The Second World War did not end in 1945

“The Second World War didn’t end in 1945” 1 : Understanding the Transformative Powers of World War II & National Homogeneity in Mainland Europe and Colonial Spheres Allison Brown Introduction to European Studies Dr. Blackler 8 May 2020 “Without such collective amnesia, Europe’s astonishing post-war recovery would not have been possible … In the circumstances of 1945, in a continent covered with rubble, there was much to 1 Maclean, Rory. “Berlin: Portrait of a City through the Centuries”, 2014, pg. 293 be gained by behaving as though the past was indeed dead and buried and a new age about to begin”2. This promise of a new age that Judt alluded to in Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945 allowed for the economic and social recovery that would occur not only in Europe but globally for years to come. World War II is easily the most impactful and transformative conflict of modern times, from international gains in diplomacy and human rights to realizations of radical national homogeneity, the conflict drastically changed the world. The goals of this essay are to establish why the Second World War era transformed Europe both socially and economically, how the victorious European powers seemed to have modified their views on ‘population politics’ but continued to embrace ‘population politics’, and conclude with national homogeneity’s role in colonial spheres. The end of conflict in Europe was the beginning of the transformation in Europe that would 3 occur, “ … to many, the Second World War didn’t end in 1945” . The economic and cultural change that would take place in the years to come would be transformative because unlike other past conflicts, this war’s impact through occupation of territory and involvement of communities, such as women entering the workforce and ‘Victory Gardens’ “ … was primarily a civilian experience … but 4 this was a war of occupation, of repression, or exploitation and extermination” . World War II’s occupation of territories, public repression of minorities, and genocide was previously foreign to the mainstream population and had lasting implications on how the public responded to economic changes in their states. The most notable economic reformation following the war was the Marshall Plan, drafted by the United States Secretary of State to revive the struggling European economy, “The remedy lies in breaking the vicious circle and restoring the confidence of the European people in the economic 5 future of their own countries and of Europe as a whole” . The Marshall Plan delivered economic aid 2 Judt, Tony. “Postwar: a History of Europe since 1945”, 2005, pg. 448 3 Maclean, Rory. “Berlin: Portrait of a City through the Centuries”, 2014, pg. 293 4 Judt, Tony. “Postwar: a History of Europe since 1945”, 2005, pg. 13-14 5 Blackler, Adam. “From Retribution to Rehabilitation”, George C., Marshall 1 6 to Europe totalling over twelve billion US dollars that allowed countries to decide how to implement the funds with Marshall’s intent to encourage economic development and financial assistance for multiple years and required European states to work together to restore the economy. Other economic plans like the Monnet Plan (France) and the Centre Planning Commission (Czechoslovakia) also added aid for the mainland. Regarding Germany, “… looking back, it is ironic that after fighting a murderous war to reduce the power of an over-mighty Germany … the [victors] ended up dividing it [Germany] between them to benefit separately from its restored strength. It had become clear—first to the British, then to the Americans, belatedly to the French and finally the Soviets—that the only way to keep Germany from being the problem was to change the terms of the 7 debate and declare a solution” . The Marshall Plan did just that, it declared a solution through its economic reforms and restored the German Mark to an equal value to other European nations. Through public involvement during the war, economic changes that affected the way the public lived their lives, and an awakening of sorts concerning national homogeneity, Europe experienced irreversible transformations region wide; “Changes on this scale can only be described as revolutionary. Like the war itself, they represented a radical caesura, a clear break with the past, and 8 a preparation for even bigger changes still to come” . However, a “clear break with the past” was not imminent regarding ‘population politics’ and countries still seeking national homogeneity. Following the provoking and widespread results of the Holocaust was a realization that even allied governments in part had been to blame, “What was taking place in 1945, and had been underway for at least a year, was thus an unprecedented exercise in ethnic cleansing and population transfer. In part this was the outcome of ‘voluntary’ ethnic separation...”9. Leading up to World War II, this ‘voluntary’ ethnic separation Judt refers to was taking place across all of Europe. From separating the French and German that occupied Alsacethe 6 Blackler, Adam. “From Retribution to Rehabilitation” 7 Judt, Tony. “Postwar: a History of Europe since 1945”, 2005, pg. 128 8 Judt, Tony. “Postwar: a History of Europe since 1945”, 2005, pg. 39 9 Judt, Tony. “Postwar: a History of Europe since 1945”, 2005, pg. 24 2 Lorraine region to the genocide of Armenians in Turkey, this ethnic separation and ‘cleansing’ took place across all of Europe, and although it took the most extreme form there, it certainly did not originate in Germany. A clear example of national homogeneity stemming from mainland Europe was still that of “the Jewish question” as described by Theodor Herzl, “The Jewish question persists wherever Jews live in appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with Jewish immigrants. We are naturally drawn into those places where we are not persecuted, and our 10 appearance there gives rise to persecution” . What were countries to do with the largest, albeit reduced, minority population in Europe? Although these countries abhorred the treatment of Jewish populations in recent years, they were still unwilling to accept the religion into their own states, and sought a location for them to reside. Since 1920, Jewish settlements had grown in Palestine and the Middle Eastern country seemed to be a viable option to designate as the sought after “Jewish State”. The primarily Arab state would see more Jewish settlements arise as “Mandatory Palestine” took place and protest grew; “Without doubt, the British had ignored the will of Palestine’s Arab inhabitants … the majority of [Jewish] outside Palestine, had supported and were still supporting the 11 (Muslim) Ottoman Empire in its war against the (Christian) Allied Powers” . Protest and violence plagued the split Arab and Jewish country until it escalated into a Civil War that stretched from 1947 12 to 1948 and the British “washed their hands” of the nation and left the fate of the split country to the recently established League of Nations. This answer to the “Jewish question” is just one of many examples of European nations still attempting to preserve national homogeneity following World War II. This exclusion from centralized society also took place on a relatively untouched plane during the second world war, the European colonial territories. 10 Blackler, Adam. “Territorial Partitions: Modern Historical Origins”, Herzel, Theodor 11 Blackler, Adam. “Territorial Partitions: Modern Historical Origins”, Morris, Benny 12 Blackler, Adam. “Territorial Partitions: Modern Historical Origins” 3 “ … we [the colonized] realize that nothing was left to chance and that the final aim of colonization was to convince the indigenous population it could be saved from darkness. The result was to hammer into the heads of the indigenous population that if the colonist were to leave, they 13 would regress into barbarism, degradation, and bestiality” . This realization, voiced by Frantz Fanon from the French colony of Martinique, was common across European colonies and showed how colonizers valued their national homogeneity over the livelihoods of their colonists. Preceding World War II decolonization seemed the way forward, the cost of maintaining an overseas empire grew and the Atlantic Charter influenced colonists. However, in the case of France, the second World War encouraged the European power to establish their national pride and fulfill mercantile needs at the same time. In 1945, France took rule over Algeria once again. Years later, President Guy Mollet would offer independence to Morocco and Tunisia and promise a better future for French14Algeria . Instead, violence and terrorism flourished. An indication of a state clinging to their national homogeneity regardless that French Algeria became a colony in 1830 and cross population interaction and residence had occurred. France’s demand for national homogeneity would eventually cost them the region and leave behind lasting marks of ‘population politics’ and colonization. A lasting transformation of the colonial sphere from World War II was the implementation of The League of Nations’ mandate system which classified European colonies into three different categories and allocated different levels of autonomy to each section ranging from nations that “… have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized”15 to nations that mandates seemed necessary from colonizers. Entente powers transferred the legal control of colonized countries from one to another as if they were trading resources with no regard to the people that lived within and impacted by their decisions. ‘Population politics’ still were very much at play in the colonial sphere, these populations would 13 Blackler, Adam. “Things Fall Apart”, Fanon, Frantz 14 Blackler, Adam. “Things Fall Apart” 15 Blackler, Adam. “Territorial Partitions: Modern Historical Origins”, League of Nations Mandate System 4 struggle for their independence and lives because ultimately “… imperial powers at the time 16 generally took no note of the wishes of third world peoples” . From the Belgian Congo to French occupied West Africa, colonizers excluded those populations to protect the national homogeneity of their motherlands at all costs. All things considered, the Second World War era indefinitely transformed Europe in two key ways. Social transformation occurred through the public involvement with the conflict and widespread horrors of genocide in the Holocaust. And economically through the US implemented 17 Marshall Plan that worked to level Europe’s economic playing-field and “declared a solution” for Germany economically. Regarding ‘population politics’, it is clear that European national homogeneity stretches much further than the division between East and West Germans, and in reality 18 affected the world following World War II. From “the Jewish question” to European colonies, attempts to preserve national homogeneity for European states would cause violence and inequality 19 that stretches even until today. The current rise of the alt-right in countries like Germany , growing 20 discontent in European countries with a rise in the refugee population, and “Brexit” are indications of a rapidly changing Europe; A Europe that still holds much influence in the world and the potential for an integrated future. 16 Blackler, Adam. “Territorial Partitions: Modern Historical Origins”, Morris, Benny 17 Judt, Tony. “Postwar: a History of Europe since 1945”, 2005, pg. 128 18 Blackler, Adam. “Territorial Partitions: Modern Historical Origins”, Herzel, Theodor 19 Blackler, Adam. “East Comes West” 20 Blackler, Adam. “East Comes West” 5