The peace treaties of the first world war are deemed by some people to be too harsh on Germany and its allies as well as being nearsighted due to all the difficulties it is said to have conceived. The Treaty of Versailles which was composed in 1919, was an attempt to come to an understanding between the winning powers on what the punishment and consequences for the defeated powers would be. Due to the fact that Germany lost the conflict yet was economically and socially whole, she was required to sign the treaty and admit to the punishment that came with it. This essay will explore and analyze to what degree the Treaty of Versailles can be deemed to be harsh and short-sighted.
This section will illustrate a few reasons why the Treaty of Versailles
…show more content…
For instance, studying the statistics gathered by modern historian Henig, we recognize that ‘It stripped her of approximately 13.5% of her territory, 13% of her economic potency and roughly 7 million [or 10%] of her residents’. Hence, this strengthens my preceding point that ‘the Allies could have allotted Germany much harder terms’. This drives me on to my subsequent analysis for supporting the Treaty, which was that the Allies started to inadequately complete the terms of the now tender Treaty, therefore making its consequences not being as harsh upon Germany.Since it was never suitably executed, Germany didn’t suffer as much as they should have, should the terms been followed through. One basis for the terms not being perfectly implemented lies among the allies, who started to view the Treaty as excessively harsh and felt guilt towards Germany, who, accordingly, utilized this guilt by adding further anger. In the end, the Rhineland was de-militarized furthermore a substantial amount of settlements were left unpaid. Should the allies have provided more assistance, Germany may have felt much harsher repercussions from the