REVISION POINT #1: Were the peace treaties of 1919–23 fair?
A) Study the extract, and then answer the questions which follow.
We want a peace which will be just. We want a stern peace because the occasion demands it, but the severity must not be for vengeance, but for justice. Above all we want to protect the future against a repetition of the horrors of this war.
Lloyd George speaking about the Paris Peace Conference.
(a) Describe what Clemenceau and Lloyd George each wanted to achieve in the peace settlement of 1919–20. 
Clemencau: He was part of the Big Three, he represented France. He wanted to cripple Germany, so that it never recovered and it wouldn’t have the chance to take revenge. France was devastated after de war, more than Germany, Clemencau wanted to take all the colonies and Alsace-Lorraine (to recover it). France was really angry, it wanted to punish Germany extremely harshly. But Clemenceau knew that he would have to accept some issues to have what he wanted. France was really threatened by Germany because it was a broder country and it would be the first that Germany would attack.
Lloyd George: He was also part of the Big Three, he represented Great Britain. What he wanted from the peace treaty was to punish Germany but not harshly. He wanted to punish it JUSTLY. In the elections he had promised that he would make justice, he won so, he had to do it. He also wanted to take German army, navy and colonies. It was a big threaten for the British. But Germany was also a trading partner of Britain, and it wanted to continue trading with it. That is another reason why he didn’t want to punish Germany very much.
LUCILA LAFUENTE – S3
(b) Why did the Treaty of Versailles cause problems for Germany in the years up to 1923? 
The treaty of Versailles caused problems to Germany in the years up to 1923 becuase after the war Germany was very weak. And they were very angry and ashamed, besides they were not invited to join the League of Nations until the Locarno Treaty was signed (in 1925), so this angered the Germans even more. Also there was a huge gap between the living standards of the rich and the poor, there were a lot of widows, politicians were weak and they were blamed because they had accepted the war guilt, the payment of reparations, giving up colonies and their army and navy were limited. For the Germans accepting the blame for starting the war was very harsh because they thought that all countries should share the blame. Besides they didn’t realize how bad Germany’s army was until they lost the war- What is more they had to pay reparations, which was a difficult task to do considering the poverty the war left. Later the lack of money led to hyperinflation. But when Stressman won the elecitons and became president, he managed to improve Germany´s situation.
AGUSTINA SUBIRÀ – S3
(c) Was the Treaty of Versailles fair? Explain your answer. 
The treaty was partly fair, these are some of the reasons.
When Russia left the war in 1917, Germany made a treaty with Russia which was harsher than the treaty of Versailles. People thought that Germans had no rights to complain as the Treaty of Brest-Litousk had been meaner.
Germany had to accept all the guilt for the war so they had to pay for all the reparations. The total amount of money was really high and accepting the blame for something that should be shared was very mean and unfair for the Germans.
The only country that disarmed was Germany because they were forced by the Treaty. It was unfair for Germany to disarm when the 14 points and the League of Nations discouraged countries from staying armed.
Another fact that was unfair from the Treaty of Versailles was that the winning countries wanted to use the treaty to make lots of profits and benefits for themselves other than making justice or making Germany and the other countries pay for what they had done.
The treaty was partly fair on German, they deserved some of the points but not all of them.
RAMIRO BERGOGLIO – S3
B) Study the extract, and then answer the questions which follow.
In my opinion, it is not possible to lay the entire responsibility for the war on any single nation. By aiming at the destruction of the economic life of Germany this treaty threatens the health and prosperity of the Allies themselves. By making impossible demands it leaves Europe more unsettled than it found it.
John Maynard Keynes writing in 1920. Keynes was a British official in Paris at the Peace Conference but left early, disgusted at the treatment of Germany.
(a) What did Clemenceau want to achieve from the peace settlement of 1919–20? 
(b) Why did the terms of the Treaty of Versailles cause so much bitterness in Germany? 
The Treaty of Versailles caused so much bitterness in Germany because they thought that the treaty was harsh. One of the reasons was because they didn’t feel that they had all the blame for starting the war and they had to accept, they lost lots of territories and colonies, this was a major blow to Germany’s pride and to its economy. Germany economy was so bad and paying reparations made the economy worse than it was. She was furious because the army was reduced too much for a country of Germany’s size. Also she wasn’t invited to join the League of Nations, which made her furious.
OLIVIA BOLOMO – S4
(c) ‘The peacemakers of 1919–23 coped successfully with the problems they faced.’ How far do you agree with this statement on the treaties made with the defeated powers? Explain your answer. 
In the next essay I will explain how far the peacemakers of 1919-23 coped with the problems they faced.
After the war, a number of treaties were established, such as St. Germain, Neuilly, Trianon, Sevres and last but not least, the most memorable one, The Treaty of Versailles. The Treaty of Versailles’ aim was to make Germany pay because of all the damage she had caused in many countries such as France. The thing about it was how harsh it was. German reactions to it were horrifying; they were being forced to accept a harsh treaty without any choice or even a comment. They were being forced to accept war guilt, reparations and to lose army and territory.
Moreover, the Treaty of St Germain in 1919 dealt with Austria which was really out sorting out a chaotic jumble of territories into new states rather than punishing Austria. This Treaty left many countries, like Italy, willing to get more land than what they got. Concerning the Treaty of Neuilly in 1919 which dealt with Bulgaria, she did well compared to Germany, Austria and Hungary. However, it lost lands, paid reparations, etc. In the Treaty of Trianon in 1920 Hungary which lost a substantial amount of territory, its economy was so weak that it couldn’t even pay the reparations the Treaty established. That’s a sign of how badly the Treaty was thought, it is ridiculous to ask money to a country that is so weak that it won’t be able to pay. Finally, the Treaty of Sevres in 1920-dealt with Turkey. Turkey lost many territories, although it was not a successful treaty. Turks were outraged by it. Moreover, the motives of Britain and France in taking control of former Turkish lands were suspect. The Arabs who had helped the British in the war gained little. Palestine was also a controversial area.
So, as overall, we can easily see the peacemakers didn’t totally cope with the problems they faced. Countries didn’t agree or they ended up not respecting the treaties, because they were hard, or the countries finished taking revenge years later.
MORA BREYAUI – S4
REVISION POINT #2: To what extent was the League of Nations a success?
(a) Describe the humanitarian work of the League of Nations in the 1920s. 
(b) Why was the League able to achieve some successes in the 1920s in dealing with international disputes? 
The League was able to achieve some successes in the 1920s in dealing with international disputes because the atmosphere in Europe was very calm and peaceful. Even though USA had become isolationist, they gave loans to the European countries. For example, as the USA gave loans to Germany they could pay France, and at the same time, with that money France repaid the loans that the US had given them during the war. As the economies were reactivating the general mood was improving, because of this, everyone was more cooperative when they had disputes and resolved it in a friendlier way and without causing many problems.
MALE ELÌA – S4
(c) How far can the World Depression be blamed for the failure of the League? Explain your answer. 
In the next essay I will explain how far the World Depression can be blamed for the failure of the League.
On the one hand, the World Depression can be blamed for the failure of the League, since there had been a crash in world trade, which damaged the trade and industry of all countries and it affected relations between countries. Also, it led to important political changes within countries.
On the other hand, there were other causes such as decisions which were slow, when the League was supposed to act quickly and with determination.
Furthermore, the economic sanctions didn’t work, because the league didn’t impose them, since they were worried that without the USA they wouldn’t work. What is more, when they imposed them, they were easily broken.
Moreover, Britain and France that were the leading members, weren’t prepared to abandon their own self-interest to support the League.
In addition, the League had no armed forces of its own and it was bound to uphold the peace treaties which had created it.
Last but not least, at any one time important countries were not members such as Germany, the USSR, and the USA that was never a member, so without such major powers, the League lacked authority.
In conclusion, the World Depression can be blamed for the failure of the League, but there are many other causes which helped for the failure.
MERCEDES ORFILA – S4
Study the extract, and then answer the questions which follow.
Article 16: Should any member of the League resort to war, it shall be regarded as having committed an act of war against all other members of the League, and this will end immediately all trade and financial relations with that member.
From the Covenant of the League of Nations.
(a) How did the League of Nations hope to prevent future wars between nations? 
One of the aims of the League of Nations was to discourage agression, preventing war was part of this aim. They hoped to prevent future wars betwwen countries by, first apply economic sanctions, for example, stop trading with the agressor or stop any financial relations; If this wouldn’t function they would send troops to the place to defend the country that was being attacked. One very important method that the League tried to apply was disarmament. They encouraged disarmament, but any country applied it. any of them were prepared for being the first in disarm. Germany was forced to do it, so it disarmed, but this caused a lot of problems.
LUCILA LAFUENTE – S3
(b) Why did the League of Nations fail to restrict the aggression of Japan in the 1930s? 
(c) How far was the League of Nations a failure? Explain your answer. 
The League of Nations was not a complete failure as a lot people say. But why?
On the one hand, they could solve many disputes and achieve some objectives. Such as, the dispute for Upper Silesia, in which Germany and Poland wanted to control it. The Aaland Islands; and the conflict in Bulgaria. Also, the League improved the living and working conditions around the world. These issues could be solved quickly and effectivly.
On the other hand, not all the disputes were solved correctly and quickly. For example the Vilna dispute between Poland and Lithuania; the dispute in Corfu between the Greeks and Italians; the Geneva Protocol could not be solve; but the disputes unsolved were not the only things that made the League partly a failure. At the beginning, most of the countries were recovering from the war, so everyone was interested in its own problems. In addition, disarmament was a complete failure, neither of the countries disarmed. Also, a lot of decisions to different disputes were too slow and when they took the final decision, the country did not accept it. The economic sanctions did not work. As the League did not have an army, none of the countries wanted to set their army as the League of Nations’ army. The economic crash of 1929 affected the whole world, consencuently the League was really affected by it, as the countries were only interested in recovering their economy.
In conclusion, the League of Nations was not a complete failure, but had more failures than successes.
MA. PAULA TEAR – S3