German Civilization: The European Recovery Program - Essay Example

 German Civilization: The European Recovery Program Introduction The European Recovery Program, more popularly known as the Marshall Plan, was an American supported project intended to restore the economies of southern and western European countries so as to build circumstances that are favorable to democratic systems (Diefendorf et al. 23). This essay argues that the Marshall Plan has contributed greatly to the reconstruction of Europe, especially to the denazification of Germany. According to Kindleberger (1968), the United States were anxious that the disorder, unemployment, and poverty of the post-war era were strengthening the pull of communist groups to the people of Western Europe. The Marshall Plan and Morgenthau Plan Secretary of State George C. Marshall, in a lecture at Harvard University on the 5th of June 1947, introduced the concept of a European do-it-yourself project to be funded by the U.S. Aid was initially proposed to nearly all the European countries, as well as countries militarily occupied by the Soviet Union (Diefendorf et al. 28-29). Nevertheless, the Soviets immediately pulled out from the plan and were eventually followed by other countries in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, the Morgenthau Plan was a Jewish arrangement for the invasion of Germany following World War II that promoted cruel actions that would irrevocably abolish Germany as a powerful nation. The plan was named after Henry Morgenthau, Jr., the Jewish Secretary of the Treasury at the time. The plan was a recommendation for the supervision of conquered Germany after the Second World War (Dietrich 44). Morgenthau suggested the dividing of Germany into two independent states—the north and the south (Dietrich 12). The entire of western Germany, excluding the south, would be transformed into an international region. The Morgenthau Plan comprised numerous of the actions already suggested for managing Germany after the war. Huge reparations were to be pulled together. Mines and factories were to be abolished (Dietrich 68). Germany was to be completely deactivated or emptied of arms and transformed into an agrarian state for the next two decades. In other words, the industrial capability of Germany was to be totally exterminated so as to deter any hostile moves from Germany (Axelrod 83). What were the reasons that led the United States to implement the Marshall Plan? The Marshall plan aimed to reconstruct a war-torn zone, revolutionize industry, strengthen European currency, and promote global trade, particularly with the U.S., whose economic goals called for a wealthier Europe able to import U.S. products. Nevertheless, one of the major reasons that led the U.S. to implement the Marshall Plan was to control the expanding influence of USSR in Europe and hinder the expansion of communism (Axelrod 49). Another objective of the United States was to promote and strengthen economic collaboration among the European states and to fuel economic development in Europe. And there was expectation that building hope and alleviating suffering would weaken the pull of Marxist ideals and communist principles among the European people (Kindleberger 372). What were the repercussions of this decision with regard to the denazification of Germany? Political scholars and historians have claimed that the Marshall Plan involved a wide-ranging scheme for European economic collaboration and that this, consequently, had importance for the Plan’s economics too. The Plan visualized the reconstruction or denazification of Germany as a platform for European reconstruction. It would also consider the security anxieties and demands of the previous victims of Germany in Western Europe (Baiman 78). Viewing the Marshall Plan in such manner, the widespread practice of assessing its impact based on the actual resource transfers it triggered is expected to be deceptive. The key concept of the Plan rests in taking advantage of German instead of U.S. capabilities to finance Europe’s recovery. From such it is apparent as well that the Marshall Plan as a political scheme worked largely to the disadvantage of plans to recover French power in Europe at the expense of Germany, as specified in the Monnet Plan (Baiman 81). The Marshall Plan and its associated components are instruments to furnish integrity to Germany. U.S. measures, on the one hand, intentionally safeguarded West Germany from its wartime beneficiaries and hence stopped them from striking back against Nazi Germany’s wartime manipulation strategies. On the other hand, the organizations formed by the US or by means of American pressure guaranteed the Nazi Germany’s previous victims that reconstructing the Germany economy and its intricate network of trade with Europe would not place their national security at risk once more (Kindleberger 375). It is believed that, in view of the earlier record of Germany of Nazi ‘New Order’ rules, the primary objective of American policy was to promote global collaboration as a trustworthy option in Germany (Kindleberger 372). Occurrences like the Berlin rescue operation and currency reform contributed to the persuasion of German leaders of the integrity of the pledges given by the U.S. government. The Marshall Plan also allowed Germany to reliably get involved in free trade, which it could barely have accomplished by itself. The crisis surpassed, the exports of Germany kept on rising all over the 1950s (Diefendorf et al. 81). With exports resulting in economic development it is logical to assume that the Marshall Plan contributed substantially to the successful recovery of Germany. How did the United States profit from this decision in the post-war period? The Marshall Plan enabled the fast reconstruction of the national economies of Europe. However, the Plan also had apparent benefits for the United States. Not merely was the Marshall Plan triumphant in bringing back stability into numerous European regimes and hindering Soviet growth, it created a ‘new Europe’ wherein the institution of political economy was rooted in free trade instead of self-interest and protectionism (Axelrod 113). This enabled U.S. exporters to penetrate European markets more quickly than prior to the Second World War. Since majority of the goods and resources bought with Marshall Plan reserves originated from the United States itself, this profited American local businesses and exporters. It enabled the U.S. to recuperate from a temporary economic recession in 1946-7 and move into an era of economic prosperity (Baiman 84). As stated by Diefendorf and colleagues (1993), American companies formed trade connections and networks in Europe that persisted even after the termination of the Marshall Plan. Conclusions The Marshall Plan was skillfully promoted by the U.S. government as a visionary and charitable policy, to enable the reconstruction of Europe. Nevertheless, the provisions of Marshall Plan resources were not openly publicized. The United States suggested financially supporting the Soviet-bloc countries and the Soviet Union itself, seeing that the circumstances would make it unlikely for them to say yes. Nevertheless, in any case, the Marshall Plan apparently benefited both the reconstruction of Germany and the U.S. economy. Works Cited Axelrod, Alan. The Real History of the Cold War: A New Look at the Past. UK: Sterling Publishing Company, Inc., 2009. Print. Baiman, Ron. “Unequal Exchange Without a Labor Theory of Prices: On the Need for a Global Marshall Plan and a Solidarity Trading Regime,” Review of Radical Political Economics 38.1 (2006): 71-89. Print. Diefendorf, Jeffrey et al. American Policy and the Reconstruction of West Germany, 1945-1955. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Print. Dietrich, John. The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy. New York: Algora Publishing, 2013. Print. Kindleberger, Charles. “The Marshall Plan and the Cold War,” International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy 23.3 (1968): 369-382. Print. Read More