Could the Treaty be justified? Cambridge IGCSE History revision
Not started
Learn it
In plain words
Was it a vicious revenge, or about as fair as anyone could have managed in the wreckage of 1919? Historians have argued over it for a century. In the exam you need to be able to argue both sides, and to know what people said at the time.
8 things to know
- The case against the Treaty. Germany was not allowed to negotiate, so it was a dictated peace. Germany alone was blamed for a war that many countries had helped to cause.
- The reparations and the loss of industry were so heavy that critics said Germany could never recover. Self-determination was given to others and denied to Germans.
- The Treaty punished the new democratic government and the German people, not the Kaiser who had led them into war.
- The case for the Treaty. Germany had treated Russia far more harshly in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in March 1918, taking about a third of Russia's population and much of its industry.
- The war had killed millions and wrecked large areas of France and Belgium. Public opinion in the Allied countries would have accepted nothing softer.
- Germany was not destroyed. It remained a single country with the largest population in western Europe, and it recovered in the 1920s.
- The peacemakers faced an almost impossible task, with different aims, impatient voters and a continent in chaos.
- Opinions at the time. Germans were outraged. The British economist John Maynard Keynes said that the reparations would ruin Europe. The French commander Marshal Foch said: "This is not peace. It is an armistice for twenty years." Many in France thought it too soft, and many in Britain came to think it too hard.
Worked example
"The Treaty of Versailles was a fair settlement." How far do you agree? Plan a 10-mark answer.
- Fair: Germany had imposed a harsher treaty at Brest-Litovsk, the damage to France and Belgium was enormous, and Germany was left united and able to recover.
- Unfair: it was a Diktat, the war guilt clause blamed Germany alone, and reparations and the loss of land punished ordinary Germans.
- Judgement: it was harsh, but understandable in the mood of 1919. Its real fault was that it was harsh enough to anger Germany and not harsh enough to keep it weak.
Tips and tricks
- Brest-Litovsk is the best single piece of evidence that the Treaty was justified. Use it.
- "At the time" matters. People in 1919 had just lived through four years of slaughter. Judge the Treaty by what they knew, and say that you are doing so.
It lands in your notebook with its questions as flashcards.
Could the Treaty be justified?: 5 questions and answers
These are the quiz’s questions. Do the quiz first, then come back here for the ones that got you.
Which treaty had Germany imposed on Russia in 1918?
It was far harsher than Versailles.
Who said the Treaty was "an armistice for twenty years"?
He believed that it would only delay another war.
What did Keynes argue about the Treaty?
He was a British economist at the conference.
Why did Germans call the Treaty a Diktat?
The terms were dictated to them.
Which argument best supports the view that the Treaty was not too harsh?Stretch
A treaty meant to destroy Germany would not have left it intact.
Quiz
5 questions
Tap an answer and you’ll see straight away whether it’s right, and why.
Worksheet
3 questions, 20 marks. Write your answers on paper, then check them.
Could the Treaty be justified?
Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 20 marks · papermunch.org
Name ______________________________ Date ______________
What criticisms were made of the Treaty of Versailles at the time?[4]
Show answerHide answer
Any four: Germans called it a Diktat, because they had no say; the war guilt clause was seen as unjust; Keynes argued that reparations were too high and would damage Europe's economy; Foch said that it would only delay another war; many in France thought it too lenient.
Why did some people at the time believe the Treaty was justified?[6]
Show answerHide answer
The war had caused death and destruction on a huge scale, especially in France and Belgium, and people believed that Germany should pay. Germany had imposed a much harsher treaty on Russia at Brest-Litovsk in 1918, so it could not complain of harshness. Germany was not broken up, and kept most of its land and industry.
"The Treaty of Versailles was too harsh on Germany." How far do you agree?[10]
Show answerHide answer
Too harsh: war guilt blamed Germany alone; reparations of £6.6 billion and the loss of industry caused hardship and led to the crisis of 1923; the army was too small for defence; Germans were denied self-determination. Not too harsh: Germany had been harsher to Russia at Brest-Litovsk; Germany stayed united and recovered in the 1920s; the Allies' losses demanded payment. Judgement: it was harsh, but not unreasonably so for the time. It left Germany resentful and still strong.
Answers: Could the Treaty be justified?
- 1. Any four: Germans called it a Diktat, because they had no say; the war guilt clause was seen as unjust; Keynes argued that reparations were too high and would damage Europe's economy; Foch said that it would only delay another war; many in France thought it too lenient.
- 2. The war had caused death and destruction on a huge scale, especially in France and Belgium, and people believed that Germany should pay. Germany had imposed a much harsher treaty on Russia at Brest-Litovsk in 1918, so it could not complain of harshness. Germany was not broken up, and kept most of its land and industry.
- 3. Too harsh: war guilt blamed Germany alone; reparations of £6.6 billion and the loss of industry caused hardship and led to the crisis of 1923; the army was too small for defence; Germans were denied self-determination. Not too harsh: Germany had been harsher to Russia at Brest-Litovsk; Germany stayed united and recovered in the 1920s; the Allies' losses demanded payment. Judgement: it was harsh, but not unreasonably so for the time. It left Germany resentful and still strong.