Milestone Comparison narrative
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
220
Subject
History
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by BrigadierWolfMaster899
HIS 220 Milestone Three
Comparison of Narratives The Germans and the French viewed the Treaty of Versailles with very different points of perspectives and biases. The Germans for their part believed that the 14-Poinyts presented by President Wilson were acceptable. However, the terms of the treaty went above what the delegation had expected in terms of gaining peace.
1
The Germans believed that they were right to complain and produced an alternative view of the treaty and its harshness. The German’s assigned the President of the German Delegation Brockdorff-Rantzau to respond to their observations of what the treaty entailed. Germany understood as a whole that the reparations made would cause hardships but felt the treaty enacted those hardships on a scale that the country could not handle. There were several points of contention stated by President Brockdorff-Rantzau in his letter to President Georges Clemenceau of France.
First, the distributed territories were a point of contention. Germany felt that it was being decimated to a point that it could not support itself by renouncing all the territories that were required by the treaty. President Brockdorff-Rantzau went on to state “Germany, thus cut in pieces and weakened, must declare herself ready in principle to bear all the war expenses of her
enemies, which would exceed many times over the total amount of German State and private assets.”
2
The letter would go further by providing 9-Points that Germany believed was fair and equitable with regards to concessions they were willing to make even though the treaty had already been agreed upon in their letter to President Clemenceau.
3
. Later in the letter they 1 Brockdorff -Rantzau, Ulrich K .C .G. Letter from the German delegation to President Clemenceau of France. Letter from U.S. Department of State, Office if the Historian. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, Volume VI. https ://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1919 Parisv06 /d89 (accessed September 27, 2023)
2 Brockdorff -Rantzau, Letter from the German delegation to President Clemenceau of France, Para. 5
3 Clemenceau, Gorges, Allied Reply to German Delegates' Protest Against Proposed Peace Terms at the Paris Peace Conference, May 1919, https://www.firstworldwar.com/source/parispeaceconf_germanprotest2.htm. (Accessed September 27, 2023)
would argue the unfairness of separating 2.5 Germans from their mother country with the renouncement of certain territories.
4
The French response from President Clemenceau’ viewed things quite differently than Germany
did and believed that the punishments were not only right, but that Germany had no right to complain.
The letter starts off cordial enough until it begins explaining the position of both countries by stating “The protest of the German Delegation shows that they utterly fail to understand the position in which Germany stands today. They seem to think that Germany has only to "make sacrifices in order to attain peace," as if this were but the end of some mere struggle for territory and power.”
5
France and the Allied Powers felt that the treaty, though harsh in nature was very attainable by Germany for the aggressions of Worl War I. The letter was very direct in stating that Germany had always been a country who wanted more power than they were entitled to instead of brokering peace though friendship with its neighboring countries. President Clemenceau points out that to attain the peace so needed, justice must be enforced.
The biases from both sides are very evident especially when it comes to reparations. The Germans thought they were overly harsh and the victorious nations would bring about their ruin
by giving up so much and being controlled by the victors and the rights to self-determination in President Wilson’s 14-Points.
6
In essence Germany could not rule itself.
The French had several biases for the treaty. They felt that the punishment for the loser of World War I were justified because they instigated and encompass a war like attitude and the atrocities they enacted throughout the entire region. One bias is always about money. The 4 Brockdorff -Rantzau, Letter from the German delegation to President Clemenceau of France, Point. 5 Para. 5
5 Clemenceau, Allied Reply to German Delegates' Protest Against Proposed Peace Terms at the Paris Peace Conference, May 1919, para. 3
6 Robert O. Paxton and Julie Hessler, Europe in the Twentieth Century, 5th ed. (Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2011). 142.
countries of France and Britain wanted Germany to relinquish funds so they could pay their own debts to the United States incurred during the war that Germany started.
7
When you read the letter from Clemenceau, he focuses on all of the bad things that Germany has done instead of really responding to each of the issues brought forth by the letter from Brockendorf.
The Treaty of Versailles was a pivotal moment in our history and both countries perspectives would continue all the way to World War II. Both of the letters showed a bias that really only favored their country. The arguments they presented were well laid out however the acrimonious nature in both letters would not help to alleviate any resentment brought forth by the treaty.
7 Paxton and Hessler, Europe in the Twentieth Century, 5th ed. 152-153
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Modified
Annotated
Bibliography
Brockdorff -Rantzau, Ulrich K .C .G. Letter from the German delegation to President Clemenceau of France. Letter from U.S. Department of State, Office if the Historian. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, Volume VI. https ://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1919 Parisv06 /d89 (accessed September 27, 2023)
President Brockdorff-Rantzau’s letter to President Clemenceau is a primary source
and was intended to alleviate some of the reparations that the Treaty of Versailles had
enacted. He was selected by the German delegates to correspond with the Allied powers to
discuss the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. His point of view that the agreement
would destroy their country both politically and economically was put into writing very
well. The complaints he had made would change nothing that was presented in the treaty.
Though he agreed with the reparations he felt they were unfair and wanted the Allied
Powers to know his thoughts and opinions. Throughout the letter he portrays Germany as
victims of the injustice be brought down on the country as if nobody else suffered. Clemenceau, Gorges, Allied Reply to German Delegates' Protest Against Proposed Peace Terms at
the Paris Peace Conference, May 1919, https://www.firstworldwar.com/source/parispeaceconf_germanprotest2.htm. (Accessed September 27, 2023)
President Clemenceau’s letter is a primary source that he wrote in response to the German
President and his delegation on the Treaty of Versailles. His letter was more of a reproach
to the letter he received. His letter basically stated that the German’s had deserved the
punishments enacted and would not change because of a letter stating its unfairness. The
reparations in his opinion were fair and just. He felt that the German’s believed that they
were the only ones who suffered because of the war. He points this out throughout his
letter in the way he describes the past instances of rule and power forced up Europe by the
Germans.
Robert O. Paxton and Julie Hessler, Europe in the Twentieth Century, 5th ed. (Belmont,
CA: Cengage Learning, 2011).
The history book “Europe in the Twentieth Century, 5th ed.” By Paxton and Hessler
is a secondary source of information. It provides stunning detail of what transpired in
Europe throughout the early twentieth century. Though fact based you can find different
variations to the events presented throughout the internet and other publications. This is an
outside perspective from their in-depth research of the time period.