w. 39

Thursday:

Questions we worked with in class:

Marshall Plan Speech

Western countries (the U.S. in particular) felt that an unstable situation in European countries could lead to the further spread of communism into western Europe – or the re-establishment of fascism/Nazism.

But there is also the argument that weak European economies would have a detrimental (skadlig) effect on the U.S. economy.

 Explain how European economies could have an effect on the American economy.

-       consider economic systems

-       consider recent history (e.g., WWI and WWII)

 How are “working economies” connected to the existence of “free institutions”?

 According to the speech, who/what should be the driving force in making sure the program goes forward?

Soviet Reaction to the Marshall Plan

There are a number of claims made in this text. You want to try to understand what is stated. You will likely need to ask a number of questions.

What do the the Soviets say are the Americans’ motives for the MP?

The Soviets say that the U.S. has conditions (vilkor) for the use of the MP money. Explain their argument.

According to the Soviets, what will be the effect of MP money on European countries?

******

As you discuss the arguments in these two documents. Consider:

-       Are there factual errors in the statements?

-       Do you see hidden agendas in the statements? (That is, is the speaker/writer trying to argue something beyond what is actually written. Is there is a secret or ulterior motive (dold agenda)?)

-       Knowing what you know about the postwar development of Europe, how does that influence your analyses?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The first 23 minutes of this documentary summarizes material about the
Truman Doctrine,
the Marshall Plan,
the 1948 coup in Czechoslovakia,
U.S. post-war boom

Cold War 3/24 Marshall Plan 1947-1952

(The remaining 23 minutes deals specifically with the countries of Greece, France, Yugoslavia, and Italy.)

The Marshall Plan

Official name: European Recovery Program

What was it?

Billions of dollars of grants and loans made by the United States to a total of 16 European countries.

When?

Proposed in 1947 by Secretary of State George C. Marshall. Payments started in 1948 and ended in 1952

Why was it introduced?

- rehabilitation of Europe was taking a long time

- industries not getting going

- food and essential products were being imported instead of enough being produced w/i Europe

- costs were eating up countries’ money reserves

It was argued that without intervention, the result would be

- poverty

- desperation

- chaos

(echoes of end of WWI)

What would be outcomes of poverty, desperation, and chaos?

•          lack of stable economies

•          inflation

•          no free institutions

Which could lead to -->

radical political ideas can take hold -- as happened between WWI and WWII

(Lenin and communism in Russia 1917)

(Mussolini and fascism in Italy 1922)

(Hitler and Nazism in Germany 1933)

What was desired?

- Europe would build up its own economies

- Europe could then develop free institutions

What were the guidelines for getting money?

- All European countries were eligible -- regardless of what side they were on during World War II.

- Amount of money requested and how it would be used had to be determined by the European countries.

- If a country attempted to block another country’s recovery it would receive no aid.

(Czechoslovakia was forced by the Soviet Union to not participate in the MP. And then in Feb. 1948, there was a communist coup in Czechoslovakia, thus firmly bringing it under Soviet control. This helped convince the U.S. Congress of the need to approve the money for the MP.)

p. 968 in your book

What did the U.S. get?

- A Europe with healthy economies, not crippled by workers’ strikes and inflation

- A Europe of economic integration

- Countries that shared the general economic system the U.S. had - and thus it has trading partners in Europe

- Political allies

This led to -->

- A Europe not at war

- A Europe that could be trade partners -- among themselves and with the U.S. — short-term and long-term

- Europe again economically competitive in the world

What did the Soviet Union think?

- U.S. wanted to control the countries that took the financial aid — not help them.

- It was seen as an aggressive act

This led to -->

- Soviet Union revived the Comintern (Communist International) as the Cominform and to use it to control the countries of the Eastern bloc

- Soviets created Comecon (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance) from 1949–1991 — to keep countries from breaking away from the Eastern bloc. Participating countries had to accept large degree of control from USSR.

You will recall that when we first talked about the division of Germany, I noted that the United States advocated (argued for) rebuilding Germany's economy, along with reforming the country's political system. The economic argument was that Europe could not become a place where the countries did not return to war if Germany was weak. It was argued that Germany had to be a viable part of Europe's economy. 

In class on Monday we talked about the argument that countries whose economies are integrated (connected) are less likely to go to war against each other -- because doing so would mean injuring a country's own economy. Take, for example, a country such as Sweden, which makes cars. Volvo imports car parts from multiple countries. If Sweden were to attack one of those countries from which Volvo imports car parts, Volvo would no longer be able to make cars. If Volvo can't make cars and thus sell cars, Volvo can't make money, the Swedish government cannot collect taxes from Volvo (and other companies inside of Sweden that work with Volvo), employees will get laid off from Volvo, and the Swedish government would not be able to collect taxes from those people either. Thus there is a spiraling effect that damage's the country's economy.

So having the economies of the various European countries tied together would make it less likely that they would go to war with each other. And having Germany as a healthy economy would make that goal easier to achieve, because Germany is in the center of many European countries. And, indeed, we can say that this has worked. At least we can say that with the exception of wars of what was Yugoslavia and the Russian incursion into Ukrainian territory, there have not been wars in Europe since 1945.

As we'll talk about on Thursday, we can argue whether or not there is a correlation between the Marshall Plan and the recovery of European economies and postwar peace. It is impossible to say that there is any causal effect (causation).

And we'll try to understand the MP speech and the Soviet response in some detail.

******
Here's the exercise we did in class connected to the Truman Doctrine

Truman Doctrine

In the table below are listed the “alternative ways of life” that Truman presents in his speech (March 1947).

-will of the majority is the basis for society -free institutions, -representative government, -free elections, -guarantees of individual liberty, -freedom of speech and religion, -freedom from political oppression

-will of a minority forcibly imposed upon the majority -terror and oppression are a basis for society -a controlled press and radio -fixed elections -suppression of personal freedoms

1.	-  a judicial system (courts/domstolar) that is independent from the government or any single political party
2.	- an independent news media (not controlled by the government or a single political party)
3.	- a TV channel that delivers propaganda for the government
4.	- independent publishers (förlag), where the publishing of books is not subject to government approval
5.	- the ability to move freely within the country
6.	- a secret police that has the right to take you into custody in secret
7.	- elections where the winning candidate has won by 99%
8.	- the ability to check out books from the library without fear that the government will know what you’re reading
9.	- the ability to exhibit art or perform music or drama of all kinds without getting approval first from the government
10.	- the ability to send material to others without fear that the government will intercept it
11.	- the threat of imprisonment or other punishment (e.g., being sent to labor camps) as a consequence of criticizing the government or ruling party
12.	- the threat of not getting a job, a promotion, entrance into school — for yourself or your family — as a consequence of criticizing the government or ruling party
13.	- a school curriculum (läroplan) independent from political parties
14.	- the opportunity to run for political office without fear of intimidation (hotelser)
15.	- the right to import literature, films, and music from other countries
16.	- the right to practice a religion, including attending church and participating in religious ceremonies
17.	- an educational system where entrance to programs and determination of grades are based on performance (how well you perform on tests and in courses) rather than on connections (knowing the right people) or bribery
18.	- forced-labor camps where people can be sent — and likely tortured — as a way to encourage people to not cross/go against the government

You have two columns: these are the two societies laid out in Truman’s speech.

The numbered topics are specific parts of society. How do these topics match up with the issues in the columns?

Draw on your own experience and knowledge, but also try to think about these issues in connection with society today: In which societies will you find these? Do they exist in Swedish society?