International Relation - Essay Example

International Relation By Presented to International Relation Outline I. Introduction A. Setting of the speech B. The time and period when the speech was made C. Audience II. Content A. Europe is Divided B. Communist Fifth Column C. War is Not Inevitable III. Insight of the Speech IV. Conclusion V. Bibliography Introduction “The Sinews of Peace”, was the heading of a speech given by Winston Churchill. In the audience there was the noticeable presence of President McClure. It was one of his supreme speeches, Iron Curtain, given by him as a British prime minister (Reynolds, 2006, pp. 250-252). The setting or rather the place of the occasion was in Fulton, Missouri, at the Westminster College. This event took place in 1946, on the 5th of March. This was a period when soldiers were coming back to their country from the Pacific and Europe. Hope seemed to be something of the past after World War II. It was felt that there seemed to be some light at the end of the tunnel in 1919, after World War 1, then in 1945 and 1946 after World War II. Now ten months subsequent to the closing stages of World War II in Europe, Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech majorly conveyed the hope he had for the United Nations’ future. He also believed that there would be a good outcome out of the relationship the United Nations had with Britain. The fact that Churchill decreed that an ‘Iron Curtain’ had been placed in between the Eastern European Communist autocracies and the Western industrial democratic system, made his speech become renowned. Contents of the speech Churchill was openly declaring and affirming his thoughts and assumptions towards the USSR in his celebrated speech. The first part of the speech focuses on the fact that Europe is divided. He uses the term “iron curtain” to refer to the partitioning. At this point of time, Europe had been partitioned into Communist and non-Communist subjects of authority (Muller, 1999). In his speech, he argues that in order to prevent the stretching of the communist ideals, the Western democracies should first and for most pick up the initiative to control the communist movement. According to Churchill, there would be an occurrence of a calamity if they did not succeed in preventing the ideals. Churchill further supported his argument by linking the situation or rather comparing it with the World War II and the ways in which it would have been avoided without causing the loss of the many lives. He assumes that their energy put forth would be rendered futile if the communism stretched further. This is clearly brought out when he said, that that was surely not the unconventional Europe they had fought to put up. Neither was it the one which enclosed the fundamentals of everlasting tranquility. This clearly bestows us the notion that acquiring of peace would be impossible if communism existed. The second part of the speech majorly focuses on the Communist Fifth Column. The Fifth Columns are representatives in a country who combine efforts with the Soviet to help in bringing transformation in their countries. At this point, Churchill raises the fear of Communism to stretch in countries neighboring Eastern Europe. These consist of China, Italy, France, Turkey and Persia. He fears that Communist actions are being sustained and being constructed by the Soviets, in the above mentioned countries, with the aim of overthrowing the government (Miller, 2000, p.30). In the third part of his speech, Churchill majorly focuses on the fact that War is Not Inevitable. He goes ahead to claim that war will not automatically come to pass, even if the condition is severe (due to the stretching of the Soviet Union). This is because the Russians are against the war. He believes the Soviets will attempt to pave the way for their welfare as much as possible without fighting. He thinks that the United States, Britain, the democracies and the Commonwealth should come together on the basis of common ground which is to create resistance against the Russians’ strategies, believing that this will form a basis for Russia to reassess its growth actions. Churchill also speaks for a restoration between Great Britain and the United States, as it was a great coalition during the time of war. He calls this treaty or rather alliance the “Special Relationship.” This coalition was of great meaning during World War II leading to their ultimate triumph. Churchill also believes that a very important energy will be established if a well-built bond is created between the Great Britain and the United States. This will create a fresh power to counter the expansion of the Soviet movement (Roberts, 2006, p.122). He believes that peace may be conserved and the progress of Russia blocked, if a familiar strategy is structured by the Western nations. Churchill’s most important worry is that the United States might go back to the guiding principle of isolationism which had once occurred in the 1930s and the 1920s and he also wants to bring it to the open that the United States requires to be globally alarmed. In his political career, Churchill’s most recurring theme was about the development and maintenance of the good relationship between English speaking people (Grenville, 2005, pp. 174-176). Insight of Churchill’s speech In his speech, we get to identify whose side Churchill is on. This is noticed from his numerous contradicting accounts. He says that because Russia fought so bravely in the World War II, it had all the rights to acquire a piece of earth on the Western boundaries so as to uphold safety measures. His saying that although the Communist party was in small numbers in Eastern Europe, they had still soared high in terms of power and were searching all over to acquire overall control, proposes that Churchill had changed his mind regarding the statement that he declared earlier that Russia should have the opportunity to acquire the Western boundary’s land (Ryan, 1979, p.896). When Churchill talked of the tumbling down of the “Iron Curtain”, he was recognizing and declaring a certainty which quite a number of people in the West were not ready to accept (Gaddis, 1983, p.173). The statement had so much power that till now, that quite a great deal of leaders still go back to it and quote it in their speeches to empower their own measures. Churchill also identified the major cause of upcoming conflict, or havoc, to the objectives of the Soviet terrain. He had in mind that philosophy was not the only reason for causing the hostility and the rebellion. On a larger scale, the Soviets were accomplishing the expansionist objectives of the Russian czars. With this going on, the urge of the expansionist, in the 1940s, was greatly felt in Eastern Europe. As at now, it is felt in Afghanistan (Ryan, 1979, p.906). He also compelled the West to be strong so as to create a new European form of togetherness. This is when he said that not a single country should be put as an outsider. Greatest of all, he cautioned the rigid nature of the American association. He said that it was impossible to have a recurrence of the retreat that caused havoc in America which emerged from the global duty after World War I(Henig, 2005, pp.68-73). Churchill was looking forward to an organization which would provide security for the community. He was expecting, in three years’ time, the NATO organization, and that is why he asked the Western power to combine their efforts. He concluded by saying that the Russians admired strength so much and they didn’t respect weakness at all (Miller, 2000, p.52). In general, the speech was a call for unity and peace. He started by saying that the greatest assignment and responsibility of the people was to protect the ordinary man’s lives from the dismay and the depression of yet one more war. He talked of the future global disagreement if there was no unity. Conclusion Some portion of the speech provoked negative sentiments or rather brutal objection amongst a number of people, who believed that they were through with fighting. To date, the “Iron Curtain” is viewed as an influential and notable caution to an upcoming and brutal opposition. We all notice that he was on the right track when he cautioned against conciliation and also against the firm advance to the Russians. Till now, his thoughts and insights can be felt as fresh as dew on the morning grass. Its touch has not been erased and can still be strongly felt despite the passing of many years. It is impossible for us to embrace his advice about the Soviet movement and ignore his advice about us, the people of the nations. The portions, the Soviet movement and us as a people, are like an item having been brought forth by one intelligent brain which is an outcome of a multifaceted sensible perception of the world. Over many years, Winston Churchill’s counsels and voice, still echo to the world as a whole. He said that we could act upon the Russians but only if we encompassed both power and agility, and also the enthusiasm to position our vital ground and nevertheless to perceive a mighty global awareness which goes beyond oppositions which are anticipated, local clashes and unimportant fights. Bibliography Gaddis, J. L. (1983). The Emerging Post-Revisionist Synthesis on the Origins of the Cold War. Diplomatic History, 7(3), 171–190. Grenville, J. A. S. (2005). A History of the World from the 20th to the 21st Century. Belmont, CA: Routledge. Henig, R. B. (2005). The Origins of the Second World War, 1933 – 41. Belmont, CA: Routledge. Miller, R. G. (2000). To Save a City: The Berlin Airlift, 1948 – 1949. Texas: Texas A&M University Press. From http://www.historyguide.org/europe/churchill.html Muller, J. W. (1999). Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” Speech Fifty Years Later. (J. W. Muller, Ed.). Columbia: University of Missouri Press. Reynolds, D. (2006). Churchill, Stalin, and the “Iron Curtain.” From World War to Cold War: Churchill, Roosevelt, and the International History of the 1940 (pp. 249–266). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Roberts, G. (2006). Stalin’s Wars: From World War to Cold War, 1939 – 1953. Cambridge, MA: Yale University Press. Ryan, H. B. (1979). A New Look at Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” Speech. The Historical Journal, 22(4), 895–920. Read More