Rating: 
Summary: A new order born
Review: Much has been said about a new world order after the collapse of the Soviet Union but the fact is that the order in which we live today was born at the end of the first world war. Sure, balances have shifted since then as some powers grew and other withered but the map of the western world today is essentially the blueprint designed 84 years ago in Paris. WWI was the formative event of modern Europe: it brought about the collapse of two empires (Austria-Hungary, Ottoman) and the seeds of a new one (Soviet). The disintegration of the old empires, whose territories extended from the Baltic Sea to the Persian Gulf, produced a tremendous vacuum that was to be filled by a gushing stream of new states powered by a new force: nationalism. The collapse of the old order meant that a new one had to be put together. And then there was the issue of Germany, which alone -its allies having literally vanished- stood to pay the price for the defeat. These were the tasks of the peace conference.MacMillan gives a fascinating account of how all this was to happen. The three Powers, brought to life through the strong personalities of their famous representatives, each approached the conference with different perspectives. Clemenceau's preoccupation was with France's security from future german aggression. Lloyd-George was determined to safeguard the interests of the British empire. Wilson, with a detachment afforded to him by geography, an isolationist tradition of US foreign policy and a pre-superpower status, championed a new order based on self-determination and international cooperation. Against the desires of the Powers stood the forces of nationalistic awakenings, regional strife, territorial disputes, ancient claims, war-time promises, colonial aspirations. MacMillan manages to cut through an enormous complexity of issues and succeeds in painting a vivid picture, at times humorous, at times chilling, of a conference with its crises, its lighter moments, its tantrums and the personal animosities. There has been much second-guessing of the final peace treaty in the years since, especially in light of the second world war. It's possible of course to argue that different decisions might have lead to different outcomes. MacMillan does not play the blame-game: the what-if's are infinite and the exercise futile. The collapse of the old order was an event of such proportions that it is too simplistic to expect that it could have been resolved in six months of negotiations. The first war was the eruption that broke up the old order; it took a second powerful eruption to put a new one together. And seventy years later, the Soviet Union collapsed in a tremor that came as the final aftershock. What are missing from this book are good, informative maps. Maps of Europe, the middle east, the far east and Africa are included at the beginning of the book but the detail is not sufficient to follow the often intricate territorial disputes. It would also have been nice to include an appendix with short biographies of the various participants. The principal protagonists are covered in great detail but there are numerous secondary characters that appear throughout the book and who are difficult to keep track of. None of this distracts from the value of the book. The high praise it has received is well deserved.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant...better than fiction!
Review: This is a brilliant book. If you love books that detail the relationships between people during periods of high stress,you'll appreciate this book. If you want to understand the impact of our leader's decisions in 1918-1919 on today's political environment, you'll appreciate this book. It really helped me understand why we're in the mess we're in today. Also, it's fun to read. Very, very well written.
Rating:
Summary: Peace does not come easy.
Review: Macmillan has scored a hit with this highly informative and very readable book. Paris 1919 focuses on those crucial months in Paris that would determine the success of Wilson's Fourteen Points, how Germany and the other Central Powers were to be treated, as well as the difficult decisions on changing the maps. The main players are President Wilson, Britain's Prime Minister David Lloyd George, and French Premier Georges Clemenceau. While these "Big Three" are the main characters I think it is fair to say that in this book you will get a comprehensive look at a who's who of major political leaders from across Europe and the world who converged on Paris. I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said that there was never a good war or a bad peace. It was abundantly clear with our advantage of hindsight to see that the peace that resulted from the Paris Peace Conference did not produce a lasting peace. The Great War to end all wars was an omen as to what would occur only twenty years later. How interesting that this book on how difficult it really is in achieving peace can be related to modern day events in the aftermath of the war in Iraq, maybe not on the same scale but still very relevant. From reading this book you will find how difficult it was to have such a diverse group of interests represented by all the major allied powers to come together and agree on how the peace should have been achieved. France wanted to ensure its weakened nation's security; Britain wanted to promote its economic interests and its superiority on the seas; the United States, at least following Wilson's guidelines, wanted to end the old ways of settling these kinds of disputes by creating a League of Nations to achieve a lasting peace. Nationalism had also sprouted in much of Europe and the right to self-determination became the cry of many people to achieve their goals. Wilson was hailed as a hero by Europeans when he first came to Europe to assemble with the other allied leaders in Paris. This marked what would become the United States' rising role in international affairs. But a grave mistake was made when people put such high expectations on the leaders sent to the Peace Conference. Wilson had noble goals, but several of his ideals were too naive. The United States was not that familiar with how these types of matters had been settled in the past in Europe and Wilson himself would end up compromising and betraying some of his principles for what was seen as being more practical at the time. This is really a story of high ideals, fear of the future, self-interests, sacrifice, betrayal, human weakness etc, etc. Not only did the allied powers have to decide what to do with the Germans in particular, but how to help build and rebuild countries along ethnic, religious, and national boundaries. This was a very difficult task indeed that has caused major problems up to the present day. I could go on to cover so much more on this book but I will sum it all up by stating that this is an excellent book dealing with many complex issues that resulted from the Great War as well as the strengths and weaknesses shared by all human beings. Watch out for key figures during the Paris Peace Conference that would come back in the future.
Rating: 
Summary: A Superbly Written Narrative, but Lacking in Clear Judgments
Review: As a literary portrayal of the Paris Conference, this book can't be beat. Its nearly five hundred pages of text are not only well-written, but scholarly, comprehensive, and sometimes even entertaining. MacMillan focuses on the numerous personalities of the conference and arranges the book around the various issues they handled there. Most of the time, this is done on a country by country basis, although some issues - such as those surrounding the peace terms for Germany - are covered thematically. My only major complaint with the book is its judgments on the conference. While MacMillan clearly shows that the major players failed to deliver a workable peace on numerous issues, she plainly has a soft spot for the whole enterprise and defends it against most criticism, including the most common one: that its failings would lead directly to World War 2. She also defends the peace conference against its most famous critic, John Maynard Keynes, and his argument that the economic terms against Germany were too harsh. Unfortunately, MacMillan's defense of the Paris conference is not up to the same standards as her narrative skills in describing it. I read Keynes' "The Economic Consequences of the Peace" soon after finishing this book and was surprised to see the famous economist's main arguments were still convincing. MacMillan really doesn't even touch on Keynes' points in any detail, but brushes them aside with an argument that Keynes already anticipated in his book. (See my review of "The Economic Consequences of the Peace" for details.)
Rating:
Summary: A book of history that illuminates problems of today
Review: It is difficult to find a book of history so relevant to today's problems facing the United States in the Middle East, the Balkans, and elsewhere. Marget MacMillian has written such a book, an extraordinaryly vivid acount recreating the time, mood, hopes, and fears as the victorious Allied powers attempted in Paris in the months following the November Armistic to sort out all of the geopolitical wildfires that faced them. MacMillian adeptly sketches the personalities of the Big Four: of Wilson's self-rightenous and his inability to compromise his beloved Fourteen Points; the pragmatic and sometimes shallow Lloyd George who often acted as broker between opposing views; of Clemenceu, the old "tiger," whose nation had suffered the most and who attempted to moderate the desire for vengance caused by Germany in northern France [she notes that French trains carrying German diplomats to Paris moved with ordered glacial slowness through the battle-scarred terrain of France] with French larger international interests; and, finally, Italy's Orlando, given to emotional appeals, who often was bypassed by the others. One of the multitude of problems facing the Allies was what to do with Turkey, the former "sick man of Europe," whose empire had collapsed during the war, and particularly with the Middle East. The Brits took Palestine and the legacy of the earlier Balfour Declaration proposing a Jewish homeland there, and also Mesopotamia, now Iraq, which the British knew, but not the French, contained oil reserves. France took control of Syria and Lebanon. The newly formed Iraq, however, proved difficult to govern and civil unrest caused British troops to scour the countryside, with Churchill complaining that "We are at our wit's end to find a single soldier," [of the opposition], and of British newspapers complaining about the amount of money being spent on securing Iraq when more pressing domestic problems were underfunded. A familar ring? • Macmillan also notes how the idealism of the Fourteen Points fired the flames of nationalism and anti-colonialism.
• The tremendous amount of work done by behind-the-scenes expert's groups, attempting to redraw boundaries in the aftermath of the demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and a multitude of other territorial problems.
• The press of internal politics that caused Lloyd George and Wilson to periodically return home, leaving the peacemaking to underlings.
• How fatigue and the press of so many details upon the decisionmakers often led to hasty, unwise decisions based less on facts and merits than on tiredness and a self-imposed "get-it-done" imperative. These are only a few of the many points MacMillan covers in her book. It might be noted that MacMillan is the great-granddaughter of Lloyd George--but it is clear that George is cut no slack in exposing his weaknesses. MacMillan's sourcing is fine, she writes a good sentence, even at times with a bit of humor, and although the size of the book may cause readers to pause, the effort is worthwhile. This is a keeper book for use as a reference.
Rating: 
Summary: Superficial, biased and pro-capitalist account
Review: Margaret MacMillan, an historian based at Ryerson University, tells the story of the Paris conference of 1919. The German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman empires had all been overthrown, and delegates from thirty countries met for six months to agree Treaties supposed to bring peace and stability. But only the British, French, US and Italian governments took the decisions. Did the 'Big Four' achieve peace? After 'the war to end war', this was a peace to end peace. They irritated, but did not corral, Germany. They encouraged Greece to attack Turkey, disastrously. They opposed self-determination for the peoples of Asia, Africa and the Middle East. They backed Winston Churchill's counter-revolutionary attack on Russia. As he boasted, "they shot Soviet Russians at sight. They stood as invaders on Russian soil. They armed the enemies of the Soviet Government. They blockaded its ports and sunk its battleships. They earnestly desired and schemed its downfall." Spurred by class hatred, Churchill was the most vicious enemy of the Russian people. MacMillan, to her shame, writes, "With hindsight, Churchill and Foch were right about the Bolsheviks." Further, the Conference let Britain and France divide the Middle East into occupied mandates, 'telling the Moslem what he ought to think', as Balfour said. MacMillan quotes Lloyd George, "Mesopotamia ... yes ... oil ... we must have Mesopotamia; Palestine ... yes ... the Holy Land ... Zionism ... we must have Palestine; Syria ... h'm ... what is there in Syria? Let the French have that." MacMillan likens the end of the First World War to the counter-revolutions of 1989-90: "there was the same sense of a new order emerging." But the end of the Soviet Union did not bring peace, quite the opposite: it ended the post-1945 peace settlement and ushered in a period of wars, from Yugoslavia to Chechnya to Iraq. Her own account shows that the 1919 Conference did not bring a new order, ending war. This is fashionable history seen through the prism of personalities, the 'great man' approach to history, yielding trite judgements favouring the capitalist powers. No wonder Blair liked this book!
Rating:
Summary: The Conference that Made the 21st Century World
Review: World War I ended with an inconclusive result. Basically the Germans lost because they were exhausted. France was in ruins. Germany was never invaded. The "Big Four" sat around the conference table to divvy up Europe and the Near East and we have lived with the results ever since. This book details the events that took place in Paris in 1919. Woodrow Wilson, who was already ill, was obsessed with his 14 points. However, those points did not always fit what the big powers saw as their national interest. Compromises were made and we are still living with the results--for example the borders in the Middle East which often have more to do with the French and the British than they do to where the ethnic groups actually live. Think about Iraq: It's a mishmosh of groups. Then there is Turkey, whose borders resulted from events on the ground (as in Ataturk). This is a well written book that will interest any history nut. It should appeal to a larger audience, however, due to the current interest in events in the Middle East and the continuing turmoil in the Balkans. After all, it was the turmoil in the Balkans that began World War I. Somethings never change.
Rating:
Summary: An outstanding work which helps explain the modern world
Review: Margaret Macmillian first caught my eye on C-Span's Booknotes series hosted by Brian Lamb. Macmillan is a native Canadian who is a granddaughter of British Prime Minister Lloyd George. In this wonderfully written, outstandingly researched and well told account of the Versailles Conference of 1919 she details all the intricate details of the event. The reader learns how politcail and military strategy for all the major victor nations in World War I carved up the world as the dream for world peace and a League of Nation was born .
I especially found fascinating her account of the Middle East and how what was done then set the stage for all the developments in this powder keg region of the world. Macmillan also gives a good account of the nations of the Balkans and Central Europe clarifying what they hoped to receive from the hands of the United States, Britain, France and Italy (the major
nations at the Conference).
Good thumbnail sketches of the major players from Woodrow Wilson the scholarly US leader to the ebullient Lloyd George and
a large supporting cast are valuable.
This book would do quite well in a college course on 20th century Europe and the Middle East. I recommend it!
Rating:
Summary: Comprehensive and readable book on aftermath of World War I
Review: The American president discovers that the U.S. has a deep commonality of beliefs and goals with the British, while he comes to view the French delegation as "the hardest I ever tried to do business with." The winning coalition is in the process of trying to destroy the militarism of the vanquished, while rehabilitating the vanquished nation. Leaders face the generic question of which groups of people define a "nation," deserving of self-determination. Do shared race, religion, ethnicity, language, or even alphabet comprise a "nation" ?
No, this is not Baghdad 2003, but Paris 1919.
As an earlier review said, the story of the post-World War I peace conference in Paris in 1919 is a "complex series of parallel stories," which are masterfully told by author MacMillan. The author provides in-depth coverage of the peace conference, while also giving the reader background on the history of each country and important diplomat, providing an understanding of each country's motivations and agenda in Paris, together with each delegation's political pressures at home.
It was definitely a different time -- a time of paternalism and colonies -- a time when Wilson could pontificate about self-determination, but shoot down a proposed clause in the treaty calling for racial equality. The racial equality clause was proposed by our Japanese allies who were insulted by laws such as California's, which not only segregated Japanese but prohibited land ownership by Japanese. The dismissal of this Japanese proposal helped put Japan and the U.S. on an adversarial path.
It was a time when the British blithely decided that the very different peoples in Mesopotamia should be brought together into what are now the borders of Iraq.
The respective rights of Zionists and Palestinians in the Middle East were at issue.
A young kitchen assistant at the Paris Ritz hotel sent in a petition asking that his native country, Vietnam, be granted independence from France. The petition was ignored, and the kitchen assistant was Ho Chi Minh.
The conference also faced the issues of the end of the Russian monarchy, and the new Bolshevik revolution. Although the Bolsheviks weren't in control of all Russia, should the Bolsheviks be recognized and invited to Paris? The political missteps here helped convince the Soviets that the Allies were not their friends.
Perhaps the largest issue, of course, was how to treat Germany. How important was it to assign "guilt" to Germany for World War I? How just was it to compel war reparation payments from Germany? What should have been included in the "bill" ? How large should those payments have been -- how much of Germany's economic product should be taken from it? Did the fact, and size, of these payments contribute to the rise of Hitler, and the Second World War? MacMillan deals with these issues at length.
The Paris Peace conference came down to several men sitting in a room and talking, remaking the world as they did. The ramifications of what they decided will continue well into the future. MacMillan says, "If they could have done better, they certainly could have done much worse."
I recommend this book to anyone interested in the historical underpinnings of the current world situation. When you finish it, it's like listening to the Paul Harvey feature -- "and now you know the rest of the story."
Rating:
Summary: Why no Pulitzer?
Review: If it was mine to give, I'd award Margaret MacMillan, PhD of the University of Toronto the Pulitzer Prize in history for Paris 1919. You almost can't understand Hitler's rhetoric, his appeal to Germans, Austrians, German speaking Czechs, the residents of Alsace-Lorraine, the Poles, and the roots of WWII without understanding what happened at Versailles in 1919. You can't understand Versailles without understanding the underlying perplexities of language, religion, nationality, and economic worth that made dividing up Germany, Hungary, and the Austrian-Hungarian Empire so difficult a task. What I admire about Ms. MacMillan's book is that she assumes little reader's knowledge, and most Americans know only a little about Western Europe and almost nothing about Central Europe, Eastern Europe, or the Balkans. She explains the tensions in those regions in understandable terms. Once she explains it, many of the important territorial claims make sense. German claims on Poland, Danzig and the Polish corridor, and Czechoslovakia suddenly have some logic to them. Once you see, from her perspective, what Wilson promised and what Clemenceau actually delivered, you understand the intense feeling of the Germans against France, and Wilson's failings as a statesman and leader. You may understand why French seizure of the Rhineland was such a betrayal to the Germans and why Wilson's Fourteen Points, and particularly his emphasis on self-determination, made it so difficult for America to condemn the "unification" (Anshluss) with Austria. This is a wonderfully researched book. I thoroughly enjoyed it and heartily recommend it.
|
