history essay example pdf

history essay example pdf

Exploring the Impact of World War II on Global Politics: A Historical Analysis

1. Introduction

Over the years, a lot of political book authors and theorists have explored the effects of global wars on international relations theories. Among the notable events that had a profound impact on the theories of totalitarianism, nationalism, imperialism, and worldwide scales is World War II. Differentiating the traditional and the modern international relations theories, the traditional approach began to address the issues associated with World War II while the Cold War emerged. The fact that the war is still a critical turning point in international relations theories and ideologies is making it an attractive and elusive topic. Therefore, it is time to recall and reconsider profoundly what World War II contributed to its longevity and skill to shape people’s daily life, international institutional structures, political priorities, ideologies, science, and technological evolution of the world system. Such an analysis would explore the limitations and strengths of this international catastrophe in reducing war motives between power states. When considered in the light of the above, the paper aimed at reviewing the principal scholarly and academic works about World War II in order to respond to two intensive questions: What are the reasons for this event being included in international relations theories? Will the academic and political debate about World War II be maintained in the future, or will the focus of the theory of international relations evolve around it and other more recent international politics issues? To address the above questions in a comprehensive manner, the paper addressed a new line of thinking based on literature evidence about the impacts of World War II on global politics. After such a review, it is evident that the impact of World War II on hegemony and diplomatic power of nations, international politics, and international institutions triggered new international relations theories and reinforced some classical theories, such as the realism one. Despite the considerable reduction in the political-military purpose of the war and the militarization of the globe after, the fact of the efforts to create a world order became more popular and indispensable than the war itself should be considered as a lasting legacy of international relations and a theory that fully legitimizes the resolution of international disputes by peaceful means.

2. The Causes and Outbreak of World War II

Not only did the Germans seriously refuse to sign the Treaty of Versailles, but they also bitterly resented the war-guilt clause, which they were forced to accept as a severe national self-indictment. They were confident, or more precisely, overconfident, that the notorious “war guilt” would later prove to be an unpopular or ill-judged document which Hitler promised, in his Mein Kampf, to repudiate – the first promise recorded in his book that the Nazis actually kept once they gained power in 1933. From beginning to end, Germany never fully supported the Treaty of Versailles and the subsequent peace settlement; instead, it felt totally humiliated by both, obsessed by the war guilt because it had poisoned Germany’s honor, and regarded the treaty with bitterness, especially because of the heavy reparations it was to pay. In time, Germany’s feelings about Versailles came to dominate the country’s political thought and repressive attitudes.

In the wake of World War I, which had brought massive change and unsettling political, military, and economic upheaval to Europe and the United States, World War II – a global event such as the world had never known before – erupted without warning. In many respects, the causes of World War II in Europe were directly and indirectly traces of World War I: the Treaty of Versailles failed in the end to bring about the long though not-so-sweet peace predicted by its chief architect, the President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson. In 1919, the new German Weimar Republic entered into the treaty, and in 1920, the United States and the other countries at Paris ratified it. However, the World War I “settlement” was not fully accepted by all of those who had been on the winning side, let alone by the losing powers, which began to compete for leadership in contravention of a great number of key provisions of Versailles. Among them was Article 231, which required Germany to assume full responsibility for the war.

3. The Key Players and Alliances

The two camps were not ad hoc combinations brought together by diplomatic exigencies. At the conclusion of the First World War, several European governments were convinced that only the establishment of a formal association of powers would preserve peace and order for the world. However, at the most critical period of possible demolition by war, the League had been allowed to collapse and its principles forgotten, while the survivors of the Second War — the USSR, USA, UK, and ultimately, China — took through their foreign policies and actions too high-handed and too peremptory a line to create international equipoise. There was an evident contempt for the other members of the United Nations in their attitudes; factual or debatable matters were immediately cast in the light of moral principles and might soon counted for more than justice.

With the trade and industry becoming completely dependent on overseas sources, the powers had come to adopt an aggressive and selfish outlook on world politics. The European strategy led first to a division of the world into spheres of influence and then to an encouragement or suppression of foreign rivalries among the lesser or increasingly formidable rival powers. By 1939, these rivalries and this theory of separation and spheres had produced two hostile camps possessing determined aims. The rivalry would not be settled by discussion and arbitration; territorial and strategic problems would have to be decided by the sword.

4. The Aftermath and Consequences

The failure of Allied military intervention in Spain, the fact that the three ‘Democratic’ Powers did not create a corporate international order after the First World War and the appeasement policy – in other words, weakness – eradicated, for Europe, the sense of the military power of the fascist states. All these factors led to Germany’s powerful desire for Lebensraum, Italy’s colonial project, Spain’s trade monopoly, and Russia’s will to expand. All these factors taken together induce some scholars to see the Spanish Civil War, rather than the invasion of Poland, as the true start of the war.

The consequences of all these operations have merely been delayed rather than averted. This can be seen from the fact that disaster has since overtaken Russia. The United States and the British Empire, though emerging victorious, have been bled white in their fight with Germany. The result is a world where, contrary to Roosevelt’s vision, economic and American power has shifted to a brutal and tyrannical communist country and a corrupt and colonial British Empire. In addition, China poses a danger in the East. Economic domination is turning into a stranglehold.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be seen that the Second World War had a tremendous power to shape global politics. This is seen through the consequences for individual governments and their policies, as well as in the restructuring of international governance, and also in changing views on the rules and tools of war. In this respect, one could consider the Second World War as a prime example of the transformative effect of suffering and loss for the transformation of global politics. Indeed, the many radical changes that occurred within the transformation of global politics as a result of the Second World War did have many positive effects.

In this paper, the Second World War’s impact on global politics is subject to a historical analysis. Different ways in which the conflict altered the status quo are explored, with specific examples provided to highlight the transformative effects. The creation of the United Nations is examined in particular depth, and it is argued that this was the only institution able to truly enforce peace within international relations, now more complex than ever before. The downsides of becoming a superpower are suggested to have been largely counteracted by the creation of the UN. Post-war, and looking to the future, the Cold War is highlighted as an important part of how the Second World War transformed global politics. Finally, it is argued that World War II and its consequences were possibly the most transformative event within global politics to date, possibly only being outstripped by the consequences of the end of the Cold War.