On
12th March, 1947,
Harry S. Truman
, announced
details to Congress of what eventually became known as the
Truman
Doctrine
. In his speech he pledged American support for "free
peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities
or by outside pressures". This speech also included a request
that Congress agree to give military and economic aid to Greece in
its fight against communism.
Three months later
George C. Marshall
,
Truman's Secretary of State, announced details of what became known
as the
Marshall
Plan or the European Recovery Program (ERP). Marshall offered American
financial aid for a programme of European economic recovery.
Ernest
Bevin
, the British foreign secretary, made it clear he fully supported
the scheme but the idea was rejected by the Soviet Union. A conference
was held in Paris in September and sixteen nations in Western Europe
agreed on a four year recovery plan.
On 3rd April, 1948,
Harry S. Truman
signed
the first appropriation bill authorizing $5,300,000,000 for the first
year of the ERP. Paul G. Hoffman was appointed as head of the Organization
for Economic Cooperation (OEEC) administration and by 1951 was able
to report that industrial production in Western Europe had grown 30
per cent since the beginning of the
Second World
War
.
The European Recovery Program came to an end on 31st December, 1951.
It its three year existence, the ERP spent almost $12,500,000,000.
It was succeeded by the Mutual Security Administration.
(1)
President Truman
, speech to Congress (12th
March, 1947)
The seeds of totalitarian
regimes are nurtured by misery and want. They spread and grow in the
evil soil of poverty and strife. They reach their full potential when
the hope of a people for a better life has died. We must keep that
hope alive. If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace
of the world - and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own
nation.
At the present moment in world history nearly every nation must choose
between alternative ways of life. The choice is often not a free one.
One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished
by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees
of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom
from political oppression.
The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly
imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a
controlled press and radio, fixed elections, and the suppression of
personal freedom. I believe that it must be the policy of the United
States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation
by armed minorities or by outside pressures.
(2)
George
Marshall
, Secretary of State, speech at Harvard University (5th
June, 1947)
It is logical that the United
States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return
of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be
no political stability and no assured peace. Our policy is directed
not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation,
and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy
in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social
conditions in which free institutions can exist.
(3)
Andrei
Vyshinsky
, Soviet Un
ion
spokesman at the
United Nations
, speech (18th
September, 1947)
The
so-called Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan are particularly glaring
examples of the manner in which the principles of the United Nations
are violated, of the way in which the organization is ignored. This
is clearly proved by the measures taken by the United States Government
with regard to Greece and Turkey which ignore and bypass the United
States as well as the measures proposed under the so-called Marshall
Plan in Europe.
This policy conflicts sharply with the principles expressed by the
General Assembly in its resolution of 11th December, 1946, which declares
that relief supplies to other countries "should at no time be
used as a political weapon". It is becoming more and more evident
to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan will mean
placing European countries under the economic and political control
of the United States.
The so-called
Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan are particularly
glaring
examples of the way in which the principles of the United Nations
are violated, of the way in which the Organisation is ignored. As
is now clear, the Marshall Plan constitutes in essence merely a variant
of the Truman Doctrine adapted to the conditions of postwar Europe.
In bringing forward this plan, the United States Government apparently
counted on the cooperation of the Governments of the United Kingdom
and France to confront the European countries in need of relief with
the necessity of renouncing their inalienable right to dispose of
their economic resources and to plan their national economy in their
own way. The United States also counted on making all these countries
directly dependent on the interests of American monopolies, which
are striving to avert the approaching depression by an accelerated
export of commodities and capital to Europe.
It is becoming more and
more evident to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan
will mean placing European countries under the economic and political
control of the United States and direct interference by the latter
in the internal affairs of those countries. Moreover, this plan is
an attempt to split Europe into two camps and, with the help of the
United Kingdom and France, to complete the formation of a bloc of
several European countries hostile to the interests of the democratic
countries of Eastern Europe and most particularly to the interests
of the Soviet Union. An important feature of this Plan is the attempt
to confront the - countries of Eastern Europe with a bloc of Western
European States including Western Germany. The intention is to make
use of Western Germany and German heavy industry (the Ruhr) as one
of the most important economic bases for American expansion in Europe,
in disregard of the national interests of the countries which suffered
from German aggression.
(4)
Konrad Adenauer
,
speech in Berne (23rd March, 1949)
It is impossible to understand
the present condition of Germany without a brief survey of what happened
after 1945. The unconditional surrender of the German armed forces
in May 1945 was interpreted by the Allies to mean a complete transfer
of governmental authority into their hands. This interpretation was
wrong from the point of view of international law. By it the Allies
in practice assumed a task which it was impossible for them to fulfil.
I consider it to have been a grave mistake. They would have been unable
to solve this task with the best will in the world. There was bound
to be failure and this failure badly affected the prestige of the
Allies in Germany. It would have been wiser if the Allies had, after
a short intermediate state due to the confusion left by the war, let
the Germans order their affairs and had confined themselves to supervision.
Their attempt to govern this large disorganized country from outside,
often guided by extraneous political and economic criteria of their
own, was bound to fail. It brought about a rapid economic, physical,
and psychological disintegration of the Germans which might have been
avoided. It also seems that intentions such as had once been manifested
in the Morgenthau Plan played their part. This continued until the
Marshall Plan brought the turning point. The Marshall Plan will remain
for all time a glorious page in the history of the United States of
America. But the change was very slow and the economic, physical,
moral, and political decline of Germany which had begun with the unconditional
surrender took great efforts to reverse.
(5)
George Kennan
,
Foreign Affairs Journal
(July, 1957)
It is clear that the main element of any United States policy towards
the Soviet Union must be that of a long-term, patient but firm and
vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies. It is clear
that the United states cannot expect in the foreseeable future to
enjoy political intimacy with the Soviet regime. It must continue
to regard the Soviet Union as a rival, not a partner, in the political
arena.
(6) Felix Greene,
The Enemy
(1965)
Marshall Plan aid, essentially intended to keep the post-war economies
of the West Europe countries within the capitalist world, was also
intended to dominate their economy. Every transaction was arranged
to provide not only immediate profits for specific US banks, finance
corporations, investment trusts and industries, but to make the European
nations dependent on the United States.
Available from Amazon Books
(order below)