Essay for Lesson 7: Adenauer and Post-War Germany
Introduction
The downfall of Germany after the Second World War is an outcome thought by many that time as deserving for a nation touted to have caused one of the most atrocious events in human history. The Nazi Party, which ran Germany under its terrible regime before and during the Second World War, has perpetrated a series of destructive actions that soon wrought havoc to the rest of the world. From the anti-Semitic platform of the Nazi Party that generated the Holocaust up to the unholy alliances with Italy, Japan and others under the Axis Powers that led to massive destruction of lives and properties in different parts of the world, Germany undoubtedly had the greatest responsibility to account for with regard to the Second World War. Therefore, the victors of the Second World War – France, the Soviet Union (USSR), United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US), partitioned Germany into four parts and sought to apply their own sets of post-war recovery agendas within each assigned German territory. The US eventually united with France and UK to form the tri-zone – later West Germany, while the USSR isolated itself to form East Germany (Fulbrook 205-235).
As the US consolidated its influence over West Germany, two crucial courses of action have emerged – the Marshall Plan and the Morgenthau Plan. Both employ highly contrasting objectives – the Marshall Plan outlined a set of goals allowing West Germany to resurrect its industrial power, while the Morgenthau Plan sought to disable any German war effort from ever emerging in the future by implementing de-industrializing measures towards reversion to an agricultural economy. Whereas both the Marshall Plan and the Morgenthau Plan sought for the complete denazification of Germany, only one of the two prevailed. The US eventually chose the Marshall Plan over the Morgenthau Plan – a move that greatly benefited West Germany in its goal to reestablish itself as a reckoning force in the international community and the Americans as their nation grew economically and diplomatically in Europe (Fulbrook 205-235).
One could easily contrast the Marshall Plan from the Morgenthau Plan with regard to their respective objectives for West Germany – the former focused on industrialization while the latter emphasized on deindustrialization. Named after US Secretary of State George Marshall, the Marshall Plan outlined the need of West Germany to recover from its economic malaise by reviving industrial activities. Through a $20 billion package from the US granted to Europe, the Marshall Plan successfully reinvigorated industries within West Germany. Different industrial sectors in West Germany soon started resolving their fractured relations with counterparts from other nations resulting from the implementation of the Marshall Plan. Moreover, the US prevented the removal of industrial facilities within West Germany – a move in which France was previously active, noting that deindustrialization is not the solution for helping the nation in its post-war recovery. Overall, the Marshall Plan helped West Germany to rebuild its reputation as a reliable economic force in Europe within a relatively short period as attested by the economic miracle of the 1950s (Fulbrook 205-235; Hohn 17-51; Turner 1-54; 104-147).
In contrast, the unimplemented Morgenthau Plan, named after US Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, sought to resolve the problem of West Germany on post-war recovery differently. With the earnest objective to prevent any future German war effort akin to that of the Second World War, the Morgenthau Plan casted doubts over the objective of the Marshall Plan to help West Germany revive its industrial activities. The Morgenthau Plan, above all things, promoted the dismantling of all industrial facilities within West Germany – a move earlier started by France within its West German partition and the USSR in East Germany. Furthermore, the Morgenthau Plan saw its proposed division of all of Germany into a northern and southern region as a potent measure to revert the nation from an industrial state to an agricultural one, hence preventing it from becoming capable to wage any war in the future. However, the Morgenthau Plan did not take effect because the US itself saw the Marshall Plan as a strategic move to its interests, apart from the fact that it benefits West Germany more in its post-war recovery (Fulbrook 205-235; Hohn 17-51; Turner 1-54; 104-147).
The Decision to Implement the Marshall Plan and its Benefits to the United States (US)
The reasons of the US for deciding to implement the Marshall Plan over the Morgenthau Plan involve both its own interests alongside that of West Germany. Firstly, from an economic perspective, allowing West Germany to become industrially powerful again would enable it to reestablish its economic credibility throughout Europe. At the same time, such would allow the US to have a strategic economic partner in Europe, hence enabling it to institute its influence firmly throughout the continent. Secondly, from a political perspective, turning West Germany into an economically influential nation in Europe would enable the US to have a key ally in its goal to contain the influence of the USSR in the continent during the early days of the Cold War. Without economic power, there is no other way for West Germany to become an influential figure in Europe, given its tarnished post-war image. At the same time, the US would have lost ground in Europe against the USSR had it decided against the Marshall Plan (Fulbrook 205-235; Hohn 17-51; Turner 1-54; 104-147).
The Repercussions of the Marshall Plan to the Denazification of Germany
Most notably – albeit initially perceived differently, the Marshall Plan paved way for the effective denazification of West Germany. Konrad Adenauer, whose leadership inspired the revitalization of West Germany before the international community, proved equally capable of supporting the reforms associated with the Marshall Plan. Adenauer possessed the right kind of moral ascendancy to lead West Germany away from its past with the Nazi Party, given his personal and political adherence to anti-nationalist, anti-Nazi and anti-Prussian ideologies that merged well with the growing reputation of the nation as an economic power in Europe that time. Likewise, Adenauer possessed key political relationships with influential European characters, particularly with the President of France that time, Charles de Gaulle, which helped him align West Germany to the Western Alliance during the Cold War, effectively coinciding well with the growing influence of the US in the nation that time resulting from the Marshall Plan. The denazification of West Germany, in the foregoing respect, transpired through the reconstruction of diplomatic relations with several nations in Europe - a development that was otherwise impossible during the aggressive regime of the Nazi Party (Fulbrook 205-235; Hohn 17-51; Turner 1-54; 104-147).
Conclusion: Is the Marshall Plan the Better Decision?
In assessing the potency of the Marshall Plan as the better decision over the Morgenthau Plan, four aspects must come into play – its benefit for West Germany and Germany as a whole, advantage for the US, value to European political and economic stability and effectiveness in the denazification agenda. Firstly, the Marshall Plan proved more effective than the Morgenthau Plan because it expressly advocated and realized economic reforms via industrialization within West Germany, which in turn affected East Germany as well upon reunification in 1989. Secondly, the US amassed positive gains from the Marshall Plan in terms of cultivating its influence in Europe – a strategy that led it to emerge as the victor of the Cold War. Thirdly, a strong West Germany and an influential US enabled Europe to curtail the intimidating presence of the USSR during the Cold War, which would have otherwise resulted to another major conflict akin to the Second World War due to desperation over the lack of a potent balancing force. Lastly, the denazification of West Germany proceeded smoothly due to the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan changed the image of West Germany from a hostile force in Europe to one that advocates the cultivation of constructive economic undertakings and democratic values coming from the US throughout the continent, hence leading to increased credibility before the international community – a development that continued and progressed even after the nation reunited with East Germany. Whereas the Morgenthau Plan also condemned the historical connections of Germany with the Nazi Party, its implementation would render other foregoing consequences of the Marshall Plan somewhat inconceivable, given the reversion to an agricultural economy would not do West Germany a favor in terms of effective economic recovery and building an improved image before the international community. Consequentially, the Morgenthau Plan would not have enabled the US to use West Germany well as its strategic partner in curtailing the USSR in Europe during the Cold War.
Works Cited
Fulbrook, Mary. A Concise History of Germany. 2nd ed. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.
Hohn, Maria. GIs and Fräuleins: The German-American Encounter in 1950s West Germany. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2002. Print.
Turner, Henry Ashby. Germany from Partition to Reunification. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1992. Print.
