IB Internal Assessment in History

TO WHAT EXTENT DID THE MARSHALL PLAN AID THE ECONOMIC

RECONSTRUCTION OF WESTERN EUROPE AFTER THE WORLD WAR II?

Word Count:

Table of Contents
Part A: Identification and Evaluation of Sources……………………....

Part B: Investigation………………………………………………………

Part C: Reflection…………………………………………………………

Bibliography………………………………………………………………

Part A: Identification and Evaluation of Sources

 This investigation seeks to answer, “To what extent did the Marshall Plan aid the economic

reconstruction of Western Europe after WWII?” The focus is on the economic issues of the

era in Western Europe that were the result of several events before the end of WWII

attempting to be solved by this new plan called, Marshall Plan. The first key source is a

journal article called “The Marshall Plan Mystique '', relevant by explaining why this

mechanism cannot be applied or reproduced for every country in the same way as the specific

needs to which international assistance must be adapted, showing the best part of this plan.

The second key source is a journal article by John H. Williams called “End of the Marshall

Plan”, relevant by describing and analyzing some key points of this event and as the title

mentioned explain how the end of this plan was.

Source A

The origin of source A is the evaluation about the Marshall Plan by a foundation called

Kapur Surya Foundation writing a journal article, so it is written by David Ekbladh for the

public in general, and its purpose is to provide a perspective regarding an event. A value of

this origin is that it is written by a person with a different perspective than one who could

write about it while this event took place. The purpose of source A is showing to what extent

the Marshall Plan helped in the reactivation of the economy in western Europe. A value of

the purpose is the background information about the plan itself and specific information of

the impact in more than one place giving an extended view of the events.

A limitation of the origin is that, coming from a journal article, source A cannot be

considered as a primary source, leaving historians lacking background knowledge and only

analysis regarding some aspects of the plan. A limitation of the purpose is that the audience is

not centered for historians, referring to a document that does not have the necessary

information for an analysis in depth about this topic. This leaves room for incorrect

assumptions about what this plan was really looking for.

Source B

The origin of source B is Foreign Affairs journal, written by John H. William and published

by Council on Foreign Relations a NGO dedicated to being a resource for its members,

government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and

religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the

world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries, as it is

described in their website. The purpose of source B is to discuss and inform academics of

evidence regarding the result of the Marshall Plan in Europe. A value of this purpose is, in

reaching academic audiences, William presents analyses of the result of the actions taken in

the Marshall Plan, developing accurate arguments supported by sophisticated evidence.

A limitation of the origin is the limited view of the author about this event, likewise, it was

not written in that time so it is the interpretation of someone else that we are analyzing, as

interpretations may change over time, creating uncertainty as to accurate scenarios and

events. A limitation of the purpose is that the article itself is not developed focusing on the

whole historical event and therefore, may not accurately present alternative perspectives to

The Marshall Plan actions. Historical facts regarding actions taken may be manipulated,

creating false perceptions regarding the efficiency or to what extent this helped to aid the

economic reconstruction in Europe.

Part B: Investigation

In the time before the Second World War, a lot of people were dead and millions more

homeless, it was bloodier than anyone who had lived through the Great War could have
imagined, the global economy was devastated and even more in the western countries such as

Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, France,

Italy, and Germany which was the epicenter of the conflict, been unable to afford a rebuild.

The idea of instability, in every aspect, was something common in society after WWII in

Europe, taking into account that a lot of countries were devastated as a result of the posterior

years for inconvenient as the Great Depression and the Great War, seen the peace and union

as something unreachable in those days, until 1948 when the United States designed a plan to

reactivate the western country´s economies and stop the advance of the URSS, but we are

going to take special attention on the promises that claim this plan and how effective was for

the reconstruction of this area, and its social and economic impact.

The Marshall Plan was seen as a method of helping to prevent the economic deterioration

of post-war Europe, also for the stop the expansionism of the communism ideals, the abrupt

stop of international trade stimulating the European production while promoting the adoption

of some policies and measures leading to the stabilization and an incrementing on the

bonding with Europe and the rest of the World (Congressional Research Service). As it is

common knowledge, we can clearly identify that the level of unemployment at this time did

not help with all the current situations that the area was overcoming, industries were

destroyed and unable to reactivate themselves, even worse, all these countries were already in

debt to the United States. This prompted the Truman Administration and Congress to work

together to formulate the European Recovery Program, which provided approximately $ 13.3

billion of aid to these countries, which went a long way toward reviving the economy of the

underprivileged areas. The recovery had been financed by drawing down on domestic stocks

and foreign assets. Capital was increasingly unavailable for investment. Agricultural supplies

remained below 1938 levels; food imports were consuming a growing share of the limited

foreign exchange. A growing dollar deficit had been built up in European nations, as a result,
expectations for any future growth were low and to make the situation worse trade between

European nations was stagnant. Likewise, we can also see evidence of the improvement in

the statistics of the productions of these countries before and after the application of the

mentioned plan,

Source: Brown and Opie, American Foreign Assistance, p. 249 and 253

Another powerful argument for the Marshall plan's efficacy in Western Europe was

contributing not only to economic stability but also to social stability, causing a feeling of

accompaniment and greater unity, nationalism on the part of the citizens and finally seeing

progress and a measure adopted by the states that seek the common welfare.

It is important to mention that Europeans had already had bad past years in themes like,

food shortages, unemployment, and other hardships associated with the war and recovery, the

European public was now faced with further suffering. To many observers, the declining

economic conditions were generating pessimism regarding Europe's future that increased

class divisions and political instability. Communist parties, already large in major countries

such as Italy and France, threatened to come to power. It is therefore when The Truman

Doctrine, enunciated in March 1947, that it was U.S. policy to provide support to nations

threatened by communism.
 A few months later, in July of the same year, 16 nations attended a conference in Paris in

which the Committee of European Economic Cooperation (CEEC) was created and

established. The purpose of the committee was to gather information on European

requirements and existing resources to meet those needs rapidly and efficiently. Its final

report in September 1947 called for a four-year program to encourage production, create

internal financial stability, develop economic cooperation among participating countries, and

solve the deficit problem then existing with the American dollar zone. A new European body,

the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), was established by

agreement of the participating countries in order to maintain the “union” by which the

program was founded and reinforce the sense of mutual responsibility for its success, but, the

Soviet Union and, under pressure, its allies, refused to participate in a common recovery

program on the grounds that the necessity to reveal national economic plans would infringe

on national sovereignty and that the U.S. interest was only to increase its exports.

On the other hand, we can identify an important impact in factors like psychology and in

Communisms. As the then Director of Policy Planning at the State Department George

Kennan noted, "The psychological success at the outset was so amazing that we felt that the

psychological effect was four-fifths accomplished before the first supplies arrived” 1, referring

that people credibility in their governments had come back progressively, the hope had come

back in European’s streets.

Perhaps the inducement of the United States in setting up the Marshall Plan had been the

belief that helping the economic hardship in Europe would lead to political stability, the

advance of Communism governments throughout the continent was dangerous.

The European Recovery Program (Marshall Plan) assistance is said by many historians to

have contributed to more positive morale in Europe and to political and economic stability,
which helped to stop the strong advance of domestic communist parties. Resulting in an

increase of the U.S. political and economic role in Europe.

The United States prestige and power in Europe were already strong following World War

II in several aspects. However, the U.S. private sector economic relations grew substantially

during this period as a consequence of the program's encouragement of increased exports

from Europe and loans for the purchase of U.S. goods.

Even at the time of the Marshall Plan, there were those who found the program lacking. If

Marshall Plan aid was going to combat communism, they felt, it would have to provide

benefits to the working class in Europe. Many believed that the increased production sought

by the Plan would have little effect on those most inclined to support communism, but, to my

way of thinking this plan led to a lot of changes throughout European territory, and was a

good “weapon” for the purge of some bad aspects inside Europe, likewise, we must take into

consideration that it was good for the recovery of the place, but still have some points that

were not addressed completely during this plan, some stuff that was promised and never

accomplished.

Part C: Reflection

Through my investigation into The Marshall Plan efficacy in Western Europe, I gained

specific knowledge about the methods employed by historians in their investigations, and the

challenges they faced in their works. We can agree that one significant action carried out by

historians is analyzing sources to formulate an investigation question based on an argument

regarding historical events. Following historians, I searched through web pages, academic

journals, books, statistics and treaties to formulate arguments, and found that history offers

different interpretations for singular events.

 The methods used by historians do not end with a search of some sources, moreover, it

requires a construction of the events taking into account the different authors in order to be as

objective as possible. The way to accomplish this goal is to carefully take a deep view over

sources, deducing their central argument or purpose, and identify their strengths and

weaknesses. Once these aspects have been analyzed, historians develop arguments, citing the

strongest support for an event’s interpretation.

My investigation led me to comprehend challenges faced by historians regarding historical

investigations. The purpose of history is the study of life in society in the past, the subject is

based only on the surviving records, and historians therefore struggle in determining

“absolute” truths.

My investigation led to a conclusion about society and economy in those times being a

cause-and-effect impact. For that reason, I investigated multiple implications of this situation,

including the economic resources that were provided in this area, and the desire to benefit

European people, if there were any. Both opinions are valid, yet due to the nature of history,

the causal nature of these concepts can never truly be determined.

All in all, this investigation taught the methods of analysis employed by historians, and the

challenges they face, arriving at the revelation that it is impossible to capture the entirety of

an event. Instead, historians detect limitations of evidence and, when varying perspectives

are placed together, develop an extended explanation for historical scenarios.

Bibliography:

● Berle, A. A. (2015). The Marshall Plan in the European Struggle. Social Research,

82(1), 199–218. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44282097

● Carleton University Center for European Studies (CES). The Reconstruction of

Europe in the Shadow of Communism -- External Pressure - EU Learning. (n.d.).

https://carleton.ca/ces/eulearning/history/europe-after-wwii/the-reconstruction-of-

europe-in-the-shadow-of-communism-external-pressure/

● Congressional Research Service. (2018, January 18). The Marshall Plan: Design,

Accomplishments, and Significance. EveryCRSReport.com.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R45079
● EKBLADH, D. (2003). The Marshall Plan Mystique. World Affairs: The Journal of

International Issues, 7(3), 37–45. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48505357

● Kissinger, H. A. (2015, May 22). Reflections on the Marshall Plan. Harvard Gazette.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2015/05/reflections-on-the-marshall-plan/.

● Weissman, A. (2013). Pivotal Politics—The Marshall Plan: A Turning Point in

Foreign Aid and the Struggle for Democracy. The History Teacher, 47(1), 111-129.

Retrieved June 25, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43264189

● Williams, J. (1952). End of the Marshall Plan. Foreign Affairs, 30(4), 593-611.

doi:10.2307/20030926 https://www.jstor.org/stable/20030926

● 1 In Charles Mee, Jr. The Marshall Plan: The Launching of the Pax Americana. p.

246.

● 2 Council on Foreign Relations. (n.d.). Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved

September 29, 2021, from https://www.cfr.org/