UNIT 32 : GLIMPSE OF THE POST-WAR WORLD

Structure
32.0 32.1 32.2 Objectivcs Introduction Post-War Scenario
.32.1.1 32.2.1 32.3.3 32.2.4 32.2.5 Iln~nedli~te Priorities Yugoslavia Poland Greece The Two Ger~n;~nies Kecovery and Boon : Econo~ny in Capitalist Europe Economy in Smiulist Europe The Capitalist Europe The Stxiialist Europe

32.3

Econonlic Reconstruction in Post-War Europe

32.3.1 31.3.2

32.4

Politics in Post-War Europe

32.4.1 32.4.2

32.5 32.6

Let Us Sun1 Up Answers to Check Your Progress Esercises

32.0 OBJECTIVES
This is the last Unit of the course. It explains to you the possibilities in the realm of politics and economny that existed in Europe at the end of the War. After reading this Unit you will: learn something about the immediate Post-war situation in Europe; discover the naturc of economy and politics in the various European countries in the post-war period: and understand the nature and extent of influence tliat forces outside Europe, like the USA esercised over European developments.

32.1

INTRODUCTION

r
7

In Units 30 and 3 1 of this Block, you nlust have learnt about two vital aspects of the world wars. One, it is possible to interpret tlle two world wars as one long war that started around 1914, had a long period of truce in between and culminated in 1945 with decisive winners and loser. Some of the unresolved aspects of the first war (or first phase of the war) were resolved. decisively and concl~lsivelyin the second. Two, the war. may have been fought primarily on European territory and had European countries as major participants (except, of course, Japan and U.S.A.). But it was truly a global war because the major forces fighting the war were aspiring for a domination of the total world, not just Europe. Previously, in Block 7, you learnt about the triple ideological division of Europe into forces of liberal and France in the main), fascism (represented nvainly by democracy (represented by ~ i i t a i n Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini) and the socialist world (represented by the USSR).' It was precisely these three forces which competed with each other for a total domination of the earth. In the decisive phase of the war the forces of liberal democracy and socialism got together to defeat and eliminate the third force, fascism. This was the essence of the World War. The post-war period witnessed fierce competition withoiit a war. between the two remaining forces (liberal democracy and socialist) althougl~

fills ~ J I I i~I ~ ~O

I I ~ 10E GI\

\mi : I

~IIJII~SC or IIIC P~st-\\':lr World.

POST-WAR SCENARIO
As ccoilo~llic inler-connections bec;imc trans-continental. a war of domination within Europe bcc;lmc the first tn~ly global war in hislory For that reason, Ihe history of Europe after the War can rlot be read i~~depends~ltly of events outside Europe. especially since these interco~l~lcclio~~s bcca~neevcr lllore potent and complex. Consequently, certain non-European ibrccs lverc of great significance witllin Europe until Ihc end of the 1980s. These were, for esa~nple. the preponderance of An1eric:ln influence in European affairs. tlle dominance of the glob;~llinii~~cial system, and the sustained hostility between the two militarized dollar in l l ~ e politico-cco~~on~ic blocs that cmcrged idicr the war.

32.2.1

Immediilte Priorities

SOIIIC of the prioritics wele the rollowir~g.I) Domestically, within in each country. tlle social ;~ndcco~loillicdislocations caused by the War had to be rectified. 2) Continentally, the political 11l:ip of Europe h:~d to be redrawn subslantially since the existing hierarchy of nationst;ltes \Itas no longer \f;~lid, 3) Regionally, iaecting only West Europe. arose the problem of \vill~dr;~wing fro111the colonies. 4) 111 the collrse of settling these issues. the syste~llic conflict bet\\,ccn a~pitalisn~ ;~nd socialism becanle pan-European: it added a further dimension to the Iradilional political, ccononlic, a~:d c \ ~ l t ~ division ~ r i ~ i between East and West Europe, and it aflccred in nlalfy \\.;~ysthe trajectory of European developnlents over the next forty years. Tlle first three processes noted abnve 11ow merged with and were expressed through the bipolar or East-West tliv~sionof Europe Within Europe, the balance of power had shifted decisively to a nlore assertive Sovier I;rtton. which sought to establish full control over its strategic sphere of interest in Eas! Eiu!~pcDuring the War the Soviet Union and the AngloAulerican alliailce had divided Er~ropeinto such spheres of interest and agreed not to interfere in cach otllers areas. 'I'11e West Eumpean powers. especially the United Kingdom. had been fi~~ancially deplcted by tl~cw:lr i~ndbeen displaced from their great power eminence: they now opted. with varying degrccs of reluctance or cntl~usiasm,for a subordinate relationship with capital-surplus USA. Ezusopean countries, which llad the freedom to do slrz~tcgiccalculus. assumed i~lternlediate positions so. or which fcll outside the pale of Il~e ranging from diplonratic neutralit\, to prag~natic ambivalence. The fate of Germany alone was decided through inter-bloc conflict. This was perhaps inevitable. It culminated in the creation or the Federal Republic of Gerilrany (FRG). and East Germany of two states, West Ges~nany or tlle Ger~nanDenlocratic Republic (GDR). For long they did not even acknowledge each olher's csistencc. Tlle political and eco~lo~nic collsequeoces of the war were uneven across Europe. With the exception of Britain and in part the Sovict Union. new patterns of national politics and new internatioi~alterritorial disputes emcrgcd. During tile War, politically oriented armed resistance groups were organized ti~rougl~out the territories occupied by Germany; at the same" time, national govcri~ments-in-exile, represe~llingthese territories. filnctioned as pressure wit11 !he allied powers. These were often riven by conflict, usually groups lobbyi~~g ideological, but occasio~lally also ethnic, as in the case of tlle ethnically plural Yugoslavia. by the communists, organized resistance against the Within France, the Maquis. donli~~ated operated from Germans: outside France, llle Free French and its French National Co~nnlittee London. and de\leloped evcntu:~llyinto tlle provisional government before the inaubwration of the Fourth French Republic.

32.2.2

Yugoslavia

Inevitably, intensc rivalry over post-War arrangenlents tended to develop between left-wing resistance factio~ls and liberal or right-wing govenlnlents in exile. In Yugoslavia, the situation was co~llplicarcdby thc pscsencc of two distinct pressure groups, tlle conlmunist National Liberation Front led by Josip Broz Tito on tlle o ~ l c hand. and on the other. the nationalist and royalist Cheuiiks under Draza Mihailovicll. More often tlran not, the solution to such fi~~lda~lle~ltal inter~lal conflicls \vitliin ni~tionalpolitics entailed eslernal intervention. In East

Europe it liappe~icdthrougli swift semi-niilitary scttlc~nent : in Wcst Europe it was done through institutional arrange~nenls to csclude rival claimants from crfectivc power. supplementcd whcre necessary by milit:iry aid. Tlie nature of tlie settlc~ilcr~t ~nEast Europe nierely deferred the cn~ptionof tlie ine~.itablecrisis. whicli finally occurred in tlic 1980s: and the West European solution led to licq~~cnt crises of go\~cr~l~i~cnt. ii~ld occasionally of tlic systelil itself. Yugoslavia was esceptio~~al for tlie co~il~iluliists Iiaving seized power without the assistance of the Red Anny: it \vas tliercfore able to join tlie Soviet Bloc and leave it subsequently of its own volition. Ulti111;itelyliowe\;er. it sliarcd the fate of its lilore dependent neighbours in terms of etli~iic di~.ision aad svste~n disintegration.

GIii~~psr uf the post-War World

32.2.3

Poland

Poland liad been bifurcated during the war and occl~piedby both Gcr~ilanyand tlie Soviet Union: d ~ initial e resista~~ce \\!as tl~crefore bound to be both anti-Gcnnan and anti-Soviet. The uationalist Ho~ile Anily worked in co-operation with tlie exiled governluent in London, but it was decimated by the Gcrmans alter the failure of tlie Warsaw Uprising in 19-11. I11 Sovietoccupied Poland. tlie communist-lcd Polisli Co~ilmitteeof National Liberation managed to seize the initiative with the lielp of tlic adva~icingSovict Red Anily. Given tlie destruction tlie ~r&risionalGovern~nentof National Unity of the Home Army. it was able to do~ili~late that was formed by tlic lilerger of the Lwo rival provisional governlilents based in London and Soviet-held Poland.

32.2.4

Greece

In Grcece. on the othcr I~and.t l ~ c proccss of resolution was protractcd and uncertain because tlie resistance was divided between tlic com~nunist-ledNational Liberation Front and tlic Leag~e. Tlic Government of Natio~ialUnih undcr right-wing republican National Dcmocr,~lic Gcorgios Papandreous and sponsored by the British, sough1 lo disband tlie comniunist-led National Liberation Front in 194.1. But it led to civil war. \vliich was suspended by the Varkiza truce of 19.15. A ~nanipulatedelection and plebiscite llien retunled royalists and royalty to power. It triggered off a~iotl~er round of civil wilr and Alnzriciin intcnlention against the com~nunists.Therc~fterGreece saw a successio~iof unstablc govcn~mcnts. frequently in conflict with tlie monarchy. tollo\\-ed by prolonged niililary dictatorsliip until the mid-seventies. However. not all of Europe followed this pattern. Unlike so lilaily other cases. the resistance niovelnents in Denmark. tlie Netlicrliinds. and N o ~ vwere ~ I ~ relatively unified Tliey poscd little difficulty for post-War national polit~calrcvival. Stable niult~-part~ coalition arrangements emerged to assume office aiid i~np!ement tlie "social de~~locratic conscnsus" of inco~iic transfers. and a ~iioderate and gradualist extended social welfare, fiscally eng~~icered socioeconomic relonii. to \vhich electoral opinion ligre. as elsewherc. liad dccisively swung. Whatever the specific ~iiodeof resolutio~iof i~il~iicdiate post-war problcn~s, tlie bi-polar division into an east and a west bloc caine to do~ili~latc thinking aiid i~cti~ig by tlie end of the 19-10s. This wvas evident. iiot merely in tlie rhetoric of international and do~iiestic politics. but equally in the fundamental prc~ilises of ~iiucli illfluentid scholarship and journalism. It tended therefore to distract attention fro111other divisions. oppositioiis, a ~ i d unities si~iiultaneously at work. Germany and the neutrals were to a certain degree tlic exceptions. Such overarching categories can often be misleading: but bloc affiliation and tension did exert sig~ufica~it i~lfiuenceon tlie international diplo~~iatjc stance of nations and on crucial aspects of their domestic policy. They also contributed to tlie emergence of supra-national projects, whose very evolution, paradoxically enough. tended so~llctiniesto rcveal tlie extent of intra-bloc differences. These were more pronounced and transparent in the case of the non-Soviet bloc.

.'
r

32.2.5

The Two Germanis

The most significant and perhaps the no st peculiar of such supra-national projects was the making of the two Germanies. The Allies liad arrived at no agreellient on Gerniany and indeed competed for the control of Berlin in what is known as the "Race for Berlin". It led power. Tlie delay over to the partition of Gennany into four zones. one under mch occup~ing the final settlement only revealed the difference of opinion within the westem bloc over tlie extent to which Germany's militar?; and ecor~onuc reconstrucrion could be penuitted. But ~t

Ylie

World

At

W:lr

also ~llirroreda~rd~nagaiticdpost-War strategic rivalry to the point of two scpilrate states

being sct up over tllc decade.

The initial Franco-US agenda. overriding British objections. proposcd to de-industrialize to the nlini~nunl nccessany. and that excess Germany. It expected that output would be li~nited equipnlent available in Ger~llany would be shipped out as reparation for war dimage. Given the decpening hostility between the US and tlle Soviet Union. tl~cse projects were altered. The US shified perspective from the relatively isolationist "Aa~erica First" stance !o the pursuit of ian u~~ambiguously intcnrentionist one described as t l ~ e "leadership of the Free World." From this now flowed tllc Tru~llanDoctrine and the Marshall Plan. Tlre Tnnnan Doctrine a~lnoi~nced its support for "frce peoples who arc resisting attcmpted subjugation by armcd ~llinorities or by outside pressure": and the Marsl~i~ll Plan. knotvn off~cially as the European Rccovery Progrdmale. set out to rcvive and reconstruct Europc, including West Germany. Tllc Marsl~allPli111 WilS set within tl~c franlework of the nc\v lnolletary i111dtrading systenl b;~scd on the suprcnlacy of the US dollar and the dis~~la~ltling of trade barricrs. The latter werc cnvisnged by the Bretton Woods institi~tions(World Bank and lntcr~lational Monetary Fund or IMF) i~nd the General Agreenlo~lton Tariffs and Tri~de (GATT). Accordingly. a sweeping :lgenda for the recovery of West Genllally was set afoot. Tlle Level Plan of 1946, which had limited prodilction to half the level of 1938. was norv of I~~dustry abrogated. A major political rcfonn now instituted multi-party elections. imposed strict co~~trols on trade unions. and eli~ninatcd"undesirable" political tendcnc~cs. A currency refor111 rcpliiccd the old reicl~smark with the new deutsclle mark. Conse~lsus having bcen arrived at, ll~c French. British. and Anler~can zones were ~nergcd in 1949 to c r a t e the Federal Republic of Germany (Wcst Germany). Ho\vever. sovereignty was granted lo tl~cFcderal Republic only in 1955 af2er its defences were secured by a linlited remilitarization and its induction into NATO. T!\e zonc of Soviet occupation or East Gennany. went through the same process of being rcsiructured to ensure integration with the Soviet power structure. The new state was established in 1919: the Communist Party's domination was then secured. popular unrest qucllcd. and a replica of tlle Soviet pattern of development confirnled. before the country was declared sovereign in 1954. Berlin. the capital of undiv~dcd Germany, having been likewise divided. continued to remin.the focus of hostilities, from the Blockade of 1948 to the building of the wall in 1961. Given the hostility between the two blocs. supra-national projects were regularly devised \vithin cilcll bloc in order to consolidate it further. Co~ni~lform was established in the east in 1917 to co-ordinatc coln~llunist activity in Europe. But because it reaclled into West Europe also. it \Vils finally disbanded in 1956 as a gesture of goodwill. Tlle Council of Mtltilal Eco~~o~llic Assistance (COMECON) was set up in 1949 for greater economic integration, while tlle Warsaw Pact was establisllcd in 1955 for military co-ordination. Such bodies were no re llulllerous in the West. They reflected different align~nentsand brought together differcnt co~nbinationsof countries. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was eshbbslled in 1949 ils a trans-continental military body. and the European Coal and Steel Conlrnllnity appeared in 1951 with the specific economlc concerns that the name suggests. On tllc other hand, the European Economic Co~n~nunity of 1957 and the European C o m u nity of 1957 had larger objectives that prompted apprehensions of loss of national Gvereignty. notably in Britain. In respo~ae.Britain initiated in 1959 the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). Reconstru~:iofi. undertaken amidst such acrimony, relied to a great extent on such agencies and instruments.
Check Your Progress 1

Note : i)

Write your answer in tl1c space given below. Check your answer with the answers given at the end of this Unit.

ii)
1)

Describe the process tluough which Gennany was divided into two nation dtates.

.................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................

Glin~pseuf the Paqt-War

World

2)

Write five lines on the inunediate priorities of the European countries afier the war. ....................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................

-

32.3

ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION IN POST-WAR EUROPE

The War had damaged the economies of nearly all the European countries. The immediate task therefore war to recover the losses incurred and somehow restore tlle pre-war levels of economic development. The nel* step was to attain new level of economic prosperity. This process of economic recovery and development followed different trajectories in the liberal democratic and the socialist world. Let us first see what happened in the liberal democratic part of Europe.

32.3.1

Recovery and Boom : Economy in Capitalist Europe

The first phase of econonlic recovery. from 1945 to 1947, was effected through bilaterally negotiated US loans and grants and the food aid disbursed through the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Agency (UNRRA). These sufEced to avert the general collapse of the economy that industrial dislocation and poor harvest threatened; they were adequate even to raise industrial output to prewar levels. Longer-term American objectives however required first. a fnonetary and trading system permitting the unrestricted movement of capital and commodities, and second. a bloc of politico-military partners whose defence did not have to be permanently subsidised. But Europe was burdened by a payments deficit with the US and a scarcity of dollars. Neither of the American aims could be pursued without further economic expansion. During the next phase of recovery, 1948- 1951, European countries willing to participate in the US-sponsored recovery progralllme received 13 billion dollars. Tlus was supplemented by a 1 billion dollar loan from the international Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstructio~i and Develop~lle~lt (World Bank). The largest beneficiaries of this programme 'were Britain. France. Italy. and West Gennany. It established an international body of recipient nations. the Orgilni7;ttion for European Economic Co-opention, to which each nation submitted a ~li~tional plan every four years. These aid-receiving nations were required, under the "counterpart" clause. to make available a fund of: domestic currency equal to the aid received and to be spent in ways approved by the US. They had to agree to use the aid to finance food imports only fro111 Ihe US whether or not cheaper alternative sources were available. They had to also employ the services of US shipping and insurance for 50% of aidfinanced purcllases. besides also ensuring preferential rreatnlent to Anlerican oil interests. Between 1947 and 1951. the West European econo~niessaw the restoration of financial discipline. Although performance and policy emphases varied across Europe, the following features were colnmon: state managenlent of the economy, nationalisation of key sectors like energy. transport, and banking. and dellationary policies (that is, restricted governmeilt spending and credit) that increased unemployment. It led on to a long economic booin that las ed until the mid-1970s. Altliough the deflationary policics created sane employment, they als\ led to the economic boom. As a result the period aAer the 1970s witnessed a near full eniployment. It yielded a "new capitalism" of near full emplo.yment. high productivity, high wages, and extensive social welfare. All these combined to blunt class antagonism and to generate consensual politics. Anlbitious social welfare programmes, of the kind outlined by

tlrc Bcfrridge Rcport in tlrc UK and s~milarmanifestoes elsewhere, cntailed a dramatic increase in go\ crlilncnt expenditure, unlike tlre frugal years of 1947-1931. Such expenditures sust;rined denrand and fuelled investment: at the saliie time. they led to higher tax revenues in tlre intcrest of balanced budgcts. 1ndustrial and agricultural activity expanded: exports rose, leading to reduction in the trade deficit with tlie USA: and accuniulation mounted. However. tlre results were uneven across West Europe. Less developed colrntries like Ireland. Portugal were less aected by tlic quantitative and qualitative transformations Spain. a ~ i d acliic\*edb! tlie Inore advanced economies. Growth and the standard of living varied between co~u~itries. and so did i~ico~iie distribution patterns within them. As may be espected, there were wide variations in tlie specific ~iiodeof economic nianirgenient. tlre degree of state intervention. tlie rolc and sopliisticatio~iof planning, tlie proportion of state to private e~itcrprisc witlri~i each econoaiy, tlic relation between state. employers, and unions, and in the ~iicclia~iis~ii and cstelit of social welfare. Likc\vise, within tlic European boom individual European countries. a1 different li~ricsand with different frequencies. experienced brief cco~io~rlic crises likc a~i~iual recessions. tradc imbalances. poor liarvests etc. Nonetlieless, between I950 aad (lie early 1970s. Europe madc asto~rishingadvances in productivity and standard of liviag. It induced the belief that a new forni of managed capitalism Ilad been tlic ~iotoriouscyclical tendencies and internal crises of established: tllat it would tm~isce~rd tl~it govcniment intervention would ensure general social welfare. capitalism. a ~ i d Howe\.cr tlie long boo111came to an cnd in 1973 with tlic first oil shock. when oil-producing a~id dra~iiatically raiscd tlrc prices of oil. European economies suffered countries u~iilatcr;rlly rose. Tliey immediately led to inflationary pressures. output dccelerated. and r~ncliiploy~~ie~rt management, restrictive policies witlli~ithc parameters of the existing systeni of eco~iomic and niorc gradually. to a change of cconolriic perspective. From the late 1970s, in countq after country. tlic social denlocritic conselisus broke down. New political programmes proposcd to restrict social welfare to tlie ~ninimumnccesslry. They repudiated government intcn.ention and demand ~ilanagenrent. Tliey de~iouliced institutiolialized trade union bargaining as obslaclcs to the free play of market forces. All these led to tlie privatization of tratio~ralizedindustries. extensive deregulation. and the adoption of monetarist and supplyside policies. In Fr;ince. for example, state interve~ition and planning liad b&n by far the most pronounced in Europe: and the Socialist go\lernnient's Interim Plan of 1982-1983 had carried of the state sector and a series of ratio~ializationscbe~iiesby the midout ;rn espa~lsio~l eighties. But tlrese were reversed bv Jacques Cliirac's right-wing governrilelit between 1986 and 1988 tlirouglr extensive privatization. Tlic strccessor Socialist governliient committed ilsclf to "neither oalionaliriition nor privatization". In effcct. in most of capitalist Europe, a new "free ~narket"ecorio~iiicco~rsc~rsus had emerged.

32.3.2

Econonly in Socialist Europe

In tlie Soviet bloc. rcconstn~ct~o~i was liindcred by tlie relatively lower capacity of tlie leading power. tlic Soviet Union. E~Tcnialcapital was -in sliort supply, except on ternis that were unacceptable to the Soviet system. Capital for the in.!,;,Aalization programme therefore liad to be intcr~ially generated. Sovia rccovcry itself required the continuation of reparations from its ally. thc Ger~uanDc~irocraticRepublic (GDR) and Austria until the mid-1950s. In the ncivly so\.icti~cdco~uitrics.nalionalizirtion permitted rapid expansion in heavy industrial capacity. Radical agrarian progril~iililcsof far111collectivization and nationalization on the soo~r pluuged tile agricultural sector into turnioil and led to food shortages. East Soviet ~rrodel Europe was tlrus preoccupied wit11 tlic problem of adjusting to a new *stem of production and stag~:'~tion in tlrc vey sectors whose boon1 was tlie basis of West European prosperity. Tlic plan-arr\,;n eco~io~i~ics of tlre caster11 bloc. with tlie exception of the USSR began with a \.cry low industri;ll basc. Albania and Bulgaria werc predo~iiinantlyagrickltural, and Poland's ~llanufacturing base was co~rfi~ied to Silesia and Warsaw. Since investment priorities were largely deternl~~ied by thc statc. national plans focussed excessively on dpuoping heavy industry. Tlic rcsultilig i~~ibi~lance led to clrronic shortages of consumer goods. As in tlie West. tlicre were sig~iifica~it variations on this general pattern. While private activity in agriculture was drastically curtailed by the introduction of collective and state farms, Polish on privately ownt$'f:rrnis. In short, the agricultural output was prcdo~ninantlvprod~~ccd collectivizatio~l~iiodcli n Polalid in tlie 1940s and tlre carly 1950s lrad failed. In Yugoslavia, i~idr~slrics wcrc not state-o\tned bul givz!~over to Workers' Co~mcilsto be nJn for proi't.

Disparities in the do~ilestic availability of resources also deter~ni~lcd the estcllt of relia~lce on the USSR for material aid. In the initial stages, trade and econo~liicrclatlo~iswere co~ifi~ied to thc region. that is, the eastern bloc. However. the sliortage of capital and of agricultural product, especially wheat, led to a parallcl dependence on western co~ultries. Poland and Ro~na~iia borrowed estensively progranunes; but semicing these from the West in the 1970s to finance rlicir i~idustrial~zatio~i debts demanded austerity measures and higher food prices lo rcilacc subsidies on food. In ~ d of invest~iientled Bulgaria and Hungary, the shortage of consumer goods a ~ n:isalli~;.;lv:! These were however to refonils designed to decentralize planning and aimulate in\~cstmcal, withdrawn in Bulgaria following tlie Soviet invasion of Czechoslo~~akia. By the early 1970s, the USSR was co~npelled to import grain fro~il tlie USA. Food grain and light industrial i~nportsfrom the hard currency areas (the West) without corresponding exports resulted in a combined balance of payments deficit of 10 billion dollars by 1975. Thesc were financed by borrowings from tvestern balks. l~nportswere cut back and the deficit was eliminated: but. by 19x2. East bloc debts stood at 81 billion dollars and its debtservice rdtio stood at 100 percent. lliat is, it was borrowing lnoney solely in order to pay back debts. Soviet export earnings deteriorated with the collapse of world oil prices in the mid1980s. Further import restrictions were hindered by domestic compulsions; the trade deficit was therefore financed through the sale of gold. Of the east European economies. Poland was dollars. East European econonlies made tlie largest debtor. with loans to the tune of 35 billio~i rapid advances in heavy industry; but their deficiencies in the provision of consumer goods and in agrarian production. co~npounded by the diversion of investment to niilitary requirements, resulted in stagnation and do~i~estic crises by tlie mid-1980s. Tlie final consequence was. as in the West, the repudiation of the statist paradigm and the replication of its free market model.
Check Your Progress 2

Glimpse of the Post-Wur World

Note : i)

Write your answer in the space given below. Check your answer with the answers given at the end of this Unit.

ii) 1)

develop~nentin the Capitalist Europe. Write five lines on tlie phascs of eco~ionlic

2)

In what ways was the eco~ioniicdevelop~ne~it of Socialist Europe different from its pitali list counter-part'? Answer in five lines.

32.4 POLITICS IN POST-WAR EUROPE

As yo11 are now aware. one niajor feature of the Post-war Europe was its division between the two victorious forces of t!ie-.W_ar. Europe now canie to be sliarply divided between a socialist bloc and a capitalist bloc, or geographically Spcaking. East-European bloc and WestEuropean bloc. This division of Europe was as ~narkedin economy as in politics. In the previous section you learnt something about the different ecoliomic trajectories being

followed in the eastern and the western blocs. Tliis sectio~~ will inform yo11about tlie different political trajectories followed in the two blocs. by a plurality of polities, ranging In the political sphere, western Europe was disti~iguisl~ed from electoral democracies to dictatorships. Tlie eastern bloc was Inore uniform and regimented. with common ideological orientations and control by fraternally associated co~nmunistparties; but they also exhibited some variations in practice and witnessed occasional "deviations" and frequent dissent.

32.4.1

The Capitalist Europe

In west European cou~ltries wbich adopted the "social democratic" consensus, the ~iominal distinction between parties of tlie left, centre, and right were retained: but tlie distinction in substai~ceand progralnme was narrowed to tlie point where tlieir ideological differences indicated pre-war predilections or sig~~ified differences of emphases. As early as 1953. even as Winston Cliurchill was co~i~pelled to accept, so stilunch an esponent of conservatis~l~ followi~ig tlie Conservative Party's acceptance of tlie inised economy, that "party differences are now in practice niiai~ilythose of e~llphasis." The idea of the "social democrdtic consensus" itself is valid only in post-war terms. It was and pragmatic dilution of the pre-war programme of social democracy based on a substa~ltial to accomniodate fundamental tenets of conservatism (the sanctity of private property) and of liberalism (the limited state). Social Democracy thus conceded tlie possibility of the gradualist refornl of capitalism. The conservative acceptalice of this reconstructed social democratic agenda was an equally pragmatic recognition of prevailing social and international circumstances: the first available opportunity was tlierefore seized to dismantle the edifice based upon it. Tliis consensus allowed stable coalitions of rightcentre and leficentre groupings: occasionally, in the immediate atlennatli of bitter electoral conflict. even "grand coalitions" of tlie left and the right were possible. Except for Britain in West Europe. the predoniinant tendency was towards tlie formation of coalition governments even where the electoral system was not based on proporlional representation. Such govcrnnlelit formation was often preceded by comples post-electoral bargaining on policies and priorities and on the suitable distribution of office. Scandinavian coalition governments were stable because the social denlocratic parties were firnlly entrenclied within ~ l a t i o ~ ~ politics. al However. tlie exact content of of coalitional politics did not consensus did vary. In Britain. where the liniiting circun~stances rule from 1959 to I964 saw tlie beginnings of the attack on operate, Tory or Co~~servative universal welfare in favour of a niore discri~ninatorywelfare. Similarly. while continental social democracy had worked out a fairly stable relationship with labour, in Britain the Labour Party's relationship had an unstable element, beginning as early as 1951 wit11 the rise of the-Bevanite opposition within the party. . Among the electoral denlocmcies, tlie Italian polity was exceptional for its extreme instability of government and a very strong co~il~nunist presence. In this respect it was like the Fourth French Republic which was dissolved in 1958 with de Gaulle's establishment of the Fifth French Republic. Govern~nentin Italy was do~ili~lated by the Christian Democratic Party. itself a broad spectrunl entity that acco~n~nodated a range of tendencies, from clerico-fascism on tlie far right to Catholic c o ~ n m u ~ ~on is~ the n left, but whose centre of gravity was its moderate conservative fi~ction.But it was helped by the division of tlie left bemeen the communists and the socialists. Of tlie major Europeal~countries outside the Soviet bloc, Spain. Portugal, and Greece witnessed prolo~~ged dictatorships: it was not until the 1970s that electoral democracy was restored. In Grecce. after tlie American-aided defeat of tlie communists, a succession of unstable coalitions assumed ofice u ~ ~ t 1967. il Tlie militaly then seized power: but mass unrest a ~ the ~ dtlircat of civil war finally forced it to rcstorc civilian rule. On the Iberian peninsuli~. botli Spiiin and Portugal. Inore or lcss unaffccled by the war. continued witli tlieir pre-war dictatorsliips and pursued relatively autarchic and isolationist policies. Thc long dictalorsliip of Fra~lcisco Fr~nco in Spain ended with his death In 1975 and tlle restoration 1 1 Portugal. the interve~itionof a radicalized section of the of tlic constitutional mooarchy. 1

army led to a series of revolutionary events before an elected civilian government headed by the Socialist Party was installed. In former imperial countries. decolonization engendered political crlses. eitlier directly or indirectly. In France, the Indo-Chin;) and Algerian wars provoked so severe a crisis that the volatile Fourth RepubIic. in wl~osetwelve years of existelice no less than twenty-three governments were formed, was dissolved in 1958 and the new. the Fifth Republic. fashioned largely by the executive. was instituted. Belgium was already troubled by the north-south Flemish-Walloon divide and the conflict over the future of :l~e~nonarch,Leopold: but the independence of the Congo induced austerity measures whicll contributed to strike waves in 1960-196 I. In Portugal, the independence wars of Guinea-Bissau, Angola. and Moza~nbique furnished tlie context for tlie nlilitary coup against the "New Slate" dictatorship, continuously in power from the 1930s. Even Britain. which had relinquished its colonial territories rather more tamely, witnessed the resignation of prime minister Anthony Eden, following the adventurist protection of residual interests in the Suez Canal in 1956.

Glhnpse uf the post-war

World

32.4.2 The Socialist Europe

By contrast with the West, colnlnunlst parties generallv ~nonopoli~cd power in the eastern were contained. within permissible limits, within the bloc. Hence differences of opi~lio~l party: and intense power stn~ggles were conducted tl~erein. 'I'hc degree of autononly from the USSR however depended on a host of factors. including the exqent of popular mobilization that could be achieved. In Poland. t l ~ c initial phase of co~n~iiunist rule was marked by the assertion of national independence under Wladyslaw Gomulka to tlie estent of his espulsio~~ froin the party. In 1950. llic ;inti-Soviet riots in Poznan enabled the purge of Soviet synipi~thizers,tlie return of Gomulka. and solile relasalion fro111rigid controls. Bv the 1960s. these relatively liberal trends had bee11 reversed. 'The Polish rcgi~ile wnis frequently troubled by dissent in various forms. Tlicsc includcd workcrs' riots over working conditions illid Illass demonstratio~ls against the rise in food prices when subsidies were reduced in order to finance further industrialin~tion.All these led to the replacement of Go~llulkaby Edward Giereck. The 1980s saw further strikes against rising food prices. A new factor in Polis11 politics now emerged. the independent trade union called Solidarity, after government conceded to striking workers the right to unionise independently I-f party controls. T11e mo~nentum of opposiliol~ Illat Solidarity could sustain conlributcd eventually to the demise of the co~ii~iiunist party regime. In East Germany. Czechoslovakia. and Hungary. early attempts at relasing social controls and establishing some autonolny fro111 tlie Soviet Union were curbed through repression. AiitiSoviet riots in East Germany were qi~elledby Soviet forces in 1953. Hungary carried out sweeping economic and political reforms after 1953. They first provoked the reinoval of tlle premier, Inlre Nagv in 1955: then an ar~lied revolt that brought him back at tlie head of a new revolutionary government in 1956; and eventually intervention by Soviet troops to install Jimos Kadar in power. T l ~ e Czccl~oslow~ok attenlpt to introduce similar refonn under Alesander Dubcek, who replaced Antonin Novotny. led to a similar i ~ i v a s i o by ~~ Warsaw Pact troops in 1968. Romania and Bulgaria were relatively more autonomous. despite the latter's dependence on tlie Soviet Union for investment and basic raw materials. By tlie 1960s. Bulgaria had introduced some degree of local and private initiatjve in the ecoeonly: but, after the Czec1~oslovakinvasion. these refornls were withdrawn. By the 1970s. Bulgaria bad established trade relations with the West. and in 1980, opened the ecollolliy to foreign investment. Romania adhered to tlle basic Soviet niodel of course; but. from as carly as ll~eI96Os, began to pursue a foreign policy that was re~ilarkablyindependent of tlie Soviet Union. It not only expressed disapproval of the invasion of Czec1ioslow~iikia.but also establislied coiiin~ercial relations with west European countries, from who~il capital and oil were procured. In 19621963. both Bulgaria and Romania opposed a Soviet proposal to set up a sup&-national authority in COMECON to cnsure the co~npulsoryspecialisation of its ~llcnlbcrstates in scctors in whicli they possessed the greatest potential. Albania and Yugoslavia. iiltliougl~part of the European coinniunist world. nrcre iis different from it as Ihey were from each otlier. Albania. initially part of tlic Soviet sphere. began gradually to drift out by 1958: by 1968 it had been espelled fro~il both tlic COMECON and the Warsaw Pact. It withdrew inlo complete iso1;ltion and autarchy. hostile to both the cast of and west blocs until the 1990s. By 1948 Yugoslavia liad offended Moscow lo tlic cstc~it

bcirig expelled by Stalin fro111 the "fatnily of fraternal Conlmunist Parties". After 1953 and econo~ilicties were renewed. As a result of its political indepenhowever. d~plo~liatic dence, Yugoslav~a'spolitical and econonlic systelil was the most decentralised in all of the east bloc: and intenlationally. it enjoyed tlie freedom to pursue non-alignment as its foreign policy. Bv tlie close of the 1980s. domestic crisis had reached the point that the traditional instru~lle~lts of repression werc no longer effective. In part, the reforms within the Soviet Union contributed to the amplification of dissent in the rest of the unreconstructed Communist bloc. besides also depriving them of ar~nedassistance. should this have become necessary. Beginni~~g wit11 Romani;~in 1990. tlie existing political edifice in the east bloc coll;ipsed. to be rcplaced by new systelns based on multi-pafly elections. National boundaries were extensi\dv redrii\\n as ~nulti-ethnic co~~ntries disintegrated under the pressure of separatist assertions: aind. ill tllc otlicr end of tlie spectrunl, the Geniian Denlocratic Republic was absorbed into the Federal Republic of Ger~nany.
Chcck Your Progrcss 3 Note :

i)

Write your answer in tlie space given bclow. L'hcck your answer with the answers given at the end of this Unit.

ii)

I)

Write five lines on tlic nature of politics as it evolved in the Western European countries.

2)

In \vliat IViiys was the politics in eastern bloc diRerent from West'? Write in five lines.

32.5

LET US SLIM UP

E~lropcin the 20th cenluv had bee11divided anlong three major forces (liberal democracy, fascisol. socialism) Illat were bolh different and distant from one another. The final phase of the n.;lr witnessed a grand alliance between two (liberal democracy and socialism) against the lliird ( ~ ~ I s c ~ Once s I I ~ )the . third force was eliminated in the war, the alliance between liberal dc~iiocracy and socialistn brokc down and was replaced by fierce rivalry and competition for a greater share in the new world. This rivalry has generally been referred to as the 'Cold War'. T l ~ -'Cold e War' period wit~~essed the consolidation of different kinds of economic and political forn~alion in eastern and western Europe. In the econoinic sphere the eastern European countries (socialist bloc) conce~~lrated on building hcajy industries under state co~itrol and collectivisi~tion of agriculture. wit11 minor variation fro111one country to another. Tlic cconornic develop~ne~lt of lhe Western European countries (capitalist bloc) on the other hand. \\.as fi~la~lced and ~llonitoredby tlie USA. Their cconotnies. afier a pliasc of recovery lio~n the war. witnessed an unprecedented boom which brought about general prosperity to llicse countries. In tlie polilical doolilin. Tlic jI1esteni countries reprcsented' a plurality of politics. ranging fro111electoral de~iiocracicsto dictatorships. The eastern countries, on the other Iii~nd.were rnore uniforni and rcginiented wit11 varying degrees of control eserciscd by USSR. tlicir leader. Tllcy i ~ l ~ i t r i i followed ~ b l ~ a single party system ;IS against a multi-party conipro~nise Illat cxisted in western Europe.

It was thus t11i)t the 'triple ~deologicaldi\.isionl of Europe during tlle pre-war period WilS rcplaced by ;I phase of 'Cold War' in \~hich tl~e two forces con~peted wit11 each othcr without resorting to an actual war. Tlle two 'systenls' conlpeted with c;lcl~ other for economic political i~nd military superiority for al~llostfifiy yeilrs. Around the end of the 1980s the Cold War had a sudden end after tile socialist bloc failed to successfully conlpele with the capitalist world and collapsed.

t : i i w i ~ s r 1 4 tisr Pd~si -\V;nr,

!\'t*r!d

32.6' ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR EXERCISES Check.Your Progress 1

I) See Sub-sec. 32.2.5 2) See Sub-sec. 32.2.1

PROGRESS

Check Your Progress 2

I) In your answer you should enlphasize the role played by the USA. dehtionary policies adopted initially leading to ecollonlic boon1 and finally the elnergence of an econonlic consensus in lhe capitalist Europe. See Sub-se. 32.3.1.

2) In your answer you should elnpllasize the following points : a) b) c) different role played by the USA ilnd USSR in the two bloc respectively: atte~npts at a collectivisation of agriculture in the socialist blocs: and advances madc by the socialist ecoilo~niesin heavy industry and military invest-, inent. See Sub-sec. 32.3.2

Check Your Progress 3

1) Scc Sub-sec. 32.4.1

2) See Sub-sec. '32.4

SOME USEFUL BOOKS FOR THIS BLOCK

A.J.P. Taylor. The Struggle for Mastery
in Europe.

A.J.P. Taylor, The Origit7.v c!f. (hc Second I-Vorld War. David Thomson, Europe since A'npolcow.
E.J. Hobsbarn. The Age o j ' E i ~ ~ p t r e 187.5-1914. , E.J. Hobsbarn, The ; I T of Ex(rert,es. ;

Stephen J. Lee. .l:;)ect.v of E ~ ~ r o p e nHistoty, n 1789- 1980.

APPENDIX MAJOR EVENTS IN EUROPEAN HISTORY

Seven Years' War Tlle War of American Independence Industrial Revolution in England Thc French Revolution Rule of Napoleon Bonaparte The Congress of Vienna Thc Concert of Europe ., The July Revolution Tllc February Revolutioa Metternich's Era The Cr~~ilean War Napoleon 111 and the Second French Republic Thc Paris Commune Tlie Third Republic Tlic Unification of Italy Tlie Unification of Gernlany Ncw Germany Rule of Bis~narck Rule of Kaiser William Gcrman Republic Russia Czar Alexander I Nickolas I Alesander I1 Alesander 111 Nicliolas I1 Balkans Wars First World War Peace of Paris Trcatv of ~ersailles Tlie Bolshe\lik Revolution in Russia Thc Lcabwe of Nations : Locarilo Pact, 1922, Geneva Protocol- 1924, Kellong-Briand Pact1928, Disarnlament. 1932. Rule of Mt~ssoliili Rulc of Lenin The Econon~ic Depression in Europe Hitlcr and N a z ~ Gernlany Stal~n and Russia Ronle-Berlln-Tokyo- Axis The Munich Pact . The Tlrird Reicll Kanlal Pasha (Turkey) Second World War Bcg11111i1lg of Cold War Trullran Doctrine