Was the Treaty of Versailles Fair
Was the Treaty of Versailles fair?
Answer:
The Entente and the US spoke with different voices in 1918-19. President Wilson talked about a peace without 'victors or vanquished', which implied concepts of fairness, but Britain and France (and their allies) imposed a conventional treaty with winners and losers. That is the key issue.
Answer
In 1918 when the war had ended the League of Nations was drawn up, but at the same time the "big three" were planning a way to get compensation for the war and make Germany a lesser threat to any of the European countries.In 1914 Germany had a big empire covering parts of Poland and France. In 1918 the big three had Germany in the palm of their hands, then decided to make Germany a lesser threat by cutting its army down to 100,000 men , making them pay �6,600 million in compensation. They then decided to weaken their economy but not in such a way that Germany could not buy goods from abroad. Another aspect of the treaty was taking away Germany's colonies. Germany only had itself to worry about now.
Answer
Besides the points mentioned above, Germany had also lost more than 2 million men in the war, and was also suffering from poverty, etc., as her economy had been severely crippled, if not destroyed, by the war. Forced to give up ALL her colonies, disarmament and extreme reparations had only increased the impact on Germany and her citizens. To a certain extent all these were not very fair to Germany.
The colonies were a source of national pride for most German citizens. Besides, Germany saw the TOV as merely another excuse by the victors to annex her overseas territory - they were originally for the newly set up League of Nations to rule but were given to the Allied nations to govern due to the League's lack of resources.
As for disarmament, the Rhineland that separates France from Germany became a demilitarized zone, meaning that no German soldiers were allowed in there. The army was limited to 100,000 men, very
Answer:
The Entente and the US spoke with different voices in 1918-19. President Wilson talked about a peace without 'victors or vanquished', which implied concepts of fairness, but Britain and France (and their allies) imposed a conventional treaty with winners and losers. That is the key issue.
Answer
In 1918 when the war had ended the League of Nations was drawn up, but at the same time the "big three" were planning a way to get compensation for the war and make Germany a lesser threat to any of the European countries.In 1914 Germany had a big empire covering parts of Poland and France. In 1918 the big three had Germany in the palm of their hands, then decided to make Germany a lesser threat by cutting its army down to 100,000 men , making them pay �6,600 million in compensation. They then decided to weaken their economy but not in such a way that Germany could not buy goods from abroad. Another aspect of the treaty was taking away Germany's colonies. Germany only had itself to worry about now.
Answer
Besides the points mentioned above, Germany had also lost more than 2 million men in the war, and was also suffering from poverty, etc., as her economy had been severely crippled, if not destroyed, by the war. Forced to give up ALL her colonies, disarmament and extreme reparations had only increased the impact on Germany and her citizens. To a certain extent all these were not very fair to Germany.
The colonies were a source of national pride for most German citizens. Besides, Germany saw the TOV as merely another excuse by the victors to annex her overseas territory - they were originally for the newly set up League of Nations to rule but were given to the Allied nations to govern due to the League's lack of resources.
As for disarmament, the Rhineland that separates France from Germany became a demilitarized zone, meaning that no German soldiers were allowed in there. The army was limited to 100,000 men, very