Aims of the Big Three

George Woodrow Lloyd George Differences in the

Clemenceau Wilson (USA) (Britain) aims of the Big
(France) wanted: wanted: Three
wanted:

To punish The treaty to be To punish

Germany fair to everyone Germany but not
harshly. including too harshly. Clemenceau wanted
defeated to create a buffer
countries. state between France
and Germany. He
To weaken To promote Germany to lose also wanted Germany
Germany. peace worldwide. its navy and to be broken down
colonies. into smaller states.

To take revenge To promote To protect the

on Germany. democracy. British empire.
Wilson wanted to
Germany to pay Nations to To maintain promote peace
reparations. cooperate. British control of worldwide. He also
the seas. believed in self-
determination (people
To create a He believed in Germany to pay to rule themselves)
buffer state self- reparations.
between France determination.
and Germany.

Germany to be He introduced his Britain and Lloyd George wanted

broken down into fourteen points. Germany to Germany to lose its
smaller states. begin trading navy and colonies. He
with each other also wanted To
again. maintain British
control of the seas.

Page 1
 Terms of the Treaty of Versailles

MAIN TERMS:

 Germany lost 10% of its land.

 Germany‟s armed forces were reduced.
 Germany was blamed for starting the First World War.
 Germany was forced to pay reparations.
 Germany lost her overseas colonies.
 Germany was not allowed to join the League of Nations.

TERRITORIAL TERMS OF THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES

 Alsace-Lorraine was returned back to France.

 The Saar was given to France for 15 years.
 After 15 years a referendum would be held for the people of the Saar
to decide whether they want to be under France, Germany or the
League.
 Poland was made independent and given a corridor to the Baltic Sea.
 Danzig became a free city.
 Danzig would be under the control of the League of Nations.
 Poland could use the port of Danzig for its external trade.
 The Rhineland was demilitarized
 No German troops or fortifications were allowed in the Rhineland.
 The Allies were to keep an army of occupation on the west bank of
the Rhine for 15 years.
 Baltic States (Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania) got their independence.
 Austria and Hungary became two separate countries.
 Germany and Austria were forbidden to unite.
 Czechoslovakia became an independent country.

GERMANY’S MILITARY (ARMED FORCES) RESTRICTIONS BY THE TERMS OF

THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES

Germany‟s army was cut to one hundred thousand (100 000) men.
Germany soldiers would serve in the army for a period of 12 years.
Germany was not allowed to have an air force.
Germany‟s navy was reduced to 36 battleships with no submarines.
Conscription was not allowed in Germany.
All wartime guns and weapons were to be melted down as scrap metal.
The Rhineland was demilitarized.

Page 2
 Why the treaty of Versailles was harsh / severe on Germany?

Germany started the war

Germany had invaded Belgium and France while these two countries were not involved
in the conflict between Austria and Serbia which trigged the outbreak of the First World
War. Much of the war took place in France causing massive damages to infrastructures
and killing thousands of people. Therefore, it was necessary for Germany to pay
reparations to enable countries that were affected by the war to rebuild their countries.

France wanted revenge for past attacks

Germany had attacked France twice, in 1870 and in 1914. Both times France suffered
therefore Clemenceau wanted to weaken Germany so that they will not have the
strength to attack France ever again. Reducing Germany‟s armed forces and the
demilitarization of the Rhineland was to protect France from a possible German attack
as it has done in the past.

To satisfy public opinion

People lost their loved ones in the war which was started by Germany so the French
and British people wanted Germany punished and allied leaders were away of that.
Lloyd George had become the British Prime Minister by promising the voters that he
was going to make Germany pay for the suffering during the war. That‟s why he was
demanding reparations from Germany so that the British government can compensate
war widows and orphans as well as rebuilding the country‟s economy.

Germany had punished Russia severely at Brest-Litovsk

The treaty of Versailles was less harsh compared to the treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1917
between Germany and Russia. That was evident to the allied nations that Germany
would have done the same thing to them if they were the one to draft the terms of the
treaty. Germany would have demanded territories and reparations from allied nations to
compensate its loses in the war.

Page 3
 The impact of the Treaty of Versailles on Germany

The Treaty weakened the economy of Germany

Germany lost most of its productive land for example the Saar and overseas colonies
which were very rich in terms of raw materials which they could have mined, process
and export to other countries in exchange of other needed commodities. Due to the loss
of this land, the Germans were plunged into poverty and economical problems.

The treaty cause unemployment

When Germany‟s armed forces were reduced those who served in the army, air force
and navy lost their jobs and they were in hardship and poverty. Some Germans also lost
their jobs as industries that relied on supplies from the land lost by Germany closed
down due to lack of raw materials. When Germany failed to pay reparations in 1922 and
1923 France and Belgium occupied the Ruhr industrial area and expelled hundred
thousand workers from the region when they went on strike against the occupation.

The treaty caused hyperinflation

German‟s failure to pay reparations in 1922 and 1923 led to France and Belgium to
occupy the Ruhr industrial area to take reparations in the form of raw materials. The
Weimar government ordered its workers to go on a passive resistance (not to work /
strike) so that the French and Belgians would have nothing to take. The strike left
Germany with no goods to trade therefore the government decided to print money to
pay workers and some of their debts. With so much money in circulation, people
realized that it was worthless, prices went up and the German currency lost its value.
This caused hyperinflation in Germany.

The treaty caused political unrest

The Treaty of Versailles caused various attempts to overthrow the Weimar Republic for
signing the Treaty. In 1920, the Freikorps led by Dr Kapp wanted to take over the
government but the Weimar republic were saved by Berlin workers who went on strike
to defeat the rebellion. The strike left the city without water, electricity and public
transport. In 1923, the Nazis under Adolf Hitler wanted to take over the state of Bavaria
in the Munich putsch (rebellion). In both rebellions there were loss of German lives and
this caused greater bitterness towards the Treaty of Versailles.

Page 4
Were the Big three satisfied with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles?

Clemenceau and Lloyd George were satisfied that they would earn reparations as well
as new territories. These would help them to rebuild their economies that were
destroyed by the First World War. The French were also happy with the fact that
Germany was weakened so much by taking away its armaments as it made them feel
protected against a traditional enemy. Britain gained the overseas colonies as
mandates and could thus secure its supremacy at sea and protect its huge empire.
Wilson was also satisfied that the League of Nations was included in the Treaty of
Versailles as they had hoped this organisation would maintain world peace.

However, the Big Three were not satisfied as it was a give and take exercise. The
compromise which was finally agreed upon did not satisfy them or their followers.
Clemenceau‟s attempt to take revenge failed largely especially because Wilson
prevented it. Clemenceau wanted full control over the Rhine and the Saar but Wilson
limited his claims. The French people felt that Clemenceau did not do enough at the
Treaty of Versailles to punish Germany; therefore, they voted him out as Prime Minister
in the next elections.

Most of Wilson‟s fourteen points were ignored. Wilson felt disappointed that Germany
was punished harshly and he feared that Germany would one day recover and seek
revenge. Self-determination was not fully achieved as many people found themselves
as minorities in countries that were created at the Treaty of Versailles. For example, the
newly created independent state of Czechoslovakia had people of different nationalities
such as Germans, Polish, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovakians. Colonial countries were
not consulted and did not have a say regarding their future.

Lloyd George soon realised that the Treaty of Versailles was a mistake as it punished
Germany harshly. Just as Wilson, he also felt Germany would seek revenge in the
future. He felt reparations were far too much and would create trouble for the future. He
knew that Germany was unable to pay because of its weak financial situation. Shortly
after the Treaty of Versailles was signed, Lloyd George said that the treaty was harsh
and if he was a German he would not have signed it.

Page 5
Was the Treaty of Versailles fair / justified?

Main terms of Fair Unfair

the Treaty of
Versailles

Territory  Alsace- Lorraine belonged  Germany lost

to France. productive land.
 France could make use of  Losing land weakened
the resources in the Saar to the economy of
rebuild her damaged Germany.
economy.
 Self-determination did
 Countries gained their not apply to Germans.
independence thus ruling
themselves.
Blame  Germany turned the conflict  Germany simply
between two countries into honoured the alliance
a World War. they had with Austria.
Reparations  Would help the allies to  It was a lot of money
rebuild their countries, pay which Germany could
war debts, widows and not afford to pay.
orphans.
 They lost land where
they could make money
to pay these
reparations.
Armed forces  It would prevent Germany  Germany lost her pride
from attacking other and could not defend
countries and starting herself.
another war again.
Colonies  They became mandates  As Germany lost
under the League of colonies Britain and
Nations and they would France gained former
ultimately gain Germany colonies.
independence.

Page 6
It was fair; Germany had to be held responsible for the war because they turned a
conflict between two countries, Serbia and Austria into a world war. Russia was not yet
actively involved in the conflict but Germany declared war on her. Belgium and France
had nothing to do with the conflict between Serbia and Austria but they were attacked
by Germany.

The First World War caused a lot of destructions especially to France since the war was
mostly fought on French soil. Millions lost their lives and infrastructures were destroyed
therefore, Germany had to pay reparations to compensate countries that were affected
by the war so that they can rebuild their economies.

It was also fair to reduce Germany‟s armed forces because whenever Germany was
strong it attacked other countries as it did to France in 1870 and again in 1914. The
reduction of Germany armed force would prevent Germany from attacking other
countries and prevent another war. It was also fair to return Alsace-Lorraine to France
since Germany seized the two provinces from France in 1870. It was also fair for
colonies to become mandates as they would eventually become independent.

Besides this it was unfair because the blame should have been shared by all
countries that took part in the First World War. Germany felt that they did not start
neither did they lose the war because they simply honoured an alliance they had with
Austria as Russia was threatening to attack Austria since Russia had an alliance with
Serbia, who was at conflict with Austria. Germany stopped fighting by signing an
armistice; therefore, they should have been invited at the peace conference to overlook
the agreement.

Reparation payments were a lot of money, there was no way Germany would be able to
pay such huge amount of money. After all, its economy was affected by the war as well
and areas where they could make money to pay reparations such as the Saar and
overseas colonies were taken away by the Treaty of Versailles.

The German army was their pride. An army of 100 000 men was not enough for the
country of the size of Germany. With such an army, Germany could not defend herself if
attacked by any country including smaller weaker countries. Thousands of Germans
who served in the army lost their jobs when the army was reduced and that caused
higher unemployment and poverty in Germany.

When Germany was losing land, Britain and France were gaining. Germany lost land
which was most productive as the result, the Germany economy went down and they
suffered massive unemployment and poverty. Self-determination did not apply to
Germans as many of them found themselves as minorities in territories and colonies
taken away from Germany and they were now ruled by people of those countries such
territories were given to.

Page 7
 THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Aims of the League of Nations

 Discourage aggression from any nation / to prevent war

 To solve disputes between member states
 To encourage nations to disarm
 To encourage nations to co-operate especially in business and trade
 To improve the living condition of people worldwide
 To uphold the terms of the peace treaties

Means of influence (How the League hoped to prevent war)

 Through the Covenant of the League of Nations.

These were principles Leagues members agreed to follow.

 Through Collective Security.

League members could work together e.g. an attack on one member state is an
attack to all.

 By Arbitration
The League could offer to solve disputes between countries peacefully.

 By Moral Condemnation
They could decide which country was the aggressor and tell it to stop what it was
doing.

 By imposing economic sanctions

Members of the League could refuse to trade with the aggressor.

 By use of military force

The armed forces of member countries could be used against an aggressor.

The structure of the League of Nations

 The Assembly
 The Council
 The Secretariat
 The International Labor Organization
 The Permanent Court of Justice

Page 8
 Functions of the structures of the League of Nations

The Assembly
 Every member state sent a representative to the Assembly.
 Each member state had one vote.
 The Assembly only met once a year in September.
 Decisions made by the Assembly had to be agreed by all members of the
Assembly.
 The Assembly could recommend action to the Council
 Admitting new members to the League
 Appointing temporal members of the council

The Council
 The Council met more often, usually about five times a year and in case of
emergency.
 The Council had permanent members (Britain, France, Italy, Japan and
Germany).
 The Council also had temporal members elected by the Assembly for three-year
periods.
 Each of the permanent members of the Council had a VETO rights. This meant
that one permanent member could stop the Council acting even if all other
members agreed.
 The Council could condemn, impose economic sanctions and use military force
against the aggressor.

The Secretariat
 The Secretariat was a sort of civil service of the League of Nations.
 It kept records of League meetings.
 Prepared reports for the different agencies of the League of Nations.
 The Secretariat had specialist sections covering areas such as health,
disarmament and economic matters.
 The Secretariat was headed by a Secretary General.
 Made sure that decisions of the League of Nations are carried on.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO)

 The ILO brought together employers, governments and worker‟s representatives
once a year.
 Its aim was to improve working conditions throughout the world.
 It collected statistics and information about working conditions.
 To persuade member countries to adopt its suggestions.
 To stop child labor.

Page 9
The Permanent Court of International Justice
 The Court was based at The Hague in the Netherlands.
 It was made up of judges from the member countries.
 The Court was to settle disputes between countries peacefully.
 If asked, the Court would give a decision on a border dispute between two
countries.
 It also gave legal advice to the Assembly or Council.

AGENCIES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

 The Mandates Commission

 The Health Committee
 The Refugees Committee
 The Slavery Commission
 The Disarmament Commission

FUNCTIONS OF THE AGENCIES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

The Mandates Commission

The Mandates commission made sure that Britain and France acted in the
interests of the people of the mandated territories, not in its own interests.

The Health Committee

The Health Committee attempt to deal with the problem of dangerous diseases
and to educate people about health and sanitation.

The Refugees Committee

This helped to return refugees to their original homes after the end of the First
World War.

The Slavery Commission

This worked to abolish slavery around the world.

The Disarmament Commission

This encouraged nations to get rid of their weapons and reduce the number of
soldiers.

Page 10
 SUCCESSES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS
Political successes

Disputes over the Aaland Island between Sweden and Finland in 1921. Both
countries wanted control the Aaland Island because it lies between the two countries.
The League decided that Finland should administer the Island and the interests of the
Swedish inhabitants on the island would be protected by the League. Both countries
accepted.

Dispute over Upper Silesia between Germany and Poland in 1921. Upper Silesia had
rich natural resources and a mixed German and Polish population. The League ruled
that Upper Silesia should be divided between the two countries. The League would treat
Upper Silesia as an economic unit and supervise its interest for the next fifteen years.

Dispute over Memel between Germany and Lithuania in 1921. The terms of the Treaty
of Versailles put Memel under the administration of the League while it was still to be
decided whether Memel should become part of Lithuania. Many Germans also lived
there. Lithuania received Memel which became an international zone.

War between Greece and Bulgaria in 1925. Greek soldiers took control of Bulgaria
because a Greek soldier was killed while protecting the border between the two
countries. The League ordered the two countries to stop fighting and found Greece
guilty. Greece paid reparation to Bulgaria.

Socio-economic Successes
 The League improved the health conditions worldwide by sending doctors and
nurses and distribution of medicines to affected areas.
 They also educated people about the dangers of addictive substances like drugs
and alcohol.
 The League helped refugees who were affected by the First World War as well
as with the resettlement of refugees back to their home countries.
 In 1922, the League helped Austria with a loan of 20 million dollars to recover its
economic position. A League commission supervised Austria‟s economic and
financial affairs. In 1926, the League‟s commission was withdrawn when
Austria‟s financial position had improved.
 The League provided humanitarian aid for Greece in 1923 when they were driven
out of Smyrna by the Turks. Cholera and typhoid broke out, so the League sent
doctors to bring the deadly diseases under control.
 Refuges were helped by providing homes for them and ways to help them
improve their living conditions.
 In 1925, the League formed a slavery commission to stop slave trading and
slavery of all kinds including the contract labour system.
 400 000 prisoner of war were repatriated back to their home countries.
 The League closed down four Swizz drug companies.

Page 11
FAILURES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN THE 1920S

Vilna was the capital city of Lithuania way back before it became part of the German
Empire. When Lithuania was restored after WWI at the Treaty of Versailles, Vilna
became the capital city once again. But this time around, the majority of the people
living in Vilna were Polish. In 1920, a private Polish army took control of the city.
Lithuania asked the League for help and clearly Poland was the aggressor. The League
told Poland to withdraw its troops, but the Poles refused to leave the city. The French
could not send their troops to force Polish army out of Vilna because they did not want
to upset Poland and they saw it as a useful ally against Germany in the future. Britain
were not prepared to act alone by sending troops to a far off countries. In the end, the
League did nothing and Vilna remained in Polish hands until the outbreak of the Second
World War.

War between Poland and Russia, 1920-21. The Poles were not satisfied with the
boundary with Russia. They wanted more land in the east than they were allowed to
have. During 1920, the Poles attacked the Russians and forcefully occupied an area
called White Russia. The Russians fought back and the Poles fled back to Warsaw,
Poland‟s capital city. The Poles counter-attacked the Russians and many Russian
soldiers were either killed or captured. In 1921, the Russian government accepted and
signed the Treaty of Riga. This treaty gave more land to Poland. By refusing to obey the
terms of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations, Poland was then able to
increase its size.

War between Greece and Turkey, 1921-22. Post-war treaties led to the breaking up of
Empires. In 1920, King Constantine 1 of Greece continued to take control of more
Turkish land. The Turkish part of Smyrna was already controlled by the Greeks. Mustafa
Kemal, Turkey‟s new revolutionary leader, blocked the Greeks at the Sakarya River.
The Greeks were totally defeated by the Turks at the battle of Sakarya, which continued
for three weeks. A year later, Turkish soldiers attacked Smyrna and drove out millions of
Greek civilians. Allied leaders decided to negotiate with Kemal. In 1923, the Treaty of
Lausanne replaced the Treaty of Sevres. This new treaty allowed Turkey to get back
most of her land. The Paris peace settlement and the League of Nations had been
disregarded again.

The Ruhr occupation, 1923. When Germany was not able to pay reparations in 1923,
French and Belgian soldiers occupied the Ruhr, Germany‟s richest industrial region.
Coal was taken as part of the reparations that Germany had to pay. German workers
protested against what happened in the Ruhr. The protest led Germany to have no
goods to trade. The French and Belgian reacted ruthlessly by killing over a 100 and
expelling 100 000 demonstrators. The Germany government reacted by printing millions
of bank notes to pay workers their wages and pay reparations.

Page 12
This resulted in massive inflation and made the Mark (German currency) to lose its
buying powers. The Germany government faced serious financial problems and the
strike was called off. France and Belgium received some of the coal from Germany. The
Dawes plan was introduced in 1924 to help Germany pay her reparations. In 1925
French and Belgian soldiers withdrew from the Ruhr. The two countries (France and
Belgium) had shown once more that they had no respect and trust in the League, by
simply ignoring the rules of the League.

The Corfu incident, 1923. One of the boundaries which had to be sorted out after the
First World War was the border between Greece and Albania. The conference of
ambassadors was given this job and it appointed an Italian general called Tellini to
supervise it. On 27 August, while they were surveying the Greek side of the frontier
area, Tellini and his team were ambushed and killed. The Italian leader, Mussolini was
furious and blamed the Greek government for the murder. On 29 August, Mussolini
demanded that the Greek government must pay compensation to Italy and execute the
murderers. The Greeks, however, had no idea who the murderers were. On 31 August,
Mussolini bombarded and then occupied the Greek island of Corfu. Fifteen people were
killed. Greece appealed to the League for help. The League condemned Mussolini‟s
actions. It was also suggested that Greece pay compensation but that the money be
held by the League and would be paid to Italy if, and when Tellini‟s killers were found.
Officially Mussolini accepted the League‟s ruling. However, behind the scenes,
Mussolini went to the conference of ambassadors and persuaded them to change the
League‟s ruling. The Greeks had to apologise and pay compensation directly to Italy.
On 27 September, Mussolini withdrew from Corfu boasting of his triumph.

FAILURES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN THE 1930S

Manchurian crisis 1931-33. Japan invaded Manchuria (in north-east China). After a
long delay, no action was taken. The handling of the crisis made the League seem
weak and ineffective.

Disarmament conference 1932-34. Germany complained that only it had been forced
to disarm. League members could not agree to disarm and refused to allow Germany to
rearm. Germany left the League and began to rearm openly. League members such as
Britain no longer tried to stop Germany. League members also began to increase their
armed forces.

Abyssinian crisis 1935-36. Italy invaded Abyssinia (Ethiopia today). League members
could not agree effective sanctions against Italy. Britain and France tried to do a secret
deal to give most of Abyssinia to Italy. The League of Nations was seen as powerless
and irrelevant.

Page 13
WHY SUPERPOWERS DID NOT JOIN THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS?

The USA returned to its Monroe doctrine

The doctrine stated that the USA should not interfere in the affairs of Europe and vice
versa. It was a policy of splendid isolation. The USA felt involving themselves in the
disputes of Europe was expensive and uncalled for. Main Americans felt that America
was not part of Europe and should not get involved on geo-political grounds. Wilson, the
USA president was accused of not being mandated to even propose the formation of
the League of Nations.

The American Senate voted against joining the League

They felt that American‟s involvement in the League would drag the USA into war and
would result in loss of lives to American citizens. They also feared that the USA would
spend a lot of money to make the League work and they would be forced to provide its
armed forces to the League whenever there will be conflict/war between member states.

Americans were against joining

Many Americans were also offended by Clemenceau‟s insults towards Wilson at the
Versailles conference when he claimed that America did not understand European
politics. Germany immigrants were also not happy with how Germany was harshly
punished at the peace conference. They opposed the USA joining the League.

Why Russia was not invited join the League until 1934?
In 1917, there was a communist revolution in Russia, an economic and political system
not accepted by the West. Britain and France as leading members of the League feared
that if they allow Russia to join, she will influence other countries mostly smaller nations
to turn into communism. They only allowed her to join in 1934 in an attempt to join
forces against Adolf Hitler. However, Russia was expelled from the League after Stalin
signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact.

Why Germany was not allowed join the League until 1926?
Germany was not allowed to join the League at first because France was not willing to
cooperate with its traditional enemy and was afraid Germany would make use of the
opportunity to try and change some of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Many
Germans were against joining the League as it will be an indication that they have
accepted the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Germany was only allowed to join the
League in 1926 after signing the Locarno treaty in 1926 were they promised not to
change their western border with France. Germany then left the League in 1933 when
Hitler‟s Nazis were in power.

Page 14
HOW THE STRUCTURE OF THE LEAGUE CONTRIBUTED TO THE FAILURE OF
THE LEAGUE?

Absence of super powers

The USA was never a member. Germany was not a member until 1926 and left in 1933.
The USSR did not join until 1934, whilst Japan left in 1933 and Italy left in 1937. Without
these major powers, the League lacked authority and sanctions were not effective as
the countries could not support the League‟ sanctions and could continue trading with
aggressor countries.

It was difficult for League members to agree to decisions.

Any decision that was to be taken by Assembly had to be agreed by all members of the
League of Nations. Often it was hard to get all members to agree to a decision or
decisions were delayed. Permanent members of the Council had veto rights which
meant that if any of them was not happy with a decision they had the power to
disapprove such a decision.

Lack of authority to enforce decisions

The League of Nations did not have the power to force countries to follow its decision
e.g. The Permanent Court of Justice had no way of making sure that countries followed
its rulings. The League could impose sanctions but had no power to make sure that
countries complied with these sanctions and they could not make non-members to
follow such sanctions. All this was attributed to lack of armed forces.

WHY THE LEAGUE SUCCEED IN ITS FIRST TEN YEARS

Smaller nations were involved in disputes

Conflicts of the 1920s involved smaller nations who believed and depended on the
League. These countries had faith in the League that it will protect them against
stronger bigger countries. Therefore, they were willing to accept decisions that were
taken by the League.

Countries were exhausted by WW1 and were not ready for another war
After the First World War, many nations were economically destroyed and did not have
the money to start a new war again. They also still remembered the horrors and
destruction of WWI and there was a general idealism were people wanted to make a
new and better world. In Britain and France there was enthusiasm for the League for
example there were days and rallies celebrating the League of Nations.

Page 15
People were happy with the work of the agencies of the League.
The many social successes of the League were the cause for enthusiasm amongst
many people. Small countries also supported the League because they hoped the
League would protect them against aggression of bigger strong countries. The League
was also helped by international agreements that were signed in the 1920s such as the
Locarno Treaty of 1925 Germany agreed to work together with France. This platform
allowed Germany to join the League. The Kellogg-Briand pact of 1928 countries agreed
not to use force but to solve disputes by using an arbitrator (third part).

HOW THE GREAT DEPRESSION AFFECTED THE WORK OF THE LEAGUE?

It led to an increase in aggressive nationalism.

The depression had hit Japan and Italy badly and their economies were in crisis. The
situation encourage the two countries to follow aggressive nationalism which resulted in
Japan and Italy invading Manchuria and Abyssinia respectively to solve their economic
problems.

In Germany, unemployment and poverty led people to elect the Nazis into power, who
promised to solve economic and social problems by reversing the terms of the Treaty of
Versailles.

The USA could not support sanctions of the League.

Almost every country traded with the USA and since they were not a member of the
League, they would not support the League‟s sanction as their economy was in such a
mess.

Britain and France looked at their own interest.

Britain was not willing to get involved in sorting out international disputes while its own
economy was suffering. France became worried of the changing situation in Germany
and began building series of frontier defences on its border with Germany.

HOW THE INVASION OF MANCHURIA SHOWED THE WEAKNESS OF THE

LEAGUE?

The League took too long to condemn Japan.

A League‟s commission of enquiries was sent to investigate who was the aggressor
between Japan and China since the former claimed it was protecting its railway line in
Manchuria which was sabotaged and they blamed China. The Lord Lytton commission
report was published almost a year later and condemned Japan of her actions. By that
time Japan had already completed its invasion. The League of Nations ordered Japan
to Withdraw from Manchuria, but Japan ignored, withdraws from the League of Nation
and continued its assault on China.

Page 16
League members could not agree on sanctions to impose against Japan.
Britain and Japan were trading partners and their economy was also affected by the
depression. Britain was afraid that other countries like Germany will trade with Japan at
her expense. League members could not force the USA to support sanctions as they
were not a member of the League and they were Japan‟s number one trading partner.

The League did not have an army.

The use of military force could not work as the League lacked its own army. Britain and
France were not willing to risk war against Japan, who was a super power by then.
British people claimed it was a far off affair which could not affect Europe. The League
members concentrated on rebuilding their economies which was affected by the First
World War and the great depression rather than spending money on armed forces.

WHY THE LEAGUE DID NOT ACT AGAINST MUSSOLINI WHEN ITALY INVADED
ABYSSINIA?

The League was reluctant to act.

This time around it was clear for the League of Nations, Italy was the aggressor. Britain
and France failed to take the situation seriously. They played for time since they were
desperate to keep good relations with Mussolini, who seemed to be their strongest ally
against Hitler. They condemned Mussolini‟s action but failed to force him out of
Abyssinia.

Sanctions were ineffective.

Britain and France were unwilling to take strong measures because they were
frightened that if they imposed full sanctions it would lead to war with Italy and they
were not ready for war. Britain and France did not want to upset Mussolini as this might
drive him to ally with Hitler and Germany. So, the economic sanctions the League
imposed did not include oil, coal and iron which could have ended the Abyssinian
campaign very quickly. Despites sanctions that were imposed on Italy, Non-League
members, the USA and Germany continued to trade with Italy. Later, League members
voted to remove existing sanctions.

Britain and France looked at their own interest.

Behind the scenes, the foreign ministers of Britain and France, Hoare and Laval drew
up an agreement to allow Mussolini to annex large parts (about two-third) of Abyssinia
in an attempt for Mussolini to call off the invasion. Details of the Hoare-Laval Pact were
leaked in the French press and served to undermine the credibility of the League. Both
Hoare and Laval were sacked but the damage was already done. The League voted to
remove existing sanctions against Italy. Mussolini declared that Ethiopia was part of
Italy. Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somaliland were now united to form a new colony called
Italian East Africa under the rule of Mussolini.

Page 17
The League did not have an army.
The use of military force could not work as the League lacked its own army. Britain and
France were not willing to risk war against Italy. British people claimed it was a far off
affair which could not affect Europe. The League members concentrated on rebuilding
their economies which was affected by the First World War and the great depression
rather than spending money on armed forces.

WAS THE LEAGUE A SUCCESS OR A FAILURE? / THE LEAGUE WAS A FAILURE

FROM THE START?

It was a failure / I agree, the League failed to deal with the dispute between Lithuania
and Poland over Vilna. A Polish army seized control of Vilna in 1920, and Lithuania
appealed to the League for help. The league asked Poland to withdraw its troops, but
Poland ignored them. The League took no further action and the poles, who were the
aggressors, kept Vilna.

The League failed to stop the war between Poland and Russia. The Poles were not
satisfied with the boundary with Russia. They wanted more land in the east than they
were allowed to have. During 1920, the Poles attacked the Russians and forcefully
occupied an area called White Russia. Many Russian soldiers were either killed or
captured. In 1921, the Russian government accepted and signed the Treaty of Riga.
This treaty gave more land to Poland. By refusing to obey the terms of the Treaty of
Versailles and the League of Nations, Poland was then able to increase its size.

It was a success / I disagree, the League solved the dispute over Aaland Island
between Sweden and Finland. Both countries wanted control the Aaland Island because
it lies between the two countries. The League decided that Finland should administer
the Island and the interests of the Swedish inhabitants on the island would be protected
by the League. Both countries accepted.

The League stopped the war between Greece and Bulgaria. Greek soldiers took control
of Bulgaria because a Greek soldier was killed while protecting the border between the
two countries. The League ordered the two countries to stop fighting and found Greece
guilty. Greece paid reparation to Bulgaria.

Page 18
WHY THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS FAILED?

The absence of the USA / superpowers was responsible, that the league was
powerless to oppose strong countries like Japan and Italy, when they invaded
Manchuria and Abyssinia respectively. It was expected of the USA / superpowers to be
the leading member of the League, but the. Without the USA / superpowers aggressor
countries had nothing to fear in the League. The League sanctions were ineffective as
non-League members continued to trade with aggressor countries. They were the one
that had an army and resources that would stop aggressor countries.

The league did not have any army to enforce its decisions to allow other countries like
France and Britain to pursue their own ideals, or to prevent Italy and Japan to be
aggressive towards each other. The most loyal members of the League were small
European countries, mostly because they needed international peace to ensure their
survival, but in reality they were too weak and economically dependent, to provide the
league with the power that it needed to ensure peace. The aggressive countries knew
that the League would not be able to take military action so they refused to adhere to
the League‟s requests. The League was seen as a watchdog without teeth. The bigger
countries like the USA and Russia were not part of the League to enforce its decisions.

The Treaty of Versailles, countries like Germany, Italy, Japan and others were
dissatisfied about the peace agreements made at the end of the First World War
because they felt that they were unfairly treated, they believed that the League existed
to support the arrangements made in the peace settlements, which they wanted to
change.

The League was weakened by the Great Depression at a time of economic crisis;
governments were focused on their own problems rather than what happened in far
away countries, like when Japan invaded Manchuria and Italy, invaded Abyssinia. The
League lacked teeth because France and Britain were more interested in their domestic
affairs, rather than the League‟s affairs concerning collective security that caused the
League not to make powerful countries obey its rulings.

The Depression made countries in the world struggle economically. Countries like
Japan which depended on import and export were mostly affected. Because they did
not have a lot of minerals, occupying territories like Manchuria seemed to be the only
option to save their country‟s economy. If it was not for the Depression they could have
continued in the way that they did by buying minerals from China.

Page 19
Britain and France could not always agree, because they didn‟t trust each other and
often disagreed how the League should work. The two biggest members of the League
were too busy with their own internal affairs and they also stabbed the League in the
back by signing the Hoare Laval Pact with Italy in secret, while Italy was the aggressor
during their invasion of Abyssinia. The Covenant of the League gave it the right to
impose sanctions on any aggressor, but the main problem was that the league could
only ask its members to impose sanctions on an aggressor. They had no power to force
them to do so. Britain and France as leading member were not willing to provide their
armed forces to fight aggressors.

The League’s inability to secure disarmament in the 1930s was one of its major
failures. Dictatorships to rearm and to challenge the League were formed and supported
by the people. First to challenge the League were the Japanese in 1931 when they
attacked Manchuria. The League failed to persuade one of its permanent members to
end its aggression. The condemnation by the League of Japan‟s action led to Japan‟s
resignation from the League.

The Italian invasion followed as an act of aggression against Ethiopia. Again the
League failed to act for fear of rejection by another of its permanent members. The
weakness of Britain and France in dealing with the Abyssinian crisis mirrored the
weakness of the League itself. The failure of the League over Abyssinia destroyed the
idea of Collective Security by demonstrating that League members would not act
together firmly to face aggression.

The failure of the League over Abyssinia left weak nations defenseless against
aggression by powerful neighbors. Abyssinia was occupied by foreign powers and
abandoned by the League, which resulted in other nations to realize that they could no
longer look to the league for security. The two leading members Britain and France
rather signed the Hoare-Laval Pact with Mussolini behind the Leagues back to please
him. The sanctions impose during the Abyssinian crisis on Italy was not sufficient
because it didn‟t include oil which could have stop the Italian conquest in a week.

By the time Hitler started his aggressive land grabbing in 1936, the League was a vague
reality. It failed to live up to the expectations of being a force in world peace. It was
reduced to a more humanitarian organisation to solve socio-economic problems.

Page 20
 THE COLLAPSE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE /
CAUSES OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR

Hitler’s actions which eventually led to the Second World War

1933: Took Germany out of the League of Nations

Began rearming Germany secretly
1934: Tried to take over Austria but was prevented by Mussolini
1935: Held massive rearmament rally in Germany
1936: Reintroduced conscription in Germany
Sent German troops into the Rhineland
Made an anti-Communist alliance with Japan (Berlin-Tokyo Axis)
1937: Tried out Germany‟s new weapons in the Spanish Civil War
Made an anti-Communist alliance with Italy (Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis)
1938: Took over Austria
Took over Sudetenland (Area of Czechoslovakia)
1939: Invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia
Full military alliance with Italy (the Pact of Steel – Japan joined in 1940)
Signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with Russia
Invaded Poland – Britain and France declared war on Germany

HITLER’S FOREIGN HOW HITLER BROKE HOW HITLER PREPARED

POLICY THE TERMS OF THE FOR WAR
TREATY OF VERSAILLES
 Hitler wanted to  Hitler started  Hitler held massive
abolish the Treaty rearming Germany. rearmament rally.
of Versailles.  Reintroduced  Reintroduced
 Hitler wanted to conscription in conscription in
unite all German Germany Germany.
speaking people.  Sent German troops  Sent German troops
 Hitler wanted to into the Rhineland into the Rhineland.
regain all German  Took over Austria  Tried out Germany‟s
land lost by the  Took over new weapons in the
Treaty of Versailles Sudetenland (Area Spanish Civil War.
 Hitler wanted to of Czechoslovakia)  Made an anti-
gain extra living  Invaded the rest of Communist alliance
space Czechoslovakia with Italy and Japan
(lebensraum) to  Invaded Poland (Rome-Berlin-Tokyo
expand his empire Axis).
and for the  Full military alliance
increasing German with Italy (the Pact of
population. Steel – Japan joined
 Hitler also wanted in 1940).
to defeat  Signed the Nazi-
communism. Soviet Pact with
Russia.

Page 21
Rearmament
One of Hitler‟s first steps while in power was to increase Germany‟s armed forces. This
helped Hitler to reduce unemployment in Germany which was one of the biggest
problems the country faced. It also helped Hitler to deliver on his promises to make
Germany strong again and to challenge the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.
Rearmament began in secret at first and he made a great public display of his desire
not to rearm Germany but claimed that he was only doing it because other countries
refused to disarm.

In 1935, Hitler held a massive military rally celebrating the German armed forces. He
reintroduced conscription which was banned by the Treaty of Versailles. Rearmament
boosted Nazi support. Hitler was away that Britain had sympathy with Germany as they
believed that the limits put on Germany‟s armed forces by the Treaty of Versailles were
too tight. The permitted forces (100 000 men) were not enough to defend Germany from
attack. Britain also felt that a strong Germany would be a good buffer against
Communism. Britain signed a naval agreement with Hitler, allowing Germany to
increase its navy to up to 35 percent of the size of the British navy. The French were
angry with Britain about this, but there was little they could do.

The Saar plebiscite (referendum)

The Saar was an important Germany area (in terms of its rich coal fields) and was given
to France for a period of fifteen years under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles in
1919. According to the Treaty, after the fifteen years period, the people of the Saar
region were to decide whether to become part of Germany again or to remain under
France.

In 1935, the promised referendum was to be held. Hitler began his propaganda
campaigns. He informed the people of the Saar region of his plan and desire to restore
former Germany greatness by uniting all the Germany people, building the economy
and rebuild German‟s military power. The French however, did not do much and were
not willing to keep the Saar as the two countries (Germany and France) had agreed in
1934 that Germany would have to pay French industries and infrastructures if the
people voted in favour of Germany. As a result, over 90 percent voted to retain to
Germany.

The remilitarisation of the Rhineland

In 1919, according to the Treaty of Versailles, the Rhineland became a demilitarised
zone meaning no Germany soldiers and weapons were allowed in that area (see terms
of the Treaty of Versailles). In 1936 Hitler took advantage of the crisis of Abyssinia and
made his first move in achieving one of his foreign policies i.e. abolishing the terms of
the Treaty of Versailles by sending troops into the Rhineland. Hitler however, ordered
his army generals to retreat when and if the Germany troops are attacked by the French
because at the time, the Germany army was still weak and was not ready for war but
the French were unaware of the Germany situation. Hitler justified his action claiming
that the agreement signed by France and USSR to protect each other against Germany
attack put Germany under threat. He argued that he had to put troops on his own
frontiers.

Page 22
The Rome-Berlin Axis and the Anti-Comintern Pacts

Hitler‟s successes made it easier for him to develop closer relationships with possible
allies such as Italy and Japan. The Rome-Berlin Axis (1936) was not a formal alliance
but an informal agreement between Hitler and Mussolini to work more closely together.
Thus both Italy and Germany gave support to the nationalists in the Spanish Civil War.
The Anti-Comintern Pact (1936) committed Germany and Japan to hostility towards the
Soviet Union, and Italy joined the pact in 1937. Anti-Comintern means Anti-Communist
Alliance. The aim of the pact was to limit communist influence around the world. It was
particularly aimed at the USSR. A full military alliance between Germany and Italy (The
Pact of Steel) was signed in 1939, and expanded in 1940 to include Japan.

The Anschluss with Austria

Austria is a German country both by language and culture. Hitler had been born and
raised in Austria, and his desire to unite all Germans was well known. Although the
Treaty of Versailles forbade the union of Germany and Austria, it seemed obvious that
he would try to bring it about. A strong Nazi Party already existed in Austria. In 1934
Nazis murdered the Austrian chancellor, Dollfuss, during an attempted takeover which
failed only when Mussolini, the Italian dictator to intervene. At this time, Mussolini was
suspicious of Hitler, and regarded Austria as being in Italy‟s sphere of interest.

In 1938, the Nazis made a second attempt to get Austria. Hitler encouraged the Nazis to
stir up trouble for the government. They staged demonstrations calling for union with
Germany. They caused riots and Austrian government lost control. Hitler then told the
Austrian Chancellor Schuschnigg that only the union could sort out these problems.
Schuschnigg asked for help from France and Britain but was refused it. Hitler reminded
Schuschnigg that he and Mussolini were now friends through the Rome-Berlin Axis and
that Britain and France did nothing when he remilitarised the Rhineland. Schuschnigg
called on a plebiscite to see what the Austrian people wanted. Hitler was not willing to
take any chances. If the Austrian voted “NO”, it would seem as if he forcefully taken
Austria. He simply sent his troops into Austria in March 1938, supposedly to guarantee
a trouble-free plebiscite. Under the watchful eye of the Nazi troops, 99.75 percent voted
for the Anschluss. The Anschluss was completed without any resistance and Austria
became part of Germany.

Crisis over Czechoslovakia

After the Anschluss, it was clear that Czechoslovakia would be the next country to
attract Hitler‟s attention. A free and hostile Czechoslovakia would make it impossible for
Germany to fight a war in the west. Czechoslovakia‟s geographical position, with its land
thrusting deep into German territory, would be a direct threat to Germany. Although not
a large country, Czechoslovakia was well defended (had an alliance against Germany
with France and USSR) and had a modern and well equipped army. However, it had
one crucial weakness, which Hitler planned to exploit. Its population included several
ethnic minorities, among them 3.5 million Germans living in the Sudetenland. Hitler
used the same tactics as he did with Austria, encouraging the Sudeten Germans to stir
up trouble against the Czech government.

Page 23
The Czech government was prepared to go to war with Germany over the Sudetenland
because they knew that to surrender that area would make them defenceless against
Germany, since all Czechoslovakia‟s frontier defences against Germany were in the
Sudetenland. Handing this over would mean that Hitler could easily take over the rest of
Czechoslovakia whenever he wanted. It began to look as though war between Germany
and Czechoslovakia would break out. If so, then France, USSR and probably Britain
(had an alliance with France) would go to Czechoslovakia‟s aid. However, neither
Britain nor France wanted to fight against Germany.

Neville Chamberlain was sure that a peaceful solution could be found to the Czech
crisis. On 15 September 1938 he met Hitler at Berchtesgaden in Germany to discuss
the crisis. Hitler made it clear that the crisis could be solved only by the transfer of parts
of the Sudetenland that contained German speaking people to Germany. Chamberlain
indicated that he had no objection to this as long as the transfer was done peacefully.

A week later on 22 September, having in the meantime forced the Czechs to agree to
the loss of the parts of the Sudetenland, Chamberlain returned to Germany to meet
Hitler at Bad Godesberg. But Hitler now demanded the whole area of the Sudetenland
to be handed over by 1 October, and that claims on Czech territory by Hungary and
Poland be met. If his demands were not met by 1 October 1938, Germany would invade
Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain was upset and Europe was on the brink of war.

The Munich Conference

Chamberlain was desperate for any solution that would avoid war. When Mussolini, the
Italian dictator, proposed a four-power conference, both Chamberlain and Hitler, who
now saw the prospect of achieving his aims without having to fight, agreed to attend. On
29 September 1938, Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Chamberlain (Britain) and
Daladier (France) met at Munich. Neither Russia nor Czechoslovakia, to which the
Sudetenland belonged, was invited to this meeting. The Czech representatives were in
Munich but were not allowed to attend the discussions. The four European powers
agreed to everything that Hitler demanded, namely:

Germany was to annex the whole of the Sudetenland as he promised that this
was the last territory he wanted.
Poland and Hungary would each receive a part of Czechoslovakia that contained
minority groups of their own.
The four powers that signed the Munich agreement would guarantee the borders
of the new territories.

The day after the conference, Chamberlain and Hitler met alone and they agreed an
Anglo-German Declaration. The two countries promised never to go to war with each
other again, and that they would settle all disputes between the two countries by
consultation. Chamberlain received a hero‟s welcome when he returned to Britain and
he referred the events in Munich as “peace for our time”.

Page 24
Germany invasion of Czechoslovakia

After the Munich conference, what remained of Czechoslovakia was in chaos. Their
leader Benes resigned and riots broke out between Czechs and Slovakians. There was
a struggle for power, even Communists wanted to take over the government. Various
street battles took place in Czechoslovakia and many lost their lives. On 15 March
1939, with Czechoslovakia in turmoil, Hitler ordered his troops to occupy the rest of
Czechoslovakia. There was no resistance from the Czechs nor did Britain and France
do anything about the situation.

For Chamberlain it was a step too far because, unlike the Sudeten Germans, the
Czechs were not separated from their homeland by the Treaty of Versailles. This was
clearly an invasion. On 23 March 1939 Hitler also seized the territory of Memel from
Lithuania. It was finally clear to everyone, including the British and French governments,
that the policy of appeasement was dead. In an effort to prevent any further German
aggression, Britain and France promised Poland that they would guarantee its
independence and they told Hitler that if he invaded Poland they would declare war on
Germany. However, after years of Appeasement, Hitler did not actually believe that
Britain and France would risk war by resisting him.

Crisis over Poland

After the destruction of Czechoslovakia, it was clear that Poland would be Hitler‟s next
target. Germany had obvious claims on some polish territory. The Polish Corridor, which
split East Prussia from the rest of Germany, had been taken from Germany by the
Treaty of Versailles, as had the city of Danzig, which was now a free city under the
League of Nations control. Hitler wanted these areas back and he also wanted polish
territory as lebensraum (living space).

Despite this, the Poles enjoyed a friendly relationship with Hitler‟s Germany until 1939.
The Polish government sympathised with the Nazis‟ authoritarian and anti-Semitic (anti-
Jewish) policies. They had even taken part in the destruction of Czechoslovakia after
the Munich Conference by grabbing Teschen. At first, the Poles found it hard to take
seriously Hitler‟s demands and increasing threats against them. They even thought their
best hope of survival was to try and avoid making commitments to either two powerful
neighbours, Germany and the Soviet Union.

Britain‟s guarantee to preserve the independence of Poland made the Poles feel safer
than they really were. There was little that Britain and France could do to stop a German
invasion of Poland – it was too far away from them. So the attitude of Poland‟s other
powerful neighbour, the Soviet Union, would be crucial. Hitler had feared the USSR
would come to the rescue of Poland than Britain and France.

Discussion between Britain, France and the Soviet Union took place through early
August 1939, but collapsed because of distrust between the two sides, and also
because the Poles refused to let Soviet troops enter their territory in advance of an
attack by Germany. The Soviets thought Britain and France would be happy to see the
Soviet Union doing all the fighting if war broke out with Germany.

Page 25
The Nazi-Soviet Pact

 The Nazi-Soviet Pact was a treaty signed on 23 August 1939 by Molotov (USSR)
and Von Ribbentrop (Germany), the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of their
respective countries.
 It was a non-aggression pact – USSR and Germany agreed not to fight each
other.
 The pact was to last for ten years with an option for another five years extension.
 All differences should be resolved through negotiation or arbitration.
 The two parties would not join any group of powers directly or indirectly
threatening one of the two parties.
 Secretly, they also decided to split up Poland between them.

Why Hitler was happy when the Saar region returned to German rule in 1935?

Hitler was happy because he would make use of the coal and iron in the Saar in his
rearmament programme. It would enable him to manufacture more weapons such as
guns, cannons and ammunition. The Saar was also highly industrialised which could
help Germany recover economically as Germany was affected by reparation payments
and the depression of 1929 to the 1930s. Hitler was also happy that he was achieving
one of his aims by re-uniting German speaking people separated by the much hated
Treaty of Versailles. It also gave Hitler morale boost as the result showed that he had
the support of the German speaking people and this gave him the confidence to achieve
his aims.

Why no action was taken against Hitler when he remilitarised the Rhineland?

Firstly, the attention of the League of Nations was on the Abyssinian crisis which was
happening at exactly the same time. The League condemned Hitler‟s action but had no
power to do anything else. Many British people had begun to believe that the Treaty of
Versailles had been unfair to Germany. They saw nothing wrong with Germany placing
its soldiers on its frontiers. They were also not ready to start another war so soon as
they remembered the horrors of the First World War and they were concentrating on
rebuilding their economy which was not only affected by the great war of 1914 – 1918
but also the great depression of the 1930s.

The French, who were mostly threatening by the remilitarisation of the Rhineland were
unable to take any action against Germany without the help of Britain. The fact that
elections were to be held in France, so none of the politicians were willing to take a
stance and talk about what action to take against Hitler. They were afraid they would
lose votes as any action to prevent the remilitarisation of the Rhineland would plunge
France into war against Germany. The French also relied much on the Maginot line.
They believed it would be difficult for Germany to pass through the French defence line
and attack France. In the end, Hitler‟s gamble paid off and gave him more courage to
risk more.

Page 26
Why did Britain and France permit the Anschluss?

Many British felt that the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh on Germany and they
believed that Austrians and Germans had the right to be united since they were all
German speaking people, so the Treaty was wrong to separate them. Britain‟s Lord
Halifax had even suggested to Hitler before the Anschluss that Britain would not resist
Germany uniting with Austria. Britain at the time had a large empire and was more
interested in her colonies, which needed help to recover financially from the effects of
the First World War, and especially the Great Depression of 1929.

At the time, France was experiencing a political problem. There was a coalition
government in place, so there was almost no unity among the leaders. This made it
difficult for the government to act quickly and firmly. France was also putting its trust in
the Maginot Line. It was believed that Germans would never get through it, so they
never rearmed. At the time France also believed that without Britain it was too weak to
act alone against Germany.

Both Britain and France adopted a pacifist stance and refused to take part in war. They
were still remembering the horrors of the First World War and did not want another war
to break out. These two countries also believed in the appeasement policy – giving
Hitler what he wanted to avoid war hoping that he would be satisfied.

Why did Britain and France OR people of Europe follow the Policy of
Appeasement?

They felt the Treaty of Versailles was unfair

Many felt that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair to Germany. They assumed that once
these wrongs were put right then Germany would become a peaceful nation again. E.g.
Austrian and Germans were all German speaking people therefore the treaty was wrong
to separate them and they saw nothing wrong in Germany sending its troops to its
frontier when Germany remilitarised the Rhineland. There were about 3.5 million
Germans in the Sudetenland and they had every right to be part of Germany.

They were not ready for war

The British government believed that their armed forces were not ready for war against
Hitler. It was not all certain that the British Empire and Commonwealth states like
Canada and Australia would support a war against Germany. Britain and her allies
could not face up to Germany without the guarantee of American support as American
leaders were determined not to be dragged into another war. France could not fight
Germany without Britain as they had been defeated twice by Germany in 1870 and
1914. Both British and the French leaders vividly remembered the horrific experiences
of the First World War. They wanted to avoid another war at almost any cost.
Chamberlain needed to buy time in order to rearm Britain and prepare for war which
seemed inevitable by the day.

Page 27
Their economic problems were a higher priority
Britain and France were still suffering from the effects of the depression. They had large
debts and huge unemployment. Many felt that money should not be spent on buying
weapons rather on rebuilding their countries which were not only destroyed by the First
World War but the Great Depression of the 1930s as well.

At least Hitler was standing up to Communism

Hitler was not the only concern of Britain and its allies. He was not even their main
worry. They were more concerned about the spread of communism and particularly
about the dangers to world peace posed by Stalin, the new leader in the USSR. Many
saw Hitler as the buffer to the threat of spreading communism.

Why was the Nazi-Soviet Pact important?

The Nazi-Soviet Pact was important to Stalin because the Soviet Union would not be
drawn into a war with Germany over Poland. The Soviets did not trust Britain and
France enough to ally with them to save Poland, and now would not have to. Poland
was hostile to the Soviet Union and the two countries had fought a war in the 1920s.
Much of Poland‟s territory had been taken from Russia when Poland was created. Now
the Soviet Union could get this land back. This area would be a useful buffer zone
against any future German attack. Stalin still believed that war with Germany would
come eventually, but the pact gave him time to build up the strength of Soviet armed
forces.

The Nazi-Soviet Pact was important to Hitler because he knew that he could now
invade Poland without having to fight the Soviet Union. In an event of war, Germany
would not fight on both frontiers. There would be no alliance between the Soviet Union,
Britain and France to prevent Hitler carrying out his plans. Hitler would be able to get
back the land lost to Poland at Versailles, and begin to acquire lebensraum.

The Nazi-Soviet Pact left Britain and France to fight Germany alone. Hitler did not really
believe they would go to war over Poland, but almost had second thoughts when
Britain‟s reaction to the pact was the signing of a formal alliance with Poland on 25
August 1939. This time Britain and France would not be able to back down in the face of
Nazi aggression. If they did, it would signal to the world that they could no longer be
regarded as great powers, and unlike in 1938, re-armament meant that they were now
more ready for war. But the Anglo-Polish alliance did not change anything. It took only a
few days for Hitler to recover his nerve and order that Poland be invaded on 1
September. When Hitler ignored Britain and France‟s ultimatum to call off the attack,
they declared war on 3 September. Nevertheless, within three weeks Poland had been
defeated, its armies completely powerless against the Blitzkrieg (lightning war) launched
by Germany. Two weeks into the fighting, Soviet armies invaded Poland from the east,
at the same time occupying the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania).

Page 28
Why did Britain go to war over Poland in 1939?

Chamberlain signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, giving the Sudetenland
to Germany. However, within months, Germany troops took over the rest of
Czechoslovakia and made it part of Germany. British leaders now realised that the
policy of appeasement had failed. Neither Britain nor France wanted to go to war with
Germany in 1939. They would have preferred a peaceful solution to the Polish crisis
and did their best to persuade the Poles to negotiate with Hitler over the disputed areas,
Danzig and the Polish Corridor. The problem was that the Poles did not want to
negotiate as they knew from the example of Czechoslovakia that negotiating with Hitler
could be fatal. Anyway, once the Nazi-Soviet Pact was signed, negotiations would be
meaningless as Germany and the Soviet Union had secretly resolved to split Poland
between them.

They realised that Hitler would not stop using force to get his own way. They also
realised that Hitler would not stop until he had taken lebensraum in Eastern Europe as
that was part of his foreign policy. They also realised that once he had conquered
Eastern Europe he would be so powerful that Britain and France would be unable to
stop him if he decided to conquer them as well.

Britain and France went to war because they were forced to. Hitler had finally pushed
them to the point at which they had to resist. Once Poland was attacked by Germany,
Britain was forced to honour its guarantee. Of course, this could not save Poland
because there was nothing that Britain and France could do to stop the German
invasion, but it would mean war. The alternative was national humiliation and
acceptance of German domination of Europe.

How far had Hitler achieved his aims in foreign policy?

Hitler achieved some of his foreign policy because he managed to break the terms of
the Treaty of Versailles by rearming Germany and the remilitarization of the Rhineland.
Hitler was also successful in uniting German speaking people that were separated by
the Treaty of Versailles when he completed the Anschluss with Austria and taking the
Sudetenland in 1938 without any form of resistance. These actions made Germany to
be a greater nation once again.

However, Hitler did not achieve his aim of expanding Germany territory because when
Germany took non-German land through the invasion of the rest of Czechoslovakia,
Britain and France realised that Hitler could not be satisfied and that he would not stop.
They warned Hitler if he took one more step toward invading Poland they would declare
war on him. Hitler did not take them serious, he invaded Poland and two days later,
Britain and France declared war on Germany. Therefore, Hitler did not completely
achieve his aims as he failed to take the land in Poland as well as uniting the Germans
in Poland into greater Germany. Hitler did not achieve his aims of defeating communism
since communists remained a powerful opposition in Germany and he failed to defeat
communist Russia during the Second World War.

Page 29
Was the Policy of Appeasement a success or a failure?

The Appeasement Policy was a success to the extent that many believed Chamberlain
had no other choice at that time. It was widely believed that the British forces were not
ready to face up to Hitler who had rearmed Germany remarkably.

Public opinion was also against war as they felt that money should not be spend on
buying weapons but should be used to improve economic and social welfare. The
British government were also away of the fact that important countries in her empire
such as Canada and Australia were against war and there was no guarantee that the
USA would support them in a war against Germany. Chamberlain needed to buy time in
order to rearm Britain and prepare for war which seemed inevitable by the day.

However, the appeasement policy failed as it encouraged Hitler to be more aggressive.

Each gamble he got away with encouraged him to take a bigger risk. For example,
when Hitler got Austria without any resistance, he started his demands over the
Sudetenland and when he got Sudetenland, he invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia and
then invaded Poland despite been warned not to attack Poland. Appeasing Hitler,
basically, made him feel Britain and France were scared of him and would not stop him.

This policy also allowed Germany to grow too stronger than Britain and France. Hitler
was able to secure his western frontier when he remilitarised the land and made use of
minerals in the area in his rearmament programme. Austrian army joined the Germany
army when the Anschluss was completed and he also got the Skoda weapon factory
when he acquired the Sudetenland. It was also a mistake to put too much trust in Hitler.
Hitler had always broken his promises.

Appeasement policy was based on the mistaken idea that Hitler was trustworthy. The
policy also scared the USSR because Hitler made no secret of his desire to expand
Germany eastward. Appeasement sent the message to USSR that Britain and France
would not stand in Hitler‟s way.

Page 30
Factors that contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War

Treaty of Versailles
Problems that Germany experienced after 1920 were blamed on the Treaty of
Versailles. Hitler used it to justify many of his acts of aggression against his neighbours.
Hitler and many Germans believed that the Treaty of Versailles was a constant
reminder to Germans of their defeat in the First World War and it was humiliating
because of the war guilt clause. Therefore, Germany had to seek revenge the moment
that they had recovered. This revenge, that is reversing tor abolishing the terms of the
Treaty of Versailles eventually led to the Second World War as Britain and France
stopped Hitler to take more land in Eastern Europe.

The failure of the League of Nations

The League of Nations failed to act against countries that broke peace. Its failure to
force Japan out of Manchuria and China made Mussolini and Hitler think that they could
also get away with using force to get what they wanted. When the League failed to act
against Italy, Hitler began to break the terms of the Treaty of Versailles such as
remilitarising the Rhineland, made the union with Austria, took over Sudetenland, and
invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia and lastly the invasion of Poland caused WWII.

Hitler’s Foreign Policy

Hitler‟s foreign policy included expanding Germany territory to create more living space
for increasing German population and reversing the Treaty of Versailles, taking back
lost land by force. He made the Anschluss with Austria which made Germany stronger
as the army of Austria joined that of Germany. Germany gained the Skoda weapon
factory when Hitler took over the Sudetenland, a part of Czechoslovakia in 1938 thus
boosting Hitler‟s rearmament programme. Hitler then took over the rest of
Czechoslovakia. When Germany invaded Poland in 1939, Britain and France declared
war on Germany. This marked the beginning of the Second World War

The Appeasement Policy

The appeasement policy gave Hitler the courage to demand more land from Europe.
Every time he got away with what he wanted he took the next step demanding more
land. Hitler then believed that Britain and France were afraid of him and he thought they
would not stop him. Appeasing Hitler made Germany to grow stronger and gave him the
power to take even bigger risks. Since appeasing made Hitler to invade even more
territories, Hitler had to be stopped when he invaded Poland and that‟s what led to the
Second World War.

The Nazi-Soviet Pact

Hitler was not worried about the warnings of Britain and France over Poland. He was
worried of the USSR that they would come to the rescue of Poland. The Nazi-Soviet
Pact gave Hitler an opportunity to attack Poland without fear as Germany and USSR
agreed not to attack each other and secretly agreed to divide Poland among them. After
this pact Hitler invade Poland, two days later, Britain and France declared war on
Germany.

Page 31
 THE COLD WAR

The origins of the Cold War

What was the Cold War?

• The term Cold War refers to a clash between the USA and the USSR.
• The two superpowers got entangled in a Cold War that lasted nearly 50 years
which involved threats and building more and more nuclear weapons.
• There was a state of political tension and military rivalry between nations.
• There was competition between two systems namely Communism and
Capitalism.
• It was not a military war, but instead a war of words, propaganda and threats.

Causes of the Cold War

1 Beliefs
 The Soviet Union was a Communist country, ruled by a dictator, who cared little
about human rights.
 The USA was a capitalist democracy which valued freedom.
2 Aims
 Stalin wanted huge reparations from Germany, and a „buffer‟ of friendly states to
protect the USSR from being invaded again.
 Britain and the USA wanted to protect democracy, and help Germany to recover.
They were worried that large areas of Eastern Europe were falling under Soviet
control.
3 Resentment about History
 The Soviet Union could not forget that in 1918 Britain and the USA had tried to
destroy the Russian Revolution. They refused to sign an alliance with Russia
against Hitler. Stalin also thought that they had not given him enough help in the
Second World War. They did not share the secret of the atomic bomb.
 Britain and the USA could not forget that Stalin had signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with
Germany in 1939. USSR wanted to spread communism. An atomic bomb in USSR‟s
hands was a threat to world peace.
4 Events
Neither side trusted each other. Every action they took made them hate each other
more:
 Yalta Conference (February 1945)
 Potsdam Conference (July 1945)
 Russian expansion in Eastern Europe (1945-48)
 Fulton Speech (1946)
 Greece (February 1947
 Truman Doctrine (March 1947)
 Marshall plan (June 1947)
 Cominform (October 1947)
 Czechoslovakia (February 1948)

Page 32
The 1945 Summit Conferences

The Big Three during the War

During the War, Britain and the USA were allies of the Soviet Union, but the only
thing that united them was their hatred of Germany. In 1945, the Big Three held two
conferences – at Yalta (February) and Potsdam (July) – to try to sort out how they
would organize the world after the war. It was at these conferences that the
tensions between the two sides became obvious.

The Yalta conference

The Big Three: Winston Churchill (Britain), Franklin Roosevelt (USA) and Josef Stalin
(USSR)

Agreements:

1. Russia would join the United Nations.

2. Divide Germany into four „zones‟, which Britain, France, the USA and the USSR
would occupy after the war.
3. Divide the Germany capital, Berlin into four zones
4. Hunt down and bring Nazi war-criminals to trial especially those responsible for the
genocides in concentration camps.
5. Stalin to enter the war with Japan once Germany surrenders.
6. Russia to gain land from Poland and Poland would gain from Germany.
7. Eastern Europe to be seen as Soviet sphere of influence.
8. Set up a Polish Provisional Government of National Unity 'pledged to the holding of
free and unfettered elections as soon as possible'.
9. Help the freed peoples of Europe set up democratic and self-governing countries by
helping them to (a) maintain law and order; (b) carry out emergency relief
measures; (c) set up governments; and (d) hold elections (this was called the
'Declaration of Liberated Europe').
10. Set up a commission to look into reparations.

But, behind the scenes, tension was growing. After the conference, Churchill wrote to
Roosevelt that „The Soviet union has become a danger to the free world.‟

Page 33
The Potsdam conference

The Big Three: Winston Churchill – Clement Atlee (Britain), Harry Truman (USA) and
Josef Stalin (USSR)

The Conference agreed the following Protocols:

1. To set up the four „zones of occupation‟ in Germany as agreed at Yalta.
2. Ban Nazi party and to bring Nazi war-criminals to trial.
3. Poland‟s border to Oder and Neisse River.
4. Repatriate Germans in Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
5. To recognize the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity and hold 'free
and unfettered elections as soon as possible'.
6. Russia was allowed to take reparations from the Soviet Zone, and also 10% of the
industrial equipment of the western zones as reparations. America and Britain
could take reparations from their zones if they wished.
But in fact the Allies had disagreed openly about:

1. The details of how to divide Germany.

2. The size of reparations Germany ought to pay.
3. Russian policy in Eastern Europe.
4. Stalin‟s demands for a naval base in the Mediterranean

The Truman’s doctrine

• When Eastern Europe was in the control of the Soviet Union, the USA changed
their attitude to world politics and they came up with the Truman‟s Doctrine.
• Truman believed that communism succeeded when people faced poverty and
hardship.
• The USA was prepared to send money, equipment and advice to any country
that was threatened by a communist take-over.
• Truman accepted that Eastern Europe was now communist, his aim was to stop
communism from spreading any further.
• This became known as the policy of containment.

THE MARSHALL PLAN

• It was a plan of General George Marshall, the USA secretary of state.

• The USA offered to provide countries with money and goods they needed.
• The offer was open to all the countries of Europe including the Communist ones.
• The basic aim the USA was to contain Communism, therefore, it contributed to
the hostile relationship between USA and USSR.
• The Soviet Union rejected the offer and made sure that none of the other
countries on their side took advantage of it.

Page 34
THE BERLIN BLOCKADE

• Berlin was deep in the Soviet zone and was linked to West Germany by vital
roads, railways and canals. On 24 June 1948, the Soviet Union cut off all roads,
railways and freight traffic to West Berlin.
• West Berlin became developed and professional people from East Berlin walked
over to the West. Stalin did not want to lose the skills of these people.
• He blocked at roads, railways and canals to West Berlin so that the Allies could
not supply aid to West Berlin anymore.
• Stalin also believed he would force the Allies out of Berlin and make Berlin
entirely dependent on the USSR.
• He was to be surprised by the Allies response to the blockade.

THE BERLIN AIRLIFT

The Allies airlifted essential supplies such as food, fuel and medicine to West Berlin.
The USA did not want to attack the blockades because they were not willing to start
another war. The relationships between the East and the West became hostile by the
day. Picking a fight with Stalin about the blockade will only worsen the situation and the
Allies felt nothing good would come from that. No one could predict how Stalin would
react if the Allies ran down the blockade.

The Allies also did not want to give in to Stalin because they knew that he wanted to
have the whole of Berlin under him. If they had withdrawn, Stalin would take the whole
Berlin and might give him the confidence to try to push them by taking other parts of
Germany or other countries. Truman wanted to show Stalin that he was serious with
the policy of containment.

In 11 months a total of 275 000 flights delivered an average of 4 000 tonnes of supplies
per day. As a warning to the USSR, the USA stationed a B-9 aircraft capable of
carrying atomic bombs in Britain. West Berliners supported the Western Allies and
rejected Soviet pressure to become part of one city under a communist council. On 12
May 1949, the USSR reopened the land routes to West Berlin.

EFFECTS OF THE BERLIN WALL

• Many lives were lost because people who tried to cross the wall were shot.
• The movement of refugees was stopped.
• Family and friendship ties were broken.
• People from the East could not move to the more prosperous West.
• They had to accept living in impoverished East Berlin.
• People in the East had to remain in a communist area against their wishes.
• It diminished people‟s hope for a united Germany.
Page 35
HOW THE USSR GAINED CONTROL OF EASTERN EUROPE BY 1948?

By 1945 it was clear that Germany was losing the war. The Allies had landed in France
and were pushing towards Germany, while the Soviet army was moving towards
Germany from the east. The route the Soviet army took allowed it to liberate various
countries that had been occupied by Germany after 1939: the Baltic States (Latvia,
Lithuania and Estonia), Finland, Poland, Romani, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Hungary and
Czechoslovakia.

As the Soviet army moved towards Berlin it left behind soviet troops in every country it
passed through and the USSR did not withdraw their troops from those countries after
the war. In Poland, a communist government was formed despite the wishes of the
most Poles to be a democratic state. In 1945, a communist was elected Prime Minister
of Romania within a left-wing coalition. A left-wing coalition also won the elections in
Bulgaria in 1945. The communist members of the coalition then executed leaders of the
other parties and took over the government.

In Yugoslavia, Marshal Tito (a communist) was elected president in 1945. However,

Stalin did not trust him and they quarreled about how he should run his country. In
Czechoslovakia, a left-wing coalition won elections in 1945. In 1946 communists formed
the largest party, but still within a coalition.
Throughout 1946, Stalin‟s secret police operated in all the countries liberated from
German occupation to ensure that the communists in the coalition governments
remained strong and in power. Gradually the secret police arrested the non-communist
members of the coalitions until fully fledged communist governments were firmly in
place in all the countries.

By doing this, Stalin backtracked on the agreement reached at Yalta where he promised
to allow free elections in the countries of Eastern Europe so that the people could
choose the governments they wanted. Stalin did not trust the Allies as he was
convinced they would attack the Soviet Union at the first opportunity. This is why he
insisted on creating the so-called satellite states between the Soviet Union and the
West.

Page 36
Why the USSR wanted to control Eastern Europe?

Stalin wanted to create a buffer zone between the Soviet Union and the West to
ensure that no West European country would ever be able to invade the Soviet Union
again as had happened in the past first by France under Napoleon and by Germany in
1914 and in 1941.

Stalin also wanted to spread communism. At the time the USSR were the only
communist country in the world therefore, Stalin feared that the capitalists will dominate
the world and they would eventually take a stand against communist Russia. Stalin
wanted to encircle the USSR with friendly nation as a protection against the capitalists.

Stalin also wanted to strengthen the economy of the USSR. No other country
suffered much as Russia did during the war with Germany. Millions lost their lives,
hundred thousands were wounded, many were left homeless and its infrastructures
were destroyed. Stalin would make use of the resources in countries of Eastern Europe
to rebuild his country and its economy. After all it‟s the USSR who liberated these
countries from Germany occupation during the Second World War, so this was a way of
getting reparations from those countries.

WHY WAS THE TRUMAN DOCTRINE IMPORTANT?

The USA wanted to prevent the spread of Communism.

Truman believed that communism succeeded when people faced poverty and hardship.
He sent an American General George Marshall to assess the economic state of Europe
of which he discovered a ruined economy. Europe owed the USA $11.5 billion;
therefore, Marshall suggested that about $12 billion would be needed to rebuild
Europe‟s prosperity. This was to be known as the Marshall Plan/Aid.

It showed that the USA was not going to be isolationist.

The USA changed their attitude to world politics and they came up with the Truman‟s
Doctrine. The USA was prepared to send money, equipment and advice to any country
that was threatened by a communist take-over. Truman accepted that Eastern Europe
was now communist, his aim was to stop communism from spreading any further. This
became known as the policy of containment.

Page 37
It meant money, equipment and advice being invested in receiving countries.
Though the primary aim of the Marshall plan was to put the policy of containment into
practice i.e. to stop the spread of communist, it would also create new markets for
American goods. The Americans remembered the effects of the Depression of the
1930s and Truman wanted to prevent it at all costs.

WHY WAS THE MARSHALL PLAN INTRODUCED?

To help Europe recover from the war

The Marshall Plan was an American initiative to aid Western Europe in economic
assistance to help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II.
The goals of the United States were to rebuild war-torn regions, remove trade barriers,
modernize industry, improve European prosperity and prevent the spread of
communism.

To prevent the spread of Communism

The Marshall Plan was introduced to try to prevent the spread of communism. Truman
believed that communism spread when people faced hardship and poverty. In the
aftermath of the war, European countries were still rationing, a recipe for communism.
Truman wanted to rebuild Europe‟s prosperity to prevent communism taking hold in
suffering countries.

To help USA’s trade with Europe

Though the primary aim of the Marshall plan was to put the policy of containment into
practice i.e. to stop the spread of communist, it would also create new markets for
American goods. The Americans remembered the effects of the Depression of the
1930s and Truman wanted to prevent it at all costs.

Page 38
Why Stalin / USSR refused the Marshall Plan?

At first Stalin showed some interest in the Marshal Plan program but later refused to
accept it. He saw the plan was against communism and it was used by the West to
belittle the USSR in Eastern Europe. Stalin forbade any of the Eastern European states
to apply for the aid. He also felt the USA used its economic power to dominate as many
as possible states to be dependent on dollars.

The Marshall Plan included economic assistance to Germany, and the Russians could
not tolerate such aid to the enemy that had so recently devastated the Soviet Union in
the Second World War.

He maintained that the Marshall Plan would destroy the political and economic
independence of Europe. Alternatively, Stalin came up with COMECON (Council for
Mutual Economic Assistance). COMECON‟s stated objective was to devise strategies to
develop and integrate the economies of member states.

WHY DID STALIN BLOCKADE BERLIN?

Britain, France and the USA combined their zones which became known as West
Germany and West Berlin. They also reformed the currency and within months there
were signs that West Germany was recovering. As West Germany developed, more
skilled people left East Berlin to West Berlin, which was to the disadvantage to the
Soviet Union.

Berlin was deep in the Soviet zone and was linked to West Germany by vital roads,
railways and canals. On 24 June 1948, the Soviet Union cut off all roads, railways and
freight traffic to West Berlin.

Stalin blocked Berlin because West Berlin became developed and professional people
from East Berlin walked over to the West. Stalin did not want to lose the skills of these
people. He blocked at roads, railways and canals to West Berlin so that the Allies could
not supply aid to West Berlin anymore. Stalin also believed he would force the Allies out
of Berlin and make Berlin entirely dependent on the USSR.

Page 39
WHY DID THE WEST AIRLIFTED SUPPLIES INTO WEST BERLIN?

The USA did not want to attack the blockades because they were not willing to start
another war. The relationships between the East and the West became hostile by the
day. Picking a fight with Stalin about the blockade will only worsen the situation and the
Allies felt nothing good would come from that. No one could predict how Stalin would
react if the Allies ran down the blockade.

The Allies also did not want to give in to Stalin because they knew that he wanted to
have the whole of Berlin under him. If they had withdrawn, Stalin would take the whole
Berlin and might give him the confidence to try to push them by taking other parts of
Germany or other countries. Truman wanted to show Stalin that he was serious with the
policy of containment.

WHY WAS THE BERLIN WALL BUILT?

East Berlin was not as prosperous as West Berlin. While the USSR wanted as much as
possible out of East Berlin as compensation for war, the Allies start to rebuild Western
Berlin, and soon the west started to recover economically and provided an easy escape
route from East Germany to the West for about 250 000 refugees every year.

Mainly skilled people were fleeing to the West where they could get better-paid jobs.
East Germany and the USSR could not afford this. On the orders from Khrushchev and
the East Germany government, a barbed wire barrier was put up across Berlin, followed
by a wall of concrete blocks.

Khrushchev built the wall to prevent the flow of refugees as this made the USSR and its
Communist policies look bad and weak.

Page 40
Who was to blame for the Cold War, the USA or USSR?

The USA where to blame because the did not send troops to help the USSR fight
Germany in the East and they kept the secret of the atomic bomb while the two, USA
and USSR were regarded as allies during the Second World War since they were
fighting a common enemy. The attitude of the USA during the war made the USSR to
feel that the West were willing to let Germany to destroy the USSR and Stalin feared the
USA would make use of the atomic bomb on the USSR after the war with Germany and
her allies. Therefore, Stalin ordered his scientists to develop their own atomic bomb to
defend themselves.

The USA can also be blamed for stopping the spread of Communism. All what Stalin
intended to do was to create a buffer of friendly nations to protect the USSR from
another attack from the West. The USSR had previously been attacked three times by
the West, firstly by France under Napoleon, secondly by Germany in 1914 and thirdly by
Germany again in 1941. The USSR felt threatened by the capitalists as they were the
only communist country in the world at that time, so, Stalin wanted to encircle the USSR
with friendly communist countries. Truman had not understood how much Russia had
suffered in the Second World War.

Besides this, the USSR was to blame for the Cold War because they wanted to spread
communism especially by forcing countries of Eastern Europe to be communists. The
USSR was suppose to let the people of those countries to decide their own form of
government rather than been forced. Stalin was trying to build up a Soviet empire.
Communism violated human rights and this was against the principles of the USA and
their Western allies.

The USSR deliberately crippled the economy of countries in Eastern Europe including
Eastern Germany by taking reparations in the form of resources. Stalin wanted Russia
to rule the world and there was no way he was ever going to stop unless someone
stopped him. It was not just the USA, the whole free Western world was aware of the
threat of communism.

Page 41
 THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS

BACKGROUND

• In 1898 the USA helped the Cuban to win independence from Spain.
• The USA built a huge naval base at Guantanamo. American companies invested
heavily in Cuban industries.
• American companies had large stakes in most of Cuban companies, particularly
in mining and agriculture.
• In 1934 the USA helped the military officer Fulgencio Batista to establish himself
in power.

THE CUBAN REVOLUTION

• In 1959, Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. The new leader proposed
reforms to improve the economy of Cuba and in particular to end corruption in
government and the exploitation of the peasants and sugar mill workers.
• Fidel Castro also nationalized American businesses and plantations but he
allowed the Americans to keep the naval base.
• In the summer of 1960, the USA stopped buying Cuban sugar and later banned
all trade with Cuba. Then in January 1961, the USA broke off diplomatic relations
with Cuba.
• The USA hoped that these measures would starve Castro into submission but
they seemed to have pushed him closer to the Soviet Union.
• Castro began appointing communists to his government and signed a trade
agreement with the Soviet Union in which Cuban sugar would be swapped for
machinery, oil and economic aid.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USA AND CUBA FROM 1959 TO 1961

• In 1959 Fidel Castro overthrew American backed dictator Batista.

• Fidel Castro also nationalized American businesses and plantations but he
allowed the Americans to keep the naval base.
• In the summer of 1960, the USA stopped buying Cuban sugar and later banned
all trade with Cuba.
• Then in January 1961, the USA broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba.
• The USA hoped that these measures would starve Castro into submission but
they seemed to have pushed him closer to the Soviet Union.

Page 42
THE BAY OF PIGS
• The Cuban exiles (Batista's followers) received military training, weapons and
transport from the USA‟s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and aimed to launch
an attack on the coast of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs.
• They intended to establish a base for guerrilla activities against Castro and were
confident the Cuban people would support the.
• The US President Kennedy gave a go-ahead to 1 400 anti-Castro Cubans to
attack but it was a disaster.
• When they landed at the Bay of Pigs, they found themselves facing over 20 000
Cuban troops.
• There was no popular uprising to support the invasion.
• All the exiles were killed or captured.
• The USA especially president Kennedy was humiliated.
• After the Bay of Pigs incidence Fidel Castrol requested for military assistance
from the USSR and he declared Cuba was now a communist state.

WHY USSR INSTALLED MISSILES IN CUBA?

Khrushchev wanted to test the USA. He wanted to see how strong the new, young
American president was. He seemed to think that Kennedy was weak and would give in
to his scheme. He wanted to see whether the Americans would back down and let the
missiles stay, or whether they would face up to the USSR and force them to remove the
missiles.

Khrushchev wanted to gain the upper hand in the arms race. The USSR was very
concerned about the missile gap between the USSR and the US. NATO had long
range missiles in Turkey aimed at a number of Soviet cities and industrial areas. The
USSR had only medium range nuclear missile that could not reach the USA. He
believed that with missiles on Cuba threatening the USA, this would discourage the
USA from launching a missile strike against the Soviet Union.

Khrushchev also wanted to trap the USA and drag them to a nuclear war. The USSR
made no attempt to hide the missile sites, and even allowed the missiles to be
transported on the open decks of cargo ships.

This also gave Khrushchev an opportunity to spread communist to the West and
especially South America on the doorstep of the USA who always tried to stop
communism.

Khrushchev wanted to bargain with the USA. He thought he could use the missiles as
a bargaining chip. With missiles in Cuba, he could agree to remove them in return for
American concessions such as the removal of American missiles in Turkey.
Page 43
WHY THE USA WERE WORRIED ABOUT RUSSIAN MISSILES IN CUBA?

The Russian missiles were on the doorstep of the USA and threatened its supremacy
as leader of the West. The missiles were erected in Cuba which was very close to the
USA, about 160 kilometers to Florida. The missiles could destroy every major city in the
USA as far as 2 000 kilometers from Cuba.

Americans feared the missiles even more as they did not know how the young
inexperienced Kennedy would handle the crisis. Many Americans feared a nuclear war
between the USA and the USSR which could have resulted in ending humanity.

WHO WAS THE VICTOR IN THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, USA (KENNEDY) OR
USSR (KHRUSHCHEV)?

It was a victory for Kennedy (USA) because he managed to secure US‟s national
security by successfully negotiating with the USSR for the removal of missiles from
Cuba. The Soviet missiles in Cuba was less than 160km from US cities and could fire
into US with a rage of 2 000 kilometers giving USSR the capacity to strike cities deep
within the US.

In order to protect USA from any potential nuclear threat from the USSR, Kennedy
needed the removal of these nuclear missiles in Cuba. Soviet missiles in Cuba were
removed under UN supervision where as USA missiles in Turkey were removed
secretly.

Kennedy was victorious because he gave Khrushchev an ultimatum to remove the

missiles within two days. He was able to stop Soviet ships before the quarantine line.
He forced Khrushchev to back down. This raised his prestige in the USA and the West.

However, it was a victory for Khrushchev because he managed to force Kennedy into
making concessions for the removal of the missiles from Turkey which were of a threat
and the promise not to invade Cuba.

Despite the removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba, Cuba remains communist, heavily
armed and a useful ally to Russia in the USA‟s sphere of influence.

He had managed to avoid direct confrontation with the USA by claiming that the Cuban
missiles served as deterrence to US invasion, which was in fact a bluff, as the power
balance between USA and the USSR tilted towards the favor of the USSR.

Khrushchev was praised for his willingness to compromise and saved the world from a
nuclear war by agreeing to the removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba.

Page 44
 NAMIBIA UNDER GERMANY COLONIAL RULE 1884 – 1915

The role of missionaries

• To explore new areas for expanding their religious activities.

• To spread European religion and culture.
• Converted Namibian people to Christianity.
• They introduced education.
• Taught Namibians how to read and write.
• Constructed churches and schools.

ESTABLISHMENT OF GERMAN COLONIAL RULE / THE ROLE OF ADOLF

LUDERITZ IN THE COLONISATION OF NAMIBIA

• Adolf Lϋderitz sent his agent Heinrich Vogelsang to buy land for him.
• Vogelsang bought land around Angra Pequena.
• This land was bought from the Nama chief of Bethanie, Joseph Fredrich.
• Lϋderitz established a trading post at Angra Pequena and continued to buy more
land.
• Lϋderitz convinced the German chancellor, Bismarck to declare protectorate over
the area he had bought.
• Germany flag was hoisted at Angra Pequena and other parts.
• This was to show that this land belonged to Germany.

PROTECTION TREATIES

Chiefs promised:

• Not to make any treaties with other European nations

• Not to let citizens of any other nation use the land unless the German
government allowed it
• To protect the life and properties of Germans on their territory
• To allow these Germans to carry on trade
• To leave jurisdiction over all Europeans to the German authorities

Germans promised:

• To give protection to the chiefs and his community

• To recognize the chief‟s jurisdiction over his own people
• To respect the customs and tradition of the Africans
Page 45
BORDERS

• In the north, Germans negotiated with the Portuguese about the Angolan /
Namibian border. This was set on the Kunene River.
• In the east, the border was fixed between Germans and British who occupied
Botswana.
• Also the southern boundary with the British colony of the Cape was established
on the Orange River.
• At the same negotiations, German got the Caprivi Strip and Britain got Zanzibar.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NAMIBIANS AND GERMANS

• Many Germans came to Namibia for various reasons. Hunters and traders were
interested in making money, while missionaries wanted to covert people to
Christianity.
• A trade relation develop between the Namibian Societies and the Germans,
as the local people realized that they could buy useful household goods such
as buckets and tools also sell cattle, food and other produced goods to the
traders. Some people became wealthier.
• Various Namibian Societies lost land, which led to wars in the country
between the Germans and various different groups.
• Protection treaties were signed, the treaty did have the effect of stabilising the
situation but pockets of the rebellion persisted and real peace was never
achieved.

THE LIVING CONDITIONS OF THE NAMIBIANS UNDER GERMAN COLONIAL

RULE

• Namibian farm workers were badly treated.

• Workers were beaten injured and even killed.
• Colonial Police sided with the colonial farmers.
• Workers badly / lowly paid / not enough money to buy basic necessities.
• Workers were subjected to minimum food rations and as a result farm workers
resorted to steal cattle and hunting wild animals.

Page 46
WAR AGAINST WITBOOI 1893-4

• Von Francois attacked Witbooi at Hornkrans (Witbooi‟s headquarter)

• Eighty people mostly women and children were killed
• Witbooi escaped with most of his force
• Witbooi soon hit back, attacked German army camps and the wagons which
brought supplies from Walvis Bay to Windhoek
• Large parts of the country were under Witbooi
• Von François was replaced by Theodor Leutwein
• Leutwein attacked Witbooi at his new headquarter, Naukluft mountains
• After a long battle, Germans won
• Witbooi was forced to sign a treaty but he refused an unconditional surrender
• His fighters were allowed to keep their arms
• Witbooi had to provide armed support for the Germans if they needed it.

THE RESISTANCE OF 1896

• Mbanderus under Chief Kahimemua and Nikondemus Kambahahiza revolted

against loss of cattle through the artificial boundary set by Leutwein.
• They were joined by a Nama community, the Khaus.
• This was the first time Hereros and Namas acting together against Germans.
• Germans with their Namibian supporters won.
• Kahimemua and Nikondemus Kambahahiza were executed at Okahandja.

THE IMPACT OF GERMAN COLONIAL RULE ON NAMIBIANS

NEGATIVE IMPACTS
• Namibian people were left without land for grazing their animals.
• They ended up without rights and freedoms in their own country.
• They were divided into ethnic groups.
• Many were beaten, wounded, arrested or killed.
• They were forced to become cheap labourers.
• Families / marriages broke up because of the contract labour system.

POSITIVE IMPACTS
• Namibians were provided with jobs.
• They were provided with education.
• They were converted to Christianity.
• Namibia received infrastructural development.
• Germans discovered some minerals.
• They traded with locals.

Page 47
OPPOSITION/RESISTANCE TO GERMAN COLONIAL RULE

• Some chiefs like Kaptein Hendrick Witbooi refused to sign protection treaties with
the Germans.
• Some chiefs e.g. Maharero who had earrlier singed, decided to cancel these
treaties.
• Some chiefs e.g Kahimemua refused to make their land available to the
Germans.
• Chiefs such as Hendrick Witbooi wrote letters to other leaders telling them not to
sign treaties or give land to the Germans.
• Some refused to see the Germans e.g. Kambonde rejected Leutwein‟s request to
visit him in the north.
• Workers organised strikes, go-slow and escaped from work.
• The last resort was to take up arms against the Germans.

THE HERERO GENOCIDE / EXTERMINATION

• Von Trotha issued an extermination order to kill all Hereros, women or children,
with or without weapons.
• He did not allow anyone to surrender.
• Some Hereros including Samuel Maharero fled through the Omaheke towards
Botswana.
• Thousands died during the journey through the desert as there was no water.
• It is estimated about 75 – 80% of the Hereros and Namas had die.
• Many were taken prison and sent to a concentration camp on Shark Island in
Luderitz bay.

WHY GERMANS WANTED TO COLONIZE NAMIBIA?

The Rhenish Missionaries wanted protection

The Rhenish missionaries lived among Namibian communities but their lives were often
under threat due to ongoing war and conflict between the Hereros and the Namas. They
called for colonial administration that would eventual end these war and they would
continue with their religious activities. They first requested this protection from the Cape
Colony then to the German government.

To explore the territory for mineral wealth

Business people (merchants) in Germany started to pressurize the German government
to show more interest in colonies as other European countries such as Britain and
France were benefiting much while Germany was left behind. Colonialism would enable
them to have concessions to mineral wealthy of the territory.

Page 48
To trade with the indigenous people
With colonies they would gain opportunities like trading with locals and have access to
raw materials and valuable mineral such as diamond, gold etc. which could improve
Germany industries. It would also open up a new market for their products.

They wanted land

Germany was after land to resettle the poor Germans/war victims (Franco-Prussian
war) as well as land for agriculture, farming, to produce and be exported to German
markets. With the establishment of the German empire there was a demand that
Germany should have its own colonies and thereby became recognized as a colonial
power.

WHY NAMIBIAN CHIEFS WERE UNWILLING TO SELL LAND TO GERMANS?

It was a symbol of livelihood

The traditional leaders were not eager to sell the land because it was their symbol of
livelihood, where they could cultivate and produce food to feed their families and by
selling it, they will be disposed and will not be able to produce food for the sustainability
of their people. it is also where they grazed their cattle. Selling their land to the
Germans will their animals with no areas to graze which could results in many of them
dying.

They feared colonialism.

The land indicated informal political powers; it was their identity, heritage and status.
Selling their land would mean losing their power as they would find themselves under
Germany administration. The Oorlam communities remembered the arrival of the British
in the Cape Colony leaving them with no land thus forcing them to migrate north and
beyond the Orange River into present day Namibia.

EXPLAIN THE METHODS USED BY THE GERMANS TO SUBDUE/CONTROL THE

NAMIBIAN COMMUNITIES

Land Confiscation:
The Germans knew that as long as the Namibians had land and cattle, they will be able
to support themselves. The Germans therefore, looked at different ways to get hold of
Namibian land. They introduced the “protection treaties” according to which they were to
be protected against each other in exchange for land. In actual fact the Namibians did
not need this protection, because they had sorted their differences amongst themselves
earlier, but now the protection treaties took away some of their land. The fact that they
lost more and more land through the protection treaties debts, the police zone etc.
forced the Namibian people to go and work for the Germans, since they could not
sustain themselves anymore.
Page 49
Cattle Confiscation
Cattle were a necessity of life for many Namibians, without their land and cattle, they
could hardly survive. If Namibians resisted the colonial authorities, their cattle were
taken by force. In 1903, Governor Leutwein admitted that the traders had been acting
wrongly. He tried to control them by passing a law saying that no more goods should be
sold on credit to Namibians. The law did not stop the activities of the traders. They
demanded even higher prices for the goods they had previously sold on credit, and they
put Namibians under pressure to pay immediately. The people suffered even more than
before.

Colonial Oppression
The German colonial government did not stop settlers, traders or German soldiers from
violating Namibian communities. In the early 1900s, murders, rapes, beatings and other
crimes of violence were often committed without punishment by the colonists. By 1904
the situation had become unbearable.

WHY GERMANS CREATED RESERVES?

To control the movement of various groups

Germans wanted to control the movement of indigenous people by confining them to
reserves. They could not leave these places without identity passes. The Germans
would have complete power over mining and other commercial activities that were
carried out in white areas only.

To prevent groups from fighting one another

Reserves could be simply used as a German reservoir for cheap labour. White settlers,
traders and missionaries found it extremely hard to carry out their duties because of the
constant fighting between various native groups. Confining them in reserves meant that
peace could be established and the economy would grow. Germans would exploit
resources without any interference.

To separate blacks from whites (divide and rule)

Germans believed that it would be easier to control Namibians if they were to leave in
reserves. Namibians would not unite and develop a sense of solidarity in opposing
Germany administration. At the same time it would allows the Germans to be in control
of the economic heartland of the territory i.e. areas that had good fertile land for
agricultural purposes, areas rich in mineral deposits.

Page 50
WHY DID NAMIBIANS BECOME POOR UNDER GERMAN RULE?

Namibians had no antidotes to fight the rinderpest. German farmers were supplied with
antidotes and they did not lose many cattle, and that caused many Namibians to come
and work for the Germans, in order to survive and make a living.

The German Authorities set up the police zone to exercise greater control on the
indigenous people. Those who stayed in reserves, where it was dry and barren with low
rainfall, were forced to move into the police zone to look for work.

The construction of the Windhoek-Otavi railway made things worse. The railway passed
through the heart of Herero land and Namibians were forced to move without
compensation. No Namibian was allowed to live within 20 KM wide both sides of the
railway.

Namibians lost their cattle to the Germans especially the traders. They would give their
goods to Namibians on credit and set a date for payments. When this day came, if no
payments were made, German traders would confiscate cattle often more than the
value of goods. They would choose the best cattle in the kraal.

WHY THE WAR OF NATIONAL RESISTANCE STARTED / WHY HEREROS OR

NAMIBIANS REVOLTED AGAINST GERMANS?

They lost their land

Large areas of land had been taken away from the Namibian communities in the centre
and south of the country. The German colonial authorities gave this land to the
increasing number of German settlers. A German Decree of 1898 ordered that reserves
should be set up for Namibians. One of the reserves was set up in the areas of the
Namas and another in the area of the Hereros. Namibians were being treated like
foreign in their own country.

The construction of the railways made things even worse. The Windhoek –
Swakopmund line passed through the southern part of the area of the Hereros. In 1903
the Windhoek – Otavi railway line construction began. This went through the heartland
of the Hereros. The railway company took a 20 kilometer wide strip of land on both
sides of the railway line and no Namibian was allowed to leave within that land. People
had to move without compensation. The Hereros refused to meet these demands. They
knew that if they gave in, it would open up their land to German settlers.

Page 51
Their cattle were taken away by Germans
Cattle were a necessity of life for many Namibians. Without their land and cattle, they
could hardly survive. If a Namibian resisted the colonial authorities, his cattle were taken
by force. German Governor Theodor Leutwein announced an artificial southern
boundary to the land of the Hereros. Any cattle crossing this boundary were taken by
the Germans. The Hereros naturally saw this as robbery and tension grew.

Traders also took cattle by robbing Namibians. They would force Namibians to get their
goods on credit and a few weeks later they would come back and demand payments. If
no payments were made, cattle were taken often they would pick out the best cows
more than the value of goods. One man‟s cattle were taken to pay other people‟s debts.

In 1903 the German Governor, Theodor Leutwein admitted that the traders had been
acting wrongly. He tried to control them by passing a law. The law said that no more
goods should be sold on credit to Namibians. But the law did not stop the traders. They
demanded even higher price for the goods they had sold on credit before the law was
passed. They put the Namibians under pressure to pay immediately. So the people
became poorer than before.

They were brutally oppressed

German colonial rule was oppressive and cruel. The colonial authorities crushed any
attempts at opposition or resistance. But they did not stop settlers, traders or German
soldiers violating Namibian communities. In the early 1900s, there were murders, rapes,
beatings and other crimes of violence committed by the colonists. By 1904, when the
War of National Resistance began, the situation had become unbearable.

WHY GERMANY SENT MORE TROOPS TO NAMIBIA?

The first “Hottentots uprising” of the Nama and their legendary leader Hendrik Witbooi
occurred. In Germany, the government was losing patience with the inability of Von
Francois to defeat Witbooi. So in 1894, more troops and a new commander were sent
to SWA.

There were many further local uprising against the German rule as the Germans tried to
control by seizing the local property by artificially imposing European legal views of
property ownership which led to the largest of the rebellions known as the Herero wars
of 1904.

The remote farms were attacked and +- 150 German Settlers were killed. The 766
German troops was no match for the Herero. The Herero went on the offensive,
sometimes surrounding Okahandja and Windhoek, destroying the railway bridge to
Osona.
Page 52
WHY DID THE GERMANS CONDUCT AN EXTERMINATION CAMPAIGN AGAINST
THE HERERO?

Herero and Namas had attacked German settlers

The Herero had increasingly become frustrated with the expansion of German settlers
into their tribal lands. There were many raids on German settlers, resulting in many
deaths. It was decided that the Herero must be hunted down. In January 1904, the
Herero people led by Samuel Maharero and Nama led by Captain Hendrik Witbooi
rebelled against German colonial rule. German General Lothar von Trotha gave an
extermination order to end the war. Hereros were defeated in the battle of Waterberg
and drove them into the Omaheke desert where most of them died of dehydration.

The land had mineral deposits

The German settlers wanted more land and the land which had the water supplies. This
was resisted by the Herero who considered water sources vital for their survival. The
Germans decided they would control all water supplies. German companies wanted to
exploit the numerous mineral deposits, especially copper. These were deposited under
Herero land, so they had to be removed.

DID NAMIBIANS BENEFIT FROM GERMAN COLONIAL RULE?

The benefited because many Namibians became literate through Missionaries on a

basic level. The country prospered during the German Colonial Era, buildings, towns
arose. Namibians learned about trading and western customs, tradition and values
which they could have applied later in life. Railways were built to enhance the transport
of goods and trade with other countries.

On the other hand, they did not benefit because Namibians became poor because the
Germans confiscated their land. The loss of land caused a great financial setback. Their
cattle were confiscated which enriched the Germans. Many times they had to pay more
than what the goods were costing because the traders over charged them when they
took goods on credit.

A police zone was set up to control the people‟s movement in their own country.
Reserves were set up to keep the people poor because these areas were normally dry
and barren and have poor living conditions. Namibians were used for cheap labor. They
were paid low wages and were subjected to beatings and injustices.

Page 53
DID NAMIBIANS BENEFIT FROM TRADE WITH GERMANS?

They benefited because Trade with Germans led to an increased demand for wage
labourers. This opened up opportunities for natives to make income from this new
source. A money economy was introduced and with this money could pay colonial taxes
and also buy more necessities for their households.

Besides this, Namibians did not benefit because traders forced and tricked Namibians
to buy goods on credit, a system they did not understand. Failing to pay back, cost them
a lot of cattle.

People lost their traditional skills of making household goods. Increasing dependence
on trade had a very bad effect on the living conditions of Herero households especially
after the rinderpest. Headmen were driven into debt in order to take grazing land as
payment for vaccination.

DID GERMANS USE NAMIBIA’S NATURAL RESOURCES TO DEVELOP THE

COUNTRY?

Yes they developed Namibia because the copper mine at Tsumeb started operating in
1906, and diamonds were found near Luderitz. Settlers and traders flooded to these
areas and resulted in the constructions of houses, business to support the mines, the
supply of foods and other goods. Road and railways were also built and these
contributed to the development of the country‟s infrastructure.

The settler farms and the mines were a long way from the towns and the ports. In order
for the farms and mines to operate, they needed good transport system to transport
more and more goods over a long distances and greater quantities, that‟s how railways
were built.

However, they did not because Germans realised that Namibia had the potential to
become an excellent source of riches. They also realised that the people of Namibia
were keen to buy goods made in Germany. They exported all the Namibian resources in
the raw form and imported the finished products and sold at a very high price to make
profit and expand their business markets.

Page 54
WHICH WAS THE MAIN REASON WHY THE WAR OF NATIONAL RESISTANCE
STARTED, LOSS OF LAND OR LOSS OF CATTLE?

Loss of land because land was the source of wealth to the Namibian people, it was
used for grazing their animals, cultivation of food and also served as a source of water.
The Namibians ended up with land that was not enough for their animals and food
production which forced the Namibians to work for the Germans because of poverty.
Therefore, Namibians decided to take up arms against the Germans to gain back lost
land.

On the other hand loss of cattle by the Germans also contributed to the resistance
because cattle was an essential commodity to the Namibian people as it is used as a
source of food e.g. milk and meat and also served as a form of status among the
communities. They could also sell their cattle and buy other necessities of cattle; life
became difficult and hard and eventually forced them into the contract labour system.

WAS NAMIBIAN RESISTANCE TO GERMAN COLONIAL RULE SUCCESSFUL?

It was successful because Kaptein Hendrick Witbooi, Chief Maharero and other
Namibian were not keen to subject themselves to the Germans. They resisted any
efforts to make land available, hunt and trade with the Germans. Hatred amongst these
groups developed against the Germans.

Germans were confined to the central and southern parts of Namibia as they could
never defeat the northern communities. They were too large in numbers and their
weapons were modern. German colonial rule came to an end after the First World War.
During that war Namibian communities supported the invading South African troops in
the hope of defeating the oppressive German rule and together Germany surrendered
and was defeated by the end of the First World War.

It was not successful because when Namibians were not cooperating with the German
colonialists, the Germans started to invade and dominate Namibians. Witbooi was
attacked, defeated and forced to sign a protection treaty with the Germans. Mbanderus
and other small communities were also defeated which left central and southern parts of
the country under German control.

During the War of National Resistance a full-scale war evolved. The south and central
regions were involved in war. Thousand Namas and Hereros were killed. Lothar Von
Trotha brought an end to this war by exterminating 80% Hereros and 75% Namas. With
massive reinforcements from Germany von Trotha prepared a major attack on
Namibian forces. He intended to destroy the Namibian communities and tricked them
into entering the dry Omaheke sandveld. Without food and water many Namibian
families died.
Page 55
How important was the First World War to Namibia?

It was important because under the South African government some development did
take place. Hospitals, clinics and schools were built, although schools for blacks were
inferior to those of the whites. Roads were also constructed. Second Tier government
gave some measure of self-government to indigenous groups, even though important
matters like foreign policy was decided by the South Africans.

The other big advantage of World War I was that many Namibians fought voluntarily in
the war. Together with invading South African troops defeated Germans in Namibia in
1915 and that marked the end of German colonial rule. In Europe they came into
contact with different nationalities. This resulted in the beginning of different movements
trying to gain independence for Namibia.

However, it was not important because Namibian situation did not change after World I.
German domination was replaced by South African domination. When the war ended
Namibia was placed as a mandate in the care of South Africa who was supposed to
lead Namibia to independence and rule Namibia in the interest of its people. But all
South Africa really did was to exploit the people in the same way the Germans did. The
South African government used the country as cheap land to sell to Afrikaner farmers.
Like in German times, white people from South Africa flocked into Namibia. Namibians
were still ruled by a foreign power and did not have any independence.

The South Africans brought even more drastic changes. South Africa's oppressive
apartheid laws were now applied to Namibia and they confiscated more Namibian land
to provide farms for the South African settlers. As it was under the Germans, the South
Africans employed Namibians on their farms and mines. Namibians received low wages
and were treated cruelly by the South Africans. Under the Odendaal Plan, many
Namibians were put in reserves and lost even more land. Chiefs and headmen in the
reserves had no independent power. Under South African rule, just like that of the
Germans, resistance was also met with military power.

Page 56
WAS NAMIBIA BETTER OFF AS A COLONY (UNDER GERMANY) OR MANDATE
(UNDER SA)

As a colony because many Namibians became literate through Missionaries on a basic

level. The country prospered during the German Colonial Era, buildings, towns arose.
Namibians learned about trading and western customs, tradition and values which they
could have applied later in life. Railways were built to enhance the transport of goods
and trade with other countries.

As a mandate because under SA rule black Namibians were once again allowed to own
livestock, even though in the reserves. The reserves ensured that the indigenous
people did not lose all their land to white settlers. No white people were allowed to settle
in the area north of the so-called Red Line (outside the former Police Zone) and thus
there was very little loss of culture and traditions in the former Owamboland, Kavango
and Caprivi.

SA also had to report to the Mandates Commission every year about how they were
running the territory. The Mandates Commission became very angry about the way in
which SA applied its racial laws in Namibia and tried to force them to give the
indigenous people more rights and freedom.

Page 57
 SOUTH AFRICA SINCE 1948

How South Africa was charged by WW2:

• More than 2 million South Africans including 120 000 blacks fought in WW2
• Their experiences caused many whites to conclude racism was not justified
• Black servicemen met blacks from other countries who had political rights
• This strengthened their resolve to fight for political equality in South Africa
• During the war the economy boomed but when troops returned home factories
no longer had to produce for war efforts
• An economic depression set in
• There was high unemployment and dissatisfaction among both whites and blacks
• This made it possible for the National Party under Malan to win the support of
Afrikaners by making promises to enforce racial segregation to protect whites
from competition from blacks

THE ELECTION OF 1948

National Party (NP) under Dr DF Malan

• Offered apartheid to be enforced by the central government

• Each group to develop and practice its own culture and manage its own affairs
• The government would control all finances and decide where and how much land
each ethnic group would receive
• They believed in white supremacy
• They wanted to protect the purity of their race

United Party (UP) under Jan Smuts

• Segregation but not through laws

• Believed that black urbanization was inevitable and that assimilation was bound
to take place
• Wanted to manage urbanization by providing separate living space and
amenities for each group

Page 58
THE APARTHEID SYSTEM

• Political system of the National Party of South Africa from 1948 to 1994
• The policy separated blacks from whites
• The best living areas were given to whites
• Blacks only had 13% of the land
• Different laws were mad to ensure that white privileges were protected and to
keep blacks inferior
• All spheres of life were separated: religion, recreation, sports, culture, education,
the economy, suburbs, etc.

APARTHEID LAWS:

Prohibition of Mixed Marriage Act of 1949

• Made marriages between people of different races illegal

Immorality Act of 1950

• Made sexual relations between different races illegal

Population Registration Act of 1950

• Classified every individual according to race
• Defined which race every person belonged to e.g. white, black, colored
• Made it easier for the government to decide who had to stay where and to have
total control of all the people

Group Areas Act of 1950

• Made provision for separate residential areas for each race
• People were forced to relocate to other places
• People lost their properties in the process
• People had to adapt to the new environment
• Destroyed the spirit of nationalism as people could no longer unite

Separate Amenities Act of 1953

• The division of public services and spaces according to race
• Black people could not use the same shops, beaches and buses as whites
• Public places like banks and post offices had separate entries
• The standard of services were also not same for blacks and whites

Page 59
Bantu Education Act of 1953
• Pupils at black schools no longer studied the same syllabus as their white peers.
• Less money was spent on black pupils
• Resources for black were not enough
• Resources for blacks were of poor quality
• Blacks had to share benches
• Classrooms were of poor standard

Native Abolition of Passes Act / Pass Law

• Every black outside the native reserves had to carry a passbook (reference
document) wherever they went all the time
• Restricted the movement of blacks
• Police could demand to see the passbook at any time
• Anyone without it could be jailed
• Separated families as women stayed in rural areas / reserves
• It was more difficult for women to acquire passes.

SEPARATION OF THE RACES

• No mixed marriages.
• No sexual relations between Whites and non-whites.
• White people, Black people and Coloured people had to live in separate areas.
• Black people could not remain in urban areas without a permit.
• There were separate schools for Black people and White people.
• There were separate public amenities.
• There were separate toilets, parks, beaches, cemeteries.
• Bantustans were created as the homelands of Black people.

CREATION OF BANTUSTANS

• With criticism of apartheid mounting in the UN, South Africa invented the new
policy called the Homeland / Bantustans policy
• They abandoned using the word apartheid
• Blacks could develop into self-government
• Hendrik Verwoerd worked a plan of Bantustans
• Verwoerd argued that Bantustans were the original homes of the black people of
South Africa
• Shortly it was known as Separate development and Self-determination

Page 60
EFFECTS OF THE BANTUSTANS

• Communities were split into ethnic groups

• Bantustans were too small for people to farm in tradition way
• The land given to blacks was dry and barren
• Bantustans were too small which led to overcrowdings
• Thousands of people were moved out of their existing homes and resettled in
unfamiliar places
• The best farming land, the towns and areas with mineral remained under the
control of whites

THE DEFIANCE CAMPAIGN LAUNCHED IN 1952

• People deliberately broke the laws e.g.

– Using whites only entrances
– Refusing to carry passes
• The campaigns lasted for three months
• Over 8 000 people were arrested

THE FREEDOM CHARTER OF 26 JUNE 1955

• Principles of South African Congress Alliances

• Attended by African National Congress, South African Indian Congress, South
African Congress of Democrats and the Colored People‟s Congress
• Called for non-racial South Africa with political rights for all
• Demands:
– Land to be given to all landless people
– Living wages and shorter hours of work
– Free and compulsory education irrespective of color, race or nationality
• The meeting was attended by roughly 3 000 delegates
• The meeting was broken up by the police on the second day

THE SHARPEVILLE MASSACRE

• PAC and ANC organized the demonstration against the Pass Law
• People left their pass books and marched to the police station
• They demanded to be arrested
• Some started to burn their pass books publicly
• The police opened fire killing 69 people and 180 were wounded
• The government banned both the ANC and PAC
• They arrested and detained thousands of members

Page 61
AIMS AND ACTIVITIES OF UMKHONTO WE SIZWE

• To start a sabotage campaign

• To prepare for guerrilla warfare
• MK targeted government installations such as power lines, railway lines, oil
refinery and other government buildings
• The aim was to bring the government to its knees
• To force the government to negotiate with the ANC

THE BLACK CONSCIOUSNESS MOVEMENT (BCM)

• It was formed and led by Steve Biko

• Aims:
– To raise African self-respect and confidence
– To unite black South Africans of all ethnic groups in the struggle against
apartheid
– Knowing about black African heroes of the past
• To take pride in black culture, history and achievements
• Inspired a spirit of fearlessness and resistance
• Instrumental in organizing strikes such as the Soweto uprising of 1976-7
• Steve Biko was expelled from university for his political activities

THE SOWETO UPRISING 1976-7

• The government ordered the use of Afrikaans as the medium of instruction in all
schools
• Most of the black learners could not speak Afrikaans or understand it
• Even the teachers did not know Afrikaans
• A large crowd of students gathered for a protest march
• They carried cardboard placards with slogans
• They preferred and wanted English instead of Afrikaans
• They also protested against the whole Bantu Education System
• They were stopped by armed police
• The police opened fire killing four including Hector Petersen and 200 were
wounded
• The news of the killings spread
• Demonstrations and riots broke out throughout South Africa
• Thousands of protesters were killed by police and others were jailed
• Many people left the country to join the MK and other exiled organizations
Page 62
MEASURES OF THE STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED BY BOTHA IN 1985

• The police could arrest people without warrants.

• The police were free from all criminal proceedings.
• Thousands of people were arrested.
• Newspapers, radio and TV were banned from reporting demonstrations and
strikes.

CHALLENGES FACED BY DE KLERK WHEN HE BECAME PRESIDENT

• There were increasing raids from ANC and PAC.

• There was increasing white opposition to apartheid.
• The townships were ungovernable.
• Many officials were attacked and often murdered.
• Economic sanctions were biting.
• There was disinvestment.
• De Klerk believed apartheid was unsustainable.
• There was no international sport.
• Church groups were speaking out against apartheid.

WHY WHITES WERE THREATENED BY CHANGES BROUGHT BY THE SECOND

WORLD WAR?

Black people now outnumbered white people in towns

During the Second World War the number of black males working in industries
increased. More black people moved to the towns where their jobs were and black
people began to outnumber whites in towns. White South Africans thought the
segregation policy and their whole way of life could be under threat.

Some of the segregation laws had been relaxed

The Fagan Commission of 1947 reported that the trend to urbanization is irreversible
and the Pass Laws should be eased. The Commission said it would be unlikely that
black people could be prevented from coming to the cities where there were more jobs.
They depended on this to survive as the reserves in the rural areas where they were
supposed to live held few options for a livelihood. In other words, total segregation
would be impossible.

Page 63
Black people had participated in boycotts and strikes
South Africa was characterized by political and social resistance campaigns. These
were spearheaded by Blacks, Indians and Coloureds. Liberation movements such as
the African National Congress, Communist Party of South Africa and labor
organizations emerged in opposition to the white government.

The United Party said that complete segregation was not practical
Many white South Africans believed the United Party was incapable of dealing with the
post-war problems. Many white people felt that Smuts lacked a clear policy on how to
deal with black people and segregation.

WHY THE NATIONAL PARTY (NP) WON THE ELECTION OF 1948?

They promised apartheid

The supposed policy of apartheid proposed by the NP served the economic interests of
certain groups of white South Africans. Farmers from the northern portions of the
country relied on cheap labor to maximize profits while working class whites living in
urban areas feared the employment completion that would follow an urban influx of
black South Africans. Many commercial and financial Afrikaner interests based on
agriculture saw the value of apartheid in promoting growth in this sector.

They promised to preserve white purity

Malan made preservation of white supremacy through apartheid laws as the main
theme of the election campaign. The NP played up the fear of black danger and
ensures the white population of their security, as well as a position of superiority through
the apartheid policy. Through this he succeeded in convincing enough white voters to
win with a small majority.

They were helped by the clause in the Constitution of 1910

Demarcation of electoral district boundaries favored the NP. Most of the 70 seats won
by the National Party during the 1948 election were in rural areas, whereas most of the
65 seats won by the United Party were in the urban areas. According to the Constitution
that South Africa had at the time, the constituencies in the rural areas were smaller than
those in urban areas. This meant that there were more rural constituencies than urban
ones. It has been calculated that if rural and urban votes had been of equal value, the
UP would have won 80 seats and the NP/AP coalition 60 seats thus giving the UP a
majority.

Page 64
WHY DID THE NATIONAL PARTY INTRODUCED APARTHEID?

To make it easier to control blacks

The National Party invented apartheid as a means to cement their control over the
economic and social system. Initially, the main aim of apartheid was to maintain white
domination while extending racial separation.

To prevent blacks from uniting

Whites feared blacks being the majority in South Africa would join forces in resisting the
minority white government and they would eventual takeover the government. Apartheid
would make blacks live in separate ethnic groups thus making it difficult for them to
work together in resisting the white government.

To prevent competition from blacks

The white minority government had introduced apartheid laws so that they put blacks
into inferior position e.g. they introduced the Bantu Education Act to make sure that
blacks can receive poor education for them to remain cheap labourers and for the
whites to receive quality education to control blacks and also to avoid competition.

To enrich themselves
With the application of apartheid black South African would be pushed into reserves
where as whites would remain in urban areas occupying high paying jobs, in control of
the fertile land as well as controlling the land which was rich in mineral resources.

WHY WAS THE PASS SYSTEM HATED?

It seemed unfair because it only had to be carried by non-Whites. They had to carry
documentation which had to be produced on demand. Failure to do so resulted in
punishment. Citizens were classified according to race and this was supported by the
pass system.

Blacks had to carry a Pass Book wherever they went. It was a book that had to be
shown on demand and without a Pass Book, blacks were arrested. This led to raids in
the black townships to check passes and often resulted in law-abiding citizens serving
time in jail for „pass offences‟. It helped the government to control where black South
Africans lived and worked. It contained personal information as well as their finger
prints.‟

Page 65
The Pass Law separated families as it was mostly men who could acquire pass books
and this forced wives to remain in rural areas. It was very difficult for women to get pass
books. Furthermore, pass books restricted the movements of blacks from homelands
into town and cities as it was a requirement to have a pass books if blacks were to live
in white men‟s area.

Pass laws not only restricted the movement of blacks into these areas but also
prohibited their movement from one district to another without a signed pass. Blacks
were not allowed onto streets of towns in Cape Town and Natal after dark and they had
to carry a pass at all times.

WHY THE NATIONALIST GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED EDUCATION FOR BLACK

PEOPLE?

They wanted to provide them with only the skills needed for work in the
homelands or in labouring.
They wanted to prevent them from receiving an education that would lead them to want
higher positions. Bantu education aimed at training children for the manual labor and
menial jobs that the government deemed suitable for those of their race and it was
explicitly intended to indoctrinate the idea that black people were to accept being
subservient to white South Africans.

Education for black children would be cheaper

Funding for schools was to come from taxes paid by the communities that they served,
so black schools received only a small fraction of the amount of money that was
available to their white counterparts. The government was spending about 15 times
more on each white child compared with black students.

It was to maintain white supremacy.

Black people provided a vast pool of cheap labour for the whites. By restricting their
education their aspirations and opportunities would be limited; they would be prepared
only for work in the homelands or work as labourers for the whites.

Page 66
WHY WAS APARTHEID OPPOSED?

The apartheid system divided the country along racial lines and there was segregation
all over the country. The white race was promoted and was seen as superior to the
other races of the country. Public facilities such as shops, toilets, beaches, parks and
restaurants were divided according to race. White people utilized the best facilities and
then were the Indians, Coloureds with black people below the social chain.

Black people could not study in white schools and universities which made them have a
smaller circle of career options. High school education was the highest qualification that
most black people had so they could not became doctors and nurses or even lawyers.
All they could become was teachers in black schools, garden workers for white suburbs
and domestic workers if they were women.

Apartheid restricted the movement of blacks. They could not just flow in and out of the
white suburbs as they pleased, they had to carry what resembled an ID document that
had all their details that was to be assessed by the white police to grant them access
into white, Indian and Coloureds suburbs. They also could not flow in and out of the city
as they pleased too because they had a certain time allocated for them to go in the city
in the morning and evacuate later in sunset. If you were black and did not have a pass
with all your details with you, you were refused admission into the white suburbs.

School learners also opposed apartheid due to the apartheid law that stated that black
learners should be taught in Afrikaans. For many, Afrikaans was a language not even
spoken and foreign. English was already a foreign language to them and most of them
already struggled with it but when this law was passed, the learners initiated a mass
protest against the use of Afrikaans in their schoolwork. Black students could no longer
cope with failing at school because of Afrikaans so they decided to march to Orlando
Stadium in Soweto. They did this in protest of studying in Afrikaans.

WHY WAS THE SHARPEVILLE MASSACRE IMPORTANT?

The Sharpeville killings marked a major turning point in the history of resistance in
South Africa and caused worldwide anger. Demonstrations against the killings took
place in many countries and for the first time calls for international action against
apartheid began to be taken seriously. The South African economy suffered;
international sporting and cultural boycotts began to have an effect.

Page 67
Many anti-apartheid leaders became convinced that peaceful protest was no longer
enough. According to Mandela, however, strict instructions were given to its members
right from the start that on no account were they to injure or kill people. ANC and PAC
formed guerrilla wings to stage sabotage attacks on government buildings.

The South African government responded by applying the apartheid laws more
ruthlessly. Thousands of people, men and women were tried under the Security Laws
and thrown into jail or isolated on Robben Island. The government tried to speed up the
independence of the various ethnic homelands, despite the resistance of most blacks to
this policy.

WHY WAS UMKHONTO WE SIZWE SET UP?

To intensify strikes / demonstrations against apartheid

In the 1950s it became clear to some members of the ANC that passive resistance and
non-violence were not working. A factor that undoubtedly had an influence on the
thinking of the ANC which probably had a bearing on their shift towards political
violence in 1961, was the general failure of the ANC directed campaigns of the 1950s to
bring about meaningful political changes based on the policy of non-violence and
moderation following the moderate success of the Defiance Campaign of 1952.

To cripple / sabotage the economy

The Umkhonto we Sizwe was established with the intention that was expressed by most
South Africans who felt that strikes and demonstrations were not enough. Therefore,
they established the ANC‟s guerrilla wing to organise sabotage attacks on police
stations, power lines and oil refineries with bombs and rockets. The aim was to weaken
the apartheid government economically and politically and force the government into
negotiations.

To fight for independence

The most means that led to the taking up of arms was the Sharpeville Massacre of 21
March 1960. The states heavy-handed response to the peaceful demonstrations and
the subsequent banning of the ANC, PAC and SACP the following month, dealt a
serious blow to the ANC and its allies. Many members were convinced that the time had
come to rethink the approach towards the struggle for their freedom and move from
passive resistance to the armed struggle.

Page 68
EXPLAIN HOW THE CREATION OF BANTUSTANS AFFECTED THE LIVES OF
BLACK SOUTH AFRICANS?

According to the policy of Bantustans, black people were taken from their original land
and grouped together into Bantustans. This meant that they lost the land which was
familiar to them and they had to stay in places where the climatic conditions were not
conducive which resulted in the struggle for adaptation and survival.

The Bantustans were a major administrative mechanism for the removal of blacks from
the South African political system under the many laws and policies created by
apartheid. The idea was to separate blacks from the whites and give blacks the
responsibility of running their own independent governments, thus denying them
protection and any remaining rights a black could have in South Africa. Bantustans were
established for the permanent removal of the black population in white South Africa.

The local homeland economies were not developed. Bantustans relied almost entirely
on white South Africa's economy. Farming was not very viable largely because of the
poor agricultural land in the homelands. Blacks owned only 13% of South Africa‟s land.
These farm lands were in a poor condition because of soil erosion and overgrazing. As
a result, millions of blacks had to leave the Bantustans daily and work in the mines, for
white farmers and other industries in the cities. The homelands served as labor
reservoirs, housing the unemployed and releasing them when their labor was needed in
white South Africa.

People were separated from their families especially those who were fairer coloured
people who looked more white than coloured, the Indians that looked more coloureds
than Indians and the blacks who looked more coloured than black. People were moved
to places of their own race and some even moved to families that they were not even
part of.

WHY WAS STEVE BIKO IMPORTANT IN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST APARTHEID?

Steve Biko was a black student leader in the Black Consciousness Movement. Its main
aims were to raise African self-respect and confidence. The government saw the
message Biko was preaching to the young people as a threat to apartheid. He was
becoming very popular and in 1969 he formed South Africa Students Organisation
(SASO) that had members across racial lines. Especially white universities like Wits,
UCT, Natal and Rhodes started supporting him and his ideas.

Page 69
The government felt that Biko could not be allowed to continue his campaign. He was
arrested on a minor charge and then beaten so badly that he died of his injuries while in
police custody in Port Elizabeth in 1977. This death was important because it
encouraged blacks, especially the youth, to continue the struggle which became
increasingly violet, until the government finally realised that it could not maintain
apartheid and suppression against the majority of the population by force. This brought
about the end of apartheid. The more violence there was the more the deaths and
funerals where there that create new reasons for uprising.

The death of Biko as well as the uprising received a lot of international attention and the
outside world put pressure for sanctions against South African government. The UN
sanctions were biting as they started to have an effect on the South African economy.
Some countries stopped trading with South Africa at all level and some of the investors
started to withdrew their money from South Africa.

WHY DID THE SOWETO UPRISING TAKE PLACE IN 1976?

They did not like Afrikaans

The government ordered that Afrikaans to be used as the medium of instruction in
South Africa‟s black secondary school. This was a big problem because most of the
learners could not speak or understand Afrikaans. Even the teachers did not know
Afrikaans. Besides that, Afrikaans was seen as the language of the oppressor therefore,
they did not want to learn Afrikaans.

They wanted the same education as whites

Black South African students protested because they believed that they deserved to be
treated and taught equally to white South Africans. Students formed an Action
Committee later known as the Soweto Students‟ Representative Council which
organised a mass rally for 16 June to make themselves heard. This was also an
opportunity to protest about the whole Bantu education system with its inferior syllabus.

WHY AFRIKANERS OPPOSED DE KLERK?

Afrikaners felt betrayed by fellow Afrikaner F.W. de Klerk. Many said he turned his back
on them, their Afrikaner and their shared belief rooted in the Dutch Reformed Church
that God ordained whites would have their own nation in South Africa. Others felt that
de Klerk has not only betrayed his country but his father who was one of the founders of
apartheid in the late 1940s and early 1950s and served as a minister in several
governments.

Page 70
De Klerk legalized black opposition parties and freed political prisoners including Nelson
Mandela. Furthermore, de Klerk opened negotiations with the once-banned African
National Congress for a new political and social order to replace the apartheid system
under South African whites has denied political rights to blacks.

Afrikaners expressed sentiments of fear, anger and religious resentment evoked by the
prospect of South Africa becoming ruled by blacks. They claimed they had their own
culture and Christian religion and no witch doctors which the blacks do.

APARTHEID BENEFITED SOUTH AFRICANS?

Benefited
The white population had many benefits and privileges. They owned and lived on 87%
of the land. They were the big farmers and owners of big industrial enterprises.
Apartheid gave white people a good standard of living. Most of the physical labour was
done by black, coloured or Indian people.

Did not benefit

Apartheid forced the majority of black people to live on Bantustans, which was 13% of
the total area of South Africa. Some males went into towns and cities to get work, but
they were forced to leave their wives and children on the Bantustan. Many whites
complained that they could not play international sport during the „60s, „70s and „80s
because other countries refused to play them in cricket, rugby and soccer because of
apartheid.

WAS SHARPEVILLE INCIDENT A SUCCESS OR FAILURE FOR THE BLACK

SOUTH AFRICANS?

It was a success because incident encouraged more demonstrations to take place

throughout South Africa. It was also the reason why the ANC and PAC decided to start
guerrilla wings. They organised more protests and also destroyed economic targets.
These strikes made the country ungovernable and did put pressure on the government.
The outside world became aware of what was going on in South Africa. Sanctions were
imposed on South Africa by the UN. Investment money started to leave the country.
This crippled the economy of South Africa and put the government under pressure. This
was one of the reasons why the government had to change direction in the years that
followed.

It was a failure because after the incident the government became even more violet
against demonstrations and protests. The government respondent by arresting political
leaders and banned ANC and PAC. The origin of Sharpeville incident was that the black
people did not want to carry passes anymore but this did not change.
Page 71
APARTHEID IN SOUTH AFRICA WAS SUCCESSFUL?

Successful
The system was based on “divide and rule” and therefore affected blacks negatively,
while whites were advantaged. The SA government succeeded in its aim to sustain
white supremacy for over 40 years by securing the best farmland and control over the
economy for whites. Political rights were given to blacks in homelands only, but the real
political power was kept by the whites.

Not successful
The policy could not last forever, as the blacks resisted. They were unhappy because
they felt their human dignity was disregarded. They were also unhappy to be brutalized
in their own country, and because their land and cattle were confiscated. Though their
resisted was met with brutal repression by the army, police and the justices system, it
helped to bring world‟s attention to what was happening in SA. As a result SA
Government was condemned and economic sanctions were imposed. The
disinvestment campaign in the 1980s as well as the isolation of South Africa led to the
failures of the policy.

INTERNAL FACTORS THAT LED TO THE END OF APARTHEID

The ANC
In 1952, the ANC led by Mandela led a Defiance Campaign against apartheid
countrywide, defying apartheid regulations. There were arrested in their thousands.
Their actions gained publicity in newspapers abroad and in the UN. Membership
increased and the ANC became the voice of the black resistance. The ANC organized
demonstration throughout South African which made the country ungovernable. They
also formed the military wing Umkhonto we Sizwe (better known as the MK) which
started the armed struggle and aimed at sabotaging government facilities. The action of
the MK crippled the economy of South Africa.

Umkhonto we Sizwe
The Umkhonto we Sizwe was established with the intention that was expressed by most
South Africans who felt that strikes and demonstrations were not enough. Therefore,
they established the ANC‟s guerrilla wing to organise sabotage attacks on police
stations, power lines and oil refineries with bombs and rockets. The aim was to weaken
the apartheid government economically and politically and force the government into
negotiations.

Page 72
Nelson Mandela
Mandela moved around the country in disguise mobilizing people to join the struggle
against apartheid. He travelled abroad seeking help in the struggle against apartheid.
He was the first leader of Umkhonto we Sizwe. He encouraged more people to join the
struggle against apartheid. The Revonia trials saw the imprisonment of Mandela and
other leading figures. While in prison he refused to renounce the use of violence against
the white South Africa. Once free, Mandela proved to be a very skillful negotiator; his
behavior and moderation impressed many South Africans. In a spirit of forgiveness and
reconciliation, he appointed F.W. de Klerk as one of the two vice-presidents.

Sharpeville Massacre
After the massacre ANC and PAC abandoned non-violence campaigns and formed
military wings to start an armed struggle against apartheid. The massacre encouraged
many people to join the struggle against apartheid. The international community
became aware of the South African situations. Some white South African started to
question whether apartheid was the right policy and they began opposing it.

Soweto uprising
When the news of the killings broke, demonstrations spread throughout South Africa
and the country became ungovernable. The UN condemned the action of the South
African government. Anti-apartheid movements organised demonstrations and protests
in cities and towns around the world. Sport and other boycotts were introduced against
South Africa and alienated the country from old friends like Britain and USA.

The role of women

Female activists were strongly present in trade union movements which also served as
a vehicle for future organizations such as the ANC Women‟s League (ANCWL) and the
Federation of South African Women (FSAW). Their objective was to fight against racism
and oppression of women as well as to make African women understand that they had
rights both as human beings and as women.

Female activists fought along men and participated to demonstrations and guerilla
movements. Women through different organizations also acted independently and
organized bus boycotts, campaigns against restrictive passes in Pretoria and
Sharpeville. About 20 000 women attended these kinds of demonstrations. Many
participants were arrested, forced into exile or imprisoned. At the same time women
fought about gender discrimination and called for rights specific to women such as
family, children, gender equality and access to education.

Page 73
Steve Biko
He established the Black Consciousness Movement. He organized strikes and
demonstration against apartheid. He organized meetings in townships. He encouraged
blacks to take pride in black culture, history and achievements. He inspired a spirit of
fearlessness and resistance among blacks. He was instrumental in organizing strikes
such as the Soweto uprising of 1976-7. His death led to international condemnation of
the white government.

Desmond Tutu
Bishop Desmond Tutu called upon rich countries to stop trading with South Africa and to
withdraw their money they had invested in its industries. He believed that this would
help force the South African government to move towards a democratic, non-racial
system of government.

FW de Klerk
He unbanned the ANC, PAC and SACP. He released political prisoners including
Nelson Mandela and the death sentence was abolished. He instructed the police not to
arrest political activists. He scrapped all petty apartheid to laws. By January 1993, all
apartheid legislations had been repealed. He negotiated with Mandela about the
transition of power to the majority blacks.

EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT LED TO THE END OF APARTHEID

The UN
The UN disapproved the South Africa‟s apartheid policy. They recognized nationalist
movements in South Africa. They also imposed economic sanctions. As a result,
investors withdrew their money from South Africa. South Africa was isolated from the
rest of the world. UN sanctions crippled the economy of South Africa

Common wealth countries

South Africa was expelled from the common wealth. This meant that South Africa lost
its allies. Sports boycotts isolated South Africa from the rest of the world.

Neighboring countries
Neighboring countries hosted South African exiles. ANC and PAC continued with the
armed struggle from bases in neighboring countries. Black South Africans received
military training and financial assistance from Julius Nyerere, Ben Bella and other
African leaders. The independence of Namibia motivated black South African to
continue resisting apartheid

Page 74
APARTHEID ENDED DUE TO INTERNAL PRESSURE THAN EXTERNAL
PRESSURE

The internal pressure played a very important role in ending apartheid because the
constant demonstrations that were carried out impacted heavily on the government by
making the country ungovernable which resulted in chaos and the lack of law and order.
The demonstrations also resulted in the killing of many by the police and during funerals
of the victims, new demonstrations erupted which took workers out of their works and in
the process weakened the country‟s economy.

The external pressure also played an important role in ending apartheid because due
to the apartheid laws and activities such as Sharpeville massacre and Soweto uprising,
the international communities such as the UN decided to condemn apartheid and
imposed economic sanctions on South Africa which resulted in devastating economic
effects in the country in general and its trading partners. Fearful of losing friends in
Africa as de-colonization transformed the continent, powerful members of the Security
Council, including Great Britain, France, and the United States, succeeded in watering
down the proposals. However, by the late 1970s, grassroots movements in Europe and
the United States succeeded in pressuring their governments into imposing economic
and cultural sanctions on Pretoria. After the U.S. Congress passed the Comprehensive
Anti-Apartheid Act in 1986, many large multinational companies withdrew from South
Africa. By the late 1980s, the South African economy was struggling with the effects of
the internal and external boycotts as well as the burden of its military commitment in
occupying Namibia.

WAS INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION TO APARTHEID EFFECTIVE?

YES
The international opposition to apartheid was effective because the constant pressure of
sanctions on South Africa resulted in South Africa not to have a choice but to give in to
the pressure. The country‟s economy was crippled as some investors took their money
out of the country and some countries stopped trading with South Africa. Thus it was
impossible to rule a country if one could not have trade links with others and they
resorted to start arranging for free and fair elections.

NO
The international opposition to apartheid was very much ineffective, because economic
sanctions were imposed on South Africa with the intention to cripple their economy by
means of forbidding trade to take place with other countries. However, this did not have
a negative impact on South Africa because some Western countries did not stop trading
with South Africa. Therefore, the intended sanctions did not play an effective role to
cripple the economy and force the country to change direction.
Page 75