Abstract
The paper discusses the Marshall plan of 1947 as a major historical political event of the United States. It begins by acknowledging that this plan was developed from the realization by American policy makers that Europe required aid in order to recover form the devastations caused by the war.
The plan was proposed by the then secretary of state, George Marshall who stated that Europe’s weakened economy made her vulnerable to economic and political collapse (Cox & Kennedy-Pipe, 2005). European countries were required to collectively come up with a proposal on the type of aid required and then notify the US.
As such, European cooperation was a prerequisite for receiving aid through the plan (Scott, 1995). The paper recognizes that the Marshall Plan was a comprehensive scheme that was proposed for a number of reasons.
The first was that the rate of recovery following the War was very slow. Cox and Kennedy-Pipe (2005) state that the US had interest in the recovery of European economy since such a recovery had impacts on its long term economic well being.
The aid would also strengthen economies and thus prevent the outbreak of another war. The Marshall plan was also used as a tool for the containment policy which sought to curb Soviet expansionism and influence in the continent.
The plan also hoped to prevent nationalistic sentiments that had previously led to the rise of the NAZI party. The paper also reviews some of the positive and negative outcomes of the Marshall Plan.
On the positive, the plan is seen to have resulted in the successful reconstruction of Western Europe. The plan also lad the ground works for the integration of European nations, a plan which has culminated in the emergence of the European Union.
The plan also acted as a reconciliation tool and former wartime enemies were able to work together in cooperation for the development of the continent. American capitalism was also embedded in European values as a result of the Marshall Plan.
On the negative, the paper notes that the plan was a catalyst to the outbreak of the Cold War. The plan also led to the division of Germany into East and West (Chollet & Goldgeier, 2006).
The paper concludes by reasserting that the Marshall plan played a monumental role in the revival of Europe and is to be credited with the lasting peace and prosperity that the European countries enjoy.
Introduction
In its history, the United States of America has had a number of significant political events which have had major consequences for the country and even the international community. One of these monumental events in the political history of the US is the Marshall Plan of 1947.
This plan which was designed by the then Secretary of State, George Marshall, is considered by many to be the most successful aid plan implemented by the US. Through the Marshall Plan, American leaders were able to recast the war-torn Europe in the image of American neocapitalism (Hogan, 1985).
As a result of this plan, West Europe was able to quickly recover from the wartime devastations. This paper will set out to articulate what the Marshall Plan was and the reasons for its implementation.
The impacts that this plan had on the recipient countries in Europe will also be discussed so as to reaffirm the significance of this political event.
Overview of the Marshall Plan
What became known as the Marshall Plan was announced during the Harvard University address by George Marshall in 5 June, 1947. The US government was concerned that the economic deterioration experienced by Europe after the war had made the continent weak and therefore vulnerable to economic and political collapse.
President Truman engaged in active delegation by relying on the expertise of Marshall to come up with the European Recovery Program (ERP) (Cottam et al., 2009).
This plan would be a comprehensive scheme that provided “mutual aid” and joint action in Europe as a whole with the intention of pointing Europeans in the right direction (Hogan, 1985, p.46).
European countries were therefore called upon to consult with each other on the type of aid that they needed in order to recover and then notify the US which was prepared to offer financial aid to assist in the recovery.
An assessment of the conditions in Europe revealed that the continent was in genuine need of assistance. May (1948) states that the US had a sufficient margin to offer this assistance since the US had been experiencing economic growth since the prewar years and even during the war years.
Adopting a capitalistic economy was a major precondition that a country had to fulfill before it could be eligible for aid from the US.
Motivations Behind the Plan
Two years after the end of the Second World War, Europe was still lagging behind economically and reconstruction efforts were going on at a slow pace.
Following these deteriorating economic and political realities in Europe following the war, the US felt compelled to act. Cox and Kennedy-Pipe (2005) contend that while the motives behind the generous offer by the US were complex, the primary objective was to stabilize Western Europe.
This stabilization was to be achieved through economic reconstruction and political cooperation among the Western European states.
A huge motivation for the ERP was US self-interest. Hogan (1985) who was a chief historian of the plan declared that the measure “rested squarely on an American conviction that European economic recovery was essential to the long-term interests of the United States” (49).
The US recognized that a stable Europe was best for her prosperity since any European war would involve the US (Cottam et al., 2009). Assisting Europe through the ERP was therefore seen as a partly self-serving act.
The Marshall Plan effectively promised American aid to a European Recovery Program that would be designed to establish a solid economic foundation for European States (May, 1948).
The ERP also aimed at curtailing Soviet influence in Europe. In the postwar years, the Soviet Union was the most economically and politically potent force in Europe. The US was concerned that the Soviet Union would make attempts to influence the weakened European states and export her communist ideals to these countries.
The British Foreign Secretary, Ernest Bevin made the case that without economic aid, Britain and indeed the whole of Europe would be unable to resist Soviet pressure (Cox & Kennedy-Pipe, 2005).
As such, the Marshall plan was to be used as a tool by the US to combat Soviet influence without resorting to military action.
The Marshall Plan hoped to prevent nationalistic sentiments among European citizens. Cottam et al (2009) declare that nationalism is one of the most dangerous sources of political behavior in the 20th century.
The poor economic state of Europe resulted in inflation and decreased quality of living which were conditions that encouraged nationalistic tendencies. Nationalistic tendencies could result in popular support for militant nationalism which would be detrimental to European peace (Hogan, 1985).
For example, German nationalism had been to blame for WWII since it was nationalistic sentiments which had led to mass voting for the Nazis.
The Marshall plan recognized the link between economics and militant nationalism and therefore sort to prevent nationalism by easing the burdens of the war devastated Europe.
Ekovich (2006) proposes that the US was interested in seeing an integrated European since the country owed its success to the political and economic integration which had come about from the unification of the colonies.
American politicians therefore hoped to influence the unification of Europe through the aid plan.
While it was emphasized that the initiatives towards unification should come from the European countries themselves, the US attempted to influence this with the Truman Administration pushing for European integration at least on an economic level.
Impact of the Marshall Plan
- Positive Impacts
The Marshall Plan had a number of positive impacts on Europe. Perhaps the most important outcome of the Marshall Plan is that it led to the successful reconstruction of Western Europe with the countries achieving significant economic growth.
While there is disagreement as to the effectiveness of the plan with some opponents suggesting that it resulted in the wasted of over $12 billion of tax payer money, there is general agreement that the plan provided the necessary support to revive the European economy (Hogan, 1985).
The plan laid the ground works for the integration of European nations. Through the Marshall Plan, American policy makers attempted to integrate Europe in order to create the era of “lasting peace and prosperity” (Hogan, 1985).
Cottam et al. (2009) demonstrate that long-term solutions to conflicts can be achieved through developing common identities. Integration strategies are therefore best suited to restore harmony between antagonistic parties.
These integration efforts were pushed forward through strategies such as the establishment of collective responsibility for reviewing national requirements for all the countries that received aid under the Marshall Plan.
European countries were required to form an international economic infrastructure before they could be eligible for aid from the US.
The Marshall Plan also acted as a reconciliation tool for the former war-time enemies. Cottam et al. (2009) state that reconciliation calls for a changed psychological orientation towards the other. The Marshall plan forced the European nations to regard each others as partners in development.
Through the plan, the US forced the major antagonists in the war, German, France, and Britain to come up with a way to work together (Ekovich, 2006). At the onset of negotiations, France was opposed to having Germany as part of the proposed European Economic Union and it sought to have the country excluded from the aid plans.
However, US applied diplomatic pressure to foster peaceful cooperation between the former enemies and by the end; France and Germany were able to work together in a mutually beneficial way.
The Marshal Plan increased confidence in the American capitalism ideal which had not been fully embraced by Western European countries such as France. From the onset, the plan required recipient states to adopt a capitalistic economy to make them eligible for aid.
By the end of the plan, Western Europe emerged as the economic power which increased the continent’s faith in a capitalistic economic system. The plan was therefore instrumental in saving the European states which had suffered huge devastations in the war from the influence of the Soviet Union.
- Negative Impacts
Historians agree that the Marshall plan was the key catalyst to the outbreak of the Cold War which lasted for decades. This is because the Cold War began after the plan was announced the Soviet Union together with East European states decided not to participate.
Scott (1995) asserts that the Marshall Plan effectively “divided Europe into two competing blocs, each led by one of the emergent superpowers” (p.22). The adversity between these two blocs lasted for over 5 decades and resulted in many proxy wars and establishment of spheres of influence by the two powers.
The cold war resulted in massive military buildups on both sides due to the suspicion with which each side regarded the other (Cottam et al., 2009).
The Marshall Plan was also responsible for the splitting of Germany into two parts. Chollet and Goldgeier (2006) argue that since US and British officials hoped to keep Moscow out of the plan, they were unable to gain the cooperation of the Soviet Union and therefore keep Germany intact.
This move had negative impacts on the people of Eastern Germany who were left vulnerable to the Communist forces. East Germany continued to lag behind economically compared to West German and this situation only started to reverse itself after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Conclusion
This paper set out to discuss the Marshall Plan of 1947 as a significant historical political event. It has shown that a major goal of the plan was to stabilize Western Europe and foster future peace and prosperity for the region.
The Plan achieved its objectives and led to the emergence of a strong and stable Europe. The paper has demonstrated how the US used the Marshall plan as a tool for reconciliation among the former wartime enemies with great success.
However, not all the impacts of the plan were positive and it has been noted that the Marshall plan precipitated the Cold War due to Russia’s refusal to associate herself with the plan.
From this paper, it is clear that the purposes of the Marshall Plan were multiple and the consequences of the plan were monumental.
References
Chollet, D. & Goldgeier, J.M. (2006). The Faulty Premises of the Next Marshall Plan. Washington Quarterly, 29(1), 7-19.
Cottam, M., Dietz-Uhler, B. & Mastors, E. (2009). Introduction to Political Psychology. NY: Psychology Press.
Cox, M. & Kennedy-Pipe, C. (2005). The Tragedy of American Diplomacy? Rethinking the Marshall Plan. Journal of Cold War Studies, 7(1), 97-134.
Ekovich, S. (2006). American views of European Integration: A Brief History. NY: JEL.
Hogan, J.M. (1985). American Marshall Planners and the Search for a European Neocapitalism. Journal of American Historical Review. 90(1), 44-73
May, S. (1948). Measuring the Marshall Plan. Foreign Affairs. 26(3), 457-469.
Scott, P. (1995). Soviet reaction to the Marshall Plan: Opportunity or Threat? Problems of Post-communism, 42(5), 22-31.