What Challenges Did The Peacemakers At Vienna Face And How Effective Were Their Solutions?

not. The victor will not be asked, later on, whether we told the truth or not. In starting and

Through the book ‘Europe’s Last Summer’ David Fromkin tackles the issues of pre WWI Europe, and the surrounding political, economic, social, debacles that led paranoid countries to go to arms after nearly a full century of relative peace within the European continent. While Fromkin certainly points his fingers to all the nations of Europe his primary focus lies with Germany and Austria-Hungary. Though he continues to stress throughout much of the book that Kaiser Wilhelm II and Archduke Ferdinand were fervent keepers of the peace within their nations, the fault of the war ultimately could be laid at the feet of their two nations and their constant attempts at war-mongering. He claims the war could have been avoided for the moment, had all the nations of Europe wanted peace, but the two bad eggs of Europe drew them all into an unavoidable general war.

The treaty of the Versailles was an agreement between France, England and the United states. Its intentions were to prevent a second world war however, it was a total fail. An obvious reason for not being effective could be because not everyone was included in the conference such as Russia, and Central Powers. Instead, Prime minister George Clemenceau had thought he would speak for all of europe and wanted to be the strongest of europe. Clemenceau seeked revenge towards Germany, in fact he desired most dismantle the best of Germany 's military and their nationalist pride. As for the United States, Wilson implemented the fourteen points which focused on self determination of people. Only few of his points were included in the treaty but these points had been the reason for conflicts happening in europe. Participation from everyone is important and not allowing everyone 's input could lead to negative outcomes such as, The league of nations which most likely failed because the United States wasn’t allowed to participate.

The Congress of Vienna influenced world politics for the next 100 years. Their effort to maintain a balance of power diminished the power of France and increased both Britain and Prussia’s power.

Case Study 2: A Review of Comments of the German Delegation to the Paris Peace Conference on the Conditions of Peace (October 1919)

The political/geographic situation in Europe at the beginning of World War I was full of conflict and strife with nations already seeped in rivalry and hatred, bidding for power with military might and seeking to obtain it no matter what the cost or how much human life it would take to attain. Alliances are formed in a amalgamation of shared hatred for equal enemies and desire for power , Europe is abound with chaos. European borders seem to be ever changing like that of a snaking river. Austria-Hungary is full of minorities each vying for its own independence and country. Germany and France have an undying enmity for one another. Russia also hated by the Germans is seeking to protect its interests in the Balkans,while creating alliances with France and England. The continent is as a sleeping volcano waiting to erupt in a violent cataclysm of war and destruction with its epicenter between Serbia and Austria-hungry, pulling each of its respected allies into the First world war. It seems every country has some disposition towards another country over disputes not its own but of its allies. The great powers of Europe came to War after The Archdukes assassination in response to each of its respected allies becoming engulfed in a conflict between the Serbian people and Austrian-hungry nation. With both sides drawings in their alliances made prior to the war initial beginning like a domino effect, reigniting flames on animosity. Germany declaring war on Russia soon after, siding

Austria-Hungary was not ready to let Serbia, under the protection of Russia, take over territories. Balkan was one of the most unstable areas at the time, due to its turbulent history and ethnic diversity. Along the increase of nationalism, arms race was creating growing tensions that eventually escalated into war. Germany was enlarging their military power, and France followed up with doubling their army. These actions could be taken as the preparation for what was about to happen.

World War II prompted U.S. leaders to pay greater attention to the oil resources of the Persian Gulf region, because in order to maintain its status as one of the global elites in oil in the case of a domestic shortage, the United States needed to secure an available foreign oil source during the war.

In document 3, empress of Austria is contacting with her alliance, Saxony, discussing about holding their sharing enemy, Federick, but Russian force is not enough. As the leader of a country, the empress thought about the force that she and her alliance spread to lock the Prussian king. Also, she was eager for peace although she thought which was not impossible at once. Document 5 illustrates that French colonist was negotiating with British for long

The alliance system that took place between the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy) and Triple Entente (United Kingdom, Russia, and France) divided the European empires beginning the war. According to document B both alliances blamed each other from the start. By doing this both alliances were split against each other creating a diversion. The background essay states, “The great players were picking sides” this created a greater diversion between the empires. Geographically in Document A the Triple Alliance were closer together and the Triple Entente surrounded them although the Triple Entente weren’t themselves close to each other. This caused

Document A also outlines the different alliances between the three major powers; the Triple Alliance, Triple Entente and the Neutral Nations in 1914 after the assassination of Franz Ferdinand. This also proves that an outlying cause to World War 1 could be the drastic side taking after Ferdinand’s

1. The Versailles settlement quickly gained a reputation as ‘a Carthaginian peace’. What was meant by this, and was it a fair and accurate assessment.

The Successes and Failures of the Treaty of Versailles in Addressing the Causes of Conflict and Restoring Peace and Normality

According to Mingst, “when threatened, states tend to balance against aggressors, eventually overwhelming and reversing whatever initial gains were made. States act in a unitary system to secure their own national interest, in terms of power” (Mingst, 2011). The outbreak of the war was a result of the multi-polar systems between Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire, Italy, Germany, Serbia, and Russia. It is argued that Germany encouraged Austria to wage war, while the powers were seemingly equivalent, out of

The significance of the Peace of Westphalia has long been lauded as beginning of international relations as it is recognized today. Many have attributed the popularity of this belief to the article, Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948 by Leo Gross which was published in 1948. It discusses the merits of the agreement in sparking the establishing the modern state system. A more recent piece, Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth by Andreas Osiander takes an entirely different approach by attempting to debunk what Peace of Westphalia stands for in the current world. Both articles have strongly argued for their respective views on the issue, however it is clear that when it comes to whether or not the two treaties that make up the Peace of Westphalia actually contribute as much as ???? However it is clear that Osiander is more convincing??? While both articles make strong arguments to convince the reader of their respective views, Osiander employs By