To what extent was The Treaty of Versailles a positive peace agreement for the future?
The well-recognised Treaty of Versailles, signed on the 22nd June 1919, was one which has been the target of very crucial criticism over the ages. It was a treaty that subjected Germany and the other nations it was aligned with into a crisis of hardship, financially, socially and economically. Although the treaty was known to contain traits of a positive peace agreement that would prevent future war from occurring, this was not entirely the case. The Treaty of Versailles has often been labelled as a contributing factor in the outbreak of the Second World War. It is also criticised for containing harsh reparations that were imposed on Germany, causing the nation to believe that this treaty was a diktat, shaped by French domination and influence. The Treaty of Versailles affected the whole of Europe. Although superficially it portrayed positive aspects of a peace making agreement when it was signed, this attribute was only transitional. Later it would contribute to a revolution. The treaty has since been the spotlight of continuous analysis, opinions and debate to try to unfold the mystery of what its true results actually were.
The Treaty of Versailles was initially discussed at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 and was set up by the big three: Woodrow Wilson, the American president, Lloyd George, Prime Minister of Britain and Clemenceau, the French Premier, who decided to negotiate a peace treaty that would terminate World War I. In order for the violence to cease, these allied nations decided to set out the provisions of the treaty in a way that would drastically disadvantage Germany, who through their eyes, the enemy or cause of the war. The reparations imposed under these provisions included the reduction of the German army to 100,000 mean, the expulsion of heavy guns, tanks or poison gas being made in Germany, the abolishment of a compulsory military service and German...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document