomacy 1815-1914, London, Edward Arnold & Co. Ohlmeyer, Jane H. “English Civil War”, https:// www.britannica.com/event/English-Civil-Wars, accessed on August 6, 2019.

53 The First World War Chapter 3 1914-1918 After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Recount the origins and causes of the First Recognize the main debates and perspectives 1 World War. 2 on the outbreak of the First World War. Discuss the end of the First World War and the Assess the importance of the First World War impact of peace treaties on the evolution of the 3 to the development of the international system. 4 international system.

Chapter Outline Key Terms

Learning Outcomes Introduction The Great War The Causes and Origins of the First World War Militarism Armaments The Outbreak of the First World War and its Nationalism Development Imperialism The Impact of the First World War upon the Colonialism Social Darwinism International System The Question of War Guilt The End of the First World War and Peace Treaty of Versailles Treaties Naval Rivalry Self-Determination Bolshevik Revolution Entente Powers Central Powers Wilson’s Fourteen Points

54 History of International Relations 3 INTRODUCTION As a great tragedy in which millions lost their lives, the First World War, then known as internet the “Great War,” was the historical intersection For further information on the First World between modernity and a much more traditional War, please visit the British Library’s website: Europe that witnessed the complete breakdown www.bl.uk/world-war-one of the continent’s centuries-long accumulated system of values in a mere four years. States across Europe entered the First World War under a complex structure where the values and rituals of THE CAUSES AND ORIGINS OF much older regimes and times coexisted alongside THE FIRST WORLD WAR rapid social, political, and economic dynamics of This section discusses the main origins and modernization (Gülboy, 2017:15). When the war causes of the First World War. It provides an finally ended in 1918, an entire world had been outline of the main debates regarding what factors destroyed and shifted towards a new order (Lebow, caused the outbreak of the war in 1914. 2014:387). The destruction of the war and burden of tragedy were so heavy that neither side would The First World War as a Failure of take responsibility. This question of responsibility that began as early as summer 1914 lives on as the the European States System “Historian’s War” to this very day. However, due Debates about the outbreak of the First World to the defeat of Germany, this question quickly War have continued intensely since the end of the became the Question of German War Guilt as seen war. In today’s literature, a general distinction is in Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles. made between the causes of the war and the origins From the very onset, the First World War have of the war. Studies on its underlying causes have been the subject of academic inquiry. As a result, focused mostly on the relations between the great studies on the origins and causes of the First powers of Europe and their struggle for superiority World War differ wildly (Lieber, 2007: 156-157). with each other. In this context, these studies have The war was also influential in the foundation highlighted the failure of the system of states in of International Relations as a formal academic Europe established at the Congress of Vienna discipline, which first emerged in the form of peace in 1815 and which lasted nearly a century. To studies just after the end of the war, and focused pinpoint the breakdown of the European system much of its energy on the outbreak of the war in between 1904 and 1914, many look to the 1878 Europe. Especially in the wake of the Second World Berlin Congress, Bismarck’s machinations for the War, the emergence of war in 1914 became a focal continent, and the systemic tensions arising from point for international relations scholars. As one of the emergence of a united Germany. According to the milestones shaping the modern international Sydney Fay, a leading researcher on the European th system, debates over the causes and outcomes of states system of the 19 century, secret diplomacy, the First World War still rage today. various armaments races, and deeply entrenched alliances had created an anarchic environment Against this background, four sections frame since the introduction of the Bismarck System that this chapter. The first gives an overview of the eventually led to war (Fay, 1930: 2). debates about the origins and causes of the war in the literature. The second examines the outbreak According to Fay, due to the French and th and development of the war. The third discusses Industrial Revolutions at the end of the 18 the impact of the First World War on the evolution century, the social and behavioral structure of of the international system. The fourth and final Europe greatly changed throughout the 19th section focuses on the end of the war and post-war century. While nationalism, which emerged with peace settlements. the French Revolution, undermined traditional state apparatuses, the Industrial Revolution also

55 The First World War 1914-1918 3 contributed to the creation of a new form of and witnessed an almost natural balance of power. foreign policy and a political economic system that Influenced by the realist school of theory, the forced countries to seek foreign markets and raw balance of power existed in some way or form materials. While a dynamic social and economic since 1648 and formed the basis of the European order progressively led to the development of states system. This system continued within the a strong written press, newspapers and other framework of the 1815 Vienna Congress up until media outlets using ‘chauvinistic’ rhetoric also 1914 (Taylor, 1954:XXII). exacerbated the pursuit of aggressive foreign Given that the real actor of the realist theory policies (Fay, 1930: 32-33). is the state, several actors from 1648 onwards have Although Fay did not deny the importance of tried to achieve mastery in Europe against the nationalism, a provocative press, or arguments about interest of others. In his model, Taylor argued that imperialism that made European states adopt more the reason for the outbreak of war in 1914 was confrontational policies, another significant cause of similar to previous major wars in which various the First World War for him was the outbreak of new powerful actors emerge and disrupt the diplomatic crises originating from Europe’s broader balance of power. For Taylor, this was none other international system. Thesecret treaties and alliances than Germany (Taylor, 1954:XX). of the European great powers since the Franco- In this context, the First World War was a Prussian War of 1870-1871 put not merely only struggle to maintain the balance of power against a two states, but all of Europe into a fragile security Germany attempting to disrupt the existing order. dilemma. The fact that diplomatic initiatives What makes the First World War special, however, were limited due to the vagueness of the system was that in spite of Germany’s defeat, the traditional was another underlying cause of the war. Secret European balance of power could not be restored, alliances upset a fragile balance and helped erode and the transition to a new international system the localization of wars, a common practice since began. By 1918, Europe was in turmoil, and the the Congress of Vienna. With the Franco-Russian old players began to lose their hegemony over the Alliance of 1894 (whose secretive nature upset both rest of the world. Ironically, the new visions and Germany and Britain), Europe had de facto divided systems proposed for a new world order came from itself into two camps (Fay, 1930:34-35). outside of Europe. While Woodrow Wilson, the While secret alliances restricted European states’ President of the United States (US), declared his foreign policies, alliance forging could also be strictly Fourteen Points for a new world order in 1918, defensive. According to Fay, this held especially Vladimir Lenin’s socialist world vision emerged with true for Bismarck’s alliances, named after German the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917. Both Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. Nonetheless, the alternatives greatly challenged the old Eurocentric gradual consolidation of these alliances eventually balance of (Taylor, 1954: XIX-XXI). turned naturally competitive relationships into Similar to Taylor, Ruth Henig has argued hostile ones. In the process, a zero-sum understanding that the balance between great powers in Europe of politics took center stage. To back down from a deteriorated with the chain of events that began disagreement came to signal one party’s defeat, and with the Franco-Prussian War and the unification another’s victory (Fay, 1930:34-42). of Germany in 1870-1871. However, her analysis On the other hand, Taylor saw the First World differs from Taylor’s. Though Germany’s emergence War as a result of the ongoing struggle between as a rising power in the heart of Europe certainly great powers on a systemic level. From the Peace influenced the European system, she stresses of Westphalia in 1648, European states had been the decisions and policies of other states, not to acknowledged as sovereign units, despite power mention the vast social changes that occurred disparities. They were actors in a Hobbesian world in Europe throughout the 19th century, such as where the anarchic nature of the European system nationalism. With the emergence of nationalism allowed each unit to move without constraint or in multi-ethnic realms such as the Ottoman domination of one another. Yet it was hardly a Empire, new ideas affected not just the Balkans or “war of all against all;” the system regulated itself Near East, but the entire European states system.

56 History of International Relations 3 Russian expansionism and Pan-Slavism also had negative impacts on the Balkans, encouraging small nations to revolt and the already crumbling Austria-Hungarian Empire to perceive a great threat to its continued existence. After the events of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878, the dangerous situation in the Balkans had the potential to draw more than these two great empires into war, as German Chancellor Bismarck and British Prime Minister William E. Gladstone especially foretold (Henig, 2002:1-2).

Figure 3.1 The Congress of Berlin, a painting by Anton von Werner. Source: en.wikipedia.org

In order to prevent an unstable situation created by Russia after the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878 from exploding, Bismarck convened the Congress of Berlin in 1878 as a check and balance for the region. Berlin divided the region into two spheres of influence, with Russia to the East and Austria-Hungary to the West. The presence of the Ottoman Empire was reintroduced to Macedonia. Though it would not last forever, Bismarck’s system helped establish a temporary safety valve to prevent the Balkans from dragging the rest of Europe into war in the 19th century (Gülboy, 2014:7-37). The 1878 Congress of Berlin was thus one of the milestones of the pre-1914 system. The 1815 Concert of Europe, on the brink of collapse since the Crimean War, with Bismarck’s intervention lasted until 1904. While Germany’s mediator role as an “honest broker” balanced the turbulent great powers of Europe (and was recognized by Britain), its checks and balances system managed to keep order in the Balkans. The Austro- Russian agreement of 1897 to respect each other’s interests in the region and act jointly concerning fait accompli is one such example, coming as it did even after Bismarck’s departure as chancellor (Rich: 1992:335). Outside of the Balkans, Bismarck also formed a system of alliances across Europe to support his complicated diplomatic system. In 1879, a defensive alliance was formed between Germany and Austria- Hungary in order to decrease the latter’s perception of threat from Russia. The Dual Alliance ensured the German commitment to Austria-Hungary in case of a Russian aggression while aiming to discourage any Austria-Hungarian attack on Russia. In 1881, Bismarck established the second Three Emperors’ League between Austria-Hungary, Germany and Russia. The final part of this complicated diplomatic mechanism was the signature of the Reinsurance Treaty of 1887 between Germany and Russia, without the knowledge of Austria-Hungary, in which both parties agreed to remain neutral in case of a third party aggression. Thus, Bismarck sought to balance Russia and Austria-Hungary by attaching both countries to Germany in this process (Williamson, 2016:150-155). The system established by Bismarck, which enjoyed the approval of Britain and Russia, filled the power gap at the center of Europe after Austria-Hungary’s long demise. But this kind of diplomacy was also global.

57 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Germany helped preserve Russian interests in the many ships as the world’s next two largest navies Far East at least in part to keep the peace in the combined (Gülboy, 2014:25-30). Balkans. Supporting Russia in 1895 against Japan in The first of the diplomatic crises was the the Dreibund or Triple Intervention illustrates this Fashoda Crisis of 1898 between France and point (Nish, 2014:41). Bismarck also supported Britain. Though the French had pulled back in French colonial ambitions as a means of limiting the face of a British demonstration of power, crises the latter’s designs on Alsace-Lorraine. Knowing the such as this in a remote African region showed how importance of restraining Austria-Hungary in the quickly armed conflict between great European Balkans, Bismarck also approved of ascribing her de powers might erupt, even from a distant colonial facto rule over Bosnia and Herzegovina. backwater. As Modelski and Organski have argued, However, the diplomatic crises pinpointed Britain’s declining hegemonic status at the end of the as the main reasons for the breakout of war in 19th century made it more sensitive to external 1914 continued to erode the system. Bismarck’s challenges and caused it to follow a more aggressive resignation as chancellor in 1890 paved the way foreign policy. This sensitivity eventually forced for ‘Weltpolitik’ (A world politics), the shift in British decision makers to abandon their much- Germany’s Europe-centered foreign policy to cherished “splendid isolation” and adopted a policy one that looked overseas, where it soon started that resulted in the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in clashing with Britain’s . For 1902 (Modelski, 1978:214-235). domestic political reasons, the new administration While the Anglo-Japanese Alliance provided the in Germany did not renew the Reinsurance Treaty Japanese much needed diplomatic and financial with Russia in 1890, thus accelerating Franco- support in a possible war against Russia, it also Russian rapprochement. The initial result of this enabled Britain to sustain the status quo in China was the 1894 Franco-Russian Alliance. without directly challenging Russia. Moreover, the According to George F. Kennan, Germany’s Russians’ heavy defeat in the Russo-Japanese War abandonment of traditional Bismarckian of 1904-1905 helped Britain halt the growing continental policies for an expansionist colonial Russian influence in China, and removed the policy had three consequences. First, Germany imminent Russian threat to Pax Britannica in the failed to fulfill Russia’s security concerns and Far East (Taylor, 1954:380-382). indirectly encouraged Austria-Hungary in her Despite successful British diplomatic maneuvers relations with the latter. Second, she triggered a to deal with challenges to its naval superiority and potential clash with Britain, given Germany’s colonial interests, the relative decline in British substantial naval buildup. Third, the absence of power was still growing apparent. That being said, Bismarck and the Franco-Russian alliance divided while the decision to abandon its splendid isolation Europe into two rival camps. The consolidation led to bilateral talks with Germany between 1898 of alliances, especially the Franco-Russian, caused and 1902, these failed since neither party wanted allied states to depend more on each other and to enter a binding alliance (MacMillan, 2014:117). hindered their diplomatic efforts. For Kennan, this Britain’s relations with Germany further became the sole cause of the outbreak of the war in deteriorated when the German Navy began 1914 (Kennan, 1984: XII-XX). developing dreadnoughts, a race that many scholars Germany’s quest for empire outside the and historians consider one of the main causes of European continent and desire to develop a the war. Furthermore, the resolution of colonial strong navy greatly troubled Britain. Nonetheless, disputes between Britain, France, and Russia in through the 1890’s, the Franco-Russian alliance did 1904 and 1907 left Germany as the chief challenger to British hegemony. With mounting tensions from more to frighten London. The French ‘Jeune École’ the dreadnought race already in the background, naval program, a strategy aimed to strike at British things were only exacerbated when Britain gave trade routes and ports with rapid, smaller naval France a ‘blank check’ to act against Germany in ships, particularly worried her. To see off any such the First Crisis of 1905. Once again, it threat, Britain adopted the “two-power standard,” seemed a European war might spring from the most whereby the Royal Navy would maintain twice as trivial of colonial causes (Schroeder, 1972:320-325).

58 History of International Relations 3

Figure 3.2 HMS Dreadnought, a British battleship launched at Portsmouth in 1906. Source: www.britannica.com In this context, the failure of the Anglo- Entente, which caused a great fear of encirclement German alliance, rising German power, and the among German decision-makers. When Germany impact of the Franco-Russian Alliance all caused failed to receive support from anyone but Austria- great stress to the European states system. While Hungary during the First Morocco Crisis, their some historians attribute great importance to the dependence on the latter increased, especially in failed alliance talks between Germany and Britain, the Balkans, where German influence played a others see them as but a minor detail compared to critical role in restraining Vienna. the Moroccan or Bosnian crises, which many see as the main reason for war (Koch, 1969:378-392). Yet the underlying causes for war differ from TheTriple Entente was an “association one to another. For scholars such as Schroeder, a between Great Britain, France, and Russia, supporter of the systemic approach, the German- the nucleus of the Allied Powers in World British alliance was never meant to happen because War I. It developed from the Franco- neither side favored a binding alliance. As such, he Russian alliance that gradually developed argues that the unsuccessful alliance talks alienated and was formalized in 1894, the Anglo- both sides and contributed in a negative way to an French Entente Cordiale of 1904, and an already crumbling system. In fact, Britain came into Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907, which terms with France in 1904 and with Russia in 1907 brought the Triple Entente into existence,” in regards to colonial affairs, rapprochements that (www.britannica.com/topic/Triple-Entente). led to a more lasting alliance. After the Anglo-French and Anglo-Russian settlements, British decision makers only concerned about the preservation of As feared, the unbalanced situation that arose their empire which indirectly encouraged Franco- from the First Moroccan Crisis deepened with the Russian pressure on Germany, thus exacerbating 1908 Bosnian crisis. After the 1908 Young Turk German fears of encirclement and laying the Revolution, the situation in the Balkans became foundation for the German justification of war as more ambiguous, as the Young Turk a defensive one for survival (Schroeder, 1972:326). reinstated the 1876 Constitution and summoned After the First Morocco Crisis in 1905, the delegates from every part of the empire, including division in Europe became apparent, and alliance Austrian-occupied Bosnia (which, legally, was still politics took precedence over the traditional part of the empire according to the Berlin Treaty congress system. This was made particularly clear of 1878, despite the fact that Austria-Hungary had with British fears of its own decline and the rise been given administrative rights over it). Shaken of Germany, particularly regarding the naval race. by these developments, Austrian officials rushed to This opened the way for binding alliances both annex the region to the Habsburg Empire (Bridge in Europe and abroad, starting with the Triple and Bullen, 1980:160-163).

59 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Despite the secret and fateful talks between Balkans from 1908 onward. The real causa causans Austrian Foreign Minister Count Aehrenthal and (the immediate cause) for war, he argued, was the Russian Foreign Minister Alexander Izvolsky— demise of Austria-Hungary’s role at the center. which amounted to Russian recognition of the (Schroeder, 1972:323) annexation in return for Austrian approval of The Bosnia Crisis showed how the European Russian demands on the Turkish Straits—, the states system could be drawn into a much larger war unilateral decision to annex Bosnia led for a new through a Balkan spark. Though things cooled in diplomatic crisis in Europe. After the failed talks, the Balkans in the immediate years after 1908, yet the Russians decided to oppose Austria’s unilateral another crisis in Morocco brought the great powers decision and called for an international conference of Europe close to war. The Second Morocco on behalf of Serbia, which also had claims on Crisis, also known as , was another Bosnia. When Austria refused, Germany supported milestone on the road to the First World War. Austria, forcing Russia and Serbia to step back in When the French moved a large column of soldiers the face of a joint German-Austrian ultimatum further into the interior of Morocco, Germany (Seaman, 1955:157-165). demanded territorial compensation. Threatening Even though the situation seemed resolved warfare if they did not get it, Berlin sent a gunboat after Russia backed down, the Bosnian Crisis of to Agadir. Though the French backed down and 1908 brought Europe one step closer to war. In gave Germany a slice of the , which many ways, it resembled the July Crisis of 1914: became part of Germany’s colony of Austria-Hungary’s unilateral decisions, Germany’s (Neukamerun), Germany’s perceived bullying “Blank Check” to Austria, and the mobilization left a bitter taste in the mouths of the British. of troops by each actor involved. That said, 1908 Fearing Berlin would also build a naval base on the differed from 1914 in a fundamental way because Moroccan Atlantic, Lloyd George gave his famous of the humiliation that Russia faced; and following Mansion House Speech in which he dangled the the Balkan Wars, there was far less question of possibility of war (Gülboy, 2004:63-67). the Russians backing down (Rich, 1992:412-415). What had also become clear was that Austria- Hungary had become the weakest link in the European system, a spark that would trigger a chain reaction according to many international relations theorists (Christensen and Snyder, 1990:137-168). According to Schroeder, the fact that Britain and Russia overlooked how much Austria-Hungary’s sense of survival was tied up with the critical role it had played since the 1815 Congress of Vienna led the latter to demonstrate its power. Prior to 1914, he wrote, European stability was forged by Vienna, with Britain and Russia as guarantors. After the Crimean War, however, a destabilizing power vacuum had accrued in Central Europe, hence the creation of the Bismarckian system, which also gave prime of place to Austria-Hungary, with German controls. For Schroeder, the irresponsibility of the great powers was leading to systemic breakdown— whether by Britain’s negation of the role of Austria- Hungary as the balancer in the European states system; the destabilization of German foreign policy by the naval race with Britain; the formation Figure 3.3 Front-page of the French newspaper, Le Petit of the Triple Entente that deepened Germany’s Journal, showing the partition of Bosnia, 18 October 1908. feeling of encirclement; Germany’s quest for power; Source: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Le_Petit_ or Russia’s inability to fill the power vacuum in the Journal_Balkan_Crisis_(1908).jpg

60 History of International Relations 3 Before the July Crisis of 1914, the First and Second Though the assassination of the Archduke Franz Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 once again revealed Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary on June 28, 1914 that region’s potential to drag the great powers into by Serbian nationalist-anarchist Gavrilo Princip was a broader confrontation. It was the final withdrawal a sui generis incident, the erosion of the European of the Ottoman Empire from the Balkans, which system since 1904 had removed too many barriers seemed to encourage more Russian intervention, that to potential armed conflict (MacMillan, 2014:27- dismembered the last remnants of Bismarck’s system 26). Unlike like the other two crises, developments of checks and balances. With this gone, the European generated in the Balkans caused a chain reaction Concert had no safety mechanism on which to rely. this time. As Joachim Remak argued, the outbreak Despite Russia’s inability to support Serbia during of the First World War was the continuation of the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913, she could not back the Balkan Wars; he even described it as the ‘Third down in 1914 either. Meanwhile, however, Austria- Balkan War’ (Remak, 1971:358-366). It was Hungary’s decline led her to pursue an aggressive the irredentist policies of the small Balkan states policy, while Germany feared that further Austrian without an Ottoman “safety valve” that dragged a decline would leave Berlin more isolated than ever declining Austria-Hungary and destabilized Russia (Rich, 1992:425-435). into conflict, pulling Germany and Britain into the morass with them. Given Germany’s Weltpolitik, along with its naval buildup and the British policy TheBalkan Wars (1912-1913) were of preventing the emergence of hegemonic states, “two successive military conflicts... The made it impossible to avert or localize the war this First Balkan War was fought between the time. Collapsing on all sides, the irresponsibility members of the Balkan League—Serbia, of the European great powers and the removal of Bulgaria, Greece, and Montenegro—and the any safety mechanisms paved the way for the Great Ottoman Empire... The Second Balkan War War (Schroeder, 1972:338-345). began when Serbia, Greece, and Romania quarreled with Bulgaria over the division of their joint conquests in Macedonia,” (www. britannica.com/topic/Balkan-Wars)

Figure 3.4 Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie in an open carriage before their assassination at Sarajevo, June 28, 1914. Source: www.britannica.com

61 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Other Main Causes of the First such as the hugely unexpected Japanese victory World War over Russia, caused other states to pursue aggressive diplomacy and brinksmanship (Joll and Martel, There were also other main causes that led to the 2016:103-104). outbreak of the war in 1914. These were militarism and armaments, nationalism, and imperialism. Ideologically, Alfred Thayer Mahan’s theories of naval supremacy also had a huge impact on the minds of both civilians and military officers Militarism and Armaments around the world, especially the German high The outbreak of the First World War has attracted command. Kaiser Wilhelm himself was deeply many scholars and researchers since 1914. Although influenced by Mahan’s thesis, and considered a many of these initial studies reflected state-led strong navy and trade fleet absolutely necessary to perspectives, it was not long before understanding great power status (MacMillan, 2014:165-166). the underlying and immediate causes of war became This, of course, was viewed with great apprehension the main objective for many researchers, rather by the British. Trying to adhere to its ‘two-power’ than simply justifying one belligerent’s behavior standard of having twice as many gunboats as the over another. As such, militarism and armaments next two powers combined, Britain also had to became one of the central arguments. This rests contend with the fact that France and Russia were on the claim that the pre-war state apparatus and also expanding their fleets. At the end of the day, minds of the era’s key decision-makers in Europe however, it was the British-German rivalry that did became gradually more militarized. Militarism, most to lead to war in terms of naval rivalry. along with the glorification of national heroism, Finally, one must not forget the autonomy of had nearly everyone under its spell. Europe’s Chiefs of Staffs. Only with the latter’s In this context, the practice of mass popular ability to make secret war plans and insufficient conscription since the French Revolution was a civilian control over military affairs could war major milestone. Its combination with nationalism, become ‘inevitable’ (Fromkin, 2013:40-45). another relatively recent phenomenon, was lethal. Moreover, the changing structure of the population, Nationalism especially the migration from rural to urban areas, revealed the fragility of administrations across The emergence of nationalism after the French Europe, especially the legitimacy of monarchies. Revolution and its spread throughout Europe To mitigate this, many governments turned their during the Napoleonic Wars has long been a attention to national consciousness through the problematic subject for European politicians. incontestable status of the army within society (Joll Though the Congress of Vienna took an anti- and Martel, 2016:98). liberal and anti-nationalist stance, it was clear that the monarchical structures of Europe were under Industrialization was also transforming threat. While multi-ethnic empires like Austria- European society, not to mention the war. Hungary, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire were Massive production rates and economic expansion the most affected by nationalist uprisings, German greatly enhanced the scale of most states’ military and also demonstrated the buildups. By the end of the 19th century, nearly potential power of national movements. European state treated its capacity to arm as an extension of its power, especially when it came to On the one hand, the idea of self-determination naval armaments. and formation of nation-states was driven by major demographic changes, particularly massive migration On the other hand, in diplomatic terms, the from rural to urban areas. On the other, it was wars for German unification and the success of the driven by a recent common historical experience: in Prussian army in the 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian Germany, the Prussian led nation-building process; War led many states to adopt the Prussian model of in Italy, the Risorgimento; and in France, an older militarization, which leaned heavily on integrating process since the Napoleonic Wars that was greatly the nation into a military way of life, thus forging galvanized a sense of victimization after the loss of a military nation (Fay, 1930:39). Other examples, Alsace-Lorraine to Germany in 1871.

62 History of International Relations 3 Imperialism The role of imperialism has long been a subject of Self-determination: “The idea that each debate. According to scholars such as Fay, although national group has the right to establish colonialism was nothing new in European history, its own national state. It is most often post-Industrial Revolution imperialism was of a associated with the tenets of Wilsonian different nature. With newly industrialized states internationalism and became a key driving bound to secure greater supplies of raw materials to force in the struggle to end imperialism,” maintain a high production capacity, imperialism (Best, et al. 2008:11) quickly came to be seen as a leading means of seizing, controlling, or finding new markets for The gradual spread ofnational consciousness their products (Fay, 1930:44). The timing was also also triggered micro-nationalisms among various significant. Coincident with the discovery of new Balkan nations that had long lived under the lands or the opening up of ancient kingdoms and Ottoman rule. These set off fears in Central empires (China, Japan, Vietnam), vast swathes of Europe, where the Austrians were rightly weary the earth were brought into the Western-dominated of their own restless minorities. Before long, economic order in a very short period of time (Joll ideologies like Pan-Slavism and Pan-Germanism and Martel, 2016:247). became foreign policy tools that put huge pressure, The construction of the railroads and granting and greatly exacerbated tensions, between everyone of economic privileges to less developed countries on the continent. also helped create and sustain new markets, both The development of industrial technologies of which further incensed imperialistic attitudes and the overwhelming power of science and recent and foreign policies. Meanwhile, the Fashoda scientific discoveries had also European societies Crisis in 1898, the intensified ‘Eastern Question,’ and politicians to believe in human superiority and or the ‘Scramble for China’ each exacerbated mankind’s dominance over nature. The ideas of tensions between the European powers. In this Charles Darwin, bastardized by Herbert Spencer, context, many socialists saw military struggle as also began to argue that the survival of species— the inevitable result of imperial ambitions. One of and later peoples—rested on constant competition the most important arguments for the imperialistic and elimination. Before long, Social Darwinism origins of the First World War came from Vladimir was hugely popular in the minds of European Lenin, who described the war as one of class diplomats, soldiers, and politicians that had grown struggle. Defining imperialism as the last stage of to believe that some nations are bound by nature to capitalism, he claimed that the recession-ravaged rule and survive, while others are destined to perish economies of Europe had come under the control or serve (MacMillan, 2014:27). As such, ideas such of great industrialists, capitalists, and bankers as nationalism and Social Darwinism also played a seeking new markets and raw materials. In his eyes, hugely important role in the eventual outbreak of war. the nature of war was a class struggle that had been taken to a global level (Lenin, 1999).

Social Darwinism is “the theory that human groups and races are subject to the same laws of natural selection as Charles Darwin had perceived in plants and animals in nature. According to the theory, which was popular in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the weak were diminished and their cultures delimited while the strong grew in power and in cultural influence over the weak,”(www.britannica.com/topic/ social-Darwinism).

63 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Germany began the war with great speed. Employing the Schlieffen Plan, which proposed attacking through neutral Belgium in order to take out the French as quickly as possible before moving against Russia, the German high command desperately wanted to avoid a two-front war. Though Russia had been slow to mobilize, each Entente power had different plans. Military officials in France had been working on a series of plans since their defeat in 1871, of which Plan 17 prevailed and was based on a massive offensive toward Alsace-Lorraine. On the other hand, the Russians, under Plan 19, had begun to mobilize five armies whose deployment would later be decided. No war plans had been made by the British army (Stevenson, 1997:49).

Schlieffen Plan:“The German pre-1914 plan for a pre-emptive military offensive against France, which would involve troops Figure 3.5 “China ... the cake of kings and ... of passing through neutral Belgium. It is named emperors”, a French political cartoon from 1898. after the German army chief of staff, General Source: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:China_ Alfred von Schlieffen,” (Best, et al. 2008:18). imperialism_cartoon.jpg

Any hopes for a quick war through rapid 1 military victories were dashed within the first few months of fighting. Due to the intensity, speed, Discuss the main features of the European and scope of the German offensive, the French states system before the First World War. and Russians had to improvise. The Russian army began her offensive earlier than originally intended, and as such was underprepared, while a premature THE OUTBREAK OF THE French offensive toward the Rhine was prevented FIRST WORLD WAR AND ITS by the need to stop the German offensive through DEVELOPMENT Belgium at the famous Battle of the Marne in The escalation that started with the assassination . On the other side of Europe, the of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo Russian offensive turned into a major disaster at the on 28 June 1914 led to mobilization in July. By Battle of Tannenberg. After the so-called Race to August 1, every great power but Britain was at the Sea and the Battle of Ypres in November 1914, war. When news of the German note to Belgium, all bets were off. The Entente’s inability to create a which demanded safe passage of their armies across united command or combined executive body to Belgian territory, was refused, the British decided fight not only the war but to assess the failures of to intervene on behalf of the latter, a neutral state these battles also bore bitter consequences (Hart, whose independence it had guaranteed since the 2016: 65-152). 1830s. After the refusal, Britain warned Germany By the end of November, the frontline in France not to invade Belgium. When Berlin ignored this, was stabilized from the Channel Sea to the Swiss Britain declared war on Germany (Stevenson, border, a line of approximately 500 miles, a burden 1997:28-39). shared by the French and British armies. When the Ottoman Empire joined the war in November on

64 History of International Relations 3 the side of the Central Powers, Russia’s position became more precarious, as the Ottomans closed the straits to the Black Sea, seriously damaging the link between the Entente Powers. On the other hand, the German strategy to win over the Ottoman Empire and move against Russia provided a new area of opportunity for the Entente. The Balkan states and Italy were opportunist neutrals, but the potential of bribing Italy and the Balkan states to join the war remained. However, the performance of the Entente had not made a good impression on these neutral powers, and a show of power would be necessary. Japan’s entry into Central Powers refer to the coalition of the war on the side of the Entente proved that the war had a states during the First World War that tendency to spread out of Europe (Strachan, 2014:91-158). consisted of Germany, Austria-Hungary, In the final days of 1914, expectations for a short war the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria. The had all but vanished. The battleground in the west had Central Powers were defeated by the somehow stabilized, but continued to rage over a vast Entente Powers at the end of the war. geography spreading from Eastern Europe to the Caucasus and Middle East. Naval forces were also engaging in battles around the whole world. It was not only the armies that Entente Powers, also known Allies or suffered from the war; economies had also weakened to Allied Powers, refer to the coalition of a point where the war effort could not be sustained. This states during the First World War fought was fast becoming a . Each side searched against the Central Powers. “The major desperately for two things: how to sustain the war effort Allied powers in were Great while finding the best strategy to win the war as quickly Britain (and the British Empire), France, as possible. and the , formally linked by By 1915, each side thought they had found a solution the of September 5, 1914. to the first problem. While Germany shifted to a war Other countries that had been, or came to economy aimed at utilizing the entire economy’s output be, allied by treaty to one or more of those for the military, the Entente powers tried to improve their powers were also called Allies: Portugal and industrial output and import more goods from the United Japan by treaty with Britain; Italy by the States. Each side planned major offensives. Treaty of London of April 26, 1915, with all three powers. Other countries—including With the failure of the Schlieffen Plan after the Battle the United States after its entry on April 6, of the Marne, the German high command turned its 1917—that were arrayed against the Central attention to the eastern front, where Russia had proved Powers were called ‘Associated Powers,’ not much weaker after the Battle of Tannenberg. While the so- Allied powers; U.S. President Woodrow called Masurian Lakes Offensives met with initial success, Wilson emphasized that distinction to the Russian offensive in Galicia overwhelmed the Austria- preserve America’s free hand. The Treaty Hungarian army, thus balancing the Eastern Front by the of Versailles (June 28, 1919) concluding summer of 1915 (Gülboy, 2004:156). the war listed 27 ‘Allied and Associated The major Entente offensive aimed at the Turkish Powers’: Belgium, Bolivia, , the British Straits was the Gallipoli Campaign (Çanakkale Battles). Empire, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Though the initial naval attack failed, fighting on this Ecuador, France, Greece, Guatemala, , front lasted until January 1916, when the Turks prevailed. the Hejaz, Honduras, Italy, Japan, , The immediate impact of the Gallipoli Campaign was the Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, inclusion of Italy and Bulgaria to the war, the former with Romania, Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Siam, the Entente and the latter with the Alliance. 1915 proved the United States, and Uruguay,” (www. yet again that the war would be long and devastating as britannica.com/topic/Allied-Powers- new fronts were opened and previously neutral powers international-alliance#ref1228825). took sides.

65 The First World War 1914-1918 3

Figure 3.6 Çanakkale Martyrs’ Memorial.

The year 1916 saw some of the bitterest confrontations on every front. While the German high command planned a new campaign to terminate the French Army, the Entente relied on individual offensives to be made simultaneously on multiple fronts. While the German attack on Verdun, which started in February, put great pressure on the French army in the west and caused massive casualties for both sides, Russia’s Brusilov Offensive in June brought down the Austria-Hungarian front in Galicia. Though the early success of Brusilov offensive caused Romania to break her neutrality in favor of the Entente, the front was quickly stabilized, after which Romania was invaded by a German-led coalition. The Somme Offensive led by the British that began in July was a resounding failure and had enormous casualties of both men and material (Gülboy, 2004:202-212). The ferocity of the fighting that year can be seen in the number of casualties. During the campaigns on the Western and Eastern fronts, which each saw over eight months of fighting, both sides suffered millions of casualties. If the smaller campaigns on other fronts like Palestine, Serbia, and Italy are taken into consideration, the number becomes enormous. It was therefore natural that 1917 began with both a lull in the fighting and overtures of peace (Gülboy, 2004:229). Up until then, both the Entente and Central Powers had presumed the war would end through military victory. As such, each through all its weight behind huge campaigns. The catastrophic losses suffered on each side only created mounting anti- war sentiment on each home front. Deprived of any kind of military success and the level of attrition rising rapidly, the belligerents were having great difficulty on the domestic front. After sustaining over a million casualties during the Brusilov Offensive in 1916, a brief moment of military success, Russia was on the brink of collapse. By 1917, Russian casualties exceeded four million. In addition to a series of military blunders, a crashing economy was also bringing Russia to the verge of collapse. As more and more men were drafted from the factories and farms, economic output catastrophically fell. 1917 saw huge shortages, and larger cities were vastly undersupplied (Hobsbawm, 1994:60-61). In March 1917, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to abdicate, and an interim government came to power under the leadership of social democrat Alexander Kerensky. At Kerensky’s insistence, Russia honored her alliances and remained in the war, but the Russian army was in shambles, and after a series of drawbacks a great amount of land was lost to the German summer offensives. In November 1917 (October in the Julian calendar), Bolsheviks under the leadership of Vladimir Lenin brought down the Kerensky government

66 History of International Relations 3 with a swift coup and seized power in Petrograd, After four years of fighting, she had successfully plunging Russia into a bloody civil war that would beaten one of her main rivals (Russia) and fought last until 1922. With Russia out of the picture, a successful defensive war in the West where she fighting on the Eastern Front virtually ended with still controlled much of Northern France and the signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk between Belgium. However, bad weather and the British the new Bolshevik government and the Central blockade of the sea-lanes since 1914 had caused Powers in 1918. This enabled Germany to transfer great food shortages on the German home front. almost all of her forces to the Western Front and Fearing collapse on the home front, Germany obtain numerical supremacy for the first time since was desperate to win the war. At the beginning of 1914 (Hobsbawm, 1994:62). 1918, then, it was supremely focused on a limited military victory to force her opponents to settle for peace (Strachan, 2014:313-315). Bolsheviks: “Originally in 1903 a faction It was evident that the course of the war had led by Lenin within the Russian Social effectively destroyed the old ways of European Democratic Party, over time the Bolsheviks diplomacy, and the belligerents lacked the became a separate party and led the October necessary links to negotiate an end to hostilities. 1917 revolution in Russia. After this It was in that sense that US President Woodrow ‘Bolsheviks’ was used as a shorthand to refer Wilson declared his famous Fourteen Points in to the Soviet government and communists January 1918 to constitute a basis for post-war in general,” (Best, et al. 2008:27). peace negotiations. In them, he described the essentials of global peace and the redrawing of the European map on a new basis. Before this could happen, however, practically every European power was scrambling to make as many gains as possible before taking their seat at the peace table. At first sight, then, Wilson’s Fourteen Points had little effect (Strachan, 2014:352).

Figure 3.7 Vladimir Lenin addressing the crowd during the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.

Though the revolution in Russia weakened the Entente’s fighting power, it was the United States’ declaration of war on Germany in April 1917 that tipped the balance. That being said, American military support was slow to materialize, and it was estimated that the American armies would not be fit to fight in France until mid-1918. At the beginning of that year, after nearly four long years of war, Germany still seemed formidable. Figure 3.8 Woodrow Wilson, 28th US President (Term She controlled an alliance that included Austro- of Office: 1913-1921). Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria. Source: www.britannica.com

67 The First World War 1914-1918 3 In the spring of 1918, the German army in different layers, though predominantly in unleashed a series of offensives on the Western geopolitical terms: Europe had lost its supremacy Front, and through August both sides struggled to to the United States. On the other hand was the hold their ground in a series of counter-offensives. Soviet Russia, whose socio-economic and political Despite certain successes, by the summer of 1918, model emerged as a stark alternative to both. it was clear that Germany had exhausted herself. Still, the major problem immediately after the Moreover, though the Entente had suffered a great war was the Treaty of Versailles, whose spoils left deal of casualties, fresh American troops were a deeply dissatisfied Germany and many predicted reaching the continent to fill the gap. In Germany, might cause a new European conflict. Given the deprived of a military success, tensions in major new power structure, which now contained non- cities began to rise (Strachan, 1998:239-252). European powers within its top hierarchy, it was By the end of September, the possibility of evident that a new European war might later revolution in Germany was real. After an uprising in transform into a global conflict. Two decades later, the German Navy on 3 November 1918, the threat it would (Hobsbawm, 1994:200). of the revolution seemed imminent. Unable to In structural terms, it was evident that the sustain the fighting on the Western Front, Germany major actors of the pre-World War I system were sued for peace, and an armistice was signed on 11 either extinct or unable to fulfill their roles in the November 1918. The war was over. As the work of post-war peace. The Ottoman Empire, Austria- the soldiers was done, it was time for the politicians Hungary, and Tsarist Russia had each disintegrated to build the peace (Stokesbury,2002: 294-317). into new states; Germany was forced into a much lesser position by the Treaty of Versailles; and both Britain and France came out of the war too weak to protect their pre-war political primacy. On the 2 other hand, non-European powers like the US Apart from the systemic approach, what are and Japan were now great powers and inclined to the main reasons for the outbreak of war? leave their mark on the new international system according to their own points of view. As such, it could be argued that what came out of the post- THE IMPACT OF THE FIRST war was not a new system but a fragile structure WORLD WAR UPON THE amidst a chaotic and unknown new situation (Kur, INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM 2017:297-354). The First World War was a major shock to the The First World War had been the greatest international system, which destroyed its structure conflict then known to mankind: the soldiers, and invalidated the old norms and values of supplies, and casualties it elicited were greater European politics. As the European concert and than anything seen before. Though other conflicts balance of power proved too weak to prevent or had also had a global scope, nothing could match stop a major continental war, almost every major the First World War in intensity. Half of Europe power felt the need for a new institutional model became a battlefield, and millions of civilians as of international politics. Enter US President well as soldiers suffered the consequences. And this Wilson, whose proposed League of Nations was hardly limited to Europe: The Middle East, Far was to act as a forum of nations in which states East, and Africa also became violently contested would collectively resolve their problems. At the fronts (Gülboy, 2017:15-16). Paris Peace Conference in 1919, the League of Though belligerents kept successful statistics Nations was founded to guide the post-war world of their military losses, less is known about the order. However, it was a far too benign a design catastrophic civilian losses. The number of men for its time, and proved to be too weak to prevent drafted for military service was nearly 65.5 million, further war. As such, the major outcome of the of which nearly nine million died and 21 million First World War was the complete alteration of were injured. The number of missing in action the international structure. This change appeared would surely cause this number to rise.

68 History of International Relations 3 Apart from Britain and Germany, none of the Though a strong political movement for belligerents were prepared for a long war of attrition. women’s rights had existed before the war, the war As such, the first crises on the domestic front began intensified women’s fight for equal rights. As men to show in 1915. Whether these were insufficient were taken from factories, women were integrated munitions or food shortages, they were met with into the labor force. The more their contribution great bravery. Everywhere, the war economy to civilian life became visible, the more they fought transformed societies. As working hours and for equal rights. conditions became more demanding for workers The international system was also transformed and conditions worsened, labor unrest spread. economic terms. The US now exported most of the Shortages and deteriorating living conditions also commodities sought on the international market, caused great dissatisfaction among civilians, before and the war’s end left the victorious states in huge long leading to antiwar sentiment and testing the debt to the US. In order to fund these debts, the legitimacy of monarchy throughout the continent. victors demanded a great sum of reparations from Everywhere socialism was on the rise, especially the defeated, which in turn put serious strain on after the Russian Revolution of 1917 (Ferguson, the post-war international system throughout the 2015:233-250). 1920s.

3 Discuss the main differences between previous colonial activities and the imperialist expansionism of the European states before and during the First World War.

THE END OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR AND PEACE TREATIES During the war, civilian administrators were in a secondary position to soldiers, no matter the regime. By its end, however, civilian politicians once again had a voice in the policy-making process. The armistices signed with the Central Powers ended hostilities, and the quest for peace began under the Anglo-American misnomer to call the First World War “the war to end all wars”. As such, the Paris Peace Conference was convened on January 18, 1919 in order to shape the content and terms of post-war peace settlements with the defeated countries, namely Germany, Austria- Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria. Not surprisingly, only the victors were summoned in Paris where the representatives of the Allied and associated countries assembled. Figure 3.9 A collection of significant facts about the However, differences between the victors began First World War. to appear almost immediately. For starters, the Source: www.britannica.com conference was chaired by a committee called “the Council of Ten,” which was composed of two delegates from each power: Britain, France, Italy,

69 The First World War 1914-1918 3 the US, and Japan, the chief victors of the Entente. (Sharp, 2018:24) Within this council, Britain, France, Italy, and the United States were represented by Lloyd George, Georges Clemenceau, Vittorio Orlando, and Woodrow Wilson, respectively. However, any mutual accord was short-lived. Clemenceau sought the most ardent precautionary and punitive measures against Germany, pursuing measures that would not allow Germany to recover anytime in the foreseeable future, lest she seek a war of revenge (MacMillan, 2004:34-36). It was not dissimilar to Bismarck’s policy after 1871. On the other hand, British Prime Minister Lloyd George was primarily interested in the former Ottoman lands and the British Empire’s Middle Eastern realm of influence. Unlike French Prime Minister Clemenceau, Lloyd George was not in favor of vindictive measures against Germany, nor did he relish French dominance over Europe. What Britain wanted was a stable post-war order.

Figure 3.10 The Big Four, principal architects of the Treaty of Versailles, at the Paris Peace Conference: (from left to right) Italian Prime Minister Vittorio Orlando, British Prime Minister Lloyd George, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau, and US President Woodrow Wilson, Paris, 1919. Source: www.britannica.com

That being said, Britain did not intend to take a strong stand against her allies on the German Question. Before long, Lloyd George and Clemenceau began to shape the course of the talks. The fate of Central and Eastern Europe and the Middle East and former Ottoman territories was determined almost unilaterally according to the interests of Britain and France. Borders were redrawn without due concern for local circumstances, especially ethnic and sectarian. When he did pipe in, Italian Prime Minister Orlando followed his French and British counterparts on the pursuit of Italian self-interest. In the face of these three leaders, Wilson was greatly disappointed (Uçarol, 2013:658). When Wilson asked the US Congress for a declaration of war in April 1917, he already had a US- dominated peace process in mind. Thinking it could determine the peace if it first determined the war, Wilson was ambitious in his quest to remake the international system according to American values. However, he quickly found himself out-maneuvered by Lloyd George and Clemenceau (Uçarol, 2013:658). Veteran practitioners of European diplomacy, Lloyd George and Clemenceau were generally successful in stalling Wilson while gracefully ignoring his ideas and recommendations. Though they in theory agreed with his Fourteen Points, they whittled with the text so much that they had scarcely any relevance by the end (Uçarol, 2013:659). For instance, the disarmament of the conflicting parties envisaged in the Fourth Point was limited to the defeated nations. The Eleventh Point, which promised the independence of the Balkan states, was also subverted in the creation of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, a product of the post-

70 History of International Relations 3 Versailles System that subsumed Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, , and Serbia. Furthermore, the new Hungarian state founded after the collapse of the Dual Monarchy had lost much of its territory to Romania. Already a newly unstable situation had emerged in the Balkans, a region with no shortage of potential ethnic, religious, or sectarian flashpoints (Armaoğlu, 2010:180-181).

Fourteen Points “On Jan. 8, 1918, President Wilson, in his address to the joint session of the United States Congress, formulated under 14 separate heads his ideas of the essential nature of a post-World War I settlement. The text of the Fourteen Points is as follows: 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. The emoval,r 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. 4. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety. 5. 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. 6. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation 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. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy. 7. 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. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired. 8. 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. 9. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality. 10. The peoples of ustria-Hungary,A whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development. 11. 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. 12. TheTurkish 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. 13. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should 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. 14. 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,” (www.britannica.com/event/Fourteen-Points).

71 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Despite the fact that secret treaties were re-establishment of Belgian independence (7); prohibited by Wilson’s Fourteen Points, the the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France (8); the territories received from the defeated states via establishment of the right of self-determination the peace treaties had long been determined for the peoples of the former Austria-Hungarian within the framework of previously signed secret Empire (10); the establishment of an independent agreements. Arrangements made for the Ottoman Poland (13); and the establishment of an Empire, for example, had been determined during international organization that sustains peace and the war (McMeekin, 2011:22-50). Only five ensures security, i.e. the League of Nations (14) of the principles that Wilson envisioned in the (Uçarol, 2013:659). Paris Peace Conference were ever established: the Europe Before World War IEurope After World War I

Figure 3.11 Europe before and after the First World War. Source: http://www.csun.edu/~sr6161/world/unit%206/Unit%206%20Detail%202.pdf

On July 28, 1919, the first peace agreement while southern Schleswig remained part of was signed with Germany in the famous Hall Germany (Sharp, 2018:118-120). of Mirrors at Versailles. It was here that Alsace- Under the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was also Lorraine was returned to France, and the Eupen considered responsible for the outbreak of the war and Malmedy regions ceded by Germany to and, as such, was made to pay a huge war indemnity Belgium. Germany also lost territory in the East, for the destruction the war had wrought. A figure to as the new state of Poland was to include Posen be determined by an allied commission, Germany and certain West Prussian lands. Furthermore, the was also ordered to hand over all its merchant inclusion of Danzig within the Polish borders in ships, construction machinery and materials, one- order to ensure Poland’s free passage to the sea, eighth of its livestock, and a large amount of coal to split eastern Prussia from mainland Germany Britain, France, and Belgium (Gülboy, 2004:303). (Uçarol, 2013:659). In the north of Schleswig, a Financial advisors at the Paris Peace Conference disputed region between Denmark and Germany, reported that $10 billion would cover Allied losses soon became part of Denmark after a plebiscite,

72 History of International Relations 3 during the war. France, however, demanded an The Treaty also imposed restrictions on the amount so severe that Germany might never German army. The submarines and warships that recover in military or economic terms. Its pressure were surrendered and interned at Scapa Flow were for “reparations” in part VIII of the Versailles also to be shared among the Allies. Besides the Treaty included the cost of Belgian war bonds, surrender of the German navy, obligatory military compensation for the families of deceased soldiers, service was lifted, and the German army could and the costs of Allied troops occupying the Rhine not exceed 100,000 troops. Nor could Germany into German compensation payments. When the produce aircraft or tanks. Small amounts of ships commission made its final decision in 1921, the and destroyers were permitted, as opposed to the total amounted to $33 billion (132 billion gold construction or possession of dreadnoughts or marks) (Gülboy, 2004:304). submarines.

Table 3.1 Peace Agreements at the end of the First World War. State Peace Agreement Germany Treaty of Versailles Austria Treaty of Saint-Germain Bulgaria Treaty of Neuilly Hungary The Ottoman Empire Treaty of Sevres (not implemented)

Following the signing of the Versailles Treaty, the Empire. With this agreement Hungary ceded Allied powers began talks with the other defeated Slovakia to Czechoslovakia, Transylvania to states, forming a five-member council, chaired by Romania, and Slovenia and Croatia to Yugoslavia, Clemenceau, to which the UK, the US, Italy, and while the Hungarian Army was limited to 35,000 France each sent a delegate. On September 10, 1919, men (Armaoğlu, 2010:191). the Allies and Austria signed the Treaty of Saint- The treaty the Allies had planned regarding Germain, which formally acknowledged the end of to the Ottoman Empire was postponed until the the Habsburg Empire. Austria ceded Trieste, Southern rest were concluded, mainly because of the secret Tirol, and the Istrian Peninsula to Italy, while the agreements made regarding the fact of the Ottoman independence of the new states like Czechoslovakia, Empire during the course of the war. Since a Poland, Hungary, and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, significant number of these consisted of ceding Slovenes (Yugoslavia) were recognized. Having lost Ottoman lands to Russia, these were obviated by the the vast majority of its empire, Austria’s army was Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. But Italy and Greece also limited to 30.000 troops, an army responsible also wanted their share from the remnants of the for internal security and the maintenance of public Ottoman Empire. For this reason, disagreements order; its navy was distributed among allies. Finally, over the partition of the empire was the cause of it was forbidden for Austria to unite with Germany serious controversy between the allies through mid- (Uçarol, 2013:661-662). 1920. For this reason, a conference was convened in Later that autumn, the Treaty of Neuilly was San Remo, Italy in April of 1920 to reconcile each signed between the Allied powers and Bulgaria on party’s position (Uçarol, 2013: 664). On August November 27, 1919. As a result, Bulgaria ceded 10, 1920, the Treaty of Sèvres was signed between Dobruja to Romania, West Macedonia to the the Allies and Ottoman representatives. With newly created kingdom of Yugoslavia, and Western Sèvres, the Ottoman Empire would lose all of its Thrace to Greece. The Bulgarian army was not to land except a small corner confined to Istanbul and exceed 20.000 soldiers. Central Anatolia. The Eastern Thracian territories On June 4, 1920, the Treaty of Trianon was west of Çatalca were ceded to Greece, while much signed with Hungary, now an independent state of western Anatolia and the Turkish Aegean were after the dismantling of the Austro-Hungarian to fall under “Greek influence,” particularly the

73 The First World War 1914-1918 3 important Ottoman port city of Izmir and its The treaties signed after the war revealed a surroundings (Uçarol, 2013: 663-673). new order in Europe. Called the Versailles Order Further south, the Mediterranean region was and dominated by the force of British and French recognized as the Italian area of influence, while much strength, it was full of inconsistencies. For one, of eastern Anatolia would be ceded to the nascent state despite all the talk of self-determination, nearly of Armenia, whose borders would be at least partially every new state emerging from the Austro- determined by US President Wilson (Uçarol, 2013: Hungarian and Ottoman empires had artificially 665). Apart from the establishment of an independent determined boundaries and sizeable discontented Armenian state, Sèvres also included provisions that minorities. granted the Kurds living under the Ottoman rule a local From a macro perspective, the League of autonomy with eventual independence (Uçarol, 2013: Nations was formed to ensure the endurance of the 665). The remaining minorities within the borders of international system engendered by the peace, but the Ottoman Empire were also granted broad rights, was soon dominated by Britain and France. Used and the economic privileges and capitulations from to pursue the ends of Paris and London, defeated which the Allies had benefited before the war were to or dissatisfied nations soon saw it as illegitimate. remain firmly in place. States that suffered major territorial losses, such as Considering the small and landlocked area left for Germany, Hungary, and Bulgaria, banded together the Turkish population after the Allies carved up the with others not satisfied with the terms of peace, Ottoman Empire, a great discontent arose among such as Italy and Romania. Soon calling itself them that eventually turned into a mass nationalist the revisionist bloc, this contrasted itself with the independence movement under the leadership of newly established states and the status-quo powers Mustafa Kemal. With the victory of Turkey at the of Britain and France, i.e. the anti-revisionists. As end of the Turkish National War of Independence, such, the general dissatisfaction and perceived the Treaty of Sèvres was invalidated once and for all. injustices of the Versailles Order were in place When the Lausanne Peace Treaty was signed on well before the Great Depression of 1929. Under July 24, 1923, a lasting peace was finally achieved these circumstances, fascism and authoritarian between the Allies and the newly founded Turkish ideas found a particularly receptive audience in the Republic. Turkey achieved irrevocable political and revisionist states before long. economic independence and membership in the The primary outcomes of the Paris Peace international community (Akşin, 2015:125-139). Conference can be listed as follows: • First, the peace treaties, mainly the Treaty of Versailles, constituted a new Europe in which Germany and other defeated states lost their pre-war status. This ended the great power model of the Concert of Europe and formed a new great power hierarchy in which Britain and France seemed to dominate Europe. • Second, the end of the First World War marked the emergence of new non-European powers—namely the US and Japan—and the end of European dominance over the international system. The war effectively destroyed the core value system on which the pre-war international system had been built. Wilson’s Fourteen Points set the basis for the reconstruction of a new set of values for Figure 3.12 Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Founder of the the emerging international system, while an Republic of Turkey. alternative world order emanating from Russia via the Bolshevik Revolution had also aroused Source: www.ata.tsk.tr

74 History of International Relations 3 the hopes of millions. A long generation later, from the beginning, as the US refrained to this would lead to the establishment of two join. Second, neither the defeated states nor different world orders in 1945, a bipolar the Soviet Russia were accepted as members. world order that dominated the planet until As a result, it represented barely one-third of the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. the actors in the international system. That • Third, as the globalization of the international being said, it had been designed to evolve system was already underway before the into a greater structure over time, with the outbreak of war, the League of Nations had eventual admittance of the originally omitted something of a soft landing. Designed to states. Indeed, by early 1930’s, the League had create a forum in which states could develop accepted almost every state as a member. new ways and models of open diplomacy to • Fifth, the end of the war marked a sharp solve their disputes, the League encouraged increase in economic interdependence between a new understanding of collective security in states, which added a strong economic to which states would prefer diplomacy to war the political dimension of the international to solve their disputes and collectively try to system. Moreover, the Bolshevik Revolution prevent individual conflicts from turning into and subsequent emergence of the USSR a major war. added a third, now ideological, dimension • Fourth, since the First World War was supposed to it in which the clash between liberal and to be as a “war to end all wars,” the new peace communist ideologies quickly turned serious. was to prevent war as foreign policy option. Built upon a collective security structure in which states would employ diplomacy for 4 conflict resolution, the new system made the use of force a last resort. However, there What did US President Wilson’s Fourteen were fatal flows in its structure. To begin Points stand for? with, membership in the League was weak

75 The First World War 1914-1918 3

Recount the origins and causes of LO 1 the First World War.

The First World War has been a matter of debate since its outbreak. Belligerent states, later historians, and researchers alike have all made vigorous different arguments about how the war broke out, a debate raging to this day. Of these, several stand out. First is the systemic approach, which argues that systemic failures in the international system led to war. While Taylor relied on a balance of power theory that leaned heavily on realism, Schroeder saw the decline of Austria-Hungary as the protector of the European order since 1815 as the first link in a chain reaction of events that brought about systemic collapse. While Remak argued that the First World War was as a continuation of the Balkan Wars, Gülboy stresses the importance of the Berlin Congress of 1878, which implemented a system of checks and balances for the Balkans using the Ottoman Empire, i.e. to restrain smaller powers with a middling one. Whether it was a lack of interest on the part of the Ottomans, Russia’s destabilizing interventions, or self-interested British policies in the region, the system of checks and balances collapsed with the Balkan Wars and paved the way for Summary a much larger conflagration. Apart from systemic approaches, others look to various new ideas as the cause of war. For many scholars, nationalism and militarism, two sides of the same coin, had influenced European societies and key decision-makers since the French and Industrial Revolutions. Combined with transformed state structures, rapid demographic changes whose effects statesmen tried to redirect toward nation-building only accelerated these processes. Imperialism and the scramble for colonial possessions and markets were also seen by many as the main reasons for war. The search for raw materials and markets made industrialized states more aggressive in foreign policy, creating an avalanche effect. For Marxists and other observers, this cutthroat competition made every imperial competitor in Europe at least partially guilty for the outbreak of the war.

Recognize the main debates and perspectives LO 2 on the outbreak of the First World War.

The First World War started after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary. However, the belligerents expected a swift outcome after a century of relative peace since 1815. Although war was still an option for resolving disputes between states in the pre-1914 era, few predicted its rapid spread or the deathlike lethargy with which it remained for four long years. Nevertheless, it would be also wrong to assume that the outbreak of the war was a sudden and totally unexpected incident. Indeed, diplomatic crises, the rise of nationalism, and imperialist rivalries had stirred relations between European states since the late 19th century. However, such a conflagration was still an unwanted and unexpected development in the summer of 1913, particularly as many European statesmen were on summer holiday. When rising tensions between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, and then Germany and Russia erupted, many had a rude awakening. Whatever the case, its origins still haunt many to this day.

76 History of International Relations 3

Assess the importance of the First World War on LO 3 the development of the international system.

The First World War was a catalyst for a new world order, a radical transformation of relationships between states and societies. Indeed, it is still a critical milestone for assessing the international order we now inhabit. From the very moment of its outbreak, ancient empires and dynasties marched literally to their end, and a completely new system of nation-states and self-determination arose. The decline and often rapid crumbling of the old aristocracies also changed the continent’s social dynamics. A completely new way diplomacy and international relations arose. The four bloody years of struggle from 1914-1918 brought about a radical transformation that neither states nor societies could escape. Summary

Discuss the end of the First World War and the LO 4 impact of peace treaties on the evolution of the international system.

When the war ended in 1918, European dominance over the world in economic, diplomatic, or military terms was greatly weakened, and new actors like US and Japan emerged. The war also led to a cataclysmic revolution in Russia where the Bolsheviks rose to power, ushering in a new global ideology that would eventually have millions of partisans around the world. The decline of Europe witnessed an immediate quest for a new world order to emerge.

77 The First World War 1914-1918 3

1 Which pair of the following diplomatic I. Great power management based on common meetings constituted the basis of the pre-1914 values and reference points European states system? II. The prohibition of the use of force in a. Paris Peace Conference-San Remo Conference international relations b. -San Francisco Conference III. Major roles of international institutions in c. Aix-la-Chapelle Conference-Congress of Verona conflict resolution d. Congress of Vienna – Congress of Berlin IV. The localization of wars yb the intervention of e. Frankfurt Congress of 1848-Paris Conference of Great Powers 1856 5 Which one of the above were the principles Test Yourself Test 2 Which of the following is not one of the main of the system in Europe before 1914? causes of the outbreak of the First World War? a. I and II a. Nationalism b. I and III b. Imperialism c. I and IV c. Wilsonianism d. I, II and III d. Armaments e. I, II, III and IV e. Militarism 6 According to George F. Kennan, the 3 In which of the following options are the consolidation of which alliance below was the members of the Triple Entente given together and principal cause of the outbreak of the First World correctly? War? a. Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Russia a. The ualD Alliance b. Austria-Hungary, Germany, and the Ottoman b. Three Emperors’ League Empire c. The olyH Alliance c. Britain, Germany, and France d. The ranco-RussianF Alliance d. Austria-Hungary, Britain, and Russia e. The uadrupleQ Alliance e. Britain, France, and Russia 7 Which of the following was one of the 4 Which of the following countries was not one countries that disintegrated into new states at the of the Central Powers in the First World War? end of the First World War? a. Germany a. Britain b. United States b. France c. Austria-Hungary c. Italy d. Ottoman Empire d. Japan e. Bulgaria e. Austria-Hungary

78 History of International Relations 3

8 The first of the diplomatic crises was the 10 Which of the following was the peace treaty Fashoda Crisis of 1898 between. signed between the Soviet Russia and the Central Powers? Which of the following options correctly completes the sentence above? a. Treaty of Versailles Test Yourself a. Britain and Germany b. Treaty of Saint-Germain b. Russia and Austria-Hungary c. Treaty of Neuilly c. France and Britain d. Treaty of Brest-Litovsk d. France and Germany e. Treaty of Sèvres e. Germany and Russia

9 Who declared the Fourteen Points in January 1918 to constitute a basis for post-war peace negotiations? a. Woodrow Wilson b. Lloyd George c. Vladimir Lenin d. Georges Clemenceau e. Vittorio Orlando

79 The First World War 1914-1918 3

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review the 1. d 6. d “The Causes and Origins of the First World “The Causes and Origins of the First World War” section. War” section.

2. c If your answer is wrong, please review the 7. e If your answer is wrong, please review the “The Causes and Origins of the First World “The Impact of the First World War upon War” section. the International System” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the 3. e 8. c If your answer is wrong, please review the “The Causes and Origins of the First World “The Causes and Origins of the First World War” section. War” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review the b a 4. “The Outbreak of the First World War and 9. “The End of the First World War and Peace its Development” section. Treaties” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review the 5. c 10. d “The Causes and Origins of the First World “The Outbreak of the First World War and War” section. its Development” section. Answer Key for “Test Yourself” for “Test Answer Key

80 History of International Relations 3

Discuss the main features of the European states system before the First World War.

Before the outbreak of war in 1914, the European states system rested on the Suggested Answers for “Your Turn” system built by the Congress of Vienna in 1815. The main characteristics of that were the common values and reference points that each major party shared in order to sustain the peace after the turmoil of 1789-1815. While war was still seen as a diplomatic tool, “a continuation of politics by other your turn 1 means,” as Von Clausewitz famously said, being too overt an aggressor and jeopardizing the system against the interests of other powers was always frowned upon. Even if there were wars between conflicting parties, the great powers intervened in order to localize the conflict. This great power hierarchy established in Vienna in 1815 was consolidated by Bismarck and laid the basis of the pre-1914 system.

Apart from the systemic approach, what are the main reasons for the outbreak of war?

Militarism, secret treaties, nationalism, armaments, the naval race, and imperialism all played an important role in the outbreak of the war in 1914. From 1871 onwards, the myth of Prussian military might dominated military strategies and minds, especially the idea of quick offensive strategies. On the other hand, the formation of national armies since the French Revolution had penetrated nations across the continent, making mass conscription the norm rather than exception. Since the French Revolution, nationalism had also spread to every corner of Europe. It was only natural that the multi- ethnic and multi-lingual empires felt threatened by this, and sought to nip it in the bud. The most threatened, and therefore most conservative, anti- liberal, and anti-nationalist of these was Austria. The Ottoman Empire was also mortally threatened by this rising wave of nationalism, particularly in the Balkans. Indeed, the rising micro-nationalism of the Balkans against a your turn 2 variety of ancient, multiethnic monarchies threatened the very existence of the European system. Another principle reason for the outbreak of war was the mounting imperialism of the late 19th century, which began with the Industrial Revolution and the scramble for raw materials and new markets. As the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution, Britain’s foreign policy was naturally the first to be affected. Setting out to acquire new colonies, ports, and control of critical sea routes to sustain the flow of commercial activity, the British conquest of India was one of the first examples of industrial colonialism. Before long, however, vast unconquered parts of the world became the source of conflict between European powers. This included the unofficial partition of China and Southeast Asia, the exploration of the unknown parts of Africa, and disputes along countless border areas of influence. Rivalry in Central Asia raged between Britain and Russia, while the partition of influence in China was hotly contested by Russia, France, Britain, the US, and Germany. That’s without mentioning the ‘Eastern Question’ and the future of the Ottoman Empire, each of whose irresolution brought Europe one step closer to war.

81 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Discuss the main differences between previous colonial activities and the imperialist expansionism of European states before and during the First World War.

Overseas conquests could be traced back at least to the British, Dutch, Spanish, and French colonial activities of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries. Though these colonial activities contained some aspects of late 19th century imperialism, such as the exploitation of natural resources or expanding trade activities, the 19th century variety represented a new phenomenon in the wake of the Industrial Revolution and its gradual spread throughout Europe. Imperialism rested on the idea of industrial production and the ever-mounting your turn 3 need for raw materials at an affordable price, after which the finished product or manufacture would be re-exported back to said colonial market. While cheap labor and raw materials were important to imperialism, convenient and global markets were also needed for industrialists and large owners of capital. According to Lenin, the First World War was the first major imperialist war in which the capitalists and bourgeoisie that controlled the state canalized its resources to overcome recession-prone domestic markets by finding new markets and cheap materials and labor.

What did US President Wilson’s Fourteen Points stand

Suggested Answers for “Your Turn” Suggested Answers for “Your for?

US President Woodrow Wilson announced his Fourteen Points for Peace in January 1918 after a year of failed efforts by the Vatican to end the war, clearly demonstrating the bankruptcy of European diplomatic methods. His intention in putting these forward was to lay the ground for a lasting US-brokered peace in Europe on new lines. According to Wilson, the European states system had your turn 4 demonstrated its inability to establish a permanent peace. As such, he wanted to outlaw war as a diplomatic tool. This included outlawing for once and for all the tradition of self-interested alliances and secret treaties, which prevented stable, lasting, and transparent relationships. As such, Wilson’s principles can be seen both as a contribution to the traditional European states system from an exterior actor, as well as its quest for a new world order which the United States would take the lead.

82 History of International Relations 3

References

Akşin, S. (2015). Kısa 20. Yüzyıl Tarihi, İstanbul: Joll, J. ve Martell, G. (2016). Birinci Dünya Savaşı Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları. Neden Çıktı?, İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları. Armaoğlu, F. (2010). 20. Yüzyıl Siyasi Tarihi, İstanbul: Alkım Yayınevi. Kennan, George F. (1984). The Fateful Alliance: France, Russia and the Coming of the First World Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A., & Schulze, K. War, New York: Manchester University Press. E. (2008). International History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond, New York: Routledge. Koch, H. W. (1969). “The Anglo-German Alliance Negotiations: Missed Opportunity or Myth?”, Bridge, F. R. and Bullen, R. (1980). Great Powers and History, Vol. 54, No. 182, pp. 378-392. European State System: 1815-1914, New York: Longman Group Limited. Kur, C. (2017). “Japonya’nın Doğu Asya Güç Dengesindeki Yükselişi ve I. Dünya Savaşı’nın Christensen, Thomas J. and Snyder, J. (1990). Japon Emperyalist Genişlemesindeki Yeri”, in “Chain Gangs and Passed Bucks: Predicting Burak Gülboy and Bülent Akkuş (Eds.). Birinci Alliance Patterns in Multipolarity”, International Dünya Savaşı’nı Anlamak: Uluslararası İlişkiler Organization, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 137-168. Teorileri Çerçevesinden Analizler, İstanbul: Fay, S. (1930). The Origins of the World War, New Milenyum Yayınları, pp. 297-354. York, The Macmillan Company. Lebow, Richard N. (2014). “What can international Ferguson, N. (2015). Hazin Savaş, İstanbul: Yapı relations theory learn from the origins of World Kredi Yayınları. War I?”, International Relations, Volume: 28, Fromkin, D. (2013). Avrupa’da Son Yaz, İstanbul: Alfa issue: 4, pp. 387-410. Yayınları. Lenin, V.I.. (1999). Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Gülboy, B. (2017). “Birinci Dünya Savaşı’nı Capitalism, Australia: Resistance Books. Anlamak”, in B.S. Gülboy ve Akkuş, Birinci Lieber, Keir A. (2007). “The New History of World Dünya Savaşı’nı Anlamak: Uluslararası İlişkiler War I and What It Means for International Teorileri Çerçevesinden Analizler, İstanbul: Relations Theory”, International Security, Volume Milenyum Yayınları. 32, Number 2, Fall 2007, pp. 155-191. Gülboy B.S. (2014). “Bandwagoning vs Chain McMeekin, S. (2011). Rusya’nın I. Dünya Savaşı’nda Ganging: the Failure of Great Power Diplomacy Rusya’nın Rolü, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Kültür Sanat in the Balkans before the First World War”, Yayıncılık. International Journal of Turcologia, vol.9, pp.7-37, MacMillan, M. (2014). Barışa Son Veren Savaş, 2014 İstanbul: ALFA Yayıncılık. Gülboy, B. (2004). Birinci Dünya Savaşı Tarihi, MacMillan, M. (2004). Paris 1919, Ankara: ODTÜ İstanbul: Altın Kitaplar. Yayıncılık. Gülboy, B. (2014). Mutlak Savaş: Birinci Dünya Nish, I. (2014). The Origins of the Russo-Japanese War, Savaşı’nın Kökenleri Üzerine Clausewitzyen London-New York: Routledge. Bir Çözümleme, İstanbul: Uluslararası İlişkiler Kütüphanesi, Röle Yayıncılık. Modelski, G. (1978). “The Long Cycle of Global Politics and the Nation-State”, Comparative Hart, Basil L. (2016). Birinci Dünya Savaşı Tarihi, Studies in Society and History, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. İstanbul: İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, İstanbul. 214-235. Henig, R. (2002). The Origins of the First World War, Schroeder, P. (1972). “World War I as Galloping New York: Routledge. Gertie: A Reply to Joachim Remak”, The Journal Hobsbawm, Eric J. (1994). Age of Extremes: The Short of Modern History, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 319-345. Twentieth Century, 1914-1991, London: Michael Seaman, L.C.B. (1955). From Vienna to Versailles, Joceph. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.

83 The First World War 1914-1918 3 Rich, N. (1992). Great Power Diplomacy: 1814-1914, Websites United States: McGraw Hill Inc, 1992. www.bl.uk/world-war-one Remak, J. (1971). “1914-The Third Balkan War: www.britannica.com/topic/Triple-Entente Origins Reconsidered”, The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 353-366. www.britannica.com/topic/Balkan-Wars Sharp, A. (2018). The Versailles Settlement: Peacemaking www.britannica.com/topic/social-Darwinism in Paris, 1919, London: Palgrave Macmillan www.britannica.com/topic/Allied-Powers- Publishers. international-alliance#ref1228825 Stevenson, D. (1997). The Outbreak of the First World www.britannica.com/event/Fourteen-Point War, New York: Palgrave Macmillan Press Ltd. Stokesbury, James L. (2002). A Short History of World War I, New York: Perennial Harper Collins Publishers. Strachan, H. (2014). Birinci Dünya Savaşı, İstanbul: Say Yayınları. Strachan, H. (1998). World War I: A History, Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Taylor, A.J.P. (1954). The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848-1918, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Uçarol, R. (2013). Siyasi Tarih:1789-2012, İstanbul: Der Yayınları. Williamson, David G. (2016). Germany Since 1789: A Nation Forged and Renewed, New York:Palgrave Macmillan.

84

World Politics in The Chapter 4 Interwar Years 1919-1939

After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Explain the main reasons behind the rise and Discuss the Great Depression of 1929 and its 1 fall of the League of Nations 2 impact on world politics Assess the determining factors behind the rise of revisionist powers, namely Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, and the Soviet Explain the causes and effects of the Spanish 3 Union, in the interwar international system 4 Civil War

Learning Outcomes Chapter Outline Key Terms Introduction Paris Peace Conference The Rise and Fall of the League of Nations Fourteen Points The Great Depression and its Impact on World Politics League of Nations The Rise of Revisionist Powers in the International Treaty of Versailles System Locarno Pact The Spanish Civil War Briand-Kellogg Pact Irredentism Revisionism Appeasement Fascism Nazism

86 History of International Relations

INTRODUCTION were intended to outline his vision for a postwar This chapter introduces the key developments settlement and lasting peace, and they were highly that shaped the international system during the influential when negotiating the post-World War Interwar period between 1919 and 1939. These I order. The Fourteen Points include references to include, among others, the Paris Peace Conference, open diplomacy, freedom of the seas, the reduction the League of Nations, the post-World War I peace of national armaments, the removal of trade settlements, the Locarno Pact, the Kellogg-Briand barriers between nations, impartial adjustment of pacts, the Great Depression of 1929, the rise of all colonial claims, the readjustment of territorial Nazism and Fascism, the appeasement policies, and borders based on the right to self-determination - the Spanish Civil War. By the end of the First World especially within the former German, Ottoman, War, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian, and Austro-Hungarian empires-, the German Empire, and the Russian Empire ceased to rights of minorities in those states, and the creation exist. The winners of the war—France, Britain, and of “a general associations of nations” known as Italy—were suffering from the economic fallout of the League of Nations. Wilson believed these the war. Moreover, the fear of a revival of German principles would remove the main causes of any aggression persisted. France in particular was major future war. adamant to make Germany pay for the costs of the Against this background, this chapter is divided war and hence demanded an unrealistic amount of into four sections. The first discusses the emergence war reparations. For the United States, the victory of the interwar international system by focusing meant a moral superiority vis-a-vis European on the rise and fall of the League of Nations. The belligerency and imperialism. Claiming that the second examines the Great Depression of 1929 First World War was the “war to end all wars,” the and its impact on international politics. The third US suggested the spread of democracy as a solution focuses on the rise of the revisionist states, -namely to imperialist visions and policies, which only led Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, and to war, as they saw it. the Soviet Union (the Union of Soviet Socialist American foreign policy preferences diverged Republics, USSR)- in the international system. from European , which was based on The fourth and final section addresses the Spanish power politics, fragile and short-term strategic civil war. alliances, and secret diplomacy behind. Meanwhile, however, the founders of the United States (the THE RISE AND FALL OF THE New World) sought to isolate the US from the LEAGUE OF NATIONS conflicts of Europe the( Old World). The Monroe This section focuses on the emergence of Doctrine adopted by US President James Monroe the new international system after World War in 1823 laid the foundations of this policy of I and discusses its development in the 1920s. preventing Europeans from intervening within It begins with a brief introduction of the Paris the internal affairs of the Americas, while at the Peace Conference and then addresses the creation same time removing the US from the internal of a permanent international organization, the clashes of the European continent. Forced to League of Nations. The section also examines post- enter World War I on the side of the British, US war peace settlements, particularly the Treaty of President Woodrow Wilson was eager to return Versailles. Finally, it discusses major developments to the traditional isolationist policy as the war that shaped the course of world politics in the ended. However, the US first wanted to make sure 1920s. to resolve certain issues which they considered as the root causes of World War I. Wilson emphasized the importance of spreading democracy and liberal Paris Peace Conference values, transparent diplomacy, collective security and After the end of the First World War, the Paris the right to national self-determination in order to Peace Conference convened between January build long-lasting alliances and a peaceful world order and June 1919 in order to design the post-war (Carr, 1946: 27). Thus, Wilson’s Fourteen Points international system and determine the fate of

87 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

the defeated countries of the war. Representatives or colonial possessions of the Germans and from thirty-two Allied and associated countries Ottomans -many of which subsequently became participated in the conference. However, the mandates of France and Britain-, the drawing of principal actors, known as the “Big Four”, were new national boundaries, and the preparation Great Britain, France, Italy, and the United of five treaties imposed on the losers that later States, represented as they were by David Lloyd proved fatal to forging a lasting peaceful order. George, Georges Clemenceau, Vittorio Emanuele US President Wilson personally attended the Paris Orlando, and Woodrow Wilson, respectively. It Peace Conference, where he denounced realpolitik is not surprising that the decisions taken at the and argued for the necessity of adopting collective Paris Peace Conference primarily reflected the security, disarmament, and the establishment of an preferences of the Big Four at the expense of the international organization to promote world peace defeated countries. Germany and the Soviet Union, (Kissinger, 1994: 247). As they needed the US’ two of the strongest European powers, were not financial and military support to recover and keep even invited. According to Kissinger (1994: 231), the wounded enemy (Germany) down, Europeans this was a serious mistake which undermined the had to agree with the League of Nations. Replacing credibility of the conference and drew Germany the old European politics based on bilateralism, and the Soviet Union closer together. While the Wilson aimed to forge a new world order based on Germans felt marginalized, the Soviets protested multilateralism, collective security, and disarmament. the conference as “a capitalist tool for imperialism” and distanced themselves from the Western powers. In response, despite from the Western Collective Security powers, both governments signed the Treaty of refers to “[t]he principle of maintaining peace Rapallo in 1922 that established full diplomatic between states by mobilizing international relations and renounced claims against each other opinion to condemn aggression. [It is] [c] (Kissinger, 1994: 264). ommonly seen as one of the chief purposes The main decisions taken at the Paris Peace of international organizations such as the Conference included the establishment of the League of Nations,” (Best et al., 2008:36). League of Nations, war reparations, overseas

Figure 4.1 The Big Four at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919: Lloyd George, Vittorio Orlando, Georges Clemenceau, and Woodrow Wilson. Source: www.history.com

88 History of International Relations

The League of Nations new members to the League, and appointed At the very beginning of the Paris Peace the Council of the League of Nations. Conference, the victorious allies began to work • The Council was the executive body of the on the covenant of the League of Nations. Hence, League of Nations whose primary duty was the committee on the Covenant of the League of to settle international disputes. It included Nations was set up under the chairmanship of US four permanent members, Britain, France, President Wilson whose top priority was to create a Italy, and Japan, in addition to eleven other permanent international organization for the post- members elected by the General Assembly war world order. Although the idea of establishing every three years. Between 1920 and 1946, an international organization was widely welcomed, more than 60 cases involving international each major power had different priorities. Wilson, disputes were brought to the Council. for example, considered a general guarantee system, However, only a handful, including the which would ensure the territorial integrity and Aaland Islands, Memel, Vilnius, Upper political independence of each member state against Silesia, Mosul, Saar, and Hatay (Sancak), any external aggression, as the most important were settled by its decision. element of the new organization (Northedge, • The Secretariat was responsible for the 1986:30). However, the British opposed Wilson’s administrative affairs of the League, guarantee system on the ground that this would consisting of a Secretary-General and staff. make any territorial changes impossible under all The Secretariat was mandated to prepare the conditions. They proposed extra provisions that agenda and published reports of meetings would allow the reconsideration of international under the direction of the Secretary- treaties and conditions which became inapplicable. General. From its establishment to its The French, on the other hand, was in favor of demise in 1946, the League had only three an organization backed by its own military force Secretaries-General: The first Secretary- as they considered that this would secure France General was Sir Eric Drummond, a British against any German aggression in the future diplomat and politician who assumed this (Henig, 2010). After extensive debates, the title between 1919 and 1933. The second League’s covenant was adopted as part of the Treaty was , a French diplomat who of Versailles, and eventually, the League of Nations acted as Secretary-General between 1933 was officially established on January 10, 1920. and 1940. Sean Lester, an Irish diplomat, While 44 countries became the original was its final Secretary-General from 1940 members of the League, the number increased in the to 1946. interwar years and 63 states became its members by The League of Nations was considered as “a 1939. The main objective of the League of Nations radical departure from past international practice,” was to promote and maintain international peace (Steiner, 2005:40). The secret diplomacy of the through collective security and resolve conflicts 19th century was widely blamed for the outbreak through transparent and multilateral negotiations. of World War I. Therefore, transparent, open, The League was the first ever permanent and and multilateral diplomacy became the founding universal international organization for promoting principles of the newly established League. However, and maintaining world peace with members from as the “first large-scale attempt to standardize all around the world. international political problems,” the League was The League had three principal organs: the exposed to infinite complications since it aimed to Assembly, the Council, and the Permanent bring a universal standard to the relations of more Secretariat. than sixty member states “differing widely in size, • The Assembly was composed of in power, and in political, economic and cultural representatives from all member states and development” (Carr, 1946: 28). assembled on an annual basis in Geneva. Although the idea of creating a permanent As for its main functions, the Assembly universal organization for international peace and controlled the League’s budget, accepted security was promoted by US President Wilson,

89 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

the US never joined the League. The US Congress member, Japan, left in 1933 following the invasion was still committed to isolationism and thus the of Manchuria. The Soviet Union joined in 1934 US Senate rejected the ratification of the Treaty of and was expelled in 1939 after invading Finland. Versailles. This prevented the US accession to the Finally, the number of members had dropped to 23 League of Nations. Kissinger claims that Wilson by 1945. Hobsbawm (1995: 34) calls the League was seriously mistaken in personally attending “an almost total failure” except for its earlier the Paris Conference and thus remaining outside successes in resolving a couple of minor conflicts. his own country for months. The more he stayed Although the architects of the League of Nations outside the US, the less able he became in his considered the organization as a mechanism of efforts to convince the US Senate about the League collective security that would protect all member of Nations (Kissinger, 1994: 230). Without the US states against external aggression and thus prevent support, the League suffered a serious credibility future great wars, the League was ill-made from the gap as an American idea that could not even receive beginning. According to Kissinger (1994: 269), American support. European collective security efforts failed in the Without the backing of the major powers, the interwar era because: League of Nations lacked a powerful sanctioning 1. there was no common enemy to necessitate mechanism to prevent free-riders who resorted to a common military strategy; unilateralism, violence, and fait accomplis. As the 2. bureaucratic measures slowing down League was not a world government, aggressors common decision-making proved very started to leave the organization when it did not difficult for European powers to act on time suit their purposes, which rapidly reduced its against aggression; and capacity. For example, Germany joined in 1926 but left in 1933 after Adolf Hitler came to power. Italy, 3. the League of Nations had no army to a founding member of the League, withdrew in prevent free riders who resorted to invasion 1937 after invading Abyssinia. Another founding and unilateral violence when it suited them.

Figure 4.2 The Palace of Nations, the Headquarters of the League of Nations, today serving as the United Nations Office at Geneva. Source: www.britannica.com

90 History of International Relations

Moreover, there was no efficient sanctioning possibility of compromise in return for peace. It mechanism within the League of Nations for also helped kick off the “National Struggle” under conflict prevention. Therefore, the League of the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Pasha (Atatürk). Nations was ill-designed from the very beginning. As the Ottoman Parliament was dissolved after the “No act of aggression involving a major power has invasion, the Treaty of Sèvres was never ratified. ever been defeated by applying the principle of Instead, it was superseded by a new document, the collective security”; Kissinger (1994: 249) claims. Treaty of Lausanne, which on July 24, 1923 laid According to Kennedy, many scholars had the foundations of the Republic of Turkey and is expected the world to be dominated by three still valid today. rising great powers in the beginning of the 20th Still, the Treaty of Versailles was the most Century: Germany, Russia, and the US. However, important post-World War I treaty since it all three powers were absent in the international determined the fate of Germany. Signed on June system after World War I: Germany was defeated, 28, 1919, the Versailles Treaty created a new Russia collapsed through the Bolshevik revolution, international order, a large goal of which was to and went into isolation, and the US willingly keep Germany incapacitated. The provisions retreated from the center of the diplomatic stage of the treaty spelt the loss of German colonies, (Kennedy, 1987: 277). Therefore, the world after which then became the mandates of the League of the war turned out to be very different from the Nations; the loss of German territory to Poland, expectations of the experts of the time. Borders Czechoslovakia, and Belgium; the demilitarization were redrawn and new states established out of the of the mineral-rich area of the Rhineland; the loss ashes of the fallen empires, but in the absence of of Alsace-Lorraine to France; the French economic great powers to provide balance to the international exploitation of the Saarland; the imposition system, new challengers emerged to bring war and of limitations on the German armed forces to conflict. 100,000 soldiers (around seven divisions); a ban on the German air force; and a ban on Anschluss Peace Treaties (any German unification with Austria). Equally pointedly, the War Guilt clause forced Germany At the end of the Paris Peace Conference, peace to accept full responsibility for World War I and treaties were signed with the defeated countries: pay huge sums of war reparations. Since this the Treaty of Versailles was signed with Germany was historically doubtful at best, according to on June 28, 1919; the Treaty of Saint-Germain Hobsbawm (1995: 110), it served as a powerful with Austria on September 10, 1919; the Treaty justification for the resurgence of German of Neuilly with Bulgaria on November 27, 1919; nationalism and militarism after the war’s end. the Treaty of Trianon with Hungary on June 4, The main intent of the Versailles order was to 1920. Following a delay, the last peace treaty was create a new international system free of war and the Treaty of Sèvres signed with the Ottoman conflict, especially that perpetrated by Germany. Empire on August 10, 1920. Post-war settlements By incapacitating the latter, Versailles was meant huge economic, military and territorial believed to have contributed to the achievement losses for the defeated countries and the collapse of world peace that the League of Nations was of age-old empires. For instance, the Hungarian sworn to establish. The United States and Britain territory was reduced to 28% of its pre-war lands, believed that an incapacitated Germany could be a psychological setback that led to the Trianon harmoniously adapted into this new international Syndrome in Hungary, i.e. the perpetual fear of system through a liberal political change, rendering losing more land to external powers. this new international order would prosperous and Similarly, the aborted Treaty of Sèvres, which sustainable. However, the very provisions of the aimed at the partition of Anatolia, led to serious treaty prevented the achievement of such internal and long-lasting resentment in Turkish people change in Germany (Clark, 2005: 111). Far from against the Western powers. Indeed, the Treaty taming Germany, the Versailles order bred a violent of Sèvres demonstrated to the new Turkish reaction that did much to result in the formation government based in Ankara that there was no of Nazi Germany.

91 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

The effects of Versailles on Germany were very burden, but its political symbolism for German negative. Having initially expected it to reflect resentment, suspicion, and hostility to other major the liberal principles of the US President Wilson, European powers, each of which helped clear the they were shocked to learn that its provisions were way for World War II (Taylor, 1961: 71). much harsher than expected (Kissinger, 1994: Anxious about a possible German “resurgence,” 231). Indeed, the German government rightfully France also sought to establish an “anti-revisionist protested that it had been designed specifically to bloc” with the states of Eastern Europe, i.e. the Little prevent German recovery. The Treaty of Versailles Entente of 1921. Composed of Czechoslovakia, was a “dictated peace” in the eyes of Germans Romania, and Yugoslavia to prevent a Hungarian whose after-effects soon led to hyper-inflation and revisionism, the Little Entente, with the strong the devaluation of the German mark over a million support of the French, also aimed at making sure times over. In addition to economic problems, the Germany could never reemerge as a threatening newly established Weimar Republic was politically power. France then concluded bilateral agreements very fragile. This had a huge impact on German with Belgium (1920), Poland (1921), Czechoslovakia society, which greatly feared the violence between (1924), Romania (1926), and Yugoslavia (1927) to Communists and Nazis. Indeed, a weak German prevent just the resurgence of Germany (Kennedy, government suffering from massive economic crisis 1987: 277). However, although a strong supporter provided a fertile ground for Nazism to flourish, of an “anti-revisionist bloc,” France resorted to while Hitler’s promises to reclaim Germany’s lost revisionism itself by invading the Ruhr under the territory and reputation helped rally the masses pretext of preventing German revisionism. under the Nazi umbrella. Germany was initially only able to pay 1 billion out of the 132 billion marks demanded at Versailles. attention By the end of 1922, it declared it was impossible to pay the remainder and proposed a four-year moratorium The Weimar Republic was the unofficial (Kissinger, 1994: 257). In response, the French and name to describe the German government Belgium troops invaded the coal-and-steel rich Ruhr from 1918 to 1933. area in 1923 to receive payment in kind. However, the French unilateral action over the Ruhr only proved the inability of French military and political power to The Implementation of the Peace in force the Germans to their knees. In response to the the 1920s invasion of the Ruhr, the German government paid the miners in the Ruhr to go on strike, practically France was the chief architect behind denying France Germany’s coal and steel, though Germany’s economic and political insolvency since this came partially at the expense of hyperinflation it aimed at preventing a future German resurgence. (Kissinger, 1994: 267). France therefore failed to The amount to be paid as war reparations was extract resources in spite of the invasion, while the highly disputable. In 1921, the total sum of the invasion of the Ruhr was one of the first instances war reparations was fixed at 132 billion Gold that demonstrated the incapability of the League of Marks (about $33 billion), which was far beyond Nations to prevent unilateral action by a member Germany’s capacity to pay (Hobsbawm, 1995: 98). state. The lack of a sanctions mechanism within the The US suggested Germany pay in installments League prohibited any firm action against France. according to its capacity, while France insisted on What’s more, Britain and the US did not approve receiving the money at once and in full. France’s of French unilateral action (Kissinger, 1994: 268). goal, after all, was to tailor the provisions of the Unlike France, preventing a quick German recovery Treaty of Versailles to make Germany economically was not their top priority since in their minds a larger too weak to attempt anything with the common threat was already emerging—the Soviet Union. wisdom that any payment of such an impossible As they saw it, Germany could serve as a buffer sum would reduce Germany “to a state of Asiatic zone against possible Soviet expansion in Europe. poverty” (Taylor, 1961: 70). However, the real Moreover, Britain feared that Germans, if stateless, problem behind reparations was not its economic might fall into the Soviet hands.

92 History of International Relations

Figure 4.3 French troops in the Ruhr area. Source: www.wikipedia.org

The invasion of the Ruhr raised alarms in investors (Taylor, 1961: 70-71). Nevertheless, in Washington since the US government, as the the short run, the plan helped momentarily thaw main post-World War I creditor, was very much Franco-German hostility and provided a positive concerned with getting back the money it had atmosphere for the realization of the Locarno Pact. lent Europe. The British wartime debt to the Signed in the small Swiss city of Locarno in US amounted to the half of the British national 1925, the Locarno Pact was one of the first steps to income, while French debts were two-thirds of the establish collective security over Western Europe that French national income (Hobsbawm, 1995: 98). included Germany, though its initial plan excluded Therefore, both Britain and France were deeply them. Proposed by Britain, it was to establish a dependent on the US credits for economic recovery, security zone to contain future threats against for which German war reparations seemed a perfect Europe, including future German aggression—but solution. Germany, however, first needed to reach the opposite happened. Signed in 1925 by France, a level of economic solvency before it could pay Britain, Germany, Italy, and Belgium, the Locarno any such sum. To do so, the US devised a plan in treaties actually went on to ensure Germany’s 1924 called the Dawes Plan that sought to find a protection from possible belligerents. The efforts way for everyone to pay their debts. Named after of German Chancellor and later Foreign Minister the US banker and statesman Charles G. Dawes, Gustav Stresemann to convince European powers the plan suggested that the US would lend money of the ills of alienating Germany were remarkable, to Germany for economic build-up. With US warning his European counterparts that Versailles assistance, the German economy would recover, would only further provoke Germany. He claimed and Germany would be able to pay its war debts to that the only way to come to terms with Germany France. Having been paid by the Germans, France on a permanent basis was to incorporate it into would be able to pay back the wartime credits to a newly emerging European security structure. the US and buy US goods to rebuild. According His words prevailed as European powers sought to Taylor, in the long run, Germany was the net to avoid losing Germany to the Soviet Union. As gainer from the Dawes Plan since it borrowed far such, Germany became a member of the League of more from private American investors than it paid Nations and gained a security guarantee through in war reparations to France or Britain. Nor did the Locarno Pact, despite the fact that many still Germany have to pay back its debts to American feared Germany over all. Therefore, designed to be

93 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

a prime instrument of European collective security, the Locarno Pact proved to be one of the first instances of appeasement in Europe. Nevertheless, The Locarno Pact the pact was also favored by the French, since it refers to “[t]he series of treaties concluded included Germany’s relinquishment of Alsace and at Locarno in Switzerland in October 1925. Lorraine to France and the demilitarization of the The most important was the Rhineland Pact, Rhineland. As a result, the three foreign ministers, signed by France, Germany and Belgium Aristide Briand of France, Austen Chamberlain and guaranteed by Britain and Italy, which of Britain, and Gustav Stresemann of Germany affirmed the inviolability of the Franco- received the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts German and Belgo-German borders and at Locarno. Taylor (1961: 83), therefore, calls the demilitarization of the Rhineland. the Locarno Pact as “the greatest triumph of In addition, Germany signed arbitration appeasement,” giving Europe “a period of peace treaties with France, Belgium, Poland and and hope.” Kissinger (1994: 274), however, was Czechoslovakia,” (Best et al. 2008: 50). more pessimistic: rather than pacify Europe, he argued, it merely defined it as the next battlefield.

Figure 4.4 Architects of the Locarno Pact: German Foreign Minister Gustav Stresemann, British Foreign Secretary Austen Chamberlain, and French Foreign Minister Aristide Briand at Locarno negotiations in 1925. Source: www.britannica.com According to Taylor (1961:77), the occupation of the Ruhr and ensuing Locarno Pact proved that cooperation, i.e. appeasement of the Germans, was the only way for Versailles to work. When France tried to use force in its invasion of the Ruhr, it miserably failed to make Germany pay up. Only after conciliating them through the American plan and the British efforts at Locarno could Berlin be persuaded to comply with the war reparations clause of the treaty. As such, Taylor (1961: 77-78) claims that appeasement was the only viable method of keeping Germany in line and was successful throughout the 1920s. Kissinger, on the other hand, argues that Locarno actually helped Germany replenish its strength while further pacifying France. After Locarno, Germany accelerated its secret armament through huge sums of American credits, while France was only able to construct the Maginot Line, a defensive wall to ward-off a future German offensive (Kissinger, 1994: 279-280).

94 History of International Relations

Disarmament was one of the key mottos of the the world’s history when war seems less likely than 1920s and an important condition for the League it does at present” (Carr, 1946: 36). Eight days of Nation’s claim for achieving world peace. From later, Japan initiated its plan to invade Manchuria. early 1920s onwards, there had been a series of The peaceful atmosphere of the 1920s was rapidly attempts at disarmament. The Washington Naval replaced with anarchy and conflict of the 1930s, Conference between 1921 and 1922 was one of especially after the world economic crisis of 1929. the first organized efforts to do so. Composed of By the time the Japanese invaded Manchuria, the nine participants including the United States, the Kellogg-Briand Pact was all but redundant. United Kingdom, Japan, France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, and China, the conference aimed to scale down their naval capabilities. It was followed by conferences in Geneva in 1927 1 and London in 1930 to ensure a continued Discuss why the Treaty of Versailles failed. commitment for naval disarmament. Moreover, the League established a commission in 1926 to launch a “Disarmament Conference” with the objective THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND of triggering global disarmament. However, ITS IMPACT ON WORLD POLITICS this was only assembled in 1932 once the tides The world economic crisis of October 1929, had already largely turned against disarmament. also known as the Great Depression, brought These were completely abandoned after the rapid an abrupt end to efforts for world peace. Instead, militarization of Nazi Germany in the mid-1930s. it augured a decade full of agony, uncertainty, Before the 1920s came to a close, disarmament distrust and, eventually, conflict. The 1929 Great efforts were also joined by efforts to issue a complete Depression also had a remarkable impact upon the ban on the use of force in world politics. The victors world economy, causing a significant drop in the of World War I aimed to outlaw the use of force in global industrial production and trade. Producing international politics through an agreement, “the 42% of global industrial output in 1929 compared International Treaty for the Renunciation of War to Europe’s 28%, the US’ disproportionate as an Instrument of National Policy”, known as influence on the global economy was destined to the Kellogg-Briand Pact. The pact emerged from have a particularly negative effect on the global a French suggestion to the US that two countries economy after 1929. should sign a bilateral nonaggression pact. However, upon the US proposal, it turned into a multilateral agreement in which other states were also invited to join (Best et al. 2006: 53). Signed in Paris on August 27, 1928, the pact renounced war as an instrument of national policy and declared the use of force illegal. Named after US Secretary of State Frank Billings Kellogg and French Foreign Minister Aristide Briand, the pact was ultimately signed by 62 nations, including, Germany, Italy, and Japan. It was a typical symbol of the post-World War I period highlighted by Wilsonian euphoria and optimism for world peace. According to Carr (1946: 30), the pact was nothing more than a utopia indicating how detached Western statesmen were from reality; indeed, rarely had anyone been more wrong about the direction global politics would take. On September 10, 1931, Lord Cecil, the British Figure 4.5 Migrant Mother, an icon of the Great delegate to the League of Nations, told the League Depression, photograph by Dorothea Lange. Assembly, “there has scarcely ever been a period in Source: www.britannica.com

95 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

As the world’s largest creditor, US loans were the US went into a deep isolationism under the also viewed as a strategic asset with which to President Franklin Roosevelt by minimizing its persecute Germany, with Paris hoping to tie Berlin international transactions (Taylor, 1961: 90). In to Washington through onerous borrowing terms. the wake of economic liberalism’s destruction, If Germany were eternally dependent on US cash, protectionism and the command economy it would not be able to quickly restore its economic gained popularity (Hobsbawm, 1995: 95). and military power. However, Europeans seemed The Soviet Union, who remained just beyond to forget that they were nearly as dependent on the capitalist world, were mostly immune to the US cash and products, to the extent that any effects of the Great Depression. They faced no US decline would have serious consequences for unemployment problem and, due to the five year the global economy. When the US stock market plans and massive industrialization between 1929 crashed in 1929, its effect was as heavy on Europe as and 1940, their industrial production tripled. it was the world, with US credits to Europe almost While the Soviets manufactured 5% of the immediately cut-off, leading to an uncontrollable world’s products in 1929, this increased to 18% chain-reaction of a substantial decrease in in 1938 (Hobsbawm, 1995: 96). Indeed, Soviet investment and consumption (Kennedy, 1987: manufacturing in 1938 exceeded that of the US, 282). Producers of foodstuffs and raw materials, Germany, Britain, France and Italy combined including African, South and East Asian, and (Kennedy, 1987: 299). According to many, then, Latin American countries, were furthermore hurt where capitalism failed, communism prospered. by the plummeting demand, which they sought With the latter’s economic policies now seen to remedy by increasing supply, which then led as serious alternatives to capitalism, the Great to a further sharp decrease in prices making it Depression was a boon of sorts for the Soviets, impossible for them to buy manufactured products and states around the world increasingly adopted (Hobsbawm, 1995: 92). Tragically, each attempt to Soviet-style central economic plans as a model for fix the crisis led to the further deterioration of the recovery. Communism as an idea in general also global system of trade and credit (Kennedy, 1987: attracted much attention, not merely in Central 282). US exports fell by 50%, and world trade fell and Eastern Europe, but across Western Europe, by 60% between 1929 and 1932, while the value East and Southeast Asia, and Latin America. The of European trade decreased by more than 65%. Great Depression, it could be said, was a godsend The capitalist world economy came as close as it for communism. ever had to collapse (Hobsbawm, 1995: 91). The 1929 Great Depression also had significant Unemployment rates in Europe and the US political effects. Democratic governments the between 1932-33 demonstrate the depth of the Great world over were forced to resign, while military Depression: in Britain they were 23%; Belgium coups in Latin America became an almost daily 22%; Sweden 24%; the US 27%; Austria 29%; occurrence. With 13 million unemployed in Norway 31%; Denmark 32%; and in Germany a 1932, it was not long before Germany succumbed whopping 44%. Unemployment was highlighted to ultranationalist, populist, and aggressive in the Western press as “the most widespread, the promises of redemption. When the Nazi Party most insidious, and the most corroding malady was founded, for example, 85% of its members of.... Western civilization” (Hobsbawm, 1995: 94). were unemployed (Hobsbawm, 1995: 94). Under Due to the Great Depression, economic liberalism the Nazi leadership, unemployment in Germany lost its influence, and the gold standard system fell to 1.7 million by 1935 and to roughly zero in that had long maintained a stable international 1938 (Kennedy, 1987: 346-365). Meanwhile, the currency exchange system was abandoned by use of force and the imposition of fait accomplis the US, Britain, France, Canada, Belgium, the became popular foreign policy practices, both at Netherlands, and Scandinavia. Britain, the heart of the expense of collective security and the League trade liberalization in Europe, abandoned free trade of Nations. Meanwhile, inward-looking Britain in 1931, while both Britain and France sought and France felt compelled to appease this German economic recovery through a “domestic-oriented revisionism, a mistake that eventually resulted in and inward-looking” economic policy. Similarly, the Second World War.

96 History of International Relations

At the end of the day, the Great Depression was Bandwagoning is to side with the rising fertile ground for the rise of extremist ideologies revisionist power contrary to traditional notions such as Nazism, Fascism, and Stalinism. In the of the balance of power, which counter-alliances realm of international relations, meanwhile, historically try and prevent (think of Napoleon, for diplomacy and international law lost their example). Generally exercised by lesser powers for credibility, and aggressive foreign policy through offensive or defensive purposes, one either joins an unilateral action and the use of force became the alliance with the expected winner to share in the spoils rule of the day (Gülmez, 2017). Aggressive aspects of victory or, in the case of defensive bandwagoning, of these policies included revisionism, irredentism, to escape invasion oneself. An example of the and bandwagoning, while defensive ones included former is Hungary’s alliance with Nazi Germany, appeasement and isolationism. during which they renounced the Treaty of Trianon Revisionism is the desire to alter the international and occupied a portion of Czechoslovakia. So status quo in a significant way through the violation did Bulgaria, which annexed South Dobrudja in of treaties and the imposition of territorial change by Romania. Often lacking military capabilities, these coercion or the use of force. It is adopted by states that states joined forces with more powerful states such as are dissatisfied with the prevailing status quo (Carr, Germany and Italy to fulfill their revisionist agendas. 1946: 212). Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and, to a lesser States resorting to defensive bandwagoning, on the degree, Imperial Japan were highly dissatisfied with other hand, are forced to do so because they lack the the post-World War I order, which they considered capability to resist the aggressor, as was the case with as unfair and humiliating. As such, Germany Romania and Yugoslavia (though the later fought unilaterally repudiated the Treaty of Versailles, the Germans with great intensity). resumed rearmament, and pursued a belligerent These inefficient defensive measures were part policy towards Czechoslovakia and Poland in the of the reason why the world failed to prevent 1930s. Italy, for its part, remilitarized the Dodecanese the revisionist acts of Germany, Italy and Japan. Islands and invaded Abyssinia/ and Albania. According to British Prime Minister Winston Finally, Japan rejected existing international naval Churchill, World War II could have been easily treaties and launched an unrestricted fleet build-up prevented had the major status quo powers pursued a before invading Manchuria and China. confrontational strategy of rearmament and balance Irredentism is a territorial claim by one of power through temporary alliances (Ripsman and against another, aimed at equalizing Levy, 2008: 149). However, the global economic crisis the boundaries of its ‘nation’ (or ethnicity) with persuaded status quo powers to adopt soft measures the borders of the state. It carries a nationalist and such as appeasement and isolationism, which failed to populist agenda to liberate “brothers and sisters prevent aggressive behavior or World War II. suffering under a foreign dominance” and claims Appeasement is the policy of buying off the recovery of ethnic frontier groups lying outside a potential aggressor through negotiation and the territory of the nation-state. It is a version of compromise in order to prevent an armed conflict, revisionism whose aim of expanding its territory a policy Britain and France applied to both Fascist comes under the pretext of liberating and reuniting Italy and Nazi Germany. It was first applied to with long-lost relatives. Relying on the support of fascist Italian leader Benito Mussolini, who invaded kinsmen in said neighboring territory or country, Abyssinia/Ethiopia in 1935. Considering Germany irredentism provides the claimant state a strong a bigger threat, Britain and France wanted to keep propaganda tool for the annexation of a territory Italy as a potential ally on the continent. Fearing a without having to use force. Nazi Germany direct confrontation with Nazi leader Hitler, they used this argument when it invaded Austria, the next gave their consent to the Nazi partition of mostly German-speaking Sudetenland part of Czechoslovakia at the Munich Conference of 1938. Czechoslovakia, Memelland in , and Yet rather than limiting the risk of war, this strategy Danzig and the Polish Corridor, annexing the lands only emboldened Hitler’s revisionist ambitions. under question either through popular referendum The false promises that Britain and France had or with the consent of other great powers without given Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania only necessarily resorting to force. accelerated later Axis aggression.

97 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

For its part, US foreign policy in the 1930s Germany until 1945. These were the last democratic relied on isolationism, a US tradition of avoiding elections held in a unified Germany until 1990. entanglement in European conflicts that dates Hitler, who had served as a corporal in World to George Washington. Yet their isolationism War I, believed Germany had been defeated because during this time was also motivated by poverty of a “Jewish conspiracy” and from the betrayal of and unemployment, not to mention many pro- German leaders who lacked the will to fight to the German and anti-British tendencies among the end (Kissinger, 1994: 289-290). Denouncing the American public, and an American urge for remain Treaty of Versailles, he advocated anti-Semitism, fully independent in its foreign relations. anti-communism, and anti-capitalism. In doing so, he forged the concept of Lebensraum (living space), a great central-eastern European empire in which Germans would lord it over their lesser Slavic and 2 Jewish neighbors. Advocating National Socialism, Discuss how the Great Depression of 1929 i.e. socialism for German-speaking “Aryans,” influenced states’ foreign policy behaviors. the Nazis became the largest political party in Germany, and Hitler was appointed chancellor in 1933 by President Paul von Hindenburg. Mein THE RISE OF REVISIONIST Kampf, the memoir containing detailed accounts POWERS IN THE INTERNATIONAL of Hitler’s political ideas, sold a million copies after SYSTEM he came to power. The Great Depression not only brought the The burning of the Reichstag, the German nations of the world to the brink of bankruptcy, it Parliament, on February 27, 1933 facilitated also provided fertile ground for the establishment Hitler’s ascension to absolute authority. Although of extreme political formations, most notably it is still uncertain who was responsible for the including Nazism in Germany and Fascism in arson—and many are of the opinion that Hitler Italy. Nor, for that matter, would the military take- ordered his propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels over in Japan or the revisionist policies of the Soviet to stage the blaze—he successfully blamed the Union have been possible without the fallout of the German Communist Party for the attack. A week Great Depression. after the fire, Hitler won a landslide victory in the March 5 federal elections. He then persecuted

the main opposition in parliament and passed Nazi Germany the Enabling Act of March 23 that granted him An already defeated Germany went through absolute powers. After President Hindenburg’s serious economic and political crises in the early death, Hitler dissolved all opposition. With full 1920s, first experiencing hyperinflation and a authority vested in his hands, he then set about near-complete dependence on the Allied powers. reviving the German economy and eliminated The once mighty Prussian-led German Empire had unemployment through massive industrialization been dissolved into a weak Weimar Republic, while and rearmament. The widespread programs of society was torn between ultra-nationalist and road-building, electrification, and industrial communist clashes. investment, along with mass conscription, made National Socialist German Workers’ Party, unemployment in Germany virtually non-existent known as, also known as the Nazi Party, was (Kennedy, 1987: 306). He also encouraged founded in 1920 and increased in popularity population growth and gave medals of honor to throughout the mid-1920s onwards as the German women who gave birth to 3-5 children. At the public grew more and more distraught with the same time, however, Jews were persecuted and lost Treaty of Versailles and Allied pressures over war their German citizenship under the Nuremberg reparations and the War Guilt clause. On March Race Laws of 1935. The German public, happy 5, 1933, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the with their regained economic freedom and political Nazi Party won the federal elections with 43.9% of dignity, turned a blind eye to the curbing of civil the vote and became the dominant political force in liberties and the suffering of the Jews.

98 History of International Relations

In October 1933, shortly after Hitler took By the end of 1938, Germany had already power, Germany withdrew from the League of become the second biggest steel producer in the Nations. Nazi Germany then rapidly set about a world after the US. The US produced 26.4 million series of revisionist and irredentist policies that tons of steel whereas Germany produced 20.7 eventually resulted in World War II. Reintroduced million, the Soviet Union 16.5 million, and Japan military conscription in March 1935, they 6 million. It had also become the third biggest remilitarized the Rhineland in 1936, both of economy and second biggest military power in which violated both the treaties of Versailles the world less than six years after Hitler came to and Locarno. Germany also acquired the Saar power. Although the Versailles Treaty permitted region along its Western frontier by plebiscite. the German army only seven divisions, Hitler had Hitler subsequently signed a treaty of friendship increased the country’s total land divisions to 71 with Italy in 1936 and sent 6,500 troops and by 1938 and 103 by 1939. The German air force, air support to Spanish monarchists seeking to Luftwaffe, expanded from 36 planes in 1932 to 5112 overthrow the Republican government in 1936. in 1936 (Kennedy, 1987: 305). That being said, He also denounced the non-aggression treaty massive investments in rearmament did damage with Poland signed in January 1934 and the their economy. The more armaments Germany Anglo-German Naval Agreement of June 1935. had, the more Hitler was tempted to resort to war In March 1938, Nazi Germany incorporated to remedy economic difficulties (Kennedy, 1987: Austria into the German Reich, and in September 308). By 1939, Hitler’s revisionism had brought the of that year his troops marched straight into world to the doorsteps of another great war. Hitler Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland unopposed after invaded the rest of unoccupied Czechoslovakia the infamous Munich agreement allowed him to on March 15, 1939 and acquired the region of annex that part of Germany’s southern neighbor. Memel from Lithuania in March 23 after a series of threats. Finally, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non- Aggression Pact of August 1939 helped Germany forestall any conflict with the Soviet Union for the time being. Nazi Germany was ready for an offensive; when Hitler’s final push into Poland began on September 1, 1939, World War II had begun. According to Taylor (1961: 10), there were two popular views about Hitler. The first depicted Hitler as a “mad man” with an agenda to conquer the world at any cost. The second depicted him as a rational tactician who carefully planned his long- term strategy to defeat the Soviets and establish a colonial empire in Eastern Europe. Taylor (1961:11) denies both views and claims that Hitler had neither a quest for world supremacy nor had prepared long-term plans for the future. Rather, he claims, Hitler neither desired nor prepared for a great war, but aimed to reach his goals through guile, propaganda, deception, and limited warfare. Besides, he was much more obsessed with anti- Semitism than world supremacy. Taylor (1961: Figure 4.6 The Remilitarization of the Rhineland in 23) emphasizes that Hitler only mentioned 1936. Lebensraum in seven of his seven hundred page- Source: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org long Mein Kampf, while giving no hint of conquering the world. Agreeing with Churchill, Taylor (1961: 25-26) claims that World War II

99 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

could have been prevented had Britain and France Hitler’s resolve for rearmament and expansion. The not so overestimated and feared Hitler’s so-called British government continued its disarmament desire for world supremacy. According to Kissinger policy even when Hitler announced he would (1994: 295), however, it was irrelevant whether or overthrow the Treaty of Versailles and start massive not Hitler aimed at world supremacy, because once rearmament (Kissinger 1994: 291). Germany gained military superiority, it would The Munich Agreementof September 30, be impossible to deal with him through peaceful 1938 is the most important example of appeasement. means. Similarly, Kennedy (1987: 308) concludes Agreed to by Germany, Italy, France, and Britain, that the more weapons Germany obtained, the it permitted Germany’s annexation of the more tempted Hitler became to use them to start Sudetenland in Western Czechoslovakia. British a war chiefly due to the motivation to remedy the Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain returned to economic burden of rearmament. Therefore, war London believing he had victoriously managed was inevitable once Nazi Germany regained its to tame Hitler: “We regard the agreement signed military strength. Nevertheless, both Kissinger and last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement Kennedy share Taylor’s argument that the West as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to should have never let Germany rearm itself until go to war with one another again,” read the press a point where it became too powerful to deal with. communiqué. He also remarked in another press Was appeasement a proper response to Nazi conference that the world would be at peace: “My Germany? France and Britain succumbed to public good friends, for the second time in our history, a pressure to achieve peace at any price, and facing British Prime Minister has returned from Germany the brutality of the Great Depression, they were not bringing peace with honor. I believe it is peace for physically capable of deterring Germany, Japan, or ouro time. G home and get a nice quiet sleep.” The Italy without doing so at great cost. In addition, Czechs, however, called Munich “the Betrayal” appeasement was based on the assumption that because Britain and France had cast their security Hitler was a reasonable leader. After all, he had guarantees to the winds to sacrifice Czechoslovak been a most successful politician between 1933 lands to prevent war with Germany. This only and 1938 when the world believed him to be encouraged Hitler to pursue an even more pursuing normal and limited objectives (Kissinger, aggressive policy resulting in the invasion of the 1994: 289). Britain, in particular, underestimated entire Czechoslovakia six months later.

Figure 4.7 British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, French Prime Minister Édouard Daladier, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler, and Italian Leader Benito Mussolini in Munich, 1938.

100 History of International Relations

Britain’s dilemma was that it had to choose As regards Italy’s revisionist acts of the 1930s, between a heavy rearmament program and it first occupied the Wal Wal Oasis some 80km economic recovery; eventually, it chose the latter. inside the Ethiopian frontier in November 1934 Fearing that a war to contain the German threat before invading the rest of Abyssinia /Ethiopia in would cost Britain its “leading Great Power status,” 1936. In theory, the League of Nations’ covenant France also felt incapable of resolutely responding had declared that an attack on one league member to Hitler (Kennedy, 1976: 195). Though French would be considered an attack on all. Italy, statesmen did sense another war with Germany was especially as a founding member of the League, brewing, they did not act against Germany. This was expected to uphold its principles. However, depleted the credibility of their deterrent, giving there was no efficient sanction mechanism within Hitler the confidence to invade Czechoslovakia the League, and since France and Britain chose not and Poland. to endorse sanctions against Italy, the League soon The academic literature generally equates the lost all credibility. Worse, it was later revealed that appeasement of Britain and France to “wishful British foreign minister Samuel Hoare and French thinking” and blames the two governments for premier Pierre Laval had secretly planned to carve mistakenly approaching Hitler as a reasonable up Abyssinia in December 1935 and give most man. Recently, Ripsman and Levy (2008) of the country to Mussolini. Both lost their jobs have raised the alternative claim that British because of this. appeasement of Hitler was not based on wishful For the British and French governments, it thinking, but driven by strategic calculations to was Nazi Germany that constituted the biggest buy time until Britain had reached a military threat. Italy was a necessary evil, as they needed capacity to confront him. British statesmen Mussolini’s partnership against Hitler, though knew they had to remain firm against Hitler, but certain politicians such as Winston Churchill due to the economic crisis, the British military had even expressed sympathy for Mussolini’s Italy capacity lagged behind Germany. Appeasement, (Hobsbawm, 1995: 113). Indeed, they did not wish they argued, was only a means of buying time to scare off Italy by issuing sanctions and throw her (Ripsman and Levy, 2008: 150-151). into the hands of Hitler. As such, while supporting certain sanctions against Italy, they refused to close Fascist Italy the Suez Canal to Italian shipping and resisted oil sanctions. Britain politely asked Italy whether oil was similar to Nazism in sanctions would be considered in Rome as a casus terms of its anti-liberalism, anti-capitalism, anti- belli (cause for war), and when Rome replied in the Marxism, and ultra-nationalism. It was not, affirmative, the British government refrain from however, necessarily anti-Semitic or racist. In fact, doing so. The British slogan of the period was “all Mussolini only adopted anti-Semitism in 1938 sanctions short of war,” which in practical terms after his alliance with Hitler had grown stronger meant doing nothing (Kissinger, 1994: 299). (Hobsbawm, 1995: 116). In the meantime, Italy British and French indifference to the invasion pursued self-sufficiency and protectionism in its of Ethiopia further destroyed the League’s economics and irredentism in its foreign policy. legitimacy. Yet not only did Italy conquer the rest Fascists under the leadership of Benito Mussolini of Ethiopia by May 1936, but contrary to their believed they had a right to invade weaker states. intentions, French and British appeasement made Ironically, Mussolini, the founder of the Italian Italy withdraw from the League and draw closer to Fascist movement, had claimed to be the voice of Nazi Germany. This even gave Hitler confidence the oppressed in Italy. Elected Prime Minister in about carrying out acts of war in Czechoslovakia 1922, he became Il Duce, or dictator, in 1925 when and Poland since he was convinced that no one he dismissed Rome’s democracy. That being said, could punish him. Italian Fascism was more pragmatic and less clearly based on a certain ideology. Its ultimate objective, Italy under Mussolini also remilitarized the at least on paper, was to revive the Roman Empire Dodecanese islands in 1936 and then provided with Mussolini at its head. military assistance (some 50,000 Italian troops) to General Francisco Franco in the Spanish Civil War

101 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

from 1936 onwards. Italian troops later invaded industrialization to boost their economy in ways Albania in April 1939 and provided financial and that would mirror Nazi Germany (Hobsbawm, military assistance to terrorist groups seeking to 1995: 128). Japan also called for Asian unification destabilize Yugoslavia through the assassination of against Western imperialism that would lead to King Alexander. Asian self-sufficiency and prosperity. In reality, it According to Hobsbawm (1995: 129-131), meant Japanese imperial domination in the Far East. Mussolini was an inspiration to Hitler, but it According to Hobsbawm (1995: 104), the gates to would be Hitler who gave fascism its global appeal. World War II were opened first in 1931 with the Indeed, Mussolini’s brand of fascism only spread Japanese military take-over and the invasion of elsewhere after Hitler took power in 1933. Though Manchuria. Mussolini had come to power earlier than Hitler, Japanese revisionist acts can be summarized as he embraced Hitler’s policies after the formation follows: Japan denounced the 1922 Washington of the Axis bloc. However, the bloc was far from Treaty, which limited its naval capacity, and solid since there was little to no trust between the increased the size of its military fleet to 14,000, two leaders. nearly double the prescribed limit of 8,000. It also Before the Axis was established, Mussolini had invaded Manchuria in 1931, occupied Shanghai in also deployed Italian troops to the Brenner Pass in 1932, and withdrew from the League of Nations 1934 in order to prevent the annexation of Austria in 1933. It then launched a full-scale invasion of by Nazi Germany, even supporting the anti-Hitler China in 1937 and started a continent-wide armed “Stresa front”, a coalition of France, Britain and conflict through the rest of the war until 1945. Italy formed in April 1935 (Kennedy, 1987: 335). However, by 1936, and despite the warnings of Italian foreign minister Count Galeazzo Ciano, Mussolini decided to join forces with Germany. A realist, he knew he needed Hitler’s support since he could “simulate greatness only as Hitler’s jackal” (Taylor, 1961: 177). Thus Mussolini also hopped on the Hitlerian bandwagon in order to fulfill Italian revisionist dreams. Though he had been indifferent to Austrian calls for help in 1938, it was not long before Mussolini felt threatened by Hitler’s aggressive policies. When Czechoslovakia was invaded in March 1938, Mussolini complained to Ciano: “Every time Hitler occupies a country he sends me a message” (Taylor, 1961: 250). Though he had once dreamt of establishing an anti-German Figure 4.8 Japanese troops outside Mukden, front based in Hungary and Yugoslavia, it was too Manchuria, September 1931. late to stand against Hitler (Taylor, 1961: 250). Source: www.britannica.com

Imperial Japan The invasion of Manchuria was the League of After facing economic collapse during the Great Nations’ first serious challenge, against which it clearly Depression, Japan witnessed spiraling prices, falling failed. Manchuria was under Chinese jurisdiction, exports, high unemployment, and social unrest. but China did not have physical control over Prime Minister Hamaguchi Osachi, for example, the territory. The lawlessness in Manchuria also was shot by an ultra-nationalist in 1930, and the hurt Japanese trade interests, which helped push military had taken over the civil administration Japan to take action (Taylor, 1961: 91). Whatever by the summer of 1931. The military government the case, the invasion marked the collapse of adopted a planned economy inspired by the Soviet collective security, as there was no united action economic model and initiated heavy armament and against Japanese aggression. Eager for the vast

102 History of International Relations

natural resources of China, the Japanese army which had escaped the world economic crisis, but acted independently of the civilian government also openly declared their rivalry to the Western in invading Manchuria, a feat that hastened the liberal economic and political system. That is why military’s take-over back home as well. Troops the Soviets were treated as a “pariah state” and quickly conquered the entire border region, kept out of the League of Nations until the mid- establishing the puppet state of Manchukuo. 1930s, when only a bigger enemy, Nazi Germany, The League of Nations condemned the action, but began to emerge (Kennedy, 1987: 290). Emerging was powerless to intervene, and Japan withdrew economically powerful after the Great Depression, its membership. Other revisionist powers, Italy the Soviets sought to play an important role in and Germany, remained indifferent to Japanese European politics throughout the 1930s. They aggression. Italy had no interest in the Far East, positioned themselves against the rising Nazi and Germany benefited from Japan’s unilateralism, Germany and sought to form a balancing bloc in which set a precedent to justify German unilateral Europe against the Nazis and other extreme right- acts in Europe. For its part, the Soviet Union was wing tendencies on the continent. They also saw concerned over Japan but did not want to stand Nazi expansion as a primary security threat and against it alone. France was too afraid to weaken called for all “peace-loving” states to unite against its position against Germany by focusing its energy Nazis. The threat of Hitler helped the Soviets on the Far East. Similarly, Britain had no intention to find a seat in the European balance of power, to act, being too concerned with maintaining joining the League of Nations in 1934, with Soviet the stability of its imperial presence in the Far Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov becoming an East. Besides, no country was willing to cut off ardent supporter of collective security on behalf international trade with Japan in the midst of an of his country. The US also finally recognized the economic crisis. Britain and the US, two major USSR in 1933. powers with strong interests and investments in the Although Europeans and Americans saw a Far East, refrained from issuing economic sanctions possible German-Soviet war that would weaken against Japan, although they were outspokenly both sides in their own favor, they prioritized the against any territorial change in the region (Taylor, Nazis as the main threat. The Soviet Union was 1961: 91). seen as a lesser evil than Hitler’s Germany. A poll In November 1936, Japan signed an anti- in the US conducted in January 1939 found out communist treaty called the “Anti-Comintern that if a war would break out between Germany Pact” with Germany. After Italy joined the pact in and the USSR, 83% of the US public would prefer 1937, the Axis bloc was finalized under the name supporting the Soviets over the Germans. This was of “Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis.” In 1939, the “Pact a highly unexpected answer from the most anti- of Steel” agreement signed by the three powers communist nation in the world and reflects the formally declared their military alliance. According extent of the fear against the Nazi Germany in the to Hobsawm (1995: 131-132), it was rather fitting late 1930s (Hobsbawm, 1995: 143). for imperial Japan to form an alliance with Nazi Europeans, however, did not necessarily Germany since “the Japanese were second to none desire an alliance with the Soviets; it was in their conviction of racial superiority and the merely a marriage of convenience against the need for racial purity” and willingness to resort to Nazis. Besides, the Soviets under the leadership barbarism to support it. of Joseph Stalin went through an intensive authoritarian transformation, especially from The Soviet Union the mid-1930s onwards. Stalin’s infamous Great Purge (1936-8) had already aimed at wiping out The Soviet Union emerged victorious from the any opposition against him within the Red Army Great Depression since Soviet economic policy had or across the bureaucracy, resulting in the torture become a model for other countries suffering from and execution of more than a million people, the crisis. According to Kennedy (1987: 285), consolidating Stalin’s authoritarian grip, and the Soviets were both admired and detested in hugely weakening the international image of the the West, because they offered a new civilization, Soviet Union (Conquest, 1968).

103 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

Nor did France and Britain invite the USSR to the Munich Agreement. Indeed, Europeans only invited the USSR to collective security talks only after Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia. By this point, however, it was too late to prevent World War II. Nor, for that matter, had the Soviets ever desired a permanent alliance with the Europeans. They just needed temporary partnership to counter-balance and deter an aggressive Germany. They also sought contact with Germany. Their main strategy, then, was to pursue a balance of power with whomever possible. They sought an Anglo–Franco– Soviet pact against the Axis front, which never materialized because of a lack of mutual trust, according to Taylor (1961: 319). Remarkably, merely one day after negotiations for the Soviet- British-French partnership were suspended, the Soviets signed a pact of non-aggression with Nazi Germany on August 23, 1939. Carley (1993: 304) claims that the Soviets had already been involved in secret negotiations with Figure 4.9 Soviet Leader Joseph Stalin and German Germany while negotiations were underway with Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop in the France and Britain. The Soviets chose to make a Kremlin, Moscow, 1939. deal with whomever offered better conditions. Source: www.wikipedia.org The Soviet-Nazi Non-Aggression Pact, also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact after the According to Taylor (1961: 318), the Molotov- foreign ministers of the USSR and Germany, Ribbentrop Pact was much more honest than the was concluded on August 23, 1939. It was an Munich Agreement insofar as the Soviets promised to remain neutral if the Nazis attacked Poland. example of Soviet bandwagoning that included However, in Munich, Britain and France directly both offensive and defensive strategies. Theirs agreed to hand over the Sudetenland to Germany. was defensive in terms of guaranteeing peace On the other hand, both pacts were similar in the with the Nazis and forestalling Nazi invasion. sense that they both constituted a document for However, it was also an example of offensive appeasing Hitler. The Soviets expected the pact bandwagoning because the USSR had its own to limit Germany’s revisionism to Poland and revisionist motives and aimed at sharing the prevent a total war (Taylor, 1961: 319). They were spoils of victory. The Soviets occupied Bessarabia mistaken, of course, just like France and Britain, in Romania on June 28, 1939 and Northern since Hitler’s revisionism in Eastern Europe led to Bukovina, another Romanian territory, a few the World War II. days later. By signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop In brief, the military take-over in Japan in Pact, the USSR undermined the League of 1931 and the Nazi victory in Germany in 1933 Nations and shocked Europeans, for whom Nazi opened a decade of revisionism and violence Germany was supposed to be the sworn enemy and the gate to World War II. When fascist of the Soviets. The last minute rapprochement Italy joined their ranks in 1937, the tripartite between the two behemoths was a purely realist Axis became one of the most fearsome alliances in history. Britain and France, suffering from survival strategy. economic crisis, could not appease the rising

104 History of International Relations

German and Italian revisionism, while the US THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR was still governed on the basis of a traditional The Spanish civil war was one of the most isolationist foreign policy. The Soviet Union that significant events in world politics during the had long marginalized itself from the outside interwar period, which turned into a proxy war world following the Bolshevik Revolution, re- between the Axis powers and the Soviet Union. emerged on the world scene throughout the Therefore, it was considered as a preview of World 1930s as the country unaffected by the Great War II (Sander, 2004:55). The Spanish civil war Depression. However, not only Britain and was an outcome of mainly internal political, social, France, but the Soviet Union and Italy were and economic factors. A troubling political climate also forced to appease Hitler in the vein hope of in Spain led to 33 cabinet changes between 1902 preventing an all-out war. and 1923, the year a fascist dictator, General Primo Overall, the interwar period is defined by de Rivera, came to power through a coup d’état. these political and economic factors clearing the His six years of dictatorship paved the way for the path for World War II: flourishing of an extreme right and left, though he • e the failur of the Treaty of Versailles, which was finally forced to resign in 1930 after losing the was seen as unjust and humiliating by the support of the army. A republic was proclaimed in Germans; 1931 and leftist Republicans won the elections. • the Great Depression, which challenged the However, they had inherited a bankrupt and world economic order and pushed nation- politically polarized state lacking well-functioning states to self-sufficiency and protectionism; democratic institutions. A failed coup against the Republican government in January 1932 revealed • the rise of Hitler and his revisionist policies; increasing social and political polarization that • the unsuccessful French and British rendered the environment ripe for a civil war. A appeasement policy towards aggressors; and series of fascist and ultra-nationalist groups were • e the failur of the League of Nations and the pitted against the Republican regime, namely the concept of collective security. Spanish Confederation of Autonomous Right- Last but not least was the Spanish Civil War, wing Groups (CEDA), the ultra-traditionalist, an internationalized conflict fought between Catholic, monarchist Carlists, and the Falange monarchists and nationalists on one side and Española movement led by the son of Rivera. republicans on the other, both of which needed During the 1936 elections, the Republicans considerable foreign assistance. Nazi Germany gained a narrow victory under the Popular Front and Fascist Italy both saw this as an opportunity of Manuel Azana, leader of the Left Republican to test their military technology and strategic Party. Leftist reforms on landowners and clerics capabilities in preparation for a much bigger such as the confiscation of church properties war. The Spanish Civil War constituted the last created havoc, leading to attacks, strikes on curtain of Hitler’s long play and served as a churches, and the farms of landowners. Mutiny litmus test for the German military and political within the Spanish army against the Republican superiority. Like World War II itself, there was to regime encouraged General Francisco Franco to go be no negotiated settlement; the winner would to Spanish Morocco in order to lead a rebellion. take all. Many army officers joined him. The nationalists, however, did not mean to launch a civil war. With a sizeable portion of the army, they aimed for a quick victory. But there was no sign of swift victory. The Republican government distributed weapons to 3 peasants and workers and convinced them to fight Why did Britain, France, Italy and the Soviet for liberty and equality, with help from the Soviets Union choose to appease Hitler? to boot. A three-year civil war was in the making. The main justification of the nationalist rebellion was based on religion, insofar as it was seen as a crusade against the destruction 105 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

of Catholicism in Spain. Indeed, the rebellion troops, provided air transport and bombings, sold started with 160,000 men but grew to more than 100 tanks with artillery, and donated around 1 million troops by 1939. The war ended with 800,000 rifles and revolvers to the nationalists. The around 200,000 war deaths and another 300.000 German experience in flying combat missions over wounded. Nationalists justified their revolt as a Spain also proved priceless for Germany during holy war against “infidels” who sought to destroy World War II, while German merchant ships the Catholic Church in Spain, for which the carried military equipment and supplies. Indeed, burning of churches and murder of clerics were 35 German warships and U-boats patrolled the blamed on Republicans. Furthermore, there was Spanish coasts to prevent a Republican attack, a considerable Nazi and Fascist influence on the while the German navy enforced an embargo on Spanish Nationalists to smash communism and Spain imposed by the League of Nations Non- establish nationalist domination. Intervention Committee. However, both Germans Germany, Italy, and volunteers from other and broke the embargo many times to aid countries such as Portugal and France also the nationalists. On the other hand, the Italian joined the Spanish Civil War on the side of the Corpo Truppe Volontarie was the largest foreign nationalists. Germany’s Condor Legion, on the military assistance to the nationalists, with 78,500 other hand, consisting of 7,000 volunteers from the men, 750 aircraft, and 150 armored vehicles. With German air force and ground army, served mainly recent combat experience from their invasion of as supervisors and trainers rather than actual fight. Ethiopia, Italy would suffer 3,819 casualties and That said, they trained tens of thousands of Spanish about 12,000 wounded in the Spanish Civil War.

Figure 4.10 Guernica, oil painting by Pablo Picasso created in response to the German bombing of Guernica, a Basque city in Spain, during the civil war.

Hitler’s involvement in the Spanish war aimed at diverting British and French attention from Central and Eastern Europe so he would be unhindered in his plans for eastern expansion. Germany also used the Spanish war as a chance to build an image as the punisher of Communists. Before long, the Soviet Union was the only nation to give outright support to the Republicans. Using its Propaganda Ministry to pose as the “defenders of Western civilization” against the Communists, Spain became a primary vehicle for Hitler’s anti-Bolshevik propaganda campaigns throughout the decade. According to Hitler, the Spanish war provided the opportunity for “the gradual formation of a group of powers which are willing to make a common front with Germany and Italy under the banner of anti-Bolshevism,” thus obliging Britain to come to terms with German and Italian expansion (Kotkin, 2017: 355).

106 History of International Relations

At the end of the day, the Spanish war proved an international effort to draw up “essential and beneficial for Hitler. Germany gained the valuable fundamental principles” of international behavior. raw materials from Spain, while the war undermined The US initiative was rejected by Britain as useless. British and French credibility, encouraging Hitler to This caused the US to further distance itself from make even more dramatic plans for eastern expansion. the security needs of the European democracies. The war also helped drive a wedge between the USSR Following the nationalist victory under Franco’s and Britain and France and was one of the reasons leadership, Franco became the dictator of Spain Stalin reluctantly concluded that an accommodation until his death in November 1975. Though he had with Hitler was necessary. For its part, Italy invested received considerable German and Italian assistance, in the Spanish war much more heavily than Germany. Franco chose to remain neutral during the Second It deployed forces and got directly involved in actual World War. He did not let German troops pass on battles, unlike Germany. Exhausted militarily and their way to invade British Gibraltar. Although he economically, Italian fascism still gained a wide did allow the Axis powers to use Spain’s ports and reputation across Europe. That said, the real winner sent around 15,000 Falangist militia in Germany’s was Germany, which had no serious losses, and campaign for Stalingrad, which cost Spain 13,000 Italian war fatigue increased Rome’s dependence on lives, he withdrew the rest of his troops under Germany in the event of a greater war. As if on cue, pressure from the Allies in October 1943. the Second World War began just five months after A great struggle between two grand ideologies, the Spanish Civil war ended. Fascism and Communism, the Spanish Civil War That said, France also provided limited support was more than a civil war. Accordingly, it can be to the Republicans, though it did not send seen as a ‘little World War’ whose implications for troops. Instead, it sponsored a non-intervention Europe were considerable. It increased solidarity agreement among all the European states in the among fascists and ultra-nationalists all over Europe, hope of discouraging Italian and German aid to encouraging them to sharpen their ambitions. Franco. Britain, meanwhile, devised a series of It gave Nazis the confidence to invade Austria, non-intervention schemes, but all its efforts failed. Czechoslovakia, and Poland and drew Fascist Italy International brigades were formed consisting completely away from the democratic western front of around 40,000 volunteers from around the toward the Nazis. It also crystallized the division world to fight for the Republicans. sent between democratic and dictatorial states. The failure $2 million and a number of airplanes, while Soviet of the Western democracies to act during the civil assistance included both humanitarian aid in the war indicated the weakness of their appeasement form of food and other supplies for the civilian policy, encouraging Hitler go even further. For its population and financial aid that amounted to part, Japan also used the troubling climate in Europe around 65 million rubles. The Soviet government as an opportunity to invade China. Finally, the war adhered to the Agreement on Non-Intervention in served as a rehearsal for World War II, preparing Spanish Affairs; it still sent 806 military aircraft, the German and Italian armies for total war. Nazi 362 tanks, 120 armored cars, 1555 artillery pieces, Germany in particular considered the civil war 500,000 rifles, 340 grenade launchers, 15,113 as an opportunity to test its newly developed war machine-guns, more than 110,000 aerial bombs, machines, the German tanks, and obtained vital data about 3.4 million rounds of ammunition, 500,000 about their performance in warfare (Kennedy, 1987: grenades, 862 million cartridges, and 1500 tons of 325). This knowledge was particularly useful in the gunpowder. There were also 2000 Soviet volunteers, application of the German Blitzkrieg –lightning mostly trainers, in Spain. war- method throughout the war. For its part, the US continued to pursue isolationism. The Spanish Civil War had divided American public opinion and reinforced isolationist sentiment in the country, causing the US 4 government to strengthen its neutrality legislation. Why was the Spanish Civil War more of a victory President Roosevelt’s peace initiative of early 1938 for Nazi Germany than Fascist Italy? refers to a meeting of ambassadors to sponsor

107 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

Explain the main reasons behind the rise and fall of the League of LO 1 Nations.

At the Paris Peace Conference, the architects of the League of Nations considered the organization as a mechanism of collective security that would protect all member states against external aggression and thus prevent future great wars. The League of Nations, however, was ill-made from the beginning since the US never became a member, and there was no sanctioning mechanism to enforce compliance with international norms and law. Moreover, it was hard to set standards for the relations of sixty member states that widely differed in size and in power as well as in political, economic and cultural development. Nor was there a common enemy to necessitate a unified military strategy. Bureaucratic measures slowing down common decision-making also proved very difficult for European powers to act on time against aggression. Moreover, the League had no army to prevent free riders who resorted to invasion and unilateral violence when it suited them. Therefore, the League of Nations failed to establish a lasting collective security and

Summary to prevent another World War. Although the League of Nations was founded on the principle of collective security, it was never able to apply it properly, when a major power was involved in a conflict. The League members hid behind the pretext of the lack of the League’s sanctioning mechanism when Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931. However, even when the League of Nations adopted a sanctioning mechanism, it lacked the capacity to make member states execute those sanctions when Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935. The League of Nations showed no reaction to the annexation of Austria into Germany in 1938, and when the League actually stepped up and expelled the Soviet Union for invading Finland in 1939, it held no effect whatsoever on the actions of the Soviets (Kissinger, 1994: 249). The League members did not feel committed to step up when an aggression by a major power took place outside their borders, since the League had no capacity to make them step up. These deficiencies not only prevented a functioning collective security for Europe, but also discredited the League of Nations, prepared its demise, and cleared the path for World War II.

Discuss the Great Depression and LO 2 its impact on world politics.

Another turning point during the interwar period was the Great Depression of 1929, which shattered the world economy and provided fertile ground for political extremism around the world. The 1929 world economic crisis brought an abrupt end to any efforts at world peace. It started a new decade full of agony, uncertainty, distrust and, eventually, conflict. The crisis had a remarkable impact upon the world economy, causing a significant drop in world industrial production and trade. According to Hobsbawm (1995), the Great Depression was the ultimate factor behind the political extremism that culminated in World War II. Had there been no Depression, populist leaders like Hitler and Mussolini would not have been able to successfully mobilize the masses for ultra-nationalism; the Communist economic system of the Soviet Union would not have been considered as an important alternative to capitalism; the chances for a Second World War would have greatly decreased; and the collective security system advocated by League of Nations would not have failed (Hobsbawm, 1995). On the other hand, according to Taylor (1961), the rise of Nazi ideology in Germany not only stemmed from the Great Depression, but also from the French obsession with curbing German power. The impossible task of paying huge sums of war reparations demanded by the French to cripple Germany proved counter-effective and threw Germans into the hands of the Nazis. Besides, as Kissinger (1994) points out, the League of Nations was doomed for failure from the beginning due to the deficiencies in its organizational and operational design. As such, the Great Depression was also a serious trigger for the spread of chaos and conflict worldwide. Nevertheless, the structural deficiencies of the League were also a crucial impediment to world peace.

108 History of International Relations

Assess the determining factors behind the rise of revisionist powers, namely Nazi Germany, Fascist LO 3 Italy, Imperial Japan, and the Soviet Union, in the interwar international system.

The Great Depression not only brought the nations of the world to the brink of economic bankruptcy, but also provided fertile ground for the establishment of extreme political formations including Nazism in Germany and Fascism in Italy. Moreover, the military take-over in Japan and the revisionist policies of

the Soviet Union were other remarkable political repercussions of the Great Depression. While Germany Summary pursued decisive policies of revisionism and irredentism through threat or use of force, many nations including Britain, France, Italy, and the Soviet Union either resorted to appeasement or bandwagoning to deal with Hitler. This only made Hitler all the more determined to pursue aggressive policies. Mussolini was an inspiration to Hitler, but it was Hitler who gave fascism its worldwide popularity and prestige. Mussolini’s fascism only successfully spread to other countries after Hitler came to power in 1933. Japan, for its part, was transformed into an imperial and military power after the ill effects of the Great Depression. Since the League of Nations could not prevent the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, Japan became even more aggressive in its foreign policy. Finally, the Soviet Union was perhaps the lone winner of the Great Depression, becoming a model for other countries. Using this as a leverage for their rise in world politics, the Soviets were still forced to bandwagon and appease Hitler in their vein attempt to avoid confrontation. Overall, several political and economic developments in the interwar period paved the way for the outbreak of the Second World War: the failure of the Treaty of Versailles, the Great Depression, the rise of Hitler and his revisionist policies, the unsuccessful French and British appeasement policy towards aggressors, and the failure of the League of Nations and the concept of collective security.

Explain the causes and effects of LO 4 the Spanish Civil War.

Leftist land reforms and attacks on clerics, including the confiscation of church property, created havoc in Spain. Poverty-stricken rural peasants seized land from wealthy estate-owners. After a mutiny within the Spanish army against the Republican regime encouraged General Franco to go to Spanish Morocco in order to kick off the rebellion, it was not long before Germany, Italy and volunteers from other countries such as Portugal and France started pouring into Spain to fight on behalf of the nationalists. The only visible supporter of the Republicans was the Soviet Union. The Spanish Civil War was more than a civil war because it was a struggle between two grand ideologies, Fascism and Communism. Accordingly, it can be seen as a ‘little World War’ whose implications for Europe were considerable. It increased solidarity among fascists and ultra-nationalists all over Europe and gave the Nazis the confidence to invade Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. It also drew Fascist Italy completely away from the democratic West and bound it to the Nazis. It also crystallized the division between democratic and dictatorial states. The failure of the Western democracies to act during the civil war indicated the weakness of their appeasement policy, encouraging Hitler go even further. For its part, Japan also used the troubling climate in Europe as an opportunity to invade China. Finally, the war served as a rehearsal for World War II, preparing the German and Italian armies for total war. Germany in particular considered the civil war as an opportunity to test its newly developed war machines, the German tanks, and obtained vital data about their performance in warfare.

109 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

1 Which of the following states was expelled 6 Which of the following was the most from the League of Nations in 1939? important example of the French and British appeasement policy towards Nazi Germany? a. Italy b. Germany a. The Locarno actP c. Japan b. The ellogg-BriandK Pact d. The ovietS Union c. The unichM Agreement e. China d. The Saint-Germain Treaty e. The Versailles Treaty

2 Which of the following states did not pursue 7 I. Austria an appeasement policy towards Hitler’s Germany? Test Yourself Test II. Sudetenland a. France b. Italy III. Memelland c. Britain . IV Saar region d. The nitedU States . V Switzerland e. The ovietS Union Which of the above were among direct targets of Nazi Germany’s irredentism? 3 Which of the following was an initiative that sought to find a solution for Germany’s payment of a. Only I war reparations? b. I and II c. I, II and III a. The ellogg-BriandK Pact d. I, II, III and IV b. The Versailles Treaty e. I, II, III, IV and V c. The awesD Plan d. The Locarno actP e. The rianonT Treaty 8 I. Lack of an efficient sanctioning mechanism 4 Which of the following is not one of the II. Slow decision-making process due to crises that the League of Nations failed to respond? bureaucratic procedures a. The byssiniaA crisis III. Lack of a standing army b. The anchurianM crisis . IV Lack of a common enemy to create c. The uezS crisis collective stra tegy d. The uhrR crisis Which of the above can be considered as the main e. The udetenlandS crisis reasons for the failure of the League of Nations? a. Only I 5 Which of the following refers to the policy b. I and II of buying off a potential aggressor through c. II and III negotiation and compromise in order to prevent d. I, II and III an armed conflict? e. I, II, III and IV a. Bandwagoning b. Appeasement c. Revisionism d. Irredentism e. Isolationism

110 History of International Relations

9 Which of the following statements about the 10 I. The failure of the Treaty of Versailles Spanish civil war is not correct? II. The reatG Depression of 1929 a. It was a struggle between two grand ideologies, III. The evisionistr policies of Hitler’s

Fascism and Communism. Test Yourself b. It drew Italy closer toward the western Germany democratic countries. . IV The failure of the British and French c. It increased solidarity among fascists and ultra- appeasement policy nationalist in Europe. . V The failure of the League of Nations d. It crystalized the division between democratic and dictatorial states. Which of the above are among the main causes of e. It gave Nazis the confidence to invade other the Second World War? countries. a. Only I b. I and II c. I, II and III d. I, II, III and IV e. I, II, III, IV and V

111 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review 1. d 6. c “The Rise and Fall of the League of Nations” the “The Rise of Revisionist Powers in the section. International System” section.

2. d If your answer is wrong, please review 7. d If your answer is wrong, please review the “The Rise of Revisionist Powers in the the “The Rise of Revisionist Powers in the International System” section. International System” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review the 3. c 8. e “The Rise and Fall of the League of Nations” “The Rise and Fall of the League of Nations” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the c b If your answer is wrong, please review the 4. “The Rise and Fall of the League of Nations” 9. “The Spanish Civil War” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review 5. b 10. e “The Great Depression and its Impact On the “The Rise of Revisionist Powers in the World Politics” section. International System” section. Answer Key for “Test Yourself” for “Test Key Answer

Discuss why the Treaty of Versailles failed.

The Treaty of Versailles failed because it suffered from several major weaknesses. Its provisions included terms that were impossible for Germany to comply with. Among others, the War Guilt clause, war reparations, and territorial arrangements took the precedence. Zara Steiner (2005:68), for instance, argues that “[t]he Versailles treaty was [...] a flawed treaty. [...] It failed to solve the problem of both punishing and conciliating a country that remained a great power despite the four years of fighting and its military defeat. It could hardly have been otherwise, given the very different aims of the peacemakers, not to speak of the multiplicity of problems that they faced, your turn 1 many well beyond their competence or control. Little beyond the common wish to defeat the Germans had kept the war coalition together; apart from a shared belief in Germany’s responsibility for the war, there was even less consensus among the treaty-drafters in Paris. The settlement was further weakened by the way the treaty was drafted and by the erratic methods of its creators. It was never reviewed in its entirety, and compromise or postponed solutions contributed to its incoherence and inconsistency. It is no surprise that the Treaty of Versailles was a bundle of compromises that fully satisfied Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your none of the three peacemakers. The ambiguities, real and imagined, of the military victory in 1918 were as critical and distorting for the deliberations as the pressures of popular politics. [...].”

112 History of International Relations

Discuss how the Great Depression of 1929 influenced states’ foreign policy behaviors. Suggested answers for “Your Turn”

The Great Depression provided fertile ground for the rise of extremist ideologies such as Nazism and Fascism. Diplomacy and international law lost credibility, while aggressive foreign policy through unilateral action and the use of force became dominant norms in international relations. Common aggressive foreign policies involved revisionism, irredentism, and bandwagoning, while defensive policies of the time included appeasement and isolationism. Revisionism is defined as the desire to alter the international status quo in a significant way through the violation of treaties and the imposition of territorial change by coercion or the use of force. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan were the major revisionist powers during the interwar period. Irredentism is your turn 2 a territorial claim by one sovereign state against another, aimed at equalizing the boundaries of its ‘nation’ (or ethnicity) with the borders of the state. The German annexation of Austria, the Sudetenland, and the Memelland during the 1930s illustrates this point. Bandwagoning is to side with the rising revisionist power contrary to traditional notions of the balance of power, which counter- alliances historically try and prevent. Hungary’s alliance with Nazi Germany is one of its examples. Appeasement is the policy of buying off a potential aggressor through negotiation and compromise in order to prevent an armed conflict. Britain and France pursued appeasement policy towards both Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. During the 1930s, the US relied on isolationism since she avoided entanglement in European conflicts.

Why did Britain, France, Italy and the Soviet Union choose to appease Hitler?

Each state decided to conduct appeasement policy toward Hitler for different reasons. France and Britain succumbed to public pressure to achieve peace at any price, and facing the brutality of the Great Depression, they were not physically capable of deterring Germany, Japan, or Italy. In addition, appeasement was based on the assumption that Hitler was a reasonable leader. your turn 3 That said, Mussolini also appeased Hitler, and Italy remained indifferent to Austrian calls for help when Hitler annexed it through the Anschluss in 1938. By that year, Mussolini felt threatened enough by Hitler’s aggressive policies to simply turn a blind eye. The Soviets, for their part, thought they could limit Germany’s revisionism to Poland and prevent a total war if they appeased Hitler. Like France and Britain, they too were mistaken.

Why was the Spanish Civil War more a victory for Nazi Germany than Fascist Italy?

The Spanish Civil War proved more beneficial for Hitler. Germany gained the valuable raw materials, while the Spanish war also undermined British and French credibility, encouraging Hitler to plan a more dramatic eastern expansion. The war also helped drive the Soviet Union away from Britain and France and was one of the reasons why Stalin reluctantly concluded that an your turn 4 accommodation with Hitler was necessary. Italy, for its part, invested much more heavily in the Spanish Civil War than Germany, deploying forces and fighting in actual battles, unlike Germany. While Italy was exhausted militarily and economically by the end of the war, Germany had no serious losses. This only increased Italian dependence on Germany in the event of a greater war, which began only five months after the end of the Spanish Civil War.

113 World Politics in The Interwar Years 1919-1939

References

Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A., & Schulze, K. Kennedy, P. (1976) ‘The Tradition of Appeasement in E. (2008). International History of the Twentieth British Foreign Policy 1865–1939’, British Journal Century and Beyond, New York: Routledge. of International Studies, 2:3, 195-215. Carley, M. J. (1993). “End of the ‘Low, Dishonest Kennedy, P. (1987). The Rise and Fall of the Great Decade’: Failure of the Anglo-Franco-Soviet Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict Alliance in 1939”, Europe-Asia Studies, 45:2, 303- from 1500 to 2000, New York: Random House. 341. Kissinger, H. (1994). Diplomacy, New York: Simon Carr, E. H. (1946). The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919- and Schuster. 1939:n A Introduction to the Study of International Kotkin, S. (2017). Stalin: Waiting for Hitler, 1929– Relations, London: Macmillan. 1941, London: Penguin Press. Clark, I. (2005). Legitimacy in International Society, Northedge, F.S. (1986). The League of Nations: Its Oxford: Oxford University Press. Life and Times 1920-1946, Leicester, Leicester Conquest, R. (1968). The Great Terror: Stalin’s Purge University Press of the Thirties, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Taylor, A.J. P. (1961). The Origins of the Second World Gülmez, S. B. (2017). “Turkish foreign policy as an War, London: Hamilton. anomaly: revisionism and irredentism through Sander, O. (2004). Siyasi Tarih 1918-1994, Ankara: diplomacy in the 1930s”, British Journal of Middle İmge Kitabevi. Eastern Studies, 44:1, 30-47 Steiner, Z. (2005). The Lights that Failed: European Henig, R. (2010). The League of Nations, London, International History 1919–1933, New York: Haus Publishing. Oxford University Press. Hobsbawm, E. J. (1995). Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914-1991, London: Abacus.

Further Reading

Garraty, John A. (1987). The Great Depression, Anchor Preston, P. (2016). The Spanish Civil War: Reaction, Press. Revolution and Revenge, Harper Collins. Housten, M. (2011). The League of Nations and the Shirer, William L. (1991). The rise and fall of the Third Organization of Peace, Routledge. Reich: A history of Nazi Germany, Random House.

114

The Second World War Chapter 5 1939-1945

After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Describe the outbreak of the Second World Analyze how the war was transformed from a 1 War. 2 European to a global war. Explain the importance of Allied conferences during the war and the establishment of the United Nations for the post-war international Discuss the end of the war. 3 system. 4 Key Terms Allied Powers Chapter Outline Axis Powers

Learning Outcomes Total War Introduction Blitzkrieg (Lightning War) The Outbreak of the Second World War Luftwaffe, Red Army From European War to Global War Royal Air Force Inter-Allied Conferences During the War and the Operation Barbarossa Establishment of the United Nations Atomic Bomb The End of the Second World War Yalta Conference United Nations

116 History of International Relations

INTRODUCTION for one, was convinced that only with the raw The Second World War was a global war materials mainland China and Southeast Asia between the world’s leading powers that caused could it survive. Hitler, in a similar vein, was great and lasting destruction to human civilization. convinced that the Soviet Union must be destroyed A catastrophic instance of ‘total war,’ even neutral to allow for German settlement of Eastern Europe countries were profoundly affected. Fought across a and mastery of her agriculture and raw materials. vast geography, from the jungles of Madagascar and That this would come at the expense—and with deserts of North Africa to the steppes of East Asia, the destruction of—a ‘much-hated’ Bolshevik few escaped its wrath. The ambitions of the aggressor ideology, was all the better, according to Berlin. states—on the one hand Germany, Japan, and Italy, Italy, for its part, waged a war against the British in and on the other, the Soviet Union (officially the Egypt in order to wrest control of the Suez Canal Union of Soviet Socialist Republics-USSR), which and capture strategic sources of Middle Eastern invaded both Finland and Poland, dictated the oil. This last material was extremely crucial for the war’s geography. Each belligerent sought to take Western Allies, whose large merchant ships and advantage of the war to create new security regimes navies relied heavily upon it. As such, the warring and secure and protect their international status. parties did their best to deny one another resources At the beginning, the ambitions of the major Axis and principle trade routes through warfare both powers, namely Germany, Japan, and Italy, were economic and physical. Before long, this tendency limited to safeguarding their spheres of interests brought the war to nearly every corner of the planet and the “new orders” they had created in Europe, (Overy, 2015:1-3). the Mediterranean, and Asia. Before long, however, Until the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in these morphed into an all-out world war, given the 1941, World War II had mostly been a European global reach of the Allied powers, in particular war fought near the Atlantic; afterward it became the United States and the British Empire (Overy, Asiatic and Pacific. The war in Europe passed 2015:1). through three main phases: Much of the stage for war was already set by • First, the German victories against Poland, the mid-1930s: the invasion of Manchuria in Scandinavia, the Low Countries (Belgium, 1931, the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in 1935; the Netherlands, and Luxembourg), and German and Italian intervention into the Spanish France, ending in the Battle of Britain in Civil War of 1936-1939; the German Anschluss of the summer of 1940. Austria in 1938; and the German occupation of • Second, the war spread to the Balkans, Czechoslovakia in 1938-9 are but several examples North Africa, and the German invasion of (Hobsbawm, 1995:37). When Germany attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941. Poland on September 1, 1939, London and • Third were the first fierce battles of Paris declared war on Berlin. From there things the eastern front, which culminated moved quickly. In June 1940 Germany invaded in Germany’s advance some 600 miles and occupied France, and in June 1941 attacked into Soviet territory by the end of 1941 the Soviet Union. By December of that year, in (Thomson, 1990:765). the wake of Pearl Harbor (December 7), she had In such a devastating conflict, the scramble to declared war on the United States. Japan, which secure new resources constantly exacerbated the had been militarily present in Manchuria since the fighting. The term used to describe this tendency early 1930s, launched an all-out invasion of China is total war—a war without limits involving in July 1937. Four years later, she would be at war the mobilization of a country’s entire human, with the United States, the Netherlands, Britain, intellectual, economic, and technical resources. Australia, and New Zealand across most of Asia. Of course, this differed country by country. In Although there was solidarity between Germany, the case of the United States, mobilization was Japan, and Italy, their wars were waged as separate only partial, though it still out-produced every ones. These conflicts’ geographical denouement other nation. On the other hand, the Soviet was also determined by economic needs. Japan, Union was forced to mobilize almost everything

117 The Second World War 1939-1945

available in its unoccupied zones. Of these, oil important was of immense importance, and had German forces captured the USSR’s Caucasian oilfields, The Second World War was fought between or the Italians and German Commander Erwin two rival groups of states, Axis powers and Allied Rommel taken hold of Middle East oil, the entire powers. The major Axis powers were Germany, outcome of the war may have gone differently Japan, and Italy while the main Allied powers, (Overy, 2015:2). also known as Allies, were Great Britain, France, The mobilization of civil society and the public the Soviet Union, and the United States. to serve particular war ends was another huge factor. In the Axis powers in particular, the masses were mobilized with particular vigor. Convincing THE OUTBREAK OF THE SECOND a weary public that the sacrifices were necessary WORLD WAR became an integral component of total war. Which often was not difficult, given that people’s The section introduces the main events at the families and urban environment were often under beginning of World War II, which broke out in the threat of total devastation. As such, patriotic 1939 after the German invasion of Poland. propaganda and political, psychological, and information warfare against enemies were carried The Invasion of Poland out extensively. Anger, vengefulness, hatred, fear, After the German occupation of Czechoslovakia and sheer bravery cemented the union of huge in 1939, Hitler turned his attention to Poland, publics against the national “enemy.” To suppress demanding the annexation of the Free City of public dissent, the German, Italian, and Soviet Danzig and the abolition of the Polish Corridor, dictatorships also monitored their populations a narrow strip linking Poland with the Baltic Sea with every means—though extreme measures were and dividing East Prussia from the rest of Germany also taken to prevent hunger, inflation, working (Gilbert, 2004:15). The Second World War began class unrest that had plagued Europe during and with the German attack on Poland on September after the First World War (Overy, 2015:4). 1,1939 (Parker, 2001:21).

Figure 5.1 German troops invading Poland, September 1939. Germany organized two massive blows for attacking Poland: on the one hand, Army Group South under General Gerd von Rundstedt would drive northwestward from Silesia toward Warsaw. On the other hand, Army Group North would close the Polish Corridor and move southeast toward Warsaw. While Army Group North consisted of 630,000 soldiers, Army Group South had 886,000. TheLuftwaffe , the German Air Force, also planned a massive strategic bombing attack on Warsaw at the beginning of the war. However, this plan over Warsaw was not carried out during the initial invasion on September 1, 1939

118 History of International Relations

due to bad weather conditions. The Luftwaffe Many towns and villages in Poland were burned and German army had worked together to realize to the ground by German forces. At the end of the ground attacks with air support. German forces first week of the war, Krakow was controlled by had approximately 54 divisions against Poland— the Germans. At Bedzin, on September 8, several six panzer divisions, four light divisions, and hundred Jews were burned in a synagogue (Gilbert, four motorized infantry divisions. The rest were 2004:19-20). Within three weeks, German troops conventional infantry divisions. The Polish Army had sieged Warsaw. German bombings over the consisted of 30 active divisions, 11 independent Polish capital were severe and frightened the entire cavalry brigades, and 2 mechanized brigades. population of the city. All of Poland had been Compared with the German forces, the Polish invaded by the German troops in four weeks. Army was weak in terms of mechanized forces. 694,000 Polish soldiers had been captured by Moreover, Polish infantry did not have enough German forces, while another 217,000 were in training or weapons for mobile operations. For Russian hands. More than 60,000 had been killed in instance, the Polish Air Force possessed only 313 action (Gilbert, 2004:14-15). From the beginning combat aircraft whereas the Luftwaffe had 2,085 of the German attack, the SS Einsatzgruppen, (Murray and Millett, 2000:45-48). paramilitary death squads of Nazi Germany, set On September 1, German troops crossed the about committing atrocities against the Jews. Polish frontier. Adolf Hitler’s method in Poland In the occupied territories, German authorities was called ‘Blitzkrieg’—a lightning war. For concentrated Jews into restricted ghettos, where starters, German air attacks destroyed much of starvation, disease, and overwork became some of the Polish air force. Second, German bombers the most common methods of persecution (Murray attacked at road and rail communications, and Millett, 2000:50-51). munitions dumps, and civilian centers. These well- Only few days before the beginning of the coordinated German tanks and armored vehicles Second World War, Nazi Germany and the Soviet with devastating air power destroyed Polish forces Union had concluded a non-aggression treaty on within a short time. The aim of the invasion of August 23, 1939. The Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Poland was not only to regain the territories lost Pact divided Eastern Europe into German and in 1918 but also to establish the German rule over Soviet spheres of influence, and thereby partitioned Poland (Gilbert, 2004:14-15). A few hours after Poland between two countries. Germany ceded the German invasion of Poland, the British and the greater part of Lithuania to the Soviet Union French governments demanded that Germany in return for a larger share of Poland. Following suspend its aggressive action, which Berlin declined the German invasion, the Red Army invaded to do. Having guaranteed the integrity of Poland’s Poland from the east on September 17, 1939. The territory in April 1939, Britain and France declared partition of Poland was concluded on September war on Germany on September 3, 1939. Thus, 29 and Germany formally annexed Danzig on 26 the European phase of the Second World War October (Rich, 2003:214). began(Rich, 2003:212).

119 The Second World War 1939-1945

Figure 5.2 German and Soviet invasion of Poland, September 1939. Source: encyclopedia.ushmm.org The Invasion of Finland, Denmark, Joseph Stalin’s territorial demands. As a result, the and Norway Soviet Union gained the whole Karelian Isthmus, Following the Soviet occupation of eastern as well as Finnish territories further to the north. Poland, the Red Army tried to strengthen its The Soviet attack on Finland also upset Germany, position in the north. Since 1938 the Soviets which had great economic interests in this region had demanded concessions from Finland in the (Murray and Millett, 2000:56-57). According to Karelian Isthmus and concerning various islands in Rich, although the Red Army gained a victory the Gulf of Finland to provide a better defensive in Finland in March 1940, the Russo-Finish war perimeter for Leningrad. The Soviets also wanted revealed the weakness of Soviet forces in the face of to lease the port of Hanko for a Soviet naval base. Finnish resistance (Rich, 2003:217). On November 26, 1939, the Soviet demands Back in Berlin, Hitler aimed to conquer Britain were rejected by the Finns. On the morning of before turning his forces against the Soviet Union November 29, the Red Army attacked the Soviet- (Gilbert, 2004:56). However, he received certain Finnish border (Rich, 2003:217). Although the reports that “the Allies were preparing to occupy Red Army had superiority in numbers and material, Norway and Sweden under the cover of coming the Finns put up fierce resistance. In Finland, to the aid of Finland” (Rich, 2003:217). He the Red Army continued its advances with heavy further argued that such a preparation should be bombardment of road and rail junctions (Gilbert, prevented, for if the British forces had occupied 2004:45,51). On February 5, 1940, the British Norway and Sweden this would have been a and French governments agreed to intervene in serious threat to German strategic and economic the Russo-Finish war. Neville Chamberlain, the interests. Germany had various naval bases in the British Prime Minister, said “Finland must not be Baltic Sea and depended on Sweden’s iron ore allowed to disappear from the map.” It was also (Rich, 2003:217). On March 1, 1940 Hitler issued agreed that the Allied forces should take control a detailed directive stating that the “new operation of the Swedish iron ore fields at Gällivare (Gilbert, of war would anticipate English action against 2004:54). Scandinavia and the Baltic, secure supplies of iron By early March 1940, the Red Army had ore from Sweden, and provide the Navy and Air broken through Finnish lines, and on March 13 Force with expanded bases for operations against the Finnish government accepted Soviet leader England” (Gilbert, 2004:58).

120 History of International Relations

On April 2, Hitler ordered that the invasion troops arrived on the French soil near Sedan. of Denmark and Norway to begin on April 9. German General Heinz Wilhelm Guderian’s German forces occupied Denmark within hours. panzer corps reached the Meuse River (Murray The Danish King, Christian X, demanded an and Millett, 2000:66-73). In June 1940, Hitler immediate ceasefire, making Denmark Hitler’s launched what was then the most ambitious step of second military conquest (Gilbert, 2004:65). the war: the occupation of Paris, something not The Germans sent their entire navy to Norway’s achieved since 1871. On June 3, 1940, the German strategically important points. 2,000 troops were air forces bombed Paris, killing 254 people, 195 sent to Narvik, 1,700 to Trondheim, 1,900 to Köln, of which were civilians, the rest soldiers. Britain Königsberg, and Karlsruhe, 1,100 to Kristiansand, made certain preparations to combat the invasion and 2,000 to Oslo (Murray and Millett, 2000:57- force, should France fall or the Germans mobilize 58). Although Britain and France tried to help on the English Channel (Gilbert, 2004:95). Norway and sank many German ships, the On June 4, British Prime Minister Winston German forces won the battle in Norway. On May Churchill delivered a famous speech in the House 10, German troops upped the ante by invading the of Commons reiterating Britain’s determination to Netherlands and Belgium. Within days, German fight on: air forces parachuted into Rotterdam and captured the important Belgian fortress of Eben Emael “Even though large tracts of Europe and many (Rich, 2003:219). old and famous states have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of The German Attack on Western Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight Europe on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing The Germans aimed to overthrow the French confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall government, invade France, and minimize Britain’s defend our island, whatever the cost may be,” (quoted continental influence. On May 12, 1940, German in Gilbert, 2004:96).

Figure 5.3 The Nazi Occupation of Paris during the Second World War.

121 The Second World War 1939-1945

At this point, Italy declared war both on France der Wehrmacht - OKW) to prepare “extensive and Britain, which also paved the way for new war operations against the economic foundations upon zones (Rich, 2003:220). In East Africa, Italy became which England rests,” its industry, utilities, and sovereign in . Britain was Italy’s African ports, in November 1939. Toward the end of May, neighbor in both British Somalia and British East he wanted a “full-scale” and quick air attack against Africa, while Italy’s Libyan border with Egypt was Britain. On June 30, 1940, when he understood less than 450 miles from the Suez Canal, Britain’s that victory over France was guaranteed, Hitler got vital imperial waterway. On June 11, the Italian Air a proposal on how to beat Britain from his main Force bombed several points in Port Sudan, Aden, advisor in the OKW, General Alfred Jodl. The and the Mediterranean (Gilbert, 2004:100). emphasis was on demolishing Britain’s air force By June 14, 1940, German military vehicles had and economy (Ferris and Mawdsley, 2015:315). reached Paris. On June 16, a new French government In September 1940, thirty German divisions was formed under Marshal Henri-Philippe Pétain, would plan a coup de grâce (a decisive finishing act) who asked the Germans for an armistice. This was against Britain with Hitler’s Directive No. 16 of July signed on June 22, 1940, dividing the country into 16, codenamed Sea Lion, whose preparations were two parts, an occupied and an unoccupied zone. to be ready by mid-August. When the German navy German troops occupied all of northern France. The decided on Sea Lion, it had one heavy cruiser, four south and France’s territories in North Africa came destroyers, and two light cruisers ready for battle. under the jurisdiction of the new French government Britain had eleven cruisers, five capital ships, an in Vichy headed by Pétain (Rich, 2003:220). The aircraft carrier, and eighty destroyers, not to mention cost of the brief Franco-German war was 92,000 another seven capital ships, seven cruisers, two French soldiers, 7,500 Belgians, and 2,900 Dutch. carriers, and thirty destroyers in the Mediterranean Germany became the master of Europe from the (Ferris and Mawdsley, 2015:315-318). North Cape to the Pyrenees and the Atlantic Ocean General Jodl’s operational outline of July 21 to the River Bug (Gilbert, 2004:112-113). stated that “England is in possession of command of the sea” (his emphasis). The only thing Germany The Battle of Britain could do was land on the east of the Channel coast (Sussex, Kent and Hampshire), where the Luftwaffe The victories ofWehrmacht , the armed forces could strike British warships across the shortest of Nazi Germany, in May-June 1940 led to a new approach. In a conference at Berghof on July 31, phase in the Second World War. After the fall of 1940 Hitler spelled out the technical factors against France, Germany began to master Western Europe, an invasion: “Our small navy is 15 percent [the and Italy entered the war on its side. Britain was size] of the enemy’s, our number of destroyers is 8 forced to fight alone. But a month into office on percent that of the enemy, and the number of motor June 4, 1940, Prime Minister Churchill promised torpedo boats 10-12 per cent that of the enemy.” But resistance, “if necessary for years, if necessary alone: he also said that Sea Lion was impossible and told [W]e shall defend our island, whatever the cost may his military advisors that he had decided to attack be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the Soviet Union, since this would indirectly force the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and Britain out of the war. Hitler’s aim was to deprive in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall Britain of any hope of allies. Besides the geopolitical never surrender” (Ferris and Mawdsley, 2015:315). and ideological reasons for attacking the Soviet After the fall of France, Hitler ordered German Union, an immediate factor was the impracticability troops to prepare a detailed plan for the invasion of a cross-Channel invasion. Hitler discarded Sea of Britain. In the meantime, however, more than Lion and turned to Operation Barbarossa against ten million rounds of rifle ammunition, 50,000 Soviet Russia. In the meantime, however, he saw air rifles, and a hundred field guns were flown from bombing as a powerful tool against Britain. Right the United States to Britain (Gilbert, 2004:116). after cancelling Sea Lion, on August 1, 1940, with Hitler declared Britain a “leading enemy power,” Directive No. 17 Hitler ordered an air attack on though had already ordered the High Command Britain to crush the Royal Air Force (RAF) (Ferris of the German armed forces (Oberkommando and Mawdsley, 2015:318-320).

122 History of International Relations

Figure 5.4 The Battle of Britain in 1940.

Germany was aware that any invasion of Britain most effective between August 24 and September 5 must have air superiority over the Channel and when it attacked forward RAF airbases and their C3I Channel coast (Thompson, 1990:773). With this systems (command, control, communications and aim in mind, from July 1940 to June 1941, the information systems). But the Fighter Command German Air Force dropped untold tons of bombs steadily achieved operational victories. Its victory on Britain. Hitler’s Luftwaffe not only had excellent over the North Sea on August 15 smashed all threats ground support and air superiority; Germany’s to Scotland and northern England, turning that area fighter aircraft rivaled the British, and her pilots into a safe training ground for new pilots. German were initially better and had excellent tactics. But morale got worse and worse. They began to make the Luftwaffe was too weak to defeat Britain and had erroneous assessments that Fighter Command was big problems in strategy and intelligence. Britons near death, one of the most significant intelligence prepared for the worst, which the Germans could failures of the war. By September 16, the day of the not understand; drunk with victory from so many last great attack, the Germans believed they had other successful campaigns, the Luftwaffe expected driven Fighter Command down to 117 effective to rapidly crush Britain’s Fighter Command and fighters. However, the real number was 300 per force it to surrender. Its head, Herman Göring, cent higher, with 216 Spitfires and 356 Hurricanes. said, “our first aim is to destroy his fighters. If they Hitler began to accept that he could not beat avoid combat in the air, we shall attack them on Britain in 1940 and turned single-mindedly to the the ground or force them to accept a fight by using campaign against Russia (Ferris and Mawdsley, bombers to attack targets within the range of our 2015:326-327). fighters.” Yet the Luftwaffe had no means to make The main targets of the German planes were the British Fighter Command stand and die (Ferris aircraft, airfields, and British cities, such as London and Mawdsley, 2015:322). (Coffin et.al. 2011:824). During the Battle of When the Luftwaffe attacked, its hopes for a Britain hundreds of German planes made massive rapid surrender soon collapsed, and the war was attacks over Britain. On August 13, Germany prolonged. The Luftwaffe could win only by forcing launched another campaign, the Day of the Eagle. an absolute level of losses, especially in pilots, that However, unlike the previous attacks on Poland, Fighter Command could not stand. Between Scandinavia, France, and the Low Countries, the July 10 and October 31, 915 British and 1,733 attack on Britain had no ground-based activity. German aircraft were destroyed. The Luftwaffe was On August 23, the Luftwaffe launched its fourth 123 The Second World War 1939-1945

massive bombing attack since the Day of the Eagle, the Enigma, which was used by all branches of the dropping bombs on British aircraft factories and oil German armed forces, military intelligence, the SS storage tanks. On the evening of August 25, British and police, merchant vessels, and railways with Ultra, bombers attacked German armament factories in its code-breaking operation (Rich, 2003:222-223). the north of Berlin (Gilbert, 2004:127, 130-131). On September 15, 1940, hundreds of German planes According to Rich, it is not certain whether the made every effort to destroy the British Royal Air Germans gained superiority of the air. He remarks that Force, during which time sixty German aircraft were British forces had two advantages: first, they had been shot down. On September 17, Hitler postponed the quicker than the Germans to recognize the importance invasion of Britain “until further notice,” mentioning of radar systems in the usage of early warnings against that: “We have conquered France at the cost of air attacks. By the spring of 1939, Britain had built 30,000 men. During one night of crossing we could a chain of fifty-one radar stations. Second, Britain lose many times of that—and success is not certain” succeeded in breaking the German code machine, (Gilbert, 2004:135).

Figure 5.5 Rescue workers searching through wreckage in Britain, 1941. In June 1940, Winston Churchill predicted a battle that never occurred. Instead, the Germans carried out a spasmodic air campaign against Britain that lasted into 1945, and failed. Britain was never forced to fight on its beaches or its hills. Since the Royal Navy deterred a seaborne invasion of Britain, the Germans had to rely on air power. Heavily underestimated, the British scored a stalemate in battle and a triumph in strategy (Ferris and Mawdsley, 2015:327). The British resistance against Germany can be explained by two important reasons: The first was the political leadership of Churchill, who replaced Chamberlain in May 1940. During the Battle of Britain, he exhibited courage and gave moral support to the British public. The second reason was Churchill’s personal diplomacy. Behind the scenes he convinced US President Franklin D. Roosevelt to finalize American neutrality, while still sending huge amounts of war munitions to Britain under the Lend-Lease program (Coffin et.al. 2011:824). In March 1941, the US Congress passed the ingeniousLend-Lease Act, which authorized the president to put American resources at the disposal of any state whose defense he regarded as necessary for American security. Although the program was initially aimed to rescue Britain, it was eventually included more than thirty-eight states fighting against the Axis powers (Best et.al. 2008:149). Additionally, Britain made a variety of counter-measures, ranging from conventional armed convoys,

124 History of International Relations

escorts, and depth-charges to bomber-raids on In response, Hitler issued Directive No. 25 U-boat pens and factories, air-spotting, and radar declaring a simultaneous attack on Yugoslavia and (Thomson, 1990:774). Greece (Gilbert, 2004:174), and German troops invaded Yugoslavia on April 6. While the Yugoslav The Axis Invasion of the Balkans resistance lasted eleven days, Mussolini’s attack on Greece was a complete failure. Fearing that Britain Germany also had significant economic and would support Greece in order to attack Romanian strategic interests in the Balkans. This region oil fields, on April 23, a massive German force provided it with critical supplies of bauxite, attacked Greece and overran the country. Although antinomy, lead, copper, raw textiles, livestock, and the Greeks stubbornly resisted and were supported cereal. Moreover, Romanian oil was crucial to the by fifty thousand British, New Zealander, and German war economy. On June 27, 1940, the Australian troops, in the end the country fell. By Soviets demanded Romania’s cession of Bessarabia the summer of 1941, all of Europe, except Spain, as well as Northern Bukovina. The annexation of Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey, was these territories by the Soviet Union brought it either under German occupation or allied with the close to Romanian oil fields. On September 20, Nazi regime (Perry, et.al. 2008:828). Hitler ordered the dispatch of German troops to Romania, where they began to arrive in October 1940. The German attack on Romania also gave Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini the cover to launch a campaign against Greece. On book During the Second World War, Turkey October 28, 1940, Mussolini issued an ultimatum successfully stayed out of the war despite the demanding strategic bases in the Greek territory. pressures from both the Axis powers and the According to Hitler, the main obstacle to Allied powers. For further information on Yugoslavia’s cooperation with the Axis powers was its the Turkish foreign policy during the war, fear of Italy. For that reason, he offered a guarantee please see Selim Deringil, (2004). Turkish to the Yugoslavian government that Germany Foreign Policy during the Second World War: would protect Yugoslavia from Italian troops. The Active Neutrality, Cambridge, Cambridge Yugoslavian government accepted Hitler’s offer University Press. on the condition that neither Germany nor Italy would demand the passage of troops through the Yugoslav territory or demand any other kind of military assistance from Yugoslavia. The Yugoslav treaty with the Axis powers was signed on March 1 25, 1941. The following day, Yugoslav army forces made a coup d’état and overthrew the regime (Rich, Explain the origins and major events related to the 2003:226-228). Second World War.

125 The Second World War 1939-1945

Figure 5.6 Europe under the German Occupation, 1941-1942. Source: commons.wikimedia.org FROM EUROPEAN WAR TO Germans thought that they would win the war in GLOBAL WAR a matter of weeks, and certainly before the onset of winter, which everyone knew would hinder large- The section focuses on the transformation of scale operations (Roberts, 2002:17). the war from a European war to a global one. Compared with the German Army, the Red Army was weak and unprepared, and the initial The German Invasion of the Soviet German attack was successful. By July 3, 1941, the Union Chief of the German Army General Staff, General The German invasion of Soviet Russia in June Franz Halder, wrote in his diary: “it was probably 1941 was the greatest military operation in history. no overstatement to say that the Russian campaign The 3.5 million-strong invasion force consisted has been won in the space of two weeks” (Roberts, of three main army groups: Army Group North 2002:18). The codename for the German invasion attacked from East Prussia and fought along the was Operation Barbarossa in honor of Frederick Baltic coastal lands towards Leningrad; Army I, the Holy Roman Emperor who organized a Group Centre moved towards Minsk, , 12th century crusade to liberate the holy places of and Moscow; and Army Group South advanced Christianity from the Muslim control. According towards . In their invasion of the Soviet to Nazi propaganda, the German campaign in Union, German forces used the same Blitzkrieg Russia was of a similar character—a crusade against tactics they had employed in 1939–1940 against a Bolshevik regime that threatened European Poland, France, and the Low Countries. The civilization (Roberts, 2002:18).

126 History of International Relations

Figure 5.7 German Invasion of the Soviet Union, 1941-1942. Source: encyclopedia.ushmm.org

On the morning of June 22, 1941, Operation Furthermore, he added, “the enemy and all his Barbarossa began. Hitler had assembled some accomplishes must be hounded and annihilated at four million men, thirty-three hundred tanks, and every step” (Gilbert, 2004: 214-215). 2,000 planes for war against the Soviet Union. On July 6, on the Leningrad front, German German bombers rained bombs on sixty-six Soviet troops reached Tartu, less than 300km from the aerodromes, destroying many of their aircraft former imperial capital. On July 7, Churchill wrote on the ground. The Luftwaffe destroyed twelve to Stalin stating that “Britain would do everything hundred Soviet aircraft (Perry, et.al. 2008:828) and to help you that time, geography, and our resources bombed five Soviet cities: Kovno, Minsk, Rovno, allow.” The same day, Churchill instructed the Chief Odessa, and Sevastopol. On the morning of June of the British Air Staff to use Britain’s air resources 26, German forces reached the city of Dvinsk to begin devastating German cities with the aim of after penetrating 300km across the Soviet border drawing German air forces back from the Russian (Gilbert, 2004: 206, 209). front. On July 12, Britain and the Soviet Union On July 3, 1941, Stalin delivered a radio speech signed a pact of mutual assistance against Germany. to the Russian people: “A grave threat hangs Furthermore, the Royal Air Force was bombing over our country,” warning people that “military Hanover, Hamburg, Frankfurt, Mannheim, and tribunals will pass summary judgment on any Berlin. On July 14, Churchill declared “we have who fail in our defense, whether through panic thrown upon Germany about half the tonnage of or treachery, regardless of their position or rank” bombs thrown by the Germans upon our cities (Gilbert, 2004: 209). According to Gilbert, Stalin’s during the whole course of the war. But this is only speech a powerful appeal, not only to communism and beginning…” (Gilbert, 2004: 216-218). but also to patriotism. Stalin addressed the Russian In mid-July 1941, the Soviet Union seemed people, not only as “comrades” and “citizens”, but on the verge of destruction. On July 15, German also as “brothers and sisters” and “my friends.” forces began the encirclement of Smolensk, halfway At one point in his speech, he appealed for the between Minsk and Moscow and at the center formation of partisan units behind enemy lines of the second of the defensive lines established a “to foment guerilla warfare everywhere, to blow up mere three weeks earlier (Gilbert, 2004: 216-218). bridges and roads, damage telephone and telegraph On August 12, as Hitler mentioned in Directive lines, and set fire to forests, stores, and transports.” No.34, the immediate objective was to occupy

127 The Second World War 1939-1945

Crimea, the industrial region of Kharkov, and the By the autumn of 1941, German forces had coalfields of the Donetsk basin. If Crimea could be pushed up to the gates of Leningrad in the north; occupied, an attack across the Kerch Straits toward overrun Ukraine in the center; advanced into the Batumi “would be considered.” It was “urgently valley of the Don; laid siege to Moscow; and had necessary”, Hitler added, “that enemy airfields entered Crimea on the southern end of this gigantic from which attacks on Berlin are evidently being front (Rich, 2003:232). In October 1941, they made be destroyed” (Gilbert, 2004: 216-218). launched Operation Typhoon, an attack on Moscow In mid-August 1941, on a battleship at with more than 70 divisions—a million men with Newfoundland, Churchill and Roosevelt agreed 1,700 tanks, 14,000 artillery pieces, and almost to issue a public document known as the Atlantic 1,000 planes. On October 3, Hitler announced Charter, a joint Anglo-American commitment “the enemy is already broken and will never rise to a post-war world order. Its principles included again” (Thomson, 1990:791). On November 12, “respect[ing] the right of all peoples to choose however, the temperature on the Moscow front fell the form of government under which they will to -12C (Gilbert, 2004:262). On the Eastern front, live… and [their] wish to see sovereign rights and the German position was worsening due to weather self-government restored to those who have been conditions. Subzero weather made it very difficult forcibly deprived of them” (Rich, 2003:258-259). for German troops to capture Moscow (Perry, et.al. The Charter also referred to the establishment of a 2008:829). In the end, the Nazis failed to capture wider and permanent organization for international the Soviet capital (Roberts, 2002:18). security, i.e. the United Nations (UN). For Roberts, three aspects explain the Within three weeks the Soviets had suffered successful defense of Moscow: 750,000 casualties and lost 10,000 tanks and • First, the Soviet Union had human and 4,000 aircraft. The Germans had also captured material power to block the advance of Kiev and encircled Leningrad. By the end of Operation Typhoon. In mid-November 1941 the Soviets had lost 200 divisions and Moscow was defended by a quarter of a suffered 4.3 million casualties in the form of the million troops with 1,250 artillery guns, dead, wounded, missing, or captured (Roberts, 500 tanks, and 600–700 aircraft. Though 2002:18). By late July 1941, however, it seemed initially outnumbered by the Germans, by clear that German assumptions about the quick early December the Soviet force had grown destruction of the Red Army were not true. By to over a million. the end of June, the Soviets had already called up • Second, General Georgy K. Zhukov was 5.3 million reservists and would deploy many field appointed as Commander-in-Chief for the armies between July and October. In the summer defense of the city. To become one of the of 1941, the Soviets deployed 97 existing divisions major Soviet commanders of World War to the west and created about 194 new divisions II, he was able to mobilize and maintain and 84 separate brigades. The sheer weight of a successful defense of Moscow, and numbers began to wreck German plans (Murray eventually launch a counter-offensive. and Millett, 2000:125). • Third, when the German troops advanced The Germans’ operational pause between the end towards Moscow, there was a general panic in of July and the end of August 1941 resulted from the city due to the rumors circulating about their inability to transport sufficient ammunitions the Soviet evacuation. To prevent this, Stalin and fuel. Moreover, the Soviet Union’s mobilization stayed in the city (Roberts, 2002:39-40). On played a significant part in this operational pause. As November 6 and 7, he delivered a speech German Chief of General Staff Halder stated, “Soviet in front of the public for the anniversary reserves were desperately short of equipment, lacked of the Bolshevik Revolution. His tone was experienced officers and NCOs [noncommissioned confident and his message patriotic. On officers], and possessed the barest tactical knowledge, November 7, Stalin told members of the but they provided the manpower for a series armed forces parading through the Red of counterattacks that now broke on German Square on their way to the front: spearheads” (Murray and Millett, 2000:126).

128 History of International Relations

“The whole world is looking to you as the force For 1942, Hitler planned another Blitzkrieg capable of destroying the plundering hordes of the campaign in Russia codenamed ‘Operation German invaders. The enslaved peoples of Europe Blau’ (Blue) and to be led by Army Group South ... look to you as their liberators. A great liberation commanded by Fedor von Bock. mission has fallen to your lot. Be worthy of this mission! When Operation Blau was launched on June The war you are waging is a war of liberation, a just 28, 1942, its aim was not to capture Stalingrad. war. Let the manly images of our great ancestors – By August, however, this changed. By capturing Alexander Nevsky [who defeated the Swedes], Dimitry Stalingrad, the reasoning went, German troops Donskoy [who beat the Tartars], Kurma Minin would cut Soviet access to Baku oil. The German and Dimitry Pozharsky [who drove the Poles out of attack on Stalingrad began on August 23, 1942 Moscow], Alexander Suvorov and Mikhail Kutuzov with massive air raids. For two days, the Luftwaffe [the Russian hero generals of the Napoleonic wars] – pounded the city with more than 2,000 sorties, inspire you in this war. May the victorious banner of leading to 40,000 casualties, according to official the great Lenin be your lodestar” (quoted in Roberts, Soviet figures, or 25,000, according to more 2002:41). conservative estimates (Roberts, 2002:77).

Figure 5.8. Soviet soldiers against German troops during the Battle of Stalingrad, February 1943. Source: www.britannica.com

On the Eastern Front, the Battle of Stalingrad was so decisive that it has left an eternal print on the public mind, where it was absolutely crucial to the course of the war. After Stalingrad, German troops gained no further victories in Russia. The city of Stalingrad had 450,000 inhabitants and stood at a critical juncture of the River Volga, a very important supply route from the Caucasus and Persia. When the German Army planned its operations for the summer of 1942, its main target was to capture the oilfields of the Caucasus On September 1942, Hitler delivered a speech on the radio declaring “the city which bore Stalin’s name would be captured and never lost.” Bell argues that this became the symbol of prestige rather than strategy (Bell, 2011:96). For Stalin, Stalingrad had symbolic importance since it bore his name. As such, strategy, psychology, and symbolism played a pivotal role in the battle (Bell, 2011:97-99). During the Russian civil war, Stalin had organized the defense of the city against counter-revolutionary armies. When he became the leader of the Soviet Communist Party in the 1920s, the city was renamed Stalingrad in his honor. For this purpose, the invasion of the city had a huge symbolic importance for the Germans. Hobsbawm also attributed a great significance to the Battle of Stalingrad, arguing “from Stalingrad on everyone knew that the defeat of Germany was only a question of time,” (Hobsbawm, 1995:40). Between September 25 and October 5, 1942, more than 160,000 Russian soldiers crossed the Volga. On October 7, as a result of Stalin’s appeal for more fighter aircraft, the British government arranged for thirteen merchant ships to help Soviet forces. There was also an American contribution to the battle.

129 The Second World War 1939-1945

The United States had already delivered 56,445 with more mortars, guns, tanks, and aircraft than field telephones, 381,431 miles of field telephone any other battle of the Second World War. One- wire, and 81,287 Thompson machine guns to the third of all the German divisions on the Eastern Soviet Union (Gilbert, 2004: 372). In September Front was engaged in the war here. Here Hitler’s 1942, the battle was concentrated in the southern tactics were foiled by the genius organization and and central part of the city. From September 27 dedication of the Soviet forces, and the devotion to October 7, German forces concentrated on the of the people to their cause. Witnessing such north for the control of the industrial area. They resistance, and fearful of the news that the western occupied much of the residential district near the Allies had landed in Sicily and that Italy would pull factory area but failed to take the factories. By out of the war, Hitler had to call off the campaign. the end of October, the Germans had taken the By this point, German troops would be desperately Dzerzhinskii Tractor factory, the Barrikady, and needed in the Mediterranean (Bourke, 2001:128). Red October (Roberts, 2002:84). Between July and October 1943, the Soviets The first part of the battle was hard-fought but had liberated 140,000 square miles of their country not decisive. The second, however, can be seen as a (Thomson, 1990:791). A Soviet counter-attack in turning point in the Soviet-German war, when the November 1943 planned by General Zhukov, who Soviet plan designed by Russian Generals Zhukov had successfully defended Moscow the previous and Vasilevsky was more successful. This plan drove year, also defeated the Germans. Not believing the Germans back and encircled them from the that the Russians had sufficient men, material, or north and south (Bell, 2011:100). Eventually, with competence to launch a massive counter-offensive, the defeat at Stalingrad, Germany’s material power German commanders were taken by surprise. With and moral were destroyed. Thomson remarks his soldiers exhausted and desperately short of that “the defense of Stalingrad rightly became a food, medical supplies, weapons, and ammunition, symbol and saga of Soviet resistance” (Thomson, Friedrich Paulus, commander of the Sixth Army, 1990:790). As Perry et.al point out, “[t]he battle urged Hitler to withdraw the German forces. of Stalingrad was an epic struggle in which Russian Hitler refused. After suffering tens of thousands soldiers and civilians contested every building of additional casualties, the remnants of the Sixth and street of the city. In this urban battlefield, Army surrendered on February 2, 1943. Some scarred by mile after mile of destroyed buildings 260,000 German soldiers had lost their lives in and mountains of rubble, the combatants were the Battle of Stalingrad, while another 110,000 separated by mere yards, snipers lurked in the maze were taken prisoner (Perry, et.al. 2008:838). In the of ruins, and tough Russian soldiers stealthily and spring of 1944, the Soviets retook Crimea, Odessa, ceaselessly attacked at night with bayonets and and Sevastopol and reestablished their power in the daggers; here the blitzkrieg, which had brought Black Sea (Thomson, 1990:791). the Germans immense success in their earlier As far as the German treatment of prisoners offensives, did not apply,” (2008:838). went, most Soviet political cadres were immediately The Soviet victory at Stalingrad was the turning executed upon capture, and huge numbers of point in the war on the Eastern Front, one of the prisoners of war were intentionally starved to death main fronts in World War II. More than 80 per cent in camps. Of the 5.5 million Soviet soldiers taken of all combat during the Second World War took prisoner, more than 3.5 million of them died in place there. It was here that the Germans suffered captivity, mainly from starvation. While these 90 per cent of their total losses: 600 divisions and extermination camps were directed by murderous SS ten million dead, wounded, missing, or captured divisions, the regular German army, the Wehrmacht, (Roberts, 2002:9). also conspired to starve Soviet prisoners of war. Operation Citadel was the name of the Battle Russian peasants were also regularly targeted, with of Kursk. For Hitler and the German army, this many stripped of their clothes in the freezing winter. would provide an opportunity to get revenge for Many villages were also burned down to the ground the humiliating defeat at Moscow (1941) and in retribution for partisan attacks on the German Stalingrad (1942). This battle lasted fifty days, army. Mass deportations to be used as slave labor from July 5 to August 23, 1943 and was waged were also made (Perry, et.al., 2008:830-831).

130 History of International Relations

Overall, there were about 16 million Soviet these, Russians and Poles in particular were seen as civilian war deaths. Of these, 11 million died under inferior human beings in the Nazi ideology. Living the German occupation and another five million in terrible conditions, they were poorly fed and were victims of Nazi deportation. It is difficult to worked incredibly long hours. Many perished from be precise about civilian death rates from 1941– hunger and disease. Many of the leading German 1945, but at least several million fell victim to the companies also collaborated in the enslavement Germans after Stalingrad. As for military casualties, and exploitation of foreign laborers, and Jewish the Red Army lost over 16 million, including property across Europe was expropriated. Ruling four million dead, between 1941-1945 (Roberts, Europe through terror and force, the New German 2002:149-150). Order leaned heavily on the torture chamber, prison Besides plundering the lands they invaded, the cell, firing squad, and concentration camps. After Nazis also used native inhabitants as slave laborers, annexing certain Polish provinces, the Nazis also transporting around seven million people from executed priests and leading intellectuals and closed around Europe to Germany for such purposes. Of many churches and schools (Perry, et.al. 2008:830).

Figure 5.9 The Auschwitz concentration camp, Oswiecim, Poland.

131 The Second World War 1939-1945

The Holocaust

“The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. Holocaust is a word of Greek origin meaning ‘sacrifice by fire.’ The Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, believed that Germans were ‘racially superior’ and that the Jews, deemed ‘inferior,’ were an alien threat to the so-called German racial community. During the era of the Holocaust, German authorities also targeted other groups because of their perceived racial and biological inferiority: Roma (Gypsies), people with disabilities, and some of the Slavic peoples (Poles, Russians, and others)… In 1933, the Jewish population of Europe stood at over nine million. Most European Jews lived in countries that Nazi Germany would occupy or influence during World War II. By 1945, the Germans and their collaborators killed nearly two out of every three European Jews as part of the ‘Final Solution,’ the Nazi policy to murder the Jews of Europe… Jews were the primary victims of Nazi racism, but other victims included Roma (Gypsies) and people with mental or physical disabilities. The Nazis murdered some 200,000 Roma. And they murdered at least 250,000 mentally or physically disabled patients, mainly German and living in institutions, in the so-called Euthanasia Program… As Nazi tyranny spread across Europe, the Germans and their collaborators persecuted and murdered millions of other people. Between two and three million Soviet prisoners of war were murdered or died of starvation, disease, neglect, or brutal treatment. The Germans targeted the non-Jewish Polish intelligentsia for killing, and deported millions of Polish and Soviet civilians for forced labor in Germany or in occupied Poland, where these individuals worked and often died under deplorable conditions… In the early years of the Nazi regime, the National Socialist government established concentration camps to detain real and imagined political and ideological opponents… [T]he Germans and their collaborators created ghettos, transit camps, and forced-labor camps for Jews during the war years. The German authorities also established numerous forced-labor camps, both in the so-called Greater German Reich and in German-occupied territory, for non-Jews whose labor the Germans sought to exploit… Between 1941 and 1944, Nazi German authorities deported millions of Jews from Germany, from occupied territories, and from the countries of many of its Axis allies to ghettos and to killing centers, often called extermination camps, where they were murdered in specially developed gassing facilities… In the final months of the war, … [a]s Allied forces moved across Europe in a series of offensives against Germany, they began to encounter and liberate concentration camp prisoners, as well as prisoners en route by forced march from one camp to another....” (https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/introduction-to-the-holocaust).

The War in Asia-Pacific and the US Japanese Navy (IJN) an inferior position in the Entry Into the War number of capital ships it could have compared to Before the outbreak of the war in the Pacific, the US and UK, had bred resentment in the IJN the Japanese economy had become increasingly ranks. When the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) dependent on America’s iron, metals, and oil to officers stationed in southern Manchuria invaded supply its army between 1931 and 1941. Since the region and established a puppet state called Manchukuo the US government recognized this dependency, , the country was quickly condemned it imposed certain economic sanctions and by the League of Nations, a body from which restrictions on Japan in response to its belligerence Japan quickly withdrew in 1933. Japan grew against China (Overy, 2015:53). The Washington much more involved in Chinese politics and Chiang Kai-shek Naval Conference of 1921-1922 had led to a began confronted ’s Nationalists Mao Zedong Nine-Power Pact aimed to protect China that had and the Communist forces under proved of little value. Moreover, the Naval Arms (Kuehn, 2015:420-421). Limitation Treaty, which assigned the Imperial In the early summer of 1940, the Japanese army demanded a closer relationship with Germany.

132 History of International Relations

Prime Minister Admiral Yonai Mitsumasa, who was pro-British and had reservations about a German alliance, was forced to resign. Konoe Fumimaro came to power with the aim of overturning Anglo- American dominance of the international system. Japan, Germany, and Italy signed the in September 1940 to support one another in any war with another power. According to the Japanese government, this alliance would deter the Americans and strengthen Japanese power in the Pacific. In October, the Japanese government threatened the Vichy government in France by occupying northern Vietnam. The Japanese Army sought to invade and occupy the rest of Southeast Asia, a region deeply important to American and European capitalism. It was not long, then, that the US ratcheted up its collaboration with Britain in Asia as well (Overy, 2015:52). Under the new leadership of Tojo Hideki, on December 1, 1941 the Japanese government decided to attack Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific, including the US naval base at Pearl Figure 5.10 The Japanese expansion during the late Harbor, Hawaii. Yet the subsequent December 19th and early 20th centuries. 7 attack on Pearl Harbor had the opposite of its intended effect. Far from causing the US to sue for Source: www.britannica.com peace, it ignited the largest war machine in human history (Overy, 2015:54). In addition to bombing The conquest of Malaya and the Dutch East American warships, the Japanese bombers struck at Indies provided Japan with three quarters of the Pearl Harbor’s airfields, destroying 188 aircraft and world’s natural rubber, two-thirds of its tin, and killing 2,400 people (Gilbert, 2004:278). Shortly ample oil supplies. In the Philippines, Japanese thereafter, Japanese troops attacked Malaya, the forces isolated the Americans in the Bataan Philippines, and Indonesia. On the coast of China, peninsula (Parker, 2001:92). By May 1942, with they seized the American garrisons at Shanghai the fall of Corregidor in the Philippines, the and Tientsin (Overy, 2015:55). As such, the US Japanese army controlled a huge amount of land immediately declared war on Japan. On December and sea as far west as the Burma-India border and 8, Britain followed suit and Churchill informed the Andaman and Nicobar Islands; as far south the Japanese government “that a state of war exists as Indonesia and northern Papua and the Gilbert between our two countries.” A day later, Japanese Islands; and as far north as Wake Island and some troops occupied Bangkok (Gilbert, 2004:281- of the Aleutian chain (Overy, 2015:55). 282). On December 11, Hitler and Mussolini By the spring of 1942, the Axis powers seemed declared war on the United States, arguably the to hold the upper hand. The Japanese Empire had single most decisive act of the Second World War. invaded the coast of China, Indochina (Vietnam), Now Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United Thailand, Burma, Malaya, the Dutch East Indies States were pitted against Germany, Italy, and (Indonesia), the Philippines, and other islands in Japan- although the Soviet Union did not declare the Pacific. Germany controlled Europe almost to war on Japan until 1945 (Parker, 2001:84). Moscow. By the end of 1942, however, things began to look up for the Allies. Three decisive battles, namely Midway, Stalingrad, and El Alamein, were key to this development.

133 The Second World War 1939-1945

In June 1942, in an attempt to divide and the British Eight Army, commanded by General destroy the US fleet, the Japanese fleet moved to Bernard L. Montgomery, drove the Germans from Midway, eleven hundred miles northwest of Pearl Egypt at the Battle of El Alamein in October 1942 Harbor, while another section sailed toward the (Perry, et.al., 2008:840). Aleutian Islands. However, the American fleet On November 8, 1942, under General Dwight had certain advantages that became crucial in the D. Eisenhower, a hundred thousand American Battle of Midway. First, the Americans had known and British troops landed in Algeria and Morocco the Japanese plans since cracking their naval code. and seized the key ports of Algiers, Oran, and Second, the Americans had radar, which would Casablanca. Rommel first retreated to Libya’s enable them to forecast Japanese attacks and locate capital, Tripoli. But the Allied sea and air cordon Japanese targets. Third, the Americans had Midway made things worse for him and he flew to East island itself (Rich, 2003:256). On June 4, 1942, Prussia on 28 November 1942 to consult with the American and Japanese navies entered into a Hitler, to no avail. On May 13, 1943, the Afrika naval battle. As the two fleets were too far from Korps, the German expeditionary force in Africa, each other, they could not use their big guns or even was defeated, the Axis forces surrendered, and the see each other. Yet American pilots still destroyed war in North Africa was over, with the Axis powers four aircraft carriers and downed 322 Japanese suffering casualties of prisoners of war of over planes, gaining superiority over Japanese forces 300,000 (Bourke, 2001:114; Gordon, 1980: 391). in the process (Perry, et.al. 2008:840). By the end Back in Europe, the Allies invaded Sicily in of the battle, the Americans had destroyed Japan’s July 1943 as part of their efforts to wrest control heavy aircraft carriers, 7 battleships, 12 cruisers, 44 of the Mediterranean. Not long after the American destroyers, and 234 planes (Rich, 2003:257). With Seventh and British Eight armies landed on Sicily, a the battle of Midway, Japan also seemed to lose palace revolution took place in Rome on 25 July in its initiative (Perry, et.al., 2008:840). In August, which Mussolini’s 21 years of rule were brought to American forces gained beachheads at Guadalcanal an end. After heavy fighting, the Allies had defeated in the before moving towards the German units by mid-August, which brought New Guinea. By February 1943 Guadalcanal was about the imprisonment of Mussolini and the retaken by American troops, and New Guinea was establishment of the new government by Marshal recaptured by the end of that year. In October Badoglio (Thomson, 1990:783). On September 1943, the Americans won the greatest naval 2, British and American forces crossed the Straits battle of the war in the center of the Philippine of Messina and began their invasion of the Italian archipelago (Thomson, 1990:802-803). mainland. Though the Badoglio government signed an armistice with the Allies a day later (Rich, The War in North Africa 2003:275), Anglo-American forces still engaged Italian dictator Mussolini had a difficult time in heavy fighting with the Germans in Salerno, with the fierce winds of the Western Desert, Egypt just southeast of Naples. In October 1943, a new and Libya, and North Africa. For the Allies, access government in Italy declared war on Germany, to the Suez Canal was a vital communication link. and the number of Italian partisans resisting the When Mussolini sent Italian troops based in Libya Germans grew to 300,000. Nonetheless, fighting into British-held Egypt in September 1940, they in Italy would continue until the war’s bitter were pushed back by British troops in merely two end, around which time Mussolini was finally months. Barely 50,000 British defeated nearly executed (April 28, 1945)—two days before Hitler 500,000 Italian and colonial troops. To prevent committed suicide (Thomson, 1990:783). a total catastrophe, Hitler sent General Erwin As for the broader strategic goals of the Anglo- Rommel to command the Axis troops. Despite American coalition, Churchill famously met his great aptitude, by November Rommel found Roosevelt at the President’s Hyde Park home in himself in a weak position. He attacked in January August 1943, where they reached an agreement 1942, capturing the Libyan port of Tobruk and to share all intelligence about each other’s efforts forcing the British to retreat into Egypt (Bourke, to develop an atomic weapon. Agreeing that the 2001:112-113). Yet these gains were reversed when research and manufacture of the bomb would 134 History of International Relations

be in the United States, both countries agreed in France. In the middle of August, Paris rose up never to use “this agency against each other.” The against the Germans and was soon liberated (Perry, second article stated that “we will not use it against et.al. 2008:841). third parties without each other’s consent,” while the third stipulated that “we will not either of us communicate any information about Tube Alloys to third parties except by mutual consent.” The fourth 2 article noted that Churchill “expressly disclaims Discuss how technological developments were used any interest in these industrial and commercial for war purposes and how technologies created aspects beyond what may be considered by the during the war were later given to civilian use. President of the United States to be fair and just in harmony with the economic welfare of the world” (Gilbert, 2004:453-454). INTER-ALLIED CONFERENCES DURING THE WAR AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNITED NATIONS Between 1943 and 1945, the major Allied powers, the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, soon known as the Big Three, met at a series of conferences to decide upon the fate of the post-war international system. Here, they tried to establish a general framework for socio-political relations between states and discuss the formation of the United Nations (Hobsbawm, 1995:42). In mid-January 1943, Churchill and Roosevelt Figure 5.11 Allied troops approaching the Normandy met in the Franco-Moroccan city of Casablanca beaches on D-Day to coordinate the next stages of the war (Rich, Source: encyclopedia.ushmm.org 2003:274). At the Casablanca Conference (January 14-24, 1944) they decided on the “unconditional surrender” of Germany and Japan On June 6, 1944, what is now known as and not to launch the cross-Channel liberation of D-Day , the Allied parachutists landed on five German-occupied Europe until the early summer beaches of Normandy in France. The invasion force of 1944 (Gilbert, 2004:396). consisted of 175,000 soldiers and more than 7,000 vessels, including warships, minesweepers, cargo The Big Three then decided to prepare a plan ships, and landing craft (Perry, et.al. 2008:841). for the post-war world order. Representatives from Having gained absolute air and naval superiority each country, namely British Foreign Secretary in the Channel, the Allied forces did not meet Anthony Eden, US Secretary of State Cordell Hull, serious resistance from either sea or air. On the and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, first day, General Eisenhower landed 130,000 met in Moscow from October 19-30, 1943 to work soldiers (Thomson, 1990:784-785). By July 2, on draft proposals (Rich, 2003: 276). Chaired by Moscow nearly a million men had landed in Europe. The Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov, the Conference main attack would be directed at Pas de Calais. As greatly bolstered the Soviet Union’s the French transportation system was destroyed diplomatic reputation after its military victories by Allied planes just before the invasion, German against the Germans in Stalingrad and Kursk troops sent to fortify the defenses at Normandy met (Bell, 2011:155). It was here that the Soviets gave delay after delay. Aided by air control, the Allies priority to securing a firm Western commitment to overwhelmed the German defenders. By the end of opening a second front in France. The three foreign July, the Allied forces had established their control ministers also agreed about the need to punish the Germans and separate Austria from Germany.

135 The Second World War 1939-1945

Beyond these, they established a tripartite European On November 28, 1943, the leaders of the Big Advisory Commission (EAC) among themselves to Three, Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill, met in the draw up proposals for the future of Germany and Iranian capital of Tehran. By the time they met for Europe (Rich, 2003:276). the (November 28-December Not that the Allies had forgotten Asia. From 1), the Red Army had already prevailed over the November 22-26, 1943, days before the celebrated Germans at Stalingrad in February 1943 and the Tehran Conference, US President Roosevelt and Battle of Kursk in July of that same year. With British Prime Minister Churchill met at the First the Red Army clearly superior to the Wehrmacht Cairo Conference, talks to which Roosevelt had in the east, Allies were also winning important also invited Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek. Aware battles against German U-boats in May 1943 (Bell, of Roosevelt’s anticolonial penchant, Churchill 2011:152). In terms of military operations, the Big was not pleased with the inclusion of Chiang, Three were in an agreement from the very beginning. fearing Roosevelt might make commitments to the Roosevelt and Churchill provided assurances Chinese leader to the detriment of British interests. to Stalin that the main military objective of the By including it in the Four-Power Declaration, Western powers was a cross-Channel invasion of the Americans helped elevate China to the status France the following May. Stalin promised to start of a major world power. In addition to opposing offensives on the eastern front to coincide with British proposals for further operations in the Western operations in France and to declare war on Mediterranean and Balkans, Roosevelt agreed with Japan shortly after Germany’s defeat. During the Chiang on eliminating colonialism in Asia. Issued Tehran meeting and in private conversations with on December 1, the Cairo Declaration stated “the the Soviet leader, President Roosevelt proposed the Three Great Allies were fighting this to restrain establishment of the UN, an organization which and punish the aggression of Japan” and that Japan would be controlled and directed by Britain, was to abandon all the islands she had seized or China, the Soviet Union, and the United States, to occupied in the Pacific since the beginning of the which Stalin made his reservations about the role Second World War. Furthermore, the declaration of China known. In Tehran, Stalin suggested that stated that “all the territories Japan has stolen the “German Reich should be eliminated, the word from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa expunged from the German language; Germans (), and the Pescadors… by violence and deprived permanently of the means of waging war; greed” should be given back. The three powers also their country dismembered; [and] their industry decided “that in due course Korea shall become ruthlessly liquidated” (Rich, 2003:279). free and independent” (Gilbert, 2004:278). Despite their broadly similar aims, the Big Three could not formulate final proposals for the future of Germany in Tehran. Moscow consistently expressed its intention to regain the Soviet boundaries of June 1941, territorial demands that Churchill rejected. Roosevelt, however, agreed with Stalin in opposing Churchill’s proposals to restore France as a major European military power. Regarding the problems of the Middle East, the Big Three made important negotiations about Iran, signing a special agreement to maintain that country’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. At the end, the Big Three issued a joint declaration stating “they had coordinated their plans for the destruction of the German armed forces; expressed certainty their Figure 5.12 Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, US President concord would make for an enduring peace; and Franklin D. Roosevelt, and British Prime Minister Winston looked forward to welcoming all countries, large Churchill at the Tehran Conference, December 1943. and small, into the world family of democratic nations” (Rich, 2003: 279-280). Source: www.britannica.com

136 History of International Relations

In February 1945 Stalin, Roosevelt, and • A Security Council to be established with Churchill met again to discuss the political five permanent members and six rotating problems of post-war Europe in the Crimean town members elected by the General Assembly of Yalta. The main points discussed at the Yalta of the UN for a period of two years. The Conference (February 4-11, 1945) were as follows: role of the Security Council would be to • the establishment of the United Nations, investigate the disputes and to take action to preserve international peace; • the partition of Germany and reparation payments, • a General Assembly where all the UN members would be represented. Each • the settlement of Polish issue, member state would have one vote, and all • whether and under what conditions the the problems within the scope of the UN Soviet Union would enter the war against charter could be discussed here, with non- Japan (Bell, 2011:202). binding recommendations made to the In the early stage of the conference, the Security Council; three easily reached an agreement on the United • an Economic and Social Council with the Nations. The details about the partition of powers to engage in studies and to prepare Germany were not confirmed at Yalta, it was reports “with respect to international decided that Germany should be divided into economic, social, cultural, educational, four separate zones: British, American, Soviet, and health, and related matters” and make French (Thomson, 1990:786). As for reparations, their recommendations to the specialized Stalin demanded $20 billion from Germany, an agencies, member states, and the General amount that Roosevelt and Churchill could not Assembly; accept, citing the failure of the Treaty of Versailles • an International Court of Justice to replace as but one reason why (Bell, 2011:205). Much of the Permanent Court of International the negotiations at Yalta were centered around the Justice established in 1919 with the same question of Poland. While the Allied leaders had task of adjudication of international already decided in Tehran that East Prussia and all disputes; German territory east of the Oder and Neisse Rivers were to be given to the Soviet Union and Poland • a Secretariat with administrative staff (Rich, 2003:288), Poland’s western frontiers were headed by a Secretary-General appointed not agreed upon at Yalta (Thomson, 1990:795). by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council (UNa). The Establishment of the United Nations Unsurprisingly, membership and voting While the war was still raging, representatives procedures in the Security Council were the cause of the United States, China, Russia, and of major disputes among the Big Three. While Britain met at the Dumbarton Oaks estate in the United States insisted on China’s inclusion in Washington D.C. in the late summer of 1944 the Security Council, the Soviets objected to this, to draft the structure and basic principles of a stating that China lacked the power to fulfill its new international organization, i.e. the United ‘’ role. Churchill, seeing it as a US Nations. According to Roosevelt, one of the proxy, also objected to China’s inclusion, and major achievements of the Western Allies had against which he suggested France instead. Final been to convince the Soviet Union of the necessity agreement on the composition of the Security of founding a United Nations organization to Council and voting procedures were decided at maintain international peace and security in Yalta in early 1945. The Soviets withdrew their the post-war period. Eventually, representatives objection to the inclusion of France and China as a reached an agreement on the basic structure of the permanent member upon securing the British and organization that is known as the Dumbarton American agreement that each Security Council Oaks Proposals. As such, they agreed on the member would have a veto power over any decision creation of five principal organs of the UN: reached. The Soviet Union also agreed on the

137 The Second World War 1939-1945

Western position that procedural questions should the age-long struggle of the Slav nations for their be decided by a majority vote (Rich, 2003:292). existence and independence had ended in victory. At Yalta the Big Three agreed on convening He further said, “Your courage has defeated the of the United Nations Conference on the Nazis. The war is over” (Gilbert, 2004:692). International Organization in San Francisco on April 25, 1945. The forty-six nations that had The Potsdam Conference (July declared war on Japan and Germany and had 17-August 2, 1945) signed the United Nations Declaration were invited to the conference. The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist After the surrender of Germany and the end Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, of the war in Europe, the leaders of the Big Three newly liberated Denmark, and Argentina were also gathered in Potsdam, an old Prussian garrison town invited. Participating states represented over 80% of in Germany, on July 17, 1945 to discuss the war with the world’s population (UNb). With the acceptance Japan and the post-war settlement of Europe. With of Poland as an original member, the UN had fifty- regard to the four occupation zones of Germany, one states as its founding members in the end. the principles issued at Potsdam were essentially the same as those decided at Yalta: “Germany was to be disarmed, demilitarized, denazified, and democratized, but kept sufficiently productive to 3 provide the goods and services required to meet the needs of the occupation forces and the German Elaborate the importance of the Inter-Allied population, whose average living standards were Conferences. not to exceed those of other European countries” (Rich, 2003: 297). THE END OF THE SECOND As there was a general election in Britain eight WORLD WAR days after the conference began, Churchill and Eden went back to await the results. When the This section introduces the main events that Labor Party won, Churchill resigned from his lead to the end of World War II in 1945. post, and the Big Three were forced to postpone certain final decisions about the fate of the Axis The Defeat of Germany in April and powers. That said, issues regarding territory and May of 1945 reparations were resolved at Potsdam, and the Soviets withdrew their demand for $20 billion in By April 1945, British, American, and Soviet reparations. Western leaders did not oppose the troops were penetrating Germany from east and Soviet annexation of a large part of East Prussia west. On April 12, 1945, President Roosevelt (Rich, 2003: 297-298). died and was succeeded by Vice-President Harry S. Truman. On April 13, from his underground The Allied powers also drew up a declaration in Berlin, Hitler issued a proclamation to the at Potsdam to be presented to Japan. Issued on German troops stating that “Berlin would remain July 27, 1945, it began as an ultimatum and set German and Vienna—which the Russians had of principles from which they promised not to finally captured that very day—would be German deviate. These included the partial occupation of again” (Gilbert, 2004:663). However, by April Japan until a new political regime was established; 30, Red Army Sergeant Meliton Kantaria had the limitation of Japanese sovereignty to its hoisted the Red Army banner from the second home islands, thus losing Korea and Manchuria; floor of the Reichstag. That same day, Hitler had the denunciation and elimination of the rulers shot himself in his underground bunker, while who attempted world conquest and misled the Eva Braun swallowed poison (Gilbert, 2004: Japanese people; the formation of a peaceful and 680-681). On May 7, 1945, a demoralized and responsible government “in accordance with the devastated Germany unconditionally surrendered. freely expressed will of the Japanese people;” and In Moscow, May 9 was marked as Victory Day. a fair trial of all the war criminals to ensure justice. For this purpose, Stalin declared on the radio that The declaration concluded by stating:

138 History of International Relations

“We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim help convince the Japanese, a first atomic bomb was now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese tested at Alamogordo, New Mexico on July 16, 1945 armed forces. […] The alternative for Japan is prompt (Gilbert, 2004:692). Insufficient to convince the and utter destruction.” Japanese high command, between August 6-9, the US struck three deadly blows upon Japan. The first The Potsdam Declaration was signed by was an atomic bomb they dropped on Hiroshima Churchill and Truman and a nominal Chinese when General Carl Spaatz, commander of the US representative. Stalin did not sign it since the Soviet Army Strategic Air Force in the Pacific, was given Union was not technically at war with Japan. The the order on 25 July to drop two atomic bombs on practical aim of signing this declaration was to keep select Japanese cities after August 3. The first was a document in the hands of the Americans. But the Hiroshima, chosen because it was large and had declaration was never formally handed to Japan, but not suffered from earlier military attacks. Receiving rather broadcast on the radio and then published confirmation that there were no prisoner of war in the press so that the Japanese authorities would camps in the area, on August 6, 1945 at 08:15 a.m. have knowledge of it (Bell, 2011:221). the world’s first atomic bomb was dropped from a Leading Japanese authorities and military B-29 bomber onto Hiroshima. Of uranium origin, rulers began to discuss this declaration the day it it had a destructive power equivalent to 12,500 was broadcast to decide on a proper way of action, tons of TNT. Of the 76,000 buildings in the city, and a reply. Seeing that Stalin had not signed the only 6,000 were left standing. Its immediate effect declaration, Japanese authorities concluded that was the death of between 70,000-130,000 people, the Soviet Union might still act as a mediator. a number that greatly increased as the effects of Unconditional surrender, it goes without saying, radiation later kicked it (Bell, 2011:222). was difficult for Japan to accept. Although the military leaders could fight until the end, this was not the case for the civil authorities, who were still hoping to surrender on favorable terms that would allow Japan to keep Korea and Manchuria. Still it was a difficult decision to surrender or fight till the end. In a press conference held on July 28, 1945, Japanese Prime Minister Admiral Suzuki announced the government had no choice but to reject the declaration and fight until the end—a very costly decision indeed (Bell, 2011:222).

The Use of the Atomic Bomb and the Japanese Surrender Like Germany, Japan was fighting till the end. Since there was no audible talk of surrender, President Truman and his advisers discussed what city the atomic bomb should be dropped on. Although Tokyo was a “possibility,” the committee Figure 5.13 A mushroom cloud above Hiroshima, wrote on April 27, “it is now practically rubble Japan, on August 6, 1945, after a US dropped an atomic with only the palace grounds left standing.” They bomb on the city. concluded: “Hiroshima is the largest untouched Source: www.britannica.com target not on the 21st Bomber Command list. Consideration should be given to this city” (Gilbert, 2004:676-677). The second blow Japan suffered was of a different sort. This time it was a declaration of war That said, the US had made attempts to warn by the Soviet Union on August 8, 1945. Japan was Japan of the terrible power of its nuclear weapon. To

139 The Second World War 1939-1945

shocked, since it had until then expected the Soviet Back in Washington, US Secretary of State James Union to act as a mediator in its peace talks with Byrnes opposed allowing the Japanese Emperor to the United States. After the Japanese Ambassador remain the sole sovereign ruler, insisting that the to Moscow was informed of the news by Molotov, Japanese state must be subject to the Supreme Soviet troops began attacking across a 4,400km Allied Commander. Only then could a government front across Korea, Manchuria, and Mongolia on be established with the will of the Japanese people. August 9. With a troop ratio of 3-1 and far more Japan was looking for some sort of a compromise. tanks and weapons than the Japanese, the Soviets In the end, the Emperor would have some kind made rapid gains, reaching Manchuria’s capital of of role. The United States sent its reply to Britain, Mukden on August 20. Failing to surrender after the Soviet Union, and China on August 10, 1945. these two disastrous blows, the United States went After fierce discussions, on August 14, 1945, the dropped another atomic weapon, this time on the Supreme War Council and Emperor Hirohito city of Nagasaki. The latter was doubly unlucky— declared that Japan would no longer continue the the first choice of target had been Kokura, but war. Emperor Hirohito instructed the government thick clouds diverted the pilot from there to to prepare an Imperial Rescript bringing the war to Nagasaki. This second bomb was plutonium rather an end and accepting the United States conditions. than uranium-based and had a more complex But the military wing did not accept this. After design. Much more powerful than that dropped attempting a coup d’état, which failed, its leaders on Hiroshima, it was equivalent to 22,000 tons committed suicide, including General Korechika of TNT. However, the city’s many ridges and Anami, the Minister of War. The Emperor narrow valleys decreased the effects of the bomb; survived. His pre-recorded surrender speech was compared to Hiroshima, ‘only’ two-thirds of the broadcast at noon on August 15, 1945, declaring city’s buildings were destroyed and 30,000-74,000 Japan’s surrender (Bell, 2011:225-226). Japan people initially lost their lives (Bell, 2011:223). formally signed the surrender on September 2, Japan’s initial response to these three blows 1945, bringing the Second World War to an end. was total silence. The two key elements having the authority and power to decide were the military A General Assessment of the Second and the emperor. Surrender was not an option World War and Its Legacy for the former, as defense was a sacred duty. Even though Japan had lost the Okinawa and Iwo Jima The German victory over France in May and battles, Japanese soldiers had fought until the end. June of 1940 determined the territorial framework But the Soviet invasion and the dropping of two of the war in central and western Europe for the atomic bombs were of another scale. On August coming four years. Germany’s loss of the Battle of 9, 1945, the Japanese cabinet and Supreme War Britain in the summer and autumn of 1940 was Council met to discuss whether to surrender. On another critical point that encouraged the Allies one side were the hardliners and army officers that to continue fighting, while also giving the United insisted on fighting; on the other was the peace States a later base to intervene in the European party, which included the former Foreign Minister continent. With Operation Barbarossa, Germany Mamoru Shigemitsu and former Premier Konoe. conquered large territories of the Soviet Union, but These latter were proposing immediate surrender could not capture Moscow. The Soviets overcame with the condition that status of the Emperor be the offensive and showed the world that Germany maintained as sovereign ruler. No decision could could be beaten. In East Asia and the Pacific be made, however, and finally Emperor Hirohito front, the US experienced a major shock with the was invited. In the meeting, Foreign Minister surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Shigenori Togo said that if the Emperor’s status Japan then conquered the rest of Southeast Asia, was not changed, then Japan could and should capturing its extensive minerals, rubber, and oil. surrender. Invited by Prime Minister Kantaro Through its group of islands stretching from the Suzuki to speak, Hirohito declared his opinion in North to the South Pacific, Japan also established favor of surrender and left the room. His decision a long defensive line. The initial triumph of was accepted by all (Bell, 2011:224). Germany in the west and Japan in the east marked

140 History of International Relations

the geographical limits of both. By late 1942, both impossible task after the damage both material Axis powers had reached their limits. and psychological done to their reputations by the From mid-1942 to mid-1943 the balance of Germans and Japanese. Most former colonies in power shifted towards the Allies. In the German- Asia became independent by 1954. The mandate Soviet war, the Battle of Stalingrad between system of the League of Nations that allowed July 1942 and February 1943 obliterated the France and Britain to dominate the Middle East “legendary invincibility” of the German army. also collapsed with the creation of new independent The same happened to Japan in a series of naval Arab states. This was followed by the unilateral battles through summer 1945. Although Japan was declaration of an independent state of Israel by militarily defeated by mid-July, it did not admit the Jews, thus sowing the seeds of many future this until mid-August. Even after the Soviet entry Arab-Israeli wars. Meanwhile in Eastern Europe, and two atomic bombs, Japan still dragged its feet, the old frontiers were mainly restored. In the waiting until the very last moment to surrender case of Poland, however, its borders were shifted (Bell, 2011:231). significantly westward at the expense of Poles in the east (now the Soviet Union) and Germans in Europe was greatly damaged in the Second the west. In Poland, Ukraine, and the Baltic States, World War and in a very weak position after 1945. insurgencies were waged against the imposition of Asia was also battered. Japan and Germany were Soviet rule. In Greece, the end of Axis power led temporarily disarmed in order to pose no regional to a civil war between nationalists and monarchists threat. Almost immediately, a new balance of power on one side and Communist partisans on the other was formed between the United States and Soviet (Overy, 2015:5). The roots ofthe Cold War had Union, with the former’s main impetus the revival everywhere been sown. of the world economy. In 1945 the victorious states established the United Nations to resolve further international conflicts, a task the League of Nations had clearly not achieved. Sadly, however, the end of the war brought little peace. The old 4 European empires sought to re-impose themselves Discuss the end of the Second World War. in Indonesia, Vietnam, Burma, and India, an

141 The Second World War 1939-1945

Describe the outbreak of the LO 1 Second World War.

By the beginning of 1939, Germany had become determined to invade and occupy Poland. When it finally attacked Poland on September 1, 1939, the Second World War had begun. A few hours after the German forces’ invasion of Poland, the British and French governments demanded that Germany suspend its aggressive action; the Germans declined. On September 3, Britain and France declared war on Germany. On September 17, the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the east, as per the two countries’ negotiations in August of that year in which Germany had agreed to cede the greater part of Lithuania to the Soviet Union in return for a larger share of Poland.

Analyze how the war was

Summary transformed from a European LO 2 into a global war.

On the morning of December 7, 1941, Japanese bombers swept in low out of the morning haze and bombed United States warships in Pearl Harbor. Next day, the United States and Great Britain declared war on Japan. Three days later Germany and Italy themselves declared war on the United States. With this declaration, Britain, the Soviet Union and the United States made an alliance against Germany, Italy and Japan, though the Soviet Union would not declare war on Japan until 1945.

Explain the importance of Inter-Allied Conferences and the establishment of the United LO 3 Nations for the post-war international system.

Between 1943 and 1945 the main Allied powers, the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union made a series of conferences to decide the shape of the peace and determine their post-war relations with one another. During these, the Allied powers tried to establish a general framework of socio- political relations between states and to discuss the formation of the United Nations, a body that was established in 1945 to maintain international peace and security.

Discuss the end of the Second LO 4 World War.

Between 6 and 9 August, 1945 Japan faced three deadly blows. The first was the dropping of an atomic bomb on Hiroshima after General Carl Spaatz, commander of the US Army Strategic Air Force in the Pacific, was ordered on July 25 to drop two atom bombs on select Japanese cities after August 3. The first city was Hiroshima, chosen because it was large and had not suffered from earlier conventional military attacks. When the world’s first atomic bomb, or uranium origin, was dropped on August 6, 1945 at 08:15 a.m. from a B-29 bomber, it had a destructive power equivalent to 12,500 tons of TNT. Two days later the Soviet Union declared war on Japan and invaded Manchuria. On August 9, a second bomb, this time made of plutonium, was dropped on the naval base of Nagasaki.

142 History of International Relations

1 I. The invasion of Manchuria 5 Which of the following was the first II. The talianI invasion of Abyssinia document that referred to the establishment of the United Nations? III. German and Italian intervention into the Test Yourself Spanish Civil War A. Lend-Lease Act B. Potsdam Declaration IV. The ermanG Anschluss of Austria C. Atlantic Charter V. The ermanG occupation of Czechoslovakia D. Tripartite Pact Which of the above are among the crises of the E. Four-Power Declaration 1930s that paved the way for the outbreak of the Second World War? 6 Which of the following was a member of the A. Only I Axis Powers? B. I and II A. Britain C. I, II and III B. France D. I, II, III and IV C. United States E. I, II, III, IV and V D. Japan E. China 2 Which of the following events started the Second World War? 7 Which of the following countries was not A. The invasion of the Low Countries invaded by Nazi Germany during the Second B. The occupation of arisP World War? C. The invasion of Poland A. France D. The bombing campaign against ritainB B. Poland E. The invasion of the Soviet Union C. Denmark D. Spain 3 Which of the following was the city onto E. Yugoslavia which the world’s first atomic bomb was dropped in 1945? 8 Which of the following was signed between A. Munich Japan, Germany, and Italy in September 1940 B. Tokyo to support one another in any war with another C. Hiroshima power? D. Nagasaki A. Tripartite Pact E. Moscow B. Nine-Power Pact C. Four-Power Declaration 4 Which of the following statements about the D. Naval Arms Limitation Treaty impact of the Second World War is not correct? E. Atlantic Charter A. TheUS and Soviet Union emerged as the two most powerful states. B. European imperial powers began to lose their colonies. C. Japan and Germany were temporarily disarmed. D. European monarchies were restored. E. Greece entered into a civil war.

143 The Second World War 1939-1945

9 I. The establishment of the nitedU Nations 10 Which of the following can be considered as II. The partition of Germany and reparation a turning point in the Eastern Front during the payments Second World War? III. The settlement of olishP issue A. The attleB of Stalingrad B. The allF of France IV. The conditions the ovietS declaration of C. The attleB of Britain war on Japan D. The attleB of Midway Which of the above are among the main points E. The attleB of El Alamein discussed at the Yalta Conference? A. Only I Test Yourself Test B. I and II C. II and III D. I, II and III E. I, II, III and IV

144 History of International Relations

If your answer is wrong, please review the

1. E If your answer is wrong, please review the 6. D Answer Key for “Test Yourself” “From European War to Global War.” “Introduction” section. section.

2. C If your answer is wrong, please review the 7. D If your answer is wrong, please review the “The Outbreak of the Second World War.” “The Outbreak of the Second World War.” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review 3. C If your answer is wrong, please review the 8. A the “From European War to Global War” “The End of the Second World War.” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review 4. D If your answer is wrong, please review the 9. E the “Inter-Allied Conferences During the “The End of the Second World War.” section. War and the Establishment of the United Nations.” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the If your answer is wrong, please review 5. C 10. A “From European War to Global War.” the “From European War to Global War” section. section.

Explain the origins and major events leading up to the Second World War.

This war was between ideological families: on the one hand, liberalism and communism, the descendants of the 18th century Enlightenment and its

major revolutions, while on the other, fascism, militarism, Social Darwinism, Suggested answers for “Your Turn” imperialism, and nationalism, intellectual children of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Apart from unfinished business from the aftermath of World War I, fascist aggression in the 1930s paved the way for the Second World War. During this time Germany, Japan, and Italy violated the major international peace agreements with near total impunity. With Germany and Italy dominated by fascist parties, and Japan by revanchist expansionists, each considered itself destined to rule over “lesser nations.” Territorial claims and economic considerations also played a crucial role in the outbreak of the war. Apart from providing a base for German economic expansionism and the seizure of raw materials and agricultural resources of Eurasia, Hitler’s war your turn 1 against the Soviet Union was also predicated upon a great clash of civilizations with Bolshevik and socialist ideology. On the other hand, Italy’s war against British Commonwealth forces in Egypt aimed to control the Suez Canal and oil of the Middle East. Oil was crucial for the Western Allies since they had large merchant ships and navies dependent upon oil for long-distance trans- oceanic trade routes that also had to be protected. As such, each belligerent did its best to deny others’ resources and trade routes whether through sanctions and other forms of economic warfare, or sheer military means. This brought the war to nearly every corner of the globe. Fought on many different fronts, the war’s major milestones were the Battle of Britain, the German invasion of the Soviet Union, the defeat of Germany at Stalingrad, the Battle of Midway, Germany’s declaration of war against the United States, the dropping of the atomic bomb, and the Japanese surrender.

145 The Second World War 1939-1945

Discuss how technological developments were used for war purposes and how new war technologies gave way to civilian use.

The Second World War was a war of machines. Tanks and aircraft, motorized columns and heavy artillery, and ships and submarines were all used. Great technological innovations such as radar, guided missiles, jet-propelled planes, and magnetic mines were also made during the six-year global conflict. Great your turn 2 fleets of airplanes attacked troops and naval units, destroyed railroads and industrial centers, and prepared the way for invasion. Control of the air was essential to offensive action on land or sea. Indeed, the air power of the Western Allies was their major weapon against Germany. Blood plasma, penicillin, and sulfa drugs were also put to great use to save lives.

Elaborate the importance of the Inter-Allied Conferences

Between 1943 and 1945 the main Allied powers, the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union met at a series of conferences to decide upon the framework of the post-war order and discuss how to create the United Nations. In the Casablanca Conference (January 14-24, 1944) they decided

Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your on the “unconditional surrender” of Germany and Japan and not to launch the cross-Channel liberation of German-occupied Europe until the early summer of 1944. The of October 19-30 1943 helped establish a tripartite European Advisory Commission (EAC) consisting of diplomatic representatives of the Big Three, which was to draw up proposals for the future of Germany and Europe. After the First Cairo Conference (November your turn 3 22-26, 1943) and the Tehran Conference (November 28-December 1, 1943) Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill met to discuss the political problems of post-war Europe in the Crimean town of Yalta in early February 1945. The main points discussed at the Yalta Conference (February 4-11, 1945) were as follows: the establishment of the United Nations, the partition of Germany and reparations payments, the settlement of Polish issue, and on what terms the Soviet Union would enter the war against Japan. The leaders of the Big Three gathered in Potsdam, an old Prussian garrison town, on July 17, 1945 to discuss the continuing war with Japan and the post-war settlement in Europe.

Discuss the legacy of the Second World War.

The Second World War was the most destructive in history. War-related deaths alone (excluding those from disease and famine) are estimated to be between three and five times that of World War I, at roughly 50-56 million. Moreover, tens of millions were made refugees, both internal and not, by the war, and countless displaced persons needed great assistance to rebuild their lives. It is estimated that by May 1945, roughly 40.5 million people had your turn 4 been uprooted in Europe. The following year saw drastic socio-economic and political changes around the world, with political upheavals, civil wars, and liberation movements immediately rocking Asia (China, Korea, Malaya, Indo- China, and Indonesia), Africa (Algeria, Madagascar), and Europe (Greece, Yugoslavia) alone. De-colonization had also firmly begun. But totalitarianism of the fascist (not communist) variety had seen its day. 146 History of International Relations

References

Bell, P.M.H. (2011). Twelve Turning Points of the Overy, R (ed.) (2015). The Oxford Illustrated History Second World War, New Haven: Yale University of World War II, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Press. Parker, R.A.C. (2001). The Second World War: A Short Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A., & Schulze, K. History, Oxford: Oxford University Press. E. (2008). International History of the Twentieth Perry M., Chase M., Jacob J.R., Jacob M.C. and Laue Century and Beyond, New York: Routledge. T.H. von. (2008). Western Civilization: Ideas, Bourke, J. (2001). The Second World War: A People’s Politics, and Society, Boston, New York: Houghton History, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Coffin J., Stacey R., Cole J. and Symes C. (2011). Rich, N. (2003). Great Power Diplomacy: Since 1914, Western Civilizations: Their History and Culture, Bston: McGraw-Hill. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. Roberts, G. (2002). Victory at Stalingrad, Great Ferris, J. and Mawdsley, E. (eds.) (2015). Fighting the Britain: Longman. War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thomson, D. (1990).Europe since Napoleon, London: Gilbert, M. (2004). The Second World War: A Complete Penguin Books. History, New York, RosettaBooks. Review Text in World History, Gordon, I.L. (1980). Websites New York: Amsco School Publishing. Holocaust Encyclopedia, “Introduction to Hobsbawm, E. (1995). The Age of Extremes: The Short Holocaust,” https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/ Twentieth Century, 1914-1991, Great Britain: content/en/article/introduction-to-the-holocaust, Abacus. (20.06.2019) Kuehn, J. T. (2015). “The War in the Pacific”, in UNa, “1944-1945:Dumbarton Oaks and Yalta”, Ferris, J. and Mawdsley, E. (eds.), Fighting the https://www.un.org/en/sections/history-united- War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, nations-charter/1944-1945-dumbarton-oaks- pp. 420-454. and-yalta/index.html, (15.05.2019). Murray, W and Millet, A.R. (2000). A War To Be Won: UNb, “1945: The San Francisco Conference”, https:// Fighting the Second World War, Cambridge: The www.un.org/en/sections/history-united-nations- Beknap Press of Harvard University Press. charter/1945-san-francisco-conference/index. html, (15.05.2019).

147 The Cold War: Global Chapter 6 Developments

After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Describe how the Cold War was institutionalized and how the confrontation between two rival blocs consolidated in the 1 Explain the emergence of the Cold War. 2 1950s. Identify the reasons behind the rise and fall of Analyze the rise of the ‘Second’ Cold War in 3 Détente in international politics. 4 the early 1980s and how it ended. Learning Outcomes

Chapter Outline Key Terms Introduction Truman Doctrine The Emergence of the Cold War The Marshall Plan The Cold War in the 1950s: Institutionalization and Containment Confrontation NATO The Cold War in the 1960s and 1970s: From Korean War Confrontation to Détente The “Second” Cold War and Its End Berlin Wall Cuban Missile Crisis Détente Vietnam War Glasnost and Perestroika

148 History of International Relations

INTRODUCTION into fifteen separate republics. The bipolar The term Cold War is used to define the period international system was the main decisive factor of nearly fifty years following the Second World that shaped the course of international politics War during which the United States and Soviet during the Cold War. Within the framework of Union competed for world supremacy under the the bipolar international system in which the guise of Western bloc and Eastern Bloc. It was a US was leading the Western bloc and the USSR rivalry highlighted by establishment of two military leading the Eastern bloc, each superpower sought blocs—the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to shape the political, military, economic, strategic, (NATO), led by Washington, and the Warsaw and geopolitical attitudes and practices of their Pact, by Moscow. To be sure, opinions differ as to respective members. For most of this time, a when the Cold War began. While some scholars delicate balance of power was struck, with each accept the end of the Second World War in 1945 bloc implementing containment policies against as the starting point of the Cold War, others think the other (Emeklier, 2010). it started with the “Long Telegram” sent by US The first part of this chapter focuses on the diplomat George F. Kennan in 1946 from Moscow origins and emergence of the Cold War as it to the US. Kennan’s analysis was one of the factors unfolded at the time. The second will concentrate that influenced Washington’s containment policy on the 1950s, which many see as the most for the next half-century. When British Prime “dangerous” period of the Cold War. The third will Minister Winston Churchill famously made evaluate developments in the 1960s and 1970s, reference to the “Iron Curtain” descending across while the final section will examine the 1980s and Central and Eastern Europe during his speech in their broader context. Fulton, Missouri on March 5, 1946, the imagery stuck, and Russian historians cite Churchill’s speech THE EMERGENCE OF THE COLD as the starting date of the Cold War (Dockrill and WAR Hopkins, 2006: 33). This section analyzes the origins and causes of The Cold War can be also defined from different the Cold War and examines the main developments perspectives. From an ideological perspective, it in the emergence of the Cold War between 1945- pitted the capitalism of the United States versus 1950. The section begins with the introduction the communism of the Union of Soviet Socialist of issues that led to the growing tension between Republics (USSR). Yet the conflict can also be wartime allies and then discusses the formation of described from a realpolitik perspective, as the the Western and Eastern blocs in the late 1940s. competition between two conflicting geopolitical interest blocs. For the cultural determinist, the Cold War was a struggle between civilizations, Origins and Causes of Cold War with an Orthodox authoritarian collectivist East On April 5, 1945, soldiers from the US Army’s pitted against a liberal individualistic Catholic 69th Infantry Division met their Soviet counterparts and Protestant West (Pechatnov, 2010). Soviet from the Red Army’s 58th Guards Division on leader Joseph Stalin, for his part, saw the world the banks of the Elbe River in eastern Germany. as divided into two irreparable sides—capitalists Yet rather than warmly embrace one another and and imperialist regimes, on the one hand, versus celebrate their impending victory over the greatest a communist and progressive bloc, on the other. foe of the century, they were deeply suspicious of Harry Truman, for his part, US President from one another. Worse, within hardly a year’s time, by 1945 to 1953, described two conflicting systems— many accounts, the Cold War had begun. Where one promoting freedom versus another bent on did the wartime Allies go wrong? subjugating other countries (Library of Congress, For starters, because each country had fought a 2016). different war. Though the United States had fought Despite these differences, the Cold War is valiantly on land and at sea on three continents generally considered to have lasted from 1945 to (Europe, Asia-Pacific, and Africa), it had entered 1991 when the Soviet Union itself finally dissolved the war relatively late, in December 1941, and

149 The Cold War: Global Developments

‘only’ lost around 300,000 men. Not only was Yalta Conference none of the conflict (outside Hawaii) fought on Roosevelt himself had promised Stalin at American soil, but its economy emerged as the Tehran in November 1943 that the US would world’s most powerful as a direct result, accounting evacuate its troops from Europe within two years for over 50% of global gross domestic product of defeating Hitler. Whether or not his successors (GDP) by 1945. The Soviet Union, on the other had any intention of keeping his pledge was hand, had lost 27 million people, and most of immaterial to the Soviet position: having barely its major cities, industry, and agriculture lay in escaped a near-death situation, there was no ruins. As it appeared to Stalin, not unreasonably, question of Soviet troops leaving Europe anytime “wartime expenditures in blood and treasure… soon (Kimball, 1991:97-99). As such, when the should largely determine who got what after the victors met 15 months after Tehran at the Soviet war: the Soviet Union, therefore, would get a lot” Black Sea resort town of Yalta in February 1945 (Gaddis, 2005:27). to begin negotiating the post-war status of Europe, Though most point to 1946-47 as the beginning more tangible disagreements about the future of of the Cold War, the US and USSR had had very Germany and Eastern Europe would emerge. strained ties since the Russian Revolution of 1917. When it came to the basic outlines of post-war Washington, for example, had long refused to Poland, they were in agreement. The Soviet Union recognize the Bolsheviks as the rightful rulers of would receive 178,000 km2 of former Polish post-czarist Russia, and did not diplomatically territory in the east (present-day , Lithuania, recognize the USSR until Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ukraine), around the ‘Curzon line’, named came to power in 1933. Indeed, decades before after the British statesman who helped negotiate the the era of McCarthyism (late 1940s-early 1950s), borders of post-World War I Poland—or roughly which later came to be known as the Second Red the parts of Poland that the USSR had invaded as Scare, and during which time members of US part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939. As Congress led a witch-hunt against thousands of compensation, Poland would be compensated with 2 Americans suspected of communist sympathies, 101,000 km of former German territory in the the US had already lived through a First Red Scare west. (1917-1920). When it came to the German question, however, Ignited by the Russian Revolution and fears there was less consensus. Though it was agreed at that the anarchy and revolutionary upheaval of Yalta that the US, USSR, Britain, and France—the post-World War I Europe would spread to the latter at Churchill’s insistence—would each have United States via immigration from eastern and their own occupation zones in Germany and, more specifically, in Berlin, the exact parameters of these southern Europe and an increase in anarchist and were not settled. Although Roosevelt convinced organized labor movements, Congress passed the Churchill and Stalin to sign the “Declaration on Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act and Liberated Europe,” which called for elections Immigration Act of 1918. Collectively, these made in occupied Europe as soon as possible, Yalta’s it a crime to insult the US government or armed wording was so vague—and ‘democracy’ meant forces during a time of war and greatly restricted such different things to each of the powers— immigration to countries outside of northwestern that the most difficult questions for the post-war Europe—citizens of which were considered prone settlement of Germany was left for Potsdam. to socialism, anarchy, and generally morally unfit, according to the xenophobic ethos of the time. Psychologically, then, the ideological Potsdam foundations of the Cold War had been laid long As often happens in human history, a crucial before. That being said, it was disagreements about unforeseen event, unrelated to the war, happened how to organize a post-Hitler Europe that set the between Yalta and Potsdam: the death of US wartime allies on a diplomatic crash course. President Roosevelt. While he was sympathetic to

150 History of International Relations

Stalin’s demands for Soviet hegemony over Eastern The stakes only grew higher after the US Europe, his successor Harry Truman was not. On detonated a nuclear bomb over Hiroshima. Stalin, May 11, barely three days after the war in Europe whose intelligence agencies had long penetrated had ended, Truman suspended Lend-Lease aid the US nuclear facilities at Los Alamos, was not to the USSR. In July, he managed to postpone surprised when Truman announced at Potsdam the Potsdam Conference until after the US had that the US had conducted a successful nuclear detonated its first atomic bomb. Most saw this as test in the desert of New Mexico in mid-July. That a means of intimidating Stalin and pressuring the said, he was far less pleased when they actually Soviets to relinquish their hegemony in Eastern dropped one on the Japanese on August 6 and 9. Europe and claims over Asia-Pacific. As Stalin told his scientists at the time, “Hiroshima Stalin, however, was undeterred by such has shaken the whole world. The balance has threats. Rather than cow to American demands been destroyed… that cannot be” (Montefiore, that he allowed democratic elections in Poland 2004:504). and elsewhere, he determined to develop a Soviet atomic bomb all the quicker (they would by The Strategy of Containment and the 1949). And thus, while the Allies could agree upon Formation of the Western Alliance German demilitarization, denazification, and the establishment of an Allied Control Council Still, Stalin had achieved most of his desired (ACC) in which the commanders-in-chief of each post-war territorial gains in Eastern Europe and of the four occupying armies would theoretically East Asia. As 1945 drew into 1946, then, he govern Germany, the Soviets insisted that each set about securing the Soviet Union’s southern commander have complete control over his borders. Overconfident, he demanded too much, respective zone—thus all but guaranteeing a more rousing the enmity of both Britain and the US and permanent partition. Since they were also unable hardening Truman’s resolve. Not only did Stalin to agree on what reparations Germany should pay delay withdrawing Soviet troops from northern and to whom, Potsdam left the German question Iran (who had been stationed there as part of as unresolved as ever. the Anglo-Soviet agreement of 1942 to prevent the Germans from seizing Persian oil), he also demanded territorial concessions from Turkey, control over the Turkish straits, and a role in the administration of Italy’s former North African colonies as a stepping stone for establishing Soviet naval bases in the eastern Mediterranean. Even Stalin’s normally quiescent Foreign Minister, Vyacheslav Molotov, told his boss the Allies “won’t allow it” (cited in Resis, 1993:8). By early 1946, the US and Britain had taken their case against the USSR regarding Iran to the United Nations Security Council—the “first significant use of the new world organization to deal with an international crisis” (Gaddis, 2005). What’s more, Truman also deployed the US Sixth Fleet to the Figure 6.1 Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, US President eastern Mediterranean, where it remains to this day. Harry S. Truman, and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill at the Potsdam Conference in July 1945. Containment Source: www.britannica.com It was in February 1946, however, that the mounting ideological and geopolitical divide between the US and USSR was given crystal form.

151 The Cold War: Global Developments

Sent off hastily by a junior Foreign Service Officer went ahead. As Stalin saw it, the new SED was at the US Embassy in Moscow, George F Kennan’s to serve as an electoral spearhead for the rest of “Long Telegram” would become the single most Germany once it had established its preeminence influential document in the Cold War. Describing in Berlin and the East. Only under socialist- both Russian and the Soviet Union as “impervious communist (i.e. Soviet) leadership could Germany to the logic of reason” and “highly sensitive to the then be administratively united. logic of force,” the telegram described at length Ironically, however, it was the US and Britain “the instinctive Russian sense of insecurity” that that made the first tactical moves to unite their dictated the violent and hard-headed contours of zones (and thus move closer to partitioning Soviet foreign policy. Germany). With Britain’s post-war finances severely Soviet leaders, it argued, had little choice but strained, it could no longer shoulder the burden to treat the outside world as hostile, chiefly as an of feeding and administering its zone, already excuse “for the dictatorship without which they the most densely populated of Germany. Thus, it do not know how to rule, for cruelties they did merged its zone with that of the US in January not dare to inflict, for sacrifices they felt bound to 1947 to create the Bizonia. Though the Russians command.” (cited in Gaddis, 2005:53). Indeed, protested this maneuver, Washington and London the Soviet Union would only back down when claimed it not only did not violate Potsdam, but “strong resistance [was] encountered.” This did not actively supported it. After all, the Soviets would mean that war was inevitable, Kennan maintained, never get war reparations if the German economy only that there needed to be “a long-term, patient could not run a surplus. And the only way to fix but firm and vigilant containment of Russian the German economy was to further centralize expansive tendencies.” Thus was born the logic of its administration, especially its most productive containment, the chief American foreign policy economic zones in the west. objective for the duration of the Cold War. Truman Doctrine Iron Curtain Britain’s German zone of occupation was far Winston Churchill seconded this motion in a from its only financial burden. A country in ruin famous speech in Fulton, Missouri the following after World War II and beset by poverty and month. Speaking at Westminster College on unemployment, the Labour Party had swept to March 6, 1946, he warned: “From Stettin in power in a landslide victory in July 1945. Moreover, the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an Iron Curtain after Clement Attlee replaced Winston Churchill has descended across the Continent.” Though as prime minister, he committed his country to a communist governments had yet to take power in regime of “socialist reform” that had little room most of Eastern and Central Europe—there were and practically no appetite for overseas adventures certain signs that the Soviet authorities were more or undue responsibilities. lenient in certain regards than even the French Barely a month after the creation of the occupation authorities—the writing was on the wall. Bizonia in Germany, Britain made the shocking After an electoral fiasco in Hungary in announcement that it could no longer offer November 1945 in which the anti-communist economic assistance to Turkey or Greece, two smallholding peasant party received well over 50% countries whose fates were central to that of of the vote, compared to the communists’ 25%, Europe and the Middle East. Given that Stalin had Stalin decided that no such chances could be recently instructed Yugoslav communists to assist taken elsewhere, especially in Germany. In order Greek communists in the ongoing Greek Civil War to bolster the German Communist Party (KPD), (1946-47)—contravening his pledge to Churchill Stalin leaned on the German Socialists (SPD) to to remain neutral in that country—the timing of form a grand union with the KDP to be known Britain’s retreat was critical. as the Socialist Unity Party (SED). Though West President Truman wasted little time in Berliner SPD members overwhelmingly rejected presenting what would become known as the this merger in a March 1946 referendum, it still Truman Doctrine, announcing on March 12, 1947

152 History of International Relations

that it was henceforth “the policy of the United initially sent a large Soviet delegation to Paris States to support free peoples who are resisting to discuss receiving aid, then retracted it, while attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by allowing Eastern European delegations to attend outside pressures,” i.e. communism—starting with before abruptly ordering them back. Eventually Turkey and Greece (Public Papers of the Presidents he banned his satellite states from partaking in the of the United States, 1963: 178–79). largest economic recovery package in history. As such, many see Foreign Minister Molotov’s Marshall Plan abrupt departure from Paris in June 1947 as the beginning of the formation of the Western bloc. Meeting in Moscow a month later in April This left 16 countries, including Turkey and 1947, the US, British, French, and Soviet foreign Greece, in the Marshall Plan’s new economic orbit, ministers equally failed to resolve the status of which, if successful, would soon morph into a more Germany and Eastern Europe (Gaddis, 2005:54). permanent structure of economic—and, gradually, Newly appointed as Truman’s secretary of state, political—interdependence. the brinkmanship was too much for former general George C. Marshall. Greatly perturbed by what he saw in Moscow—a seemingly indifferent The London Conference of Foreign Stalin in whose hands the fate of Europe rested— Ministers in November 1947 Marshall turned once again to George Kennan. If A series of escalating crisis in 1947-48 forged the young diplomat could diagnose the disease, the Western bloc into much more than a loose went his reasoning, then surely he must prescribe economic alliance determined to rebuild Europe. a remedy. In response, Kennan gave Marshall the After the failed meeting in Moscow in April 1946, outline of what would soon become the European the four occupying powers met once again in Recovery Program. Seeking nothing less than London to discuss the fate of Germany. The Soviets the reconstruction of a war-torn Europe, when favored its unification since under any partition, Marshall announced his program during the the rich industrial complex of the Ruhr would Harvard Commencement speech of June 1947, it fall under a US-led Western European bloc, thus immediately became known as the Marshall Plan. depriving the USSR of an important source of war To be one of the largest assistance programs reparations, which it rightly felt was its due and in modern history, the Marshall Plan did not had been agreed upon at Potsdam. distinguish between those parts of Europe under The US, for its part, was fearful that a unified Soviet control and those that were not. Seeing Germany would fall into Moscow’s orbit, and thus hunger, poverty, and unemployment as a larger opposed German unification. Instead, it favored immediate threat to Europe than the Red Army— the incorporation of a united Western German since the former might more readily push the masses political unit into a broader Western defensive into the hands of Moscow-dominated communist alliance. Though the French were strongly opposed parties than the latter—the Marshall Plan would to anything that would unite the Germans, even serve a two-fold purpose: first, provide a material if only in the west, Washington finally convinced basis that would disabuse Europeans of the promise Paris to permit the creation of a West German state of communism; second, force the Soviet Union to within a broader Western defense alliance after the either accept American aid, thus tacitly admitting communist seizure of power in Czechoslovakia in the strengths of the capitalist system—or throw up February 1948 -the only Soviet-orbit country until its “own wall” and thus justifying the creation and then not under communist rule. existence of a Western bloc (Gaddis, 1997). Both worked better than Washington could have imagined. On the one hand, the Marshall The Pact Plan set in motion an economic miracle the likes On March 17, 1948, in response to the Czech of which Western Europe had never seen; on the coup, Belgium, Britain, France, Luxembourg, other, it forced Stalin into the incredibly clumsy and the Netherlands signed a mutual defense position of nearly accepting American aid. Stalin pact called the Treaty of Brussels, also known as

153 The Cold War: Global Developments

the Brussels Pact. Though it did not mention the armed brigade (US), which risked a larger military USSR by name, and did not include the US, it conflagration—British Foreign Minister Ernest would form the backbone of what would become Bevin settled upon the far more sensible strategy the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) of relieving the West Berliners via airlift. Flying in the following year. That same month, Congress 2000 tons of goods and foodstuffs a day by late approved the first installment of Marshall Plan July, the Western powers increased their daily funds, some $5 billion, for which the Organization tonnage to 5600 tons by January 1949 and 8000 for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) was by April, flying more than 275,000 sorties during established to help administer. the span of the blockade. On May 12, 1949, in After the failure of the London Foreign Ministers’ return for renewed talks to be held on the sidelines of the UN in New York, Stalin finally lifted the Conference in late 1947, the US, France, Britain, blockade. Eleven days later, the Federal Republic and the Benelux states (Netherlands, Belgium, and of Germany (in German: FDR, or West Germany) Luxembourg) met again from February to June was established. This was followed by the creation 1948 in what would be called the London Six of the Democratic Republic of Germany (in Power Conference to hammer out an agreement German: GDR, or East Germany) by the Soviets on the formulation of a unified West German state. out of its former occupation zone. The partition To appease French fears of a reinvigorated of Germany and division of Berlin was thus Germany, the industrial complex of the Ruhr completed, which became the symbol of the Cold was to be administered by a new body called the War division in the world. International Ruhr Authority, while the new West German state would also have to accept an Occupation Statute that gave Britain, France, and The Creation of NATO the US extensive powers over its foreign relations, The Berlin blockade, in addition to the Prague trade, economic status, and disarmament. On coup, also did wonders for sealing the budding June 7, the West Germans were allowed to Western military alliance. Incidentally, talks for draft a constitution, and on June 20 a single said alliance were inextricably tied up with those currency was introduced for West Germany, the for the establishment of a West German state. Deutschmark. The Soviets, hardly content with And despite pushback from the French, who were these developments, immediately responded by understandably nervous about the creation of a introducing their own currency in the east, the strong West German state, Washington pushed on, Ostmark. gaining congressional backing at home and pledges of faith from European allies for the creation of both the FDR and a firmer military alliance. On April Berlin Blockade 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization While the Soviets had already sought to exert was signed in Washington by Canada, the US, the pressure on the Western bloc by exerting tighter Brussels Pact powers –namely Belgium, Britain, controls over who and what could enter West France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands-, Berlin—a tiny enclave in a vast Soviet-controlled Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Italy, and Portugal. zone—since March of that year, things came to a Before the end of the Cold War, Greece (1952), head after the Deutschmark was introduced into Turkey (1952), West Germany (1955) and Spain West Berlin on June 23, 1948. With the excuse (1982) also entered the alliance. they were trying to prevent useless Reichsmarks, To initially last 20 years, there were early fears the former currency, from flooding East Berlin, among many Western Europeans that the US on June 24 the Soviets enacted a full land and rail was not fully committed to the alliance, given blockade of West Berlin, even cutting off electricity that Article 5 of the treaty gave each country the supplies from the East. For the next eleven months, right to “take such action as it deems necessary, no one would enter or leave the city. including the use of armed force, to restore and Though the Western powers were initially maintain security in the North Atlantic area”—a unsure of what to do—gravitating between doing rather ambiguous amount of leeway when it came nothing (France) and bursting the lines with an to forcing one state (the US) to intervene on behalf

154 History of International Relations

of another (say, France). However, when the NATO theory, to communist-led coalitions of left-liberals Council first met in September, the US put these and socialists, it was only from 1947 that Moscow worries to rest by taking a seat on all five regional set about creating a firmly consolidatedEastern defense and military committees into which the bloc in response to geopolitical developments in alliance had been divided and by approving a large the west. military assistance program to build up Western Europe’s defense forces. Cominform and Conquest of Eastern Europe Stalin reacted to the Marshall Plan of June 1947 as Kennan had predicted he would: by further tightening his grip over Central and Eastern Europe. In September 1947, he launched the Cominform (Communist Information Bureau), a latter-day Comintern, or Communist International, the organ that had dictated international communist party orthodoxy in the interwar years. Now billing itself as the leader of the ‘anti-imperialist and democrat’ camp within Europe against a US-led ‘imperialist’ bloc, the Soviet Union abandoned its previous policy of working with liberal and socialist Figure 6.2 NATO Flag. parties within its sphere of influence. From mid- Source: gorselarsiv.anadolu.edu.tr 1947 onward, an unmistakable eastern bloc was in the making. The formation of the Eastern Bloc: Up until that point, Eastern Europe and The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe the Balkans had known a diversity of political regimes. True, Romania and Poland were already After the Nazi defeat at the famous Battle in communist hands by early 1947: in Romania, of Kursk in the summer of 1943, from which the communists and socialists had joined forces at the Germans would never recover, it was only the Soviets’ urging in March 1946 and won 80% of a matter of time before the far superior Soviet the vote in national elections that November, while armies marched westward into the rest of Central in Poland, a series of intimidations, electoral fraud, and Eastern Europe. By early September 1944, and the of the popular, anti-communist Soviet forces were firmly in control of Bucharest Peasant Party from the January 1947 elections put (Romania) and Sofia (Bulgaria). By February the country in communist hands. But Yugoslavia 1945 they had occupied Budapest; Vienna and and Albania both had independent communist Berlin would follow in April and May. Of the regimes, and Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and future communist states, only Yugoslavia, whose Bulgaria were only under the marginal influence communist partisans had fought a long and bloody of Moscow. Prior to Cominform, even Polish war of attrition against the Germans themselves, Communist leader Wladyslaw Gomulka had and Albania would be unoccupied by Soviet forces. envisioned a far more independent line for Despite these military victories and the communist Poland (for which he would be forced understandable Soviet desire to create a series to resign and imprisoned a year later). of buffer states—not to mention the American In Bulgaria, for example, elections in December conviction that countries such as Poland and 1945 had brought a communist-led coalition to Romania lay firmly within the Soviet ‘sphere power that included two important opposition of influence’ (in which communism could leaders. When national assembly elections were therefore not be ‘contained’)—the USSR did not held the following October, over a third of the seats immediately install communist regimes in all of were won by opposition parties. Though the west its occupied territories. Still committed, at least in saw this great reason for hope, after the Truman

155 The Cold War: Global Developments

Doctrine, which promised American aid to anti- Moscow. When elections were held on May 30, communist forces in Greece and Turkey, Bulgaria 1948, only members from a Moscow-approved became a ‘front-line’ state. Bulgarian communists National Front list were allowed to run. Though soon liquidated the opposition, and with a nod communist Yugoslavia would split with Moscow from the newly created Cominform, set about in the summer of 1948 over Tito’s refusal to creating a single-party state. subordinate his country’s foreign policy to the USSR or join a wider Yugoslav-Bulgarian union, The Prague Coup, Hungary, and as Stalin had suggested, the die for the eastern bloc was cast. With Yugoslavia expelled from the Cominform, Despite liberating Prague from Nazi occupation every other member state now abided by Moscow’s in May 1945—perhaps the last battle of the increasingly stringent dictates. This included six-year European war—the Soviets had pulled Hungary, who was though largely influenced their troops out of Czechoslovakia by December by a Soviet-dominated Allied Control Council 1945. Nor did they interfere in the March 1946 since 1945, had had free elections in which elections in which the communists only took 38% communists and socialists only took 45% of the of the vote. Though communists and socialists vote as late as August 1947. With Cominform in dominated the new government, it was still led by full effect, however, Budapest was pressured into President Edvard Beneš, the country’s celebrated signing a mutual assistance treaty with Moscow pre-war leader on the eve of the notorious Munich in January 1949, giving Moscow the right to keep Agreement (1938). troops stationed in Hungary and the unequivocal All this changed when the Marshall Plan (1947) political power that entails. By September, the entered the picture. After the Czech parliament People’s Republic of Hungary had been declared voted unanimously in July 1947 to attend the under the leadership of arch-Stalinist Mátyás Paris Conference to discuss Marshall aid, the Rákosi. Soviets began to push back. Being recalled from As a final institutional measure to solidify the Paris to Moscow to prevent Czechoslovakia from emerging eastern bloc and counter the Marshall making any rapprochement with Washington, Plan, in January 1949 Moscow launched the Czechoslovak Foreign Minister Jan Masaryk Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, better would later remark: “I went to Moscow as the known as COMECON. With the aim of facilitating foreign minister of an independent sovereign state; the economic development of the eastern bloc, I returned as a lackey of the Soviet government” the group’s original members included the USSR, (Behrman, 2007:95). Fearing, not incorrectly, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, and that Washington was using said aid to establish a Poland. Albania joined in 1949, but would leave in western bloc, the Soviet Union strictly forbid any 1961 after the Soviet-Albanian split. East Germany other ‘client’ state from participating too. joined in 1950, followed by the Mongolian People’s Though communists were already losing Republic in 1962, Cuba in 1972, and Vietnam, popularity in Czechoslovakia, the Soviets backed its tenth and final member, in 1978. Though the a coup in Prague in February 1948 that forced Warsaw Pact was still six years away, the eastern President Beneš to appoint a new cabinet, bloc had been firmly established. all of whose members were now approved by

156 History of International Relations

Figure 6.3 European Map during the Cold War. Source: commons.wikimedia.org

East Asia and the Middle East. In the East, Stalin supported the North Koreans in their invasion 1 against the South, a war that soon escalated into Who is to blame for the emergence of the Cold vast proportions once the UN Command began War—the US or the USSR? directing the defense of . While the Korean War was raging (1950-53), in 1952 and 1953 the US and Soviet Union both conducted THE COLD WAR IN THE 1950s: their first hydrogen bomb tests, a weapon of INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND much greater destructive capacity than previous CONFRONTATION atomic bombs. After the death of Stalin in 1953, leaders on both sides grew closer to the idea of From the late 1940 and early 1950 onward, peaceful coexistence, a policy first introduced by the Cold War began to escalate and became more Soviet Prime Minister Georgy Malenkov and later global. Looking at developments in the West, the strengthened by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev rearmament of West Germany was planned, and at the 20th party congress in 1956 during the new policies were put forward to contain the latter’s infamous “secret speech” denouncing the Soviets. Among others, these included the creation crimes of Stalin. However, ideological competition of new military alliances and organizations in

157 The Cold War: Global Developments

between the great powers continued apace, (Suh, 2013: 1). On December 15, 1945, the United especially as revolutionaries the world over began States, Soviet Union, and Britain met in Moscow adopting Marxist-Leninist language and, in their and decided to unite Korea temporarily. In 1947, minds, techniques to reshape their countries’ path the UN held elections under the auspices of the of development. UN Commission. The Soviet Union, however, did not comply with this decision and did not allow The Communist Victory in China the commission into the north. As a result, the UN only allowed elections in areas it could enter. It should not be forgotten that the communist On May 10, 1948, the first general elections victory in the (1927-1949) were held south of the 38th parallel, and Syngman was also one of the most decisive moments of the Rhee was elected president. In contrast, the 20th century. As the end of a huge and immensely Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea, important saga that had first seen the country’s founded by Kim II-Sung in 1948, declared its two most powerful political movements, the independence in 1950. As attempts to unify the Kuomintang, i.e. Nationalists under the leadership two Koreas grew increasingly fruitless, things came of Chiang Kai-shek, and the communists, under to a hear on June 25, 1950 when North Korean the leadership of Mao Zedong, briefly aligned forces invaded South Korean territory (Sander, (1924-27) in their common effort to root out 2014: 276-278). When the forces of communist warlordism before turning viciously against one China joined the invading North in October 1950, another (1927-onward), Mao’s victory in 1949 the Korean War became a Sino-UN war that lasted would shape a large part of 20th century global until 1953. After no territorial gains, the armistice history. Terrifying the American establishment, ending the war demarcated the border between many of whom now accused Truman of ‘losing North and South Korea as once again at the 38th China,’ the communist seizure of power in parallel (Armaoğlu, 2004: 455-456). Beijing went a long way toward convincing the Americans, with the UN and many other nations behind them, to go to war in Korea the following The Death of Stalin and The Policy of year (1950-53). What’s more, Mao’s victory also Peaceful Coexistence diluted the USSR’s monopoly on socialist power. After Stalin’s death in 1953, the Soviet With two great eastern states now firmly vying for Politburo introduced a collective leadership the position of the world’s ‘most revolutionary,’ system so that absolute power was no longer the dual nature of the rivalry for world mastery exercised by one person. The collective leadership (Moscow vs. Washington) had in some sense now consisted of Malenkov, Molotov, Lavrently Beria, been surpassed. Nikolai Bulganin, and Khrushchev. The policy of destalinization was formulated during this The Korean War period, especially once Prime Minister Malenkov introduced the policy of peaceful coexistence with With Western and Eastern blocs fully formed, the West in August 1953—though the policy has Asia became the second battleground of the Cold since come to be more associated with Khrushchev. War—though in absolute terms, it was also the first According to Malenkov, speaking after Stalin’s region in which a real Cold War-related conflict funeral, “we stand as we have always stood for broke out (McMahon, 2003: 35). First things first, the peaceful coexistence of the two systems. We this was because the end of World War II had also hold that there are no objective reasons for clashes brought an end to Japanese rule over the Korean between the United States of America and the peninsula. This did not, however, bring immediate Soviet Union” (Dunbabin, 2008: 199). This policy independence to the peninsula or country. As a significantly reduced the tension between the result of the mounting Cold War rivalry between Eastern and Western Blocks and allowed the Soviet the US and Soviet Union, Korea was partitioned in Union to organize the Geneva Summit, the first two, with the North falling under the remit of the time both bloc’s respective heads of state had met Soviet Union everywhere north of the 38th parallel, since Potsdam. while the South Korean state was allied to the US

158 History of International Relations

Revealing that neither side desired war, more, Washington hoped to contain the spread of the spirit of Geneva was built upon during communism from reaching China, Indonesia, and Khrushchev’s visit to Bombay in 1956, during the nascent South Korean state. which time he gave a hopeful and rousing speech Though China was ‘lost’ to communism, for world peace. Socialists and capitalists, he and the Korean War then raging, in 1951 the said, must live side by side on this planet. The US signed the Mutual Security Treaty with Japan, possibility of peaceful coexistence only increased which agreed to station US troops in Japan for with the success of the Camp David Summit held the latter’s defense. In 1954, this was updated to in September 1959, when US President Dwight the Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement, which D. Eisenhower invited Soviet leader Khrushchev encouraged a higher, purely defensive participation on a several-week tour of the United States to calm from Japanese troops in the islands’ security. tensions that had been mounting over the fate Similar mutual defense treaties were signed with of Berlin. In May 1960, however, an American the Philippines (1951) and South Korea (1953) to U2 spy plane conducting surveillance deep into bolster the US containment policy in the region, in Soviet territory was shot down, causing a minor addition to considerably larger collective security international crisis that ended hopes for this treaties such as ANZUS and SEATO. particular phase of peaceful coexistence. When The former, the Australian-New Zealand- the Berlin Crisis of 1961 broke out, causing the United States Pact (ANZUS), signed in 1951, Soviet-sponsored East German regime to erect committed Australia, New Zealand, and the the Berlin Wall, the Cold War was back with a United States to a nonbinding collective defense vengeance (Lightbody, 1999: 36-38). treaty in which each country considered an On May 14, 1955, immediately after the attack on one of them to be an attack on all. The accession of West Germany to NATO, the Soviet latter, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization Union created the Warsaw Pact. Formally known as (SEATO), signed in Manila in September 1954 the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual but to be headquartered in Bangkok, committed Assistance, in addition to the USSR it contained the United States, France, Great Britain, New Albania (which formally left the pact in 1968), Zealand, Australia, the Philippines, Thailand, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, and to a similarly non-binding anti- Poland, and Romania. A collective defense treaty communist collective defense treaty. SEATO signed in Warsaw, the pact complemented the would be, however, criticized for having merely COMECON, which had been established by the two Southeast Asian nations. Soviets in 1949 to support Central and Eastern

European communist economies. With the establishment of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, The Baghdad Pact two ideologically opposed mutual defense blocs, a The creation of the Baghdad Pact was another protracted arms race was all but inevitable. significant development in the institutionalization of the Cold War insofar as it extended the goal Containment in Asia-Pacific of militarily containing the Soviet Union far into the Middle East. Established in 1955 after Though weary of stretching its resources too an agreement between Turkey and Iraq, it also thinly, after 1945 the US felt superior in its lone included Britain, Pakistan, and Iran. As a rule, possession of a nuclear weapon and sought to extend the general purpose of this pact was to prevent its influence over East Asia and the Pacific Rim the spread of communism into the Middle East at the expense of Soviet ambitions in the region. and keep the Soviets away from vital Middle East Seeking to make Japan, which it had occupied in oil. Yet following the overthrow of anti-Soviet 1945, and the Philippines, an American colony rule in Iraq in 1959, the Pact began to crumble. since 1898 (which it would relinquish in 1946), Iraq immediately left the organization, and when into model anti-communist Asian states, the US the US joined as an associate member, its name pumped money into developing both countries was changed to the Central Treaty Organization into vibrant, democratic, capitalist states. What’s (CENTO). The headquarters of the organization

159 The Cold War: Global Developments

moved to Ankara. After the As a result, Nasser overnight became the most of 1979, Iran also withdrew, and CENTO was influential leader in the . Moreover, dissolved. the Soviet Union greatly increased its influence The Baghdad Pact caused different perceptions in the Middle East as a result of its opposition to among the countries of the region. While the attacks (Sander, 2014: 301-305). Finally, and member states saw it as a guarantee against Soviet perhaps most importantly, neither Britain nor expansionism, Saudi Arabia and Egypt stood France’s position or image in the region would ever against it. Egyptian president Abdul Gamel Nasser, recover. for his part, did not see the Soviet Union as a threat and described the pact as an instrument of Western imperialism. The real threat to Arab countries, for him, was Israel and Western imperialism (Uzer and Uzer, 2005:112-113). These varying perceptions all became manifest in the Suez Canal Crisis of 1956.

The 1956 Suez Crisis Egypt had been under the leadership of Colonel Abdul Gamel Nasser since 1952, a hugely popular leader in the Arab world. Nasser pursued two policies to enable Egypt to gain mastery of the region. The first was to buy arms from the Eastern Bloc to strengthen itself against Israel. The second was to build the Aswan dam to economically develop Egypt. Both of these helped trigger the 1956 Suez Crisis and the Second Arab-Israeli War. When Nasser’s bid for credit from the West for the construction of the Aswan dam was rescinded by the US and Britain as punishment for having accepted Soviet arms and aid, Nasser responded by Figure 6.4 Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th President of nationalizing the Suez Canal in July 1956. Neither the United Office, (Term of Office: 1953-1961). the London Conference, which convened in August Source: www.britannica.com 1956 to solve the problem, nor the UN, could reach a solution. On 16 October, British Prime The Eisenhower Doctrine Minister Anthony Eden went to Paris. During his talks there, they decided upon a joint intervention These developments motivated US President to reclaim the canal, in partnership with Israel. On Eisenhower, who launched an economic and October 29, Israel began its invasion of the Sinai military aid program in January 1957 to protect Peninsula, after which France and Britain launched Middle Eastern countries from military threats and air strikes against Egypt. internal (communist-inspired) turmoil. Known as the Eisenhower Doctrine, this policy was a Though militarily successful, both the US and direct response to the perceived increase in Soviet Soviet Union opposed these attacks at the UN. influence in the region and, as such, promised This unusual mutual understanding on a question aid to any Middle Eastern country “threatened of grave international political importance between by armed aggression,” i.e. communism, whether the US and the Soviet Union led to a ceasefire from within or without. Many Arabs, however, on November 6, after which France and Britain perceived the doctrine as an arrangement aimed at withdrew their troops from the canal in December protecting Western interests in the region. With the 1956. Although Israel resisted withdrawing from US providing all the necessary assistance, including its occupied territories, Egypt ultimately regained the use of military force, to the state in question full control over the canal by the end of the crisis.

160 History of International Relations

seeking help, Congress gave the President the 1960 barely two weeks before a proposed summit authority to militarily intervene virtually anywhere in Paris between the US and Soviet leadership. in the region. Finally, the doctrine included a $200 The meeting was vitally important for both camps million allowance that the US president could since they along with France and Britain were dispense at his discretion (Sander, 2014: 306-307). going to discuss a number of critical Cold War The first implementation of the Eisenhower issues, including the problem of Berlin (Kissinger, Doctrine was in in 1958. Although the 2014: 561). All the same, President Eisenhower latter was not under any direct Soviet threat, the accepted the spy mission of the U-2 planes, which President of Lebanon, Camille Chamoun, asked hurt the trust between the two countries, while also for US assistance against his domestic political showing that the US leadership had put little stock opponents, who were presumed to be in legion in “peaceful coexistence” as a means of information with and Egypt, whose governments had gathering (Armaoğlu, 2004: 600-601). Expecting just united to form the United Arab Republic, a formal apology, Khrushchev stormed out of the mostly under Nasser’s leadership. Eisenhower summit before traveling to Berlin to extend the accepted Chamoun’s request and sent US troops deadline of his Berlin ultimatum of 1958, for to Lebanon, who subsequently occupied the port which he had demanded the full withdrawal of of Beirut for the next three months. Despite the Western troops from West Berlin, until the end Americans’ efforts to present a neutral face to the of the US presidential elections (Kissinger, 2014: region, the Eisenhower Doctrine was perceived 563). Until these occurred, there was scarcely no by the USSR, Egypt, and Syria as little more than communication between the two , a an intervention in their internal affairs, while tense environment that set the tone for the erection supporting Israel no less. It did not, then, quell the of the Berlin Wall in 1961. surge of Soviet influence in the region, which only grew in Egypt and Syria, two of the region’s most The Berlin Wall important powers (Sander, 2014: 307). By the time Soviet leader Khrushchev issued his notorious ultimatum in November 1958 for Western forces to withdraw from Berlin, 4.5 2 million East Germans had escaped through West Berlin en route to West Germany, some 20% of the Do some research on the Hungarian Revolution country’s population. Appalled by this brain drain, of 1956. and general demographic catastrophe, Khrushchev was keen to put the issue to rest once and for all. In order to keep East Germany in tact, the Soviets THE COLD WAR IN THE had to shut the valve that was leaking its best and 1960s AND 1970s: FROM brightest via West Berlin. Though Khrushchev CONFRONTATION TO DÉTENTE did not threaten the use of force if the Western Despite tensions in the Middle East, there powers did not comply with his ultimatum, it was had been a brief thaw in relations between the widely understood that the USSR meant business. superpowers in the second half of the 1950s, After a series of conciliatory talks between 1958- created mostly in wake of the Geneva Summit 1960, it appeared that the four occupying powers of 1955 and that of Paris in 1960. However, this might come to some arrangement. These hopes abruptly came to an end in 1960. were dashed, however, when a United States U-2 spy plane was shot down during a reconnaissance mission over the Soviet Union in May 1960. U-2 Spy Plane Incident: The End of However, there were still hopes that John F. the Peaceful Coexistence Kennedy, elected president later that year over his US covert intelligence operations behind Soviet even more anti-communist opponent, Richard lines were brutally brought to the fore when the Nixon, might be able to reach an agreement with USSR shot down an American U-2 spy plane in Khrushchev over the question of Berlin.

161 The Cold War: Global Developments

By the time Kennedy took office in early 1961, As its longtime ‘backyard,’ US military might however, Khrushchev was threatening to sign a and ideology could not afford to be challenged separate treaty with East Germany by the end of in the region (Young and Kent, 2013: 108). the year if the Western powers did not relinquish When American ally General Fulgencio Batista their control over West Berlin, an arrangement was overthrown in Cuba by Fidel Castro in that would in theory contravene the Potsdam 1959, many began to worry that this augured the agreements but which West Berlin mayor Willy beginning of the “spread of communism beyond Brandt referred to as Khrushchev “marrying Asia and Europe” (Lightbody, 1999: 56). Castro’s himself.” But Kennedy held firm. Amidst the subsequent nationalization policy and desire to confusion, however, by July 1961 over 1,000 East seek assistance from the Soviet Union only added Germans were fleeing to West Berlin per day. To fuel to the fire. prevent any further demographic collapse, in the US President Kennedy inherited this situation night between August 12-13, the Soviets began from President Eisenhower and chose to follow erecting a wall in their section of Berlin. Given his example. With the CIA training Cuban exiles that this was in the Soviet section of the city, the to become the central tool of US policy towards Western powers did not intervene. From here on Cuba, the Bay of Pigs invasion was initiated in 1961 out, it was understood that the West had its remit to take down Castro regime (Mason, 1996: 37). of influence, West Berlin and West Germany, However, US-backed forces were defeated by the and the Soviet Union its—East Berlin and East Cubans on arrival. The consequences of this failed Germany. A stable, if precarious, balance seemed invasion drew Cuba much closer to the Soviet to have been struck. Union, while paradoxically expressing an American intolerance for any perceived Soviet or communist advance in the region (Best et al., 2008: 273). Almost a year after the failed invasion, US U-2 spy planes were able to photograph the existence of Soviet nuclear missiles on the island (Mason, 1996: 31). Due to its proximity to the US, merely 90 miles from Florida, the perceived threat of this development in the US was huge (Chari, 2010: 29). Giving the Soviets a ‘first strike’ opportunity to counter US missile deployment in Turkey and Italy was Khrushchev’s ploy to protect Cuba from a further US invasion. It also brought the Soviet Figure 6.5 Berlin Wall. leverage in its fight to counter American weapons deployed against the USSR (Lightbody, 1999: 57). Source: www..int An Executive Committee was immediately assembled by President Kennedy to evaluate his The Cuban Missile Crisis: the Edge policy options towards Cuba. Kennedy first put of Nuclear War? Cuba under a naval blockade, despite Cuba’s Outside of Europe, however, the US policy protests that the missiles deployed were purely for of containing Soviet expansion began to be defensive purposes. While the Soviet Union offered shattered when many of the Third World states to broker a diplomatic solution, Khrushchev was gaining independence from the 1950s onward looking for new ways to use the Cuban Missile began looking at socialism as the way forward. Crisis as its bargaining chip to resolve the Berlin Developments in Latin America were not different issue and eliminate US ballistic missiles pointed than elsewhere, and the wide attraction of leftwing against the USSR in Turkey (Allison, 1969: 260- ideas across the continent made Washington very 263). nervous (Dockrill and Hopkins, 2006: 83-85).

162 History of International Relations

Figure 6.6 US President John F. Kennedy at the Oval Office, announcing the naval blockade of Cuba on October 22, 1962. Source: www.britannica.com

The world was on high alert, given the potential Although its exact start date cannot be of a nuclear war. The tension was eased, however, pinpointed out, the “hotline” established between on October 26, when Moscow declared that it Washington and Moscow in October 1962 would remove its missile pads in Cuba if the US remained in use for critical communications. A promised not to attempt another invasion of the year later, both powers signed the first Nuclear Test- island (Dockrill and Hopkins, 2006: 85). Even Ban Treaty, an effort to prevent a new arms race by more important was the secret US promise to restricting the testing of nuclear weapons. Last but dismantle its nuclear arsenal in Turkey (Allison, not least, the basis had been set for later talks to 1969:260). In the end, the crisis revealed that open reduce nuclear and conventional arms (Lightbody, channels of diplomacy and communication could 1999: 65). go an extremely long way to bringing a situation This ease in tensions also had an impact on intra- back from the brink, setting a powerful precedent regional and international relations. Both France for détente a decade later. and West Germany entered into independent diplomacy with the Soviet Union, marking the The Détente Era beginning of a series of independently declared détentes with the USSR from 1964 onward When tensions between the two superpowers (Zickel, 1991: 420-425). France was the first to do reached their zenith during the Cuban Missile Crisis, so, for several reasons. First, while the memory of both understood that they had to work together to French President Charles De Gaulle’s role in ending avoid a nuclear catastrophe. As Khrushchev once World War II was still fresh in France, the French put it, “there are only two ways; either peaceful had a feeling that his legacy in ending the conflict coexistence or the most destructive war in history. had been overlooked (Kissinger, 2014: 584). As There is no third choice” (Khrushchev, 1959: 7). such, France acquired a nuclear weapon in 1960, From that point onward, intensified relations which eased its security concerns vis-à-vis the between the communist and capitalist bloc aimed Soviet Union. On the one hand, the US decision at the détente, a policy aimed at setting adequate to remove its nuclear deterrent from Turkey shook political safeguards for both powers to live in peace some of the French elite’s faith in Washington (Sander, 2014: 445).

163 The Cold War: Global Developments

(Sander, 2014: 188). On the other, US unilateral Congress to assist any Southeast Asian country actions had brought NATO to the brink of nuclear threatened by “communist aggression” in August war with Warsaw Pact. For these reasons, in 1964 1964. From here on out, the US military effort France established relations with the Soviet Union in Vietnam was vastly expanded, with US troop as an independent European power under the numbers reaching 535,000 in 1968 (Dockrill motto of “the Europe of fatherlands stretching and Hopkins, 2006: 75-96) and vast bombing from the Atlantic to the Urals” (Day, 2016: 107). campaigns being carried out against civilian and To further improve its relations with the USSR and military targets in the North. The Soviet Union, create a “third way” in diplomacy, France withdrew for its part, was training North Vietnamese forces. its forces from NATO’s military command in 1966. The effects of the Vietnam War on the US economy had become visible by the second half The Vietnam War: a Crisis to Upend of the 1960s. Combined with the communists’ Détente Tet Offensive against US and South Vietnamese forces in January 1968, anti-war sentiment grew so Decolonization had a huge impact on the much that Johnson was forced to withdraw from international relations of the Cold War. France, as the presidential elections later that year (Mason, one of the last dying colonial powers, was extremely 1996: 38). President Richard Nixon, who took keen to reestablish its colony in Indochina to secure office in 1969 on the promise of making peace in its place at the seat of great powers at the end of Vietnam, actually increased the bombardment of World War II. Meeting tough resistance from Vietnam in 1970, but without any concrete results. nationalist and communist Vietnamese forces led Furthermore, Nixon’s policy of Vietnamization, by Ho Chi Minh, the US began supporting the namely the effort to get South Vietnamese forces French, especially after the Korean War (1950- to defeat the North and their southern Viet Cong 53). Fearing a “domino effect” that more countries allies, failed the same year (Dockrill and Hopkins, would fall to communism after China and North 2006: 107). Nixon eventually signed the Paris Korea, the US rapidly increased its aid to the Agreement with the North in 1973 under the French, whose forces were eventually defeated at motto of “peace with honor”, which led to the the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. withdrawal of US troops from Vietnam (Mason, The fate of Indochina was decided during 1996: 39). In 1975, the southern capital of Saigon the Geneva Conference of 1954. Accordingly, (now Ho Chi Minh City), fell to the communists. Indochina was divided into three states: Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. French rule was over, and Vietnam was partitioned at the 17th parallel. Ostpolitik and Superpower Détente The US propped up South Vietnam, which was Although the independent initiatives of France ruled by Ngo Dinh Diem (1955-1963), a French- ended with trade agreements with the Soviet speaking Catholic and anti-communist former Union, these initiatives could not ease the latter’s civil servant. As the conflict between the North, security concerns. In contrast to France, however, which was ruled by Ho Chi Minh’s communists, West Germany had much to offer to the Soviet and the South began to intensify, the US gradually Union, regarding both security and greater political increased its economic and military support for the concerns. In this regard, Ostpolitik, the ‘Eastern South. Slowly but surely, however, the Viet Cong, Policy’ of West German Chancellor Willy Brandt or communist sympathizers in the South, began initiated in 1966, was an important political gaining the upper hand in battle. initiative for the normalization of relations between After the assassination of President Kennedy West Germany and the Soviet Union, on the one in November 1963, Lyndon B. Johnson became hand, and East and West Germany, on the other president of the United States. After the Gulf of (Sommer, 1968: 59-60). Tonkin Incident in which the US claimed North In contrast to the Hallstein Doctrine, which Vietnamese forces had attacked its USS Maddox forbid West Germany from establishing ties with warship off the coast of North Vietnam, President any government that recognized East Germany, Johnson subsequently got authorization from the Ostpolitik allowed it to establish relations with

164 History of International Relations

Romania in 1967 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 1970. In line with this, Germany’s eastern border (Sommer, 1968: 63-64). However, the Soviet at the Oder-Neisse was also officially recognized Union considered the Ostpolitik of Willy Brandt an (Dockrill and Hopkins, 2006: 104). interference in its sphere of influence and ordered The diplomatic initiatives of France and Warsaw Pact troops to invade Czechoslovakia in Ostpolitik eased tensions in Europe and set the base 1968 to crush the protests of the Prague Spring for the realization of superpower détente between the (Raus, 2005: 5). US and Soviet Union shortly thereafter, such as when Johnson and Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin met to discuss various Cold War issues in 1967 (Boyle, 2003: 37). However, differences over Vietnam and the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia delayed détente until the signing of the first Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 between the US, Soviet Union, and 41 other states. According to the NPT, member states were divided into two categories. Within these categories, Nuclear-Weapon States were the privileged few allowed to have nuclear weapons in their arsenals—France, the US, China, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union. The rest of the world were Non-Nuclear Weapon States (Tertrais, 2005: 1). In many respects NPT was the product of both European and superpower détente, and a new balance of power in the world. Diplomatic initiatives of France and West Germany towards the Soviet Union had set the basis for compromise Figure 6.7 Willy Brandt, Chancellor of the Federal on complicated issues, while Western European Republic of Germany (1969-1974) and Nobel Laureate states’ perceptions of the Soviet Union had for Peace. considerably changed. Moreover, decent personal Source: www.britannica.com ties between Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev and US President Johnson had also helped soften relations between the two superpowers (Miles, 2016: 729). attention Moreover, China’s detonation of its own nuclear bomb in 1964 and hydrogen bomb in 1967 Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik was an attempt spurred an important intra-communist rivalry to strengthen relations between West and between Moscow and Beijing that paradoxically East Germany and develop West Germany’s drove the former closer to the West. relations with the Soviet Union and Poland. Under these new dynamics, US President It helped Brandt win the Nobel Peace Prize Richard Nixon stated that his new aim was in 1971, even if it was a controversial policy the realization of superpower détente and an in Germany. honorable exit from Vietnam (Ness, 1986: 281). His appointment of Henry Kissinger as advisor gave momentum to détente, as the latter also Despite the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia encouraged a shift in US policy to recognize communist China and allow it into the UN in in 1968, Brandt embarked on direct talks with the 1971 (Lightbody, 1999: 68). When President Soviet Union in 1969 to continue Ostpolitik, foster Nixon visited China in 1972 before a summit in greater trade relations, and neutralize the status of Moscow, it only exacerbated the Sino-Soviet split East Germany. Moreover, the Soviet Union’s fears (Goh, 2005: 475). Indeed, it can be argued that for its own security were eased with the signing US-China rapprochement was yet another factor of a Non-Aggression Pact with West Germany in in the US-USSR détente.

165 The Cold War: Global Developments

treaty on the prevention of nuclear war (CVCE, 2016: 19). Unfortunately, Nixon’s visit to Crimea was not as successful due to ongoing developments in the Middle East. The Arab-Israeli War of 1973 () and Brezhnev’s decision to promote communism in the Third World caused the emergence of new conflicts that threatened to derail détente (Lightbody, 1999: 69; Mason, 1996: 55). Seemingly overnight in the late 1970s, much of the Third World became a battlefield of ideological competition. As the US’ sphere of influence in the Third World shrank, its ongoing relations with the Soviet Figure 6.8 US President Richard Nixon during his visit Union only soured after the latter intervened first to communist China in 1972. in the Angolan Civil War (1975-1990) and later Source: www.nixonfoundation.org in Mozambique, Somalia, and Ethiopia (Mason, 1996: 55). These developments harmed the After visiting Beijing, President Nixon travelled trustful cooperation between the superpowers. The to Moscow in May 1972 for a summit. The mood withdrawal of the US from South Vietnam and the for détente had already been set, and both powers occupation of Saigon by communist forces in 1975 wanted to halt the arms race to relieve their had greatly demoralized the US ruling classes, economies from the strain thereof. As a result, the encouraging them to take countermeasures against Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I) was perceived Soviet expansion. Though US President concluded to limit the amount of intercontinental Gerald R. Ford’s proposed SALT II treaty of 1974 ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched seemed to be losing steam, détente still progressed ballistic missiles (SLBMs) (Pifer, 2017: 2). SALT in continental Europe. I had a huge effect on the powers’ bilateral trade, One of the most significant outcomes of détente whose volume reached $490 million in 1973 was the 1975 signing of the Helsinki Accords. The (Lightbody, 1999: 69). Indeed, the effects of final act of the Conference on Security and Co- détente had now become visible across Europe and operation in Europe (CSCE), a series of negotiations Asia-Pacific. first proposed by the Warsaw Pact in 1966 to settle In continental Europe, Ostpolitik really bore the larger post-war questions of Europe, Helsinki fruit in 1972 when East and West Germany was a landmark agreement between the two blocs. normalized relations. This easing of tensions was For starters, the 1975 Helsinki Final Act was a mirrored in Asia, where triangular diplomacy very wide-ranging set of accords, containing three between the US, China, and Soviet Union was “baskets” of separate agreements: also showing signs of success amidst greater • the first concerning security (i.e. which bloc communication (Kissinger, 2014: 718-720). was granted supremacy over which country The 1970s were rightly regarded as the decade of in Europe); disarmament (UN, 2019). While the ratification • the second economic, technological, and of the NPT and finalization of SALT I cleared the environmental cooperation; path for a massive arms reduction in continental Europe, the 1973 Mutual Balanced Force • the third humanitarian and cultural Reduction (MFBR) talks sought to reduce the cooperation. number of military units in continental Europe Given that the first ‘basket’ legitimized Soviet (Dockrill and Hopkins, 2006: 121). control over Eastern Europe, it was seen by many Links between the US and Soviet Union were at the time as a victory for Moscow and realpolitik. only deepened during summits in Washington and However, as scholars such as Anthony Best have Crimea in 1973 and 1974. When Brezhnev visited argued, the real victory may have laid in basket Washington in 1973, he signed an important three, the ‘Trojan horse’ that convinced the USSR

166 History of International Relations to agree to protect certain within its THE “SECOND” COLD WAR AND sphere (Best, et al., 2015:594). Indeed, barely a year ITS END later important Soviet dissidents such as Andrei Not only did developments everywhere seem to Sakharov and his wife Yelena Bonner had set up the be conspiring against Washington—the spread of Moscow Helsinki Group and called on intellectuals across the Soviet sphere to follow their lead. That communism in Africa and Latin America; the US’s same year, Polish intellectuals had established the unsuccessful military war in Vietnam; the failure Workers Defense Committee (KOR)—which of arms reduction talks; oil shocks; the Iranian eventually helped lead to the Solidarity movement Revolution of 1979—they also seemed to increase in 1980—and by January 1977, Czechoslovak the visibility and power of the Soviet Union. As the activists had established Charter 77. Though the USSR reached nuclear parity with the US, many in USSR continued to violate human rights in its US policy-making circles also started questioning sphere of influence, an enormously important the value of détente (Cox, 1990: 32). The Soviet precedent had been set. Human rights were now invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 convinced the US on the agenda in the communist world and would policy making elite that a reversal of détente was not recede until serious, ground-shaking changes necessary. This period is known as the Second Cold were made. For the time being, however, the War (1979-1985) in the literature (Painter, 1999: USSR felt secure in its domestic and foreign policy, 106) and coincides with the election of strongly which is one of the reasons it continued to support anti-communist Ronald Reagan as president of the revolutionary movements across the Third World in US in 1980. the late 1970s—a fact that continued to unsettle US President Reagan, a Hollywood star who took presidents Ford and Carter and helped lead to the office in 1981, was a staunch supporter of the collapse of détente. exact opposite policies of détente (Young and As such, the period of détente was nearly over Kent, 2013: 365-366). Denouncing the policies of when Jimmy Carter became the president of the US presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter, he believed his in 1977. Describing the Soviet Union “as the greatest predecessors had underestimated the capabilities of threat to world peace since World War Two,” Carter’s the US and overestimated its security (Cox, 1990: foreign policy was hardly pro-Soviet. Under the 34). To reverse their policies, Reagan depicted the influence of his National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Soviet Union as an ‘evil empire’ and redirected Brzezinski, Carter became firmly convinced that the US foreign policy as such (Painter, 1999: 106). To US had to respond to Soviet geopolitical advances counter this late surge of communism around the (Young and Kent, 2013: 277). This led the US to Third World, in his first year alone Reagan increased arm and train Islamist groups, mujahedeen, to resist the number of US military units and approved new Soviet expansionism, a policy first put tested when nuclear armament programs to reach a strategic the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979. Not balance with Soviet Union (Young and Kent, 2013: only were the SALT II provisions never approved by 366-370). To justify these new armament policies, the US; Washington was also deepening its relations he called this “peace through strength.” with China during this time (Ball, 2009: 202). Reagan’s aggressive new foreign policy was not Though the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979 was an unwelcome development for Washington, the US taken lightly by the Soviet Union. Still, they followed still toughened its policies towards the Eastern bloc the path of détente in the hopes of coming to terms as the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan (1979-1989) with Reagan. Brezhnev also ramped up his talks with deepened. the European powers to show the USSR’s desire for peace with Western Europe. Accusing the US of purposefully souring Soviet-European ties, the stable path of détente was about to shift to a more confrontational one (Young and Kent, 2013: 370). 3 When Yuri Andropov became the premier of Evaluate and discuss the Détente era in the Cold the Soviet Union in 1982, he found himself in a War new arms race with the US. Nor, for that matter, did things improve when the USSR shot down

167 The Cold War: Global Developments

a Korean Airlines flighten route from Seoul to Domestic troubles in the Soviet system had also left New York in 1983. Determined to strike back their mark, while many Eastern European states in against communism the world over, in 1983 the Soviet orbit were thirsting for independence the US overthrew the miniscule communist (Painter, 1999: 100-101). By the beginning of government on the Caribbean island of Grenada, the 1980s, Soviet economic growth had fallen to before moving to back other anti-communist rebel zero, dependent as it was on the price of energy groups in Afghanistan, Cambodia, Nicaragua, and (Lightbody, 1999: 115). Amidst this economic (Mason, 1996: 66; Painter, 1999: 100). contraction, it could hardly afford its arms race The aggressive stance of the US was only bolstered with the Western bloc; the need to reform the by the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) of that system had become all too obvious. same year, according to which the US would have Under these circumstances, Gorbachev kept an advanced missile defense system put into outer his belief in socialism. Introducing glasnost space in order to destroy enemy missiles in flight (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) as (Painter, 1999: 96). If by means of ‘Star Wars’ part of a ‘new thinking’ needed to fix the failing program the US could really eliminate Soviet parts of the Soviet system, Moscow hoped to give ballistic missiles from the sky, then the US would more autonomy to the sister republics. Efforts have the upper hand in the Second Cold War. were also made to systematically tackle rampant 1983 is also known as the ‘year of the missile’ social problems such as alcoholism and cynicism (Young and Kent, 2013: 378). Not only were many by improving inadequate social provisions (Young missiles deployed by both blocs in their respective and Kent, 2013: 416). With respect to the allies’ territories across Europe; the superpowers economy and industry, policy-makers thought also virtually cut off their communication perestroika, or a loosening of state controls on channels. While the Soviet Union walked out of production, could engender a more efficient the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (START) in economic model. But the effects of glasnost and 1983, the people of Europe and the US protested perestroika were not limited to these areas alone; against Reagan for provoking a new arms race and they also had a large impact on Soviet foreign escalating the risk of war (Dockrill and Hopkins, policy. To achieve these new ends, a different style 2006: 141). Under pressure from said protests, of foreign policy was needed. Gorbachev retired Reagan decided to initiate arms limitation talks. the Brezhnev Doctrine, which allowed for Soviet Meanwhile, his administration’s tough language intervention to shore up any communist state also began to soften, declaring the US’ willingness facing internal or external pressure, in order to to meet for new arms reduction costs in 1984, ease tensions in Eastern Europe and open a new with which the new Soviet premier, Konstantin communication channel with the US (Day, 2016: Chernenko, agreed (McMahon, 2003: 165). 205). Reagan took heed of Gorbachev’s efforts and soon softened his language (McMahon, A Last Attempt to Save the Union: 2003: 176)—the mood for a second détente was set (1985-1991). Glasnost and Perestroika, and the Second Détente After the death of Chernenko, Mikhail Brezhnev Doctrine is Gorbachev became General Secretary of the “expounded by Leonid Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in Brezhnev in November 1968 affirming the 1985, but the Union he inherited was in financial right of the Soviet Union to intervene in and social crisis (Ball, 2009: 221-222). The war in the affairs of communist countries in order Afghanistan had proven extremely costly, while the to protect communism,” (Best et al., 2008: ping pong diplomacy of Kissinger had strengthened 280). Chinese-American relations, putting the Soviet Union in a tight corner (Kissinger, 2014: 765).

168 History of International Relations

also relieve the Soviet economy. As such, by 1989 the arms race aspect of the Cold War was virtually over, and NATO declared the end of military conflict between the camps in 1990 (Lightbody, 1999: 114). Warsaw Pact representatives were long in following suit, and the START arms reductions treaty was signed in 1991 between the US and Soviet Union, cutting the number of each power’s strategic missiles by up to 50 percent (Dockrill and Hopkins, 2006: 151). In short, the Soviet Union was no longer a threat to Europe or the US.

Figure 6.9 US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet The End of the Cold War: The Leader Mikhail Gorbachev during the Reykjavik Summit Collapse of the Communist in 1986. Regimes in Eastern Europe and the Source: www.atomicheritage.org Disintegration of the Soviet Union Gorbachev’s foreign policy and domestic A series of negotiations also took place between reforms had also a remarkable impact on the 1985-1989. Reagan and Gorbachev first met at a communist regimes in Eastern Europe. With the summit in Geneva in 1985 to conclude an arms renunciation of the Brezhnev Doctrine, Gorbachev reduction deal. Though talks here were inconclusive, affirmed that the Warsaw Pact’s armies would no a second summit was held in Reykjavik in 1986, longer interfere in their internal affairs (Lightbody, though this too failed after Reagan consistently 1999: 115). Thus, the Soviet hegemony in Eastern refused to disband the US’ SDI program. Gorbachev, Europe rapidly ended, and many states began however, considered a new arms reduction deal as the arduous journey of going it alone. Eastern necessary for establishing a “common European European states’ reasons for the transition to ‘free- home” (Lightbody, 1999: 114). Moreover, the market economy’ and ‘democracy’ at this time were arms reduction deal was crucial to lifting a huge threefold: economic hardship, the renunciation of burden on the Soviet economy. The following the Brezhnev Doctrine, and the erosion of mass year, Gorbachev scrapped the USSR’s reservations support for the communist idea (Mason, 1996: about the SDI in preparation for a third round of 66-67). talks to be held in Washington in 1987. There a The first attempt at democracy was made in compromise was finally reached with the signing Poland in 1989 where the Solidarity movement of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. As earned a decisive victory in the elections of 1989 a result of the ‘zero option’ treaty, as it came to be and formed the country’s first post-war non- known, both powers’ entire class of intermediate communist government. Czechoslovakia struck range missiles were eliminated, in addition to the next when its successfully dismantlement of many in continental Europe replaced the communist government with one among both Warsaw Pact and NATO members ruled by Vaclav Havel, a playwright and dissident (Day, 2016: 206). in 1989. The communist governments of Bulgaria In 1988, Gorbachev declared before the fourth and Romania collapsed later that year—the latter summit that the Soviet Union was withdrawing with more violence than elsewhere in the region. from Afghanistan, an action that made the ‘evil Another attempt at democratization was then empire’ much rosier in the eyes of the US foreign made in Hungary and proved successful when the policy-making elite (Lightbody, 1999: 114). government agreed to honor Imre Nagy, a hero Gorbachev also announced unilateral cuts of of the 1956 uprising against the Soviet Union. Warsaw Pact forces of up to 10% (Ball, 2009: 226). Eventually the new elections were held in April These actions showed that Gorbachev was serious 1990. In short, the end of the Soviet hegemony about ending the arms in Europe. This move would gave way to peaceful revolutions in Eastern Europe

169 The Cold War: Global Developments

in 1989 everywhere but Romania. The Cold War flag replaced the Soviet flag in Moscow, and the had seemingly come to an end. Cold War ended not with a devastating nuclear The most dramatic event, however, was the fall or conventional war, but through Gorbachev’s of the Berlin Wall in 1989, which symbolized the glasnost and perestroika, and the changing of a division of the world between the two superpowers. small banner. A year later Germany was reunited, a huge piece of the unfinished puzzle of World War II was finally put in place (McMahon, 2003: 181). When a unified Germany was admitted into NATO in the summer of 1990, even Gorbachev gave his blessing. The Soviet Union had gone down an irremediable path: though no longer a threat to the West, it was also on its way to dissolution. Hardline communists in the CPSU were not happy with their country’s shrinking sphere of influence, nor with glasnost and perestroika. To restore the power of the Soviet Union, a coup was planned on August 19, 1991 to end Gorbachev’s rule. It was Boris Yeltsin, then chair of the Russian Supreme Soviet and later president of the Russian Figure 6. 10 Boris Yeltsin speaking on a tank outside the Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, who countered parliament in Moscow against the coup, August 19, 1991. the coup with great popular support. The role Source: www.britannica.com and reputation of the CPSU was now over, and on December 1991, four months after the coup attempt, a Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was established of 11 of 15 ex-Soviet states 4 (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Turkmenistan Discuss Gorbachev’s glasnost and perestroika did not join the original CIS, and Ukraine and policies. Georgia also later withdrew). In 1991, the Russian

170 History of International Relations

LO 1 Explain the emergence of the Cold War.

Though fixed immemorial in memories around the world, the beginning Cold War came as something of a surprise in the late 1940s. Though both the Soviet Union and the United States were on a full war footing at the end of the Second World War, scarcely could they have predicted the feats of the Berlin Blockade barely three years later, or backing opposite sides in the Korean War by 1950. That being said, a

combination of differing security concerns and competing visions for the future of the post-war European Summary and global order were hardly going to make the transition from fascism to liberalism or communism a seamless one.

Describe how the Cold War was institutionalized and how the confrontation between two rival LO 2 blocs consolidated in the 1950s.

After the partition of Germany and the creation of NATO in 1949, it was only a matter of time before the eastern bloc responded in kind. Though it was not created until 1955, the Warsaw Pact, i.e. the Soviets’ response to NATO, made the transition of Europe into two competing ideological blocs complete. And though the USSR and broader Soviet sphere of influence experienced a brief moment of hope with Stalin’s death in 1953 and Khrushchev’s subsequent ‘destalinization’ policies from 1956 onward, twin revolts in Poland and Hungary ensured that Moscow was not going to back down anytime soon. As tensions between the two great powers continued to mount over the undetermined status of Berlin, the 1950s remained as tense, if not tenser, than any other decade in the global cold war.

Identify the reasons behind the rise and fall of LO 3 Détente in international politics.

After the Cuban Missile Crisis, both superpowers had to cooperate in order to ease tensions that might otherwise lead to nuclear war. As such, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963 is rightly regarded as the first step to achieve this goal. Thereafter the two blocs continued establishing new channels for diplomacy, economic collaboration, and for resolving problematic issues inherited from World War II. Between 1963-1979, the Cold War was markedly different. Known as the Détente era, there was a strong base for better understanding among the blocs. Moreover, lingering problems between France and the Soviet Union and West Germany and the Soviet Union were largely reversed.

171 The Cold War: Global Developments

Analyze the rise of the ‘Second’ Cold War in the early 1980s and LO 4 how it ended.

A series of geopolitical events occurred in the late 1970s that Brezhnev and the USSR saw as opportunities to spread socialism and the influence of Moscow. Views as acts of aggression by the Carter and Reagan administrations, a string of seeming communist victories across Africa and Latin America seemed to prove Reagan right that Moscow was on the offensive. Combined with Washington’s defeat in Vietnam, the Iranian Revolution of 1979, and the oil shocks of 1973 and 1979, the US’ image was greatly weakened. What’s more, the Soviet Union had reached nuclear parity with the US during this period, and was increasing its visibility across the map. When the USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the US policy- making elite turned more forcefully against Moscow, ending détente. The years from 1979 to 1985 became known as the Second Cold War. The Reagan administration’s rigid stance toward the USSR began to soften when Mikhail Gorbachev took office in 1985. The Evil Empire moniker was politely

Summary shelved, and various summits were soon held between the US and Soviet Union related to the arms race and other problematic Cold War issues. Although strong differences remained, and most of these summits failed to achieve their stated aims, Gorbachev was willing to make key concessions in line with his glasnost and perestroika policies, with Eastern European states taking the lead in their march to further democratization. Before long the Berlin Wall was torn down, and an important spillover effect spread to virtually every communist regime. Elections were held, which the former uniformly lost. Even more, the arms race between European states and the Soviet Union was on the verge of ending, virtually ending the Cold War in continental Europe in 1990. A year later, the START negotiations brought it to an end between the US and USSR, now that Moscow no longer posed a threat to Washington or her European allies. To be sure, hardline communists in the CPSU were not happy about these developments. After a failed coup, the CPSU was subsequently banned in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic in November 6, which would become the Russian Federation a month later. That same month, December 1991, saw the creation of the CIS. When the Russian replaced the Soviet flag in Moscow that month, it marked the end of both the Soviet Union and the Cold War.

172 History of International Relations

1 Who introduced the concept of the “Iron 6 Which of the following was the main aim of Curtain”? the Eisenhower Doctrine? a. George F. Kennan a. To protect Middle Eastern countries seeking b. Harry Truman help from a communist threat. Test Yourself c. Winston Churchill b. To contain the Soviet Union in South Asia. d. Joseph Stalin c. To create an alliance against the Soviet Union e. Adbul Gamel Nasser in the North Atlantic region. d. To facilitate the economic recovery of Europe 2 Which of the following was the chief after World War II. American foreign policy objective for the duration e. To achieve the ‘peaceful coexistence of the two of the Cold War? blocs. a. Containment b. Détente 7 When did the Soviet Union shot down the c. Common Defense U-2 spy plane? d. Peaceful Coexistence a. 1965 b. 1972 c. 1963 e. Isolationism d. 1960 e. 1984

3 Which of the following was launched for the 8 Which of the following was signed by the US economic reconstruction of war-torn Europe? and USSR in 1963 in order to prevent a new arms race by restricting the testing of nuclear weapons? a. Truman Doctrine b. Brussels Pact a. Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement c. Warsaw Pact b. Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty d. Marshall Plan c. Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty e. COMECON d. Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty e. Helsinki Final Act 4 Which of the following was a founding member of the NATO? 9 Who introduced the policies of “glasnost” and “perestroika” to reform the Soviet system? a. Germany b. Turkey a. Joseph Stalin c. Italy b. Harry Truman d. Greece c. Mikhail Gorbachev e. Spain d. Ronald Reagan e. Richard Nixon 5 Which of the following states was not a member of the Warsaw Pact? 10 When was Commonwealth of Independent States formed? a. Poland b. Greece a. September 1989 c. Romania b. January 1990 d. Bulgaria c. February 1991 e. East Germany d. December 1991 e. August 1992

173 The Cold War: Global Developments

If your answer is wrong, please review the 1. c If your answer is wrong, please review the 6. a “The Cold War in the 1950s: The Cold “The Emergence of the Cold War” section. War in the 1950s: Institutionalization and Confrontation” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the 2. a If your answer is wrong, please review the 7. d “Cold War in the 1960s and 1970s: From “The Emergence of the Cold War” section. Confrontation to Détente” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the 3. d If your answer is wrong, please review the 8. b “Cold War in the 1960s and 1970s: From “The Emergence of the Cold War” section. Confrontation to Détente” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the c If your answer is wrong, please review the c 4. 9. “The ‘Second’ Cold War and Its End” “The Emergence of the Cold War” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the “The If your answer is wrong, please review the 5. b 10. d Cold War in the 1950s: Institutionalization “The ‘Second’ Cold War and Its End”

Answer Key for “Test Yourself” for “Test Key Answer and Confrontation” section. section.

Who is to blame for the emergence of the Cold War—the US or the USSR?

One of the century’s most controversial questions—second, perhaps, only to who was to blame for the break out of World War I—the question of determining whether the US or USSR was guilty for the Cold War is hardly easier to answer today than at the time. As such, strong arguments have been made against both countries. Until the 1970s, virtually every American and Western historian put the blame on the Soviet Union for several critical reasons: first, they ascribed the USSR’s perceived aggression in Eastern and Central Europe as the inevitable result of a political philosophy that in theory yearned for world domination. This was the idea, as put forward by countless communist thinkers, strategists, and the occasional statesman, that only when communism swept the entire planet, and eliminated every ‘imperialist’ and capitalist country, would there be peace. Though Soviet statesmen hardly adopted this view, it was commonly believed in the West for decades. Evidence for this view lies in Stalin’s attempts to keep troops in Iran after WWII, seize territory in Turkey and control of your turn 1 the Turkish straits, and establish a leg in Italy’s former North African colonies. By the 1970s, however, a revisionist school began to appear. Led by historians such as William Appleman Williams, many (left wing) historians began to argue that the US was to blame. Evidenced by its determination to keep markets open to capitalism at any cost, they argued, American statesmen deliberately disregarded the USSR’s security needs (to create friendly buffer states in the west to prevent any more attacks). Instead of understanding that places like Poland would naturally fall into the Soviet sphere of influence, as President Franklin Roosevelt so perfectly had, in order to prevent Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your another German invasion, from April 1945 onward President Truman pursued a very aggressive foreign policy against the USSR. Particularly strong evidence for this view is that the US only dropped the atomic bomb on Japan as a means of intimidating Stalin, a move that many see as otherwise unnecessary. In the last 20 years, however, a post- revisionist view has emerged. Led by John Lewis Gaddis, it argues that neither country was to blame, and that misunderstandings on each side led to an unnecessary conflict.

174 History of International Relations

Do some research on the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Suggested answers for “Your Turn”

Just as the world’s attention—and wrath—were focused on the Anglo- Franco-Israeli invasion of Egypt in late October 1956, the Soviet Union was violently putting down a popular revolution in Hungary. Encouraged by Khrushchev’s famous ‘secret speech’ at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party in February 1956 in which he criticized the excesses of Stalinism—the first step in a much-desired period of ‘destalinization’—students in Budapest began making various demands for the liberalization of Hungarian life. As this happened, relations between the US and Hungary began to improve, and Washington even encouraged to rebel against Moscow— assuming the Soviets would not violently put down another revolt, as they had your turn 2 in Poland that June, for fear of tarnishing their reputation. While the Politburo did go as far as forcing Hungarian Stalinist strongman Mátyás Rákosi into early retirement in June, this only emboldened protestors. By late October, 200,000 protestors had taken to the streets and removed the city’s towering statue of Stalin; it was not long before armed anti-Soviet were formed, Hungary’s government had collapsed, and independent communist Imre Nagy was made premier minister on October 24. On November 1, Hungary withdrew from the Warsaw Pact, which was only formed the year before. Three days later, Soviet tanks rolled into the country. Though Budapest and other cities put up a tremendous fight, by November 11 the disorganized Hungarian army had collapsed and the insurrectionists were defeated, after which 700 Soviet soldiers and 2,500 Hungarian citizens laid dead.

Evaluate and discuss the Détente era in the Cold War

Détente was the systematic decrease of tensions between the US and Soviet Union and their respective camps between 1963-1979. During this time a ‘hotline’ was established between Washington and Moscow for quick communications, and in 1963 both powers signed the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, revealing both powers’ desire to de-escalate the nuclear arms race. Last your turn 3 but not least, a basis was set for discussing the reduction of various nuclear and conventional arms. Détente also had a huge impact on the international affairs of Europe. European states established independent relations with the Soviet Union, while the US and Soviet Union concluded arms reduction talks and trade deals. That said, many saw détente as decreasing the sphere of influence of the US while improving the Soviets’. Despite much greater trade and interaction between the two great powers, the Soviet decision to invade Afghanistan in 1979 brought détente to a swift end.

175 The Cold War: Global Developments

Discuss Gorbachev’s glasnost and perestroika policies.

Mikhail Gorbachev inherited a union struggling with many problems, but kept his belief in the superiority of socialism. That said, he still reversed the Brezhnev Doctrine, which greatly lightened the shadow Moscow cast over Eastern European communist states. Introducing glasnost (openness) and your turn 4 perestroika (restructuring) to try and reform the Soviet’s broken social and economic model, this new spirit of openness and democratization created a new period of détente from 1985 onward that would eventually result in the collapse of the USSR in 1991. Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your

References

Books and Articles Cox, M. (1990). From Truman Doctrine to the Second Superpower Détente: The Rise and Fall of Allison, G. (1969). The Cuban Missile Crisis, The the Cold War, Journal of Peace Research 27, No: 1, American Political Science Review, No: 63, Vol:3, pp. 25-41. pp. 689-718. Day, M. (2016). The Cold War: A Political and Armaoğlu, F. (2004). 20. Yüzyıl Siyasi Tarihi (Cilt 1-2: Diplomatic History of Modern World, Britannica 1914-1995), İstanbul: Alkım Yayınevi. Educational Publishing. Ball, S. J. (2009). The Cold War: An International Dockrill, M. L. and Hopkins, M. F. (2006). The Cold History, 1947-1991, London: Bloomsbury War, 1945-1991, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, Publishing. 2nd Edition. Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A. and Schulze, K. Dunbabin, J.P.D. (2008). The Cold War: The Great E. (2008). International History of the Twentieth Powers and their Allies, London: Routledge. Century and Beyond, 2nd Edition, New York: Routledge. Goh, E. (2005). Nixon, Kissenger and the “Soviet Card” in the US Opening to China, 1971-1974, Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A., and Schulze, Diplomatic History, 29, Issue. 3, pp. 475-502. K. E. (2014). International History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond, 3rd Edition, New York: Khrushchev, S. N. (1959). On Peaceful Coexistence, Routledge. Foreign Affairs,38, No: 1, pp. 1-18. Boyle, K. (2003). The Price of Peace: Vietnam, the Kissinger, H. (2014). Diplomasi, İstanbul: Kültür Pound, and the Crisis of the American Empire, Yayınları. Diplomatic History 27, No: 1, pp. 37-72. Lightbody, B. (1999). The Cold War, New York: Chari, C. (2010). Superpower Rivalry and Conflict: The Routledge. Long Shadow of the Cold War on the Twenty First Mason, J.W. (1996). The Cold War 1945-1991, Oxon: Century, London, Routledge. Routledge.

176 History of International Relations

McMahon, R. (2003). Cold War: A Very Short Kimball, W.F. (1991). The Juggler: Franklin Roosevelt Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press. as Wartime Statesman, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Miles, S. (2016). Envisioning Détente: The Johnson Administration and the October 1964 Behrman, G. M. (2007). The Most Noble Adventure: Khrushchev Ouster, Diplomatic History, 40, No: The Marshall Plan and the Time When America 4, pp. 722-749. Helped Save Europe, New York: Free Press. Ness, V. P. (1986). Richard Nixon, the Vietnam War, Albert Resis, (ed.). (1993). Molotov Remembers: Inside and American Accommodation with China: A Kremlin Politics: Conversations with Felix Chuev, Review Article, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 8, Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. No: 3, pp. 231-245. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Painter, S. D. (1999). The Cold War An International Harry S. Truman, 1947 (1963). Washington: History: Making of Contemporary World, London, Government Printing Office. Routledge.

Pechatnov, V. O. (2010). The Cold War: A View from Websites Russia, Journal of Azerbaijani Studies. Emeklier, B. (2010). Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Uluslararası Pifer, S. (2017). The future of US- Russia Nuclear Arms Sistemin Analizi, 03 May 2010, http://www. Control, AIP Conference Proceedings 1898. bilgesam.org/incele/1901/-soguk-savas-sonrasi- Sander, O. (2014). Siyasi Tarih: 1918-1994, Ankara: uluslararasi-sistemin-analizi/#.XSzUDegzZ8c, İmge Kitabevi, 24th Edition. 20.06.2019 Sommer, T. (1968). Bonn’s New Ostpolitik, Journal of Library of Congress, (2016). Cold War: Soviet International Affairs, 22, No. 1, pp. 59-78. Perspectives, 31 August 2016, https://www.loc. gov/exhibits/archives/cols.html, 07.05.2019. Tertrais, B. (2005). Saving the NPT: Past and Future Non-Proliferation Bargains, IEIA, pp. 1-13. Raus, R. (2005). Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik and European Integration, CVCE, https://www.cvce. Uzer, U. and Uzer A. (2005). Diverging Perceptions eu/content/publication/2004/7/12/076ebcb2- of the Cold War: Baghdad Pact as a Source of 853c-488a-8a68-4432a35028c9/publishable_ Conflict Between Turkey and the Nationalist Arab en.pdf, pp. 1-7, 17.08.2019. Countries, The Turkish Yearbook, Vol.XXXVI, pp.101-118. Suh, B. M. M. (2013). A Tale of Two Koreas: Breaking the Vicious Circle, October, 2013, http://www. Young, J. W. and Kent, J. (2013). International isodarco.it/courses/andalo14/doc/suh_A-Tale-of- Relations Since 1945, Oxford: Oxford University Two-Koreas.pdf, 21.06.2019. Press, 2nd Edition. CVCE (2016). The Cold War (1945-1989), 7 Zickel, E. R. (1991). Soviet Union: A Country Study, July 2016, https://www.cvce.eu/content/ Washington: Federal Research Division. publication/2011/11/21/6dfe06ed-4790-48a4- Gaddis, J.L. (2005). The Cold War: A New History, 8968-855e90593185/publishable_en.pdf, New York: Penguin Books. 29.06.2019. Montefiore, S. S. (2003). Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, New York: Vintage Books.

177 The Cold War 1945-1989: Chapter 7 Regional Developments After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Define the concept of decolonization and Analyze the emergence of the Non-Aligned 1 explain the decolonization process. 2 Movement.

Evaluate how the Cold War affected Europe Discuss the impact of the Cold War on 3 and European integration. 4 developing regions. Learning Outcomes Chapter Outline Key Terms Introduction Decolonization The Era of Decolonization Bandung Conference The Non-Aligned Movement The Bandung Conference and Non-Aligned Third World Movement European Integration The Cold War and European Integration The Middle East Pan-Arabism Effects of the Cold War on Developing Arab-Israeli Conflict Regions The Balkans The Yugoslav-Soviet Split Latin America The Alliance for Progress

178 History of International Relations 7 INTRODUCTION policy. By examining regions based upon the main Even though there is scant consensus among developments that took place within them, this historians about precisely when the Cold War chapter merges regional, extra-regional, and global began, everyone is in agreement that it rapidly forces. developed after 1945 with the rise of the United States and Soviet Union as rival global powers. This THE ERA OF DECOLONIZATION rivalry would influence and shape world affairs for Decolonization—that is, the end of European the next forty-five years. At the state-level, this imperial rule—is one of the major aspects rivalry had lasting effects on the institutions of both of post-1945 global politics. The collapse of superpowers. At the regional level, the superpower former colonial empires changed the focus of tension affected regions in various ways and led international politics and reshaped the world’s to different outcomes, including decolonization, political structure by creating new independent regional integration, pan-movements, revolutions, states and political alignments. Scholars have conflicts, and wars. Even though the impact of the provided various definitions of the term. Whereas Cold War differed by region—Eastern Europe, a group of scholars defines decolonization as “the for example, felt its effect far more than most process whereby an imperial power gives up its other regions—superpower confrontation still formal authority over its colonies” (Best et al., dramatically affected the politics of every region in 2008: 81), Young and Kent (2013: xxv) call it the world. “the ending of European control over large areas For starters, the decolonization process of the globe”. Thomas and Thompson (2018: 2) coincided with the Cold War and established defines decolonization “a process that gathered regional subsystems in which newly created momentum in the long Cold War cycle running independent states have operated ever since. from the 1940s to the early 1990s”. As Buzan and Waever put it, “the tidal wave of Though particularly intense after the end decolonization rolled back imperial power, created of World War II, it is generally agreed that dozens of new states, and allowed regional security decolonization is not a new phenomenon. Hopkins dynamics to start operating among these newly outlines two waves of decolonization in his study. independent actors in most Africa, the Middle East, According to him, the first wave occurred in the and South and Southeast Asia” (cited in Stewart- late eighteenth century and gave birth to the US Ingersoll and Frazier, 2012: 5). This period of and Latin American states. The second wave came in confrontation, conflict, cooperation, and the shift the post-World War II era coincided with the Cold of states from colonialism to independence highly War (Hopkins, 2017: 729-730). The second wave determined the regional politics of Asia, Africa, of decolonization began with India, far and away Europe, the Balkans, the Middle East, and Latin the world’s most populous and important colony, America, as each region experienced corollaries of who obtained its independence from Britain in the Cold War in varying degrees. 1947. Later decolonization eventually spread to Regional politics are intense and interactive every other Asian and African colony in the world. and typically involve three levels: regional, extra- Scholars of decolonization usually study the regional, and global forces. Based on this premise, subject by raising questions of when and why this chapter examines regions by addressing which decolonization began. This first is difficult to answer developments were influenced by superpower since, as Cooper (2012: 39) claims, “decolonization rivalry and how. Those include the process and was not simply a moment dividing a neat ‘before’ impact of decolonization, the formation of from a clear ‘after’, but a process”. It is also difficult alliances, the Non-Aligned Movement and bloc to generalize the causes of decolonization and consolidation, and conflict as well as cooperation. colonial collapse since colonial states and colonized Beginning with the analysis of the decolonization countries had different experiences. As such, process, the chapter offers a detailed reassessment of scholars have focused on three factors to explain the rise of the Third World and the nonalignment the decolonization process in the 20th century:

179 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 • The first is internal pressure, which can be evaluated at the local or regional level. Colonized peoples’ demands for reform and independence as well as the rise of anti-colonial political and nationalist movements can be considered as internal pressures against British, Dutch, and French colonial rule (Langenhove, 1961: 405, Betts, 2004: 37). The national politics of colonized powers were shaped upon these internal pressures. • The second is the inability and weakness of colonial powers to rule their colonies. World War II demonstrated that European colonial powers were no longer able to rule their African and Asian colonies. Fonseca and Marcos (2013: 209) argue that “if World War I helped to create local resistance movements against colonialism, it was World War II that destroyed the colonial system itself.” • d The thir factor is the external pressure which can also be expressed as effects made at the international level, including anti-colonial support from other states and international actors, including the United Nations (UN) (Kay, 1967: 787). Against this background, most former colonies gained their independence from European colonial rulers between 1947 and 1980.

Table 7.1 Principal examples of the decolonization process between 1947 to 1980 Colonial State Colonized Country Year of Independence Belgium 1962 India 1947 Pakistan 1947 Burma 1948 Sri Lanka 1948 Ghana 1957 Malaya 1957 Britain Zaire 1960 Nigeria 1960 1961 Tanganyika 1961 Uganda 1962 Algeria 1962 Kenya 1963 Zimbabwe 1980 French African Colonies France (Cameroon, , , , Ivory 1960 Coast, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, and Upper Volta) Holland Indonesia 1949 Guinea-Bissau 1974 Mozambique 1975 Portugal Cape Verde 1975 Sao Tome 1975 Angola 1975 Source: (Scott, 2014: 54)

180 History of International Relations 7 Decolonization did not follow the same path The territorial dispute between the two countries in every colonized area. The process was relatively led to significant regional instability in South peaceful and orderly in some areas, such as Africa, Asia, including three wars fought since 1947 while it led to upheavals and revolutionary wars in alone (Young and Kent, 2013: 207). others, such as Algeria and Malaya. Moreover, after independence, some countries were able to acquire stable governments while others were ruled by The Kashmir Issue is a territorial conflict between dictators or military juntas for decades. A case in India and Pakistan over Kashmir, a majority- point is the independence of India from Britain Muslim province in the northwest of the Indian in 1947, which produced the world’s largest stable subcontinent mostly controlled by Hindu- democracy (Scott, 2014: 54). majority India. The conflict began in August 1947 and remains a source of instability to this day. India’s political resistance to British rule began in the nineteenth century with the establishment of the Congress Party in 1888, and the anti-colonial On the other hand, Algerian independence movement in India gained momentum after the from French rule was the result of a long and Second World War. Mahatma Gandhi played a protracted war from 1954-1962. The movement pioneering role in the process by leading the Indian for Algerian independence began during World National Congress, eventually helping India gain War I and gained momentum after World War independence in 1947, at which point it split into II with the establishment of National Liberation two independent states, India and Pakistan (Young Front (FLN) in October 1954. In November of and Kent, 2013: 63). India’s success became an that year, the FLN launched attacks against the inspiration for other anti-colonial movements French army that would drag out into an eight- across the world. year war of attrition in which over a million Algerians would perish (from an initial population of 9 million at the war’s beginning). After the French lost their will to fight an eternally bloody conflict, a referendum was held in 1962 in which the Algerian people voted for independence, which French president Charles de Gaulle accepted (Best et al., 2008: 407-408). Decolonization and the Cold War overlapped in time. Even though the policies of both superpowers and other Western nation-states were significant, these were not the main factors in decolonization. Fonseca and Marcos state (2013: 210) that “with the Cold War under way, there was, however, no substantial interference from the Figure 7.1 Mohandas (Mahatma) Gandhi (1869-1948), superpowers in this process.” On the other hand, the the leader of the Indian anti-colonial movement. superpowers’ actions, attitudes, and anti-colonial Source: www.britannica.com positions inflected the course and outcome of the decolonization process. As Betts (2004: 36) puts As an independent country, India became it, “the Cold War activities of the US and Soviet a republic in January 1950, making it the Union affected the course of decolonization, but most populous democracy in the world. In the they were in no causal factors in its occurrence”. following years, the first Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, focused on the country’s Self-determination is the idea that a country can modernization. However, the division of the determine its own destiny and has the right to country into Pakistan and India led to the establish its own sovereign government. emergence of a new regional conflict: Kashmir.

181 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 Decolonization was also accelerated by the THE BANDUNG CONFERENCE UN efforts against colonialism. The UN Charter, AND NON-ALIGNED signed on June 26, 1945, established the principle MOVEMENT of self-determination and provided the basis for its own decolonization push. Moreover, in 1960, the The concept of “nonalignment” is a Cold UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration on War phenomenon used to explain the foreign the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries policy of formerly colonized countries. As a term, and Peoples, through which the UN affirmed that nonalignment is commonly used to describe the “the right of all people to self-determination” and policy of remaining aloof from the super power proclaimed that “colonialism should be brought alliance system of the Cold War and developing to a speedy and unconditional end” (UN, 2019). friendly relations with other nations (Gupta Indeed, the process gained much momentum after and Shukla, 2009: 376). The first Indian Prime the UN’s adoption of this anti-colonial stance. As Minister, Nehru, espoused nonalignment to formerly colonized countries became independent describe the foreign policy of India, defining it as states, they joined the UN, and thus the number “… [an] attempt by a nation to keep itself aloof of UN members increased from 51 in 1945 to 104 from military blocs. It means trying to view things, in 1961. By 1961, almost half of the UN member as far as possible, not from a military point of view, states were formerly colonized countries (Van but with an independent viewpoint toward the Langenhove, 1961: 415-416). end of having friendly relations with all countries” (cited in Gupta and Shukla, 2009: 377). The new members drastically changed the focus and pattern of international relations and Nehru stressed the need for an international transformed the nature and functioning of the platform for Asian countries to come together and UN. As the formerly colonized powers made the express their concerns on the basis of regional and transition from colonial dependency to sovereignty, international politics. The firstAsian Relations the formation of independent states resulted in major Conference was convened under the leadership shifts and changes in the regional distribution of power of Nehru in New Delhi between March 23 and and affected global power dynamics (Young and Kent, April 2, 1947. At the conference, Nehru stated 2013: xxv). These newly independent countries now that India would adopt an independent foreign sought to partake in regional and international affairs policy and stay out of great power military and while protecting their independence and sovereignty ideological alliances of the Cold War. He claimed in the midst of the Cold War consolidations and that other newly independent Asian countries alliances then forming. As a solution, leaders of should do the same in order to preserve their newly independent countries such as Indian Prime independence (Best et al., 2008: 318). Even in Minister Nehru and Ahmed Sukarno, the first his speech before independence on September president of Indonesia, proposed a foreign policy 7, 1946, Nehru declared that India was a free strategy of Non-Alignment. country, stating:

“We propose to function so as progressively to achieve that independence in action both in our domestic internet affairs and our foreign relations. We shall take full For the UN Declaration on the Granting part in international conferences as a free nation with of Independence to Colonial Countries and our own policy and not merely as a satellite of another Peoples, please see: http://www.un.org/en/ nation. We hope to develop close and direct contacts decolonization/declaration.shtml with other nations and to cooperate with them in the furtherance of world peace and freedom. We propose, as far as possible, to keep away from the power of politics of groups, aligned against one another, which 1 has led in the past to world wars and which may again lead to disasters on an even vaster scale,” (cited Discuss the role of the UN, the US, and the Soviet in Kumar, 1983: 446). Union in the process of decolonization.

182 History of International Relations 7 As the Cold War was unfolding, the prime ministers of India, Burma (now Myanmar), Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), Indonesia, and Pakistan met in Colombo (the capital of Sri Lanka) to discuss their common concerns, including liberation movements, great power involvement in Indochina, and the US and British tendency to form alliances in Asia (Young and Kent, 2013: 320). The Colombo Conference in 1954 was the motivation for the Bandung Conference. In 1954, the aforementioned leaders decided to convene a Figure 7.2 Leaders of the Non-Aligned Movement at conference the following year whose agenda was the founding Bandung Conference, 1955: Indian Prime set by five issues: “economic cooperation, cultural Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Ghanaian President Kwame cooperation, human rights and self-determination, Nkrumah, Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser, problems of dependent peoples, and world peace Indonesia’s president Ahmed Sukarno, and Yugoslav and cooperation” (Dennehy, 2007: 216). Leader Josip Broz Tito. The Asian-African Conference, which is known Source: www.google.com.tr as the Bandung Conference, was organized by Indonesia, India, Burma, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan in Bandung, Indonesia in April 1955. Political leaders Third World countries came together in many from twenty-nine newly independent postcolonial conferences and meetings before 1955, and the countries of Asia and Africa came together in previous meetings had prepared the ground for Bandung (Acharya, 2016: 343). In his opening Bandung. Nevertheless, the Bandung Conference speech, Indonesia’s president Sukarno referred is significant because it was the first multilateral to the conference as “the first intercontinental meeting of newly independent states and a conference of colored peoples in the history of milestone for the development of a Third World mankind” (cited in Acharya, 2016: 342). consciousness (Best et al., 2008: 332). As other scholars have noted its importance, “it was the

Bandung conference of the Afro-Asian movement The participants at the Bandung Conference (18- which symbolized the emergence of the Third 24 April 1955) World as a motive force in international relations” The Kingdom of Afghanistan, Burma, the (Schaufelbuehl et. al. 2015: 902). Kingdom of Cambodia, Ceylon, the People’s Republic of China, Cyprus (was still under Third World: “A collective term of French colonial rule but represented by Makarios III), the origin for those states that are part of neither the Republic of Egypt, Ethiopian Empire, Gold Coast, developed capitalist world nor the communist bloc. India, Indonesia, the Imperial State of Iran, the It includes the states of Latin America, Africa, the Kingdom of Iraq, Japan, , the Kingdom of Middle East, South Asia, and South-East Asia. It is Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, the Kingdom of Libya, the also referred to as ‘the Global South’ in contrast to Kingdom of Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi developed ‘North’” (Best et al., 2008: 238). Arabia, Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Turkey, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the State of Vietnam, and the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen (Acharya, 2014: 408).

183 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 Considered as an alternative to the bipolar international system after the Second World War, the Conference influenced the foreign policy strategies of formerly colonized countries and laid the foundations of the Non-Aligned Movement (Acharya, 2016: 347). The Ten Principles of Bandung were also adopted in the Afro-Asian Conference at Bandung, providing the foundations of the movement and guiding spirit of African-Asian solidarity and peaceful coexistence (Bissio, 2017: 95).

The Ten Principles of Bandung 1. Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations. 3. Recognition of the equality of all races and of equality among all nations, both large and small. 4. Non-intervention or non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. 5. Respect for the right of every nation to defend itself, singularly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. 6. A. The non-use of collective defense pacts to benefit the specific interests of any of the great Powers. B. The non-use of pressure by any one country against another. 7. Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country. 8. Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. 9. Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation. 10. Respect for justice and international obligations (Bissio, 2017:96).

The significance and legacy of Bandung have political order. According to him, the Bandung been extensively documented by scholars. First of Conference led to the development of the Non- all, the Conference brought Third World countries Aligned Movement and the emergence of South- together and prepared the ground for South-South East Asian regionalism and strengthened the global cooperation. Moreover, in the era of East-West norms of anti-colonialism, self-determination, human conflict, the participants of Bandung developed a rights, and nonintervention. new style of Third World politics by pointing out The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) was the structures of inequality among nations and institutionalized with its first summit in September voicing the Third World’santi-colonial as well as 1961 in Belgrade, following a preparatory conference anti-racist demands (Phillips, 2016, 334; Thomas in Cairo. The preparatory meeting emphasized the and Thompson, 2018; 13). Bradley (2010: 479) importance of holding such a conference by stating also summarizes its importance by arguing that that: “[the conference] provided an opportunity for Third World leaders to discuss transnational “The participants expressed the conviction that, anticolonial ideologies of regional, race, and class by holding such a conference, positive results could solidarities and to create an international space be achieved in the interests of world peace, effective apart from both the imperial and Cold War orders.” international cooperation, and the realization of the Acharya (2014: 415; 2016:349) emphasizes aspirations of millions of people for independence the importance of the Bandung Conference for and a better and happier future,” (cited in Kumar, understanding the evolution of post-war global 1983: 446).

184 History of International Relations 7 Based on the Ten Principles of Bandung, the criteria for NAM membership were determined in the preparatory conference. In order to be considered as a member of the movement, a country should meet the following criteria: 1. The country should adopt an independent foreign policy based on the co-existence of states with different political and social systems and on non-alignment, or should be showing a trend in favor of such a policy. 2. Thecountry concerned should be st consistently supporting movements for Figure 7.3 1 Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement, national independence. the Belgrade Conference, 1961. 3. The country should not be a member of a Source: en.wikipedia.org multilateral military alliance concluded in the context of great power conflicts. important 4. If a country has a bilateral military agreement with a great power or is a member of a Some scholars prefer to use the terms regional defense pact, the agreement or pact ‘neutrality’ and ‘neutralism’ instead of should not be one deliberately concluded in ‘nonalignment’ while others use nonalignment the context of great power conflicts. synonymously with neutralization, 5. If it has conceded military bases to a foreign isolationism, and unilateralism. Sometimes power, the concession should not have the term neutrality is used interchangeably been made in the context of Great Power with nonalignment. conflicts (cited in Lyon, 1980: 135). The principles and common goals of the movement were also specified in the Cairo meeting The Non-Aligned Movement is seen as a of June 1961. Accordingly, the first goal is the product or consequence of World War II and “exchange of views on the international situation; considered as a reaction to the post-war bipolar second, taking measures for strengthening world order (Lüthi, 2016: 98). Participants of international peace in the spheres of decolonization, the movement came together to fight against apartheid, disarmament, nuclear testing, and so colonialism in Asia and Africa, and the actions on; and, third, problems of unequal economic development across the world,” (Lüthi, 2016: 99). of the movement played fundamental roles in the decolonization process. The most newly The first official summit of the Non-Aligned independent states adopted nonalignment as their Movement was thus held in Belgrade on September foreign policy strategy and engaged in regional and Josip Broz Tito 1-6, 1961. , the president of global political environments. Yugoslavia, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the President of Egypt, and Jawaharlal Nehru, the prime minister of Even though scholars agree that the delegates India, took the initiative in convening the Belgrade who got together in Bandung had a common Conference. Twenty-five countries which met the antagonism against colonialism, their arguments above conditions for membership attended the differ when they explain motivations and goals conference, including European (Yugoslavia and of the participants to form such an association. Cyprus) and Latin American (Cuba), and Asian and Lüthi (2016: 98), for instance, argues that the African states (Best et al., 2008: 323). The summit main concern of the non-aligned countries to institutionalized the Non-Aligned Movement, and come together was their demand to have a voice its final declaration called for “peaceful coexistence, in international issues, including the nuclear arms reduction of East-West tension, and respect for the race. Moreover, newly independent states of Africa independence and integrity of all states” (Betts, and Asia refused to align themselves with either the 2004: 44). Soviet Union or the US. Instead, they preferred

185 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 to adopt an independent foreign policy and to THE COLD WAR AND keep themselves outside of the two rival blocs. EUROPEAN INTEGRATION With the adoption of a nonalignment policy, the Before World War II broke out in 1939, newly independent states aimed to preserve their France, Britain and Germany were great powers independence and maintain their sovereignty by of the international system, and Europe was at the avoiding superpower alliances during the Cold War center of international politics. However, most power struggle (Kumar, 1983: 445). In addition to European countries were in ruins at the end of the concerns regarding sovereignty and independence, war. As the Soviet Union and the US became two the world peace was also a matter of concern for superpowers with the capability of exercising power Third World countries. Those regarded military over the continent, Europe became an important alliances as dangerous for world peace as well as battleground of the Cold War. their own security and aimed to avoid a global war Hanhimaki (2012) divides Europe’s Cold (Gupta and Shukla, 2009: 377). The development War into three periods: of South-South social and economic cooperation was also a subject of concern of such an association • The first was from 1945 to the early 1960s, (Phillips, 2016: 329). during which the division of the continent took place. This period also coincided with The Non-Aligned Movement essentially set the era of decolonization. out an agenda to advance the political interests of • The second was from the early 1960s to the decolonized and developing countries. However, mid-1970s, the period of the rise of détente by the early 1960s, members of the movement, and the relative stabilization of Europe. along with certain developing countries, began to • The last period was from the mid-1970s to also focus on the issue of economic development. the late 1980s, during which the Cold War As a result, the United Nations Conference on affected every region on earth. Finally, the Trade and Development (UNCTAD) took place Soviet Union collapsed and the Cold War in Geneva in 1964. As a new forum for seventy- ended in 1989-1991. Europe had thus seven countries organized under the auspices of experienced the beginning, maturity, and the Group-77 (G-77), UNCTAD began lobbying the end of the Cold War. for fairer terms of trade between developed After long years of Franco-German antagonism, and developing countries and easier access to Europe had witnessed a shift in French-German development aid. The G-77 aimed to defend the relations in the post-World War II era, and economic interests of the Third World against the European integration became a crucial developed countries, in addition to recognizing development in both regional and global politics developing countries’ equal international standing (Hanhimaki, 2012: 283-284). The idea of the (Best et al., 2008: 327). As such, throughout the European integration gained momentum after Cold War, developing countries sought to achieve the end of World War II. The war had disastrous an economic voice through the and a effects on European political stability, as well as its political one through the Non-Aligned Movement. economic and military power. Moreover, the post- Both organizations are still international war era marked major changes in the international forums for more than 100 states, most of which system and brought shifts in the international are developing, which continue to advocate power dynamics. While the policy-makers of international cooperation, multilateralism, and France and Britain continued to act as world self-determination in world politics. powers, their influence over the international system had dramatically diminished. India’s independence in particular showed the declining power and role of Britain in the international arena 2 (McCormick, 2015: 73-75). On the other hand, How did the Bandung Conference the Soviet Union and US rose as superpowers with affect the course of the Cold War? their economic and military capabilities, including weapons of mass destruction, in the international system. (Scott, 2014: 51).

186 History of International Relations 7 These developments led to fundamental European countries together (Lieber, 1970: 20). changes in Europe, and Cold War European Although the plan was initially welcomed by politics were characterized by the bipolar structure the Soviet Union, Moscow eventually objected of the international system. Best et al. (2008:216) a coordinated plan for European economic provides an explanation of the political structure recovery, assuming that it would undermine its of the continent as “…Germany in ruins, France influence in Europe. largely excluded from the victor’s table and Britain French political and economic adviser Jean in no condition to play a major role in continental Monnet was a decisive proponent of European Europe [and] there were, ultimately, only two unity. In a 1943 speech, he stated that “there will be major powers capable of exercising predominant no peace in Europe if the states are reconstituted on influence over the old continent”. the basis of national sovereignty…. The countries In the wake of World War II, Europe had of Europe are too small to guarantee their peoples two priorities: post-war economic recovery and the the necessary prosperity and social development. maintenance of long-term peace and stability. US The European states must constitute themselves financial assistance for recovery, which is known as into a federation” (as cited in Gordon, 2007: 12). the Marshall Plan of 1947, was important for the This speech inspired the Schuman Plan of 1950 reconstruction of the European economy. The US which led to the realization of the European Coal demonstrated its support for the idea of European and Steel Community (ECSC). French statesman unity by insisting that those European countries Robert Schuman proposed his initiative in a should establish a permanent agency to manage speech in May 1950 in which he outlined the need US financial aid. In 1948, the Organization to pool German and French coal and steel resources for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) under a single authority. The proposal’s two biggest was established to administer the aid. The plan aims were economic recovery and ensuring peace brought about the idea of European integration among European countries, especially between the to the agenda of international politics and helped continent’s two historic rivals: France and Germany form an intergovernmental body by getting six (McCormick, 2008: 51).

Figure 7.4 “Homage to the Founding Fathers of Europe”, a monument in front of Robert Schuman’s House by Zurab Tsereteli representing four founders of the European Union, namely Alcide De Gasperi, Robert Schuman, Jean Monnet, and Konrad Adenauer. Source: en.wikipedia.org

187 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7

The Schuman Declaration of May 9, 1950 “World peace cannot be safeguarded without making creative efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it. The contribution which an organized and living Europe can bring to civilization is indispensable to the maintenance of peaceful relations. In taking upon herself for more than 20 years the role of champion of a united Europe, France has always had as her essential aim the service of peace. A united Europe was not achieved and we had war. Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements that first create a de facto solidarity. The coming together of the nations of Europe requires the elimination of the age-old opposition of France and Germany. Any action taken must in the first place concern these two countries. With this aim in view, the French Government proposes that action be taken immediately on one limited but decisive point: It proposes that Franco-German production of coal and steel as a whole be placed under a common authority within the framework of an organization open to the participation of the other countries of Europe. The pooling of coal and steel production should immediately provide for the setting up of common foundations for economic development as a first step in the federation of Europe, and will change the destinies of those regions which have long been devoted to the manufacture of munitions of war, of which they have been the most constant victims. The solidarity in production thus established will make it plain that any war between France and Germany becomes not merely unthinkable, but materially impossible. The setting up of this powerful productive unit, open to all countries willing to take part and bound ultimately to provide all the member countries with the basic elements of industrial production on the same terms, will lay a true foundation for their economic unification,” (Foundation Robert Schuman, 2011).

Six European countries, namely Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg, and Netherlands responded positively by pooling their coal and steel industries and signing the Treaty of Paris in 1951. The establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community was the first step towards the European integration and paved the way for the establishment of the European Economic Community in 1957. With the 1957 Treaties of Rome, two supranational communities were established: the European Economic Community (EEC), and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). The EEC was set up to foster economic cooperation and work toward broader integration with the same six founding countries (Best et al., 2008: 228). Member countries set specific goals including “agreement on a common external tariff for all goods coming into the community, the development of a single market, within which there would be free movement of people, goods, money, and services, and a common agricultural policy” (McCormick, 2008: 45-46). The treaty also established new institutions: the Council, the Commission, the Assembly (subsequently called the European Parliament), and the Court of Justice. The EAEC, on the other hand, was set up in order to develop Europe’s nuclear industry Figure 7.5 Signing of the Treaty of Rome, March 25, 1957. (Phinnemore, 2015:15). Source: www.britannica.com

188 History of International Relations 7 Britain declined to sign the Treaty of Rome in (SEA), which gave new momentum to European 1957 and did not join the EEC until 1973. After integration. The SEA was a milestone in creating World War II, the British paid less attention to a single market across Europe and initiated the Europe and mainly focused on cooperation with transformation of the EEC into the European the United States (McCormick, 2015: 73-74). Union (McGiffen, 2005: 4). Besides, as an alternative to the Franco-German- led EEC, Britain created the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) in 1960 with other six European countries, namely Austria, Denmark, 3 Norway, Portugal, Sweden, and Switzerland (McCormick, 2015: 102-103). However, due to What was the Soviet attitude towards the success of the EEC, the British changed their the Marshall Plan? tone and twice applied to join the EEC, in 1963 and 1967. However, both applications were vetoed by French President de Gaulle, who was convinced EFFECTS OF THE COLD WAR that Britain was not yet ready to join the EEC, and ON DEVELOPING REGIONS that British membership would only increase US influence on the community (Phinnemore, 16; The superpower rivalry between the US and Watts, 2008 :25-26; McCormick, 2008: 54). Soviet Union and their respective blocs impacted every region of the world. However, the Cold One of the crucial developments in European War affected certain regions more than others. integration during the 1960s was the signing of the This section examines how Cold War politics and Treaty of Brussels in 1965 (Merger Treaty), which superpower rivalry influenced regional developments officially combined the executive bodies of the in political, economic, and military terms. ECSC, EEC, and Euratom (McCormick, 2015: 95). Since the early 1970s, the EEC also made significant efforts to achieve an economic and The Cold War in the Middle East monetary union, as a result of which the European During the Cold War, the Middle East was one Monetary System was finally established in 1979 of the most important scenes of contention and (Blair, 2013 :46). intense superpower rivalry because of its strategic The 1970s and 1980s saw further developments geographical location and oil reserves (Khalidi, in the deepening and enlargement of European 2009: 9). Needless to say, this competition deeply integration. During the Cold War, three such affected the region’s political dynamics. As L. Carl waves took place. In the first, Britain, Denmark, Brown states, “the Middle East has been more and Ireland were admitted as full members of the consistently and more thoroughly ensnared in EEC in 1973. The second came with the admission great power politics than any other part of the non- of Greece in 1981, which had applied for full Western world” (cited in Owen, 2004: 23). The membership since the fall of its military junta in superpowers’ military and diplomatic involvement 1974. The third and last enlargement during the in the region deeply affected and shaped regional Cold War took place in 1986 and took in Portugal political dynamics and led to major regional and Spain, two formerly authoritarian countries developments, including the establishment of (McCormick, 2008:54-56). Israel, the Arab-Israeli wars, and the rise of Arab The global economic recession of the 1970s, nationalism. greatly exacerbated by the 1973 oil crisis, affected The colonial experience also had a lasting Western countries in particular. The late 1970s impact on the region, and the political legacy of and early 1980s were a period in which European colonialism is especially crucial to understanding pessimism was dominant, and no considerable how the Middle Eastern regional subsystem was progress towards European integration was made. formed, why the region experienced more conflicts The most significant development made in the and rivalries relative to other regions, and what the 1980s was the signing of the Single European Act implications of this legacy are for the formation of

189 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 national consciousness in the region, namely Pan- As violence and hostility between Jewish Arabism. In the aftermath of World War II, Middle settlers and Palestinian inhabitants escalated, the Eastern countries that were under French, British, British Government attempted to find solutions. and Italian colonial rule gained their independence In February 1947, the British Government decided and established a regional subsystem. As several to turn the Palestinian issue over to the United scholars put it, “the Middle Eastern RSC [Regional Nations. In November 1947, the UN General Security Complex] was born fighting” (Buzan and Assembly passed Resolution 181 regarding the Waever, 2003: 188). The establishment of Israel partition of Palestine. The partition plan included has led to interstate wars in the Middle East, and the following issues: war and ideologies have characterized its regional politics. Most notably, the Arab-Israeli conflict has “The creation of the Arab and Jewish States not dominated the regional agenda and triggered many later than 1 October 1948; the division of Palestine other regional conflicts and wars and undermined into eight parts: three were allotted to the Arab state the stability of the region. and three to the Jewish state; the seventh, the town of Jaffa, was to form an Arab enclave within Jewish territory; The international regime for Jerusalem, the The Arab-Israeli Conflict eighth division, is to be administered by the United The political atmosphere of the Middle East Nations Trusteeship Council,” (The United Nations at the end of World War II was characterized Department of Public Information, 2003: 10). by violence and war, in large part because of the continuing tension between Arabs and Jews (Galtung, 1971: 173). Both the sense of nationalism and nation building, and the legacy of colonialism have played a role in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Zionism as an ideology and nationalist movement arose in Europe during the 19th century and set about trying to find a homeland for the Jews. During this period, Palestine was only one of the options. Theodor Herzl was one of the most important figures in the early history of Zionism and called for the creation of a Jewish homeland. The issuance of theBalfour Declaration of 1917 by the British government pledged the British support for the Zionist movement and proved a milestone in the creation of the State of Israel (Best et al., 2008: 108-111). The declaration allowed Jewish immigration to Palestine and stated that “[h]is Majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object […]” (cited in Gelvin, 2011: 219). Palestinians refused to accept Jewish settlement policies (Gelvin, 2011: 221). The Arab Revolt, which is also known as Great Revolt, broke out in Palestine in 1936 with the rise of Jewish immigration to Palestine and ended in 1939. The anti-British revolt is important in terms of being Figure 7.6 UN Plan for the Partition of Palestine the first major uprising in the modern history of adopted in 1947. Palestinians (Gelvin, 2011: 109). Source: www.britannica.com

190 History of International Relations 7 Following the 1947 UN resolution on the to Israeli shipping on May 22, the war began on authorization of partition of Palestine, the state of June 5, when Israel launched a surprise attack on Israel was established on May 14, 1948. Arab states Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian airfields. Lasting refused to accept the partition plan. A few hours six days and resulting in an overwhelming Israeli after the proclamation of independence of Israel, victory, the latter seized the Palestinian territories the armies of five Arab nations, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, of the , East Jerusalem, and , Transjordan (Since 1949 Jordan), and Lebanon in addition to the Syrian Golan Heights and the invaded the newly established country on the night Egyptian Sinai Peninsula (Best et al., 2008: 433- of 15 May 1948. Cold War superpowers influenced 434). A turning point in Middle Eastern politics, the war by providing military aid to their allies in the war changed the regional balance of power the Middle East. The war ended in 1949 with an strongly in Israel’s favor, discrediting Nasser and armistice. However, this agreement left the main arguably shattering pan-Arabism once and for all. issues unresolved and created the conditions for substantial wars involving Arab states and Israel, including the wars of 1956, 1967, 1969-70, 1973, and 1982 (Hinnebusch, 2015: 178; Buzan and Waever, 2003: 191). When General Gamal Abdel Nasser became president of Egypt in 1956, he had two basic aims: the revival of Arab nationalism and the creation of a powerful regional state that could stand up to Israel. In order to do so, Nasser needed weapons, which he eventually got from the Eastern bloc, and to build the Aswan High Dam in order to create Figure 7.7 Six-Day War in 1967. the energy needed to industrialize the country. Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle- When the West retracted its offer to fund the east-39960461 Dam, Nasser announced on July 26, 1959 that he was nationalizing the British and French-owned After the Six-Day War, the Arab states aimed Suez Canal Company to finance Aswan (Sander, to regain lost land and determined their strategies 2005: 301-302). Now the target of Britain, France, accordingly. In October 1973, Egypt and Syria and Israel, Nasser’s nationalization of the canal launched a surprise joint attack against Israel on brought about one of the major international the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur. Though the events of the Cold War period: the Suez War. Egyptian army succeeded in crossing the Suez After rejecting a Franco-British ultimatum to Canal in several places and the relinquish the canal, Britain, France and Israel occupied the Golan Heights on the first day of the occupied the canal zone in October 1956, but war, the Israeli army managed to counterattack and pressure from the US, Soviet Union, and United regain the Golan Heights and push the Egyptians Nations forced the invading powers to withdraw back from the canal. Though inconclusive, the war from Egypt (Sander, 2005 :303). The Suez fiasco helped restore Arab military self-confidence (Best marked the end of Franco-British power in the et al., 2008: 437-438). As Khalidi (2009: 127- Middle East, and led to a power vacuum in which 128) notes, the war also highlighted the active the US and Soviet Union would now compete to role played by non-state actors: “[t]his was the last fulfil (Best et al., 2008: 471). of the exclusively state-to-state Arab-Israeli wars. The Six-Day war of 1967 also resulted from Thereafter, non-state actors like thePalestine increasing tensions between Arabs and Israelis. Liberation Organization (PLO) and, later, Hamas Triggered by Nasser’s closure of the Gulf of Aqaba and Hezbollah became the main combatants […]”.

191 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 War, in March 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a ThePalestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) is peace treaty at Camp David. The resulting Egypt- a political organization founded in 1964 in Jerusalem Israel Peace Treaty was the first agreement of many with the purpose of representing all Palestinian Arabs further Camp David accords. According to the and their claims for the liberation of their homeland. agreement, Israel withdrew its troops from the Sinai From 1969 to 2004, was the leader of Peninsula, and the troops that Egypt could deploy the PLO. The PLO embraced a broader role over in the region were limited. An historic milestone in time and later represented Palestine in international resolving a huge bilateral dispute between the two organizations and forums, including the United countries, the treaty was still criticized for failing Nations and Non-Aligned Movement. to achieve a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement (Quandt,1986:357-358).

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is an intergovernmental organization founded in September 1960 by Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. Its main objective is to coordinate and unify the petroleum policies of member countries.

The Jordanian and Lebanese Civil Wars The partition of Palestine and ensuing wars caused a serious refugee problem as hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forced to flee their Figure 7.8 Yasser Arafat (1929-2004), Chairman of country and seek refuge in neighboring Arab states, the Palestinian Liberation Army and Nobel Laureate for including Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria. This Peace. created huge internal political turmoil and led Source: www.nobelprize.org directly to the Jordanian and Lebanese civil wars. Both Jordan and Lebanon had received a huge In October 1973, the Arab countries used influx of Palestinian refugees at the outbreak of the a different tactic when the Organization of 1948 Arab-Israeli war. After the establishment of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) the PLO in 1964, Jordan hosted its headquarters, announced an oil embargo against the United States from which the PLO would soon launch attacks and other Israeli allies. Causing a huge sudden on Israel. However, Jordanian-PLO relations spike in oil prices, the resulting 1973 oil crisis “hit broke in 1970 after the PLO began to challenge the poorest countries hardest, produced enormous the Jordanian monarchy, leading to a civil war in inflationary pressures, led Western banks, flooded Jordan, otherwise known as . with oil revenues, to be over eager in lending to After intense fighting between the PLO and the less developed countries, and posed large questions , the PLO was expelled about the problems of the international economy” from Jordan in 1971 and relocated to Lebanon (Young and Kent, 2013: 274). (Best et al., 2008: 441). A new era in the history of Arab-Israeli conflict The PLO’s arrival in Lebanon disrupted an began with the normalization of relations between already extremely sensitive political and social Egypt and Israel in 1978 when US President Jimmy structure. The incredibly complex Lebanese Carter invited Egyptian President Anwar Sadat confessional system, which took into consideration and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin to the diversity of the Lebanese population and the United States to facilitate negotiations between allocated power accordingly (if still unfairly), was the two countries. Six years after the Yom Kippur greatly strained by the arrival of the PLO. Simply

192 History of International Relations 7 unable to account for demographic changes, as Arab nationalism emerged as an opposition Ghosn and Khoury have shown (2011: 383), it was movement in the Ottoman Empire during the this series of “international domestic tensions over twentieth century and remained a minority the political structure, issues of power-sharing, movement until the end of the Ottoman Empire. As exploitation of sectarian differences, economic the latter declined in power, Europe’s Great Powers, inequalities and disparities, combined with Britain and France, extended their influence into external/regional conflicts pertaining to the Israelis the Middle East. Those regional developments led and Palestinians, that led to the outbreak of war on to the rise of local nationalisms, most notably Arab April 13, 1975” and only ended in 1990 once the nationalism. As Best et al. (2008: 92) wrote: “the Syrian forces of Hafez al-Assad were allowed by the combination of Ottoman weakness and steady United States to establishe their hegemony over the European penetration created the environment for small and incredibly fractured state. the rise of Arab nationalism”. Especially with the establishment of Israel Pan-Arabism and the United Arab and the effects of Arab-Israeli dispute, Arab states Republic believed they need to unite against Israel under “the banner of Arab nationalism” to liberate Palestine While Pan-Arabism dominated regional and keep the integrity of Arab soil (Kramer, 1993: political discourse and the political consciousness 188; Khalidi, 1978: 696). The establishment of a of Arabs during the Cold War, the creation of Israel single state had been experienced in some measure did much to foster Pan-Arab movements. Porath with the establishment of the United Arab Republic (2014: 162), for example, argues that: (UAR) between Egypt and Syria. “The effect of the developments in Palestine during Syrians had been strong defenders of Arab unity 1936-9 stands as perhaps the single most important and made several attempts, including passing two factor which contributed to the growth of Pan-Arab resolutions—one in November 1957 and another ideology, to the feeling of solidarity among the Arab in January 1958—to form such a political unity peoples, and to the attempt at shaping a unified with Egypt (Palmer, 1966: 51). The President of general Arab position and policy.” Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser, who also wanted Egyptian foreign policy to unify the Arab world, The notion of Pan-Arabism was put as the was an important defender of pan-Arab movements Umma Arabiyya, Wahida Dhat Risala Khalida, and Arab nationalism. Moreover, the Baath Party “the one Arab nation with an immortal mission,” in Syria was a pan-Arab movement “standing for (Ajami, 1978: 355). Pan-Arabism is basically the Arab nationalism, freedom from foreign rule, and idea that all Arabs should get together to form one the establishment of a single Arab state” (Devlin, Arab state. Reiser (1983: 218) defines pan-Arabism 1991: 1396). as “an idea and a movement that recognizes the close affinity shared by the Arab people and attempts to give that affinity some meaningful Baath Party, the Arab Socialist Baath Party: Baath practical expression”. Khalidi (1978: 695) observes means resurrection or renaissance. The Baath Party the Arab states’ system as: was founded in Syria in the late 1940s by Michel ‘Aflaq and Salah al-Din Bitar. The party embraced “… first and foremost a ‘pan’ system. It postulates three principles: unity, freedom, and socialism the existence of a single Arab Nation behind the façade (Devlin, 1991). of a multiplicity of sovereign states. In pan-Arab ideology, this Nation is actual, not potential. […] From this perspective, the individual Arab states are Both the Baath Party and Syrian Army pushed deviant and transient entities: their frontiers illusory the Asali government, which was formed by Sabri and permeable; their rulers interim caretakers, al-‘Asali in June 1956, to embrace Syrian-Egyptian or obstacles to be removed. […] Before such super- unity. After several Syrian-initiated attempts and legitimacy, the legitimacy of the individual state meetings, Nasser, who was at first reluctant to shrinks into irrelevance,”. undertake such a project especially because of two

193 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 countries’ having sharp structural differences, agreed the Shah’s authoritarian and suppressive regime. In to a political union between Egypt and Syria, and January 1979, the shah and his wife finally fled Iran, the union was proclaimed on February 1, 1958. and in February, Ayatollah Khomeini returned to This new unitary state was called the United Arab Tehran after 14 years of exile in Turkey, Iraq, and Republic with Nasser as its president. Even though France and began to lead the country (Wagner, the demand for such a merger came from Syria, 2010:15). The Iranian Revolution of 1979 greatly and the Syrian army pushed forward for it, the affected both regional dynamics and relations UAR dissolved on September 28, 1961, following between the superpowers, but hardly along Cold a Syrian coup d’état. A group of Syrian army officers War lines. Firmly rejecting the model of both staged a military coup and led to the secession of Washington and Moscow, Tehran not only broke Syria from the UAR (Seale, 1961: 471). ties with the US in 1979 but later fought a brutal During the union, Nasser was hesitant to share and disastrous eight-year war with neighborhood power with the Syrian government, which led to Iraq (1980-88) that would change the course of the dissatisfaction in Syria. Baath leader Salah Bitar region for the rest of the century. put it as “the rupture between Nasser and the Baath was caused by a certain Egyptian hegemonic view of the union” (cited in Walt, 1990: 208). Following the dissolution of the UAR, more efforts were made to foster further Arab solidarity. However, the 1967 defeat of Arab states by Israel was not only a military failure, but also it discredited Arab unity. Best et al. (2008: 458) state that “the 1967 June War drove home very clearly that pan-Arabism was an ideal which was not borne out by reality”. In this conflictive environment, the rise of Arab nationalism also triggered inter-Arab rivalry rather than playing a cooperative role. Arab nationalism, Figure 7.9 Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini after his which aims to incorporate all Arabs into the same return to Tehran in 1979. political entity and create an Arab state system, Source: www.britannica.com has led to disagreements and competition among Arabs themselves over the leadership of the Arab Iran- world. The Iran-Iraq War broke out one year after the Iranian Revolution. In the late 1970s, Iraq was a The Iranian Revolution rising power and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein In the 1960s and 1970s, Shah Mohammed sought to play a preeminent role in regional politics. Reza Pehlevi sought to implement a massive With the changes that took place after the Iranian program of social and economic modernization. Revolution, Iran and its Shia-colored revolution Though authoritarian in nature, Young and Kent became a threat to Saddam’s hold on power in a (2013:342) note that the Shah’s regime still tried mostly Shia country. Saddam also sought to take to create a political party capable of mobilizing advantage of the revolutionary turmoil in Iran to popular support. When this was unforthcoming, strike while it was defenseless (Parasiliti, 2003: however, “his regime relied on arbitrary, personal 154). On September 16, 1980, Saddam announced rule, a ruthless secret police… [and had] no freedom that Iraq had exited the Shatt al-Arab Agreement of press or assembly.” Long opposed by Ayatollah and intended to have full control over the Shatt Ruhollah Khomeini, then in exile in France, with al-Arab river. On September 22, Iraq launched each increasing blunder of the Shah, the force of a surprise attack, triggering a disastrous eight- Khomeini’s powerful speeches grew. For months, year war between the two countries and further demonstrations and riots were organized to protest destabilizing the Middle East.

194 History of International Relations 7 The Cold War in the Balkans the Soviet Union and considered herself attached and The Balkan region was an important arena aligned with it in its confrontation with its former of superpower rivalry given its geopolitical and allies from the West” (cited in Zimmerman, 2014: strategic position. Even before the end of World 14). Unlike Yugoslavia and Albania, which formed a War II, the region was already divided into spheres voluntary alliance with the Soviet Union, pro-Soviet of influence by the great powers according to the communist regimes were instated in Czechoslovakia, notorious secret Percentages Agreement between Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania (Lee, 2006 :128). British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and By doing so, the Soviet Union vastly extended its Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, in October 1944. influence over Eastern Europe. However, Yugoslavia and Albania, though both communist, began taking While Greece was to be included in the British independent lines from Moscow, which finally led to sphere of influence, Bulgaria and Romania were the Yugoslav-Soviet split in 1948. left to Soviet control, while the leaders agreed to share equal influence over Yugoslavia. After World War II, Yugoslavia followed the Soviet Stalinist model and were ardent allies of The outbreak ofthe Greek Civil War at the Moscow. However, as major differences between beginning of the Cold War was especially considered the two countries began to arise, relations came to as one of the most important events since it was the a breaking point. In March 1948 the Soviet Union first battle of the Cold War period (Koumas, 2017: sent a warning memorandum to Belgrade. As the 99). The Greek Civil War took place between the Soviet Union increased its aggressive policies and Communist Party of Greece (KKE) and the Centre- actions towards the Eastern states, Yugoslavia sought Right Government, in other words Communists to maintain its sovereignty and embarked on a five- and anti-Communists, during 1946-1949. As year plan (Niebuhr, 2011: 145-146). With this, Pelt (2006: 15) puts it, “the Greek Civil War […] Tito sought to spur economic development with brought Greece to the fore in the ideological, an emphasis on industrialization by taking into political, economic and military rivalry that already consideration the internal conditions of Yugoslavia existed between East and West”. During the civil (Lees, 1978: 408). In late June 1948, Stalin war, neighboring countries of Yugoslavia, Albania convened the Cominform and expelled the Yugoslav and Bulgaria supported the Communist Party of Communist Party through a published resolution Greece while Britain assisted the Greek government titled ‘The Situation in the Yugoslav Communist (Best et al., 2008: 226). The Greek Civil War ended Party’. This accused the Central Committee of the in 1949 with the defeat of the Greek communists Communist Party of Yugoslavia of “having recently while it had dramatic consequences and left Greece pursued in domestic and foreign affairs policies in a great economic crisis. that fundamentally deviate from the Marxist- During the Cold War, other regional Leninist line” and “thereby placed themselves and developments in the region were dramatically Yugoslavia outside the family of fellow Communist influenced the dynamics and structure of bipolar parties, outside the united Communist front, and rivalry. After rejecting the Marshall Plan in July 1947, consequently outside the Cominform” (as cited in the Cominform (the Communist Information Perovic, 2007: 32). The Cominform resolution was Bureau) was organized as a response to the Marshall proof of the final split between the two countries. Plan, and the USSR adopted a more repressive Not only did it change the dynamics of the Cold strategy in Eastern Europe to increase its influence War, it also led Yugoslavia to search for “a foreign there. The Soviet Union excluded non-communist policy alternative that would secure its independence parties of the Eastern bloc states and imposed and guarantee future disassociation from the Soviet its own political, economic, social, and cultural bloc while also internally strengthening the country’s system on the Eastern European states’ systems and socialist system” (Zivotic and Cavoski, 2016: 79). individuals (Young and Kent, 2013: 49). After the split, Yugoslavia tried to secure a The Federative People’s Republic of Yugoslavia stable position in international politics and began was proclaimed on January 31, 1946. From its to develop close relations with Western countries, proclamation in 1946 to 1948, Yugoslavia was including the acceptance of material assistance voluntarily aligned with the Soviet Union. As Tito from the Truman administration, and getting into claimed “Yugoslavia voluntarily and with a full the Balkan Pact with Greece and Turkey. Relations conviction of the rightness of her act, took the side of between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union gradually

195 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 improved starting with the death of Stalin in 1953. both countries focused their attention on other After developing close relations with India and regions, including Europe and the Middle East. Egypt in the UN Security Council, Yugoslavia also Even though most Latin American communist got interested in subjects such as anti-colonialism, parties followed the Comintern (Communist collective security, and economic cooperation International) and sought to maintain support (Zivotic and Cavoski, 2016: 80-81). Indeed, this from the Soviet Union, the latter was not truly interaction laid the foundations of the Non-Aligned interested in the region until 1960, following the Movement, as Yugoslavia, seeking to find a third way, Cuban Revolution of 1959 (Harmer, 2014: 134; became the leader of the Non-Aligned Movement. Brands, 2010: 3). Brands (2010: 3) summarizes Political developments and alliance shifts in the pre-1959 crises of Latin America which led to Albanian politics are also crucial to understanding unstable conditions in the late 1950s as follows: Cold War regional and global relations. Right after World War II, Albania had close relations with “...intensifying internal strife, characterized by Yugoslavia. In late 1940s, however, it moved away a seesawing of political arrangements in the 1940s from Yugoslavia and saw a rapprochement with and 1950s, inter-American diplomatic discord, the Soviet Union. This was largely because Tito heightened by Washington’s policies during the early planned to create a Balkan Federation with Bulgaria Cold War; the ideological ferment occasioned by by including neighboring countries as well (Best decolonization and the emergence of the Third World; et al., 2008: 221). In order to prevent Tito from and the escalating US-Soviet competition for mastery integrating Albania into Yugoslavia and creating in the global south.” the Balkan Federation, Enver Hoxha, in power in Albania since 1944, sought protection from The intensity of the Cold War in Latin America Moscow, and Albania became a Soviet satellite. sharpened during the détente years of the 1960s In 1960, however, it broke ties with the and 1970s. The interaction between international USSR, a split usually explained by two factors. and regional politics had drastically influenced First, Khrushchev’s destalinization process after Latin American political dynamics during this 1956 threatened Hoxha’s position as the leader period. Harmer (2014: 135) states four defining characteristics of the region during the Cold War of Albania. Second, Albania perceived the Soviet : rapprochement with Yugoslavia as a threat to its • “First, the Cold War in Latin America independence (Lüthi, 2008: 201) In this context, was not Cold.” The state violence against Hoxha decided to intensify Albanian relations and political opponents was widespread. moved closer to China in 1960. As such, in the • Second, the Cold War in Latin America was early 1960s, Albania formed an informal alliance characterized by revolution and counter- with China. During the Sino-Albanian alliance, revolution. which lasted through the late 1960s, Albania and • Third, conflicts in Latin America China provided political, economic, and military during the Cold War had international, aid to one another (Botsiou, 2017: 268). multidimensional, and transnational characteristics as the Bay of Pigs and the overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz of Guatemala Rapprochement is a diplomatic term for the illustrate the regional impact of conflicts. improvement of previously hostile relations between • Fourth, the Cold War in Latin America was two former adversaries (Darnton, 2014: 3). underpinned by the US intervention in the region. As a result of Monroe Doctrine, among other The Cold War in Latin America things, the US was politically and economically During the first few years of the Cold War, Latin dominant in Latin America and highly involved in America was not regarded as a high priority area for the affairs of its neighbors to the south. Following the US or Soviet Union. First of all, the US was an old interventionist foreign policy toward Latin long the region’s hegemonic power and dominated America, Washington also supported various the continent’s affairs. Moreover, Latin America’s military coups if and when they fit with US interests. distance from the Soviet Union reduced the power Guatemala represents a prime example, where the projection capability of the latter. As a result, US was crucial in the overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz

196 History of International Relations 7 in 1954. The United Fruit Company (UFCO), a number of unresolved issues, such as poverty and an American-owned and run company, had been chronic political instability. It was not long before the largest single landowner in Guatemala since the dissemination of communism, especially after 1904; however, after reformist president Arbenz the formation of the Castro regime, became an took office in 1951, he announced a series of land important regional issue for the US government. reforms to improve the country’s economy and As the Bay of Pigs invasion demonstrated, military distribute the unused and underdeveloped land intervention was one of the visible methods for the of landowners to landless farmers. Based on this US in its fight against communism. reform, Arbenz expropriated a portion of UFCO’s uncultivated land (Best et al., 2008: 383-384), after which the US perceived Guatemala as a possible Bay of Pigs invasion was the unsuccessful 1961 Soviet satellite state. In June 1954, the Arbenz invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles opposed to the government was overthrown with the support of Castro regime who attempted to overthrow the Washington, whose powerful anti-communism latter’s government with the support of the American could not stomach anything resembling socialism government (Best et al., 2008: 273). in its own backyard (Young and Kent, 2013:108). The US, therefore, attempted to prevent Soviet The Monroe Doctrine was a US foreign policy influence over the region and counter its perceived principle that laid out guidelines for US supremacy threat in the Western hemisphere by providing an over other European powers in the Western economic assistance program for Latin America called Hemisphere. Declared by President Monroe in 1823, the Alliance for Progress. In fighting communism it stated that the United States would not tolerate and preventing the spread of communist revolutions, European countries to intervene in the affairs of the the Kennedy administration believed that military intervention as a foreign policy tool would only provide Western Hemisphere (Best et al., 2008: 10). a short-term solution. As such, he proposed one of the most important foreign policy strategies, the Alliance Contrary to US desires, not every Latin for Progress, towards Latin America. Initiated on March American country had taken pro-US positions. 13, 1961, the program’s aim was to promote Latin The Cuban Revolution of 1959, for example, American economic and social development (Best et had led to the emergence of a communist Cuba al., 2008: 387). Influenced by modernization theory, that soon became an ally of the Soviet Union. the Alliance for Progress was an effort “to combine the After the revolution, the Soviet Union and Cuba promotion of Latin American development with the formed a military alliance and attempted to containment of communism” (Latham, 1998: 200). manage revolutions in other nations in the region. The increasing tendency toward communism had threatened the long-established primacy of the US. Modernization Theory refers to the progressive In this context, US foreign policy makers attached transformation of a society from a traditional one to high priority to Latin America: a modern one through economic development.

“Marxism as a guide to social development is a spent force in most European countries, but remains Kennedy asserted that the Alliance was to be “a a lively alternative in Latin America today. The vast cooperative effort, unparalleled in magnitude example of Cuba suggests both the immediacy of the and nobility of purpose, to satisfy the basic needs of Marxist threat to U.S. interests and the nature of the American people for homes, work, land, health, the problems which [the United States] faces when and schools” (Kennedy, 1961). He aimed to promote Marxism is accepted as a guide to the development of major changes in Latin American economic, a Latin American society,” (Humphrey, 1964: 585). political, and social structures and believed that the Alliance would serve as an alternative to Marxist John F. Kennedy became president of the doctrine. With this development agenda, it was US in 1961, and one of the main focuses of his believed that “the United States could effectively administration was inter-American relations. guide ‘underdeveloped’ nations through a dangerous When Kennedy took office, Latin America still had transitional period in which destitution and

197 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 authoritarian repression made them most vulnerable political culture as well as socioeconomic structures, to Marxist ” (Latham, 1998: 200). which eventually led to the failure of the program. This program for Latin America included During the Cold War, the US was deeply the provision of $20 billion in loans, grants, and involved in Latin American domestic affairs investment over a decade. Moreover, it called for and followed an interventionist policy toward the establishment of democratic governments and the region. Throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and addressed education and health issues, economic early 1980s, the U.S. intervened in many Latin and social reforms as well as land reform (Brands, American countries, even undermining democracy, 2010: 46-47; Best et al., 2008: 387). including the Dominican Republic and Haiti, to eliminate the Soviet threat “in its own backyard”. (Castaneda, 1990: 470; Best et al., 2008: 391). Latin American militaries, on the other hand, had always played a critical role in regional politics. Historical legacies and economic factors help to explain the region’s tendency to military rule. In Chile, for example, the socialist government of President Salvador Allende was overthrown by a military coup led by General Augusto Pinochet in 1973. Similarly, a military junta was installed in Argentina following a coup d’état in 1976. The US also played a crucial role in installing various dictatorships. Therefore, the Cold War foreign policy elite of the US preferred the neutralization of communist movements over the promotion of democratic regimes and supported anti-communist regimes that were often antidemocratic. Figure 7.10 US President John F. Kennedy and President Alberto Lleras Camargo of Colombia during the opening ceremony of the Techo Housing Project, part of the Alliance for Progress, in Bogota, Columbia, 4 December 1961. Discuss whether Cold War dynamics explain Source: www.jfklibrary.org variations in outcomes of regional conflicts Contrary to expectations, the Alliance failed to succeed in promoting progressive and developed Latin American countries and was disbanded in 1971. According to Young and Kent (2013: 149), the Alliance failed because Kennedy mainly concentrated on removing Cuban leader Fidel Further Reading Castro and paid less attention to the program’s goal of bringing economic growth to Latin American Singh, S. (2009). NAM in the countries, which should have then trickled down Contemporary World Order: An Analysis, The to political and social benefits. As Scott and Carter Indian Journal of Political Science, 70 (4), pp. (2016: 300) put it, “after World War II US support 1213-1226. for democracy in the region remained uneven, as Şahin, K. and Mavruk Cavlak, Ç. (2018). democracy promotion took a back seat to anti- Başarısız Bir Pan-Milliyetçilik Girişimi: Birleşik communism and forcible regime change during the Arap Cumhuriyeti, Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Cold War”. Rabe (2014: 161), on the other hand, Dergisi, 5 (16), pp. 152-174. claims that while the program aimed to modernize Mazower, M. (2001). The Balkans, London: Latin America by creating progressive and democratic Orion Books. societies, policymakers disregarded Latin American

198 History of International Relations 7

Define the concept of decolonization LO 1 and explain the decolonization process

Decolonization was the main theme of the post-World War II era. Broadly speaking, the term refers to the end of colonial rule and the achievement of sovereign independence. It was founded on the principle of self-determination of peoples. This process coincided with the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union and influenced both local and global dynamics of the Cold War. While the decolonization process started in the immediate post-war years, its completion took a long time. From the immediate aftermath of World War II to the mid-1960s, former African, Asian, and Middle Eastern colonies became independent. Decolonization was a relatively peaceful process in some cases (for instance, India) while it Summary was violent in others (for example, Algeria).

Analyze the emergence of the Non- LO 2 Aligned Movement

The Non-Aligned Movement was formed by a number of Third World leaders who sought an alternative foreign policy in the context of the bipolar international system during the Cold War. These leaders rejected the idea of bloc politics and preferred not to align with either the Soviet Union or the US. Efforts made by Nehru, Sukarno, and Nasser to create a non-aligned alternative came to fruition in the form of the 1955 Bandung Conference, a landmark moment for the movement. This brought the newly independent states of the Third World together and promoted Afro-Asian cooperation. Moreover, the meeting was concluded with a declaration which set out ten guiding principles and laid the foundations for its subsequent institutionalization.

Evaluate how the Cold War affected LO 3 Europe and European integration

Cold War superpower rivalry dramatically impacted Europe at the beginning and the end of the conflict’s history. While US influence prevailed in Western Europe, the Soviet Union dominated large areas of Central and Eastern Europe. With the announcement of the Marshall Plan, the US became much more involved in the continent. The European Recovery Program of 1947, as known by its formal name, played an important role in the development of European integration. In the aftermath of World War II, the US provided financial aid to European countries to promote the economic reconstruction of Europe. With this aid, the US engaged in European affairs by aiming to prevent the spread of communism to the West and by guaranteeing American security. These policies laid the foundation for the post-war European economic integration.

Discuss the impact of the Cold War on LO 4 developing regions

Like other parts of the world, developing regions were also affected by the Cold War era of deep East- West tensions. Some regions experienced the effects of superpower rivalry more intensely than others. The rise of independent Third World countries also changed the nature of international affairs, as these regions became new arenas for superpower rivalry. The US and Soviet Union competed over influence and sought to attract newly independent countries to join their alliances. However, the latter also posed a fundamental challenge to the superpowers and their respective camps by declining to join either and responding the Cold War with the formation of the Non-Aligned Movement.

199 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7

1 Which of the following international 6 Which of the following was created by organizations promoted decolonization by Britain as an alternative to the European Economic establishing the principles of decolonization? Community in 1960? a. The orthN Atlantic Treaty Organization a. Baghdad Pact b. The nitedU Nations b. Balkan Pact c. The uropeanE Coal and Steel Community c. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) d. The Council for utualM Economic Assistance d. European Free Trade Association (EFTA) e. The rganizationO for European Economic e. European Atomic Energy Community Cooperation (Euratom)

2 From which colonial state did India gain its 7 Which of the following developments is Test Yourself Test independence? considered a milestone in European integration? a. Holland b. Portugal a. The creation of COMECON c. France d. Belgium b. The adoption of the arshallM Plan e. Britain c. The announcement of the olotovM Plan d. The creation of Cominform 3 Which of the following conferences e. The implementation of theTruman Doctrine institutionalized the Non-Aligned Movement? a. Yalta b. Potsdam 8 Which countries formed the United Arab c. Belgrade d. Fulton Republic in 1958? e. Tehran a. Libya and Sudan b. Libya and Tunisia 4 When was the Non-Aligned Movement c. Egypt and Syria formed? d. Iraq and Syria a. 1947 b. 1949 e. Iraq and Jordan c. 1958 d. 1961 e. 1972 9 From which international organization was Yugoslavia expelled by the Soviet Union in 1948? 5 I. Respect for the sovereignty and territorial a. COMECON integrity of all nations b. Cominform II. Abstention from intervention or c. Warsaw Pact interference in the internal affairs of d. Non-Aligned Movement another country e. North Atlantic Treaty Organization III. Abstention by any country from exerting pressures on other countries 10 What was the purpose of the Alliance for IV. Promotion of mutual interest and Progress? cooperation Which of the above principles were adopted at the a. To establish economic cooperation between the Bandung Conference? U.S. and Latin America b. To solve economic, cultural, and social a. I and IV international problems b. II and III c. To promote human rights and democracy in c. I, II and IV developing countries d. I, III and IV d. To help any country resist communism e. I, II, III and IV e. To provide economic aid for developing countries

200 History of International Relations 7

If your answer is wrong, please review the 1. b If your answer is wrong, please review the 6. d “The Cold War and European Integration” “The Era of Decolonization” section. section. Answer Key for “Test Yourself”

If your answer is wrong, please review the 2. e If your answer is wrong, please review the 7. b “The Cold War and European Integration” “The Era of Decolonization” section. section.

If your answer is wrong, please review 3. c 8. c If your answer is wrong, please review the the “Bandung and the Non-aligned “Effects of the Cold War on Developing Movement” section. Regions” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review If your answer is wrong, please review the d b 4. the “Bandung and the Non-aligned 9. “Effects of the Cold War on Developing Movement” section. Regions” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review If your answer is wrong, please review the 5. e 10. a the “Bandung and the Non-aligned “Effects of the Cold War on Developing Movement” section. Regions” section. Suggested answers for “Your Turn”

Discuss the role of the UN, the US, and the Soviet Union in the process of decolonization.

The UN played a pivotal role in the decolonization process. The adoption of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in 1960 was a milestone in the process of decolonization. It affirmed that all peoples have the right to self-determination and that self-determination your turn 1 was the guiding principle behind decolonization. In the aftermath of this anti- colonial statement, the process was speeded up. The view of each superpower also played an important role in this process. While superpower attitudes toward decolonization varied region by region, in general both the US and Soviet Union supported decolonization, which helped the transition from colonial rule to independence.

201 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7

How did the Bandung Conference affect the course of the Cold War?

The Bandung Conference of 1955 was an important international event of the Cold War. Bandung posed a challenge to bloc politics and military alliances to the period’s bipolar structure by proposing an alternative foreign policy and shaping the attitudes of newly independent states. The concept of the Third World was also popularized in the conference. Within the East-West conflict, your turn 2 the conference drew attention to the role of postcolonial states by creating a post-colonial and non-aligned movement and laying out the core principles of the movement. This included self-determination, non-aggression, non- interference in the domestic affairs of another state, and mutual respect for other states’ sovereignty.

What was the Soviet attitude towards the Marshall Plan?

Despite its initial welcome, the Soviet Union viewed the Marshall Plan as a potential threat to its security as well as political and economic position Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your in Eastern Europe and rejected the participation of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe’s participation. Stalin also decided to strengthen his control your turn 3 over the region by setting up political and economic forums to strengthen its strategic position. This took the form of the Communist Information Bureau (Cominform), a body through which the USSR would control its satellites through local communist parties. As an economic response to the formation of the Organization of European Economic Cooperation, the Soviet Union established the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON) in 1949.

Discuss whether the Cold War dynamics explain variations in outcomes of regional conflicts.

There is no doubt that Cold War dynamics significantly affected the process and outcome of regional conflicts in some regions more than others. While these are important in interpreting these outcomes, each conflict’s regional context must also be taken into account. These factors among others affected your turn 4 the intensity, duration, and outcome of said conflicts. In terms of the Middle East, for instance, the region’s colonial legacy, superpower involvement in local conflicts, and strategic importance all played a role, especially in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

202 History of International Relations 7

References

Acharya, A. (2014). Who are the Norm Makers? The Darnton, C. (2014). Rivalry and Alliance Politics Asian-African Conference in Bandung and the in Cold War Latin America, Baltimore: John Evolution of Norms, Global Governance, 20 (3), Hopkins University Press. pp. 405-417. Dennehy, K. (2007). “Overcoming Colonialism at Acharya, A. (2016). Studying the Bandung Conference Bandung, 1955” in Saaler, S. and Koschmann, from a Global IR Perspective, Australian Journal of J. V. (Eds.), Pan-Asianism in Modern Japanese International Affairs, 70 (4), pp. 342-357. History: Colonialism, Regionalism and Borders, New York: Routledge Ajami, F. (1978). The end of pan-Arabism, Foreign Affairs, 57, pp. 355-373. Devlin, J. F. (1991). The Baath Party: Rise and Metamorphosis, The American Historical Review, Betts, R. F. (2004). Decolonization, New York: 96 (5), pp. 1396-1407. Routledge. Fonseca, A. M. and Marcos, D. (2013). Cold Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A. and Schulze, K. War Constraints: France, West Germany and E. (2008). International History of the Twentieth Portuguese Decolonization, Portuguese Studies, 29 Century and Beyond, New York: Routledge. (2), pp. 209-226. Bissio, B. (2017). The Bandung Spirit as an Alternative Galtung, J. (1971). The Middle East and the Theory to the Present Chaos” in A World Beyond Global of Conflict, Journal of Peace Research, 8(3-4), pp: Disorder: The Courage to Hope,Britain: Cambridge 173-206. Scholar, 89-101. Gelvin, J. L. (2008). The Modern Middle East: A Blair. A. (2013). The European Union Since 1945, history, New York: Oxford University Press. London and New York: Routledge. Ghosn F. and Khoury A. (2011). Lebanon after the Botsiou, K. E. (2017). “Balkan Dilemmas in the 1970s Civil War: Peace or the Illusion of Peace?, Middle and 1980s: a Point of No Return?” in Rajak, S., East Journal, 65 (3), pp. 381-397. Botsiou, K. E., Karamouzi, E., and Hatzivassiliou, E. (Eds.), The Balkans in the Cold War, London: Gordon, C. (2007). Culture and the European Springer, 261-282. Union in a Global Context, The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 37(1), pp. 11-30. Bradley, M. P. (2010). “Decolonization, the global South, and the Cold War, 1919-1962”, in Gupta, K. R. and Shukla, V. (2009). Foreign Policy of India, New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Leffler, M. P., and Westad, O. A. (Eds.), The Distributors (P) Ltd. Cambridge History of the Cold War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 464-485. Hanhimaki, J.M. (2012). “Europe’s Cold War” in Stone, D. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Postwar Brands, H. (2010). Latin America’s Cold War, European History, New York: Oxford University Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Press, 283-298. Buzan, B. and Waever, O. (2003). Regions and Powers: Harmer, T. (2014). “The Cold War in Latin America” The Structure of International Security, New York: in Kalinovsky A. M. and Daigle C.(Eds), The Cambridge University Press. Routledge Handbook of the Cold War, New York: Castaneda, J. G. (1990). Latin America and the End of Routledge, pp. 133-148. the Cold War, World Policy Journal, 7 (3), 468-492. Hinnebusch, R. (2015). The International Politics of the Cooper, F. (2012). “Decolonization and Citizenship Middle East, Manchester: Manchester University Africa between Empires and a World of Nations” Press. 2nd ed. in Bogaerts E. and Raben R. (Eds.), Beyond Empire Hopkins, G. (2017). Globalisation and and Nation; The Decolonization of African and Decolonisation, The Journal of Imperial and Asian Societies, 1930s-1960s, Leiden: Kıtlv Press. Commonwealth History, 45 (5), pp. 729-745.

203 The Cold War 1945-1989: Regional Developments 7 Humphrey, H. H. (1964). US Policy in Latin Lyon, P. (1980). Non-alignment at the Summits: From America, Foreign Affairs, 42, pp. 585-601. Belgrade 1961 to Havana 1979-A Perspective View, The Indian Journal of Political Science, 41(1), Jankowski, J. (2002). Nasser’s Egypt, Arab Nationalism pp. 132-153. and the United Arap Republic, Lynn Rienner Publishers, London. McCormick, J. (2008). Understanding the European Union: A Concise Introduction, New York: Palgrave Kay, D. A. (1967). The Politics of Decolonization: Macmillan, 4th ed. The New Nations and the United Nations Political Process, International Organization, 21 McCormick, J. (2015). Avrupa Birliği Siyaseti, (çev.), (4): 786-811. Doğancan Özsel, Ankara: Adres Yayınları. Kennedy, J. F. (1964). Public Papers of the Presidents McGiffen, S. P. (2005).The European Union: A Critical of the United States: John F. Kennedy, 1963, Best Guide, London: Pluto Press. 2nd ed. Books on. Niebuhr, R. (2011). Nonalignment as Yugoslavia’s Khalidi, R. (2009). Sowing Crisis: The Cold War and Answer to Bloc Politics, Journal of Cold War American Dominance in the Middle East, Beacon Studies, 13(1), pp. 146-179. Press. Owen, R. (2013). State, Power and Politics in the Khalidi, W. (1978). Thinking the Unthinkable: A Making of the Modern Middle East, New York: Sovereign Palestinian State, Foreign Affairs, 56 (4): Routledge. 695-713. Palmer, M. (1966). The United Arab Republic: An Koumas, M. (2017). Cold War Dilemmas, Superpower Assessment of its Failure, Middle East Journal, 20 Influence, and Regional Interests: Greece and the (1), pp. 50-67. Palestinian Question, Journal of Cold War Studies, Parasiliti, A. T. (2003). The Causes and Timing of Iraq’s 19 (1), pp. 99-124. Wars: A Power Cycle Assessment, International Kramer, M. (1993). Arab Nationalism: Mistaken Political Science Review, 24(1), pp. 151-165. Identity, Daedalus, 122 (3), pp. 171-206. Pelt, M. (2006). Tying Greece to the West: Us-West Kumar, S. (1983). Nonalignment: International German-Greek Relations 1949-1974, Copenhagen: Goals and National Interests, Asian Survey, 23(4), Museum Tusculanum Press. pp. 445-462. Perović, J. (2007). The Tito-Stalin Split: A Reassessment in Light of New Evidence, Journal Latham, M. E. (1998). Ideology, Social Science, and of Cold War Studies, 9 (2), pp. 32-63. Destiny: Modernization and the Kennedy-era Alliance for Progress, Diplomatic History, 22(2), Phillips, A. (2016). Beyond Bandung: the 1955 pp. 199-229. Asian-African Conference and Its Legacies or International Order, Australian Journal of Lee, S. J. (2006). Russia and the USSR, 1855-1991, International Affairs, 70 (4), pp. 329-341. London and New York: Routledge. Phinnemore, D. (2015). “The European Union: Lees, L. M. (1978). The American Decision to Assist Establishment and Development” in Cini, M., Diplomatic History 2 Tito, 1948–1949, , (4), pp. and Borragán, N. P. S. (Eds.), European Union 407-422. Politics, New York: Oxford University Press, 5th Lieber, R. J. (1970). British Politics and European ed., 11-29. Unity: Parties, Elites, and Pressure Groups, Berkeley: Porath, Y. (2014). In Search of Arab Unity 1930-1945, University of California Press. New York: Routledge. Lüthi, L. M. (2008). The Sino-Soviet Split: Cold War Quandt, W. (1986). Camp David and Peacemaking in in the Communist World, Princeton: Princeton the Middle East, Political Science Quarterly, 101 University Press. (3), pp. 357-377. Lüthi, L. M. (2016). The Non-Aligned Movement Rabe, S. G. (2014). The Most Dangerous Area in the and the Cold War, 1961-1973, Journal of Cold World: John F. Kennedy Confronts Communist War Studies, 18(4), pp. 98-147. Revolution in Latin America, UNC Press Books.

204 History of International Relations 7 Reiser, S. (1983). “Pan-Arabism Revisited,” Middle Thomas, M. and Thompson, A. (Eds.). (2018). The East Journal, 37 (2), pp. 218-233. Saaler, S., & Oxford Handbook of the Ends of Empire, New York: Koschmann, J. V. (Eds.), (2007). Pan-Asianism in Oxford University Press. Modern Japanese History: Colonialism, Regionalism Van Langenhove, F. (1961). Factors of Decolonisation, and Borders, New York: Routledge. Civilisations, 11(4), pp. 401-428. Sander, O. (2005). Siyasi Tarih 1918-1994, Ankara: Wagner, H. L. (2010). The Iranian Revolution, New İmge Kitabevi. York: Chelsea House. Schaufelbuehl, J. M., Bott, S., Hanhimäki, J., and Walt, S. M. (1990). The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca: Wyss, M. (2015). Non-Alignment, the Third Cornell University Press. Force, or Fence-Sitting: Independent Pathways in the Cold War, The International History Review, Watts, D. (2008). The European Union, Edinburgh: 37 (5), pp. 901-911. Edinburgh University Press. Scott, L. (2014). “International History 1900-99” in Young, J. W. and Kent, J. (2013). International Baylis, J., Smith, S., and Owens, P. (Eds.), The Relations since 1945, New York: Oxford University Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction Press. to International Relations, New York: Oxford th Zimmerman, W. (2014). Open Borders, Nonalignment University Press, 6 ed., 50-64. and the Political Evolution of Yugoslavia, Princeton: Scott, J. M. and Carter, R. G. (2016). Promoting Princeton University Press. Democracy in Latin America: Foreign Policy Zivotic, A. and Cavoski, J. (2016). On the Road to Change and US Democracy Assistance, 1975– Belgrade: Yugoslavia, Third World Neutrals, and 2010, Third World Quarterly, 37 (2), pp. 299-320. the Evolution of Global Non-Alignment, 1954– Seale, P. (1961). The Break-up of the United Arab 1961, Journal of Cold War Studies, 18(4), pp. 79-97. Republic, The World Today, 17 (11), pp. 471-479. Stewart-Ingersoll, R., and Frazier, D. (2012). Regional Powers and Security Orders: a Theoretical Framework, New York: Routledge.

Internet References

Foundation Robert Schuman (2011). Declaration The United Nations Department of Public of 9th May 1950 Delivered by Robert Schuman, Information. (2003). The Plan of Partition and European Issue, No: 204, Retrieved from Accessed End https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/doc/ of the British Mandate, Accessed on 22 March 2019, questions-d-europe/qe-204-en.pdf http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/palestine/ch2.pdf The United Nations. (2019). Decolonization, Accessed on 15 March 2019, http://www.un.org/en/ sections/issues-depth/decolonization/index.htm

205 The World Since the End of Chapter 8 the Cold War 1989-2019

After completing this chapter, you will be able to:

Explain the reasons that brought the Cold War to an end and assess different perspectives and expectations regarding the nature of the Describe the major events that shaped the US- 1 post-Cold War order. 2 led international order during the 1990s. Identify the challenges to the US-led Analyze the impact of globalization on regional international order since the beginning of the 3 integration processes and discuss its limits. 4 21st century. Learning Outcomes

Chapter Outline Key Terms Introduction New World Order The End of the Cold War and “a New World Order” US Hegemony The Era of Liberal Internationalism: The US-led Globalization International Order in the 1990s The Gulf War Further Globalization and its Limits: NAFTA, EU, The Breakup of Yugoslavia and the Rise of Asia September 11th Attacks The US-led International Order Under Challenge: Bush Doctrine The End of America’s Unipolar Moment The War on Afghanistan The Invasion of Iraq Arab Spring Brexit Donald Trump

206 History of International Relations

INTRODUCTION leaving the United States as the sole superpower Global politics following the end of the Cold of the international system and prompting a group War can be characterized by the rise and quick fall of policymakers and scholars alike to trying to (re) of great hopes and expectations. On the one hand, define and conceptualize this ‘new world order’— in the early 1990s, there were widespread hopes or ‘new world “disorder”’—as others have preferred and expectations that an international order based to name the international system. on liberal values would quickly emerge and that the When the Soviet Union collapsed, most world would embrace liberal democracy and the Western Sovietologists and theorists of realism free market economy and thus prosper politically were accused of not being able to predict this and economically. As a major force shaping event with colossal implications. However, an world politics, globalization also heightened this ex-post facto look into the collapse of the Soviet optimistic mood about the future of the post-Cold Union reveals that a variety of factors were already War order. On the other hand, the September 11th in place, paving the way to the collapse of one of attacks and, just as importantly, the response to the superpowers of the Cold War. The element of them, brought an end to these great expectations leadership—the arrival of Mikhail Gorbachev to for the emergence of a new world order based on power in the Soviet Union in March 1985—would liberal and democratic values. The major events be the most important factor that would eventually since the beginning of the 21st century have called trigger the series of events leading to the collapse into question the future of globalization, weakening of the Soviet Union. Ambitious and considerably liberal and democratic values around the world. young compared to his predecessors, Gorbachev’s Against this background, this chapter main aim was to reform the Soviet economy that introduces the major events that have shaped had fallen behind its Western counterparts since world politics since the end of the Cold War. Four the 1960s, without making any fundamental sections frame this chapter: the first focuses on the changes in the governing ideology of the Soviet end of the Cold War and on debates about the Union. Defined as perestroika (restructuring), this nature of the post-Cold War order. The second reform package intended some small scale changes examines the main developments that shaped the in the country’s economy and politics with the US-led international system in the 1990s. The aim of primarily fixing the problems of the Soviet third discusses globalization and its limits. The economy. In the realm of the economy, these fourth and final section analyzes the major events changes involved reforms such as the introduction since the September 11th attacks. of small-scale private economic activity and giving responsibility to factory managers. In the political and social realm, these reforms were known as THE END OF THE COLD WAR glasnost (openness) and involved the creation of AND “A NEW WORLD ORDER” a more representative system, acknowledging This section analyzes the events that brought social problems and historical wrongdoings, and the Cold War to an end and assesses the debates intending to give a larger “voice” to people so that regarding the nature of the post-Cold War they could air their grievances in economically international order. turbulent times. While the solutions offered by Gorbachev to the The Dissolution of the Soviet Union structural problems of the failing Soviet economy were far from a panacea, glasnost would have two The dissolution of the Soviet Union in major unintended consequences. First, it would December 1991 is usually considered the event give the chance to both conservatives and liberals marking the end of the Cold War and the of the Soviet establishment to criticize Gorbachev’s beginning of the post-Cold War period. The end economic reforms. While the conservatives would of the Soviet Union was not simply the end of the criticize these as being too much, liberals like Soviet Union—one of the world’s two superpowers Boris Yeltsin, who in the summer of 1990 would at the time. It also meant the end of the bipolar be elected as the Chair of Congress of People’s international system established after World War II, Deputies to lead the Russian Soviet Federative

207 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

Socialist Republic, would find them too little. In any case, the row over the content and speed of the reforms would slowly undermine Gorbachev’s authority, leading to a failed coup attempt against him in August 1991. Second, Gorbachev’s authority would be further undermined with the flaring of ethnic conflicts in Azerbaijan and Georgia and the secessionist demands of the Baltic Republics. It turned out that the citizens of the Soviet Union, rather than to “voice” their economic woes, preferred to “voice” their historical grievances and grudges against the way the borders of the Soviet Union had been drawn. Given all these, in the fall of 1991, simply fixing the Soviet economy was far from Gorbachev’s only problem. With ethnic wars, secessionist struggles, criticisms against his reforms, and declarations of sovereignty followed by declarations of independence, Gorbachev had to find a way to keep the Soviet Union together. Despite his efforts, on December 8, 1991, the leaders of the Russian, Belarusian, and Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republics announced the establishment the Common Wealth of Independent States (CIS) Figure 8.1 US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet as a looser union that would replace the Union Leader Mikhail Gorbachev signing the INF Treaty on of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). Gorbachev’s December 8, 1987. resignation and the end of the Soviet Union would Source: www.reaganlibrary.gov follow shortly thereafter. Gorbachev’s reforms at the domestic level had also been accompanied by changes in Soviet Gorbachev’s ‘new thinking’ in foreign policy foreign policy. In November 1985, Gorbachev was further revealed at a speech delivered at and his American counterpart Ronald Reagan the United Nations (UN) in December 1988. at the Summit Meeting in Geneva concluded, He not only announced that the Soviet Union “nuclear war cannot be won and must never be would be withdrawing Soviet troops from Soviet fought” (Joint Soviet-United States Statement satellite countries, but hinted at the fact that a on the Summit Meeting in Geneva, 1985). One variety of paths to reforming the socialist system of the first outcomes of this change of mentality were possible (Gorbachev, 1988). This essentially was to restart the arms reduction and limitation meant the revocation of the Brezhnev Doctrine. negotiations. The most important of these efforts One more time, just like in the negotiations of the would be the signing of the Intermediate-Range arms reduction and limitation treaties, Gorbachev’s Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in December 1987 primary aim in this monumental change in foreign and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty I (START policy was to reduce the military expenditure I) in July 1991, negotiations for which had begun and, thus, burden on the Soviet economy. As a in 1982. With the INF treaty, the US and USSR result, the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan would not only eliminate 2962 nuclear missiles by was concluded in February 1989 and in Eastern June 1991, but would agree to discard an entire Europe by the end of 1994. However, the Soviet category of nuclear missiles with a range between withdrawal from Afghanistan and cessation of aid 500 kilometers to 5500 kilometers and agree on to the communist regime in Kabul would result on-site checks for the first time in history (Arms in a power vacuum that would lead to war among Control Association, 2019). the warlords of Afghanistan—most of them being

208 History of International Relations

former mujahideen—which eventually paved the competitive and free elections in November 1989. way to the Taliban seizure of power in September These would result in Vaclav Havel being elected 1996. Al Qaeda, which organized the September as president. 11 attacks, would find a safe haven in a Taliban- The fall of the communist regime in Romania led Afghanistan (see below). Gorbachev’s ‘new would be the bloodiest of the transitions in Eastern thinking’ in foreign policy would also allow another Europe. Romanian leader Nikolai Ceausescu wave of regime change in Europe, as his speech at had ruled the country with an iron fist with his the UN signaled a green light to Eastern European infamous secret service, while Romanians lived in countries of the Soviet Bloc that they were free utter deprivation and constant fear of persecution. to pursue their own path to reform without a The harsh suppression of protestors in Timisoara potential repetition of 1956 or 1968, i.e., Soviet by the Romanian leadership in mid-December tanks rolling through Eastern European capitals to 1989 would backfire, leading to protests that crush the reforms that have been launched. spread to the rest of the country. The tide then turned against Ceausescu himself at a rally in The Collapse of the Communist Bucharest that had supposedly been organized by Regimes in Eastern Europe and the his supporters. Protestors, joined by the army, then Fall of the Berlin Wall took over the building of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, forcing Ceausescu and By the end of 1989, the year also known as the his wife to flee by helicopter, shortly after which annus mirabilis (the year of miracles), one by one, they were captured. After a brief show trial, the the communist parties of the Eastern Europe caved couple fell to a firing squad in late December 1989, to the demands of the reformers in their respective ending communist rule in that country. countries, ending the monopoly on power of the In Bulgaria, Todor Zhivkov’s 35-year rule as Communist Party and paving the way to a more the Secretary General of the Communist Party democratically organized polity. In Poland, for of Bulgaria ended in a courtroom with charges example, this transition had already begun in of nepotism and corruption brought against him. 1980 when a group of Gdansk shipyard workers The Bulgarian Communist Party then agreed to led by Lech Walesa came together as the Solidarity competitive and free elections in January 1990. Movement to protest an increase in food prices. In the face of worsening economic conditions In Hungary, the “goulash communism” that and protests, the authorities cracked down on had allowed small scale capitalist activity under the movement and jailed its leaders. By early the rule of Janos Kadar, who ruled Hungary since 1989, Poland’s leader General Wojciech Jaruzelski 1956, eventually gave way to political reforms realized that he could not rule the country without beginning in the mid-1980s. The first semi- the Solidarity Movement, and thus legalized the competitive elections in 1985 were followed with movement and started a series of round-table talks the replacement of Janos Kadar as party leader that led to an elite-led democratic transition in the in May 1988, followed by the renaming of the country. These talks would not only lead to the first Hungarian Communist Party as the Socialist Party competitive elections in the Polish parliament, in in September 1989. In April 1990, the latter lost which Solidarity would capture the majority of the the parliamentary elections. More importantly, seats in both houses, but also to the election of the the Hungarian government had already granted first non-communist prime minister in the Soviet its citizens the right to travel abroad by the spring Bloc—Tadeusz Mazowiecki. of 1989—well before any other countries. What is more, rather than repairing the outdated fence In Czechoslovakia, the annus mirabilis separating Hungary from Austria, the Hungarian manifested itself in the form of small-scale protests government decided to remove it altogether, starting in January 1989. Led by dissident author allowing not only Hungarians, but many others Vaclav Havel, the number of the protestors from the Soviet Bloc, especially East Germans, demanding civil rights and the release of all political to cross over to the West. In the first three weeks prisoners grew day by day, eventually forcing the of August 1989 alone, 10,000 East Germans fled Communist Party of Czechoslovakia to agree to their country, one of the most repressive regimes in

209 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

Eastern Europe, via the Austria-Hungary border, argued that communism had failed to deliver the something which then-German Chancellor better life it had promised and the global rise of Helmut Kohl would describe in October 1990 democracies, coupled with the bravery of ordinary as “the removal of the first stone from the Berlin people in the least expected times, had brought Wall” (Mayr, 2009). about the downfall of authoritarian regimes in The removal of the fence and the near-mass the Communist bloc and triggered the end of the exodus of East Germans to the West led to the Cold War. In a similar tone, and as early as 1989, replacement of East German leader Erich Honecker, even before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, who had refused to cave in the face of mounting Francis Fukuyama in his famous article, “The dissent and amidst rising protests, with Egon Krenz End of History” argued that history was made as in October 1989. The new East German leadership, a result of the clash between individualism and unable to stop the demonstrations, agreed to grant collectivism, and that the weakening of communist the citizens of East Germany the right to apply regimes in the USSR and East Europe meant the for passports to travel to the West on November defeat of the forces of collectivism and the victory 9, 1989. Reported hastily, the news of the right to of individualism, i.e., liberalism (Fukuyama, travel was misinterpreted by East Germans, who 1989). thought they could now travel to the West via any border, including checkpoints along the Berlin Though made in 2005 and 1989, respectively, Wall. This effectively meant the symbolicfall of the each scholar’s evaluation of the end of the Cold Berlin Wall—one of the symbols of the Cold War, War was reflective of the optimistic mood that which was quickly followed by the reunification of predicted the emergence of a liberal international Germany in October 1990. With that, the Cold order in its aftermath. For decades, communism War in Europe had symbolically ended over a had been regarded as the most important obstacle year before the dissolution of the Soviet Union in standing in front of liberal democracy and the December 1991. market economy. Consequently, the predominant expectation was that now that communism as an ideology had been discarded as one of the means of governance in one of the superpowers and its satellites, the world could embrace democracy and free market economy and thus prosper politically and economically. One of the reasons for this expectation was that as the Cold War was coming to an end, the world was witnessing another major force shaping the new world order: globalization. Globalization is primarily an economic process based on the principles of neoliberal economics and driven by removing barriers to the free circulation of goods, Figure 8.2 Remains of the Berlin Wall that divided the capital, and, to a certain extent, people. Aided city between August 1961 and November 1989. by improvements in information technology, globalization is a force with huge political, Source: gorselarsiv.anadolu.edu.tr social, and cultural implications. In the 1990s, the forces of globalization shaping world politics Debating the Nature of the Post-Cold were most evident in the establishment of new War Order free-trade blocs, such as the North American Free For John Lewis Gaddis, who wrote one of Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Asia-Pacific Economic the most authoritative works on the history of Cooperation (APEC), and the further deepening of the Cold War, the end of the Cold War spelled the most important free trade bloc in the world, the “triumph of hope” (Gaddis, 2005). Gaddis the European Union (EU).

210 History of International Relations

Despite the initial expectation of the triumph of liberal values, warnings that such an expectation might be too optimistic came very quickly. In his 1991 book, The Third Wave: Democratization in the 1 Late Twentieth Century, Samuel P. Huntington Do some research on the US-led humanitarian proudly explained the reasons for the third wave interventions in Somalia and Haiti. of democratization around the world that had begun in the 1970s. Two years later, in the summer of 1993, he penned an article for Foreign Affairs THE ERA OF LIBERAL entitled “The Clash of Civilizations.” In it, he elaborated on the potential sources of conflict in INTERNATIONALISM: THE US- the post-Cold War period: LED INTERNATIONAL ORDER OF THE 1990s “The fundamental source of conflict in this new This section focuses on the major developments world will not be primarily ideological or primarily that shaped the US-led international order in the economic. The great divisions among humankind and 1990s. the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation-states will remain the most powerful actors The Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait and the in world affairs but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of First Gulf War (1990-1991) different civilizations,” (Huntington, 1993:22). Iraq invaded neighboring Kuwait on August 2, 1990. The Iraqi government maintained that Another of these pessimistic projections came historically Kuwait had been a part of Iraq and from Benjamin Barber. In his March 1992 that Iraq was simply correcting an earlier mistake article, “Jihad vs. McWorld,” he argued that the of the imperialist powers. In reality, reasons for the globalization that was shaping the current world invasion ran deeper. Indebted and war-ravaged as a order was accompanied by the forces of nationalism result of its eight-year long war with Iran, Iraq’s only and fundamentalism, neither of which boded well way out of debt and a path to reconstruction was for the future of democratic governance, locally the revenue it planned to garner by exporting oil. or internationally, as both forces limited people’s However, with low world oil prices already hurting freedom in different ways (Barber, 1992). Baghdad, Iraq claimed that Kuwait was making the These debates regarding the potential outlook situation worse and disregarding quotas established of the post-Cold War period did not only center by OPEC and thus further driving down world on whether an optimistic or pessimistic outlook oil prices. Second, the Iraqi leadership was not was what awaited the world. The role that the happy that Kuwait refused to forgo Iraq’s debt. remaining superpower of this newly emerging Third, Iraq claimed that Kuwait was using slanted order, the United States, was willing to play and drilling techniques in oilfields located near the two its engagement with the institutions of this order, countries’ disputed border and thus stealing Iraqi i.e. the UN, NATO and the EU, and the future oil. While negotiations were underway in late July of the fallen superpower, the USSR, now replaced 1990 to settle their dispute, Saddam Hussein - by Russia Federation, also became part of these Iraq’s president since 1979- simply went ahead and debates. As the scholars debated, global politics invaded Kuwait. soon began to test the willingness of both the It soon became clear that Saddam Hussein United States and Russia to articulate the role they had overplayed his hand. His uncompromising wanted to assume in the post-Cold War order. The attitude during the negotiations had also been invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in August 1990, even taken to a new level when Iraq launched missile before the official end of the Cold War, was the attacks against Israel and conditioned the Iraqi first such occasion to test the new parameters of the withdrawal from Kuwait on the US departure emerging post-Cold War world order. from Saudi Arabia and the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories in Palestine. What further

211 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

exacerbated the situation was the uncertainty of When viewed from the angle of the debates whether or not Hussein would go ahead and invade trying to project the future of the new world Saudi Arabia—a strong US ally with whom Iraq order, the First Gulf War was important for several had similar territorial problems. Such an invasion reasons. First, this was the first ever that smart would have been very consequential for the United bombs had been used, i.e. precision-guided bombs States—putting the oil supply of much of the Gulf and missiles tuned with incredible accuracy and fully at the mercy of Saddam Hussein. were very effective in destroying their intended When the UN’s embargo on Iraqi oil did not targets and were crucial to the US-led international persuade Hussein to withdraw from Kuwait, US coalition’s swift victory. Second, the war coincided President George Bush announced Operation with the development of cable news networks Desert Shield on August 7, 1990, arguing that the whose 24-hour coverage of the war led to the US imported half of the oil it consumed from the emergence of the CNN Effect. The CNN Effect region and that the invasion of Kuwait was a “major is the ability of the news media to shape public threat to its economic independence,” (Bush, 1990). opinion, including that of public officials, thus Operation Desert Shield, which necessitated a US influencing major foreign policy decisions.Third , troop build up in Saudi Arabia and the creation of the success of the international coalition, though an international coalition, was the first phase of the able to garner a swift victory against Iraq, triggered war that would eventually drive the Iraqi army out false hopes about the role of institutions and major of Kuwait. The second phase of the war, Operation powers to act collectively against a common threat Desert Storm, started on January 16, 1991 when in the post-Cold War order. Finally, though the war US-led international coalition, following a UN liberated Kuwait and forced Saddam Hussein to resolution, decided to enforce UN sanctions by accept UN-imposed sanctions and allow inspectors military force, beginning with airstrikes against Iraq. to check for weapons of mass destruction, it did These were coupled with a ground force in the final not remove him as a threat to US interests in the phase of operations. By the end of February 1991, Middle East. Along with Iran, Iraq became part of not only was Kuwait liberated, but after a humiliating the US “dual containment strategy.” Though the defeat and withdrawal, Iraq agreed to comply with First Gulf War was over within weeks, America’s the UN sanctions. Though of short duration, the account with Saddam Hussein would only be war cost the Iraqi army 10,000 soldiers, whereas the settled by its invasion of Iraq in 2003. losses among the international coalition were only in the hundreds. The Breakup of Yugoslavia and NATO Interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo The collective ability of major powers to shape the new world order would be subject to a severe test with the ethnic conflict that emerged in Bosnia-Herzegovina during the breakup of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia, established by Josip Broz Tito after World War II, had been able to maintain a semblance of unity among its different republics and ethnicities until the 1990s. This was partially the result of Tito’s popularity as a wartime hero and partially due his defiance of the Soviet Union as a principled communist leader without bowing to Moscow. But more importantly, what kept the country together was easy credit from Western institutions as a result of Tito’s positioning Yugoslavia as a neutral country between East and Figure 8.3 U.S. Navy F-14A Tomcat flying over Kuwaiti West. As the Cold War fizzled out in the late 1980s, oil wells set on fire by Iraqi force, 1991. however, so did the money that had flowed into Source: www.britannica.com

212 History of International Relations

Yugoslavia from the West. This, coupled with Tito’s Ratko Mladic captured one of the UN safe areas— death and his replacement with Serbian nationalist Srebrenica—and killed more than 8,000 Bosnian Slobodan Milosevic, who not only saw the Serbian Muslims under the gaze of Dutch UN peacekeepers. nation as the real owner of Yugoslavia, but decided The sheer disregard of great powers to the conflict to pursue a politics along ethnic lines, ignited a in Bosnia was abysmal and hypocritical, prompting powder keg. debates about whether or not national interest was In June 1991, Slovenia and Croatia declared the primary driver of military intervention—as had their independence, soon followed with Macedonia been the case in the First Gulf War. However, once in September 1991 and Bosnia-Herzegovina again it was a US-led NATO mission that would in March 1992. The federal army of Yugoslavia put an end to the conflict in Bosnia, but this would initially tried to bring Slovenia and Croatia back only come too late and only after the Srebrenica into Yugoslavia by force. However, the recognition massacre in August 1995—more than three years given to them by European countries and later the after the start of the conflict. US—not to mention the UN peacekeeping forces deployed to monitor the ceasefire established after the withdrawal of the Yugoslav federal army—gave Belgrade no choice but to let Slovenia and Croatia go. However, when Bosnia-Herzegovina declared independence in March 1992, a move recognized by the EU, Bosnian Serbs led by Radovan Karadzic and supported by Serbia declared the establishment of the Republika Srpska (“Serb Republic”), which left the Muslim Bosniaks, demographically the majority, with a small piece of territory. As this was not enough, to enforce the new Serb Republic, Bosnian Serbs besieged several cities, including the Bosnian capital Sarajevo, and tried to expel the Figure 8.4 Srebrenica Genocide Memorial, officially Muslim Bosniak population from their recently known as the Srebrenica–Potočari Memorial and created state, a move that eventually led to the Cemetery for the Victims of the 1995 Genocide. creation of concentration camps and much worse— Source: gorselarsiv.anadolu.edu.tr the mass ethnic cleansing of the Bosniaks. Nationalism not only tore apart Yugoslavia, but The reluctant American intervention was led to the worst ethnic cleansing in Europe since late for several reasons. First, US leaders were World War II. convinced that conflict in Bosnia was the case of an UN efforts to mediate the conflict came in “ancient hatred,”—an ethno-religious rivalry that two waves. First, in May 1992, the UN imposed had been going on for thousands of years, so old economic sanctions on Serbia for supporting the that it did not have a clear beginning nor possibly a Bosnian Serbs and arms embargo against all of clear end. Second, a US humanitarian intervention the former republics of Yugoslavia, including in Somalia had gone horribly awry in 1993, and Bosnia—a move that placed Bosnian Muslims in a the Clinton administration was very reluctant to heavily disadvantaged position. Second, the United get into another mission, which, they thought, Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) was geographically, was the responsibility of European sent to Bosnia with the mission of providing a safe powers, not of the United States. passage for humanitarian aid, but not with a clear As such, the UNPROFOR in Bosnia went down mandate for intervening in the war. In April 1993, in history as one of the UN’s most problematic the UN also declared six safe areas in Bosnia and humanitarian missions. It also showed the limits deployed UNPROFOR to protect these areas. of Europe to collectively act in a humanitarian The Bosnian Serb offensive of July 1995 showed crisis that was happening near the heart of Central that the efforts of the UN had been quite futile. Europe, not to mention Europe’s inability to act Within a week, Bosnian Serbian troops led by without the United States. The US intervention, 213 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

though late and initially objected to by Russia, ahead with an intervention when there was human also paved the way to the US adopting a stronger suffering but no UN approval? In 2000, the report role as the world’s policeman. Indeed, it was a US- of the Independent International Commission on brokered peace in Dayton, Ohio in November Kosovo concluded that NATO’s air strikes were 1995 that put an end to hostilities in Bosnia with “illegal but legitimate” (Independent International the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Commission on Kosovo, 2000:4). The conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina, also known as the Dayton in Kosovo came to an end in June 1999. NATO Peace Agreement. established a peacekeeping mission and gave Kosovo The perpetrators of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia some autonomy, which eventually led to the were brought to court at the International Criminal declaration of independence of Kosovo in February Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which 2008. ran from 1993 until 2017. Thisad hoc international court, which was the first since the war crimes Rwandan Genocide tribunals established after World War II in Just as in the case of Bosnia, the Rwandan Nuremberg and Tokyo, brought 161 indictments Genocide, which took the lives of an estimated against the perpetrators of ethnic cleansing, 500.000 to 1 million Tutsis and moderate Hutus including then-Serbian President Slobodan in less than 100 days in the spring and summer of Milosevic and Serbian leaders in Bosnia, Radko 1994, went down in history as a mass murder that Mladic and Radovan Karadzic. Milosevic died in took place under the gaze of Western powers. The his prison cell in March 2006, ostensibly due to role of Western powers in the Rwandan Genocide illness, before his sentence could be delivered, while was not only limited to their reluctance to get Mladic was found guilty of committing genocide involved to stop the genocide; additionally, first and crimes against humanity and Karadzic was German, and later Belgian, colonial rule had set the sentenced for life for committing genocide and stage for it by favoring the minority Tutsi against other atrocities. the majority Hutu. By the time Rwanda gained However, more conflict was yet to come independence from Belgium in 1962 as a Hutu- in Kosovo, an autonomous republic in Serbia led country, the grievance between the Hutus and populated predominantly by ethnic Albanians, Tutsis was already well established. This tension also known as Kosovars. In 1989, Belgrade ended eventually turned into a civil war in 1990 when the Kosovo’s status as an autonomous republic, a move Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), a rebel group led that was followed by a period of suppression and by Tutsi refugees settled in neighboring countries, discrimination against Kosovars. By February attacked Rwanda. What triggered the genocide, 1998, the Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) however, was the downing of the plane that carried had decided to seek independence and their attacks the Presidents of Rwanda, Juvénal Habyarimana, against federal Yugoslavian targets eventually and , Cyprien Ntaryamira, both of whom culminated in a full-scale conflict between Kosovar were ethnic Hutus, in April 1994. Albanians and the federal forces of Yugoslavia. Blaming the Tutsis and moderate Hutus for Having seen what transpired in Bosnia and fearing the double assassination, extremist Hutus first a similar ethnic cleansing in Kosovo might take murdered moderate Hutus, including the female place, in March 1999, US-led NATO forces started Prime Minister Agathe Uwilingiyimana, along with an air campaign that went on for 78 days, targeting the Belgian UN troops sent to protect her. This led strategic locations in Serbia. The fact that NATO’s Brussels to decide to pull its peacekeepers from the campaign was done without the approval of the UN peacekeeping mission. The prime minister’s UN Security Council and caused civilian casualties murder was followed by locally organized Hutu in Serbia, including the accidental bombing of the mobs murdering Tutsis and moderate Hutus, Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, led to a variety of turning a massacre into genocide in a very short ethical and legal questions about ‘humanitarian time. Understaffed and undersupplied, the interventions’: was it, for example, justifiable to put existing UN peacekeepers were unable to stop the Serbian civilian lives in danger so that civilian lives bloodshed. With the ghost of Somalia in the back in Kosovo could be saved? Or could NATO go

214 History of International Relations

of its mind, the United States was not interested in embroiling itself in another conflict. Far more controversial was the role played by French Intifada is an term that means peacekeeping forces, who have been accused of “shaking off”. In the Palestinian-Israeli protecting the Hutus rather than the Tutsis. When conflict, it refers to two popular uprisings the calls by the RPF to stop the murder heeded of Palestinians seeking to end Israel’s no answers, the RPF, led by Paul Kagame, began occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. its advance towards the Rwandan capital of Kigali. The First Intifada started in December 1987 The Rwandan Genocide was only ended with the and ended in September 1995. The Second capture of Kigali by the RPF, this time forcing Intifada lasted between September 2000 and many Hutus to become refugees in neighboring late 2005 (Brym and Araj, 2018). countries. The perpetrators of the genocide were brought to trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, which was established in 1994 by the UN Security Council “to prosecute persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and neighboring states between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994. The ad hoc court that ran from 1994 until 2015 brought indictments against 92 individuals, 62 of whom received sentences of varying lengths,” (The ICTR in Brief).

The Oslo Accords—a Momentary Lull Figure 8.5 Prime Minister of Israel Yitzhak Rabin, US in the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict President Bill Clinton, and Palestinian leader Yasser By the beginning of the post-Cold War Arafat. era, Palestinian-Israeli relations were already Source: www.nationalgeographic.org at a deadlock. Signed in September 1993 and September 1995, the Oslo Accords provided a Though the signing of the accords garnered temporary pause and a potential way out of the Yitzhak Rabin, Yasser Arafat, and Shimon Peres the deadlock until the start of the Second Intifada in Nobel Peace Prize in 1994, it quickly became clear 2000. They were also one of the reasons for high that they had been stillborn. First, there were groups hopes in the post-Cold War order. Just like the end among both the Palestinians and Israelis that saw of the Cold War, leadership was a crucial element the accords as an act of treason. On the Palestinian in the signing of the accords. First, in November side, the signing of the accords helped pave the 1988, the Palestinian Liberation Organization way towards the rise of Hamas, a radical Islamist (PLO) announced its readiness to recognize Israel alternative to PLO that considered the accords an in return for Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied act of treason. On the Israeli side, they lead to the Territories. The arrival of Yitzhak Rabin to power, assassination of Yitzhak Rabin in November 1995 who promised to find a solution to the conflict, by an Israeli extremist, who similarly saw Oslo as was the second breakthrough. In short, the accords caving to Palestinian demands. outlined a step-by-step process of self-rule for the Palestinians through the creation of a Palestinian Second, the accords were unable to stop the Authority and the withdrawal of Israeli troops violence that both sides were perpetrating against from the West Bank and Gaza. each other, and third, they did not really clarify important issues such as the current and future

215 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

state of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and I, turning over control of their nuclear weapons to Gaza, the status of Jerusalem, or the repatriation of Russia, which then dismantled them—a cost that was Palestinian refugees. The final blow to the accords born by an international consortium led by the US. came in September 2000 with the start of the The cooperative mood that began with the Second Intifada. It was triggered by the ‘visit’ of signing of START I was followed by the signing of Ariel Sharon, then leader of the Likud Party, to START II in January 1993. This introduced further Haram al-Sharif (the Temple Mount), where he cuts to nuclear warheads and intercontinental declared the holy site a part of the Jewish state. ballistic missiles in both Russia and the US. With that Israeli-Palestinian relations tumbled yet However, despite a quick ratification in the US again into a spiral of violence. Senate in January 1996, the Russian ratification for START II would only come after Vladimir Putin’s arrival to power in March 2000. This foot dragging US - Russia Relations in the 1990s was a result of opposition in the Russian Duma The optimism following the end of the Cold to START II in which both the nationalists and War also dominated relations between the communists believed this was a ploy designed by world’s two superpowers. Initially, the US and the US to weaken and humiliate Russia. Russian Federation agreed not only to try and In addition to START II, other points of work out existing and potential disagreements, disagreement slowly emerged between the United but the US would, symbolically, approve the States and Russia, as the latter started to perceive Yeltsin administration by supporting a large specific US actions in international politics as International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan to an encroachment upon its national interest and Russia. Russian dependence on Western financial traditional spheres of influence. One such moment aid was one of the reasons why the first few years came when Russia objected to NATO’s intervention of this new era was a honeymoon of sorts for the in Bosnia and Kosovo, yet later agreed to join the former rivals. peacekeeping forces deployed to each in 1995 and 1999, respectively. Russia would raise a similar but fiercer objection to NATO’s eastern enlargement. As the Warsaw Pact officially dissolved on January 1, 1991, neither Gorbachev’s nor Yeltsin’s proposal to make USSR or Russia a member of NATO was taken seriously by NATO. While NATO issued a new “strategy concept” redefining the body’s role in November 1991 that sought to take a broader approach to its understanding of security, Russia, like most of the former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe, also had to settle with NATO’s Partnership Figure 8.6 Russian President Boris Yeltsin and US for Peace Program (PfP) in 1994. Designed as President Bill Clinton in Hyde Park, USA, October 1995. a confidence-building platform between NATO Source: nsarchive.gwu.edu and PfP countries, when the question of several PfP members becoming NATO members entered the agenda in 1996, Russian Minister of Foreign One of the issues that required immediate Affairs Yevgeny Primakov stated that Russia saw attention after the dissolution of the USSR was “NATO expansion as unequivocally as a minus” that of nuclear warheads. During the Soviet era, (Hill, 1996). Despite all of Russia’s objections, Russia was not the only Soviet Republic in which NATO expanded three times in the decade and nuclear weapons were kept. Ukraine, Kazakhstan, a half proceeding the Cold War. In March 1999, and Belarus, all former Soviet republics, also held Czechia, Hungary, and Poland joined; in 2004 nuclear warheads. Their subsequent independence Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, made these countries possessors of nuclear weapons. Slovakia, and Slovenia joined; in 2009 Albania and In May 1992, these each became parties to START Croatia joined; and in 2017 Montenegro did.

216 History of International Relations

the convergence criteria was disregarded for certain countries. What is more, others such as Britain, Denmark, and Sweden exercised their right to 2 ‘opt out’ and continue to use their own national Do some research on the history of the United currency, further undermining the creation of a full Nations Framework Convention on Climate and solid monetary union. Second the Treaty of Change. Maastricht also gave EU citizens the right to work and live in any member country, rendering borders between members obsolete. FURTHER GLOBALIZATION AND In the early 1990s, however, as the political and ITS LIMITS: NAFTA, THE EU, AND economic deepening of the union was underway, THE RISE OF ASIA with the end of the Cold War, “enlargement” also This section analyzes the impact of globalization became an important issue for the EU. In July 1989, on regional integration processes and discusses its Austria applied for membership, followed with limits. Sweden in July 1991, and Finland and Norway in March 1992. While the voters in Austria, Finland, and Sweden had said “yes” to their countries’ Europe: From the European membership, Norwegians, as they had in 1972, Community to European Union voted “no,” largely to avoid sharing their oil and In 1985, efforts to further “deepen” the gas revenues from the North Sea and to not have to European Community had led to the signing open their commercial fisheries to other EU fishers. of the Single European Act. While envisioning With the collapse of the communist regimes in institutional changes that facilitated political 1989, many more countries got in line to become integration, this act also agreed to the creation of members. In the 2004 enlargement, Cyprus, an economic and monetary union (EMU) as well as Czechia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, to the creation of a ‘single market’ among members Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia each became by January 1993 in which goods, services, capital members, bringing the total membership to 25, and, more importantly, people could move freely. some 453 million people. The EU explained the Removing these barriers would be the crowning rationale for its 2004 enlargement as the desire “to achievement of the neoliberal economic paradigm extend the area of stability and peace to the whole that had begun to have its heyday in the 1980s, European continent, and so avoid the recurrence of thus shaping the European Community alongside conflicts such as that in the former Yugoslavia; to with the forces of globalization. stimulate economic growth and trade by expanding the single market from 378 million to 453 million This tendency to “deepen” was further advanced consumers in 2004… and to acquire a greater role the Treaty of Maastricht with the signing of for Europe on the international stage, particularly in February 1992. First, effective November 1, in trade negotiations,” (Publications Office, 2007). 1993, not only had the European Community Finally, Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007 while become the European Union, but members of Croatia became a full member in 2013, bringing the union had also agreed on creating a single the total of member states to 28. currency, the euro, and a common central bank for what would now be known as the Eurozone. Membership in the Eurozone was not automatic. The Americas: NAFTA and Beyond Only EU members that fulfilled the convergence The relative success of the European experiment criteria, i.e. those that had price stability and sound to stimulate economic growth through the creation public finances with manageable government of a free trade area soon motivated North American deficits and debts and achieved a certain level of leaders to create a free trade zone with minimal stability in their exchange rates and long-term barriers to the flow of goods and capital (though interest rates—were eligible for admittance in the not labor) themselves. In that sense, NAFTA can be monetary union. When the time came to put the considered the Canadian, American, and Mexican’s ‘euro’ into circulation in January 2002, however, collective answer to the European Community.

217 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

NAFTA was built on the already existing US GDP growth between 1953 and 1978 averaged and Canada Free Trade Agreement, which was in 6%, it leaped to 9.4% between 1978-2012 place since January 1, 1989. When Mexico joined for China (Hirst, 2015). Such an economic this already existing agreement in 1992, NAFTA development also engendered large debates about came to life on January 1, 1994. While its primary whether political reforms in China might ensue aim was to remove or reduce trade barriers between economic ones. Theories of modernization, for the signatory countries, it also involved measures their part, predicted that economic development to facilitate and protect investment in NAFTA had to be followed by some level of political countries, safeguarding their intellectual property reform and democratization. What is more, the rights and offering them a system of arbitration in creation of a bourgeoisie, or “red capitalists,” the NAFTA partner country. and the migration from rural areas into cities The Agreement was also seen as a remedy to made China watchers hopeful for political stimulate the Mexican economy, then in deep change. These hopes were greatly increased recession and heavy debt. Overall, NAFTA turned by the collapse of communist regimes across out to be more of a free-investment agreement than Eastern Europe in 1989, fueling the gathering a free-trade one, which resulted in controversial of protestors in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in and hard-to-measure outcomes in an increasingly June 1989. globalizing world. NAFTA definitely increased Arguing the latter were nothing but “counter- the volume of trade among members and led revolutionaries,” the Chinese government’s to an increase in foreign direct investment into response was to crush the demonstrations, a Mexico. But it also led to manufacturing job losses brutal crackdown that led to the massacre of in the US—the exact numbers are disputed—as scores of young people. Such was the brutality manufacturing jobs migrated to Mexico, where and successful cover-up of the event that estimates labor costs and environmental standards were of casualties range anywhere between 1,000 and much lower. Though this migration increased 10,000 people. Surprisingly, or not, this had the demand for Mexican labor, it did not make a little impact on China’s ties with the West. With significant improvement in wages or social benefits Western manufacturing becoming more and more for Mexican workers. dependent on China’s cheap labor, the US, for example, continued to grant ‘most favored trade’ Asia After the End of the Cold War status to China. In July 1997, Britain’s century-long lease over The international dynamics of Asia had already Hong Kong expired; along with the Portuguese started shifting before the end of the Cold War. departure from Macau in December 1999, Part of this change was fueled by domestic changes these territories were returned to China. The taking place, part of it the result of changes negotiations regarding the orderly transfer of wrought by the decline of the Cold War in the late Hong Kong, a city that had become the beating 1980s. In China, the primary source of change financial heart of Asia, had started in the early were economic reforms put in place by Deng 1970s. By the 1980s, Deng had already devised Xiaoping. Deng, who was famous for saying “the the idea of “one country, two systems” to tempt color of the cat does not matter as long as it catches back historically Chinese territories such as Hong mice,” sought economic growth by adopting a free Kong and Macau into a union with Mainland market economy, while keeping communism as the China. “One country, two systems” basically ruling political ideology of China. After launching meant that in addition to acknowledging the his economic reforms in 1978, with that dictum presence of different economic systems in these in the background and with its cheap labor force, territories, China also allowed them to maintain China became the factory of the world, as Western their legal, administrative, and judicial systems companies quickly moved their manufacturing to for a specified period of time. China and other Asian countries. While such an arrangement worked out well The arrival of the market economy was meant in the transfer of Hong Kong in 1997 and Macau by much higher economic growth rates. Though in 1999, after which both were declared “special

218 History of International Relations

administrative regions,” Taiwan, despite rounds its World War II constitution, was unable to send of negotiations and ameliorations of relations troops to help the international coalition against with Beijing, has refused to come under Chinese Iraq. Though Japan was not able to participate in governance. With its economy and geopolitical the Gulf War, as a result of its constitution, it gave position on the rise, China also wanted to assert USD13 billion for the war effort. However, when itself in international politics. To do so, Chinese the Kuwaiti government did not recognize the leader Hu Jintao (2002-12) formulated the term Japanese war contribution, Tokyo had to rethink “the peaceful rise of China” in order to highlight its security and foreign policy. China’s ascendancy as a global power without This resulted in the adoption of the Act on being a menace to any other country (see below). Cooperation for United Nations Peacekeeping India, for its part, despite being mired in internal Operations and Other Operations in June 1992, political, ethnic, and religious conflicts and having which allowed Japan to contribute to the UN’s border disputes with Pakistan and China, also election monitoring and peacekeeping operations. made huge economic strides in the 1990s. One of Following this, Japan contributed to a series the reasons it became an economic powerhouse of of missions ranging from Angola to the Golan Asia by the end of that decade was its adoption Heights. What is more, in 2007, its Defense of neoliberal economic reforms in the early 1990s. Agency, the institution established after World War Though these did not end poverty, nor lead to a II and responsible for the defense of Japan, was substantial increase in per capita income, they were renamed the Ministry of Defense. While the First crucial in opening up India to the outside world Gulf War was instrumental in changing Japan’s and helping the country to maintain above average security and threat perceptions, the rise of China economic growth rates. What is more, with its across Asia was also hugely influential, especially better-educated labor force (compared to China) since China was increasing its spending on defense and the high rate of English speakers, India quickly and openly engaging in maritime and territorial became an important outsourcing hub for Western disputes in the East and South China Seas. service sector jobs. Indeed, the mass migration of these service sector jobs has led to some to call East Asian Crisis of 1997-1998 China the “factory” of the world and India its “office.” Economic modernization and high economic growth rates were not peculiar to the above- Dangerously, however, the longstanding rivalry mentioned countries. In addition to China, Japan, between India and Pakistan that had existed Hong Kong, India, and Taiwan, countries like since their partition in 1947 culminated in a South Korea, Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia nuclear arms race. When India announced it had also became the poster children of economic performed underground nuclear tests in May development and high growth rates. For example, 1998, Pakistan followed suit, declaring that it too Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan had nuclear weapons. The US responded to these were nicknamed the Asian Tigers, while a World tests by imposing sanctions on India, which came Bank Report published in 1993 labeled Hong to an end only after the September 11 attacks, since Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, the US needed allies in South Asia for its “war on Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand as fostering a terror.” broader East Asian Miracle. This miracle came to The Japanese economic boom, or “miracle” a pause, if not a halt, however, in May 1997 when of the 1980s, went bust by the 1990s. Extending the Thai real estate bubble burst. With supply in into the 2000s, Japan saw lower growth and higher construction surpassing demand, many real estate unemployment rates. Internationally, however, developers defaulted on their loans, which triggered Japan made substantial changes in its foreign and a banking crisis. This was accompanied by a massive security policy in the 1990s. The most important currency crisis that led to the devaluation of the of these was the modification of the Japanese Thai currency. The crisis in Thailand then spread to Constitution, which had prevented Japan from Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea, and even Japan. sending troops abroad. This came immediately When South Korean investors rushed to cash out after the First Gulf War when Japan, bound by Russian Government Bonds before their maturity

219 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

date, the crisis spread to Russia, leading the The September 11th Attacks and the Russian state to declare a moratorium in August War on Terror 1998, which was followed by the devaluation of On September 11, 2001, a group of nineteen the Russian ruble and a major economic crisis. terrorists from a jihadist network headed by Though the IMF was quick to bail out the Osama bin Laden called Al-Qaeda hijacked four countries in question, economic growth rates US civilian airliners. Two of them crashed into the came to a brief pause. The crisis also increased World Trade Center in New York. The third plane the role and scope of IMF remedies offered to struck the Pentagon, the headquarters of the US countries under economic distress. In return for Department of Defense, in Washington D.C, while multibillion dollar bailout packages, and based the fourth crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. The on the application of principles of neoliberal images of the collapse of the twin towers of the economics, the IMF required states receiving World Trade Center sent shock waves across the funds to limit the involvement of the state in world. Although the US had long been a target of their economy. Neatly labeled the Washington terrorist attacks overseas, this was the first serious Consensus, this to-do list given to countries in an strike on its home soil after the attack on Pearl economic crisis involved a series of measures that Harbor in 1941. ranged from decreasing government spending to deregulation, privatization, tax reform, and trade liberalization. While the crisis in Thailand had been caused, in part, by the deregulation of financial markets, decreased government spending, as prescribed by the IMF, led to the unintended consequence of further economic contraction here and elsewhere. This led to famous economists like Joseph Stiglitz, who would receive the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2001, to question the validity of the Washington Consensus. In a 1998 talk, he highlighted the role of the state and called for the creation of a post-Washington Consensus, thus bringing the idea of unrestricted economic globalization into question (Stiglitz, 1998).

3 What is the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Figure 8.7 The Twin Towers of the World Trade Center (APEC)? in New York City, after the September 11th attacks. Source: www.britannica.com

THE US-LED INTERNATIONAL The September 11th attacks, also known as ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE: THE 9/11, marked a major turning point in recent END OF AMERICA’S UNIPOLAR history and had widespread repercussions on world MOMENT politics. First and foremost, these attacks brought an end to the great expectations and hopes that This section analyzes the main events in world th had emerged in the early post-Cold War years for politics since the September 11 attacks in 2001. a new world order based on liberal and democratic values. Both the attacks, and just as importantly,

220 History of International Relations

the response to them, seriously challenged Iran, and Iraq as part of an “axis of evil” that threatened globalization. Aimed directly at the economic, world peace by supporting terrorists and by seeking political, and military symbols of global capitalism the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction and US hegemony, the attacks revealed the jihadist (WMD). Finally, the Bush administration explicitly organization’s rancid dislike of globalization and articulated the new policy, which was also referred to US hegemony. However, the reactions to the as the Bush Doctrine, in its 2002 National Security attacks and particularly, the transformation of Strategy. Influenced by neo-conservative thinking, the US foreign policy in its aftermath, also had a the strategy defined a “tripartite threat” posed to huge impact. The post-9/11 era saw the erosion of the US security by terrorist organizations, “rogue democracy, liberal values, and civil liberties across states” supporting terrorism, and the dangers of the the world and the decline of both multilateral uncontrolled spread of WMDs (Young and Kent, diplomacy and international organizations, as 2013: 554-555). The most controversial aspect of the governments vastly increased military spending Bush Doctrine was its pre-emptive element, which and surveillance over their own citizens. The reserved the right for the US to take pre-emptive September 11th attacks also fueled Islamophobia action against potential security threats and enemies across western countries, in addition to disturbing before they could strike (Best et al., 2014: 607). The the world trade and financial system. ideological component of the Bush Doctrine was 9/11 fundamentally transformed US foreign its willingness to promote democratization across policy and its relations with the wider world. the Middle East which was based on the belief that For one thing, it reinforced the shift from democracies would not harbor terrorists (Dodge, multilateralism to unilateralism in US foreign 2012: 217). The first campaign of the war on terror policy. Indeed, the administration of President was launched in October 2001 with the war on George W. Bush, who assumed office in January Afghanistan, which was followed by the invasion 2001, had already embarked on a unilateral course of Iraq in 2003. in its foreign relations well before 9/11, revealing its refusal to sign or ratify a number of multilateral The War on Afghanistan agreements, including the UN’s Kyoto Protocol The immediate reaction of the Bush on global warming and the Rome Statute of administration to the September 11th attacks the International Criminal Court. The attacks, was to militarily dislodge the Taliban regime in however, made unilateralism more pronounced Afghanistan since it had refused to hand over in foreign policy. In December 2001, the US Osama bin Laden to the Americans and declined announced its intention of withdrawing from the to cease harboring Al-Qaeda militias. On October 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, for example. 7, 2001, the US, with British support, officially It also gave US foreign policy a new focus: the launched Operation Enduring Freedom against fight against terrorism through the use of military Taliban forces. Rather than a full-scale military force. During his speech to the US Congress on occupation, the early phase of the war involved September 20, President Bush declared a “war on US airstrikes backed by a small number of Special terror”: Forces and Marines. The US decided to re-arm and re-supply the Northern Alliance, a local armed “[...] we will pursue nations that provide aid group who had been fighting against the Taliban or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every (Rogers, 2012:339-340). The US-supported forces region, now has a decision to make. Either you are seized control of Mazar-i Sharif and Kabul, the with us, or you are with the terrorists. [...] From this capital, in November. The Taliban regime was day forward, any nation that continues to harbor finally terminated when the Taliban and its leader or support terrorism will be regarded by the United Mullah Omar fled the city of Kandahar in early States as a hostile regime,” (Bush, 2001). December 2001. The leadership of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, including bin Laden, escaped to the In his 2002 State of the Union address, Bush mountains of Tora Bora. In December, an interim extended the scope of the war on terror by including government headed by Hamid Karzai was created a number of “rogue states,” describing North Korea, with the UN-sponsored Bonn Agreement. 221 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

In the wake of the September 11th attacks, the remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power. US enjoyed widespread international support and Under considerable pressure from his ally British sympathy. For instance, for the first time in its Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush brought the case history, NATO invoked Article 5 of the alliance, to the UN Security Council once again, asking for accepting the event as an attack on all of them. authorization of the use of force. But, Germany, Recognizing the right of individual and collective France, and Russia were skeptical about military self-defense, on September 12, 2001, the UN action, and what is more, the latter two permanent Security Council passed Resolution 1368 and members of the UN Security Council were likely to expressed “its readiness to take all necessary steps veto any resolution. Therefore, the US eventually to respond to the terrorist attacks of 11 September withdrew its resolution. Despite the lack of a UN 2001, and to combat all forms of terrorism” authorization and strong international opposition, (UN Security Council, 2001). However, the war the US and Britain launched Operation Iraqi on Afghanistan was still unilaterally launched Freedom on March 20, 2003. The Coalition without international involvement, except for forces also included contributions from Australia, British support. Nor did the Bush administration Denmark, and Poland. seek any UN authorization. Only after the The military invasion of Iraq appeared to have formal ending of the military campaign against been a conspicuous success when US forces entered the Taliban was the International Security and Baghdad on April 15. Bush declared “mission Assistance Force (ISAF) deployed in Afghanistan, accomplished”, announcing the end of major combat eventually receiving contributions from forty- operations on May 1. However, an insurgence two different states, including Turkey (Young against occupation forces was in the making, which and Kent, 2013:561). Mandated by the UN, the continued to grow over the coming years. ISAF was tasked with post-conflict reconstruction Created shortly after the invasion, the Coalition and institution building and responsible for the Occupation Authority ran the country for about training and reforming of Afghan security forces. a year until it was replaced by the Iraqi Interim In August 2003, NATO assumed the leadership Government in 2004. As WMDs were not found of the ISAF, which was the first extension of its after the invasion—the prime motive for the operational commitment outside of Europe. war—creating a democratic Iraq became more pronounced as a justification for the overthrown The Invasion of Iraq of the Saddam Hussein regime. Finally, a new In early 2002, the attention of the US turned constitution was adopted and parliamentary to the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Defined elections held in 2005. Saddam Hussein himself as a key member of the “axis of evil” by the Bush was captured in Tikrit in December 2003, and was administration, the invasion of Iraq would be the tried and eventually executed in 2006. first campaign of preemptive military action. The US had accused the Iraqi regime of possessing WMD and having links with Al-Qaeda, although both allegations were later proved to be incorrect. Still, regime change in Iraq had become a top priority in Washington. Unlike Afghanistan, this time the US did not want to act without international support, at least initially, and brought the issue to the UN Security Council. However, instead of a military action, Resolution 1441 of the Security Council authorized the return of UN weapons inspectors to Iraq. As the Iraqi government agreed to comply with the UN resolution, a group of weapons inspectors Figure 8.8 Toppling of Saddam Hussein’s statue in arrived in Baghdad in late November. Still, the Bush administration was determined to militarily Baghdad after the invasion. Source: www.newyorker.com

222 History of International Relations

The US-led invasion of Iraq created chaos the systemic failure of neoliberalism whose core and instability in the country, which led to premises were the extremely unregulated financial a widespread public disorder and short-term market and state minimalism. The financial crisis increasing criminality. In the long term, Iraq was also considered as a medium-term outcome suffered from suicide bombings, terrorist attacks, of the September 11th attacks. It is argued that and sectarian violence, mainly between Sunni and what eventually took the world economy to the Shia communities, which escalated into a full-scale brink of collapse in 2008 was the loosening of civil war. Worse, the disbanding of the Iraq Army regulatory conditions over banking system due and the removal of former Ba’ath Party members to the financial panic after the attacks (Cox and from public service provided manpower for the Campanaro, 2016:77). It started in the US and insurgence. Ironically, the US invasion created Britain as a debt crisis in the mortgage market and a power vacuum that was soon filled by terrorist rapidly turned into an international banking crisis organizations such as Al-Qaeda and, eventually by with the collapse of major investment banks such the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which as Lehman Brothers. It also impacted the European seized the Iraqi cities of Mosul and Tikrit in banking system and contributed to the outbreak of 2014. The war also created a humanitarian crisis. the European sovereign debt crisis by which heavily Although it is difficult to know the exact number, indebted Eurozone countries like Greece, Ireland, the war has caused lives of nearly 200,000 civilians Spain, and Portugal have been hit hard. Resulting since the beginning of the invasion (Iraq Body in a great recession and high unemployment rates, Count). Moreover, the UN High Commissioner the financial crash of 2007-2008 was the most for Refugees (UNHCR) states that 2.1 million intense since the 1929 Great Depression. Iraqis had been internally displaced as of March The financial crisis also had far-reaching 2018 (UNHCRa). consequences for world politics. First, it presented a major challenge to the US-led international political and economic order, placing great strain on Obama’s War the basic premises of neoliberal capitalism. Coupled Barack Obama assumed office as the th44 US with its foreign policy failures, the financial crisis president in January 2009 in the midst of the raised serious doubts about US hegemony and the declining US power and prestige in the world and dominance of the West within the international economic recession due to the 2008 global financial system. Due to the Eurozone crisis, the future crisis (Cox, 2014:76). Unlike Bush, Obama’s of the European Union also came into question foreign policy relied on multilateral diplomacy and putting the idea of monetary union into a severe international cooperation with US allies. Among test. As the main burden has been shouldered by others, the main aim of his foreign policy was to ordinary people, the financial crisis fueled a great end the wars and bring US soldiers home. Still, in deal of popular resentment against globalization, order to fix the situation, he increased the number giving rise to populism, ultranationalism, and of troops in Afghanistan. His greatest achievement xenophobia across western democracies. in fighting against Al-Qaeda was the killing of its leader, Osama bin Laden, by the US special forces Challengers to the US Hegemony in May 2011. Beginning a slow withdrawal process in 2011, the combat mission of the US and NATO As the 2000s came to an end, many scholars in Afghanistan officially ended in December 2014. argued that the West was in decline and described Obama had opposed the war in Iraq when he was the US as “an ailing superpower” (Best et al. 2014: a US senator. Therefore, he committed the US to 625). The US predominance in the international withdrawing from Iraq. In late-2011, US troops system has been particularly challenged by new completed their withdrawal. rising economic powers, toward whom political and has been shifting (Patrick, 2013). Weakening the US and Europe economically, the 2008 Global Financial Crisis 2008 financial crisis only accelerated this process Originating in the US in 2007, the global and opened the door to the growing influence of financial crisis of 2008 was the culmination of new players in international politics.

223 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

As the world’s largest exporter and the major The growing assertiveness of Russian foreign provider of manufactured products, China has policy under the semi-authoritarian rule of been the world’s second largest economy by Vladimir Putin has also posed an increasingly nominal GDP since February 2011 (Young and serious challenge to US hegemony. Unlike his Kent, 2013:616). China’s growing economic predecessor Yeltsin, Putin, a former KGB officer power has been also accompanied by its increasing who became president in 2000, was determined political influence in the UN Security Council and to reestablish Russia as a major power in world broader world affairs. The rise of China is seen as politics and restore its prestige after the precipitous the most significant challenge to US hegemony, decline following the disintegration of the Soviet although some scholars, mostly Chinese, advocate Union. Highly critical of NATO expansion in that Beijing is pursuing a “peaceful rise”, which Eastern Europe, Moscow sought to re-establish is a policy of integration into the existing Russian influence in the former Soviet territories international system that can avoid confrontation and became tough in its relationship with former with the US (Cox, 2014:72). This is supported Soviet republics. by China’s acceptance of international economic A serious crisis broke out in August 2008 and political norms and by its willingness to when Russian troops invaded Georgia, which was participate in international institutions created then pursuing a pro-Western policy and seeking by the West. As such, it joined the World Trade membership into NATO and the EU. Moscow Organization (WTO) in 2001 and created a close used the military campaign of Georgia against cooperation with the Association of Southeast South Ossetia, a breakaway region within the Asian Nations (ASEAN) (Young and Kent, 2013: small Caucasian country, as a pretext to militarily 613). Nevertheless, the Chinese economic rise has intervene and recognize the independence of led to structural transformations in international Georgia’s two breakaway regions, South Ossetia economic institutions that reflect the shifting and Abkhazia. As one of the major suppliers of oil economic balance of power. For instance, an and gas to the West, Russia also periodically uses increase in its weighted vote made China the third its privileged energy position as part and parcel of most significant member of the World Bank, while its foreign relations. Moscow cut its supplies to the it became the third largest vote-holder in the IMF. Ukraine and Belarus, causing an energy crisis in Moreover, Chinese experts and economists began the rest of Europe in 2007 and 2009 (Young and to occupy top positions within these international Kent, 2013:613-614). organizations. Although the Russian opposition to US On the other hand, China’s assertive policies interventions in Libya and Syria in the UN and territorial disputes with many of its neighbors, Security Council increased tensions, relations including Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam, in between Moscow and Washington grew far more relation to islands in the South and East China tense after the conflict erupted in Ukraine in seas, have all cast doubts on just how peaceful early 2014. After pro-Russian President Viktor this rise will be. In response to China’s belligerent Yanukovych fled the country in February 2014 rhetoric towards US allies in the region, the after months of unrest, Russia invaded Crimea, a Obama administration adopted a policy known as largely ethnically Russian region of Ukraine, and the “pivot towards Asia,” which included elements formally annexed the peninsula. The conflict in of both containment and accommodation (Best Ukraine greatly deteriorated US-Russian relations, et al., 2014: 624). This multilayered policy aimed and the US imposed sanctions on Russia and at more active involvement of the US in regional increased NATO’s military presence in the region to deter any further Russian expansionism. organizations such as ASEAN and APEC and strengthening its security commitments in the In addition to China’s rise and Russia’s challenge, region; pressing for the greater role of other Asian the emergence of new coalitions of states, including countries in international economic organizations; rising powers such as Brazil, India, and South and giving a higher priority to Asia in US foreign Africa and their activism in international politics, policy (Cox, 2014: 77). reflect other structural changes in the international system that come at the expense of US dominance.

224 History of International Relations

For example, a tripartite coordinating mechanism called the India-Brazil-South Africa Dialogue Forum (IBSA) was created in 2003 to foster cooperation among these countries on a broad range of international issues. Reflecting a major shift in global governance,the Group of Twenty (G-20) has been holding leaders’ summit each year since the 2008 global financial crisis (Hurrell, 2014). Probably, the most visible sign of the shift in global power dynamics is the emergence of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The cooperation initially began between Brazil, Russia, India and China in an informal manner in 2006 and expanded with the inclusion of South Africa in 2011. In the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis, the BRICS countries have deepened their partnership, and in 2009 their leaders began to hold annual summits. The BRICS not only played instrumental roles in reforming the existing structure of global economic organizations, but also launched two new alternative institutions to the US-dominated world order: the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA). Established in 2015, the NDB aims to finance development projects in emerging economies and other developing countries. That same year, the CRA was also created to provide protection against liquidity pressures. While the former has been promoted as an alternative to the World Bank, the latter is considered as a competitor to the IMF.

Figure 8.9 BRICS 10th Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, July 2018: Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi, President of China Xi Jinping, President of South Africa Cyril Ramaphosa, President of Russia Vladimir Putin, and President of Brazil Michel Temer. Source: www.chinadaily.com

The “Arab Spring” In early 2011, a wave of uprisings rocked Arab-speaking countries across the Middle East and North Africa, which quickly became known as the Arab Spring. Rapidly organized on social media such as Facebook and Twitter, anti-government protests eventually brought down a number of dictatorial regimes. Enraged by rising prices, high unemployment, government corruption, and repression and motivated by a desire for political change and more freedom, especially among educated and unemployed urban youth, millions took to the streets in Tunis, Cairo, and other Arab capitals to demand the transformation of their societies. The Arab Spring began in Tunisia in mid-December 2010 when a street vendor named Mohammed Bouzazi burned himself to death in protest over his maltreatment by the Tunisian police. His self-

225 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

immolation triggered widespread anti-government demonstrations which rapidly brought an end to the 24-year oppressive regime of President Zine-al Abidine Bin-Ali. Anti-government protests quickly spread to other Arab countries from Morocco to Bahraini. Encouraged by the rapid success of the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia, as it became known due to its almost immediate success, protests erupted against the authoritarian government of Hosni Mubarak, who had ruled Egypt since 1981. In late January 2011, protestors gathered on Tahrir Square in Cairo to demand Mubarak’s removal. After losing the support of the military, he finally resigned from office on February 11, 2011.

Figure 8.10 Protestors celebrating the resignation of Hosni Mubarak on Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt, February 2011. Source: www.wikipedia.org

The Arab uprisings did not lead to peaceful changes of regime everywhere, however. Unlike the relatively smooth transitions in Tunisia and Egypt, the uprisings of 2011 turned into civil wars in Libya and Syria. Protests that erupted in Libya against the regime of Colonel Muammar al-Qaddafi in mid-February 2011 eventually escalated into an armed conflict between government forces and rebels demanding the removal of Qaddafi. After the regime threatened to deploy the air force and heavy armament against civilians, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973, which authorized the use of all necessary means to protect civilians and create a ‘no-fly zone’ over Libya, invoking a newly-emerging international norm called the responsibility to protect (R2P). This was implemented by an international coalition led by NATO that launched a military action against the Qaddafi regime. Criticized on the grounds that it violated the UN resolution and was used as a pretext for regime change, the military intervention helped rebels to finally bring down the Qaddafi regime in August 2011. Qaddafi himself was killed in his home city of Sirte on October 20 that year.

Adopted by the UN General Assembly in Outcome Document, the responsibility to protect (R2P) is an international norm that refers to the obligation of states to protect their citizens from four mass atrocity crimes, namely genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing. In case of state failure, R2P falls to the international community.

226 History of International Relations

Syria has proved to be a far more complicated Brexit, Trump, and the Rise of case for the international community. The popular Populism: Globalization in Crisis? uprising that erupted in March 2011 escalated into a The British vote to withdraw from the EU, better full-fledged civil war between the regime of Bashar al- known as Brexit, the election of Donald Trump Assad and rebel forces organized under the umbrella as the US president, and the rise of right-wing group of the Free Syrian Army. However, the Syrian populism across European countries have further civil war was quickly internationalized and turned called into question the future of globalization at into a proxy war for various external powers. While the heart of global capitalism. Since a referendum Russia and Iran actively supported the Assad regime, in June 2016 in which the majority of British voters opposition forces were backed by the US and its allies, elected to leave the EU, Britain has been negotiating including Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, due the terms of its withdrawal from the union. One to the vetoes of China and Russia, the UN Security of the major signs of the current populist backlash Council failed to respond to the crisis, despite the use against globalization, Brexit has helped encourage of chemical weapons several times. other anti-EU movements across the continent. As ISIS gradually seized control of many parts Having assumed office in January 2017, US in Syria and Iraq, a US-led international coalition President Donald Trump is a staunch supporter of including more than fifty states began launching unilateral and protectionist policies undermining airstrikes against ISIS targets. The Russian military the global liberal order that has been led by the involvement in September 2015 also changed the US itself since World War II. Apart from launching balance of power on the ground in favor of the aggressive economic policies, Trump withdrew Assad regime, which has since regained control of the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which most territory lost to rebel forces. Meanwhile, most included 12 countries in the Pacific region and was peace efforts, such as the UN-sponsored talks in meant to prevent the Chinese takeover of the Pacific Geneva or the Astana process initiated by Russia, economic order; took steps to renegotiate NAFTA Iran, and Turkey, have so far been fruitless. And with Mexico and Canada; began criticizing the free the human cost of the war has been catastrophic. trade agreement with South Korea; and questioned Having taken the lives of hundreds of thousands the value of the WTO itself (Stiglitz, 2018). of people, the war has also displaced 6.6 million On the trade side, the Trump administration Syrians internally and forced 5.6 million to flee the drastically increased tariffs on Chinese imports, country to seek refuge in neighboring countries, thus beginning a trade war with Beijing reminiscent according to the UNHCR (UNHCRb). of the 1980s. With his “America First” approach to With the exception of Tunisia, the Arab Spring foreign policy, the American president also decided has so far failed to bring democratic governments to to end the US participation in both the 2015 Paris the Arab world. Egypt, for its part, returned to an Agreement on climate change and the UN Global authoritarian regime in 2013 after democratically- Compact for Migration. The US also quit the UN elected President Mohamed Morsi, affiliated with Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization the Muslim Brotherhood, was removed from power (UNESCO). Having vowed to build a wall along in a military coup led by General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. the US-Mexico border, Trump also put in place much harsher immigration and border policies. Further east, popular demands for political change Along with the recent increase of right-wing, in Yemen and Bahrain were also suppressed with the ultra-nationalist, and populist political parties assistance of Saudi Arabia. Libya is currently a failed in European politics, all these events have posed state, ripped apart by a civil war between the UN- a great challenge to globalization, undermining backed Government of National Accord, which is liberal and democratic values around the world. supported by Britain, Italy, Turkey, and Qatar, and the Tobruk-based House of Representatives led by General Haftar and supported by France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, among others. As of the writing of this chapter, the ongoing Syrian war is 4 now in its eighth year, and Assad is firmly in control Discuss the establishment of the International of most of the country. Criminal Court.

227 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

Explain how the Cold War ended and assess different perspectives and expectations regarding the nature of LO 1 the post-Cold War order.

The dissolution of the Soviet Union meant the end of the bipolar international system of the Cold War and left the US as the sole global superpower. The most significant factor leading to this had been the arrival of Mikhail Gorbachev to power in 1985, a visionary who would later launch perestroika and glasnost in order to restructure the Soviet economic and political system. Accompanied with his “new thinking” in foreign policy, these reforms had unintended consequences that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. By the end of 1989, changes in Soviet foreign policy had triggered a wave of regime change in Eastern Europe. By mid-1990, democratically-elected governments had replaced communist regimes in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary. The Cold War eventually came to an end in Europe with the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989, which was immediately followed by the reunification of East and West Germany. Summary Some scholars such as John Lewis Gaddis and Francis Fukuyama defined the end of the Cold War as the triumph of hope and the victory of liberalism, and were quite optimistic that the world would embrace liberal values, democracy, and free market economics. Others, such as Samuel Huntington and Benjamin Barber, were more pessimistic for the post-Cold War international order, offering convincing theories for the potential source of future conflict.

Describe the major events that shaped the US-led international LO 2 order during the 1990s.

The first major event of the post-Cold War order was the Gulf War of 1990-1991. In response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, the US launched Operation Desert Shield against Iraq, which was followed by Operation Desert Storm, the second phase of the war, when a US-led international coalition decided to enforce UN sanctions by military force against Iraq. The Gulf War was significant in several regards, giving hints about the future of the post-Cold War international system. Another significant event was the break-up of Yugoslavia after Slovenia and Croatia declared their independence in June 1991, followed by Macedonia in September 1991 and Bosnia-Herzegovina in March 1992. A vicious civil war broke out in Bosnia that led to mass ethnic cleansing. Around the same time, radical Hutus in Rwanda committed genocide against Tutsis and moderate Hutus in Rwanda in 1994. In Israel and Palestine, meanwhile, there were post-Cold War hopes for a way out of decades-long deadlock that led to the signing of the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization in September 1993 and September 1995. Finally, when it came to superpower rivalry, after a partial honeymoon period in the early 1990s, a number of disagreements emerged between the US and Russia, particularly over the western military interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo and NATO’s eastern enlargement.

228 History of International Relations

Analyze the main aspects of globalization and discuss its LO 3 limits.

In the early 1990s, the political and economic deepening of European integration was underway. With the Maastricht Treaty, the European Community became the European Union. A single currency and a common central bank were also created. Enlargement also became an important issue. With the four waves of enlargement after the end of the Cold War, the number of member states increased to 28.

Inspired by the EU, the North American Free Trade Agreement came to life in January 1994 between Summary Canada, Mexico, and the US with the aim of creating a free trade zone. Meanwhile, in Asia, Deng Xiaoping’s liberal economic reforms helped make China the factory of the world and achieved spectacular, and sustained, economic growth. However, popular demands for political reforms in the late 1980s were brutally suppressed by the Chinese government. India, for its part, also established itself as a leading Asian economic powerhouse, though its rivalry with Pakistan culminated with both obtaining nuclear weapons. With a shrinking economy, Japan made significant changes in its foreign and security policy in the 1990s. Finally, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which began in Thailand and rapidly spread to Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea, Japan, and even Russia, wreaked havoc on emerging markets. Although the IMF quickly bailed these countries out, the crisis called the Washington Consensus greatly into question.

Identify challenges to the US- led international order since the LO 4 beginning of the 21st century.

The September 11 attacks were a major turning point in world history. In response, the Bush administration declared a global ‘war on terror,’ which greatly accelerated its shift towards unilateralism in foreign policy. The first campaign was the war on Afghanistan in November 2001, which was followed by the invasion of Iraq in 2003. When Barack Obama took office in January 2009, the US was facing its worst financial crisis since the 1929 Great Depression. This presented a major challenge to the US-led international order, especially since political and economic power were already shifting toward rising powers such as China, Russia, India, Brazil, and South Africa. In early 2011, a wave of uprisings rocked countries across the Middle East and North Africa, which quickly became known as the Arab Spring. Despite relatively smooth transitions in Tunisia and Egypt, the uprisings turned into civil wars in Libya and Syria. What is more, Brexit, the election of Donald Trump as US president, and the rise of rightwing, ultranationalist political parties in Europe called into question the future of globalization at the heart of global capitalism, undermining liberal and democratic values around the world.

229 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

1 Which country’s leader came up with the idea 6 Which of the following was the first of “one country, two systems”? campaign of the war on terror launched by US President George W. Bush following 9/11? a. China b. Hong Kong c. Taiwan d. Japan e. Vietnam a. Operation Enduring Freedom b. Operation Desert Shield 2 Which country decided not to become an c. Operation Desert Storm EU member in the 1990s? d. Operation Iraqi Freedom a. Austria b. Finland c. Norway e. Operation Restore Hope d. Sweden e. Switzerland 7 Which of the following countries’ rise is seen Test Yourself Test 3 “Annus mirabilis” is a term that. as the most significant challenge to US hegemony st Which of the following options correctly completes in the 21 century? the sentence above? a. Russia a. refers to Gorbachev’s reform policies. b. Germany b. describes the change in Japanese foreign and c. India security policy. d. Brazil c. denotes the collapse of communist regimes in e. China Eastern Europe. d. refers to the EU’s solution for increased economic growth. 8 Where did the Arab Spring begin? e. denotes the use of force on humanitarian a. Tunisia grounds. b. Egypt c. Libya 4 What was Gorbachev seeking to achieve when he launched perestroika? d. Syria e. Yemen a. To bring a full market economy to the Soviet Union. b. To democratize the Soviet Union. 9 Which of the following was the main target c. To reduce the military expenditure of the Soviet of Operation Desert Shield? Union. d. To restructure the Soviet economy. a. To create a no-fly zone over Libya. e. To change the ruling ideology of the Soviet b. To drive the Iraqi army out of Kuwait. Union. c. To overthrow the Saddam Hussein regime. d. To end the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. 5 . I Kuwait’s non-acknowledgement of Japan’s e. To provide safe passage for humanitarian aid. contribution to the First Gulf War II. Japan’s desire to be recognized as an 10 Which of the following was established to important economic and political actor prosecute persons responsible for genocide and other serious crimes in Rwanda? III. Increased Chinese spending on defense a. International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg IV. Maritime and territorial disputes in East and South China Sea b. International Military Tribunal for the Far East c. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Which of the above are among the reasons for d. International Criminal Tribunal for the former the constitutional amendment allowing Japan to participate in UN peacekeeping operations? Yugoslavia e. International Criminal Court a. Only I b. I and II c. II and III d. I, II and III e. I, II, III and IV

230 History of International Relations

If your answer is wrong, please review the 1. a 6. a If your answer is wrong, please review the “The “Further Globalization and its Limits: US-led International Order under Challenge:

NAFTA, EU, and the rise of Asia” section. The End of America’s Unipolar Moment” section. Answer Key for “Test Yourself”

2. c If your answer is wrong, please review the 7. e If your answer is wrong, please review the “The “Further Globalization and its Limits: US-led International Order under Challenge: NAFTA, EU, and the rise of Asia” section. The End of America’s Unipolar Moment” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the 3. c 8. a If your answer is wrong, please review the “The “The End of the Cold War and ‘a New World US-led International Order under Challenge: Order” section. The End of America’s Unipolar Moment” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the d b If your answer is wrong, please review the “The 4. “The End of the Cold War and ‘a New World 9. Era of Liberal Internationalism: The US-led Order” section. International Order in the 1990s” section.

If your answer is wrong, please review the 5. e 10. c If your answer is wrong, please review the “The “Further Globalization and its Limits: Era of Liberal Internationalism: The US-led NAFTA, EU, and the rise of Asia” section. International Order in the 1990s” section.

Do some research on the US-led humanitarian interventions in Somalia and Haiti. Suggested answers for “Your Turn”

Widespread atrocities witnessed in the 1990s increased pressure on the international community to prevent the occurrence of such humanitarian catastrophes and protect civilians from civil wars and gross human rights violations. The question of humanitarian intervention, thus, became a pressing issue in the early 1990s. Humanitarian intervention is defined as the threat or use of force by a state or states against another to safeguard civilians from mass atrocities and protect human rights (Best et al., 2014: 549). Among others, there were two examples of humanitarian interventions in which the US had a leading role. Due to the collapse of the state authority after the fall of the Siad Barré regime in 1991, Somalia tumbled into violence and chaos, suffering from widespread famine. In April 1992, UN sent a peacekeeping mission, UN Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM), to provide your turn 1 humanitarian assistance. Although there was no strategic and economic US interest, in his final days in office, US President George H.W. Bush launched Operation Restore Hope due to the public pressure, deploying 20,000 US troops in Somalia. US forces eventually engaged in fighting with the forces of General Mohammed Aideed, and with the death of thirteen US soldiers, the American public opinion suddenly turned against the operation in Somalia. The new Clinton administration began to withdraw troops in late 1993 as the US humanitarian intervention became an embarrassment for the US. The US failure in Somalia, however, adversely affected its response to the genocide in Rwanda. With the UN approval, in 1994 the US also launched Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti in order to restore the democratic government of elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide who had been overthrown in a military coup in 1991. Unlike Somalia, the US intervention in Haiti brought an easy victory (Young and Kent, 2013:503-507).

231 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

Do some research on the history of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“In 1992, countries joined an international treaty, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], as a framework for international cooperation to combat climate change by limiting average global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and coping with impacts that were, by then, inevitable. By 1995, countries launched negotiations to strengthen the global response to climate change, and, two years later, adopted the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol legally binds developed country Parties to emission reduction targets. The Protocol’s first commitment period started in 2008 and ended in 2012. The second commitment period began on 1 January 2013 and will end in 2020. There are now 197 Parties to the Convention and 192 Parties to the Kyoto Protocol. The 2015 Paris Agreement, adopted in Paris on 12 December 2015, marks the latest step your turn 2 in the evolution of the UN climate change regime and builds on the work undertaken under the Convention. The Paris Agreement charts a new course in the global effort to combat climate change. The Paris Agreement seeks to accelerate and intensify the actions and investment needed for a sustainable low carbon future. Its central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century Suggested answers for “Your Turn” Suggested answers for “Your well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The Agreement also aims to strengthen the ability of countries to deal with the impacts of climate change. The UNFCCC secretariat supports all institutions involved in the international climate change negotiations, particularly the Conference of the Parties (COP), the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties (CMP), the subsidiary bodies (which advise the COP/ CMP), and the COP/CMP Bureau [...]” (UN Climate Change).

232 History of International Relations

What is the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)? Suggested answers for “Your Turn”

APEC is an “organization that seeks to promote free trade and economic cooperation throughout the Asia-Pacific region. Established in 1989 in response to the growing interdependence of Asia-Pacific economies and the advent of regional economic blocs (such as the European Union and the North American Free Trade Area) in other parts of the world, APEC works to raise living standards and education levels through sustainable economic growth and to foster a sense of community and an appreciation of shared interests among Asia-Pacific countries. At the end of the 1990s APEC’s membership included its 12 founding members—Australia, Brunei, Canada, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and the United States—as well as Chile, China, Hong Kong, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Russia, Taiwan, and Vietnam. The Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC), the South Pacific Forum (SPF), and the secretariat of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) maintain observer status. At its 1994 summit meeting, APEC set an ambitious goal of achieving a free trade and investment regime in the Asia-Pacific region by 2010 for members your turn 3 with developed economies and by 2020 for members with developing ones. The following year it adopted the Osaka Action Agenda, a plan to implement APEC’s goals of liberalizing trade and investment, facilitating business activities, and promoting economic and technical cooperation. Despite these commitments, APEC’s effectiveness has been limited by its requirement that all its decisions be made by consensus. [...] APEC is organized into numerous committees, ad hoc policy groups, working groups, and a business advisory council. The committees, which examine issues such as trade and investment, economic trends, and budgetary matters, meet twice per year. The working groups are headed by experts and consider specific issues, including energy, tourism, fishing, transportation, and telecommunications. The organization’s chair, which rotates annually, hosts an annual summit meeting and meetings of foreign and economic ministers and other senior officials. The APEC secretariat, established in 1993 and headquartered in Singapore, provides advisory and logistic services as well as research and analysis,” (Moon, 2014).

Discuss the establishment of the International Criminal Court.

The crimes committed against humanity in Bosnia and Rwanda and the UN’s response to deliver justice through temporary and ad hoc courts led to the reopening of debates regarding the establishment of a permanent court to deal with these kinds of crimes. In the summer of 1998, the Rome Conference was convened to deal with the issue. The Rome Statute, which came out of this conference and was adopted with 120 states voting in favor, 7 states voting against the treaty (including the United your turn 4 States, Israel, China, Iraq, and Qatar), and 21 states abstaining, came into force in July 2002 with the ratification of the 60th country, thus establishing the International Criminal Court. The ICC tries individuals who have been accused of committing the crime of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression. As of summer 2019, the ICC had investigated 27 individuals for committing one or more of these. While three of these individuals have been acquitted, the rest of the cases are still in different stages (ICC).

233 The World Since the End of the Cold War 1989-2019

References

Best, A., Hanhimaki, J., Maiolo, J. A., & Schulze, K. Rogers, P. (2012). “Global Terrorism”, US Foreign E. (2014). International History of the Twentieth Policy, Michael Cox and Doug Stokes (Eds.), 2nd Century and Beyond, 3rd Edition, New York: Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. Routledge. 335-350. Cox M. and Campanaro R. (2016). Introduction to Stiglitz, J.E. (2018). “Trump and Globalization”, International Relations, London: University of Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol.40, No:3, pp. 515- London. 528. Cox, M. (2014). “From the End of the Cold War to The World Bank. (1993). The East Asian Miracle: a New Global Era?”,The Globalization of World Economic Growth and Public Policy, Oxford and Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, New York. Oxford University Press. John Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens Young, J. W. and Kent, J. (2013). International (Eds.), 6th Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Relations Since 1945, 2nd Edition, Oxford: Oxford Press, pp.65-79. University Press. Dodge, T. (2012). US Foreign Policy in the Middle East, US Foreign Policy, Michael Cox and Doug Stokes (Eds.), 2nd Edition, Oxford: Oxford Websites University Press, pp.197-218. ----- “The ICTR in Brief”,https://unictr.irmct.org/ Fukuyama, F. (1989). The End of History?,The en/tribunal. National Interest, 16, pp.3-18. -----“Joint Soviet-United States Statement on the Gaddis, J. L. (2005). The Cold War: A New History, Summit Meeting in Geneva,” 21 November New York: The Penguin Press. 1985, https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/research/ speeches/112185a. Hayes, T. C. (1990). Confrontation in the Gulf: The Oilfield Lying Below the Iraq-Kuwait Dispute, Arms Control Association. (February 2019). “The The New York Times. Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty at a Glance”, https://www.armscontrol.org/ Huntington, S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations, factsheets/INFtreaty. Foreign Affairs, 72(3), pp. 22-49. Barber, B. (1992). “Jihad vs. Mc World,” The Atlantic Huntington, S.P. (1991). The Third Wave: Monthly, March, https://www.theatlantic. Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, com/magazine/archive/1992/03/jihad-vs- Norman and Oklahoma: The University of mcworld/303882/. Oklahoma Press. BBC News. (2017, 23 December). “Tiananmen Hurrell, A. (2014). “Rising Powers and the Emerging Square Protest Death Toll ‘Was 10000’”, https:// Global Order”, The Globalization of World Politics: www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-42465516. An Introduction to International Relations, John Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens (Eds.), 6th Brym, R. J. and Araj B. (2018, 2 May). “Intifadah”, Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.80- https://www.britannica.com/topic/intifadah. 94. Bush, G. (1990). “Address on Iraq’s Invasion of Independent International Commission on Kosovo. Kuwait - Operation Desert Shield,” https:// (2000). The Kosovo Report: Conflict, International www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/ Response, Lessons Learned, Oxford: Oxford georgehwbushkuwaitinvasion.htm. University Press. Bush, G.W. “Address to a Joint Session of Congress Patrick, S. (2013). “The Evolving Structure of World and the America People”, September 20, 2001, Politics, 1991-2011”, International Relations Since https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/ the End of the Cold War: New&Old Dimensions, news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html. Geir Lundestad (Ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.16-41.

234 History of International Relations

Gorbachev, M. (1988). “Address by Mikhail Moon, Chung-in, (2014). “Asia-Pacific Economic Gorbachev at the UN General Assembly Session Cooperation”, https://www.britannica.com/ (Excerpts),” December 07, 1988, History and topic/Asia-Pacific-Economic-Cooperation. Public Policy Program Digital Archive, CWIHP Publications Office. (2007, 23 January). “The 2004 Archive. https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/ enlargement: the challenge of a 25-member EU,” document/%20116224%20.pdf https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ Hill, D. (1996, 9 August). “Russia: Foreign Minister ALL/?uri=LEGISSUM:e50017. Opposes NATO Expansion Eastward,” https:// Stiglitz, Joseph. (1998). “More Instruments and www.rferl.org/a/1081224.html, Broader Goals: Moving Toward the Post- Hirst, T. (2015). “A Brief History of China’s Washington Consensus,” https://www. Economic Growth”, https://www.weforum. globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/209- org/agenda/2015/07/brief-history-of-china- bwi-wto/43245.html. economic-growth/. UN Climate Change, “History of the ICC, “Cases”, https://www.icc-cpi.int/cases. Convention”, https://unfccc.int/process- and-meetings#:d8f74df9-0dbd-4932-bf3c- Iraq Body Count, “The public record of violent deaths d8a37f8de70e. following the ”, https:// www.iraqbodycount.org/. UN Security Council, (2001, 12 September). “Resolution 1368 (2001)”, S/Res/1368 Kelly, Tim and Kubo Nobuhiro. (2015). “Gulf (2001),https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_ War Trauma Began Japan’s Retreat from doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1368%20%282001%29. Pacificism,” https://www.reuters.com/article/ us-japan-military-history-insight/gulf-war- UNHCRa, “Iraq Emergency”, https://www.unhcr. trauma-began-japans-retreat-from-pacifism- org/iraq-emergency.html. idUSKBN0U300D20151220. UNHCRb, “Syria Emergency”, https://www.unhcr. Mayr, Walter. (2009, 29 May). “Cutting the Fence org/syria-emergency.html. and Changing the History,” Der Spiegel. https:// www.spiegel.de/international/europe/hungary- s-peaceful-revolution-cutting-the-fence-and- changing-history-a-627632.html

235