American History-Cold War

This work is an effort to acknowledge the Korean War. This is not an attempt to provide a history. The purpose of this work is to consider the argument that the Korean War was a natural extension of the Cold War and would not have been fought if relations with the U. S and Russia/China were not cold. Many see the Korean War as a mystery. Some parts of it seem almost immune to study and understanding. Statistics tell some things, and chronological narratives can provide a story upon which to hang data and factual information.But the problem is simply that people still do not know very much about the war. It was so complex, both in terms of its causes, and of the progress of the fighting, that the usual methods of reporting do not always tell a clear story. It was (and is) a significant part of American history, and within it are located keys to understanding America's highly transitional role in the increasingly complex world events of the time. The outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 was one of the great sea changes in postwar American history. Like the Trojan horse sent into Troy, President Harry S.Truman's June 1950 decision to intervene in the Korean crisis laid the nation bare to a bombardment of economic, political, military, and social changes. As it turned out, the Korean mobilization went far beyond preparations for America's first undeclared war; it evolved into the nation's de facto Cold War preparedness program, which came to span nearly forty years. The Korean War, which began with the invasion of the Republic of South Korea in June of 1950, can be more easily understood if we consider it as two, perhaps even three, wars.The first phase was between the United Nations and the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. This period can be considered a victory for the United Nations. Surely there is no other word for the successful landing at Inchon in September 1950, the recapture of the South Korean capital of Seoul, and the approach, by Eighth Army on the west and X Corps on the east, to the Yalu. By the middle of November, the forces of the United Nations had scattered the troops of North Korea's army and occupied most of its territory. The goals of the United Nations, to drive the invader from South Korea, had been accomplished.The second phase, which General of the Army Douglas MacArthur called â€Å"an entirely new war,† began with the Chinese entry into the conflict. This phase must be considered much less successful. In the light of the goals established for the second stage of the war – to expel the Communist Chinese and to occupy and control the territory of North Korea – the war was a failure. But somewhere during the second year of fighting, around November 1951, the nature of the goals changed again. This change may be sufficient to define a third phase of the war.The third phase was marked by the decision to take a defensive posture in Korea. After the defeat at the Chosin reservoir and the slo w United Nations return to the 38th Parallel military victory seemed to be too great a goal. The war became one of attrition, not unlike World War I. The third phase was one of waiting, patrolling, skirmishing, destroying supplies, and attacking to kill rather than to occupy, and negotiating. If the legitimate purpose of war is to create a more perfect peace, as some have suggested, then phase three of the Korean War was its most important.Certainly the long-term goals, as well as the short-term reactions, seemed to be more directed at an easing of the Cold War than at victory in Korea. The decision made by President Harry S. Truman and his advisors to enter the war in defense of South Korea was one of major significance. Some historians believe it may have been predetermined by earlier events leading up to the invasion. On the surface, however, the decision looks like a rather abrupt shift in the administration's policy concerning Korea. The reaction gave Korea more importance than it had previously held for Americans.Later, when Truman authorized General MacArthur to move across the 38th, and seek the occupation of North Korea, that decision did not appear so much out of character. In the final analysis, however, this latter decision introduced a period of military defeat, public concern, and political difficulty. There is much about the fighting during the Korean War that, in an overview, appears paradoxical. The tremendous technological advances made during World War II paid off between 1945 and 1955. Weapon development moved quickly and weapons became more and more complex.Nevertheless, the Korean War was primarily fought with weapons left over from World War II. To a significant degree it was also fought with the strategies and often with the commanders, of that war. It was war fought in the beginning by untrained and unprepared occupation troops, then by â€Å"retreads† (recalled World War II veterans), then by draftees caught up in one of the lo osest conscription nets in modern history. Of course, it was a war in which military methodology and expectancy were severely limited.Finally, we can say that the Korean War verified Clausewitz's understanding that a limited war can be true to its defined goals only as long as it remains subject to political (civilian) control. The Korean War emphatically marked the end of the post-Second World War era. The Sovietization of Eastern Europe, the Greek civil war, the Czech coup, and the Berlin Airlift, not to mention the â€Å"loss† of China to the communists, had all served to erode what had remained of the wartime â€Å"Grand Alliance† between the United States, Great Britain and the Soviet Union that had persisted through the war and to the establishment of the United Nations.But with American, British, French, Dutch, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, South African, Greek, Turkish, Filipino and Thai troops actually engaged in combat with Communist forces, the Cold War seemed obviously to have taken on a new and far more bitter dimension, and indeed, might no longer even merit the term â€Å"Cold War†. In the words of one scholar, â€Å"Without the Cold War there would have been no Korean War† (Mcmahon 69) In fact, the entry of China into the conflict in late 1950 unleashed apocalyptic imaginings of a Third World War, particularly amongst Americans.Even after the Armistice concluding the Korean War, the Cold War would continue for more than four decades. The Korean War marked a pivotal turning point in the global execution of the Cold War. To understand the larger context—the Cold War—is to understand how and why Korea fundamentally altered the political and economic scene in the United States. First, Korea marked the militarization of Harry Truman's containment policy.Before June 1950, the United States tended to emphasize the economic aspects of containment, during which time it sought to build a strong, free-marketà ¢â‚¬â€based international order to serve as a bulwark against Soviet communism. Once the war in Korea began, however, the United States emphasized military rearmament—here and abroad—to resist perceived Soviet aggression. Second, by militarizing containment as it did, the Truman administration globalized it as well.After Korea, the nation prepared itself ideologically and militarily to resist the Sovietsin every corner of the world. Thus, in the final analysis, the Korean mobilization was a mobilization within a mobilization: the nation began arming for the Korean conflict in the short-term while simultaneously mobilizing for the Cold War in the long-term. Division and Cold War came to Korea first and foremost because of the inability of outside powers, the United States and the Soviet Union, to devise a unification plan that would protect the interests of both (Wainstock 36).From the start the two powers regarded internal political configurations as highly unpredicta ble, so they were disinclined to encourage creation of an indigenous government that crossed zonal boundaries. The best opportunity for the emergence of such a government came in September 1945 with the rise of the KPR, a group that possessed strong linkages with the people's committees at the local level. Had the Americans supported the KPR, thus encouraging the KDP to play coalition rather than class politics, Koreans might have taken the lead in developing a vision of a united, independent country unthreatening to the great powers.Yet the best opportunity in this case does not represent a good opportunity, since such an outcome would have required extraordinary patience and trust on all sides, ingredients that were far from common at the time. The unexpected invasion ushered in a new and much more dangerous phase of the Cold War, not just in Asia but globally. Certain that the attack could only have occurred with the backing of the Soviet Union and China – a correct assess ment, as nowavailable evidence confirms – and convinced that it heralded a bolder and more aggressive worldwide offensive by the communist powers, the Truman administration responded vigorously.It immediately dispatched US naval and air forces to Korea in order to stem the North Korean advance and bolster South Korean defences. When that initial intervention proved insufficient, the administration dispatched US combat troops, which became part of an international force owing to the UN's condemnation of the North Korean invasion. ‘The attack upon Korea makes it plain beyond all doubt’, declared Truman in a 27 June address to the American people, ‘that Communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to conquer independent nations and will use armed invasion and war’ (Malkasian 21).He also revealed, in that same speech, that he was ordering the US Seventh Fleet to the Taiwan Strait, increasing aid to the French in Indo—China, and speeding addit ional aid to the pro—American Philippine government which was battling the radical Huk insurgency. Behind those four interventions – in Korea, China, Indo—China, and the Philippines – lay the American perception that a unified threat of formidable proportions was being mounted against Western interests by a hostile and newly aggressive world communist movement under the leadership of the Soviet Union and its Chinese junior partner.The impact of the Cold War on the Korean War is difficult to overstate. Not only did the Korean fighting lead to an intensification and geographical expansion of the Cold War, threaten a wider conflict between the United States and the communist powers, and foster increased East–West hostility, but it also spurred a huge increase in American defence spending and, more broadly, a militarization and globalization of American foreign policy. Beyond Asia, the conflict in Korea also hastened the strengthening of NATO, the armi ng of Germany, and the stationing of US troops on European soil.‘It was the Korean War and not World War II that made the United States a world military—political power’, diplomat Charles Bohlen has argued. With uncommon unanimity, scholars have affirmed that judgement, identifying the Korean War as a key turning point in the international history of the postwar era. America's ‘real commitment to contain communism everywhere originated in the events surrounding the Korean War’, contends John Lewis Gaddis. Warren I.Cohen calls it ‘a war that would alter the nature of the Soviet—American confrontation, change it from a systemic political competition into an ideologically driven, militarized contest that threatened the very survival of the globe’ (Anthony 42). Yet, as Cohen also notes, ‘that a civil war in Korea would provide the critical turning point in the postwar Soviet—American relationship, and raise the possibilit y of world war, seems, in retrospect, nothing short of bizarre’ (Ball 15). Certainly, in the aftermath of World War II, few places appeared less likely to emerge as a focal point of great power competition.Occupied and ruled by Japan as a colony ever since 1910, Korea factored into wartime councils merely as yet another minor and obscure territory whose future disposition fell on the Allies' already overburdened shoulders. At the Potsdam Conference, the Americans and Soviets agreed to share occupation responsibilities there by temporarily dividing the country at the 38th parallel; they also agreed to work towards the establishment of an independent, unified Korea at the earliest practicable time.In December 1945, at a foreign ministers' meeting in Moscow, the Soviets accepted a US proposal for the establishment of a joint Soviet—American commission to prepare for the election of a provisional Korean government as a first step toward full independence. But that plan soo n fell victim to larger Cold War tensions that militated against any meaningful cooperation, or compromise, between Moscow and Washington. By 1948, the occupation divisions had instead hardened. In the north, a pro—Soviet regime under the leadership of the former antiJapanese fighter Kim took on all the trappings of an independent regime.So, too, did its counterpart in the south: a proAmerican regime headed by the virulently anti—communist Syngman Rhee, a Korean nationalist of long standing. Each side regularly rattled sabres at the other; neither North nor South Koreans could accept a permanent division of their homeland. In 1948, the Truman administration, seeking to extricate itself gracefully from its Korean commitment, began withdrawing US military forces from the peninsula. American defence planners believed not only that US military personnel had become overextended worldwide, necessitating this pullback, but that Korea, in fact, possessed minimal strategic wort h.The North Korean invasion two years later brought a different calculus to the fore. Although it might have lacked great intrinsic strategic value, Korea stood as a potent symbol, especially in view of America's role as midwife and protector of the Seoul regime. Further, the North Korean attack, sanctioned and backed by the Soviet Union and China, threatened America's credibility as a regional and global power every bit as much as it threatened the survival of the South Korean government. To Truman, Acheson, and other senior decision—makers, the stakes at risk in Korea appeared enormous.Consequently, without any dissenting voices being raised, the president quickly authorized US military intervention. ‘If the United Nations yields to the force of aggression’, Truman declared publicly on 30 November, ‘no nation will be safe or secure. If aggression is successful in Korea, we can expect it to spread throughout Asia and Europe to this hemisphere. We are fight ing in Korea for our own national security and survival’ (Roe 90) That statement came right after the entry of Chinese Communist ‘volunteer’ forces into the fray, a development that changed the character of the Korean conflict – and, arguably, the Cold War as well.Truman and his military advisers grew overconfident after MacArthur turned the tide of battle in September 1950 by outflanking the North Koreans with his legendary Inchon landing. The UN forces under his command crossed into North Korean territory on 7 October; by 25 October, some advance units reached the Yalu River, along the North Korean—Chinese border. As they inched closer to Chinese territory, Mao informed Stalin that he had decided to send Chinese troops across the Yalu.‘The reason’, he explained, ‘is that if we allow the United States to occupy all of Korea and Korean revolutionary strength suffers a fundamental defeat, then the Americans will run more rampant to the detriment of the entire East. ’ Mao, too, saw broad regional and global implications in the Korean outcome. MacArthur, who had so cavalierly underestimated the Chinese military threat and whose forces were almost completely driven out of North Korea by the end of November, informed the Joint Chiefs of Staff: ‘We face an entirely new war’ (Paige 12).The world faced an entirely new Cold War by that time as well, one whose boundaries reached well beyond Europe. The emergence of Mao's regime in China, the Sino—Soviet alliance, Soviet and Chinese support for North Korean adventurism, the intervention of US and UN forces in Korea, the subsequent entry of Chinese troops, the presence of communist elements within Southeast Asia's nationalist movements – all ensured that the Cold War would remain a commanding presence in postwar Asia for a long time to come.The Korean War itself dragged on inconclusively until July 1953, when the warring parties signed an armistice that achieved little more than an exchange of prisoners—of—war and a return to the status quo ante bellum. The 38th parallel remained an ominous line of division – not just between North and South Korea, but between the Eastern and Western blocs. With the Korean conflict, the Cold War became increasingly global in scope. In the decade that followed the onset of the Korean fighting, few corners of the world managed to escape the ensnaring web of superpower rivalry, competition, and conflict.Indeed, the principal international flashpoints of the 1950s and 1960s – Iran, Guatemala, Indo—China, the Taiwan Strait, Suez, Lebanon, Indonesia, Cuba, the Congo – lay well beyond the Cold War's original boundaries. Only Berlin, whose contested status triggered Soviet–American crises in 1958 and again in 1961–2, belongs to the set of immediate post—World War II disputes that precipitated the East–West breach in the first place. From the standpoint of the great power struggle, the grounds for defending South Korea were strong.It was believed that if the North Korean aggression succeeded, Indo-China would be almost certain to fall under Communist control, with the aid of whatever Chinese forces were necessary. The snowballing effect of Communist triumphs might make Thailand and Burma relatively easy conquests. Since Indo-China is strategically the key to all South East Asia, the stubborn communist guerrilla movement in Malaya might be expected to gain momentum, with aid from the north, and gun-running to the Huks in the Philippines would not be too difficult.Both in the Philippines and Japan, also, the psychology of Red success would operate powerfully. In the end it might be difficult to hold Japan, especially since she cannot exist, apart from American doles, in the absence of trade with China and South East Asia. As in every crisis of the Cold War, the image of the falling dominoes was allow ed free rein. Thus far the Truman Doctrine had been enforced in Europe, but it had been a dismal failure in East Asia. If now the tremendous triumph of communism in China were capped by further Red gains in Asia the effect on Europe might be decisive.In the United States, too, the result might well be decisive politically for the Truman Administration. Its foes were already making capital bitterly about the non-enforcement of the Doctrine in China. If it collapsed in Asia there would be a mighty outcry indeed. A stage in the Cold War had come which seemed to compel a defense of the Doctrine in Asia. These considerations were sufficient to induce resolute action in Korea, without going to the defense of the United Nations. Up to this time enforcement of the United Nations Charter had not been a compelling motive in Washington.The UN was brushed aside in Greece, and independent action taken to defeat the Communist guerrillas. In Indonesia the United States had brought strong moral pre ssure to bear on the Netherlands in the Security Council, but no troops and planes were sent to fight the Dutch when they defied a UN cease fire order. Nor did the United States mobilize the UN to save the infant Israeli Republic when five Arab states invaded Palestine in 1948 to overturn by force the partition plan adopted by the UN General Assembly.Defiance of the United Nations could not have been more flagrant, but the United States moved no troops and planes to save the victims of Hitler's hate who had gathered in Israel, and who appeared to be on the point of being destroyed by the armies of UN members converging on them from all sides. In the end Israel was saved by her own heroic fighting, with arms obtained largely from communist Czechoslovakia. The United States gave no armed support to Israel as the ward of UN. The Koreans did not ask for the division of their country, even temporarily.They also organized a government which was broadly representative and quite capable of governing the country. But neither the U. S. S. R. nor the U. S. A. would permit this government to function. Each insisted on creating a government for half the country in its own image. In this attempt the Soviets succeeded, but the United States brought a twenty-year emigre back to Korea and permitted him to build himself up into a lifetime despot capable of inviting the American people in their own capital to join him in self destruction.Division having resulted and hardened, two successive attempts to unite Korea by force were made, but the outcome was a great power war which nearly destroyed Korea and did not significantly alter the division of the country. On the contrary, the division was hardened and South Korea was left an overpopulated, undernourished, unviable country, existing only on the military dole of the United States and under a police state government which was a standing invitation to revolution – Red or otherwise.To highlight the argument, it is necessar y to review the years 1945 through 1948. There can be no more striking reflection of Korea's dependence on others than the decision to divide the peninsula into occupation zones in 1945. Koreans had no input in the decision because they had no recognized government or armed forces to defend their interests. They had been swallowed up in the Japanese empire early in the century and were now being freed from that status because of Japan's defeat in a war in which Koreans had contributed more to the losing than to the winning side.Prospects for the peaceful unification of Korea from August 1945 onward were between slim and nil. The first step toward June 25, 1950, had been taken by the great powers—alone. Koreans in 1945 were deeply split among themselves—between close collaborators with the Japanese and underground dissenters; between landowners and peasants; between businessmen and factory workers; between police and civilians. These divisions had festered beneath the s urface before 1945, as the Japanese used the strategy of divide and conquer to ease the task of ruling Korea.The collaborationist issue aside, many of the disputes were foreshadowed in the divisions among exiled independence groups. After liberation from Japan they burst into the open on the peninsula itself. Their existence eliminated any chance for a united indigenous resistance to the country's partition by outsiders. Yet the particular form the divisions took and the ultimate outcome of the resulting conflicts were deeply influenced, indeed often determined, by the foreign presence.That the exiled groups during the Japanese period had looked to outsiders for assistance—Nationalist China and the United States in the case of the Right, the Soviet Union and Communist China in the case of the Left—and that one of the outsiders on each side now occupied half of Korea greatly magnified the problem. The trusteeship issue represented an extreme case, since it was totally c reated by the outsiders. Although the Soviets were able to keep the Korean Left in line on trusteeship, the Americans never persuaded the indigenous Right to support it—or even to exercise restraint in attacking it.Ultimately the United States gave in to Syngman Rhee and abandoned trusteeship, but only because, by September 1947, he represented the best hope for keeping South Korea out of Communist hands, an important U. S. objective in its own right. By the end of 1948, two indigenous governments existed on the peninsula, one exercising authority above the thirty-eighth parallel, one below it, one leftist in orientation and aligned with the Soviet Union, the other rightist and aligned with the United States.It is impossible to imagine this result without the Soviet-American agreement of 1945. If the situation in Korea at the end of 1948 cannot be grasped without reference to the foreign presence since 1945, it is also fair to say that the picture is incomplete without mentio n of the civil conflict that had waxed and waned below the thirty-eighth parallel since the fall of 1946. The unrest began in September with strikes and riots by workers in several cities and soon spread to the countryside, where landlords became frequent objects of attack.Hundreds of civilians and police died in the turmoil. The Left lost heavily in the violence, and for the next year, while unrest was widespread at the village level, it appears not to have been as well coordinated as before. The violence picked up greatly during 1948, with the biggest revolt against government authority beginning in April on Cheju Island. By the end of the year, guerrillas operated extensively on the mainland, so much so that the United States decided to postpone withdrawal of the last of its combat troops from the South.Six of South Korea's eight provinces eventually saw substantial guerrilla activity, which peaked in the fall of 1949 and subsided in the spring of 1950 as a result of strong count eraction by ROK forces. Violence in the South from late 1946 to mid-1950 brought death to some one hundred thousand Koreans. If the Americans were instrumental in suppressing the activity, the Soviets played an integral role in fostering it.Although the general strike in South Korea of September 1946 appears to have begun at the initiative of the Korean Communist Party below the thirty-eighth parallel, the Soviets soon took an active part, giving advice, which the southern rebels often solicited, encouragement, and considerable financial aid. The Soviets also pushed successfully for the merger of the three leftist parties in the two zones and participated in the training and infiltration of North Korean agents and guerrillas into the South.The unrest in South Korea grew in part out of local conditions, but neither its origins nor its course can be understood without devoting heavy attention to activities originating in the North or to actions heavily influenced by the Soviet and Ame rican presence on the peninsula. The local, national, and international forces blended together in a manner that would have made the actual course of events largely unrecognizable with the elimination of any of the three (Stueck 44). On June 25, 1950 NorthKorea invaded South Korea.The invasion was less important in actual strategic terms than in what it symbolized: a confirmation of the aggressive nature of Soviet communism. President Truman attached this symbolism immediately to the war. In his statement issued on June 27 the president declared: â€Å"The attack upon Korea makes it plain beyond all doubt that communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to conquer independent nations and will now use armed invasion and war† (Lowe 120). In response he ordered the Seventh Fleet to protect Formosa, sought U. S. condemnation of the North's aggression, and eventually committed U. S.military forces under the auspices of the United Nations to fight the Korean War. The cold war had suddenly turned into a hot war. But it was a hot war of a peculiar kind. In fact, it was the new face of war in the postwar world. The Korean War was a proxy war fought in Korea but symbolizing the worldwide struggle between the free world and the communist world. If the North Korean invasion symbolized communists' intentions to dominate the world, the U. S. response symbolized the resolve of the United States to resist Soviet domination. It was a critical moment. Metaphysical symbolism replaced tangible objectives as the focal point of war.Such a transcendental transformation had its roots in the original request of economic aid to Greece and Turkey, but it was to have consequences that would reach to the rice paddies of Vietnam. The anticommunism rhetoric was now pervasive and complete. Politicians and people interpreted the meaning of each of these three sets of events – the Hiss conviction and the other charges of domestic communist activities, the invasion of South Korea by the North, and the Chinese intervention into that war – by the standards of that rhetoric and at the same time used these events as proof that the rhetoric was correct in the first place.It was a classic tautology. Understanding and proving arose simultaneously and led to action. And action confirmed the understanding and proof. The Korean War was the linchpin of these final proofs. John Lewis Gaddis (1983) remarked that the widely shared but erroneous impression that the invasion of South Korea was the first military step in the Soviet Union's plan to conquer the world had three important consequences: (1) the transformation of NATO from â€Å"a traditional mutual defense alliance into a[n] integrated military structure† that led to the appointment of a U.S. supreme commander of NATO and the stationing of U. S. troops in Europe; (2) the rearming of West Germany and the signing of a peace treaty with Japan, thus making alliances with old enemies to fight a new enemy; and (3) the approval of National Security Memorandum No. 68, better known as NSC-68 (32). Perhaps the only issue on which the United States and China had significant common interests concerns the Korean peninsula. Washington and Beijing had a strong interest in preventing North Korean acquisition of nuclear weapons.Not only would a nuclear-armed North Korea make a North-South war far more dangerous, but it might also encourage South Korean and Japanese acquisition of nuclear weapons and cause a nuclear arms race in Northeast Asia. Thus, at times Beijing has applied economic pressure on North Korean rulers, assisting U. S. efforts to compel Pyongyang to curtail its nuclear program. Indeed, Chinese policy toward nuclear proliferation into North Korea was one Chinese policy that consistently drew praise from Washington for having â€Å"concerns similar† to America's and for playing â€Å"an important cooperative role† and providing â€Å"critical cooperation† in U. S.efforts to freeze North Korea's nuclear program. China has also been supportive of U. S. efforts to bring about North Korean participation in the four-party peace talks involving the two Koreas, China, and the United States (Guttmann 59). The United States and China also shared an interest in preventing economic and political instability in North Korea from leading to war between the two Koreas. China has contributed to this common objective of a â€Å"soft† rather than a â€Å"crash landing† of the North Korean government by encouraging Pyongyang to open its economy to foreign trade and investment and by supplying it with subsidized energy resources.As the North Korean economy rapidly deteriorated, Beijing supplied Pyongyang with emergency food and clothing supplies. Since then, Beijing has continued to provide North Korea with food, consumer goods, and energy assistance. But even U. S. -China relations on this relatively cooperative issue had tensions. Whe reas Washington's policy toward North Korea was primarily focused on preventing nuclear proliferation, Beijing's policy attached equal weight to its vital interest in preserving its significant influence in a border state located at the intersection of all of the great powers.Moreover, Beijing had even greater interest than Washington in preventing war on the Korean peninsula, insofar as it would be waged on China's border and could spill over into Chinese territory. U. S. China friction results from Washington's frustration when Chinese caution inhibits Beijing from applying greater pressure on the North Korean leadership. Thus far, U. S. -China common interests in regional stability have prevailed, but should the U. S. -North Korean agreement collapse, U. S. -China tension over North Korea could intensify.The nuclear problem on the Korean peninsula was, in part, a holdover from the Cold War. It stemmed, ultimately, from the division of the country and the threat to the status quo posed by the Communist regime in the north – the same set of circumstances that had led to war in 1950. The same dictator – Kim II-sung-who had launched the attack in 1950 was in power and threatening to acquire nuclear weapons in 1994. The problem of North Korean nuclear weapons produced a political alignment in the region that demonstrated the differences between the Cold War and post-Cold War eras in yet another way.In 1950 the United States and Japan were allied with South Korea against North Korea, the Soviet Union, and the People's Republic of China (Buzo 89). Korea has common borders with both Russia and China. All four powers participated, directly or indirectly, in the Korean War of the 1950s. The Korean War was extension of the conflict in and the Cold War, at least in American eyes. North Korea, China, and later Vietnam were seen in Washington as part of a single Communist bloc, all allies and instruments of Moscow. A scenario suggests that the Soviet Union, North Korea, and Communist China conspired to begin a war in Asia.The North Korean invasion of South Korea was the opening move in a Communist offensive for worldwide domination. However, while it is fairly certain that Premier Mao Tsetung and Stalin were both aware of North Korea's decision to invade, there is less evidence that the nations involved were acting under the aegis of international communism. In fact, failure to understand the difference between national and international communism is a significant part of the inability of the United Nations to comprehend the depth of the problem it faced.The actual element of conspiracy, it there was one, may have been in the willingness of major political powers to use small and vulnerable nations in the Cold War. That is, the Korean War simply have been a convenient battleground for one more clash between nations who did not have the courage to take on each other openly. Works Cited Anthony, Farrar-Hockley. â€Å"The China Factor i n the Korean War†. In The Korean War in History ed. James Cotton and Ian Neary. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1989. Ball, S. J. The Cold War: An International History, 1947-1991. Arnold: London, 1998.Buzo, Adrian. The Making of Modern Korea. Routledge: New York. , 2002. Gaddis John Lewis. â€Å"The Emerging Post-Revisionist Synthesis on the Origins of the Cold War†. Diplomatic History 7 (Summer 1983): 171-90. Guttmann, Allen. Korea and the Theory of Limited War. D. C. Heath: Lexington, MA, 1967. Kaufman, Burton I. The Korean Conflict. Greenwood Press: Westport, CT, 1999. Lowe, Peter. The Origins of the Korean War. London: Longmann, 1986. Malkasian, Carter. A History of Modern Wars of Attrition. Praeger: Westport, CT, 2002. Mcmahon, Robert. The Cold War: A Very Short Introduction.Oxford University Press: Oxford, England, 2003. Paige, Glenn D. The Korean Decision. New York: Free Press, 1968. Ridgway, M. B. The Korean War, Garden City, NY, 1967. Roe, Patrick C. The Dragon Strikes: China and the Korean War, June-December 1950. Presidio Press: Novato, CA, 2000. Sandler, Stanley. The Korean War: No Victors, No Vanquished. UCL Press: London, 1999. Stueck, William. Rethinking the Korean War: A New Diplomatic and Strategic History. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 2002. Wainstock, Dennis D. Truman, Macarthur and the Korean War. Greenwood Press: Westport, CT, 1999.

Labels

Alex George-Hampton Hour: 3 Labels Some argue that labels are critical to language and communication. Labeling is describing someone or something in a short phrase or word. Labels can be used to represent good things, and help characterize people and things. All languages use labels, because without them it would be very difficult to describe certain people or things. When explaining what someone looks like its almost impossible to not use labels. Short, tall, skinny, fat, longhaired, pretty, etc. are all labels. Without these types of labels we would have to use exact information to describe what a person looks like, instead of using a word or short phrase. Labels help simplify our social world, by reducing the amount of processing we do when meeting a new person The problem with labels is that they are based on assumptions. Labels are judgmental, and are created by opinions and beliefs. We willingly accept these labels as statements without evidence of them being true.These assumpt ions become stereotypes, which can become put-downs. Everyone is exposed to some form of labeling and stereotypes throughout his or her life. Labels quickly lead to name-calling and verbal abuse. Stereotypes are often based on race but can also refer to intelligence, religion, age, sexual orientation, etc. Most stereotypes are intended to give off a negative impression. Social categorization is developed from labels and stereotypes, which is a big reason for prejudice attitudes.Stereotypes are so common that it is likely to not even recognize them when they occur in everyday life. There are positive stereotypes, but negative stereotypes seem far more common. . A disadvantage to labels is that they make us ignore the difference amongst individuals, causing us to believe what isn’t necessarily true. Work cited: http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Labeling_theory http://www. simplypsychology. org/katz-braly. html http://www. colorado. edu/conflict/peace/problem/stereoty. htm

Okonkwo: a Life Story of a Tragic Hero

Esha Moore Honors English II- Hyatt May 23, 2012 Things Fall Apart Final Literally Analysis Essay Okonkwo: A Life Story of a Tragic Hero What makes up a hero in today’s society? Young children today imagine a hero with superpowers and a cape, but little do they know heroes come in many different forms. In his novel, Things Fall Apart, the Nigerian author Chinua Achebe illustrates the making of modern hero. Even though Okonkwo does not act like a regular hero, he still has a noble structure, makes mistakes throughout life, and experiences a great downfall.Elijah Wood once said â€Å"There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow men. True nobility lies in being superior to your former self. † Growing up, the Umuofia clan did not consider Okonkwo noble because of his impecunious father, Unoka: â€Å"Unoka was, of course, a debtor, and he owed every neighbor some money, from a few cowries to quite substantial amount† (Achebe 5). When Unoka died ten years ag o he has taken no title at all and left Okonkwo in debt. Greatly ashamed of his father, he based many of his beliefs about how life should be lived by doing the exact opposite of his father.Okonkwo’s nobility all begins about twenty years ago, when his clan announces him the best wrestler. This all happened when Amalinze the Cat- seven year champion- who fights Okonkwo; however, Okonkwo throws the Cat and won the match. Meanwhile, a war was going on in Mbaino, so in the nine villages of Umuofia, all the men must be present tomorrow morning. Umuofia needed a young man and a virgin: â€Å"He was a man of action, a man of war† (10). Okonkwo leaves for Mbaino knowing not to suspect upon his arrival. Okonkwo suffers various hamartia or mistakes that he truly regrets.Okonkwo starts out being his town hero; however, his biggest flaw was having uncontrollable anger, which eventually leads to his violent behavior. Okonkwo violent behavior starts before the Week of Peace. He com es home expecting Ojiungo and dinner she usually prepares for him. Okonkwo realizes her lack of absence; he then starts freaking out because she went to her friend’s house to plait her hair. Since she was not at the house, he came back to the hut and waits upon her arrival, which lead to Ojiungo beating.Ezeani, the priest of the earth goddess comes to the hut to discuss Okonkwo’s actions and how he could ruin the clan. While getting ready for The Feast of the New Yam, he makes another mistake by shooting at Ekwefi-his second wife- she mocks her husband's poor hunting ability, making a remark about guns that never shoot: â€Å"He pressed the trigger and there was a loud report accompanied by the wail of his wives and children† (39). Okonkwo tends not to think and he acts impulsively and inconsiderately.Okonkwo tries instilling his personal views on how to live as a man to Nwoye and according to Okonkwo, showing emotions are signs of acting womanly. The Oracle of the Hills and the Caves pronounce Ikemefuna should be killed, and the oldest member of the clan informs Okonkwo of this. Okonkwo has an obsessive fear of anything that can be associated with the image of his weak, lazy and gentle father whom he always considered a failure. As an ambitious man who became a successful, respectable warrior of the clan, he wants to take part in the killing of the boy; however, the older clan member forbids him to do so.Forced to march in a procession, Ikemefuna stricken by one of the clan members, when he tries to seek Okonkwo's protection, Okonkwo so as not appear weak performs: â€Å"Dazed with fear, Okonkwo drew his machete and cut him down† (61). His irascible behavior leads to besmirching his reputation. Ikemefuna's death generates a series of events, which lead to Okonkwo's downfall. Okonkwo's son, Nwoye and Ikemefuna have grown close like brothers and even Okonkwo has grown fond of Ikemefuna.While attending Ezeudu’s funeral another disaster befalls him: â€Å"Okonkwo’s gun had exploded and a piece of iron had pierced the boy’s heart† (124). The death of Ezeudu's son went against the Earth Goddess, so he was forced into exile for seven years to his mother's village. During the time of exile, white missionaries appeared on their bicycles. The Oracle warns the clan about death and destruction in the future. They ask for land to build a church and they are given the Evil Forest, with hope the cursed land will lead to their demise; instead, their church flourishes and gains more and more converts each day.When Okonkwo finds out about Nwoye’s conversion, he beats him so severely. Upset by his father’s action Nwoye runs away and never comes back; he joins the missionaries as a teacher. He sees himself and his fathers’ crowding around their ancestral shrine waiting in vain for worship and sacrifice and finding nothing but ashes of bygone days, and his children the while prayin g to the white man's god. After seven years he returns to his village, hoping to regain his position of importance, but much has changed with the invasion.Resistance to the white men was agreed upon because of fear of killing their own clansman. While the meeting was taking place, a group of messengers from the white men arrive and orders them to stop: â€Å"In a flash Okonkwo drew his machete. The messenger crouched to avoid the blow. It was useless. Okonkwo’s machete descended twice and the man’s head lay beside his uniformed body† (204). From this action, Okonkwo knows that his clan will not go to war. He has lost his respect and authority he once had from his family and his Umuofia clan.He then commits suicide by hanging himself. Okonkwo starts out being his town hero but later sees himself in situations he regrets. Okonkwo’s inflexibility to accept causes his downfall because he became so obsessed with being everything his dad was not. This causes Ok onkwo’s to no longer care whether things were wrong or right. Although Okonkwo demonstrations fear and anger actions much consideration should be taken to make sure his personal flaws in society do not interfere with one’s judgment.Work Cited Achebe, Chinua. Things Fall Apart. Anchor Books: New York: 1994.

Perception vs Reality Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

Perception vs Reality - Essay Example Stakeholders need to be informed of the prevalent circumstances irrespective of the nature of the information (Jackson, 2012). Communicating challenges and successes eliminates the negative perception from the stakeholders. Always maintain strict resource observance: Stakeholders are continuously interested in the resources and confusions arise whenever the project management is not strict as it should be. Anything that seeks to deduct from the resources or affects the distribution of resources should be well documented. There are no little requirements in the management of resources, and that perception should be avoided at all cost. The resource management team should communicate to the stakeholders on the efficient utilization of resources and the documentation requirement to access resources emphasized (Jackson, 2012). The project manager is responsible for the management of the resources and decisions made by the other levels of management should be inclusive. Quality supersedes quantity. Resources should be effectively and efficiently used and allocated accordingly to achieve better performance. In any project, stakeholders desire to have it completed quickly and inexpensively (Jackson, 2012). Perceptions of the management of how the outcome can be quickly achieved arise from executives making unrealistic promises to the stakeholders. In most cases the project has to give to receive; completing projects quickly and inexpensively results to low quality projects. Time for all the projects is a limited resource that should be carefully considered. The stakeholders need to realize that more resources need to be utilized to achieve quick results (Jackson,

Hotel Paris Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Hotel Paris - Case Study Example As the paper outlines, presentation of a new code of ethics and set of ethical guidelines is a big improvement in administering ethics among employees because they will govern their moral behavior in satisfying their guests. This improves teamwork hence high productivity because the employees must adhere to these guidelines and behave ethically. It also improves the employees’ commitment in work. In addition, it helps employees in situations of ethical dilemmas. They are able to consider both their interests and the hotels interest. This enables them to make an ethical decision based on fairness. In addition, this code of ethics improves the employer employee relationship. These set of guidelines helps the employees meet their obligations towards the organization, their coworkers, and customers. Moreover, the act of top executives of being the role model in exercising fairness, honesty, and justice in the company changes the employees’ attitudes. The top officials influ ence the employee’s ethical behaviors. If they make ethical decisions that are in accordance with the set of ethical guidelines and code of ethics, then the employees will follow the same. The top executives must be moral persons and moral leaders. Their ethical leadership determines the ethical behavior in the organization and this facilitates effectiveness in the company’s day-to-day operations. Moreover, the online training programs are efficient and effective in understanding the importance of ethical behavior in the company. The step of a transparent and honest selection and hiring process promotes fairness and reduces cases of corruption in the company. This means that the process only allows the qualified staff to get the job regardless of the race, color, tribe or status. The performance appraisal process is clear to avoid distributive injustice. The process clearly indicates who deserves it. This promotes fairness and avoids grievances.

Community Development Corporation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Community Development Corporation - Essay Example This paper also describes the kind of services the company provides. This company is not purely a community development company but has had significant contribution in the recent times. The company works alongside Community Development Corporation (CDC) in Dallas. The main focus of the two companies is mainly the kids. This is a good and commendable move especially because the kids are the future. The program supports an estimated 4000 children in about 18 schools (Jacques, 12). The DynCorp international corporation seeks to promote learning of mathematics and computer applications among other areas of focus. Most recently, the company donated 500 iPods to the children to help them understand computer applications better as well as help them download notes. Other than the small kids, the company also supports other needy groups in the society such as law enforcement veterans, international community development, veterans of the U.S. military and worldwide education programs (Jacques, 20). These are some of the sectors that are often overlooked by the government as well as other community development companies. The company also gives back to the community through its philanthropic donations project which involves training programs for the local community as well as volunteers. Through such projects, the company does not only empower the community but also prepares the community for a better

Ang Lee's 'chinese authenticity' in his transnational films Essay

Ang Lee's 'chinese authenticity' in his transnational films - Essay Example ‘Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon’ has received criticisms by Chinese audience and film scholars concerning its authenticity as a Chinese martial arts film. Looking at the film, its settings and the locations are all Chinese and its source of material is a famous series of Chinese pulp novels of the early 20th century. Yuen Wong-Ping’s martial arts chemotherapy use in the film is an excellent tradition of cinema in Hong Kong. In addition, all its actors are ethnically Chinese including major stars in East Asia. However, despite all these features, the Chinese audiences do not seem to connect to Ang Lee’s vision. They feel that the film does not reflect Chinese culture. Criticisms According to Wang and Yeh (175), Chinese audience claim that the film contains all that is Chinese as well as exotic identity. Elements of westernization are present in the film despite a total exclusion of West form in the film’s narrative. Chinese culture is a traditional cu lture and therefore it is designed to stability unlike the western culture designed for change and growth. However, Ang Lee has made a blending of Western psychological drama and Eastern fiction hence making the movie hybridized. Chinese culture is a fictional one yet Ang Lee’s ‘Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon’ has some emotional attachment due to the styles employed in the film. Critics feel that the film should not have contained elements of westernization for it to qualify as a Chinese film. The film has failed to be a symbol of Chinese culture due to the intercultural viewpoint of Ang Lee. For example Ang Lee has also failed to bring out actual Chinese values in the film. Instead, he has made a mix up of the Chinese and western values in the film by allowing some of the characters to poses and capitalize on western cultural values. In the western culture, the pursuit of happiness and individualism are highly valued. On the contrary, Chinese culture values mora lity and collectivism over individuality, and condemns the pursuit of personal happiness at the expense of others. Taking Jen as an example, the western viewers are more likely to praise her because of her qualities of strong will, independence and strength. They are also likely to perceive her as being a free person. Coming to the Chinese audience, their perception of Jen definitely differs because of the way she brings out her characters of strong will, independence and strength contradicts the Chinese cultural expectations. Holding to a strong Confucian point of view, the Chinese have criticized her for being excessively cunning and morally corrupt. This is opposed to their views on Sulian whom they say she is noble and mature enough to control her feelings. According to them, this is proper of Chinese people (Wang and Yeh 177). Some audiences have complained that the use of special effects made the work too look fake and hence a misrepresentation of the actual situation in the C hinese culture and actual Chinese Kung Fu. The movie has been produced as a Chinese martial art film. This means that the language used by he actors, including the accent, should be clearly understandable to Chinese-speaking audience. However, the accent of the leading actors bothers some Chinese-speaking audience. All the four main actors used varied accents for example Chang Chen spoke using a Taiwanese accent. Ang Lee has also been criticized by insisting on the use of Mandarin yet some of the actors were

Discuss the causes and effects of three factors of climate change Essay

Discuss the causes and effects of three factors of climate change - Essay Example Change in the climate of a given region, is because of natural and human induced factors on the environment. This paper discusses three factors that cause change in the climatic conditions of an area. These three factors include oceanic circulations, global warming and volcanic radiations. Volcanic activity is a natural factor that causes climatic change. When volcanic eruptions occur, they inject quite a large amount of duct and other gaseous elements into the stratosphere. One of the gaseous elements that reach the stratosphere is sulphur dioxide (Letcher 81). On reaching the stratosphere level, sulphur dioxide converts rapidly to form sulphuric acid aerosols. The aerosols formed continue to spread gradually covering the whole world at the stratosphere. The effects of volcanic eruptions at the stratosphere, do not wear out as fast as the effects at the lower level (Letcher 81). This is because at the lower level, the effects of gravity and rainfall, contribute to the recovery of th e volcanic effects at that level. The covering at the upper level, which constitutes sulphuric acid aerosols, reduces the direct solar beam to the earth surface. The reduction is because of the high reflective property of sulphuric acid aerosols (Letcher 81). ... The effects of volcanic activity on climate are in a long time scale, such as millions of years. Over millions of years, continuous volcanic activity, releases huge volumes of greenhouse gases, which causes global warming. On the other hand, sulphur dioxide emissions will counter the effects of global warming. Therefore, the result of the process on the climate remains uncertain, leaving other external factors, such as the nature of the volcano, to determine the change (Letcher 84). Ocean circulation is another significant factor that results to a change in the climatic conditions. This is because oceans too, play a role in the global climate system. Oceans store a large amount of heat energy. Ocean circulation is a force that causes a change in the global heat balance on Earth (Samelson 29). Major theories in ocean circulation, depict the changes in the North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW) production and thermohaline circulation, to be cause of climatic change. However, scientists have focused more on the climatic transitions that occurs between the interglacial and glacial occurrences (Samelson 29). The Gulf Stream carries heat polewards, to warm the north maritime Europe. The North Atlantic contains cold polar air (Samelson 30). On meeting the cold polar air, the warm water, releases heat to the atmosphere. The cooling water sinks with the help of the increased salinity in the region. Increase in salinity is a result of the presence of sea ice, which is present in the Arctic regions (Samelson 30). The cooling water will thus sink because of an increase in density, forming the North Atlantic Deep Water. The NADW flows through to the Pacific Ocean via western Atlantic, all the way around Australia and

One Amazing Thing by Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni Essay

One Amazing Thing by Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni - Essay Example In addition, there is a young Muslim man named Tariq who is having problems with finding his place in the world after the September 11 attacks have led to his discrimination due to his background. There is also Mr and Mrs Prichett, an older couple who have a strained marriage, a young woman called Uma whose parents live in India, and finally the manager of the visa office named Mangalam and his assistant Malathi. Although they are complete strangers at the beginning of the story, their lives are suddenly brought together when an earthquake occurs and they are trapped in the consulate building, which collapses and leaves some of them wounded. Cameron immediately takes charge of the situation by swiftly treating the injuries of those who have been wounded, ensuring that everybody remains calm, and beginning to make a plan to ensure that they all survive until they are rescued. However, as the conditions begin to worsen, some of this group begins to turn on one another due to the panic that is brought on by these conditions. To prevent any escalation in the conflict among them, Uma suggests that they all share something very amazing that has ever happened in their lives, which they have never shared with anyone. Perhaps the suggestion of hers was motivated by the fact that she was very curious about the people around her as it is stated that â€Å"she had always been†¦ interested - quite unnecessarily, some would say - in the secrets of strangers.† (Divakaruni 3). No matter what her intentions are, Uma’s suggestion makes everyone to calm down and when â€Å"Cameron switched off both flashlights†¦Uma sensed a new alertness in her companions, a shrugging off of things they couldn’t control they were ready to listen to one another† (Divakaruni 70). While each of them tells their story, they come to understand each other from very different perspectives from the ones they had of each other in the beginning. There develops a depth of understanding between them which is completely unbiased by their appearance or perceived backgrounds. Previously, they had viewed each other according to stereotype and an example of this was the belief that Cameron’s black skin made him violent just because the stereotype of African Americans is one of violence. Furthermore, others are fearful of Tariq because they think he is a terrorist just because his beard is unkempt. In this story, a sense of urgency is developed through the characters telling stories of the one event that affected their lives. This sense of urgency is brought about due to the uncertainty, which they have about their lives being saved in time before they are drowned by either the flooding water or the lack of supplies to keep them alive. The characters seem to have an attitude of having nothing to lose when they tell their stories as if it is essential that they share these stories about a specific event that happened in their lives before they face their prospective deaths if they are not rescued. They reveal some of their most thoughts concerning these events, as if by telling them to others, it will help prolong their lives for a little while longer, â€Å"When had it happened? Looking back, I could not point to one special time and say, There! That is what is amazing. We can change completely and not recognize it†¦.think terrible events have made us into stone. But love slips in like a chisel – and suddenly it is an ax, breaking us into pieces from the inside† (Divakaruni 90). The thing that makes One Amazing Thing a great story is the fact that the author has taken many stories and woven them together to make one story with all the characters in the other stories brought together into one main story. During the first

Mardi Gra Social Impact Study Essay Example for Free

Mardi Gra Social Impact Study Essay Sydney has always been the destination of lesbian and gay tourists around the world to view this great spectacle at the South Pacific’s gay and lesbian capital. The Australian gay and lesbian tourism industry has always been on the go whenever the event comes into full view. The street parades and costume parties have always attracted tourists when compared to other events and affairs. Because of this, Sydney, the gay capital of the world, has changed from â€Å"an industrial port to a cosmopolitan, global capital increasingly dependent, for the last two to three decades, on an economy driven by consumption and leisure† (Markwell, 2002, p. 82). Therefore, it is evident that the Mardi Gra contributes solely on Australia’s tourism economy, as reflected in the paper that Kevin Markwell (2002) wrote. There are tensions and demands that leak from the Mardi Gras of Sydney, and the economic impacts of big events such as this cannot be completely ignored. Mardi Gras of Australia Localization as well as globalization can create a big impact on international events and issues that surround the nations. What Markwell (2002) has called localization-globalization dynamic refers to†¦ [T]he way in which a local, community event has challenged and overturned social mores and legislation at the state and national levels partly through its elevation to a national and international event. (Markwell, 2002, p. 83) This has an impact on the tourism industry, as it evades traditional mechanisms and instead, focuses more on the trend and movement of a certain population, creating an ever-increasing power while affecting government intervention and legislation. The tensions and demands of the Mardi Gras The first Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gra parade happened on the 24th of June 1978 (Markwell, 2002, p. 83). However, what was supposed to be an enjoyable event became one that was close to disaster, as the celebration turned out to be a riot â€Å"with fifty-three people arrested and several alleging vicious assaults by police† (Markwell, 2002, p. 83). There was this tension of distinguishing what exactly was the purpose of that event, especially that there were records on concealed systematic oppression, homophobia, as well as discrimination (Markwell, 2002, p. 83). As of last year, there were approximately 10,000 people who joined the Mardi Gra of Sydney, marking the event as the biggest Mardi Gra event ever to be held in Australia (Organizers say, 2008, p. 1). According to AAP General News Wire, â€Å"Crowds of up to 300,000 people are expected to line the central city route to watch the procession of themed floats, drag queens and many more costumed and flesh-revealing revelers† (Organizers say, 2008, p. 1). To avoid unwanted riots and insurgencies, 80 military personnel and defense force employees marched among the crowds. As stated, â€Å"Those charged will face a range of offenses including affray, assault police, possessing prohibited drugs, assault, and resisting arrest† (Mother Nature, 2007, p. 1). The demand of cleaning human debris is another demand, in addition to the demand of controlling 4,000 gays and lesbians in the event that triggered an economic relief of about $500,000 in the local economy (Bathersby, 2008, p. 1). The economic impact of Mardi Gras In the economy of New Orleans, there is a report that the chosen event can generate more than $1 billion in annual spending, benefiting the economy and the tourism industry of the state (Mardi Gras questions and answers, 2009, p. 1). Noosa, on the other hand, will have poured about $500,000 last year as stated above (Bathersby, 2008, p. 1). By March 2009, they earned about $300,000, as stated in the report (Lander, 2009, p. 1). It is therefore, apparent that this year is approximately 60% less the earned revenue of last year. Nevertheless, it still is helpful to the economy, earning in New South Wales an amount of about $100,000 million each year in the area of tourism (Santow, 2002, p. 1). Each state or nation earns different amounts each year, depending on the state of tourism of that state or nation. According to Simon Santow (2002) however, [T]he Mardi Gras is suffering from a combination of increased costs and falling revenue, at a time when, ironically, there’s been no significant drop in public interest. Unless half a million dollars is found, the organization could place itself in voluntary administration, so the call has gone out for some emergency funding from the state and federal governments [of Sydney]. (Santow, 2002, p. 1) The government issues the permits in parades such as these, but there are economic impacts on big events, such as the Mardi Gras events. Focusing on the economic impact of big events In a paper that Larry Dwyer, Robert Mellor, Nina Mistilis, and Trevor Mules (2000) wrote, they stated that, as the state government receives requests in funding special events and conventions (such as the Mardi Gra), the government focuses mainly on the alleged positive impacts of these events, especially the overall economic impact. There is a framework developed by the state of New South Wales in Australia used to estimate the economic impacts of events and conventions. This is done by using â€Å"accurate and uniform set of events or conventions expenditure as input into the forecasting model† (Dwyer, Mellor, Mistilis, Mules, 2000, pp. 191-192). Forecasting event-related expenditure is done by the following these steps: first is to estimate the number of inscope visitors; second is to estimate the inscope expenditure of visitors; third is to estimate inscope expenditure of organizers, participants, teams, and media; fourth is to estimate total event related inscope expenditure; fifth is to apply multipliers to estimate economic impacts; sixth is to estimate media impacts; seventh is to estimate fiscal impacts; eighth and final is the recognition of intangible costs and benefits (Dwyer et al. , 2000, pp. 192-194).Mardi Gra is a big event, and it covers some impacts on the economy and the society, as it affects the lives of people there and abroad. References Bathersby, D. (2008, March 2). Noosa set for pink invasion. Retrieved April 9, 2009, from The Daily database: http://www. thedaily. com. au/news/2008/mar/02/noosa-set-pink-invasion/. Brown, A. L. (2009, February 27). Mardi Gras boost. Retrieved April 9, 2009, from The Daily database: http://www. thedaily. com.au/news/2009/feb/27/mardi-gras-revellers-coast-boost/. Dwyer, L. , Mellor, R. , Mistilis, N. , Mules, T. (2000). Forecasting the economic impacts of events and conventions. Event Management, 6, 191-204. Lander, A. (2009, March 9). Mardi Gras recovery on the coast. Retrieved April 9, 2009, from The Daily database: http://www. thedaily. com. au/news/2009/mar/09/mardi-gras-recovery-coast/. Mardi Gras questions and answers. (2009). Retrieved April 9, 2009, from the Compucast Interactive database: http://www.mardigrasneworleans. com/faq. html. Markwell, K. (2002). Mardi Gras tourism and the construction of Sydney as an international gay and lesbian city. GLQ, 8, 1, 81-99. Mother Nature to star Sydney gay parade. (2007, day). NSW, p. 1. Organizers say Mardi Gras will be biggest ever. (2008, day). NSW, p. 1. Santow, S. (2002, August 1). Mardi Gras in danger. Retrieved April 9, 2009, from The World Today Archive of the ABC database: http://www. abc. net. au/worldtoday/stories/s637685. htm.

Communication and Patient Centered Care Reflection

Communication and Patient Centered Care Reflection INTRODUCTION The Healthcare Quality Strategy for NHS Scotland (Scottish Government 2010) was a further development from ‘Better Health, Better Care’ (Scottish Government 2007). In this reflective account I wish to concentrate on the peoples priorities for the people of Scotland outlined within this document, the ultimate aim is to provide the highest quality of care. It has as their objectives that care given should be consistent, person centered, clinically effective and safe and equitable with patients receiving clear communication with regards to conditions and treatment (Scottish Government 2010). Hubley and Copeman, (2008) state communication skills are paramount in healthcare to ensure that tailored advice is delivered effectively. This reflective account is based on an experience from my 3rd year management placement. Using Gibbs’s Reflective Model (1988) I aim to outline what occurred throughout the incident which involved providing clear communication and patient centered care and how this can be linked to the Quality Strategy in relation to the people’s priorities. This reflective model has been selected as it enables reflection on practice in a structured way allowing one to identify critical learning and development from their experience to enhance future practice (Bullman and Schutz, 2008). This scenario will consider how this incident will aid in my transition from student nurse to staff nurse. To comply with patients’ rights to confidentiality and in accordance with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), (2010) I will use the pseudonym Mrs Wade. DESCRIPTION This reflection involves a 78 year old lady Mrs Wade who was an inpatient on the ward for 10 days after being diagnosed as having a cerebral haemorrhage. This had left Mrs Wade with a left sided weakness and aphasic. It was during afternoon visiting and taking the routine observations I noted Mrs Wade to be scoring one on the National Early Warning Score chart (NEWS) due to reduced oxygen saturation levels of 95%. However, on comparing this with previous readings this was within the parameters of her levels taken over the previous days. . I had just moved on to the next patient when Mrs Wade’s son who was visiting asked me to come back as his mother was indicating that she had pain in her chest radiating to her left jaw. I immediately took another set of observations and Mrs Wade was now scoring 10 on the NEWS chart. I immediately went to seek guidance from my mentor who instructed me to show my findings to the doctor whilst she administered GTN spray. The doctor came and asse ssed Mrs Wade and instructed me to administer 5mg of morphine, 15 liters of oxygen and commence an initial 250ml bag of normal saline and if Mrs Wades BP had still not risen I was to continue with a second bag, whilst he arranged an ECG and chest X-ray. At this time my mentor advised me that I was to take control of the situation and she would assist me if I required help. FEELINGS My initial feeling was one of complete fear. However, I felt within seconds I regained my composure and I took control of the situation. I was relieved that training had indeed prepared me for a situation like this where I automatically began to use the ABCDE assessment (Jevon, 2010). I was also anxious but relieved in being able to communicate effectively with the doctor, my mentor, team members and Mrs Wades son. I felt I was able to handover clearly and concisely. I feel that I was able to do this as I had been dealing with Mrs Wade on each of my days on duty over the previous two weeks. EVALUATION The negative aspect from this incident is how a patient in one’s care can deteriorate so rapidly. However, in the case of Mrs Wade I repeatedly asked myself if I had missed some signs and this incident could have been avoided. The positive aspect of this incident was that Mrs Wade’s deterioration had been caught instantly. I had the opportunity to discuss this incident with my mentor. At this time she praised me on how I had taken control of the situation in a calm and professional manner. I was competent when communicating with team explaining the background to Mrs Wade’s condition thus aiding an effective result in Mrs Wades condition being stabilized. It was also reiterated that this was an unavoidable situation and there was nothing I could have done differently to alter the outcome. ANALYSIS The people’s priorities outlined by The Healthcare Quality Strategy for NHS Scotland (Scottish Government 2010) and in caring for Mrs Wade on reflection I wanted to be establishing if I covered all areas and were I could improve. The priorities are to be caring and compassionate, have clear communication skills and be able to explain conditions and treatment have effective collaboration between clinicians, patients and others; A clean and safe care environment; Continuity of care; and Clinical excellence. Jones (2012) advocates that it is essential in nursing to have good communication skills. This is also advocated by Dougherty and Lister (2008) who states that communication is an integral part of maintaining a high quality of record keeping which is regarded as a vital standard of practice by the NMC (2008). Communication and written care records aid to establish a continuity of care. As I found Mrs Wade to have deteriorated it is stated by Hill (2012) that the outcome for a deteriorating patient is dependent on the knowledge and skills of the person or persons who find and care for them and the recognition of the acutely ill. As I was the first responder and having called for help I used my mentor and other team members to assist myself in assessing and stabilizing Mrs Wades vital signs. At this time I also asked my colleague to ensure Mrs Wades son was taken to the day room and someone would come to speak with him as soon as possible. This is fundamental to patient centered-care to communicate openly and honestly with all concerned (Brooker and Nicol, 2008). I used ABCDE approach recommended by Jevons (2010) and The Resuscitation Council (2010). The ABCDE approach is a systematic tool were by you assess your patient and deal with the life threatening situations first. During this time I endeavored to reassure Mrs Wade at all times through effective communication skills (Scottish Government 2010, p6). Although Mrs Wade was aphasic her airways were patent and no obstruction was noted. Therefore it was acceptable to move on to B (breathing) within the ABCDE. Patients presenting with Myocardial Infarction (MI) or Pulmonary Embolism can show an increased respiratory rate. As Mrs Wade’s respiratory rate had increased and was desaturating she was commenced on high flow oxygen (O’Driscoll 2008). Mrs Wades heart rate 109 beats per minute and on palpating the radial pulse it was fast but strong and regular. Mrs Wade’s blood pressure had decreased to 89/56 therefore commenced on a 250ml bag of saline. Urine output was already being monitored and IV access was in place. The next stage is Disability. AVPU is a tool used to assess levels of consciousness within acutely ill patients (Jevon 2009b). This is a quick assessment tool within the NEWS and ABCDE approach; However, NICE 2007 recommend the use of the Glasgow Coma Scale to give a full assessment. At this stage my mentor checked blood glucose levels. Blood glucose levels can rise in acutely ill patients due to a result of sympathetic activation (Floras 2009). However at this stage they were within the normal range of 4-7mmol/L (Diabetes UK 2013). During this situation to communicate my findings I used a systematic approach based on situation, background, assessment and recommendation (SBAR) tool to share the necessary information effectively and concisely (Pope et al 2009). In the emergency situation with Mrs Wade this highlights the involvement of nurses in collaboration with other healthcare professionals and coordinate all resources to provided effective timely care. I feel that I took on the role as lead nurse in this situation I knew it was my responsibility as a student nurse in my final placement to show that I could take control of this situation, whilst in the knowledge knowing I still had my mentor if I felt I required assistance. I felt I had to show I could effectively delegate, show leadership qualities, prioritise the care of Mrs Wade whilst being able to communicate effectively in a challenging situation. CONCLUSION The outcome was positive in the aspect that a holistic approach to Mrs Wade’s condition was taken in accordance with The Scottish Government’s Initiative (2010) on patient centered care. I felt empowered by incorporating the use of the SBAR framework in effective collaboration with the multidisciplinary team aided clear communicating in accordance with The Scottish Government (2010). This resulted in a consistent continuity of care for Mrs Wade. ACTION PLAN A result of this significant event was that it gave me the experience of dealing with an emergency situation. As stated by Scheffer and Rubenfeld (2000) â€Å"Critical thinking in nursing is an essential component of professional accountability and quality nursing care. Critical thinkers in nursing exhibit these habits of the mind: confidence, contextual perspective, creativity, flexibility, inquisitiveness, intellectual integrity, intuition, open-mindedness, perseverance, and reflection. Critical thinkers in nursing practice the cognitive skills of analyzing, applying standards, discriminating, information seeking, logical reasoning, predicting, and transforming knowledge†. I was also given the opportunity afterwards to reflect on my role and the role each member of the team took in this situation and where appropriate to remove oneself from a situation I feel for future development I will take responsibility for my own learning in areas where I felt I lacked knowledge. In this situation I had assumed that Mrs Wade was having an MI were in fact it was a PE. I believe that in the future and with more experience I may be able to differentiate and although I would not expect to be an expert I would be better equipped to deal with similar situations in the future (RCN 2013). I was particularly anxious as I know I have no experience in Basic Life Support other than what I had learned at university and knowing this woman was for resuscitation I was anxious that this situation may occur. OVERALL CONCLUSION On reflection of my own experience and in using this to aid in my transition from student nurse to staff nurse I feel I have enhanced my own knowledge on basic life support outlined by the British Resuscitation Council UK (2010) cited by (Dougherty and Lister, 2011) whilst reiterating the importance of good communication skills. It also highlighted the importance of having the confidence to acknowledge one’s own lack of knowledge and be able to admit to this and where to seek guidance to ensure that the correct protocol is followed to ensure patient safety at all times and to provide continuity of care. I feel that the care given to this patient is in line with the initiative of The Scottish Government’s Healthcare Quality Strategy for Scotland (2010). In relation to how this incident reflects on my transition it shows that on graduating as a staff nurse I will immediately assume the role which includes leadership, delegation and supervision. Once NMC registered, a host of expectations are placed upon you. The RCN (2010) reported that newly qualified staff nurses feel unprepared and overwhelmed by their new responsibilities, making the period of transition very stressful rather than exciting and truly enjoyable. However, I hope to overcome these feelings by immersing myself in the knowledge that I will adhere to all policies and guideline by The Scottish Government (2010) to ensure the best possible care and service to all. References Hill Karen Critical to Care: Improving the Care to the Acutely Ill and Deteriorating Patient Karen Hill, Acuity Practice Development Matron Southampton University Hospital NHS Trust May 2010 – January 2011 February 2012 http://fons.org/library/report-details.aspx?nstid=18132 Jones, A 2012, The foundation of good nursing practice: effective communication,Journal Of Renal Nursing, 4, 1, pp. 37-41, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 27 July 2014. Scheffer BK1,Rubenfeld MG (2000) . A Consensus statement on critical thinking in nursing  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11103973

The Paris Peace Conferences Justified History Essay

The Paris Peace Conferences Justified History Essay The relations between France and Germany up to the 21st century have never been outstanding. Ever since Napoleons domination of Germany, and Germanys later victories in their domination of France, the two countries have always been rivals with one another, to the point where they hated one another. In the decade prior to World War I, Germany had a massive buildup of military strength. When World War I began however, Germany seemed to be stuck up against all of Europe. Their defeat in the war spurred the creation of the Treaty of Versailles, a treaty directed at the losers of the war, that was greatly influenced by their enemy, France. Frances aims during the discussion of the treaty during the post war peace conferences were evidently the intent of crippling Germany until they would never be able to rise up as a threatening power in Europe. This statement seems one sided at first, but through further analysis, I found Frances thoughts and situation at the time to be justifiable to so me extent, and that their cruelty towards Germany understandable. I have therefore decided to investigate just how much of Frances aims towards Germany can be justified by their fear of Germany invasion, and a sense of national security. This paper will analyze acts of aggression between France and Germany prior to the peace conferences after the war, and uncover the extent of the hate between the two countries. Because the peace conferences consisted of multiple European personalities, including Woodrow Wilson of the United States of America, a number of their mindsets at the time will be analyzed. This analysis will allow for a further look into Germanys mental position in the minds of European leaders at the time. The specific points of the treaty will also be assessed in whether or not they follow through with Frances situation at the time, and their necessities. Through all of this analysis, it was found that Frances aims towards Germany were justifiable, in that Frances proximity of German territory evoked fear and a want for heightened security against Germany. Germany had invaded France many times, and each time had been complete domination, so their fear of German strength was understandable at the time. However, at the same time, there were some French aims that seemed to be abuses of their power over Germany after World War I, such as their confiscation of many natural resources including the German Saar Mines, and the massive reparations Germany was forced to pay. Introduction It was evident, ever since the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, that France and Germany had tensions that had the potential to catalyze a future war between not only them, but the entire world. The initial rule of Napoleon ruined future relations with Germany, with his conquest of all of the German states into his French Empire, and the forceful conversion of the German states into those of France. Along with the Franco-Prussian War, and the German annexation of Frances Alsace-Lorraine, a French state that consisted of all French peoples  [1]  , the hate that France had for Germany was unimaginable, and the brutal war debt that Germany forced France to pay certainly didnt mitigate the tensions. Prior to World War I, Germany was undoubtedly the only country that had military strength rivalling that of Great Britains, and this gave reason for the French to fear German invasion, because they did not stand a chance against the overwhelming military strength of Germany. World War I how ever, was a turning point in the balance of powers in Europe, and as a result of Germanys defeat to the Allied countries of France, Britain, and Russia  [2]  , Germany was ultimately placed into Frances position pre-World War I. It was during this time that France felt a sense of control and power over Germany, and it seemed that they wished to utilize this newfound power to implement the long awaited revenge they had for Germany since the 1800s, to be done during the post-World War I peace conferences, and namely the Treaty of Versailles. The conference for the discussion of this treaty was organized by Woodrow Wilson, the democratic President of the United States, who hoped that the shape of Germany and the successor states in central and eastern Europe would be clearer, to ensure a sustainable peace in Europe.  [3]  The members of the Allied winners  [4]  , feeling more antagonistic, felt that Germanys terms of defeat, fate of its colonies, indemnities, military limit s, and reparations, should be implemented upon them without actual conference nor discussion with Germany themselves, because they were clearly the loser of the war.  [5]  This aim was most apparent in Clemenceau, the Prime minister of France at the time, who saw Germany as a permanent enemy, and knew that France was not the lone victor of the war  [6]  . He, along with all of France, had experienced multiple German invasions and feared that Germany could start another war, and France would be its first target, due to the proximity of both countries. These fears were spread to its allies, and as a result, Germany had restricted military numbers in soldiers and vehicles, large amounts of land confiscated, and unlimited reparations  [7]  to pay. Germany was crippled to the point where not only could they not start another war, but also being on the verge of collapse. It is arguable that France was justified in their aims of the treaty for their own and national security, b ut was this massive amount of restrictions just an abuse of power for revenge? This paper will argue that Frances aims were bent on revenge for Germanys superiority in Europe prior to World War I, but will also give a discussion for other factors such as national security, and a fear for Germany, that may have influenced their offensive position towards Germany during the post-World War I peace conferences. Franco-German Relations Pre-World War I Even when Germany didnt formally exist, but existed as the country of Prussia, France never had good relations with the Germans, which is especially evident during the rule of Napoleon during the 19th century. During this time, he invaded Germany multiple times, and after the Battle of Jena-Auerstedt in October 14, 1806  [8]  , Napoleon converted the divided thirty-nine German-speaking states into his Confederation of the Rhine, and destroyed the former Holy Roman Empire that ruled over Germany. A treaty that Napoleon implemented onto Prussia as a result of their victory in this battle was the treaties of Tilsit  [9]  , which resulted in large reparations owed to France by Prussia, and stripped them of almost half of their owned territory. Anger in the German states because of this defeat evoked German nationalism in later generations in these states, views in opposition of France domination, and Napoleons rule  [10]  . During this time, one of the most hated views of Fra nce was that under Napoleons rule, the monarchs of the German states were referred to as his vassals, and all the German states were just part of the French empire  [11]  . Being conquered by France, Germanys initial view on France was a hostile one, and posed a rocky road for future relations between the two countries. At this point, France had been the dominant power in Europe, towering over all of the European countries, especially Germany. The control that France had during this time may have angered the envious Germany, giving them a mind set on reorganizing the balance of power in Europe, with France at the bottom. However, with Napoleons unstoppable empire at Frances borders, the Germans would seek their revenge later after Napoleons fall of power, in the Franco-Prussian War. The Franco-Prussian war in the 1870s between France, ruled by Napoleon the 3rd (Napoleons son), and the Kingdom of Prussia, ruled by Otto von Bismarck, ended in the defeat of Frances second empire, and a laid foundation for Germany as a significant power in Europe. This meant more than a great victory over France for Prussia, but also the unification of its states with itself being the capital, into one unified Germany in 1871  [12]  . Frances defeat in this war also meant the German annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, a French city that was purely Francophone, but forcibly taken under German control. The German annexation of this particular state was guaranteed to make France a permanent enemy, and at the time even Bismarck knew this and opposed the annexation, but was overruled by his general (General Moltke) insisting it was necessary as a defensive barrier.  [13]  The indemnity that was imposed on France after this war, was identical to the amount that Napoleon charged on Prus sia during his rule, which portrays the mindset of revenge that Germany had for France, because they wanted France to experience the same suffering that was imposed on them by France. With their faltered relations leading up to World War 1, it seemed as though the anger towards the other country would not end here, as there were acts of blatant aggression from Germany towards France that later became the actual beginnings of the war. For instance, the Schlieffen Plan of the early 20th century must be addressed, a historical event that was the catalyst for the First World War. This plan called for German troops to invade France through the neutral country of Belgium, and assume domination of French troops, then immediately turn around and defeat Russian troops on their East side, in order to consecutively engage troops from two countries  [14]  . The organization and follow through of this plan portrays the overzealousness of Germany, and their overestimation of their control over Europe, possibly because of their domination by Napoleons enormous army back in the 1800s. Even though the entire plan was flawed, due to the need for the German army to fight two con secutive battles against two different countries with no rest, there was one particular flaw that questions the thoughts Germany had at the time. The plan was originally created by Count Alfred von Schlieffen, and modified by General Molkte, as mentioned previously. The flaw was that in order to cross over to France undetected, the German army was required to march through the neutral country of Belgium, whom was in an alliance (London Treaty of 1839) with Great Britain at the time. Their invasion of Belgium caused Britain to immediately declare war on Germany, which was the start of the war. According to German records, Germany was completely aware of this alliance, but didnt believe Britain would honor their treaty with Belgium and retaliate, a major mistake on their part  [15]  . They were surprised to hear that, The Britons will go to war for a mere scrap of paper.  [16]  Although this particular flaw in German logic can be blamed on ignorance, this ignorance was arguabl y as a result of their desire to invade France, without any setbacks, which furthers the view of German-Franco hatred prior to the War. Aggression between France and Germany during World War 1 The anger towards one another between Germany and France was one of the main contributors to the war, but these feelings didnt end with the declaration of war in Europe. Throughout the course of the World War (1914-1918), it was evident through the acts of aggression from both countries, that Germany and Frances hate for one another was everlasting. One of the first major battles of World War I, on the Western Front, was the Battle of Verdun in 1916, where Germany forced France into a battle of attrition on a French city called Verdun  [17]  . A German general by the name of General Falkenhayn, saw this ancient stronghold as a vulnerable target. His strategy was to continually bombard Verdun with heavy artillery shells, and this would divert Frances attention here, thus drawing them away from the Western Front, to Verdun. This plan, he believed, would bleed France dry of troops, and win the war  [18]  . The outcome was as he had planned, with French soldiers forming a defensive position, but unaware that they were vulnerable to German attacks from all sides simultaneously. The two sides were composed of two million German attackers against two hundred thousand French defenders, however France kept sending in reinforcements, which just ended in more casualties on the French side. France suffered considerably more casualti es and deaths than Germany did.  [19]  Although this strategy of attacking Verdun and forcing a battle of attrition was a cruel act, it is arguable that because the alliances of the war were favored towards France anyways (Triple Entente), Germany had no other choice but to use such tactics to gain an edge over the war. Another arguable point revolves around the already evident German relations with France. This particular act could very possibly be another unveiling of Germanys overwhelming power onto France, and by angering France by attacking one of their most precious ancient strongholds, Germany gave France a reason to be more grim and merciless in future encounters, namely the peace conferences when the war ends, and defeat was handed to Germany by the Triple Entente Alliance. Prelude to the Treaty of Versailles When World War 1 was over, and Germany was declared the loser, and the Allies the victors, preparations were set to create a sustainable peace in Europe, and to make sure a war of the same magnitude was prevented at all costs. This fight for peace was led by Woodrow Wilson, the democratic president of the United States since 1912  [20]  . Along with him, there were several other European leaders who joined the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. These personalities were Lloyd George of Britain, Clemenceau of France, Orlando of Italy, and of Wilson himself. Each leader had a separate view of how the peace treaty should have proceeded, and the kind of peace they wanted. Woodrow Wilson Wilsons perspective on European peace was expressed through his famous Fourteen Points. His points specifically demanded the end of all secret treaties (to prevent incidents like the Schlieffen Plan), freedom of the seas, removal of barriers and discrepancies in international trade, the reduction of weapons by all powers, even land distribution, evacuation of occupied territory, a redrawing of European boundaries along borders, and an international organization with a task of solely preventing war (To be called the League of Nations)  [21]  . In Wilsons point of view, he wanted to create a new type of treaty, because he believed that it was the old treaties that focused on policies of power, secret deals that excluded mention to the victimized countries, and the creation of secret alliances made between countries  [22]  . These were significant factors that led to the first world war, and Wilson wished to reform these kinds of treaties to avoid another war. However, Wilsons F ourteen Points had much difficulty in being accepted by the Allies, because each country had a different idea of peace, and how it was to be attained. Specifically, each of the Allies had a grudge for Germany, either because of its military presence during the war, or from past relations. At the end of the war, Germany accepted an armistice in preparation for upcoming peace treaties because their initial belief was that the Treaty of Versailles was to be created on the basis of Wilsons proposed Fourteen Points, with only minor modifications  [23]  . As well, because Germany was coming under a new rule of socialistic and democratic perspectives after having overthrown their current Kaiser, they had a belief that this new democratic Germany would be treated considerably by the victorious Allies, because they would re-emerge into Europe as a new Germany  [24]  . The Allies had a considerably different perspective towards Germany, after its previous accomplishments and increase in power, and being unaware, Germany accepted the Armistice of 11 November 1918  [25]  . Demands of the Allies with the Treaty of Versailles Lloyd George of Britain Germany was arguably the most hated country during World War I, because it was the enemy of the Triple Entente, but primarily because of its enormous increasing military powers. Germanys naval power was imminent when it became Great Britains top rival in the National Arms Race  [26]  , where countries raced to construct a greater amount of weapons to show military superiority. Britain was originally the richest country with a veto over naval warfare, with all countries not daring to fight with Britain in sea battles. However, with Germanys dramatic increase in power prior to World War 1, Britain lost their control over the seas, because although the numbers of ships they had were greater, Germanys naval power was great enough to rival that of Britains  [27]  . After the war, to consolidate their power over the seas once more, Britain wished to remove Germany from naval warfare, and the treaties they had control over gave them the authority to do so. Observing the demands Geor ge had against Germany and the reasons for their weak relations, seems only because Britain was envious of increasing German strength, and wanted to uphold their previous title of the most feared naval force in Europe. Georges Clemenceau of France France had placed Germany on the top of their list of hated and feared countries, with reasons as mentioned earlier, such as the earlier German annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, which they demanded be returned at the Paris Peace Conference, and the complete domination of France by Germany during the Franco-Prussian war  [28]  . But the most evident reason was their argument that most of the war had been fought on their soil, and they demanded that Germany pay for all the damages done. At the time, there was no numerical total, but it was certain that the amount in damages that Germany had to pay was well over nine trillion francs, a sum that even Clemenceau himself said, would lead to nothing practical,  [29]  meaning that this sum of money France was demanding wasnt solely because of the damages, but with a motive to cripple Germanys economy as well. Clemenceau also insisted on their demand for security against Germany, claiming that if Germany retained ownership of their lands , enough support could start another war. However, his paranoia for security from Germany has evidence, because having seen two German invasions of France during his rule, and being dominated in both of these, Clemenceau knew full well that France was not the lone victor of the war, but rather the Allies as a whole. Because Germany almost directly borders France, it seemed understandable that Clemenceau would be so desperate for a greater sense of security from Germany. France proposed to cut down Germany to almost French size, that the west parts of the Rhine be set up as independent states under the Allies control. (The land that was taken away from Germany can be found in the appendix). If not for the rejection of the request by Wilson and Lloyd George, this confiscation of land would have been approved. Clemenceau battled the rejection, but failed and agreed to put down his request on the condition that Britain and the USA would immediately come to their aid if Germany were to l aunch an attack on France. As well, instead of the control of the Rhineland, Clemenceau proposed the demilitarization of it instead. This alternate suggestion seems justifiable, in that France craved national security, because the Rhineland was indeed a direct border between France and Germany, and if Germany stationed troops in this area, France could be in danger of an attack. However, Frances demand for the confiscation of Germanys Saar coal-mines seems to be a far stretch from security. A large portion of Germanys income came from the export of coal from these mines, and without them, the amount of reparations France set on Germany would be almost unattainable, along with the economic setbacks on Germany as a result of restrictions on its economy in the treaty. These mines, along with the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France, a small strip of Schleswig to neutral Denmark, and two tiny districts Eupen and Malmedy, to Belgium were the only territorial losses that Germany suffered f rom their loss of the war, which is relatively small and modest, considering the magnitude of their loss. Clemenceaus desire to maximize the amount of power to be taken away from Germany, even if not all of their proposals were accepted by the Allies, seemed to be solely to fulfill a sense of security from a country that was directly bordering the Rhineland and had the likelihood of invading France at any time if the opportunity was available. End Result of the Treaty of Versailles The demands in reparations that the Allies placed on Germany were massive, and as mentioned, was well over any kind of sum Germany could afford to pay. The only possible way for Germany to come up with such a sum would be from export profits. This course of action would however, compete and interfere with the Big Fours economies. This economic reasoning was ignored by the Allies, because of their mind being set on repaying their enormous debts to the USA at the time. They regarded the debt they forced onto Germany as simply another means of righting their wrongs and of putting off the danger of a German revival.  [30]  When the Treaty of Versailles was completed in May 1919 and ready to sign, the Germans initially refused, due to obvious reasons of unjust conditions. The Allies threatened Germany with hostile action in response to their refusal, and this threat caused chaos in Berlin due to conflicting perspectives. The Germans knew that there was no possible way to retaliate aga inst the victors of the war, with their damaged and insufficient army, but every German citizen (and the Allies) knew that the conditions were completely absurd and meant to collapse Germany into a state where it was impossible to revive itself, rather than simply the pursuit of peace, as initially proposed by Wilson in his Fourteen Points but later rejected by the sheer influential power of the maddened Allies. Wilson was willing to abdicate to the demands of the Allies, in return for the acceptance of his proposal of a League of Nations (Germany was excluded however). The League of Nations was formed at Geneva during the Paris Peace Conference, but the United States didnt join ironically even though Wilson suggested it, nor did Germany until 1926, or Russia until 1934. The Official Treaty of Versailles was completed in three months. During its process, the Germans did not have the right to make or suggest decisions, and the Russians were not present during the making of the treaty . According to Wilson, the formation of the League of Nations was supposedly made to adjudicate international relations and be a means to solve problems between international powers. It is arguable that the systems only purpose seemed to be for maintaining the status quo in powers, in favor of France and Britain, and the exclusion and isolation of Germany, which was completely contrary to Wilsons initial proposal. Conclusion: Germany, prior to World War I, was one of the most feared and hated powers by France along with its Allied countries. During the era of Napoleons rule of Germany in the 19th century, Germany had been near the bottom in the balance of powers in Europe. With Napoleons domination of Europe at the time, Germany was inevitably one of the targets for his invasions to conquer all of Europe. Under his rule, Germany felt like a useless French state, and vowed to seek revenge on France. When Napoleon was defeated, Germany took this fantastic news as a turning point in their position of power, by dramatically increasing their military strength to the point where they rivaled Britain in the Arms Race. Germany put their newly built army on display during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, ensuring the defeat of France, and the result of their victory was the annexation of the French state of Alsace-Lorraine, a large factor of Frances hate for Germany in their later encounters. However at the same t ime, Germanys presentation of their massive buildup of military strength evoked fear in France at the same time, because an invasion from Germany could happen at any time, considering the proximity between the two countries. The defeat of Germany by the Triple Entente Alliance in World War I, gave France a chance to revert their fear of Germany, because with their influential power in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and the creation of the Treaty of Versailles, France being one of the victors, could impose almost any amount of reparations and restrictions on Germany as they felt necessary. Clemenceaus fear of Germany was still evident during this time, because he wished to cripple Germany to the point of no revival. Frances hate for Germany, as well as their fear of them, were significant factors to Frances aims for crippling Germany in the Treaty of Versailles. The question is which one was the main contributor? With further research, it is possible to find the answer to this question. With the current evidence, it seems reasonable that France had the same mindset as Germany had after their buildup of power. Because France suddenly had so much power over Germany, after being Germanys underdog prior to World War I, revenge could have been a very influential factor that fueled their desire to crush Germany under the Treaty of Versailles and ensure that their opportunity for a return to power would never arrive. Bibiography Marks, Sally.  The Illusion of Peace: International Relations in Europe 1918-1933. First Ed. London: The Macmillan Pres LTD, 1976. Print. Sharp, Alan. The Versailles Settlement: Peacemaking After The First World War. Second Ed. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008. Print. Keylor, William R. The Legacy of The Great War. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998. Print. Roselle, Daniel, and Annie P. Young. Our Western Heritage: A Cultural-Analytic History of Europe since 1500. Lexington, Massachusetts: Ginn and Company, 1981. Print. Fischer, Conan, and Alan Sharp. After The Versailles Treaty: Enforcement, Compliance, Contested Identities. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2008. Print. Palmer, R.R, and Joel Colton. A History of the Modern World. 8th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1992. Print. Hacken, Richard, and Jane Plotke. Review of the Schlieffen Plan. World War I: The Schlieffen Plan. N.p., 10 1996. Web. 21 Dec 2012. . Macmillian, Magaret, and Richard Holbrooke. Paris 1919: Six Months that Changed the World. New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2003. Print. Schulze, Hagen, and Deborah Lucas Schneider. Germany, A New History. London: Harvard Univ Pr, 1998. 356. Print. Napoleon and the Revolutionary Crusade (1795-1815). . University of Nevada, L.A, n.d. Web. 5 Apr 2012. . Duffy, Michael. Battles:The Battle of Verdun 1916. Battles:The Battle of Verdun 1916. Safesurf, 04 2003. Web. 21 Oct 2012. .