Recently viewed 0 Save Search. The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern World. Find at OUP. Read More. Your current browser may not support copying via this button. Subscriber sign in You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Username Please enter your Username. Password Please enter your Password.
Forgot password? For the first several years of its existence, Coke was only available as a fountain drink, and its producer saw no reason for that to change. It was not until March 12, In early , Austrian Nazis conspired for the second time in four years to seize the Austrian government by force and unite their nation with Nazi Germany. On March 12, , Indian independence leader Mohandas Gandhi begins a defiant march to the sea in protest of the British monopoly on salt, his boldest act of civil disobedience yet against British rule in India.
On March 12, , eight days after his inauguration, President Franklin D. On this day, the commander of the German Home Army, Gen. Friedrich Fromm, is shot by a firing squad for his part in the July plot to assassinate the Fuhrer. By , many high-ranking German officials had made Sign up now to learn about This Day in History straight from your inbox.
In response to the critical comments made about him by singer Natalie Maines in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, President George W. They can say what they want to say. Menu Menu. Home Milestones The Truman Doctrine, Milestones: — For more information, please see the full notice. Of course, the role of Stalin cannot be ignored. His refusal of the American plan was with the benefit of hindsight a miscalculation made through overconfidence in communist power in Western Europe and a reliance upon his rigid Marxist economics.
According to this doctrine, capitalism was approaching a crisis which would cut off the flow of America aid leaving Europe ultimately in the hands of the Communists.
This situation simplified the task of American leadership and led to the alienation of Communist parties in Western Europe as the public were clearly forming a consensus in support of the American economic intervention Mallalieu His role underplays perfectly the much commented upon conclusion that both the Soviet Union and America were resigned and accepting of a division of Europe shortly after the Second World War, certainly by mid With the Marshall Plan being accepted by some and rejected by others, it is also safe to say that this fate was also accepted within Europe.
This was adopted as internal policy after the failed Paris negotiations in June-July and the rejection of the Marshall Plan Roberts There is no doubt that the Marshall Plan solidified this line of reasoning, and it is worth noting again the sense of inevitability in the division of Europe as both the Soviet and the American thought processes were at least in part converging on this division before the fact of its final existence.
Soviet rejection of the American offer led to the Molotov Plan, in which a series of bilateral treaties were made between the Soviet Union and Eastern European nations, beginning the process that led to the establishment of Comecon in Roberts With Comecon and the Marshall Plan operating in parallel, and the Truman doctrine of Containment outwardly involving America in a reactionary process against the Soviet Union, it is certainly safe to state that by late Europe was divided in two.
John Lewis Gaddis offers the possibility that the Marshall Plan was carried out and designed by America to establish an independent European power centre, not a hegemonic American bloc. He adds additionally that NATO was adopted reluctantly by America due to the anxieties of European leaders, not pioneered as a tool of American hegemony Thompson In this case, again shades of grey appear.
It may be possible that focusing on American and Soviet motives in dividing Europe underplay the influence of the European nations themselves in determining their fate. This is a similar line of reasoning to the analysis offered earlier in the discussion over the British involvement in the inception of the Truman doctrine. This revolves around the fact that domestic policy was of little consequence across all the nations involved in the outbreak of the Cold War.
This again, draws on a traditional reading of international relations paradigms in concluding that the structure of the international system created the Cold War and the division of Europe. In this sense, the Truman doctrine and the Marshall Plan, and indeed the Molotov doctrine were borne out of the inevitability of foreign politics as it was then constituted.
They were merely reactions to the already constituted structure of the post-war system, not determining factors of the formation of the new structure. It is entirely possible in this sense, to account for the division of Europe through a reading of Structural Realism. In conclusion, it is clear the division of Europe had its roots in the way that the Second World War ended.
The Truman doctrine was a manifestation of foreign policy resulting from the insecurities and fears of Soviet power filling the vacuum in Europe. Together with the Marshall Plan, it solidified the Western nations of Europe into accepting the reality of a divided Europe, indeed a divided world in which two distinct economic, ideological and political systems were in conflict.
In the strict sense of the word the combined effect of the Marshall Plan and the policy of Containment created the structure with which the previously uncodified and loosely felt, yet inevitable tensions were spiralling around before mid
0コメント