What role did Winston Churchill play in European post-war integration?

Document 1: 1948 cartoon by Illingworth

Document 2: extracts from the speech Churchill gave in Zurich on the 19^th September 1946

“If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance, there would be no limit to the happiness, to the prosperity and glory which its three or four hundred million people would enjoy. Yet it is from Europe that have sprung that series of frightful nationalistic quarrels, originated by the Teutonic nations, which we have seen even in this twentieth century and in our own lifetime, wreck the peace and mar the prospects of all mankind.[…]

There is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene [...] It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom.[…]

We must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe. […]

The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny.

In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together.

Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine."

Describe and comment this 2005 editorial cartoon by Jeff Danziger entitled "The world according to Nike"

Why did the Cold War come to an end?

Document 1: Cartoon by Nicholas Garland published in the Daily Telegraph in January 1986

Document 2: Extract of a speech given by Ronald Reagan in June 1987 in Berlin

“And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.

Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace."

Why did an iron curtain descend across the Continent after WWII?

Document 1: extract of a speech given by Winston Churchill in 1946

From what I have seen of our Russian friends and Allies during the war, I am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less respect than for weakness, especially military weakness. For that reason the old doctrine of a balance of power is unsound. We cannot afford, if we can help it, to work on narrow margins, offering temptations to a trial of strength. If the Western Democracies stand together in strict adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter, their influence for furthering those principles will be immense and no one is likely to molest them. If however they become divided or falter in their duty and if these all-important years are allowed to slip away then indeed catastrophe may overwhelm us all.

Document 2: 1947 political cartoon by Jay Darling

What were the ideological differences between the USSR and the USA during the Cold War?

Document 1: US 1950s film poster

Document 2: Extract of a speech given by President Harry S. Truman delivered on 12^th March 1947 before a Joint Session of Congress

“At the present moment in world history nearly every nation must choose between alternative ways of life. The choice is too often not a free one.

One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from political oppression.

The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a controlled press and radio, fixed elections, and the suppression of personal freedoms.

I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.”

To what extent were the 1960s and 1970s a period of “détente” between the superpowers?

Document 1:

Text adapted from the NASA mission narrative for the Apollo-Soyuz flight, a joint initiative by the USA and USSR.

…Voice contact was made soon after. “Hello Soyuz!” Stafford said in Russian. Kubasov replied in English: “Hello everybody, hi to you Tom and Deke, hello there, Vance!”

All communications among the five crew members during the mission were made in the language of the listener, with the Americans speaking Russian to the Soviet crew and the Soviet crew speaking English to the Americans.

Contact of the two spacecraft, at 12:09 pm on July 17^th 1975, was transmitted live on TV to the earth, and Stafford commented: “We have succeeded, everything is excellent.” “Soyuz and Apollo are shaking hands now” the cosmonauts answered.

Hard docking was completed over the Atlantic Ocean at 12:12 pm, 6 minutes earlier than the prelaunch flight plan, watched by millions of TV viewers worldwide. “Perfect, beautiful, well done, Tom, it was a good show, we're looking forward to shaking hands with you on board Soyuz” Leonov said. (…)

Both Soviet Communist Party General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev and US President Gerald Ford congratulated the crews and expressed their confidence in the success of the mission.

Stafford then presented Leonov with “flags for your government and the people of the Soviet Union” with the wish that “our joint work in space serves for the benefit of all countries and peoples on the earth”. Leonov then presented the U.S. crew with Soviet flags. (…)

The hatches were closed after Brand told Leonov and Kubasov: “I'm sure that we've opened up a new era in history.”

http://history.nasa.gov/apollo/apsoyhist.html

Document 2:

1968 drawing by Opland, a Dutch cartoonist 

How peaceful was the world from 1953 to 1963?

Document 1:

Closing paragraphs of the article “On Peaceful Coexistence” by Nikita Khrushchev, published in October 1959 in the magazine FOREIGN AFFAIRS 38, no. 1

(…) The Soviet people have stated and declare again that they do not want war. If the Soviet Union and the countries friendly to it are not attacked, we shall never use any weapons either against the United States or against any other countries. We do not want any horrors of war, destruction, suffering and death for ourselves or for any other peoples. We say this not because we fear anyone. Together with our friends, we are united and stronger than ever. But precisely because of that do we say that war can and should be prevented. Precisely because we want to rid mankind of war, we urge the Western powers to peaceful and lofty competition. We say to all: Let us prove to each other the advantages of one's own system not with fists, not by war, but by peaceful economic competition in conditions of peaceful coexistence.

As for the social system in some state or other, that is the domestic affair of the people of each country. We always have stood and we stand today for non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. We have always abided, and we shall abide, by these positions. The question, for example, what system will exist in the United States or in other capitalist countries cannot be decided by other peoples or states. This question can and will be decided only by the American people themselves, only by the people of each country.

The existence of the Soviet Union and of the other socialist countries is a real fact. It is also a real fact that the United States of America and the other capitalist countries live in different social conditions, in the conditions of capitalism. Then let us recognize this real situation and proceed from it in order not to go against reality, against life itself. Let us not try to change this situation by interferences from without, by means of war on the part of some states against other states.

I repeat, there is only one way to peace, one way out of the existing tension: peaceful coexistence.

Document 2:

Photo by John Sadovy taken during the Hungarian Uprising, published in LIFE magazine in 1956

Is the USA losing its influence in Latin America?

Document 1: extracts from the May 6^th 2006 article “Navigating the Nationalization and Denaturing the Strife: The Aftermath of Bolivia’s Gas Golpe” by Larry Birns and Michael Lettieri, published on the website of the Council On Hemispheric Affairs (COHA)

Washington may soon be persuaded by U.S. rightwingers to respond to the nationalization of Bolivia’s petrol industry (…) White House hardliners (…) see Evo Morales’ action as a clear sign of a dangerous growth in Hugo Chávez’s influence (…)

Geopolitically, Morales must also be attuned to the needs and concerns of other regional leaders. Lula and Kirchner’s opinions, whose countries previously received preferential pricing on Bolivian gas, cannot be easily discounted. Both leaders are concerned with ensuring their country’s energy supplies, and for Lula, finding a path between keeping industrialists dependent on gas imports happy and maintaining the ghost of his leftist credentials will be crucial for his reelection (…)

Some in Washington, who comprise the ideological heart of the anti-Chávez crusade, have taken the nationalization as a sign that the Bush administration, distracted by Iraq, has thus failed to effectively contain Caracas’ spreading influence and that Washington is in real danger of losing Latin America. The nationalization’s high media profile could force the State Department to take a tough approach to the region, even to the point of mobilizing the CIA and the U.S. military, but it is more likely to work its way by undermining the all-important chink (weakness) in the armor: the Latin American armed forces.

Document 2: cartoon by Chappatte in the International Herald Tribune (2006)

Why oppose globalization?

Document 1: information taken from a July 2011 article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette  

The Democrat congressman Jason Altmire announced that he will oppose a free-trade agreement with Colombia saying: “Colombia has a disturbing history of violence against labor organizers.”

Labor activists say congressman Altmire did the right thing on human rights by opposing the Colombia trade deal; some 50 union activists were killed last year and 17 this year in Colombia.

Now, they say, Altmire needs to take the next step and speak out against two other upcoming free- trade deals, one with Panama and another with South Korea, saying they move American jobs overseas.

A steelworker explained:  “Trade deals during the past decade have caused the U.S. to lose six million manufacturing jobs and 55,000 plants. Multinational companies easily set up operations overseas and export back to the U.S. market.  We need a fair trade model.”

Document 2: cartoon by Khalil Bendib

http://www.bendib.com/

Who supported and who opposed the USA going to war in 1917?

Document 1: extract of a speech given by Helen Keller at Carnegie Hall, New York City, on January 5^th 1916 under the auspices of the Women's Peace Party and the Labor Forum

The few who profit from the labor of the masses want to organize the workers into an army which will protect the interests of the capitalists. You are urged to add to the heavy burdens you already bear the burden of a larger army and many additional warships. (…) You do not need to make a great noise about it. With the silence and dignity of creators you can end wars and the system of selfishness and exploitation that causes wars. All you need to do to bring about this stupendous revolution is to straighten up and fold your arms (…)

Every modern war has had its root in exploitation. The Civil War was fought to decide whether to slaveholders of the South or the capitalists of the North should exploit the West. The Spanish-American War decided that the United States should exploit Cuba and the Philippines (…) The present war is to decide who shall exploit the Balkans, Turkey, Persia, Egypt, India, China, Africa (…)

Strike against all ordinances and laws and institutions that continue the slaughter of peace and the butcheries of war! Strike against war, for without you no battles can be fought! Strike against manufacturing shrapnel and gas bombs and all other tools of murder! Strike against preparedness that means death and misery to millions of human being. Be not dumb, obedient slaves in an army of destruction. Be heroes in an army of construction!

Document 2: 1917 recruitment poster by J.M. Flagg

How were Woodrow Wilson’s anti-isolationist efforts perceived?

Document 1: extract of an address to Congress given by President Woodrow Wilson on January 8^th 1918

XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

(Conclusion) In regard to these essential rectifications of wrong and assertions of right we feel ourselves to be intimate partners of all the governments and peoples associated together against the Imperialists. We cannot be separated in interest or divided in purpose. We stand together until the end.

For such arrangements and covenants we are willing to fight and to continue to fight until they are achieved; but only because we wish the right to prevail and desire a just and stable peace such as can be secured only by removing the chief provocations to war, which this programme does remove. We have no jealousy of German greatness, and there is nothing in this programme that impairs it … We wish her only to accept a place of equality among the peoples of the world, the new world in which we now live, instead of a place of mastery.

Document 2: cartoon (1919) from the National Archives

How constructive was the foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration?

Document 1: extracts from the article “What Bush Got Right” by Fareed Zakaria in NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE, August 8^th 2008

… President George W. Bush now enters his 23rd consecutive month with an approval rating under 40% … No matter what he does, or what happens in the world, the public seems to have decided that Bush has been a failure … Barack Obama, of course, promises a wholly different approach to the world … A broad shift in America's approach to the world is justified and overdue. Bush's basic conception of a "global War on Terror," … has been poorly thought-through, badly implemented, and has produced many unintended costs that will linger for years if not decades. But blanket criticism of Bush misses an important reality. The administration that became the target of so much passion and anger … is not quite the one in place today.

The foreign policies that aroused the greatest anger and opposition were mostly pursued in Bush's first term: the invasion of Iraq, the rejection of treaties, diplomacy and multilateralism. In the past few years, many of these policies have been modified, abandoned or reversed … the foreign policies in place now are more sensible, moderate and mainstream … For many people the decision to go to war in Iraq is now seen as a mistake. But wherever one stands on that issue, it is overwhelmingly clear that the administration made a series of massive blunders in Iraq in 2003 and 2004. It … arrested tens of thousands of Iraqis, mistreated and tortured some of them, and used overwhelming military force against all perceived threats … The result was a perfect storm in international affairs, a failure that kept getting worse. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/08/08/what-bush-got-right.html)

Document 2: cartoon by Mike Luckovich in the Atlanta Journal Constitution (2005)

Five questions on lesson 1 of The USA, the rich and the mighty

1. What was the population of the USA in 2006?
2. What is meant by "hard power" and "soft power"?
3. How and why has Disney expanded to Asian countries?
4. What advantages does the US's dominant position as regards Internet use give the USA?
5. How does its prospective mission to Mars illustrate the USA's expansionist aims?

MCT on GLOBALIZATION (all questions are based on the posts on globalization on this blog)

1) Nearly half the clothes worn in the USA today:

A are made in China.

B are made in the USA.

C are inspired by the Ralph Lauren-designed Olympic uniforms or by the Dayang clothes worn by Bush, Buffet and other billionaires.

D are today designed in China and made in the USA.

2) Christians in China:

A have increased greatly in number (there are more churchgoers in China than in the whole of Latin America).

B all but disappeared during the Cultural Revolution.

C have increased because of the Communist Party of China’s promotion of atheism in schools.

D are decreasing in numbers because of disputes between officially approved churches and house churches.

3) Indigenous peoples:

A are being adversely affected by globalization (tourism, bioprospecting, loss of land, forced displacement).

B are being compensated for loss of land, etc., by the IMF, World Bank and WTO.

C are turning to the parallel economy (Fairtrade, etc.).

D are being manipulated by the International Forum on Globalization.

4) Detroit is:

A in Washington State.

B in total ruins.

C gaining population.

D Motown.

5) Who, in September 2012, said the USA “is back”?

A Obama.

B Bin Laden.

C China.

D Romney.

6) “Soft power” means:

A becoming a world culture, thus avoiding cultural clash.

B making reasoned use of drones.

C Starbucks, Mc Donald’s, Disney, etc.

D encouraging democratic initiatives at grass roots level.

7) How has globalization affected ordinary Chinese?

A they are able to buy lots of extra goods (though they lack space in their homes).

B in rural areas, not so much their way of thinking but their incomes.

C many people have been evicted from their homes and left only with their personal belongings.

D it has made some of them less poor.

8) The WTO:

A was initiated in 2001 at Doha Rounds.

B is in a major backlash following the BRICKS dreadlock.

C is where the G7 decide what trade restrictions should be amended or imposed on the BRICKS.

D is where the oligopoly is being challenged more and more by the BRICKS.

9) IKEA:

A airbrushes out women from its catalogues in order to sell more furniture to male clients

B are outspoken champions of women’s rights

C is a typical liberal company, like Starbucks

D is the world’s largest furniture company retailer (and also founded by a Nazi sympathizer)

10) Globalization, according to a journalist at the Globalist Web site:

A does not help 50% of the world’s poorest

B will work, but only through effective governance

C depends on aid effectiveness for the poorest

D needs more deregulation

ANSWERS: 1A 2C 3A 4D 5A 6C 7D 8D 9D 10B