The ‘United States of Europe’.

One word has appeared more regularly in the news and media than any other in recent months and years and this is the European Union or EU.  Whether this is because of financial reasons such as in Greece within the debt crisis or political with David Cameron’s dispute with the EU of the Britain’s role within it, it has attracted both criticism and praise. The twenty-seven member union oversees co-operation among its members in many areas such as; trade, the environment, transport and employment. The modern EU is one of the final forms of integration that arrived after centuries of successes in bringing the states of Europe in a closer alliance. As suggested by the title of this blog (made famous by Winston Churchill) I would like to look briefly at the various motives behind European integration centring on the Post-War period.

The Second World War ended on Tuesday 8 May 1945 after six years of endless bloodshed and destruction. Europe had been devastated with bombing raids and death on an unprecedented scale.  With the war in the Pacific coming to a close three months after VE day in Europe, the three major powers of Europe; USA, USSR and the UK met at Yalta and Potsdam in 1945 to discuss the future of Germany, post-war reconstruction and future peace in Europe. Ideas of an integrated Europe unified with a common economic and political agenda were also found in the early post-war period and were made increasingly popular by speeches by Winston Churchill.

The place of Germany within Europe had been one of the key factors in contributing to the ideas of European integration. There was a desire in incorporate Germany into a federate Europe to avoid further conflict between the European powers. Whilst Germany had been split into four zones following the Yalta conference, in the 1946 the ‘Iron Curtain’ had descended across Europe and had split Germany in half.  What quickly arose were the two spheres of influence in Germany; the West (Britain and France) and America in the west and Soviet Russia in the east. This divide created new motives for European integration as many states in Europe, weakened by the war, were not strong enough to resist an attack from Russia should they invade. Therefore many states looked to Britain for leadership, as shown by Churchill’s evoking speeches in 1946, though Britain was more concerned with the Commonwealth than Europe.

With Europe devastated economically and even Britain seeking loans from America, integration was also one of the most important reasons for unity in Europe. ‘Integration of the European economy would promote large-scale, low-cost production that would lead to greater economic output and an improved competitive position in the world market’. [1] One of the earliest forms of economic improvement came from America in the form of the Marshall Plan in 1947. Seventeen nations joined this initiative and it became known as the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC). Whilst not all Europe joined, such as the states in Eastern Europe, this showed that economically the states of Europe needed each other to survive. To further ties, the Council of Europe was set up in 1949 to plan for further political integration. However the Commission of Ministers had no deliberate power and could only advise and offer recommendations to European states. This still represented the power that Europe could create should it act towards further unity across Europe.

To conclude the motives towards European integration are very important factors in which the EU is the modern result. I hope this blog had helped identify some of the motives behind European unity and integration in the post-war years.

Thanks

[1] J. R. Weggs., Europe Since 1945 (New York, 1977), 151.

Sources;

J. R. Weggs., Europe Since 1945 (New York, 1977).

D. W. Unwin., Europe since 1945 (London, 1972).

R. Vaughan., Twentieth Century Europe, Paths to Unity (London, 1979).

BBC History Website

Christmas on the Home Front

In this week’s blog post I will be looking at what Christmas was like in Britain or the ‘Home front’ during the Second World War. From September 1939 to the May of 1945 the world was engulfed in a second global conflict that started with the expansion of Nazi Germany in Europe. The British public would therefore have to face five Christmases before the war had ended. Whilst soldiers were being deployed in Europe, one of the greatest threats that Britain faced was from the skies. The Blitz changed Christmas as it brought the conflict to the doorstep of the people of Britain and affected all ways of life. However, whilst many other festivals and events were cancelled such as Guy Fawkes Night and the Summer Holidays, Christmas remained present for everyone to celebrate.

During the War there were many changes that people would have to adapt to celebrate Christmas. Firstly there was food rationing that came into effect from late 1939/early 1940 that took away the food traditionally associated with Christmas. In 1940 bacon and butter began to be rationed, though it wouldn’t be until the Christmas of 1941/42 that turkey and many luxuries such as chocolate were in short supply or there was none available. During 1943 ‘The Ministry of Food estimated that only one family in ten would get turkey or goose for their Christmas dinner that year. A lot of Christmas food was ‘mock’ (ie fake). Christmas recipes included mock ‘goose’, ‘turkey’ (made from lamb), ‘cream’ and ‘marzipan’.’ [1] Christmas gifts were also in short supply during the war years and many presents were handmade as gifts from shops were too expensive. Knitted slippers and other handmade objects were the exchanged as well as seeds and other practical presents. Comparing this with today’s food supplies and the amounts of gifts in which we buy, it clearly shows that many of the ideas created during the war such a making do with what we had, has been forgotten through the decades. 

Families also faced a difficult Christmas once the war had started since in most cases they would be separated from one another.  Men would be fighting in Europe or wherever they would be needed and would be away from their families for many months. Women might also be with the army or continuing with the war work. Children would be absent since they would have been evacuated away from the cities and into the countryside, away from their families and into the care of foster families.  Despite this families would still try to send gifts to one another whether overseas or across the country.

Whilst the people of Britain were changed by the harshness of war, Christmas was still a time of celebration and the festivities continued in most conditions. In contrast with modern ideas of Christmas, the people of war-time Britain would have had a much more difficult time celebrating Christmas than people do today. We therefore need to take care not to complain about the problems that we faced concerning what to give friends and family, when 60-70 years they had to worry whether they or their families would still be alive the next day. To end on a more positive note, the British people during the war years made do with what they had available and proved that even in war-time, Christmas could be celebrated in some way or another. It is also worth mentioning that the Christmas Speech, which is presented by the monarch, was established at the beginning of the war and goes on today.                           

Finally Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/britain_wwtwo/christmas_underfire_01.shtml

Sources:

http://www.iwm.org.uk

http://www.bbc.co.uk

 

A Word, or a Name?

-'I am Quisling' -'And what is the name?'

It is not that often that a single person manage to creat a word based on his or her name, and in the modern period it have been even rarer than in earlier ages, therefore will this post be about the man and traitor whose name became synonym with collaboration and national reason during and after the second world war.

On the 18th of July 1887 was a boy born with the name Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonssøn Quisling, who would rise to the highest powers and fall from grace and end his life on the 24th of October 1945, for the crimes he committed against his King and Country.

 

 

So what was it this man whose name according to http://www.thefreedictionary.com means; A traitor who serves as the puppet of the enemy occupying his or her country, did? Well Vidkun Quisling started his career in a very respectable way in the Norwegian army, and helped in Nansen’s project during the famine in Ukraine and Russia after the Russian civil war, he lived further some years in Paris and Moscow with his wife Maria until he returned to Norway in 1929 which started his political career. Quisling published his first book in Norway about race politics; “Russia and Us”(title translated from Norwegian) in 1930, and was a part of his first appressed to the public, aided by Fredrik Prytz, who was one of the leading men in Norway at the time, they had together developed a vision for the future where the traditional politics of Scandinavia and Norway would be shifted drastically to the right. In his article of 24th of May 1930, Quisling outlined his political views which called for financial reforms, a clear race political legislation in Norway and a harder line against Marxism.

During the 1930s Quisling developed his political views and it soon became clear that he had clear fascistic opinions. In 1933 did he become the leader of Nasjonal Samling, NS, which was the Norwegian fascist party, a party which stood very close to Nazi Germany in many ways, even though the party worked hard, did it never achieve a seat in parliament, but for Quisling was this not important for he was preparing for the War he knew would have to come, a war he imagined would be between the far right in the west and the far left in the east. And the war came, as we all know, in 1939 did Nazi Germany attack Poland, which threw Europe into a new catastrophic war, but this time did not Norway manage to say outside. For on the 9th of April 1940 did German troop attack Norway from many fronts, in an attempt to take the capital and the most important cities before the country could manage to resist. However, chance would it that the German ship that were destined for Oslo was sunken in the early hours on the 9th, and this gave the king, the royal family, the government and the parliament enough time to get away. This day was the beginning of Quisling’s crimes…

While the legally elected government of Norway was running for its life, and attempting to stop the German invasion, Quisling walked into the Norwegian national broadcasting center in Oslo and declared that he had taken over the power in Norway, and that the Germans was his and the nations allies. Quisling declared also a new government and was the political leader of occupied Norway through his first government (9th- 15th of april 1940); commissar Josef Terboven’s national council, leaded by Quisling (25th of September 1940- 1st of February 1942) and finally the second Quisling government(1st of February 1942- 8th of May 1945). During this time Quisling functioned as prime minister and political leader of what developed into a police stat, and he have been seen as responsible for among other things the deportation of the Norwegian jews, prosecution of political opposition, etc. However, Quisling did in the early months of 1945 see which way the war was going and took contact with the home front in Norway, for secure a safe and peaceful surrender when the German occupants surrendered. He remained in power until he surrendered himself to the police on the 9th of May 1945 in Oslo, he was trailed for treason in October 1945, and sentenced to death as earlier mentioned.

The first reference to the name Quisling as a word can be found in The Times on the 19th of april 1940, and through british newspapers and BBC, it spread throughout the world and became the word for treason collaboration we know today.

source:

http://snl.no/.nbl_biografi/Vidkun_Quisling/utdypning