[responsivevoice_button]
If you remember back a few months ago, we talked about the lessons learned and changes made after World War I. Those changes contrast sharply with those made after World War II. The move toward a closed economy and society after the first war led to global fragmentation as nations pulled back on themselves. In the aftermath of World War II, the impetus was toward an open economy and society—at least in half the world. This led down a path of continuing integration.
World leaders had the foresight to establish an array of international institutions to manage the emerging global economy. They worked hard to rebuild their vanquished enemies, Germany and Japan, through generous initiatives. This philosophical shift from closed to open societies came about through bold leadership, much of it coming from the United States. In the wake of World War I, American political and business leaders embraced isolationism—with severe consequences for the world. After World War II, they did the opposite—with very different results.
Goals
By the beginning of 1944, victory in Europe was all but assured. The task of diplomacy largely involved efforts to define the structure of the postwar world. Among the issues allied diplomats grappled with were the fate of the Eastern European nations, the future of Germany, and the establishment of a new international organization to replace the League of Nations. Behind these all was the problem of whether the liberal, democratic West and the Marxist, totalitarian Soviet Union could continue to coexist as allies.
Throughout modern history, former Grand Alliances—including the ones that defeated Germany in World War I, Napoleon’s France in the early nineteenth century, and Britain in the age of the American Revolution—had come apart once they had served their purpose. President Roosevelt and large numbers of the American people believed that the World War II Grand Alliance would have a different future.
They set out to develop a new international system of norms and ideals, conceived to ensure peace, security and prosperity for all nations. That order continues to serve global interests through a system of shared institutions and partnerships designed to prevent the atrocities and devastation of the war from ever happening again.
United Nations
The United Nations Organization would replace the old League of Nations and provide an inclusive democratic front for the four great powers that Roosevelt hoped would police the world. It began to take shape at the Dumbarton Oaks conference in Washington, DC and would become a reality after the end of the war in Europe at the San Francisco conference (June 26, 1945).
The establishment of the United Nations was the combined effort of 50 nations. The United States invested enormous amounts of hope and moral prestige in the organization. So did much of British public opinion. Hear the hopeful tone of Laurence Olivier as he reads the preamble of the Charter of the United Nations.
With the end of European colonialism in sight, especially in Africa and Asia, smaller nations were ensured a voice, and the United Nations assumed responsibility to promote economic and social cooperation and the independence of formerly colonial peoples. Today, UN Peacekeepers help countries navigate the difficult path from conflict to peace.
IMF, World Bank, and WTO
Another important aspect of the American postwar design was the establishment of an International Monetary Fund to stabilize major national currencies and thereby facilitate international trade. Along with this, an International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (Soon to be known as the World Bank) would fund postwar reconstruction and development.
These mechanisms were established at the Bretton Woods Conference in New Hampshire in July 1944. The creations of Dumbarton Oaks and Bretton Woods were institutional representations of a vision that defined peace in terms of democratic nations settling disputes multilaterally and engaging in the business of peaceful trade rather than aggressive war.
These two organizations are very closely linked, overlap in some areas, and have changed over the years. Watch the quick video below to get a sense of the differences between the two entities and what their role is in peacekeeping.
In addition to these two financial organizations, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was signed in 1947 and would pave the way for today’s World Trade Organization. This agreement was created to help open markets specifically by limiting tariffs on traded goods to help avoid a worldwide depression, like the one that helped set the stage for the war.
Universal Rights and Laws
Few on the planet were untouched by the horrors of the Second World War. Millions of soldiers from a dozen different countries had died on the front lines, while millions more had been starved or killed as a result of Adolf Hitler’s genocide against Jews, Catholics, the disabled, and other minorities. In total, as many as 60 million lives were lost in World War II. The scale of death, destruction and sheer inhumanity traumatized a generation. In the war’s immediate aftermath, the newly formed United Nations had the idea for an International Bill of Rights.
President Harry Truman nominated Eleanor Roosevelt to be the country’s first U.S. representative to the UN, calling her the new “First Lady of the World.” For the first time, the world had come together to agree, in writing, on the fundamental freedoms that belong to all people on earth. It was fittingly called the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” And the former First Lady and widow of President Franklin D. Roosevelt had been its driving force. In her speech at the Assembly of the UN she said,
“We stand today at the threshold of a great event both in the life of the United Nations and in the life of mankind, this Declaration may well become the international Magna Carta for all men everywhere.”
This universal declaration covers peacetime, but the old saying that all is fair in love and war would not be true after the ratification of the 1949 Geneva Conventions which provided international laws regarding ethical behavior in war.
It took almost four months to complete its work. However, there was a positive feeling at the meetings, even perhaps a sense of camaraderie. The following four conventions were adopted which greatly expanded the scope of international humanitarian law:
- Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field;
- Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea;
- Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War;
- Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
Finally, in the wake of the Holocaust and other horrific crimes, countries recognized the benefits of a world with established norms and shared values. As we saw, the Nuremburg trials were held from 1945-1946 and they were led by the newly formed International Military Tribunal. This entity would come to be known as the International Criminal Court and its purpose is to prosecute crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
As you can see, there were a lot of changes made after the war in an effort to prevent further war. As you reflect on these new organizations and guiding documents, I hope you will put your thoughts below. Also, I’d love to know if you can think of another type of organization or document which would have been helpful to guide the world in the wake of the war.
Remember, I want you to not only post a comment with some substance on each day (an opinion, something you found interesting, questions, ideas) but I also would like you to reply to at least one other comment for that day. Thank you!
What I find most interesting here is where it said that most grand alliances, once they served their purpose disbanded. This just leaves me asking why. I guess it could’ve just been a common enemy bringing them together, but still, after all that how do you just detach yourself from an alliance?
I know! I thought that alliances would make different countries friends so they could always have each others’ backs. I think every country has their nation above the world on their top priorities. Once the alliance doesn’t benefit them, I guess they don’t think its worth it to continue working together.
I think that was put in place to make sure no two countries got “too close” or something like that. It’s good for if a country attacks another country, it doesn’t start a new world war because if alliances.
I think the idea of an organization that looks out for poorer countries who are in need. Also, making a fixed trade monetary system was a good idea. My opinion is that Nixon should have never taken the US. off the gold standard
Why do you think Nixon should not have done that?
can you elaborate on why the system was a good idea? id like to hear your personal opinion and reasoning.
I think the Geneva Conventions were a good idea. It helps make sure that civilians were protected. This should mean that we don’t have a repeat of Pearl Harbor (many civilians were killed there) or the bombing at Nagasaki.
yea, the prevention of civilian casualties in war is very important.
I hope that the Geneva Conventions will help not have repeats of those tragic events!
even though i studied the nuremburg trials i had no idea about the iternational criminals court. thats good that a system was put in place otherwise people could keep getting away with unjust actions and never have consequences. also even after watching the video on why those two are different im still confused she used way to many big words for my brain to compute
What were the punishments in the International Criminal Court, and what was considered a “crime against peace?”
To put it into perspective, Germany would be one of the main countries charged with this crime following World War II. I believe that any premeditated act of aggression on a national level could be considered a crime against peace.
The formation of the IMF and The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which later became known as the World Bank, served a crucial purpose as a preventative measure. After World War II, stabilizing the economy as a whole and coming to the aid of struggling countries was necessary to keeping the peace.
I noticed that in the section of Universal Rights and Laws, it said that 60 million died because of World War II but in the videos we watched the other day, it said that 70 million died. Which number is more accurate? Either way, many peoples lives were impacted by WWII.
I’ve seen figures as high as 100 million. It all depends on how you calculate the data and who you ask.
I probably should have but i had never heard of the universal declaration of human rights so i was cool to here about that
Holding the international criminals court is like the ultimate court. To explain the charges of regular court and the international criminals court is basically all or nothing. Regular court charges probation and prison sentances, but the criminal court holds life sentances and death sentances, basically live or die.
I thought it was neat to learn about the universal declaration of human rights, just like Maria did.
I think it was a great idea by America to establish the world bank system after WW2. They saw that happened to Germany with the value of money plumeting, so they established that to not only help rebuild but to keep the value of money basically the same
Its interesting to see the differences in numbers between the World Bank and the IMF and their different supporters.