What Are We Learning Today?

2.4 Explore the relationship between nationalism and the pursuit of national interest.

How are Nationalism and National Interest Related?

Pg. 116

Aspects of National Interest

• Like individuals, ppl who govern democratic communities and nations make decisions based on what is in the community’s or nation’s interests. These benefits are their national interest .

• They may focus on 1 or more of the following:

Economic Prosperity

• This includes stable employment and a decent standard of living.

• Gov’ts acting in the national interest try to provide these economic benefits in various ways. They may, for example, pass laws ensuring that citizens are not exploited in the workplace. They may also enter into trade treaties with other nations.

Security & Safety

• Measures to maintain national security and physical protection include laws that protect citizens within the country, as well as secure borders that can be defended against intruders.

• Gov’ts acting in the national interest try to ensure the personal safety of citizens, peacefully resolve differences with other countries, and control who enters the country.

Beliefs & Values

• These include affirming and promoting citizens’ values, beliefs, and culture.

• Gov’ts acting in the national interest try, for example, to safeguard and respect the shared worldviews, ways of life, traditions, and languages of their citizens.

Changing Views of National Interest

• Just as ppl’s understandings of nationalism may differ, their opinions on what is in the national interest may differ.

• National interest is not static and unchanging. Events inside and outside a country can change ppl’s opinion about what is in the national interest.

• What are some examples?

What Are We Learning Today?

2.5 Analyze how the pursuit of national interest shapes foreign

policy.

How Has National Interest Shaped Foreign Policy?

• A policy is a plan of action that has been deliberately chosen to guide or influence future decisions.

• Our school, for example, has policies to guide decisions about what is in the individual or collective interests of the students and staff. (Dress code policy, attendance policy).

Domestic & Foreign Policy• A country’s policy is responsible for developing

both domestic policy and foreign policy.• Domestic Policy – guides decisions about what

to do within the country. In Canada, domestic policy may guide decisions about changing federal laws, settling Aboriginal land claims, etc.

• Foreign Policy – guides decisions about official relations with other countries. Foreign policy, which is often called external relation or foreign affairs, may involve signing treaties, establishing trade relations with foreign states, or taking action on human rights & world health.

Foreign Policy Impacts• Foreign policy decisions may have relatively

short-term effects on a limited # of ppl or long-term effects on millions of ppl.

• Some foreign policy decisions made at the end of WW I, for example, are still affecting the world today. Many ppl believe that the turmoil in the Middle Eastern countries relates directly to the foreign policy decisions of the US and European countries as they pursued their national interests at the end of WW I.

WW I• WW I was fought in Europe, the Middle East,

Asia, and Africa. On 1 side was the Central Powers, led by Germany; on the other side were the Allies, led by Britain. The world had never experienced such a wide-ranging and deadly war. Millions of ppl died, and the financial cost was enormous.

• Before WW I, nationalism had flourished in Europe. Many historians believe that nationalism and ppl’s beliefs about their national interest were important causes of this war.

How Did WW I Start?

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hE8552joxfE&feature=related

Pursuing National Interest• European gov’ts, for example, believed that

expanding their territory in Europe, as well as their colonial possessions, was in their national interests. This belief was a foundation of their foreign policy, which led them to form alliances with other European countries.

• Allied members agreed to help one another when one country was threatened. This system of alliances was one factor that brought so many countries into the war so quickly.

The Ignoring of National Interests

• Most ppl affected by WW I had had no say in the decision to go to war. If you lived in the Ottoman, Russian, or Austro-Hungarian empires, for example, you were at war when your rulers declared war.

• Even if you lived in Canada, you were included in Britain’s declaration of war. Your national interests were not considered. (FYI pg. 123)

• After more than 4 years of brutal fighting, an armistice (truce), was declared at 11am on November 11, 1918, and the war ended.

Treaty Negotiations in France• WW I was fought over sovereignty and territory,

economic interests and security, and nationalism and national identity. These issues also dominated the discussions at the peace talks that took place in Paris, France, from 1919 to 1920.

• The victorious Allies, especially France and Britain, wanted to punish Germany by imposing harsh conditions. As a result, leaders of the Allied countries made many treaty decisions that had far-reaching effects on million of ppl.

Treaty of Versailles

• The financial, military, and territorial penalties imposed on Germany and the Central Powers were severe.

• The Treaty of Versailles required Germany to reduce its military strength, pay war repartitions (compensation) of $30 billion, give up territory in Europe as well as its colonies, and accept responsibility “for causing all the loss and damage” that had affected the Allies.

National Interests after WW I in Canada

• Once WW I ended, many Canadians returned their attention to domestic concerns. The war had created an industrial boom, but this died out, and many returning Canadian veterans has trouble finding work.

• This created unrest, and ppl’s personal, collective, and national interests began to focus more on what was happening at home and less on events in other countries. Domestic issues became more important than foreign policy concerns.

National Interests after WW I in Europe

• A similar shift in priorities took place in many other countries that had been involved in the war. Belgium and France, deeply in debt, focused on rebuilding cities, towns, and farms. Britain had serious problems in its empire, especially in India. There, Mohandas Gandhi was leading a nationalist program of peaceful civil disobedience that was hurting an already battered British economy.

• Unity among the Allies, who had created the Treaty of Versailles, soon disappeared.

How Has Foreign Policy Shaped National Interest?

• Nationalism, foreign policy, and national interest can be understood as a complex and constantly changing web. Though the pursuit of national interest often shapes foreign policy, foreign policy can also shape national interest. A gov’ts policies can affect its citizens’ safety and security, their economic future, and even their culture.

• When Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, for example, that single foreign policy decision affected the Austro-Hungarian ppl’s security, their prosperity, and their culture for decades.

Homework

• Read pg. 128 & 129 and answer questions 1-3 on pg. 129 as well as the questions related to Figure 5-16. (2/3 page total)

• Due tomorrow.

Foreign Policy & Contending National Interests in Peru

• A country’s foreign policy may benefit some communities but have negative effects on others. This is what is happening in Peru.

• In 2007, the Peruvian gov’t decided that it would be in their national interest to auction land in the Amazon rainforest to foreign-owned oil companies for development. The wealth generated by oil exploration and extraction could help Peruvians, whose GDP in 2006 was $6600 a person.

Foreign Policy & Contending National Interests in Peru

• But the land in question forms part of the traditional territory of the Mashco Piro, an Indigenous ppl who shun contact with outsiders. The Mashco Piro do not want to move to another part of the forest or become part of the outside world.

• Peruvian law says that if Indigenous ppl live in a region, the land must be kept for their use. But this law can be set aside if the land is used in a way that contributes to the country’s national interest.

Foreign Policy & Contending National Interests in Peru

• Perupetro, Peru’s gov’t-owned oil company, has since auctioned off some of the land to Spanish and American oil companies.

• In September 2007, the Peruvian gov’t signed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as part of its foreign policy. It says that Indigenous peoples have the right to territories and resources they have traditionally owned, occupied and used.

9/11 and Canada in Afghanistan• The 9/11 attacks on the

US killed 2,982 ppl, including 24 Canadians. It was generally believed that the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan were hiding and protecting Osama bin Laden and other members of al-Qaeda, which had claimed responsibility for the attacks.

The United Nations & 9/11

• As a result, the United Nations agreed that the US and it allies were entitled to invade Afghanistan to destroy the Taliban and track down bin Laden.

• The UN authorized the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), to organize this mission, which started in 2001.

NATO

• As part of its foreign policy after WW II, Canada had helped found NATO. The treaty that created NATO in 1949 said that an attack on 1 member would be considered an attack on all.

• As a result, forces from Canada and other countries, including the US and Britain, went to Afghanistan under the NATO banner.

The Switch to Active Combat• The Taliban gov’t fell, and Canadian forces

helped keep peace while a new gov’t was organized. But when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, many of the American troops in Afghanistan were reassigned to Iraq.

• This reduced the size of the NATO force in Afghanistan. To make up this shortfall, other countries, such as Canada, increased the size of their force and expanded their role to include active combat.

Shift in Foreign Policy• This foreign policy shift was controversial. Most

Canadians had opposed the Iraq invasion, and some now charged that the decision to increase the # of Canadian troops in Afghanistan was a way of helping the gov’t solve a difficult problem: how to appear to support its American ally’s war on terror while responding to public opinion by staying out of the war with Iraq.

Debate over Afghanistan• Voices pg. 131.

• Debate over Afghanistan pg. 132.

• Canadian politicians disagreed over how to resolve these issues. NDP leader Jack Layton believed that a military role was “not the right mission for Canada.” He said, “Canadians want a foreign policy rooted in fact, not fear, one that is uniquely independent, not ideologically imported. And one that leads the world into peace, not (one that) follows the US into wars.”

• What do you think Layton meant by this?

• Stephen Harper: “Canada went into Afghanistan for very real reasons of national security and int’l security. Because as 9/11 showed, if we abandon our fellow human beings to lives of poverty, brutality and ignorance, in today’s global village, their misery will eventually and inevitable become our own.”

Interests & Rights for Women• When the Taliban controlled

Afghanistan, girls were not allowed to go to school and women were not allowed to have careers. Although the new NATO-backed gov’t created a ministry of women’s affairs to change this situation, Taliban resistance was causing concern. In September 2006, the Taliban took credit for assassinating Safia Ama Jan, an official with the women’s ministry.

A Slow Progression• Sima Samar was Afghanistan’s 1st minister of

women’s affairs. In 2007, she headed the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, which monitors the progress of gov’t agencies and other institutions toward implementing human rights laws and policies.

• Samar has said that changing Afghanistan will take time. “We started in 2001 with no systems at all,” she said. “We have accomplished a lot… Democracy is a process – it doesn’t come because you shout at it. You have to deal with the weak points and you can’t have it without the participation of half the population.”

What Are We Learning Today?

2.6 Analyze the relationship between nationalism and

ultranationalism.

What is Ultranationalism?• Ultranationalism is an extreme form of

nationalism. • Ppl disagree on when nationalism becomes

ultranationalism but at some point, ultranationalists move from valuing their own nation and its interests, to hostility toward ppl of other nations. This hostility can endanger int’l peace.

• Ultranationalism may be associated with a fanatical belief in the rights of your own group and a fear and loathing of anyone who challenges those beliefs.

Varying Opinions of Ultranationalism

• Whether ppl label a belief or policy nationalistic or ultranationalistic sometimes depends on the nation they belong to.

• Some might view the actions of ppl in their own group as patriotic, while claiming that similar actions by other ppls are ultranationalistic. For example, building a strong military may be viewed as nationalistic in one country – but ultranationalistic in another.

Propaganda & Ultranationalism• Propaganda refers to info. and ideas that are

spread to achieve a specific goal. The info. and ideas are often misleading and dishonest. Extreme nationalists use propaganda to manipulate strong human emotions – especially fear and insecurity – and persuade ppl to behave in certain ways. Propagandists often

– Call their opponents names (e.g., “terrorists,” “fanatics”) designed to arouse ppl’s anger and fears

Examples of Propaganda– Play down their own failures and defeats or

use words that hide the true meaning of their actions (calling their own wars “holy” or “just,” or referring to death camps as “concentration camps”)

– Use respected symbols to appeal to ppl’s values and beliefs (religious symbols, family images, or a national flag)

– Appeal to ppl’s fears when trying to persuade them to support particular actions (claiming that strict law and order is the only way to ensure peace and save a nation)

Soviet Propaganda• As millions of ppl were being sent to forced-

labour camps (gulags), Stalin’s propagandists were creating posters, slogans, songs, speeches, newspaper articles, and banners glorifying extreme nationalism and presenting Stalin as a caring father of the Soviet ppl.

Nazi Germany• In Germany, the Nazis

used newspapers, radio, and film to promote extreme nationalism. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s minister for public enlightenment and propaganda, established a huge propaganda organization that controlled all forms of the media.

Nazis and Anti-Semitism• Goebbels was

a gifted speaker who consistently preached the supremacy of the German ppl and hatred for Jews, whom he called the incarnation of evil.

Why did the Nazis hate the Jews?

What Are We Learning Today?

2.7 Analyze nationalism and ultranationalism during times of

conflict.

Who was Charlie Chaplin?

Allied Portrayal of Hitler: Charlie Chaplin

• Chaplin was a great actor to play Hitler. Above all, they shared the same moustache.

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuqJGajVJC8&feature=related

The Great Dictator (1940)• The Great Dictator is a

comedy film written, directed, produced by, and starring Charlie Chaplin. First released in October 1940, it was Chaplin's first true talking picture as well as his most commercially successful film, and more importantly, was the only major film of its period to bitterly satirize Nazism and Adolf Hitler.

The Film’s Plot• The film begins during a battle of WW I. The

protagonist is an unnamed Jewish private (Charlie Chaplin), who is a barber by profession and is fighting for the Central Powers in the army of the fictional nation of Tomainia.

• The scene cuts to victory celebrations, newspaper headlines, the evacuation and hospitalization of the private, and to a speech given 20 years later by Adenoid Hynkel (Adolf Hitler, also played by Chaplin in a double role), now the ruthless dictator of Tomainia, who has undertaken an endeavor to persecute Jews throughout the land.

Butchering the German Language• The symbol of Hynkel's fascist regime is the

"double cross" (compare the Nazi swastika) and Hynkel himself speaks a dramatic, macaronic parody of the German language (reminiscent of Hitler's own fiery speeches), "translated" at humorously obvious parts in the speech by a concise English-speaking news voice-over.

• The film is unusual for its period, as the United States was still formally at peace with Nazi Germany. Chaplin's film advanced a stirring, controversial condemnation of Hitler, fascism, anti-Semitism, and the Nazis.

Reception of the Film• The film was well received at the time of its

release, and was popular with the American public. Jewish audiences were deeply moved by the portrayal of Jewish characters and their plight, which was still a taboo subject in Hollywood films of the time.

• When the film was in production, the British government announced that it would prohibit its exhibition in the United Kingdom in keeping with its appeasement policy concerning Nazi Germany. However, by the time the film was released, the UK was at war with Germany and the film was now welcomed in part for its obvious propaganda value.

Nazi Horrors Not Really Known• In his 1964 autobiography, Chaplin stated that

he would not have been able to make such jokes about the Nazi regime had the extent of the Nazi horrors been known, particularly the death camps and the Holocaust.

• According to sources, the film was not only sent to Hitler, but an eyewitness confirmed he saw it. According to the Internet Movie Database, Chaplin, after being told Hitler saw the movie, replied: "I'd give anything to know what he thought of it." Hitler's response is not recorded but he is said to have viewed the film twice.

American Propaganda

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-PZVrWvJM0&feature=related

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQqCeEG5hs0&feature=related

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEcJF0EVT54&feature=related

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEiU6GpvJf0

Aktion T4• “Aktion T4” was the code given to the Nazi

program to eliminate “life unworthy of life.”

• It began on Hitler's order in October of 1939. The program at first focused on newborns and very young children. Midwives and doctors were required to register children up to age three that showed symptoms of mental retardation, physical deformity, or other symptoms included on a questionnaire from the Reich Health Ministry.

A Unanimous Decision Needed• A decision on whether to allow the child to live

was then made by three medical experts solely on the basis of the questionnaire, without any examination and without reading any medical records.

• The decision had to be unanimous. In cases where the decision was not unanimous the child was kept under observation and another attempt would be made to get a unanimous decision.

Aktion T4 Propaganda

• This poster reads: “60,000 Reichsmarks is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the People's community during his lifetime. Comrade, that is your money too.”

Brandenburg• At Brandenburg, a

former prison was converted into a killing center where the first experimental gassings took place. The gas chambers were disguised as shower rooms, but were actually sealed chambers connected by pipes to cylinders of carbon monoxide.

Cardinal Clemens von Galen• An outspoken critic of

the Nazi regime, he issued forceful, public denunciations of the Third Reich's euthanasia programs and persecution of the Catholic Church, making him one of the most visible and unrelenting internal voices of dissent against the Nazis.

von Galen’s Attack of the Gestapo• In 1941 von Galen gave a string of sermons

protesting Nazi policies on euthanasia, Gestapo terror, forced sterilizations and concentration camps. His attacks on the Nazi's were so severe that senior Nazi officials wanted the Bishop executed.

• On July 13, 1941, von Galen publicly attacked the regime for its Gestapo's tactics, including disappearances without trials, the closing of Catholic institutions without any stated justifications, and the resultant fear imposed on all Germans throughout the nation.

Goebbels’ Response• von Galen’s sermons were reproduced and

sent all over Germany to families, and to German soldiers on the Western and Eastern Fronts.

• The resulting local protests in Germany led to an immediate end of the euthanasia program Aktion T4. The local Nazis were furious and asked for the immediate arrest of von Galen. However, Joseph Goebbels and others preferred to wait until the end of World War II, as not to undermine in the heavily Catholic area the German morale during the ongoing war.

The Limits of Propaganda• “The broad masses of a population are more

amenable (willing to listen) to the appeal of rhetoric (effective use of language) than to any other force.”

– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

• “What they were coming up against was a pre-existing belief system. The Nazi’s could not come in and challenge those belief systems and overturn them completely within such a short period of time. So in that sense, propaganda had it’s limitations.

– Jo Fox, Durham University

Appeasement

• In the years before WW II, many ppl in countries that had experienced the terrible costs of WW I and the Great Depression believed that avoiding another war was 1 of their most important national interests.

• As a result, they hoped that appeasement (giving in to demands) was the best policy when Hitler and the Nazis began to expand Germany’s territory in Europe.

The Sudetenland• Germany had been expanding its European

territory since 1935. Finally, in 1938, Britain, France, and Italy met Hitler to discuss Germany’s recent takeover of the Sudetenland.

• Before WW I, Germany had controlled this region, but the Treaty of Versailles had awarded it to Czechoslovakia. In return for Hitler’s promise not to expand further, the European leaders agreed to allow the takeover to go unchallenged. In Britain, British prime minister Neville Chamberlain explained that “the peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France, and of Italy” in “their anxiety, their intense desire for peace.”

Munich Agreement

• Map pg. 149.

Winston Churchill’s Opposition• Not everyone agreed that appeasement would

work. Winston Churchill, who was at the time a member of Parliament in Chamberlain’s Conservative Party, condemned the agreement, saying, “An appeaser is someone who feeds a crocodile – hoping it will eat him last.” He also said that the European leaders “had to choose between war and dishonour. They chose dishonour; they will have war.”

• Early in 1939, Hitler took over the rest of Czechoslovakia. Churchill has been proven right. Appeasement had failed.

Appeasement ‘Robot Chicken’ Style

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awfYXR0Sh4Q

The League of Nations• By 1934, 58 countries, including Canada, Britain,

and France, were members of the League of Nations, which had been created after WW I. League members agreed to help one another and to take action to maintain peace.

• If 1 country invaded another, League members could– Order the aggressor to leave the other country’s

territory– Impose trade sanctions (penalties) on the

aggressor– Use military force against the aggressor

The League’s Failure• But members countries of the League were not

required to provide troops to stop aggression – and the idea of joint military action soon became an empty threat.

• When Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931, for example, China appealed to the League for help. The League condemned the invasion, but Japan responded in 1933 by resigning its membership. After that, League members could not agree on what action to take – and ended up doing nothing.

• Italy had fought on the side of the Allies in WW I, and Italian ultranationalists had expected to be rewarded. As a result, they were angry when the Treaty of Versailles failed to give Italy control of the independent African country of Ethiopia or the territory it claimed in Europe.

Invasion of Ethiopia• In October 1935, Mussolini ordered Italian forces

to invade Ethiopia. Both Italy and Ethiopia were members of the League of Nations, and in June 1936 the Ethiopian emperor travelled to League headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, to plead for help.

• In response, the League called for trade sanctions against Italy, but these failed when many countries, including the US, ignored them. Britain and France were afraid to strictly enforce the sanctions because they feared driving Mussolini into an alliance with Germany and Japan. As a result, Ethiopia received no int’l support. (Voices Pg. 150)

WW II Begins

• On September 1, 1939, Hitler launched an invasion of Poland – and Britain and France realized that appeasement was not working. On September 3, the two countries declared war on Germany. WW II had begun.

• After a special session of Parliament, PM William Lyon Mackenzie King announced on September 10 that Canada, too, was at war.

• “There is no home in Canada, no family and no individual whose fortunes and freedom are not bound up in the present struggle. I appeal to my fellow Canadians to unite in a national effort to save from destruction all that makes life itself worth living and to preserve for future generations those liberties and institutions which others have bequeathed (given) us.” • FYI pg. 151

Total War in Canada• Canada’s national interest now focused on the

war effort. With the declaration of war, the tone of the language used to describe the country’s involvement in int’l affairs also changed. The gov’t began implying that Germany was the evil enemy, and Canadians were told that they were fighting for “the freedom of mankind.”

• Gov’t policies focused on what King called “a total effort for a total war,” in which “the security for each individual is bound up in the security of the nation as a whole.”

Canadian Propaganda• Canadians were encouraged to support the war

effort by joining the armed forces or by working in essential industries and other civilian activities.

• By the end of September 1939, more than 58,000 Canadians had enlisted in the armed forces. Propaganda campaigns were launched to recruit ppl and persuade them to invest in war bonds, which helped finance the war effort.

Restricted Hiring• No employer was

allowed to hire anyone who did not have a permit from an employment office, and employment could be restricted to specific locations or industries considered essential to the war effort. (Pg. 151)

What is censorship?

Canadian Censorship• Official censorship was also introduced to

ensure that no essential info. fell into the hands of the enemy.

• Gov’t censors, for example, approved every speech broadcast on CBC and examined stories published in newspapers and magazines. Military censors read all letters from members of the armed forces, as well as letters to soldiers in enemy prisoner-of-war camps. Anything that revealed too much was blacked out.

What does conscription mean?

Why do you think Francophones were most

against conscription?

Conscription in Canada WW I• The leaders of Germany, Italy, Japan, and the

Soviet Union believed that conscription (compulsory military service) was in their national interest. They considered a strong military essential both for national defense and for carrying out their expansion plans.

• But conscription was not limited to dictatorships. During WW I, the Canadian gov’t, too, had introduced conscription. But this law had left the country bitterly divided.

Opposition from Francophones• The fiercest opposition came from Quebec

Francophones, who felt no strong connection to Britain or to France. Many Francophones were farmers who were concerned about what would happen to their farms if they forced to enlist while Francophones also faced a language barrier because English was the language of the army.

• Despite this, Francophones had volunteered in about the same ratio as Anglophones in WW I.

Conscription & WW II• When WW II started, Prime Minister William

Lyon Mackenzie King was aware of the resentments caused by conscription during WW I. Still, he introduced a limited form of conscription, though he promised not to send conscripts overseas. They would be used only to defend Canada.

• But as the war dragged on, Canadian casualties mounted, and not enough volunteers were enlisting to replace them. King faced a problem.

King Holds Referendum

• In 1942, King decided to hold a special vote to ask Canadians’ permission to break his promise of no conscription.

• When the votes were tallied, 63% of voters supported King, but this was not the whole story. As predicted, the country was sharply divided: 79% of Anglophones had favoured the plan, but 85% of Francophones had opposed it.

What were internment camps?

Internment in Canada• During WW I, many Canadians became caught

up in the racism and extreme nationalism of the period. Thousands of ppl of German and Ukrainian background were interned as enemy aliens.

• During WW II, wartime propaganda depicted Germans, Italians, and Japanese ppl as the enemy – and Canadians of German, Italian, and Japanese background were often discriminated against because of this.

Japanese Racism in Canada

• Even before WW II, Canadians of Japanese descent had been subjected to discrimination, especially in BC, where many had settled. They were, for example, not allowed to vote or to enter certain professions.

• After Japanese forces attacked Pearl Harbour and Hong Kong in December 1941, things became even worse.

Japanese Internment• In 1942, Japanese Canadians who lived within

160 km of Canada’s Pacific coast were rounded up and transported to internment camps in the BC interior or to farms on the Prairies.

• Internment camps were like prisons. The gov’t seized Japanese-owned homes, property, and businesses and sold them at bargain prices – then used the money from the sales to pay the costs of keeping ppl in the camps.

• FYI pg. 153.

Is it fair to compare conscription and the treatment of Canadians

of Japanese descent with Joseph Stalin’s actions in the SU or Adolf

Hitler’s actions in Germany?

Peacekeeping• In response to the

destruction caused by WW II, the United Nations was formed to help keep peace in the world.

• At first, UN missions involved only observation, but in 1956, a crisis over the Suez Canal highlighted the need for a different approach.

The Suez Canal• The Suez Canal was a privately owned canal,

which linked the Red and Mediterranean seas, and was owned by a British and French company that had built the waterway in the 19th century.

• The canal meant that goods, especially oil, could move between Asia and Europe more quickly and cheaply because ships no longer had to travel all the way around Africa. Ships paid fees for using the canal, and profits went to the company’s shareholders.

Looming Crisis• In 1956, the Egyptian gov’t seized the canal.

The gov’t believed that it was in Egypt’s national interest for the Egyptian ppl, not the company’s shareholders, to benefit from the canal.

• In response to the Egyptian gov’ts actions, Israeli, British, and French forces invaded the canal zone. The Soviet Union supported Egypt and threatened to attack Britain and France. Suddenly, the world was on the brink of another war.

Why do you think the Egyptian gov’t might have felt entitled to

take over the Suez Canal? Would you classify this action as

nationalistic or ultranationalistic?

(Ultranationalism is seen as moving the values of one’s own

nation and its interests to hostility toward ppl of other nations).

Lester B. Pearson

• At the time, Lester B. Pearson was Canada’s minister of external affairs. Pearson proposed that the UN send an emergency force to keep peace in the canal zone while diplomats negotiated a resolution to the crisis.

Pearson Wins Nobel Prize

• The UN welcomed Pearson’s idea, and within days, a UN force made up of soldiers from various countries, including Canada, was in the canal zone. The hostile countries withdrew and a peaceful solution was found.

• This venture marked the start of int’l peacekeeping. For his work, Pearson was awarded the Nobel Peace Price in 1957.

Peacekeeping Today• Today, peacekeepers’ responsibilities range

from establishing and keeping peace to nation building, which helps countries in crisis make the transition to more democratic forms of gov’t. Because Canadian gov’ts believe that a peaceful world is in Canada’s national interest, participating in peacekeeping missions is an important part of the country’s foreign policy.

• By 2007, Canada had taken part in more than 60 peacekeeping missions, helping to implement 170 peace settlements. In many cases, these missions were responses to ultranationalist actions.

What Are We Learning Today?

2.8 Analyze ultranationalism as a cause of genocide.

Eliminating Extreme Forms of Nationalism

• Since the end of WW II, many countries have tried to find ways to eliminate the extreme forms of nationalism that lead to crimes against humanity and genocide.

• They realize that it is in all countries’ – and all peoples’ – national interest to eliminate these crimes because they threaten the peace, security, and well-being of all peoples in all countries.

Formation of the UN

• After the League of Nations failed to prevent the horrors of WW II, world leaders were determined to create an int’l body that would preserve peace in the world.

• They believed that a forum where conflicts could be resolved peacefully was in every nation’s interest – and the United Nations emerged from these discussions.

Trying of German & Japanese War Criminals

• In 1945, the UN was in its infancy and had no permanent court to try war criminals.

• As a result, the victorious Allies set up the int’l military tribunals that tried German and Japanese individuals and gov’t organizations for crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

Criticisms of UN

• The UN has been criticized for taking too long to respond to situations in which ultranationalist states or groups within states commit crimes against humanity.

• For the UN, trying to accommodate the demands of all its member countries - each focused on its own national interests - has been a challenge.

The Int’l Criminal Court

• In 1948, the UN established a committee to work toward creating an int’l criminal court, a task that took more than 50 years to complete.

• 1 of the chief stumbling blocks was the debate over how the court would operate without infringing the sovereignty (independence) of member states. Persuading countries to agree on the laws the court would be responsible for enforcing was another challenge.

A Court of Last Resort

• The statute creating the Int’l Criminal Court was finally signed by 60 countries in 2002. By early 2008, 45 more countries had signed on.

• The ICC is sponsored by, but operates independently of, the UN. It is a court of last resort, which means that it will not act if those accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes are tried fairly in a national court.

The US, China, and many other countries have not

recognized the ICC and refuse to co-operate with it. What

might be some reasons that explain this choice?

Creation of Yugoslavia• At the Paris Peace Conference of 1918-1919,

various nations in the area known as the Balkans were merged into a single country called Yugoslavia. Though these nations often shared a history of bitter fighting with 1 another, their peoples coexisted more or less peacefully until the early 1990s.

• By the late 20th century, Yugoslavia was a tightly controlled communist state. When the SU started to collapse in the late 1980s, nationalist sentiments bubbled to the surface.

Slobodan Milosevic• Serbia and Montenegro

formed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia under the leadership of the Serbian ultranationalist Slobodan Milosevic.

• Milosevic believed that Serbs formed an ethnic nation and that everyone else should be expelled from Serbian territory.

Ethnic Cleansing• Milosevic called his expulsion process ethnic

cleansing, a code word designed to make what was happening seem more socially acceptable.

• But in reality, Serbs were killing non-Serbs. Milosevic also sent Serbian forces to help ultranationalist Bosnian Serbs drive non-Serbs out of Bosnia and Herzegovina. There, non-Serbs were harassed. They were not allowed to meet in public places, move to another town without permission, or travel by car.

Sarajevo• Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and

Herzegovina, had once been an integrated city where Orthodox Serbs, Catholic Croats, and Bosnian Muslims lived and worked together. But soon after Bosnia and Herzegovina declared independence, Serbian ultranationalist forces besieged the city.

• The siege continued until February 1996. During that time, citizens faces constant bombardments and sniper attacks. (Figure 7-14)

The UN & Sarajevo• In June 1992, the UN Security Council warned

Serbian forces to stop attacking Sarajevo or face military action.

• Although UN peacekeepers were sent to the country and tried to deliver humanitarian relief and establish safe areas where ppl were protected, the killing continued. The UN forces had been ordered to remain neutral so they could continue to get food to the besieged city.

Criticisms of UN in Sarajevo• Some ppl believed that the UN did not do

enough to stop the massacre of the citizens of Sarajevo. By the time the siege was finally lifted on February 29, 1996, the death toll in the city had risen to more than 11,000.

• In 1993, the UN Security Council established the Int’l Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. In 2002, Milosevic was put on trial for genocide and crimes against humanity, but he died before the end of his trial.

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_bU_y3fjsQ

What is self-determination?

Self-Determination• When a ppl pursue national self-determination,

they are trying to gain or keep the power to control their own affairs. They believe it is in their collective interest to make their own decisions about what will benefit them.

The UN & Self-Determination• The debate over who has the right to self-

determination and what that right means is reflected in the charter of the United Nations. According to the charter, one of the UN’s purposes is “to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of ppls.”

• In addition, all nation-states that belong to the UN are to have “sovereign equality.” But the UN leaves unanswered questions of what happens when ppls within nation-states want self-determination.

Get in a group of 4 or 5 and in 5 minutes, develop 3 criteria that would help the United Nations

decide when to recognize a new country. Take into account the UN’s position on human rights,

on a nation-state’s right to sovereignty, and on a ppl’s right

to self-determination.

Self-Determination & National Interests

• The pursuit of national self-determination is often complicated by the fact that what is in one ppl’s national interest conflicts with the national interests of other ppls. It is also important to define what “a ppl” is, and this has proven difficult.

What is “a people?” • According to Javier Leon Diaz, an int’l human

rights lawyer, no precise legal definition of the term “a people” exists. Still, ‘a people’ is often used to describe groups who– Share a common historical tradition,

language, and religion– Identify themselves as a distinct cultural

group– Have a traditional connection to a territory

• But understanding the term “a people” is only the 1st step toward resolving various ppls’ struggle for the right to self-determination.

What is a colony?

Decolonization

• Colonies are ruled by the gov’t of another country. For example, Canada used to be a former British colony.

• Decolonization refers to what happens when a colonial power withdraws from a colony. The ppl of the former colony may then form a sovereign nation-state (country).

Decolonization & Self-Determination

• A strong link between decolonization and the idea of national self-determination is built into the charter of the United Nations. Decolonized countries can join the UN and exercise sovereignty under int’l law.

• But decolonized ppls must often deal with the after-effects of colonization. Colonial powers often forced ppls who were once separate – with different languages, religions, and cultures – into a single colony. When decolonization occurs, violent conflicts such as that in Rwanda may arise. (Figure 8-5).

Decolonization in Indochina• European colonial powers (Portugal, Spain,

Britain, the Netherlands, and France) began colonizing Southeast Asia in the 1500s. By the late 1800s, France ruled Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia and had renamed the region French Indochina. (Figure 8-6)

• When Japan invaded the region during WW II, many ppl became committed to independence. In Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh, a communist leader, and the Viet Minh independence movement fought against the Japanese and then continued to fight against the French when they reoccupied the country after WW II.

Vietnam• The war between the Vietnamese and the

French, who had considerable American support, went on until 1954, when French forces were defeated.

• Afterwards, Vietnam was divided into 2: the north, which was a communist state supported by China and the Soviet Union, and the south, which was supported by the US and other Western powers. Vietnam became a battleground in the Cold War between the two superpowers: US & SU.

The Vietnam War• By 1965, the US had escalated its support of

the South Vietnamese gov’t by sending more than 200,000 American troops to the country. Over the next 4 years, the # of American troops rose to 500,000 and the war was expanded into neighbouring Cambodia.

Why would the United States care so much about little

Vietnam?

The Domino Theory• In the US, supporters of the war argued that

stopping the spread of communism in the region was in the American national interest. As early as 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower had used his domino theory to explain how the communist regimes of China and Russia, if not checked, would take over all of Southeast Asia.

• “You have a row of dominos set up. You knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly.” Other war supporters said that American soldiers were fighting for the freedom of the Vietnamese ppl.

Vietnam War Opposition• But opposition to American

involvement grew in the US during the 1960s. Some opponents said that American forces had no right to interfere in a dispute between the ppls of Vietnam. Other war critics spoke of the damage caused by US forces, the loss of American lives, and the physical and economic losses of the Vietnamese ppl.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo9yI-p5jqU

Successor States• A successor state

or states is a country created from a previous state. For example, when the Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s, 15 successor states emerged such as Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia.

India as a Successor State• During the time Britain controlled what are

today the independent nation-states of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, the colonizers exerted more and more control over the lives of the Indigenous ppls of this area.

• In the early 1800s, the East India Company’s grip on India began slipping, and in 1858, without consulting the ppls involved and with no regard for their national interests or right to self-determination, the British gov’t took over and established direct rule over what they called British India.

Indian Nationalism Increasing• During this time, the ppls of India had no real

political power. Their efforts to pursue national self-determination were ignored or put down.

• But during the first half of the 20th century, Indian nationalist movements gained strength, and the ppl began to speak out for independence and their right to govern themselves. In 1919, the British rulers had allowed Indians a national parliament elected by a select # of the wealthiest ppl in the country, but this parliament had little real power.

Non-Violent Protest

• During the 1920s, Mohandas Gandhi’s non-violent and non-cooperation movement for Indian independence attracted many followers. Gandhi fostered Indian nationalism and believed that independence could be won without bloodshed. The increasing # of ppl who joined Gandhi’s campaigns through the 1930s and 1940s amazed and frightened India’s British rulers.

Conflict Between Muslims & Hindus• The 2 dominant groups in British India were

Muslims and Hindus. In the late 1800s, they worked toward independence but by the early 20th century, some Muslims were beginning to resent the control exercised by the Hindu majority.

• Therefore, the Muslims banded together and declared that when the British left, it would be in the interest of Muslims to form their own country.

The Creation of Pakistan• In early 1940, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, leader of

the Muslim League, declared that this separate state would be called Pakistan. He insisted that Muslims and Hindus were 2 separate nations. He even wrote a letter to Gandhi describing his intentions.

• Gandhi, who advocated a united India, disagreed. He believed that Muslims and Hindus were one nation.

Rampage• In the months leading up to independence,

conflict between Muslims and Hindus grew violent. On August 15, 1947, India achieved independence, and 2 days later, Pakistan became the 2nd successor state to what had been British India.

• In both countries, the 2 groups who had once lived together peacefully, went on rampages. At least a million ppl were killed, and millions of refugees tried to escape to safety. Muslims in India made the long journey to Pakistan, and Hindus in Pakistan made the equally hard journey to India. (Figure 8-10)

Kashmir• Sometimes a ppl’s desire for self-determination

can be lost in the decolonization process. This is what happened in Kashmir since the British left India.

• Long before the British took control over Kashmir, the Kashmiri ppl lived in a clearly defined territory in the Himalaya Mountains. The ppl of the region speak Kashmiri, a distinct language. They also identify themselves as a distinct cultural group.

The Promise of a Plebiscite• In 1947, British, Indian, and Pakistani leaders

agreed that the ppl of Kashmir should have the right to decide whether to join India or Pakistan. In 1948, the United Nations decided that Kashmiris should vote on the issue in a plebiscite.

• Yet in the meantime, India invaded Kashmir and took over control of much of the Kashmiris’ traditional territory. Despite the UN’s repeated demands, the promised plebiscite has never been held, and fighting between India and Pakistan has continued on and off in the area ever since.

Kashmiris Under Assault• Kashmiris have resisted control, and violent

conflicts have arisen repeatedly over the decades. Through the original plebiscite was to ask Kashmiris whether they wanted to join India or Pakistan, many nationalist leaders in Kashmir are now calling for complete independence.

• In 2007, it was estimated that 10,000 Kahmiris have “disappeared.” Villages along the dividing law between Pakistan and Indian controlled Kashmir have been destroyed by shelling. Civilians have been killed, and the survivors have been forced to flee their ruined homes.