Download gen knowledge - WordPress.com

1
Kosovo
(Albanian, Kosove), region in south-western Serbia which enjoyed autonomous status from 1946 to 1989. The
province is predominantly hilly and mountainous. The rivers Bell, Drin, and Ibar flow through the province. The Šar
Planina mountain range rises to 2,640 m (8,660 ft). Although Kosovo has important deposits of lead and zinc, as well
as significant deposits of lignite, chromites, and magnesite, the province has long been one of the poorest regions in
Europe. Major crops of Kosovo include grains (maize, wheat, and barley), potatoes, plums, grapes, and tobacco,
and timber is an important product. There are also horticulture and viticulture industries. Cattle and sheep are raised
in Kosovo's highlands. Principal manufactures include cement and sulphuric acid. There is also a small, nascent
tourist industry in the province focused on skiing. Major cities are Priština (the capital), Prizren, and Pec, the latter
once serving (1557-1766) as the patriarchal seat of the Serbian Orthodox Church. More than 90 per cent of the
population of Kosovo is ethnic Albanian. Most of the rest of the inhabitants are Serbs and Montenegrins.
From the second millennium BC, the Illyrians (ancestors of the present-day Albanians) inhabited the Balkan
Peninsula, including what is now Kosovo. The Illyrian territory of Dardania, which comprised present-day Kosovo,
part of what is now the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), and lands now in south-west Serbia, was
eventually annexed by the Roman Empire. From the 8th to the 12th century, Kosovo was the centre of the medieval
state of Raska (Rascia). Towards the end of the 12th century, the Serbian ruler Stefan Nemanja annexed Kosovo
and, for a time, Prizren served as the capital of Serbian princes. During this period, the Serbian population in Kosovo
increased. In 1389, an invading Ottoman Turkish army inflicted heavy casualties on a Serbian army in the Battle of
Kosovo, leading to the subsequent conquest of all of Serbia (in 1459) by the Ottoman Empire. Kosovo was the
scene of a numerous subsequent anti-Turkish uprisings, but only in mid-1912 were the Turks finally expelled, and an
independent Albanian state proclaimed, which was to include Kosovo and portions of the western part of the region
of Macedonia. However, at Russia's insistence, the Great Powers divided Kosovo between Serbia and Montenegro.
In 1918, Kosovo was incorporated into the newly established Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, later called
Yugoslavia. Local Albanians staged uprisings between 1918 and 1919 which were ruthlessly crushed. The Belgrade
government resorted to forced expulsions of Albanians, closure of Albanian schools, land confiscations, and
importation of Serbian settlers. During World War II, Kosovo was appended to Italian-occupied Albania—a move
generally welcomed by local Albanians—and local Serbs were forced out. Kosovo's Albanians resisted
reincorporation into Yugoslavia, but by July 1945, the Partisan army of Josip Broz Tito succeeded in crushing
Albanian resistance. Kosovo was organized as an administrative subunit of the Republic of Serbia—at first as an
autonomous region, but later elevated to the status of an autonomous province after Albanian riots in 1968.
Renewed riots in 1981 resulted in the purging of Albanians from positions of power and protests by local Serbs. In
March 1989 Slobodan Miloševi eliminated all vestiges of Kosovo's autonomy and extended anti-Albanian
discrimination, placing the region under effective military occupation. A local underground resistance movement
continues to struggle for independence or union with Albania. Area, about 10,887 sq km (4,203 sq mi); population
(1991) 1,956,196.
------
--------------
--------------------------------------Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian War
----------
, conflict from 1991 to 1995 that represented a clash of states amid the dissolution of the Socialist Federative
Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). One state, Serbia, attempted to create the borders of a new federal state for Serbs,
which was intended to incorporate territory taken from two of the others, Bosnia (see Bosnia and Herzegovina) and
Croatia, where there were large ethnic Serb communities. This state project was countered by the two states from
which Serbia sought to carve territory, both of which, along with two other states (Slovenia and the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia) sought to maintain their territorial integrity and to establish their independence (although
Croatia, with territory under Serb control, also made an attempt to seize territory from Bosnia in the course of the
conflict).
Background
The SFRY was a Communist nation established by Josip Broz Tito after World War II comprising six formally
sovereign states: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia. Serbia had two
autonomous regions within it, Kosovo and Vojvodina. These federated states had a complex spread of ethnic
communities across them, with only Slovenia and the province of Kosovo (inhabited by ethnic Albanians) more
ethnically homogeneous. The major groups, so-called “state-forming peoples”, were the Serbs (in Serbia, Bosnia,
Croatia, and Macedonia); the Croats (in Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia); the Muslims, also latterly called “Bosniaks” (in
Bosnia, Serbia, and Croatia); the Slovenes (in Slovenia); the Montenegrins (in Montenegro); and the Macedonians
(in Macedonia). In addition, there were many other ethnic communities, of which the most significant were Albanians
(in Serbia—primarily in Kosovo; Macedonia; and Montenegro) and Hungarians (in Serbia—primarily in Vojvodina;
Slovenia; and Croatia).
The SFRY’s state structure was intended to resolve the nationalist problems, above all between Serbs and Croats,
that had thwarted the first attempt to unite the South Slavs, Royal Yugoslavia, after World War I. Tensions then had
led to a bloody intra-Yugoslav war (1941-1945). By the beginning of the 1990s, polarized views had emerged of what
the future role of the federation should be. With little genuine support for the federation in any of the states, it
effectively ceased to function. In this context the inter-communal fabric of this set of states had begun to disintegrate
while, in June 1991, two of the states, Slovenia and Croatia, declared that the federation no longer operated and that
they were independent states. Macedonia did likewise in September 1991, as did Bosnia and Herzegovina in March
1992.
Armed Conflict
Following the declarations of independence at the end of June 1991, a major armed conflict ensued. Coercive terror
was the central characteristic of the conflict, which had three theatres: Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia. The conflict in
Slovenia lasted only ten days and was generally free of terrorization. The same was not true in Croatia and Bosnia,
both of which were subject to the Serbian attempt, dominated by the Serbian president Slobodan Miloševi, to
establish new borders. This entailed the killing, terrorization, and forcible expulsion of non-Serbs in order to create a
set of contiguous territories with new boundaries reserved only for Serbs. The euphemistic though shocking label
given by some to this process was “ethnic cleansing”.
As the SFRY dissolved and conflict broke out, the overwhelming balance of power lay with the Serbian side. A major
factor in this was the role of the federal armed force, the Yugoslav People’s Army (Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija or
JNA). This force was predominantly Serb (60 per cent of the officer corps), and as a result all but a few elements
joined with the Serbian side. In Croatia and Bosnia, Serbian forces had far greater firepower, above all in terms of
heavy artillery, tanks, and air power. These forces complemented smaller local Serb groups and special paramilitary
groups organized by the Serbian security service.
Because of their superiority, Serbian forces were able to take control of more than a quarter of Croatian territory in
1991, and in 1992 around two thirds of Bosnia, laying siege to the Bosnian capital Sarajevo. However, the Serbian
side lacked manpower to complement its armoury and so became overstretched in its efforts to control territory as
the conflict developed and the armies of Bosnia and particularly Croatia became stronger. During 1993, although
putative allies, Croatian forces and the predominantly Muslim Bosnian army fought with each other for more than
nine months for territory in Bosnia. Croatian forces initially had the advantage, but as the year progressed, they were
beaten back. By the beginning of 1994, United States diplomacy had managed to align these forces again, although
difficulties remained.
By the summer of 1995, Serbian overstretch and the greater strength of Croatian and Bosnian forces meant that the
balance of power had shifted. Through offensives in May and August 1995, they retook control of almost all Serbiancontrolled land in Croatia and expelled the historical ethnic Serb communities, just as ethnic Croats had been
expelled at the beginning of the war; joint Croatian-Bosnian operations in May, August, and September ejected
Serbian forces from large areas of western Bosnia, as well as the ethnic Serb communities, as had happened to
Muslims and Croats in the early phases of hostilities.
“Ethnic Cleansing”
There were two rationales given for so-called “ethnic cleansing”. One was ethno-nationalist ideology (see Ethnic
Conflict). The other was the strategic imperative of ensuring that the territories of a new entity would be free from
political disruption, guerrilla warfare, or terrorism: by removing a population, the basis for resistance was also
removed. Ethnic cleansing did not rely on direct combat with opponents, but on the demonstrative capacity of the
violence that could be brought to bear and the example that was set by partial elimination of a population to induce
mass migration. The intended result of this was a contiguous set of ethnically pure territories. In the first months of
the conflict in Bosnia over 100,000 people were killed and up to 3 million were forced to leave their homes, or were
2
put under pressure to leave. Similar tactics, albeit on a significantly lesser scale, featured in the Croat and Bosnian
governments’ operations, and Muslim paramilitary ones, in the war in Bosnia.
The most blatant act of atrocity in the four years of conflict occurred near Srebrenica in eastern Bosnia towards the
end of the war. In July 1995 the Bosnian Serb army, dominated by the Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadi and
Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladi, overcame the Srebrenica “safe area” (see below), expelling over 40,000
Muslims, most of them already refugees, and murdering thousands of men of military age. Several thousand were
ambushed as they tried to escape from the town, while international estimates of 5,000 to 8,000 others were taken to
sites outside Srebrenica and shot.
International Engagement
One of the major aspects of the conflict was international involvement, both diplomatic and military. In response to
the campaign of politically and strategically motivated terror in Bosnia, the international community took a series of
limited measures. These included peace initiatives and peace plans; the imposition of a comprehensive regime of
sanctions on Serbia and Montenegro for involvement in Bosnia, intended to curtail the Serb campaign there; and the
decision to deploy the largest ever UN peace force to assist in the delivery of humanitarian aid and in creating the
conditions for settlement.
The UN force was intended to assist in enabling communities under siege (in effect, mainly Muslim communities) to
remain where they were, rather than being forced to become refugees. This measure had a limited impact, but did
allow communities to remain in place. As a consequence, the Bosnian government was often able to organize
militarily in those areas, albeit on a limited scale. The role of the UN peace force in Bosnia was extended in 1993 to
include responsibility for six “safe areas” designated by the UN Security Council (Bihac, Gorazde, Sarajevo,
Srebrenica, Tuzla, and Zepa). The small pockets of troops on the ground had the possibility of being supplemented
by NATO air power, but for most of a two-year period, the management of the “safe area” regime was problematic. In
the final phase of the war, two of the areas, Srebrenica and Zepa, were overrun by Serbian troops. The peace
accord agreed at Dayton, Ohio, in November 1995, and signed by Miloševi, Bosnian President Alija Izetbegovi,
and Croatian President Franjo Tudjman on December 14, envisaged one Bosnia and Herzegovina, with two
“entities”, one Serb, the other Muslim-Croat, and three communities. A large, NATO-led international peace
implementation and stabilization force (IFOR, then SFOR) was then deployed to prevent a return to hostilities and to
assist in making the peace in Bosnia work.
An additional international response was to establish the first ever international criminal tribunal. Based in The
Hague, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was active in carrying out investigations
and issuing indictments against alleged war criminals from all parties to the conflict. By spring 1998, ICTY had
issued public indictments against almost 80 individuals, of which the majority were Serbs. In addition, there were an
unknown number of sealed indictments. At the same time, SFOR had carried out a number of operations to
apprehend indictees, while others had surrendered themselves to face trial, meaning that around 30 individuals had
been taken into custody, although a small number of these were later released without facing trial.
------------------------------------------------------------Nearly three
millennia ago, the territory now considered Bosnia and Herzegovina formed part of Illyria, which became known as
the Roman province of Illyricum in the 1st century BC. Following the collapse of the Roman Empire, first the Goths
and then the Slavs conquered the territory. Various petty Slav princes ruled the area until the 12th century AD, when
Hungary made the area one of its dominions. The Hungarians later made Bosnia a banat (province) under the
control of a ban (viceroy). Ban Stephen Krotomanic extended Hungarian authority over the principality of Hum (also
known as Zahumlje), later known as Herzegovina. Krotomanic’s nephew and successor Stephen Tvtko further
extended the boundaries, and in 1376 proclaimed himself king of Serbia and Bosnia. The kingdom began to
disintegrate after the death of Tvtko. A rebellious Bosnian chieftain seized the Hum region early in the 15th century
and established it as Herzegovina, which means “independent duchy”. By 1463 the Ottoman Empire had conquered
most of Bosnia, and Herzegovina fell to them in 1483. The two territories remained provinces of the Ottoman Empire
for the next 400 years, although unsuccessful uprisings against the Turks occurred frequently during the 19th
century.
Events Prior to Independence
The population of the area included Roman Catholic Croats, Orthodox Serbs, and Muslims (Slavs who converted to
Islam during Ottoman rule) by the late 19th century. Unrest among the various ethnic groups coupled with the
increasing deterioration of the Ottoman Empire led to a general decline of the area. During the Congress of Berlin in
1878, the Habsburg dual monarchy of the Austro-Hungarian Empire negotiated with other European rulers for
administration rights over the area, and by 1908 had annexed the two provinces. Austro-Hungarian rule did little to
quell the ethnic tensions in the region, and instead it became a centre of nationalist agitation for political
independence and cultural autonomy. Europe began to take sides in the disputes: Austria-Hungary and Germany
opposed the growing Serbian nationalism, while Russia and Great Britain, in part, supported it.
In June 1914 the heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Archduke Francis Ferdinand, and his wife were
assassinated in Sarajevo, an act that precipitated World War I. Gavrilo Princip, the assassin, was a Serb student
from Bosnia. During the war, Croats and Serbs mostly fought together, hoping to create a kingdom that would unite
all the South Slavic peoples. On December 1, 1918, following the overthrow of the Habsburg monarchy at the close
of the war, Bosnia and Herzegovina merged and became part of the independent Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and
Slovenes under the Serbian monarchy of King Alexander from 1921 to 1934. When conflict between Croats and
Serbs led to greater national tensions, Alexander tightened control over the country, and in 1929 he renamed the
kingdom Yugoslavia (which means “Land of the South Slavs”).
During World War II Axis powers invaded and dismembered Yugoslavia. Italy formed a pro-Fascist puppet state
encompassing much of Croatia and Bosnia, which was headed by native nationalists in Croatia. Yugoslavs fought
against each other during the remainder of the war; in particular, the forces of Josip Broz Tito, a Croatian
Communist, fought against the Italian-backed Croat Fascist puppet state. At the end of the war, Tito reconciled all
the various parts of Yugoslavia and created a Yugoslav federation with Bosnia and Herzegovina as one of the
constituent republics, despite insistence by Serbs that the region should be made only a province like Vojvodina and
Kosovo. During the 1960s Tito granted Muslims a distinct ethnic status, in an effort to put them on equal footing with
Serbs and Croats. In the 1970s a collective presidency was instituted in the republic. Ethnic tensions continued,
however, and worsened following Tito’s death in 1980.
In 1990 the Communist Party finally relinquished power in Yugoslavia. A panoply of political parties quickly formed
throughout the country, each advocating a different cause. Most of these new parties represented distinct ethnic
groups. During the three separate elections for members of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Assembly in November and
December 1990, the Muslim Party of Democratic Action (PDA), which had engaged in various clashes with ethnic
Serbs, won 86 seats. The Serbian Democratic Party (SDP) earned 72 seats, and the Croatian Democratic Union of
Bosnia and Herzegovina (CDU-BH) won 44 seats. These three parties together filled all seven seats of the collective
presidency. Alija Izetbegovi, leader of the PDA, became the president of the presidency in the new coalition
government.
During 1991, ethnic tensions throughout Yugoslavia helped weaken the precarious Bosnian presidency. When both
Croatia and Slovenia declared their independence from Yugoslavia in June 1991, many Serbs throughout the
remaining republics began proclaiming their allegiance to Serb-dominated federal Yugoslavia. In Bosnia and
Herzegovina, as in Croatia, they formed Serbian Autonomous Regions (SARs). Rejection of the SARs by the
Bosnian government led to armed conflicts between Serbs and non-Serbs. These conflicts escalated after the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia declared its independence from Yugoslavia in September 1991. The Yugoslav
People’s Army (JNA) demonstrated its opposition to the secession of the three republics by sending in forces in an
attempt to reimpose the federation. The JNA was defeated in Slovenia; in Croatia it helped Croatian Serbs take
about 30 per cent of the country, and almost destroyed Croatia’s culturally and architecturally most important city of
Dubrovnik. In Bosnia, the Serbian Democratic Party rejected proposals for independence by the presidency of the
republic and by the PDA. Negotiations among the various parties ended in a stalemate. The dissenting Serbs
withdrew from the National Assembly in February 1992, formed an Assembly of the Serb Nation, and held a
referendum for Serbs on whether they should remain part of Yugoslavia. While nearly all participants in the
referendum voted to remain with Yugoslavia, voters in a similar referendum in February and March 1992 open to all
ethnic groups (but boycotted by most Serbs) voted to secede. That same month, Bosnia and Herzegovina declared
its independence. Shortly thereafter, the brutal Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian War broke out as the Serbs, backed by the
Yugoslav People’s Army, began battling Croats and Muslims for territory.
Independence and War
3
Despite international recognition of the independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina, first by the United States and
European Community (now EU) in April 1992 and then by the UN in May 1992, the conflict within the country went
on unabated. By May 1992, when the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) was established by
the two remaining republics, Bosnian Serbs with JNA support had gained control of more than two thirds of Bosnia
and Herzegovina, and laid siege to Sarajevo. Early mediation efforts by the EC and the UN failed, and on May 30,
1992, the UN imposed economic sanctions against the new Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), because of
continuing Serbian government support for the Bosnian Serbian militias. The FRY was not generally internationally
recognized, and was excluded from the UN as the legal successor to the former Socialist Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia. The war took a new turn in July when a group of Croats, under the leadership of Mate Boban, formed a
breakaway Croat state called the Republic of Herceg-Bosna. This move suspended the Croat and Muslim alliance
against the Serbs, and convinced EC and UN mediators that their earlier proposal, in March 1992, which called for
the division of the country into three autonomous ethnic communities under a central authority, would be necessary
to end hostilities. As before, however, this proposal was rejected.
The Bosnian government continued to request UN intervention in the expanding war. It also asked the international
community to recognize that the imposition of economic sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro was actually more
detrimental to Bosnia, which was unable to receive supplies. The Bosnian government also protested against the
international arms embargo on the republics of the former Yugoslavia, arguing that the lack of an arms supply hurt
them more than the well-armed Serbs; as a result, the United States unilaterally decided to stop enforcing the ban in
late 1994; in July 1995 the US Congress voted by a large majority to lift the arms embargo following a withdrawal of
UN peacekeeping forces. During the second half of 1992, the international community became aware of extensive
violations of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In particular, the systematic rape of an estimated 20,000
Muslim women by Serbian soldiers, in the name of so-called “ethnic cleansing”, was recognized as a barbarous
atrocity. International mediation, however, was able to accomplish very little.
Creation of Safe Areas
In June 1993 the UN Security Council passed a resolution to create six “safe areas” for Bosnian Muslims: Bihac,
Tuzla, Srebrenica, Zepa, Gorazde, and Sarajevo. The resolution called for the deployment of up to 25,000 additional
UN soldiers and gave them the mandate to use force to defend those areas. While the safe areas provided a refuge
for many driven from their homes, the international community recognized the general ineffectiveness of this
resolution as some of the safe areas, including Sarajevo and Gorazde, continued to come under attack by Serbian
forces.
In March 1994 fighting between Bosnian Muslims and Croats ended when the two groups agreed to create a joint
federation and to ally the new federation with the republic of Croatia. The federation was based on territory
amounting to 58 per cent of Bosnia and Herzegovina, contingent upon the recovery of territory from the Serbs (who
still controlled about 70 per cent of Bosnia and Herzegovina). The federation was based on eight cantons, four of
which would be Muslim-dominated, two controlled by Croats, and the remaining two of mixed ethnicity. The new
federation coexisted with the established government of the republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which remained
under the guidance of President Alija Izetbegovic. However, in early 1995 only one of the cantons had been created,
and there were power disputes within the federation government. Izetbegovic and the Muslims remained wary of the
expansion-minded Croats, which made the federation unstable.
A ceasefire between Bosnian Serbs and the Muslim-Croat federation was declared from January to April of 1995, but
fighting continued, and attempts at renewing the agreement were not successful. Despite the ceasefire, fighting
continued in the Bihac UN “safe area”, in the north-western border region, which had been under attack since
November 1994 by Bosnian Serb forces in coalition with rebel Bosnian Muslims and Croats. These forces were
supported by Croatian Serb troops from neighbouring Serb-held territory in Croatia (the self-declared Republic of
Serbian Krajina, or RSK), with the aim of joining up the western Serb-held areas of Bosnia with the RSK. Following
this alliance between the Bosnian and Croatian Serbs, the commanders of the armies of Croatia, of the Bosnian
government, and of the Bosnian Croats agreed on March 6, to establish a military alliance between their respective
forces. The move was followed in April and May by a new Bosnian government offensive against Serb forces
surrounding the UN “safe area” of Tuzla in the northern mountains, and a Bosnian Croat offensive against Serb
strongholds in the Bosnian-Croatian border area. At the same time, Bosnian Serb forces renewed attacks on
Sarajevo.
Further Fighting and Serb Reverses
The UN responded to the increased fighting with warnings to both the Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian government
forces to withdraw from the Sarajevo area. On May 25 and 26, UN air strikes were launched against Bosnian Serb
ammunition dumps. The Serbs responded with an artillery bombardment of the Tuzla “safe area”, in which almost 50
people were killed, and by seizing several hundred UN peacekeepers as hostages and “human shields”. A rapidreaction force, made up of mainly French and British troops, was authorized to bolster the UN peacekeepers
(although it did not begin operations until late July), while President Clinton agreed in principle to send US troops to
assist in a withdrawal, should the peacekeepers find themselves in an untenable position. In June, attacks on UN
“safe areas” were escalated, leading to the fall in July of both the Srebrenica and Zepa “safe areas” in the east to the
Serbs, and a new exodus of thousands of Bosnian Muslim refugees. The continuing conflict around Bihac during this
period led to a new development in the fighting: large numbers of Croatian government troops moved into the area,
under the March military agreement with Bosnian government and Bosnian Croatian troops. The initial aim of
defending Bosnian Muslims in Bihac quickly developed into a wider offensive of retaking Serb-held territory on both
sides of the Bosnian-Croatian border. A new exodus of both Bosnian Muslim, as well as Croatian Serb, refugees
resulted from the escalation in fighting. In August the Croatian government troops turned their attention to the RSK
heartland of Krajina, which they overran in five days.
Also in August, renewed Bosnian Serb attacks on Sarajevo precipitated NATO air attacks on Bosnian-Serb targets
across Bosnia and Herzegovina. By mid-September the Bosnian Serbs had acceded to NATO demands to withdraw
their heavy weapons from around Sarajevo. During this period Bosnian-Croatian forces had made rapid gains in the
north of the country. The Bosnian Serb forces now on the defensive, and with no support from the Serbian
authorities agreed to a ceasefire which was brokered by US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke. On
November 21, 1995, the Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian governments agreed to a peace—negotiated at Dayton,
Ohio, in the United States—which would formally divide Bosnia and Herzegovina into two: a Muslim-Croat federation
with about 51 per cent of the country’s territory, and a Bosnian-Serb republic with 49 per cent. Under the agreement
the Bosnian government was to exchange territory in the north-west of the county for Serb-dominated suburbs of
Sarajevo and a land corridor linking Sarajevo to Gorazde. For its part, Croatia agreed to give the Bosnia Serbs
access to the Mediterranean in exchange for Serbian-held areas around Dubrovnik; Sepa and Srebrenica would
remain in Bosnian-Serb hands. The accord was to be monitored, and enforced, by a NATO-contolled international
Implementation Force (I-For).
Peace and Recovery
Most territory earmarked for exchange under the peace accord was successfully transferred by the February 1996
deadline; although Bosnian-Serbs caused much damage to parts of Sarajevo before they left. The US-French-British
I-For, which took over from the UN in December 1995, took action against disruptive elements, such as allegedly
Iranian-backed “terrorist” camps in Bosnia and in Herzegovina. Reconstruction of the devastated country started
during the first half of 1996, while the UN focused on attempts to bring alleged war criminals, predominantly Bosnian
Serbs, before a UN tribunal. Bosnian-Serb leader Radovan Karadi was one of those indicted for war crimes,
along with military leader General Ratko Mladi. Although Karadi was not arrested, strong efforts—led by the
United States and backed by the threat of sanctions against the Bosnian Serbs—were made to have him step down
from office. In mid-July Karadi agreed to step down from the presidency and not run for political office in future,
but he retained substantial political power.
In October 1996 Bosnia and Herzegovina established formal relations with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
which also set up an accord with the Bosnian Serb statelet in February 1997. Feuding within the Bosnian Serb
leadership from July to September 1997 was seen as a realignment of forces against Karadi and his supporters;
the settlement which ended it was brokered in Belgrade under Serbian auspices. The ensuing elections within the
Bosnian Serb republic in November 1997 evicted Karadi’s party, and a moderate pro-Western Serb leadership
took office in January 1998.1
---
-------------
-----------------
----------
-------------
4
Taliban
Islamic fundamentalist movement in Afghanistan and unofficial government of most of the country since 1996. The
Taliban movement was created in August 1994 by a senior mullah, Muhammad Omar Akhund, in the southern
Afghan town of Kandahr. The name “Taliban”, meaning “student”, supposedly refers to the group’s origins,
although most members have known war all their lives and consequently have been students only for rudimentary
religious training.
Origins
The Taliban movement emerged out of the chaos and uncertainty of the Afghan-Soviet conflict of 1979-1988, and
subsequent internal civil strife in Afghanistan. During the 1980s Afghanistan was occupied by Soviet troops and
thereafter ruled by a Soviet-backed government. Afghanistan’s long war with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR) and its Afghan puppet government was largely fought by mujahedin (guerrilla) factions with military
assistance from the United States; Pakistan also provided places of refuge, military training, and other support.
After the Soviets withdrew in 1989, civil war broke out between the mujahedin factions and the central government.
Afghanistan’s central government had long been dominated by the country’s majority ethnic group, the Pashtuns, but
after Soviet withdrawal, a coalition government that included Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, and other minority groups
came to power. The Taliban, which emerged as a mujahedin faction, consisted mostly of Pashtuns intent on once
again dominating the central government in Kabul. They were trained and armed by the Frontier Constabulary, a
quasi-military unit in Pakistan, which also has a significant Pashtun population. The Taliban promoted itself as a new
force for peace and unity, and many Afghans, particularly fellow Pashtuns, supported the Taliban in hopes of respite
from years of war.
Taliban Victory
In late 1994 and early 1995, the Taliban moved through the south and west of Afghanistan, taking control of
Kandahr and many other towns and cities dominated by fellow Pashtuns. Hert and most of the other towns along
the main southern and western highway soon followed. In February 1995 the Taliban reached the outskirts of Kabul,
but were ousted by government forces in March. Again they advanced to the capital in October. While continuing to
bombard Kabul, Taliban soldiers advanced and took control of eastern Afghanistan, as well as the remote central
area.
The Taliban continued their siege of Kabul intermittently throughout 1996, until they were able to advance in
September 1996 and capture the city. Government troops fled as Pashtun control was once again restored to the
capital. Shortly after the city fell to the Taliban, Muhammad Najibullah, the last Soviet-backed president of the
country, and his brother, the security chief Shahpur Ahmadzai, both of whom had taken refuge in the UN compound
in Kabul in 1992, were dragged out by Taliban soldiers, beaten, shot, and hanged in a public area.
Taliban Government and Policies
After taking over Kabul, the Taliban created a government agency, called the Ministry for Ordering What is Right
and Forbidding What is Wrong, to enforce its fundamentalist rules of behaviour. Some of these rules had little to do
with Islamic Shari’ah law, however, and were more influenced by ancient Pashtun tribal beliefs. Taliban leaders
banned music, shut down cinemas and burned the films, and bulldozed bottles and cans of alcohol taken from
foreign hotels. Men were ordered to grow full, untrimmed beards (in accordance with orthodox Islam), and were
rounded up and beaten with sticks in an effort to force prayer in the mosques. Women were told to cover themselves
from head to toe in burkas (long veils covering the whole body) with woven, dark screens in front of the eyes;
improperly dressed women were beaten. Girls’ schools were closed, and women were forbidden to work outside
their homes. As a result, hospitals lost almost all their staff and children in orphanages were abandoned. In a country
where hundreds of thousands of men had been killed in warfare, widows, who were the sole sources of income for
their families, found themselves unable to work.
The Taliban continued to announce additional rules and laws, using Radio Kabul, and trucks equipped with
loudspeakers. The Taliban made murder, adultery, and drug dealing punishable by death, and allowed stonings,
some of which have been fatal, of women escorted by men who are not related to them. Other rules enforced by the
Taliban include the punishment of theft by amputation of the hand. Many of these laws have alarmed human-rights
groups and provoked worldwide condemnation. Even Iran has censured the Taliban’s excesses in the name of
Islam.
The Taliban’s rapid takeover of Kabul in September 1996 paved the way for their conquest of the rest of the country,
as Taliban soldiers advanced north to the mountain strongholds of the Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras. President
Burhanuddin Rabbani and Prime Minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar fled when the Taliban took over the capital,
remaining in the northern part of the country and fighting the Taliban alongside other factions. In November 1996 the
Taliban were driven back toward Kabul. Sporadic fighting between the Taliban and the northern factions reached a
stalemate in early 1997 with all but northern Afghanistan under Taliban rule. However, by mid-1997 the Taliban had
captured some of the northern area, thus bringing most of Afghanistan under their control. Thousands of refugees
streamed into UN-supported camps outside Hert. Despite concerns over human rights abuses, particularly against
women, the UN, and also the United States and other countries, have held diplomatic talks with the Taliban in an
effort to restore peace to the area.
---
---------
-----
------
------
-------
Palestine
Historic region, the extent of which has varied greatly since ancient times, situated on the eastern coast of the
Mediterranean Sea, in the Middle East, and now largely divided between Israel and the Israeli-occupied territories.
The Land
The region has an extremely diverse terrain that falls generally into four parallel zones. From west to east they are
the coastal plain; the hills and mountains of Galilee, Samaria, and Judaea; the valley of the River Jordan; and the
eastern plateau. In the extreme south lies the Negev, a rugged desert area. Elevations range from 395 m (1,296 ft)
below sea level on the shores of the Dead Sea, the lowest point on the surface of the Earth, to 1,020 m (3,347 ft)
atop Mount Hebron. The region has several fertile areas, which constitute its principal natural resource. Most notable
of these are the Plain of Sharon, along the northern part of the Mediterranean coast, and the Plain of Esdraelon (or
Jezreel), a valley north of the hills of Samaria. The water supply of the region, however, is not abundant, with
virtually all of the modest annual rainfall coming in the winter months. The River Jordan, the region's only major
stream, flows south through Lake Tiberias (the region's only large freshwater lake) to the intensely saline Dead Sea.
History
The Canaanites were the earliest known inhabitants of Palestine. During the 3rd millennium BC they became
urbanized and lived in city-states, one of which was Jericho. They developed an alphabet from which other writing
systems were derived; their religion was a major influence on the beliefs and practices of Judaism, and thus on
Christianity and Islam.
Palestine's location—at the centre of routes linking three continents—made it the meeting place for religious and
cultural influences from Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor. It was also the natural battleground for the great
powers of the region and subject to domination by adjacent empires, beginning with Egypt in the 3rd millennium BC.
Egyptian hegemony and Canaanite autonomy were constantly challenged during the 2nd millennium BC by such
ethnically diverse invaders as the Amorites, Hittites, and Hurrians. These invaders, however, were defeated by the
Egyptians and absorbed by the Canaanites, who at that time may have numbered about 200,000. As Egyptian
power began to weaken after the 14th century BC, new invaders appeared: the Hebrews, a group of Semitic tribes
from Mesopotamia, and the Philistines (after whom the country was later named), an Aegean people of IndoEuropean stock.
The Israelite Kingdom
Hebrew tribes probably migrated to the area centuries before Moses led his people out of serfdom in Egypt (c. 1270
BC), and Joshua conquered parts of Palestine (c. 1230 BC). The conquerors settled in the hill country, but they were
unable to conquer all of Palestine.
The Israelites, a confederation of Hebrew tribes, finally defeated the Canaanites about 1125 BC but found the
struggle with the Philistines more difficult. The Philistines had established an independent state on the southern
coast of Palestine and controlled a number of towns to the north and east. Superior in military organization and using
5
iron weapons, they severely defeated the Israelites about 1050 BC. The Philistine threat forced the Jews to unite and
establish a monarchy. David, Israel's great king, finally defeated the Philistines shortly after 1000 BC, and they
eventually assimilated with the Canaanites.
The unity of Israel and the feebleness of adjacent empires enabled David to establish a large independent state, with
its capital at Jerusalem. Under David's son and successor, Solomon, Israel enjoyed peace and prosperity, but at his
death in 922 BC the kingdom was divided into Israel in the north and Judah in the south. When nearby empires
resumed their expansion, the divided Israelites could no longer maintain their independence. Israel fell to Assyria in
722 and 721 BC, and Judah was conquered in 586 BC by Babylonia, which destroyed Jerusalem and exiled most of
the Jews living there.
Persian Rule
The exiled Jews were allowed to retain their national and religious identity; some of their best theological writings
and many historical books of the Old Testament were written during their exile. At the same time they did not forget
the land of Israel. When Cyrus the Great of Persia conquered Babylonia in 539 BC he permitted them to return to
Judaea, a district of Palestine. Under Persian rule the Jews were allowed considerable autonomy. They rebuilt the
walls of Jerusalem and codified the Mosaic law, the Torah, which became the code of social life and religious
observance. The Jews believed they were bound to a universal God, Yahweh, by a covenant; indeed, their concept
of one ethical God is perhaps Judaism's greatest contribution to world civilization.
Roman Province
Persian domination of Palestine was replaced by Greek rule when Alexander the Great of Macedonia took the region
in 333 BC. Alexander's successors, the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria, continued to rule the country.
The Seleucids tried to impose Hellenistic (Greek) culture and religion on the population. In the 2nd century BC,
however, the Jews revolted under the Maccabees and set up an independent state (141-63 BC) until Pompey the
Great conquered Palestine for Rome and made it a province ruled by Jewish kings. It was during the rule (37-4 BC)
of King Herod the Great that Jesus was born.
Two more Jewish revolts erupted and were suppressed—in AD 66 to 73 and 132 to 135. After the second one,
numerous Jews were killed, many were sold into slavery, and the rest were not allowed to visit Jerusalem. Judaea
was renamed Syria Palaistina.
Palestine received special attention when the Roman emperor Constantine the Great legalized Christianity in AD
313. His mother, St Helena, visited Jerusalem, and Palestine, as the Holy Land, became a focus of Christian
pilgrimage. A golden age of prosperity, security, and culture followed. Most of the population became Hellenized and
Christianized. Byzantine (Roman) rule was interrupted, however, by a brief Persian occupation (614-629) and ended
altogether when Muslim Arab armies invaded Palestine and captured Jerusalem in AD 638.
The Arab Caliphate
The Arab conquest began 1,300 years of Muslim presence in what then became known as Filastin. Palestine was
holy to Muslims because the prophet Muhammad had designated Jerusalem as the first kiblah (the direction Muslims
face when praying) and because he was believed to have ascended on a night journey to heaven from the area of
Solomon's temple, where the Dome of the Rock was later built. Jerusalem became the third holiest city of Islam.
The Muslim rulers did not force their religion on the Palestinians, and more than a century passed before the majority
converted to Islam. The remaining Christians and Jews were considered “People of the Book”. They were allowed
autonomous control in their communities and guaranteed security and freedom of worship. Such tolerance (with few
exceptions) was rare in the history of religion. Most Palestinians also adopted Arabic and Islamic culture. Palestine
benefited from the empire's trade and from its religious significance during the first Muslim caliphate dynasty, the
Umayyads of Damascus. When power shifted to Baghdd with the Abbasids in 750, Palestine became neglected. It
suffered unrest and successive domination by Seljuks, Fatimids, and Europeans during the Crusades. It shared,
however, in the glory of Muslim civilization, when the Muslim world enjoyed a golden age of science, art, philosophy,
and literature. Muslims preserved Greek learning and broke new ground in several fields, all of which later
contributed to the Renaissance in Europe. Like the rest of the empire, however, Palestine under the Mamelukes
gradually stagnated and declined.
Ottoman Rule
The Ottoman Empire of Asia Minor defeated the Mamelukes in 1517 and, with few interruptions, ruled Palestine until
the winter of 1917 and 1918. The country was divided into several districts (sanjaks), such as that of Jerusalem. The
administration of the districts was placed largely in the hands of Arabized Palestinians, who were descendants of the
Canaanites and successive settlers. The Christian and Jewish communities, however, were allowed a large measure
of autonomy. Palestine shared in the glory of the Ottoman Empire during the 16th century, but declined again when
the empire began to decline in the 17th century.
The decline of Palestine—in trade, agriculture, and population—continued until the 19th century. At that time the
search by European powers for raw materials and markets, as well as their strategic interests, brought them to the
Middle East, stimulating economic and social development. Between 1831 and 1840, Muhammad Ali, the
modernizing viceroy of Egypt, expanded his rule to Palestine. His policies modified the feudal order, increased
agriculture, and improved education. The Ottoman Empire reasserted its authority in 1840, instituting its own
reforms. German settlers and Jewish immigrants in the 1880s brought modern machinery and badly needed capital.
The rise of European nationalism in the 19th century, and especially the intensification of anti-Semitism during the
1880s, encouraged European Jews to seek haven in their “promised land”, Palestine. Theodor Herzl, author of The
Jewish State (1896; translated 1896), founded the World Zionist Organization in 1897 to solve Europe's “Jewish
problem” through Zionism. As a result, Jewish immigration to Palestine greatly increased.
In 1880, Arab Palestinians constituted about 95 per cent of the total population of 450,000. Nevertheless, Jewish
immigration, land purchase, and claims were reacted to with alarm by some Palestinian leaders, who then became
adamantly opposed to Zionism.
The British Mandate
Aided by the Arabs, the British captured Palestine from the Ottoman Turks in 1917 and 1918. The Arabs revolted
against the Turks because the British had promised them, in correspondence (1915-1916) with Husein ibn Ali of
Mecca, the independence of their countries after the war. Britain, however, also made other, conflicting
commitments. Thus, in the secret Sykes-Picot agreement with France and Russia (1916), it promised to divide and
rule the region with its allies. In a third agreement, the Balfour Declaration of 1917, Britain promised the Jews, whose
help it needed in the war effort, a Jewish “national home” in Palestine. This promise was subsequently incorporated
in the mandate conferred on Britain by the League of Nations in 1922.
During their mandate (1922-1948) the British found their contradictory promises to the Jewish and Palestinian
communities difficult to reconcile. The Zionists envisaged large-scale Jewish immigration, and some spoke of a
Jewish state constituting all of Palestine. The Palestinians, however, rejected Britain's right to promise their country
to a third party and feared dispossession by the Zionists; anti-Zionist attacks occurred in Jerusalem (1920) and Jaffa
(1921). A 1922 statement of British policy denied Zionist claims to all of Palestine and limited Jewish immigration, but
reaffirmed support for a Jewish national home. The British proposed establishing a legislative council, but
Palestinians rejected this council as discriminatory.
After 1928, when Jewish immigration increased somewhat, British policy on the subject seesawed under conflicting
Arab-Jewish pressures. Immigration rose sharply after the installation (1933) of the National Socialist regime in
Germany; in 1935 nearly 62,000 Jews entered Palestine. Fear of Jewish domination was the principal cause of the
Arab revolt that broke out in 1936 and continued intermittently until 1939. By that time Britain had again restricted
Jewish immigration and purchases of land.
The Post-World War II Period
The struggle for Palestine, which abated during World War II, resumed in 1945. The horrors of the Holocaust
produced world sympathy for European Jewry and for Zionism, and although Britain still refused to admit 100,000
Jewish survivors to Palestine, many survivors of the Nazi death camps found their way there illegally. Various plans
for solving the Palestine problem were rejected by one party or the other. Britain finally declared the mandate
6
unworkable and turned the problem over to the United Nations in April 1947. The Jews and the Palestinians
prepared for a showdown.
Although the Palestinians outnumbered the Jews (1,300,000 to 600,000), the latter were better prepared. They had a
semi-autonomous government, led by David Ben-Gurion, and their military, the Haganah, was well trained and
experienced. The Palestinians, on the other hand, had never recovered from the Arab revolt, and most of their
leaders were in exile. The Mufti of Jerusalem, their principal spokesman, refused to accept Jewish statehood. When
the UN proposed partition in November 1947, he rejected the plan while the Jews accepted it. In the military struggle
that followed, the Palestinians were defeated. Terrorism was used on both sides.
The state of Israel was established on May 14, 1948. Five Arab armies, coming to the aid of the Palestinians,
immediately attacked it. Israeli forces defeated the Arab armies, and Israel enlarged its territory. Jordan took the
West Bank of the River Jordan, and Egypt took the Gaza Strip.
The war produced 780,000 Palestinian refugees. About half probably left out of fear and panic, while the rest were
forced out to make room for Jewish immigrants from Europe and from the Arab world. The disinherited Palestinians
spread throughout the neighbouring countries, where they have maintained their Palestinian national identity and the
desire to return to their homeland. The Palastine Liberation Organization became their governing authority. In 1967,
during the Six-Day War between Israel and neighbouring Arab countries, Israel captured the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip, as well as other areas.
In 1993, after decades of violent conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, leaders from each side agreed to the
signing of an historic peace accord. Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasir Arafat and Israeli prime minister
Yitzhak Rabin met in the United States on September 13, 1993, to witness the signing of the agreement. The plan
called for Palestinian self-rule in Israeli-occupied territories, beginning with the Gaza Strip and Jericho. Palestinian
administration of these areas began in May 1994.
---
-----
-------- -
-------------
----------
------
World War I
Military conflict, from 1914 to 1918, that began as a local European war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia on July
28, 1914; was transformed into a general European struggle by Germany's declaration of war against Russia on
August 1, 1914; and eventually became a global war involving 32 nations. Twenty-eight of these nations, known as
the Allies and the Associated Powers, and including Great Britain, France, Russia, Italy, and the United States,
opposed the coalition known as the Central Powers, consisting of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, and Bulgaria.
The immediate cause of the war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia was the assassination on June 28, 1914, at
Sarajevo in Bosnia (then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire; now in Bosnia and Herzegovina), of Archduke Francis
Ferdinand, heir-presumptive to the Austrian and Hungarian thrones, by Gavrilo Princip, a Serb nationalist. The
fundamental causes of the conflict, however, were rooted deeply in the European history of the previous century,
particularly in the political and economic policies that prevailed on the Continent after 1871, the year that marked the
emergence of Germany as a great world power.
Causes of the War
The underlying causes of World War I were the spirit of intense nationalism that permeated Europe throughout the
19th and into the 20th century, the political and economic rivalry among the nations, and the establishment and
maintenance in Europe after 1871 of large armaments and of two hostile military alliances.
Nationalism
The French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars had spread throughout most of Europe the idea of political
democracy, with the resulting idea that people of the same ethnic origin, language, and political ideals had the right
to independent states. The principle of national self-determination, however, was largely ignored by the dynastic and
reactionary forces that dominated in the settlement of European affairs at the Congress of Vienna in 1815. Several
peoples who desired national autonomy were made subject to local dynasts or to other nations. Notable examples
were the German people, whom the Congress of Vienna left divided into numerous duchies, principalities, and
kingdoms; Italy, also left divided into many parts, some of which were under foreign control; and the Flemish- and
French-speaking Belgians of the Austrian Netherlands, whom the congress placed under Dutch rule. Revolutions
and strong nationalistic movements during the 19th century succeeded in nullifying much of the reactionary and antinationalist work of the congress. Belgium won its independence from the Netherlands in 1830, the unification of Italy
was accomplished in 1861, and that of Germany in 1871. At the close of the century, however, the problem of
nationalism was still unresolved in other areas of Europe, resulting in tensions both within the regions involved and
between various European nations. One particularly prominent nationalistic movement, Pan-Slavism, figured heavily
in the events preceding the war.
Imperialism
The spirit of nationalism was also manifest in economic conflict. The Industrial Revolution, which took place in Great
Britain at the end of the 18th century, followed in France in the early 19th century, and then in Germany after 1870,
caused an immense increase in the manufactures of each country and a consequent need for foreign markets. The
principal field for the European policies of economic expansion was Africa, and on that continent colonial interests
frequently clashed. Several times between 1898 and 1914 the economic rivalry in Africa between France and Great
Britain, and between Germany on one side and France and Great Britain on the other, almost precipitated a
European war.
Military Expansion
As a result of such tensions, between 1871 and 1914 the nations of Europe adopted domestic measures and foreign
policies that in turn steadily increased the danger of war. Convinced that their interests were threatened, they
maintained large standing armies, which they constantly replenished and augmented by peacetime conscription. At
the same time, they increased the size of their navies. The naval expansion was intensely competitive. Great Britain,
influenced by the expansion of the German navy begun in 1900 and by the events of the Russo-Japanese War,
developed its fleet under the direction of Admiral Sir John Fisher. The war between Russia and Japan had proved
the efficacy of long-range naval guns, and the British accordingly developed the widely copied dreadnought
battleship, notable for its heavy armament. Developments in other areas of military technology and organization led
to the dominance of general staffs with precisely formulated plans for mobilization and attack, often in programmes
that could not be reversed once begun.
Statesmen everywhere realized that the tremendous and ever-growing expenditures for armament would in time
lead either to national bankruptcy or to war, and they made several efforts for worldwide disarmament, notably at the
Hague Conferences of 1899 and 1907. International rivalry was, however, too far advanced to permit any progress
towards disarmament at these conferences.
The European nations not only armed themselves for purposes of “self-defence”, but also, in order not to find
themselves standing alone if war did break out, sought alliances with other powers. The result was a phenomenon
that in itself greatly increased the chances for generalized war: the grouping of the great European powers into two
hostile military alliances, the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy and the Triple Entente of Great
Britain, France, and Russia. Shifts within these alliances added to the building sense of crisis.
1905-1914: Crises Foreshadowing the War
With Europe divided into two hostile camps, any disturbance of the existing political or military situation in Europe,
Africa, or elsewhere provoked an international incident. Between 1905 and 1914 several international crises and two
local wars occurred, all of which threatened to bring about a general European War. The first crisis occurred over
Morocco, where Germany intervened in 1905-1906 to support Moroccan independence against French
encroachment. France threatened war against Germany, but the crisis was finally settled by an international
conference at Algeciras, Spain, in 1906. Another crisis took place in the Balkans in 1908 over the annexation by
Austria-Hungary of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Because one form of pan-Slavism was a Pan-Serbian or Greater
Serbia movement in Serbia, which had as one of its objects the acquisition by Serbia of the southern part of Bosnia,
the Serbs threatened war against Austria. War was avoided only because Serbia could not fight without Russian
support, and Russia at the time was unprepared for war. A third crisis, again in Morocco, occurred in 1911 when the
German government sent a warship to Agadir in protest against French efforts to secure supremacy in Morocco.
After threats of war on both sides, the matter was settled by a colonial compromise between France and Germany in
November 1911. Taking advantage of the preoccupation of the Great Powers with the Moroccan question, Italy
declared war on Turkey in 1911, hoping to annex the Tripoli region of northern Africa. Because Germany's policy of
7
Drang nach Osten (“drive towards the East”) obliged it to cultivate friendship with Turkey, the Italian attack had the
effect of weakening the Triple Alliance and encouraging its enemies. The Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 resulted in an
increased desire on the part of Serbia to obtain the parts of Austria-Hungary inhabited by Slavic peoples,
strengthened Austro-Hungarian suspicion of Serbia, and left Bulgaria and Turkey, both defeated in the wars, with a
desire for revenge. Germany, disappointed because Turkey had been deprived of its European territory by the
Balkan Wars, increased the size of its army. France responded by increasing peacetime military service from two to
three years. Following the example of these nations, all the others of Europe in 1913 and 1914 spent huge sums for
military preparedness.
Military Operations
On a Europe thus heavily armed and torn by national rivalries, the assassination of the Austrian archduke had a
catastrophic effect.
Diplomatic Moves
The Austro-Hungarian government, considering the assassination the work of the Greater Serbian movement,
concluded that the movement must be suppressed by a military expedition into Serbia. Otherwise it might become
powerful enough, particularly if aided by similar movements elsewhere, to cause the disruption of the AustroHungarian Empire. On July 23 Austria-Hungary sent an ultimatum to Serbia submitting ten specific demands, most
of which had to do with the suppression, with Austrian help, of anti-Austrian propaganda in Serbia. Urged by both
Great Britain and Russia, Serbia on July 25 accepted all but two of the demands, but Austria declared the Serbian
reply to be unsatisfactory. The Russians then attempted to persuade Austria to modify the terms of the ultimatum,
declaring that if Austria marched on Serbia, Russia would mobilize against Austria. A proposal, on July 26, by the
British foreign secretary, Sir Edward Grey, that a conference of Great Britain, France, Germany, and Italy settle the
Austro-Serbian dispute, was rejected by Germany.
Declarations of War
On July 28 Austria declared war against Serbia, either because it felt Russia would not actually fight for Serbia, or
because it was prepared to risk a general European conflict in order to put an end to the Greater Serbia movement.
Russia responded by partially mobilizing against Austria. Germany warned Russia that continued mobilization would
entail war with Germany, and it made Austria agree to discuss with Russia possible modification of the ultimatum to
Serbia. Germany insisted, however, that Russia immediately demobilize. Russia declined to do so, and on August 1
Germany declared war on Russia.
The French began to mobilize on the same day; on August 2 German troops traversed Luxembourg and on August 3
Germany declared war on France. On August 2 the German government informed the government of Belgium of its
intention to march on France through Belgium in order, as it claimed, to forestall an attack on Germany by French
troops marching through Belgium. The Belgian government refused to permit the passage of German troops and
called on the signatories of the Treaty of 1839, which guaranteed the neutrality of Belgium in case of a conflict in
which Great Britain, France, and Germany were involved, to observe their guarantee. Great Britain, one of the
signatories, on August 4 sent an ultimatum to Germany demanding that Belgian neutrality be respected; when
Germany refused, Britain declared war on it the same day. Italy remained neutral until May 23, 1915, when, to satisfy
its claims against Austria, it broke with the Triple Alliance and declared war on Austria-Hungary. In September 1914
Allied unity was made stronger by the Pact of London, signed by France, Great Britain, and Russia. As the war
progressed, other countries, including Turkey, Japan, the United States, and other nations of the western
hemisphere, were drawn into the conflict. Japan, which had made an alliance with Great Britain in 1902, declared
war on Germany on August 23, 1914. The United States declared war on Germany on April 6, 1917.
1914-1915: Entrenchment
Military operations began on three major European fronts: the western, or Franco-Belgian; the eastern, or Russian;
and the southern, or Serbian. In November 1914 Turkey entered the war on the side of the Central Powers, and
fighting also took place between Turkey and Great Britain at the Dardanelles and in Turkish-held Mesopotamia. In
late 1915 two more fronts had been established: the Austro-Italian, after Italy joined the Allies in May 1915; and one
on the Greek border north of Salonika (Thessaloníki), after Bulgaria joined the Central Powers in October 1915.
The Western Front
The initial German plan of the campaign was to defeat France quickly in the west, while a small part of the German
army and the entire Austro-Hungarian army held in check an expected Russian invasion in the east. The speedy
defeat of France was to be accomplished by a strategic plan known as the Schlieffen plan, which had been drawn up
by Count Alfred von Schlieffen, German chief of staff from 1891 to 1907. The Schlieffen plan called for powerful
German forces to sweep through Belgium, outflank the French by their rapid movement, then wheel about, surround,
and destroy them. As executed with certain modifications in the autumn of 1914, the plan at first seemed likely to
succeed. The swift German incursion into Belgium at the beginning of August routed the Belgian army, which
abandoned the strongholds of Liège and Namur and took safety in the fortress of Antwerp. The Germans, rushing
onward, then defeated the French at Charleroi and the British Expeditionary Force of 90,000 men at Mons, causing
the entire Allied line in Belgium to retreat. At the same time the Germans drove the French out of Lorraine, which
they had briefly invaded, and back from the borders of Luxembourg. The British and French hastily fell back to the
River Marne, but three German armies advanced steadily to the Marne, which they then crossed. The fall of the
French capital seemed so imminent that the French government moved to Bordeaux. After the Germans had
crossed the Marne, however, the French under General Joseph Jacques Césaire Joffre wheeled around Paris and
attacked the First German Army, commanded by General Alexander von Kluck, on the right of the three German
armies moving on Paris.
In the First Battle of the Marne, which took place on September 6-9, the French halted the advance of Kluck's army,
which had outdistanced the other two German armies and could not obtain their support. In addition, the German
forces had been weakened on August 25 when, believing the victory had already been won in the west, the German
chief of staff, General Helmuth von Moltke, dispatched six corps to the eastern front. The French pressure on the
German right flank caused the retreat of Kluck's army and then a general retreat of all the German forces to the
River Aisne. The French advanced and, in an endeavour to force the Germans from the Aisne, engaged them in
three battles: the Battle of the Aisne; a battle on the River Somme; and the First Battle of Arras. The Germans,
however, could not be dislodged, and even extended their line eastwards to the Meuse north of Verdun. A race to
the North Sea ensued between the two belligerents, the objective being the channel ports. The Germans were
prevented from advancing to the French channel ports chiefly by the flooding of the region of the River Yser by the
Belgians. The western part of the Allied line was held by the British who, in the race for the channel, had advanced
to Ypres, the south-west corner of Belgium. After taking Antwerp on October 10, the Germans endeavoured to break
through the British positions in Belgium, but were checked in a series of engagements known collectively as the
Battle of Flanders. In December the Allies attacked along the entire front, from Nieuport in the west to Verdun in the
east, but failed to make any appreciable gains.
By the end of 1914 both sides had established lines extending about 800 km (about 500 mi) from Switzerland to the
North Sea and had entrenched; these lines were destined to remain almost stationary for the next three years.
The Battle of Flanders marked the conclusion of the war of movement or fighting in the open on the western front.
From the end of 1914 until nearly the end of the war in 1918, the fighting consisted largely of trench warfare, in which
each side laid siege to the other's system of trenches, consisting of numerous parallel lines of intercommunicating
trenches protected by lines of barbed wire, and endeavoured from time to time to break through the lines. In this type
of fighting during 1915 in the west, the Allies were on the offensive; the Germans, who were engaged in a heavy
offensive on the eastern front (see below), made only a single attack in the west during the year. The principal
attempts in 1915 to force a breakthrough included a British attack at Neuve Chapelle in March, which took only the
German advance line. The Germans unsuccessfully attacked Ypres in April, using clouds of chlorine gas, the first
time in history that gas warfare was used in this manner on a large scale. A combined attack by the British and
French along the front between Neuve Chapelle and Arras, in May and June, advanced troops 4 km (2.5 mi) into the
German trench system, but did not secure a breakthrough. Unsuccessful simultaneous attacks were made in
September by the British in the town of Lens and French at Vimy Ridge overlooking the town. A large-scale French
attack in September on a front of about 25 km (15 mi) between Reims and the Argonne Forest, took the Germans'
first line of trenches, but was stopped at the second. On the whole the lines that had been established in the west at
the close of 1914 remained practically unchanged during 1915.
8
The Eastern Front
On the eastern front, in accordance with the plans of the Allies, the Russians assumed the offensive at the very
beginning of the war. In August 1914 two Russian armies advanced into East Prussia, and four Russian armies
invaded the Austrian province of Galicia. In East Prussia a series of Russian victories against numerically inferior
German forces had made the evacuation of that region by the Germans imminent, when a reinforced German army
commanded by General Paul von Hindenburg decisively defeated the Russians in the Battle of Tannenberg, fought
on August 26-30, 1914. The four Russian armies invading Austria advanced steadily through Galicia; they took
Przemysl and Bukovina, and by the end of March 1915 were in a position to move into Hungary. In April, however, a
combined German and Austrian army drove the Russians back from the Carpathians. In May the Austro-German
armies began a great offensive in central Poland, and by September 1915 had driven the Russians out of Poland,
Lithuania, and Courland, and had also taken possession of all the frontier fortresses of Russia. To meet this
offensive the Russians withdrew their forces from Galicia. The Russian lines, when the German drive had ceased,
lay behind the Dvina River between Riga and Dvinsk (Daugavpils), and then ran south to the Dnestr River. Although
the Central Powers did not force a decision on the eastern front in 1914-1915, the Russians lost so many men and
such large quantities of supplies that they were subsequently unable to play any decisive role in the war. In addition
to the Battle of Tannenberg, notable battles on this front during 1914-1915, centred on Masuria were the First Battle
of the Masurian Lakes (September 7-14, 1914), and the Second Battle of the Masurian Lakes (February 7-21, 1915),
both German victories.
The War in Serbia
On the Serbian front considerable activity took place in 1914-1915. In 1914 the Austrians undertook three invasions
of Serbia, all of which were repulsed; the Serbs, however, made no attempt to invade Austria-Hungary. The front
remained inactive until October 1915. Early that month, in anticipation of Bulgarian entrance into the war on the side
of the Central Powers, and in order to aid Serbia, which would be the target of a Bulgarian attack, British and French
troops were landed at Salonika, the gateway into the Balkans, by arrangement with the neutral Greek government.
After Bulgaria declared war on Serbia on October 14, 1915, the Allied troops advanced into Serbia. The Bulgarian
troops defeated Serbian forces in Serbia and also the British and French troops that had come up from Salonika.
Also in anticipation of the Bulgarian declaration of war, on October 6 a strong Austro-German drive, commanded by
General August von Mackensen, was launched from Austria-Hungary into Serbia. By the end of 1915 the Central
Powers had conquered all of Serbia and eliminated the Serbian army as a fighting force. The surviving Serbian
troops took refuge in Montenegro, Albania, and the Greek island of Corfu (Kérkira), which the French occupied in
January 1916 in order to provide a place of safety for the routed Serbs. The British and French troops in Serbia
retreated to Salonika, which they fortified and where they were held in readiness for later action.
The Turkish Front
Turkey entered the war on October 29, 1914, when Turkish warships cooperated with German warships in a naval
bombardment of Russian Black Sea ports; Russia formally declared war on Turkey on November 2, and Great
Britain and France followed suit on November 5. In December the Turks began an invasion of the Russian Caucasus
region. The invasion was successful at its inception, but by August 1915 the hold that Turkish forces had gained had
been considerably reduced. Turkish pressure in the area, however, impelled the Russian government early in 1915
to demand a diversionary attack by Great Britain on Turkey. In response, British naval forces under the command of
General Sir Ian Hamilton bombarded the Turkish forts at the Dardanelles in February 1915, and between April and
August, two landings of Allied troops took place on the Gallipoli Peninsula, one of British, Australian, and French
troops in April, and one of several additional British divisions in August. The Allied purpose was to take the
Dardanelles; however, strong resistance by Turkish troops and bad generalship on the part of the Allied command
made the Gallipoli campaign a complete failure. The Allied troops were withdrawn in December 1915 and January
1916.
In the Mesopotamian Valley, meanwhile, British forces from India defeated the Turks in several battles during 19141915, particularly that of Kut-al-Imara; but in the Battle of Ctesiphon, November 1915, the Turks checked the
advance of the British towards Baghdd and forced them to retreat to Kut-al-Imara. On December 7 the Turks laid
siege to this town.
The Italian Front
Italy declared war on Austria-Hungary on May 23, 1915. The chief military events on the Austro-Italian Front in 1915
were four indecisive battles between Austro-Hungarian and Italian armies on the Isonzo River (June 29-July 7, July
18-August 10, October 18-November 3, and November 10-December 10). The purpose of the Italian attack was to
break through the Austrian lines and capture Trieste.
1916: Continued Stalemate
German success in 1915 in thrusting the Russians back from East Prussia, Galicia, and Poland enabled Germany to
transfer some 500,000 men from the eastern to the western front for an attempt to force a decision in the west during
1916.
Verdun and the Somme
The German plan, as worked out by Erich von Falkenhayn, chief of the general staff of the German army, was to
attack the French fortress at Verdun in great strength in an effort to weaken the French irretrievably by causing the
maximum possible number of casualties. The Allied plan for 1916, as laid out by commanders in chief, Marshal
Joffre of the French army and General Sir Douglas Haig of the British, was to attempt to break through the German
lines in the west by a massive offensive during the summer in the region of the River Somme. The Germans opened
the Battle of Verdun, on February 21. After bitter fighting the Germans took Fort Douaumont (February 25), Fort
Vaux (June 2), and the fortifications of Thiaumont (June 23), but did not succeed in capturing Verdun. (It was here
that General Henri Philippe Pétain gained prominence as the “hero of Verdun”.) Because of the severe losses in the
battle, the French were able to contribute to the Allied offensive on the Somme only 16 divisions of the 40 originally
planned; the offensive, which began on July 1 and continued until the middle of November, consequently was largely
in the hands of the British. They succeeded in winning about 325 sq km (125 sq mi) of territory, but the drive did not
bring about a breakthrough. The First Battle of the Somme marked the earliest use of the modern tank, deployed by
the British on September 15 in an attack near Courcelette. From October to December the French staged a counterattack at Verdun and succeeded in recapturing Forts Douaumont and Vaux (November 2), restoring the situation that
had prevailed before February. In August Hindenburg replaced Falkenhayn as German chief of staff with General
Erich Ludendorff. In December General Robert Georges Nivelle succeeded Joffre as commander in chief of the
French armies in the north and north-east.
Russian Losses—Romanian Defeat
On the eastern front in 1916 the Russians staged an offensive in the Lake Narocz region about 95 km (60 mi) northeast of Vilna. Their attack, designed to force the Germans to move troops from Verdun to the Lake Narocz region,
was a complete failure. Not only did it fail to divert the Germans in any degree from their attack on Verdun, but also
the Russians lost more than 100,000 men. In June the Russians carried out a more successful offensive. In
response to an Italian request for action to relieve the pressure of an Austrian offensive in the Trentino-Alto Adige
region (see below), the Russians moved against the Austrians on a front extending from Pinsk south to Czernowitz.
By September, when strong German reinforcements from the western front stopped the Russian advance, the
Russians had driven some 65 km (40 mi) into the Austro-German position along the entire front and had taken about
500,000 prisoners. They did not succeed, however, in capturing either of their objectives, the cities of Kovel and
Lemberg; and their losses of approximately 1 million men left the army in a demoralized and discouraged state. The
Russian drive had nonetheless given sufficient evidence of strength to play a large part in inducing Romania to enter
the war on the side of the Allies (August 27, 1916). After its entrance into the war, Romania at once began an
invasion of the Austro-Hungarian province of Transylvania (August-September), but Austro-German forces speedily
drove the Romanians out of that region. In conjunction with Bulgarian and Turkish troops, the Austro-German forces
invaded Romania (November-December). By the middle of January 1917 Romania had been completely conquered,
and the Central Powers had gained a valuable source of wheat and oil.
Italy and the Balkans
On the Italian front 1916 was marked by another inconclusive battle on the Isonzo River, the fifth of a series in that
region, and by an Austrian offensive in the Trentino designed to break through the Italian lines and reach the rear of
the Italian position on the Isonzo. The Austrians gained considerable territory in the Trentino, but lacked the strength
to accomplish a breakthrough, and an Italian counter-offensive (June-July) succeeded in regaining most of the
9
captured terrain. From August to November four additional inconclusive battles took place on the Isonzo; the
principal gain on either side was the capture of Gorizia by the Italians on August 9.
In the Balkans during 1916 the Allied powers interfered in Greek affairs on the grounds that the Greek government
under King Constantine I was, in spite of its declared neutrality, unduly favouring the Central Powers. Allied
intervention brought about the establishment (September 29) of a provisional Greek government under the
statesman Eleutherios Venizelos, who had consistently favoured the Allied cause. At Salonika the provisional
government declared war on Germany and Bulgaria on November 3. The government of King Constantine was still
in power in Athens and large parts of Greece, and friction took place between that government and the Allies, who
resorted to a naval blockade of Greece and other action in order to enforce their demands that the Greeks cease
aiding the Central Powers. On December 19 Great Britain officially recognized the provisional Greek government.
Two periods of fighting took place in the Balkans during 1916. In August a Serbian army, brought to Salonika after
having been reconstituted at Corfu, advanced together with Russian and Italian troops against the Bulgarians and
Germans on the Salonika front. After they had gained some initial successes, a strong counter-attack thrust them
back. Beginning in early October Allied forces began a large-scale offensive in Macedonia. On November 19 the
Allied troops captured Monastir, and by the middle of December had reached Lake Ohrid, on the border of Albania
and Macedonia.
The Turkish Dominions
Considerable military activity took place in 1916 in three parts of the Turkish Ottoman Empire: Mesopotamia, Arabia,
and Palestine. In Mesopotamia, the besieged town of Kut-al-Imara fell to the Turks on April 29, 1916. In December of
that year the British began a drive towards the town, which they recaptured two months later. In Arabia in June 1916
Husein ibn Ali, grand sharif of Mecca, continued the traditional conflict between Arabs and Turks by leading, with his
son Abdullah ibn Husein, the revolt of Al ijz (now in Saudi Arabia) against Turkish rule. Husein had the help of the
British, who recognized him as king of Al ijz in December 1916. As a diversionary move to aid the Arabian revolt,
the British in November began an advance from Egypt, which they had garrisoned since early in the war, into the
Sinai Peninsula and Palestine, and by the early days of January 1917 had taken several fortifications.
Negotiation Attempts
In 1916 President Woodrow Wilson of the United States, at that time a neutral nation, attempted to bring about
negotiations between the belligerent groups of powers that would in his own words bring “peace without victory”. As
a result of his efforts, and particularly of the conferences held in Europe during the year by Wilson's confidential
adviser, Colonel Edward M. House, with leading European statesmen, some progress was at first apparently made
towards bringing an end to the war. In December the German government informed the United States that the
Central Powers were prepared to undertake peace negotiations. When the United States informed the Allies, Great
Britain rejected the German advances for two reasons: Germany had not laid down any specific terms for peace; and
the military situation at the time (Romania had just been conquered by the Central Powers) was so favourable to the
Central Powers that no acceptable terms could reasonably be expected from them. Wilson continued his mediatory
efforts, calling on the belligerents to specify the terms on which they would make peace. He finally succeeded in
eliciting concrete terms from each group, but they proved irreconcilable.
1917: US Entrance—Russian Withdrawal
Wilson still attempted to find some basis of agreement between the two belligerent groups until a change in German
war policy in January 1917 completely altered his point of view towards the war. In that month Germany announced
that, beginning on February 1, it would resort to unrestricted submarine warfare against the shipping of Great Britain
and all shipping to Great Britain. German military and civil experts had calculated that such warfare would bring
about the defeat of Great Britain in six months. Because the United States had already expressed its strong
opposition to unrestricted submarine warfare, which, it claimed, violated its rights as a neutral, and had even
threatened to break relations with Germany over the issue, Wilson dropped his peacemaking efforts. On February 3,
the United States broke diplomatic relations with Germany and at Wilson's request a number of Latin American
nations, including Peru, Bolivia, and Brazil, also did so. On April 6 the United States declared war on Germany.
Arras and Ypres
In 1917 the Allies made two large-scale attempts to break the German lines on the western front. The first Allied
attempt took place near Arras between April 9 and May 21. While it was being planned by the British and the French
high commands, the Germans withdrew from their original line along the Aisne to a new position, previously
prepared somewhat to the north, and known as the Hindenburg line, against which the Allies directed their attack.
Their offensive included the Third Battle of Arras, in which Canadian troops captured the heavily fortified and
stubbornly defended Vimy Ridge, and the British forces made an advance of 6 km (4 mi); and a battle on the Aisne,
and one in the Champagne district, both of which resulted in a slight French gain at a cost in casualties so great as
to cause a mutiny among the troops. Because of the failure of his reckless attack, General Nivelle on May 15 was
replaced by General Henri Philippe Pétain; the new commander's policy was to remain on the defensive until US
troops arrived.
The second great Allied offensive took place in June, when the British under Haig made an attempt in Flanders to
break through the right wing of the German position. A preliminary battle at Messines set the stage for the main
attacks (July 31-November 10) at Ypres, the so-called Third Battle of Ypres or Passchendale campaign. Desperate
fighting, in which each side suffered approximately 250,000 casualties, did not result in a breakthrough.
Use of Tanks
Other attacks of Allied forces on the western front in 1917 included a battle at Verdun, in which the French
succeeded in regaining an additional section of the area they had lost the previous year; and (November 20December 3) the Battle of Cambrai, during which the British opened the attack with a raid by nearly 400 tanks. This
was the first tank raid on such a scale in military history, and, but for lack of reserves, the British might have
achieved a breakthrough. As it was, the British drove an 8-km (5-mi) salient into the German lines. German counterattacks, however, compelled the British to yield most of the newly won ground.
After the United States entered the war in April 1917, it moved rapidly to raise and transport overseas a strong
military force, known as the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), under the command of General John J. Pershing.
By June 1917 more than 175,000 American troops were training in France, and one division was actually in the lines
of the Allied sector near Belfort; by November 1918 the strength of the AEF was nearly 2 million. From the spring of
1918 US troops played an important part in the fighting.
Submarine Warfare
In 1917 not only did the United States enter the war, but also the Germans failed in their attempt to drive Great
Britain to surrender through the destruction by submarine of the British and Allied shipping on which it depended for
food and other supplies. At the outset the German submarine campaign seemed likely to succeed. Towards the end
of 1916 German submarines were destroying monthly about 300,000 tons of British and Allied shipping in the North
Atlantic; in April 1917 the figure was 875,000 tons. Because the Germans had calculated that the destruction of
600,000 tons monthly for six consecutive months would be sufficient to force Great Britain to capitulate, they were
doubly certain of victory after April. Great Britain, however, roused itself to unprecedented efforts to fight the
submarine menace. By the adoption of a convoy system of screening fleets of merchant vessels with warships,
especially destroyers and submarine chasers, and by the use of hydroplanes for spotting submarines and depth
charges for destroying them, Great Britain, as the summer advanced, rendered the German submarine campaign
less and less effective. By the autumn, although large numbers of Allied ships were still being sunk, the Germans
were sustaining heavy losses in submarines. At the same time the Allied nations, especially the United States, were
rapidly building new shipping. By the outset of 1918 the Allies were turning out more new ships than the Germans
were destroying, and the German effort to end the war by submarine warfare had clearly failed.
Russia Withdraws
On the eastern front the dominating influence on the fighting during 1917 was the outbreak in March of the Russian
popular uprising against the imperial government, which resulted in turn in the establishment of a provisional
government and the abdication, in March, of Tsar Nicholas II. The provisional government continued the prosecution
of the war, in July, under General Aleksey Alekeseyevich Brusilov, the Russians staged a moderately successful 2week drive on the Galician front, but then lost much of the territory they had gained. In September the Germans took
10
Riga, defended by Russian forces under General Lavr Georgiyevich Kornilov, and in October occupied the greater
part of Latvia and a number of Russian-held islands in the Baltic Sea. The Bolshevik party seized power by force on
November 7. A cardinal policy of Bolshevism was the withdrawal of Russia from the war, and on November 20 the
government that had just come into power offered the German government an armistice. On December 15 an
armistice was signed between the Russian and Austro-German negotiators, and fighting ceased on the eastern front.
Italian Setbacks
The Allies suffered disaster on the Italian front in 1917. During the first eight months of the year, despite deficiencies
in troop strength, artillery, and ammunition, the Italian forces under General Luigi Cadorna continued efforts to break
through the Austrian lines on the Isonzo River and to attain Trieste. The Italian drives of 1917, which resulted in the
10th and 11th battles of the Isonzo, did not attain their objective. The latter part of the year (October-December) was
marked by a determined Austro-German offensive carried on by nine Austrian and six newly arrived German
divisions. Attacking on the upper Isonzo near the town of Caporetto, they succeeded in breaking the line of the
Italians, who fell back in confusion from the Isonzo to positions on the Piave River. In the disastrous Battle of
Caporetto the Italian forces lost 300,000 men as prisoners alone and, the morale of the army broken, approximately
the same number as deserters. In November British and French troops arrived to reinforce the Italians on the Piave,
and a new Italian commander in chief, General Armando Díaz, was appointed in place of General Cadorna.
Greece Enters the War
On the Balkan front in 1917, after the Allied troops had fought several inconclusive engagements at Monastir, at
Lake Presba, and on the Vardar River, the Allies initiated an effort to oust the Greek king, Constantine, claiming that
his pro-German sympathies and his aid to the Central Powers made it impossible for the Allies to conduct successful
operations in the Balkan region. In June the Allies began an invasion of Greece, and at the same time exerted
diplomatic pressure on Constantine to abdicate. He did so on June 12; Venizelos became premier of the government
formed under Alexander, the son of Constantine; and on June 27 the Greek government declared war on all four
Central Powers.
The Middle East
In Palestine during 1917 the British made two unsuccessful attempts (March and April) to take the city of Gaza.
Under a new commander, General (later Field Marshal) Sir Edmund Allenby, the British broke through the Turkish
lines at Beersheba (November), compelling the evacuation of Gaza; and on December 9, Allenby's troops took
Jerusalem. The year also witnessed the beginning of the brilliant leadership of British Colonel T. E. Lawrence, known
as Lawrence of Arabia, in the Arab revolt against Turkey. Arab troops led by Lawrence took the Turkish-held port of
Al'Aqabah in July, and during the remainder of the year executed many forays against the Turkish-held Hejz
railway. The year 1917 was also marked by British successes in Mesopotamia; they took Baghdd in March and by
September had advanced to Ramadi on the River Euphrates and Tikrit on the Tigris.
1918: The Final Year
The early part of 1918 did not look propitious for the Allied nations. On March 3 Russia signed the Treaty of BrestLitovsk, which put a formal end to the war between that nation and the Central Powers on terms more favourable to
the latter; and on May 7 Romania made peace with the Central Powers, signing the Treaty of Bucharest, by the
terms of which it ceded the Dobruja region to Bulgaria and the passes in the Carpathian Mountains to AustriaHungary, and gave Germany a long-term lease on the Romanian oil wells.
Bulgaria and Austria-Hungary Withdraw
On the Balkan front, however, the result of the fighting of 1918 was disastrous to the Central Powers. In September
a force of about 700,000 Allied troops, consisting of French, British, Greeks, Serbs, and Italians, began a large-scale
offensive against the German, Austrian, and Bulgarian troops in Serbia. The Allied offensive was so successful that
by the end of the month the Bulgarians were thoroughly beaten and concluded an armistice with the Allies. The
German success in Romania was nullified in November when, with the support of Allied troops who had advanced
into Romania after the Bulgarian capitulation, Romania re-entered the war on the Allied side. After the conclusion of
the Bulgarian armistice, the Serbian part of the Allied army continued to advance, occupying Belgrade on November
1, while the Italian army invaded and occupied Albania.
On the Italian-Austro-Hungarian front, the Austrians, in June, attacked on the Piave and succeeded in crossing the
river, only to be driven back with the loss of about 100,000 men. In October-November the Allies definitely gained
the victory in Italy, routing the Austrians in an offensive that culminated in the Battle of Vittorio Veneto (October 24November 4). The Allies completely shattered the Austrian army in this campaign; they took several hundred
thousand prisoners and the remainder of the Austrian army fled into Austria. On November 3 the Italians at last took
Trieste, and on November 5 they occupied Fiume. The shock of the defeat precipitated revolutionary events in
Austria-Hungary. The Czechs and the Slovaks had already set up a separate state; in October the South Slavs
proclaimed their independence, and in December set up an independent kingdom, later part of Yugoslavia (now
Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, and Yugoslavia). In November the Hungarians established
an independent government. The Austro-Hungarian government at Vienna concluded an armistice with the Allies on
November 3 and nine days later the last Habsburg emperor, Charles I, abdicated; on the following day the Austrian
Republic was proclaimed.
Turkey Withdraws
During 1918 the Allies also brought the campaigning in Palestine to a successful conclusion. In September the
British forces broke through the Turkish lines at Megiddo and routed the Turkish army and the German corps that
was assisting it; after being joined by Arab forces under Lawrence, the British took Lebanon and Syria. In October
they captured Damascus, Aleppo, and other key points, while French naval forces occupied Beirut, and the Turkish
government asked for an armistice. An armistice was concluded on October 30, and by its terms the Turks were
obliged to demobilize, break relations with the Central Powers, and permit Allied warships to pass through the
Dardanelles.
Last German Efforts
Despite the German victories over Russia and Romania in 1917, at the outset of 1918 the Allies, principally through
their spokesman Woodrow Wilson, formulated war aims drastically opposed to those already stated by the Central
Powers; Wilson's peace policy was enunciated in an address to the US Congress and comprised 14 points designed
to bring about a just peace, which were of considerable influence in inducing the Central Powers to cease hostilities
later in the year. At the beginning of 1918 the Germans, realizing that victory by means of submarine warfare was
impossible, and that they must force a decision on the western front before American troops might take up positions
there in force, planned for the spring of the year an all-out effort to break through the Allied lines and reach Paris.
The opening drive of their powerful offensive, which began on March 21, was directed at the British front south of
Arras. The drive hurled the British lines back 65 km (40 mi) before it was halted, on April 5, principally by hastily
summoned French reserves. The fear of a German breakthrough aroused among the Allies by the German success
in the first week of the offensive caused the Allies to appoint General (later Marshal) Ferdinand Foch in charge of
assuring coordination of Allied operations; in the following month he was made commander in chief of the Allied
armies—French, Belgian, British, and American—in France. During April a second German thrust took Messines
Ridge and Armentières from the British, and in June a powerful German surprise attack against the French on the
Aisne drove a salient 65 km (40 mi) deep into the French position and enabled the Germans to reach a point of the
Marne only 60 km (37 mi) from Paris. During this battle American troops first went into action in force; together with
French troops, the US Second Division halted (June 4) the German advance in the Battle of Château-Thierry. The
Germans made additional gains of terrain in June, but by the middle of July the force of their offensive had largely
been spent. In the Second Battle of the Marne, they succeeded in crossing the river, but once they were across their
progress was halted by French and American troops. Sensing that the German drive had lost its power, General
Foch on July 18 ordered a counter-attack. The attack drove the Germans back over the Marne, and the Allies took
the initiative on the western front that they retained to the end of the war.
End of the War in Europe
Beginning with a British drive (August 8-11) into the German lines around Amiens, the Allies began the offensive that
three months later resulted in German capitulation. During the last week of August and the first three days of
September, British and French forces won the Second Battle of the Somme and the Fifth Battle of Arras, and drove
the Germans back to the Hindenburg line. A particularly strong German salient was then reduced by American
troops (September 12-13) in the Battle of Saint-Mihiel, and more than 14,000 prisoners were taken. In October and
early November the British moved towards Cambrai and the Americans advanced partly through the Argonne Forest.
The latter thrust broke the German lines between Metz and Sedan. As a result of these offensives, Ludendorff
requested his government to seek an armistice with the Allies. The German government initiated armistice talks
11
(October) with the Allies, but they failed when President Wilson insisted on negotiating only with democratic
governments. The British advance meanwhile made rapid progress in northern France and along the Belgian coast,
and on November 10, US and French troops reached Sedan. By the beginning of November the Hindenburg line had
been completely broken, and Germans were in rapid retreat on the entire western front. The defeat of the German
army had domestic political repercussions that were catastrophic to the established German government. The
German fleet mutinied; an uprising dethroned the king of Bavaria; and in November Emperor William II abdicated
and fled to the Netherlands. The German republic was proclaimed on November 9. An armistice commission had
already been dispatched to negotiate with the Allies. At 5 a.m. on November 11, an armistice was signed in the
Forest of Compiègne between Germany and the Allies on terms laid down by the Allies; at 11 the same morning
hostilities ended on the western front.
Colonial Warfare
The forces in the German colonies of Africa and the Pacific, with the chief exception of those in German East Africa
in late 1917 and 1918, generally fought on the defensive. They were in some cases swiftly overcome, and in others
gradually, but by the end of the war in 1918 practically all had capitulated to the Allies.
Africa
In 1914 the German colonies in Africa consisted of Togoland, the Cameroons (German, Kamerun), German South
West Africa (Nambia), and German East Africa. An Anglo-French force took possession of Togoland in August 1914.
In September of that year a British force invaded the Cameroons from Nigeria, and a French force invaded from
French Equatorial Africa to the east and south of the Cameroons. After many campaigns in which the Germans
several times defeated the Allied forces, German resistance was finally overcome in February 1916. German South
West Africa was conquered, between September 1914 and July 1915, by troops from the Union of South Africa. The
most important of the German possessions, German East Africa, displayed the strongest resistance to the attacks of
the Allies. Early assaults by British and Indian troops (November 1914) were repulsed by the Germans under
General Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck. In November 1915, British naval units gained control of Lake Tanganyika, and the
following year the Allied forces (British, South Africans, and Portuguese) intended for the invasion of German East
Africa were placed under the command of General Jan Christiaan Smuts. In 1916 the Allies captured the principal
towns of German East Africa, including Tanga, Bagamoyo, Dar es Salaam, and Tabora, and Lettow-Vorbeck's
troops then retreated into the south-east section of the colony. Late in 1917, however, the German forces took the
offensive, invading Portuguese East Africa; and in November 1918 they began an invasion of Rhodesia. When the
armistice was signed in Europe in 1918, the troops in German East Africa were still fighting, even though most of the
colony was in the hands of the Allies. Lettow-Vorbeck surrendered three days after the European armistice was
declared.
The Pacific
In the Pacific a force from New Zealand captured the German-held portions of Samoa in August 1914 and in
September, Australian forces occupied German possessions in the Bismarck Archipelago and New Guinea.
Japanese forces took the fortress of Qingdao (Tsingtao), a German-held port in Shandong (Shan-tung) Province,
China, in November 1914, and between August and November of that year took possession of the German-held
Marshall Islands, the Mariana Islands, the Palau group of islands, and the Caroline Islands. After the war ended,
Japan retained Qingdao until 1922, and received a mandate over the Marshall Islands, many of the Marianas
(including Saipan), and over the Palau group and the Carolines.
The War at Sea
At the outset of war the main British fleet, the Grand Fleet, consisted of 20 dreadnoughts and numerous other ships,
including battle cruisers, cruisers, and destroyers; and the Grand Fleet was based principally at Scapa Flow, in the
Orkney Islands north of Scotland. A second British fleet, consisting of older ships, was used to guard the English
Channel. The German fleet, the High Seas Fleet, consisting of 13 dreadnoughts, was based on the North Sea ports
of Germany.
Early Operations
During 1914 no major naval engagements between the belligerents took place in the Atlantic. In the Battle of
Helogland Bight, the British raided the German naval base at Helgoland, an island off Germany in the North Sea,
sinking three German ships. German submarines sunk several British naval units, including the superdreadnought
Audacious (October 27); and a daring attempt by German submarines to raid Scapa Flow caused the British naval
units stationed there to withdraw to bases on the west coast of Scotland.
In the South Pacific a squadron of German cruisers under the command of Admiral Maximilian von Spee did
considerable damage to installations at the French island of Papeete and the British-held Fanning Island (September
and October 1914); defeated a British squadron off the headland of Coronel, Chile (November 1) in the Battle of
Coronel; and on December 8 was defeated with the loss of four out of its five ships in the Battle of Falkland Islands
by a British squadron under Admiral Sir Frederick Sturdee. During 1914 and the early part of 1915 German cruisers
did considerable damage to British shipping in the Indian Ocean and elsewhere until captured or otherwise put out of
commission.
The year 1915 was notable for the submarine blockade Germany instituted around Great Britain. The sinking by
German submarine action of the British passenger liner Lusitania on May 7 caused the loss of many American lives,
leading to a controversy between the United States and Germany that almost precipitated war between the two
nations. The firm stand taken by the United States forced Germany to modify its method of submarine warfare to the
satisfaction of the American government. In March 1916, however, the German sinking in the English Channel by
submarine of the French steamer Sussex, with the loss of American lives, led to another controversy between
Germany and the United States, a virtual US ultimatum compelling Germany temporarily to cease its unrestricted
submarine warfare.
1916 and After
The most important naval engagement of the war was the Battle of Jutland, waged on May 31 and June 1, 1916,
between the British Grand Fleet and the German High Seas Fleet. Although the British losses, both in ships and
human lives, were greater than Germany's, the German fleet, having returned to home ports, did not venture to give
battle again during the war, and the British retained their supremacy at sea. Nevertheless, during the remainder of
the war, German cruisers managed to run the blockade of Germany, which the British had established from the
outset of the war. The Germans sank considerable tonnage of Allied shipping in the North Atlantic and then returned
to their bases. In 1917 the Germans again resorted to unrestricted submarine warfare, convinced that this method
was the only one that would defeat Great Britain. The plan not only failed to force the capitulation of Great Britain,
but also caused the United States to declare war against Germany. The attacks of German submarines on British
convoys in the Atlantic and in the North Sea caused much loss of shipping. As a result, in April 1918 the British
attempted to block the German submarine bases at Ostend (Oostende) and Zeebrugge in Belgium; they succeeded
in partially blocking Zeebrugge by sinking three overage British cruisers in the harbour, but failed at Ostend. In
October, however, British land forces, advancing through Belgium, took the two submarine bases and other Belgian
ports.
German Fleet Scuttled
By the terms of the armistice the Germans surrendered to the Allies most of their fleet, consisting of 10 battleships,
17 cruisers, 50 torpedo boats, and more than 100 submarines. All of the fleet with the exception of the submarines
was interned at Scapa Flow in November 1918, with German captains and crews aboard. The Treaty of Versailles
(1919), which ended the war, provided that all the interned ships become the permanent property of the Allies; that
other warships still in German possession also be surrendered; and that the size of any future German navy be
drastically limited. In reprisal against these terms, the Germans on June 21, 1919, scuttled their ships interned at
Scapa Flow.
The total tonnage of Allied ships sunk by German submarines, surface craft, and mines was nearly 13 million; the
largest tonnage sunk in any one year was about 6 million, in 1917.
The War in the Air
World War I provided a great stimulus to the production and military use of aircraft, including the aeroplane and
airship, or dirigible balloon, and the tethered balloon, the evolution of air warfare, and the tethered balloon. Aircraft
were used for two principal purposes: observation and bombing. For observation of stationary battlefronts extensive
12
use was made by both belligerents of small tethered balloons; for scouting at sea, dirigible balloons were extensively
used, and aeroplanes were used for scouting coastal waters. In connection with military operations on land,
aeroplanes were used to observe the disposition of the troops and defences of the enemy and for bombing the
enemy's lines or troops in action. A special feature of the war was the raids conducted by means of dirigibles or
aeroplanes on important enemy centres far removed from the battlefront.
The first German aeroplane raid on Paris took place on August 30, 1914; and the first German air raid on England
was on Dover on December 21, 1914. During 1915 and 1916 the German type of dirigible known as the zeppelin
raided eastern England and London 60 times. The first German aeroplane raid on London took place on November
28, 1916, and such raids were frequent during the remainder of the war. The object of the German raids on England
was to bring about withdrawal of British planes from the western front for the defence of the homeland; to handicap
British industry; and to destroy the morale of the civilian population. The raids caused much loss of life and damage
to property but accomplished little of military value.
From the middle of 1915 aerial combats between planes or squadrons of planes of the belligerents were common.
The Germans had superiority in the air on the western front from about October 1915 to July 1916, when the
supremacy passed to the British. Allied supremacy gradually increased thereafter and with the entrance of the
United States into the war became overwhelming. In April 1918 the United States had three air squadrons at the
front; by November 1918 it had 45 squadrons comprising nearly 800 planes and more than 1,200 officers. The total
personnel of the American air service increased from about 1,200 at the outbreak of the war to nearly 200,000 at the
end. Among the noted aeroplane fighters, or aces, were the American Eddie Rickenbacker, the Canadian William
Avery Bishop, and the German Baron Manfred von Richthofen.
Summary of the War
World War I began on July 28, 1914, with the declaration of war by Austria-Hungary on Serbia, and hostilities
between the Allied and Central Powers continued until the signing of the armistice on November 11, 1918, a period
of 4 years, 3 months, and 14 days. The aggregate direct war costs of all the belligerents amounted to about US$186
billion. Casualties in the land forces amounted to more than 37 million (see the accompanying table, World War I
Casualties); in addition, close to 10 million deaths among the civilian populations were caused indirectly by the war.
Despite worldwide hopes that the settlements arrived at after the war would restore world peace on a permanent
basis, World War I actually provided the basis for an even more devastating conflict. The defeated Central Powers
declared their acceptance of President Wilson's 14 points as the basis for the armistice and expected the Allies to
utilize the principles of the 14 points as the foundation for the peace treaties. On the whole, however, the Allies came
to the conference at Versailles and to the subsequent peace conferences with the determination to exact from the
Central Powers reparations equal to the entire cost of the war, and to distribute among themselves territories and
possessions of the defeated nations according to formulae arrived at secretly during the years 1915 to 1917, before
the entry of the United States into the war. President Wilson, in the peace negotiations, at first insisted that the Paris
Peace Conference accept the full programme laid out in the 14 points, but finally, in order to secure the support of
the Allies for the all-important 14th point, which called for the creation of the League of Nations, he abandoned his
insistence on some of the other points.
The peace treaties that emerged from the conferences at Versailles, Saint-Germain, Trianon, Neuilly, and Sèvres
were on the whole inadequately enforced by the victorious powers, leading to the resurgence of militarism and
aggressive nationalism in Germany and to social disorder throughout much of Europe.
--
---
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
-
World War II
Global military conflict that, in terms of lives lost and material destruction, was the most devastating war in human
history. It began in 1939 as a European conflict between Germany and an Anglo-French-Polish coalition but
eventually widened to include most of the nations of the world. It ended in 1945, leaving a new world order of the
Superpowers dominated by the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).
More than any previous war, World War II involved the commitment of nations' entire human and economic
resources, the blurring of the distinction between combatant and non-combatant, and the expansion of the battlefield
to include all of the enemy's territory. It was also unique in modern times for the savagery of the military attacks
unleashed against civilians, and for the adoption by Nazi Germany of genocide (of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and
other groups) as a specific war aim. The most important determinants of its outcome were industrial capacity and
personnel. In the last stages of the war, two radically new weapons were introduced: the long-range rocket and the
atomic bomb. In the main, however, the war was fought with the same or improved weapons of the types used in
World War I. The greatest advances were in aircraft and tanks.
The World After World War I
Three major powers had been dissatisfied with the outcome of World War I. Germany, the principal defeated nation,
bitterly resented the territorial losses and reparations payments imposed on it by the Treaty of Versailles. Italy, one
of the victors, found its territorial gains far from enough either to offset the cost of the war or to satisfy its ambitions.
Japan, also a victor, was unhappy about its failure to gain greater holdings in East Asia.
Causes of the War
France, Great Britain, and the United States had attained their wartime objectives. They had reduced Germany to a
military cipher and had reorganized Europe and the world as they saw fit, with the French Empire and the British
Empire controlling much of the globe. The French and the British frequently disagreed on policy in the post-war
period, however, and were unsure of their ability to defend the peace settlement. The United States, disillusioned
with the Treaty of Versailles, with the selfish nature of Allied war aims, and with the secret treaties they had signed
during the war, disavowed the treaty and the League of Nations included in it, and retreated into political
isolationism.
Failure of Peace Efforts
During the 1920s, attempts were made to achieve a stable peace. The first was the establishment (1920) of the
League of Nations as a forum in which nations could settle their disputes. The League's powers were limited to
persuasion and various levels of moral and economic sanctions that the members were free to carry out as they saw
fit. At the Washington Conference of 1921-1922, the principal naval powers agreed to limit their navies according to
a fixed ratio. The Treaties of Locarno produced by the Locarno Conference (1925) included a treaty guarantee of the
German-French boundary and an arbitration agreement between Germany and Poland. In the Paris Peace Pact
(1928), 63 countries, including all the great powers except the USSR, renounced war as an instrument of national
policy and pledged to resolve all disputes among them “by pacific means”. The signatories had agreed beforehand to
exempt wars of “self-defence”.
Rise of Fascism
One of the victors' stated aims in World War I had been “to make the world safe for democracy”, and post-war
Germany adopted a democratic constitution, as did most of the other states restored or created after the war. In the
1920s, however, the wave of the future appeared to be a form of nationalistic, militaristic totalitarianism known by its
Italian name, fascism. It promised to minister to people's wants more effectively than democracy and presented itself
as the one sure defence against Communism. Benito Mussolini established the first Fascist dictatorship in Italy in
1922.
Formation of the Axis Coalition
Adolf Hitler, the Führer (leader) of the German National Socialist (Nazi) party, preached a brand of fascism
predicated on anti-Semitism and racism. Hitler promised to overturn the Versailles Treaty and secure additional
Lebensraum (living space) for the German people who, he contended, deserved more as members of a superior
race. In the early 1930s the Great Depression hit Germany. The moderate parties could not agree on what to do
about it, and large numbers of voters turned to the Nazis and Communists. In 1933 Hitler became the German
chancellor, and in a series of subsequent moves established himself as dictator.
13
Japan did not formally adopt fascism, but the armed forces' powerful position in the government enabled them to
impose a similar type of totalitarianism on the civilian leadership. As a dismantler of the world status quo, the
Japanese military was well ahead of Hitler. It used a minor clash with Chinese troops near Mukden in 1931 as a
pretext for taking over all of Manchuria, where it proclaimed the puppet state of Manchukuo in 1932. In 1937-1938 it
occupied the main Chinese ports.
Having denounced the disarmament clauses of the Versailles Treaty, created a new air force, and reintroduced
conscription, in March 1936 Hitler dispatched German troops into the Rhineland. Under the Versailles and Locarno
treaties, the Rhineland had been permanently demilitarized, but Hitler's breach of the treaties was greeted with only
feeble protests from London and Paris. Hitler had committed his first major breach of the treaty settlement of 1919
and the Anglo-French entente failed to resist him, a pattern followed with monotonous regularity until September
1939.
Hitler tried out his new weapons on the side of right-wing military rebels in the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). The
venture brought him into collaboration with Mussolini, who was also supporting the Spanish revolt after having
seized Ethiopia in the Italo-Ethiopian War of 1935-1936. Treaties between Germany, Italy, and Japan in 1936-1937
brought into being the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis. The Axis Powers thereafter became the collective term for those
countries and their allies.
German Aggression in Europe
Hitler launched his own expansionist drive with the annexation of Austria in March 1938, the Anschluss. The way
was clear: Mussolini supported him; and the British and French, overawed by German rearmament, accepted Hitler's
claim that the status of Austria was an internal German affair. The United States had severely impaired its ability to
act against aggression by passing a neutrality law that prohibited material assistance to all parties in foreign
conflicts.
In September 1938 Hitler threatened war to annex the western border area of Czechoslovakia, the Sudetenland, and
its 3.5 million ethnic Germans. The British prime minister Neville Chamberlain, initiated talks that culminated at the
end of the month in the Munich Pact, by which the Czechs, on British and French urging, relinquished the
Sudetenland in return for Hitler's promise not to take any more Czech territory. Chamberlain believed he had
achieved “peace in our time”, but the word “Munich” soon implied abject and futile appeasement.
Less than six months later, in March 1939, Hitler seized the remainder of Czechoslovakia. Alarmed by this new
aggression and by Hitler's threats against Poland, the British government pledged to aid that country if Germany
threatened its independence. France already had a mutual defence treaty with Poland.
The turn away from appeasement brought the USSR to the fore. Joseph Stalin, the Soviet dictator, had offered
military help to Czechoslovakia during the 1938 crisis, but had been ignored by all the parties to the Munich
Agreement. Now that war threatened, he was courted by both sides, but Hitler made the more attractive offer. Allied
with Britain and France, the USSR might well have had to fight, but all Germany asked for was its neutrality. In
Moscow, on the night of August 23, 1939, the Nazi-Soviet Pact was signed. In the part published the next day,
Germany and the Soviet Union agreed not to go to war against each other. A secret protocol gave Stalin a free hand
in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, eastern Poland, and eastern Romania.
Military Operations
In the early morning hours of September 1, 1939, the German armies marched into Poland. On September 3, the
British and French surprised Hitler by declaring war on Germany, but they had no plans for rendering active
assistance to the Poles. Anglo-French military plans were based on France remaining on the defensive behind the
heavily fortified Maginot Line while Britain built up its military potential for a long war. The French were not prepared
to take the risk of attacking even the lightly defended German Siegfried Line while the German army was engaged in
crushing Poland. Military and economic historians are divided about Hitler's intentions in 1939. Some economic
historians argue that Germany had rearmed only in width; that is, concentrating only on producing those weapons,
such as tanks and aircraft, suitable for a series of lightning battles, which eventually took place in Poland, Norway,
Belgium, Holland, and France. They suggest that Germany possessed neither the resources nor the desire
drastically to reduce existing civilian consumption levels to fight a long war of attrition. Others argue that Hitler all
along intended to prepare for a long war against his adversaries, which was to begin in about 1942. To this end he
had inaugurated the Four-Year Plan in 1936, under the control of Hermann Goering, which was intended to establish
a Germany self-sufficient in raw materials and foodstuffs (for which purpose, of course, Germany needed to control
the resources of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and the other Balkan states, a task accomplished by 1939), and
thereby possessing the industrial capacity necessary for war. In the event, Hitler's impatience in 1939 led him to
miscalculate on the possibility of Anglo-French intervention when he invaded Poland in September, so that Germany
was forced into a major war before it had fully built up its military strength. Whichever is the case, Hitler's gamble
paid off until 1941-1942, when the unexpected and resolute resistance of the Soviet people and armies forced him
into the long war of attrition he had sought to avoid and for which Germany was not adequately equipped.
The First Phase: Dominance of the Axis
Man for man, the German and Polish forces were an even match. Hitler committed about 1.5 million troops, and the
Polish commander, Marshal Edward Smigy-Rydz, expected to muster 1.8 million. That was not the whole picture,
however. The Germans had six panzer (armoured) and four motorized divisions; the Poles had one armoured and
one motorized brigade and a few tank battalions. The Germans' 1,600 aircraft were mostly of the latest types. Half of
the Poles' 935 planes were obsolete.
Blitzkrieg in Poland
Polish strategic doctrine called for a rigid defence of the whole frontier and anticipated several weeks of preliminary
skirmishing. It was wrong on both counts. On the morning of September 1, waves of German bombers hit the
railways and hopelessly snarled the Polish mobilization. In four more days, two army groups—one on the north out
of East Prussia, the other on the south out of Silesia—had broken through on relatively narrow fronts and were
sending armoured spearheads on fast drives towards Warsaw and Brest. This was blitzkrieg (lightning war): the use
of armour, air power, and mobile infantry in a pincer movement to encircle the enemy.
Between September 8 and 10, the Germans closed in on Warsaw from the north and south, trapping the Polish
forces west of the capital. On September 17, a second, deeper encirclement closed 160 km (100 mi) east, near
Brest. On that day, too, the Soviet Red Army lunged across the border. By September 20, practically the whole
country was in German or Soviet hands, and only isolated pockets continued to resist. The last to surrender was the
fortress at Kock, on October 15.
The Phoney War
With the fall of Poland both sides settled down to a stalemate in the west, popularly described as the “Phoney War”
or “Bore War”. The British and French became preoccupied by various schemes to fight the war in Scandinavia or
the Balkans; anything, it seemed, to keep the fighting at a distance and stave off a bloody replay of World War I.
Hitler made a half-hearted peace offer and at the same time ordered his generals to ready an attack on the Low
Countries and France. The generals, who did not think they could do against France what they had done in Poland,
asked for time and insisted they could only take Holland, Belgium, and the French channel coast. Except at sea,
where German submarines operated against merchant shipping and the British Navy imposed a blockade, little was
going on after the first week in October.
Soviet-Finnish War
On November 30, after two months of diplomatic wrangling, the USSR declared war on Finland. Stalin was bent on
having a blitzkrieg of his own, but his plan faltered. The Finns, under Marshal Carl G. Mannerheim, were expert at
winter warfare. The Soviet troops, on the other hand, were often badly led, in part because political purges had
claimed many of the Red Army's senior officers. Outnumbered by at least five to one, the Finns held their own and
kept fighting into the new year.
The attack on Finland aroused world opinion against the USSR and gave an opening to the British and French. They
had long had their eyes on a mine at Kiruna in northern Sweden that was Germany's main source of iron ore. In
summer the ore went through the Baltic Sea, in winter to the ice-free Norwegian port of Narvik and then through
neutral Norwegian waters to Germany. The Narvik-Kiruna railway also connected on the east with the Finnish
railways; consequently, an Anglo-French force ostensibly sent to help the Finns would automatically be in position to
occupy Narvik and Kiruna. The problem was to get Norway and Sweden to cooperate, which both refused to do.
14
In Germany, the naval chief, Admiral Erich Raeder, urged Hitler to occupy Norway for the sake of its open-water
ports on the Atlantic Ocean, but Hitler showed little interest until late January 1940, when the weather and the
discovery of some invasion plans by Belgium forced him to delay the attack on the Low Countries and France
indefinitely. The first studies he had made showed that Norway could best be taken by simultaneous landings at
eight port cities from Narvik to Oslo. Because the troops would have to be transported on warships and because
those would be easy prey for the British Navy, the operation would have to be executed while the nights were long.
Denmark, which posed no military problems, could be usefully included because it had airfields close to Norway.
Denmark and Norway
Stalin, fearing outside intervention, ended his war on March 8 on terms that cost Finland territory but left it
independent. The British and French then had to find another pretext for their projected action in Narvik and Kiruna;
they decided to lay mines just outside the Narvik harbour. This they thought would provoke some kind of violent
German reaction, which would let them spring to Norway's side—and into Narvik.
Hitler approved the incursions into Norway and Denmark on April 2, and the warships sailed on April 7. A British task
force laid the mines the next morning and headed home, passing the German ships without seeing them and leaving
them to make the landings unopposed on the morning of April 9. Denmark surrendered at once, and the landings
succeeded everywhere but at Oslo. There a fort blocked the approach from the sea, and fog prevented an airborne
landing. The Germans occupied Oslo by noon, but in the meantime, the Norwegian government, deciding to fight,
had moved to Elverum.
Although the Norwegians, aided by 12,000 British and French, held out in the area between Oslo and Trondheim
until May 3, the conclusion was never in doubt. Narvik was different. There 4,600 Germans faced 24,600 British,
French, and Norwegians backed by the guns of the British Navy. The Germans had an advantage in the ruggedness
of the terrain and a greater one in their opponents' slow, methodical moves. Thus, they held Narvik until May 28. In
the first week of June they were backed against the Swedish border and close to having to choose surrender or
internment, but by then, military disasters in France were forcing the British and French to recall their troops from
Narvik.
The Low Countries
By spring, Hitler had found a new and better way of handling the campaign against France and the Low Countries.
The first plan had been to have the main force go through Belgium, as it had in World War I. General Erich von
Manstein and some other advisers, however, had persuaded Hitler to shift the main force south to the area of
Luxembourg and the Ardennes Forest. The Ardennes was hilly, wooded, and not the best country for tanks, but
Manstein argued that the enemy would not expect a big attack there. The French had left the Ardennes sector
inadequately fortified, while the river crossings near Sedan were guarded by poorly trained reservists. The French
High Command had insisted that the Ardennes would slow down a German tank attack and allow time for troops to
be sent to the threatened sector. The tanks could make a fast north-westward sweep from the Ardennes, behind the
Belgians and British and part of the French. After reaching the coast and defeating the enemy in Belgium, they could
make an about-face and strike to the south-east behind the French armies along the Maginot Line.
When the attack began, on May 10, 1940, the two sides were approximately equal in numbers of troops and tanks;
the Germans were superior in aircraft. The decisive advantage of the Germans, however, was that they knew exactly
what they were going to do. Their opponents had to improvise, in part because the Belgians and Dutch tried to stay
neutral to the last. The British and French, moreover, had failed to learn from the example of Poland, having
attributed that country's defeat to its inherent weakness. Consequently, they were not prepared to deal with the
German armour. Their tanks were scattered among the infantry; those of the Germans were drawn together in a
panzer group, an armoured army.
On May 10, German airborne troops landed inside Belgium and Holland to seize airfields and bridges and, most
notably, the great Belgian fortress at Eben-Emael. The Dutch army surrendered on May 14, several hours after
bombers had destroyed the business section of Rotterdam. Also on May 14 the German main force, the panzer
group in the lead, came out of the Ardennes to begin the drive to the sea behind the British and French armies
supporting the Belgians.
The Defeat of France
On May 20, the panzer group took Abbeville at the mouth of the River Somme and began to push north along the
coast; it covered 400 km (250 mi) in 11 days. By May 26, the British and French were pushed into a narrow
beachhead around Dunkirk. The Belgian king, Leopold III, surrendered his army two days later. Destroyers and
smaller craft of all kinds rescued 338,226 men in the evacuation of Dunkirk, a heroic sealift that probably would not
have succeeded if the German commander, General Gerd von Rundstedt, had not stopped the tanks to save them
for the next phase.
The drive into France began on June 5 and picked up on June 9. Italy declared war on France and Britain on June
10. The Maginot Line, which only extended to the Belgian border, was intact, but the French commander, General
Maxime Weygand, had nothing with which to screen it or Paris on the north and west. On June 17, Marshal Henri
Philippe Pétain, the World War I hero who had become premier the day before, asked for an armistice. The armistice
was signed on June 22 on terms that gave Germany control of northern France and the Atlantic coast. Pétain then
set up a capital at Vichy in the unoccupied south-east, and his Vichy government remained an obedient client of the
Axis until the end of the war.
The Battle of Britain
In the summer of 1940, Hitler dominated Europe from the North Cape to the Pyrenees. His one remaining active
enemy—Britain, under a new prime minister, Winston Churchill—vowed to continue fighting. Whether it could was
questionable. The British Army had left most of its weapons on the beaches at Dunkirk, although its trained soldiers
had been saved. Stalin was in no mood to challenge Hitler. The United States, shocked by the fall of France, began
the first peacetime conscription in its history and greatly increased its military budget, but public opinion, although
sympathetic to Britain, was against getting into the war.
The Germans hoped to subdue the British by starving them out. In June 1940 they began the Battle of the Atlantic,
using submarine warfare to cut the British overseas lifelines. The Germans now had submarine bases in Norway and
France. At the outset the Germans had only 57 submarines, but more were being built—enough to keep Britain in
danger until the spring of 1943 and to carry on the battle for months thereafter.
Invasion was the expeditious way to finish off Britain, but that meant crossing the English Channel; Hitler would not
risk it unless the Royal Air Force (RAF) could be neutralized first. As a result, the Battle of Britain was fought in the
air, not on the beaches. In August 1940 the Germans launched daylight raids against ports and airfields and in
September against inland cities. The objective was to draw out the British fighters and destroy them. The Germans
failed to reckon with a new device, radar, which greatly increased the British fighters' effectiveness. Also, a sudden
change in strategy led the Germans to switch their attacks from RAF airfields to London and other cities, beginning
the Blitz. Because their own losses were too high, the Germans had to switch to night bombing at the end of
September. Between then and May 1941 they made 71 major raids on London and 56 on other cities, but the
damage they wrought was too indiscriminate to be militarily decisive. On September 17, 1940, Hitler postponed the
invasion indefinitely, thereby conceding defeat in the Battle of Britain.
The Balkans and North Africa (1940-1941)
In fact, Hitler had told his generals in late July 1940 that the next attack would be on the USSR. There, he said,
Germany would get its “living space” and defeat Britain as well. He claimed the British were only being kept in the
war by the hope of a falling-out between Germany and the USSR. When the USSR had been defeated and British
positions in India and the Middle East were threatened, he believed that Britain would make peace. Hitler wanted to
start in the autumn of 1940, but his advisers persuaded him to avoid the risks of a winter campaign in the USSR and
wait until the spring.
Meanwhile, Germany's ally, Mussolini, had staged an unsuccessful attack (September 1940) on British-occupied
Egypt from the Italian colony of Libya and an equally abortive invasion (October 1940) of Greece. In response to the
15
latter move, the British occupied airfields on Crete and in Greece. Hitler did not want British planes within striking
distance of his one major oil source, the Ploieti fields in Romania, and in November he began to prepare an
operation against Greece. Early in 1941 British forces pushed the Italians back into Libya, and in February Hitler sent
General Erwin Rommel with a two-division tank corps, the Afrika Korps, to help his allies.
Because he would need to cross their territory to get at Greece (and the USSR), Hitler brought Romania and
Hungary into the Axis alliance in November 1940; Bulgaria joined in March 1941. When Yugoslavia refused to follow
suit, Hitler ordered an invasion of that country.
Yugoslavia
The operations against Greece and Yugoslavia began on April 6, 1941. The Germans' primary difficulty with the
attack on Yugoslavia was in pulling together an army of nine divisions from Germany and France in less than ten
days. They had to limit themselves for several days to air raids and border skirmishing. On April 10 they opened
drives on Belgrade from the north-west, north, and south-east. The city fell on April 13, and the Yugoslav Army
surrendered the next day. Yugoslavia, however, was easier to take than it would be to hold. Guerrillas—Chetniks
under Draa Mihajloviç and partisans under Josip Broz Tito—fought throughout the war.
Greece
The Greek army of 430,000, unlike the Yugoslav army, was fully mobilized, and to some extent battle-tested, but
national pride compelled it to try to defend the Metaxas Line north-east of Salonika. By one short thrust to Salonika,
the Germans forced the surrender on April 9 of the line and about half of the Greek army. After the Greek First Army,
pulling out of Albania, was trapped at the Metsovon Pass and surrendered on April 22, the British force of some
62,000 troops retreated southward. Thereafter, fast German drives—to the Isthmus of Corinth by April 27 and
through the Peloponnisos by April 30—forced the British into an evacuation that cost them 12,000 men. An airborne
assault on May 20 to 27 also took Crete into German hands.
Meanwhile, Rommel had launched a successful counter-offensive against the British in Libya, expelling them from
the country (except for an isolated garrison at Tobruk) by April 1941.
The Second Phase: Expansion of the War
In the year after the fall of France, the war moved towards a new stage—world war. While conducting subsidiary
campaigns in the Balkans, in North Africa, and in the air against Britain, Hitler deployed his main forces to the east
and brought the countries of south-eastern Europe (as well as Finland) into a partnership against the USSR.
US Aid to Britain
The United States abandoned strict neutrality in the European war and approached a confrontation with Japan in
Asia and the Pacific Ocean. US and British conferences, begun in January 1941, determined a basic strategy for the
event of a US entry into the war, namely, that both would centre their effort on Germany, leaving Japan, if need be,
to be dealt with later.
In March 1941 the US Congress passed the Lend-Lease Act and appropriated an initial $7 billion to lend or lease
weapons and other aid to any countries the President might designate. Britain, on the verge of bankruptcy at the end
of 1940, was the main recipient, followed, after the German invasion in June 1941, by the Soviet Union. By this
means the United States hoped to ensure victory over the Axis without involving its own troops. By late summer of
1941, however, the United States was in a state of undeclared war with Germany. In July, US Marines were
stationed in Iceland, which had been occupied by the British in May 1940, and thereafter the US Navy took over the
task of escorting convoys in the waters west of Iceland. In September, President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized
ships on convoy duty to attack Axis war vessels.
Friction Between the United States and Japan
Meanwhile, American relations with Japan continued to deteriorate. In September 1940 Japan coerced Vichy France
into giving up northern Indochina. The United States retaliated by prohibiting the exportation of steel, scrap iron, and
aviation fuel to Japan. In April 1941, the Japanese signed a neutrality treaty with the USSR as insurance against an
attack from that direction if they were to come into conflict with Britain or the United States while taking a bigger bite
out of South East Asia. When Germany invaded the USSR in June, Japanese leaders considered breaking the treaty
and joining in from the east, but, making one of the most fateful decisions of the war, they chose instead to intensify
their push to the south-east. On July 23 Japan occupied southern Indochina. Two days later, the United States and
Britain froze Japanese assets. The effect was to prevent Japan from purchasing oil and strategic metals, which
would, in time, cripple its army and make its navy and air force completely useless. Since Japan estimated that it had
only six months' worth of oil reserves, this hastened its decision to secure the resources of South East Asia before it
was too late.
The German Invasion of the USSR
The war's most massive encounter began on the morning of June 22, 1941, when slightly more than 3 million Axis
troops invaded the USSR. Although German preparations had been visible for months and had been talked about
openly among the diplomats in Moscow, the Soviet forces were taken by surprise. Stalin, his confidence in the
country's military capability shaken by the Finnish war, had refused to allow any counteractivity for fear of provoking
the Germans. Moreover, the Soviet military leadership had concluded that blitzkrieg, as it had been practised in
Poland and France, would not be possible on the scale of a Soviet-German war; both sides would therefore confine
themselves for the first several weeks at least to sparring along the frontier. The Soviet army had 4.5 million troops
on the western border and outnumbered the Germans by two to one in tanks and by two or three to one in aircraft.
Many of its tanks and aircraft were older types, but some of the tanks, particularly the later famous T-34s, were far
superior to any the Germans had. Large numbers of the aircraft were destroyed on the ground in the first day,
however, and the Soviet tanks, like those of the French, were scattered among the infantry, where they could not be
effective against the German panzer groups. The infantry was first ordered to counter-attack, which was impossible,
and then forbidden to retreat, which ensured their wholesale destruction or capture.
Initial German Successes
For the invasion, the Germans had set up three army groups, designated as North, Centre, and South, and aimed
towards Leningrad (now St Petersburg), Moscow, and Kiev. Hitler and his generals had agreed that their main
strategic problem was to lock the Red Army in battle and defeat it before it could escape into the depths of the
country. They disagreed on how that could best be accomplished. Most of the generals believed that the Soviet
regime would sacrifice everything to defend Moscow: the capital, the hub of the road and railway networks, and the
country's main industrial centre. To Hitler, the land and resources of the Ukraine and the oil of the Caucasus were
more important, and he wanted to seize Leningrad as well. The result had been a compromise—the three thrusts,
with the one by Army Group Centre towards Moscow the strongest—that temporarily satisfied Hitler as well as the
generals. War games had indicated a victory in about ten weeks, which was significant because the Russian
summer, the ideal time for fighting in the USSR, was short, and the Balkans operations had caused a three-week
delay at the outset.
Ten weeks seemed ample time. Churchill offered the USSR an alliance, and Roosevelt promised Lend-Lease aid,
but after the first few days, their staffs believed everything would be over in a month or so. By the end of the first
week in July, Army Group Centre had taken 290,000 prisoners in encirclements at Biaystok and Minsk. On August
5, having crossed the Dnepr River, the last natural barrier west of Moscow, the army group wiped out a pocket near
Smolensk and counted another 300,000 prisoners. On reaching Smolensk, it had covered more than two thirds of
the distance to Moscow.
Hitler's Change of Plan
The Russians were doing exactly what the German generals had wanted, sacrificing enormous numbers of troops
and weapons to defend Moscow. Hitler, however, was not satisfied, and over the generals' protests, he ordered
Army Group Centre to divert the bulk of its armour to the north and south to help the other two army groups, thereby
stopping the advance towards Moscow. On September 8 Army Group North cut Leningrad's land connections and,
together with the Finnish army on the north, isolated the city, beginning the Siege of Leningrad. On September 16
Army Group South closed a gigantic encirclement east of Kiev that brought in 665,000 prisoners. Hitler then decided
to resume the advance towards Moscow and ordered that the armour be returned to Army Group Centre.
The Attempt to Take Moscow
After a standstill of six weeks, Army Group Centre resumed action on October 2. Within two weeks, it completed
three large encirclements and took 663,000 prisoners. Then the autumn rains set in, turning the unpaved Russian
roads to mud and stopping the advance for the better part of a month.
16
In mid-November, the weather turned cold and the ground froze. Hitler and the commander of Army Group Centre,
Field Marshal Fedor von Bock, faced the choice of having the armies dig in where they were or sending them ahead,
possibly to be overtaken by the winter. Wanting to finish the 1941 campaign with some sort of a victory at Moscow,
they chose to move ahead.
In the second half of November Bock aimed two armoured spearheads at Moscow. Just after the turn of the month,
one of those, bearing in on the city from the north-west, was less than 32 km (20 mi) away. The other, coming from
the south, had about 65 km (40 mi) still to go. The panzer divisions had often covered such distances in less than a
day, but the temperature was falling, snow was drifting on the roads, and neither the men nor the machines were
equipped for extreme cold. On December 5 the generals commanding the spearhead armies reported that they were
stopped: the tanks and trucks were freezing up, and the troops were losing their will to fight.
Soviet Counter-offensive
Stalin, who had stayed in Moscow, and his commander at the front, General Georgy Zhukov, had held back their
reserves. Many of them were recent recruits, but some were hardened veterans from Siberia, where the Red Army
had defeated the Japanese in clashes on the Manchurian border in 1939. All were dressed for winter. On December
6 they counter-attacked, and within a few days, the German spearheads were rolling back and abandoning large
numbers of vehicles and weapons, rendered useless by the cold.
On Stalin's orders, the Moscow counter-attack was quickly converted into a counter-offensive on the entire front. The
Germans had not built any defence lines to the rear and could not dig in because the ground was frozen hard as
concrete. Some of the generals recommended retreating to Poland, but on December 18, Hitler ordered the troops to
stand fast wherever they were. Thereafter, the Russians chopped great chunks out of the German front, but enough
of it survived the winter to maintain the Siege of Leningrad, continue the threat to Moscow, and keep the western
Ukraine in German hands.
The German check before Moscow was a major setback for Hitler's plans. For the first time since 1939 blitzkrieg had
failed to achieve the total destruction of an enemy. One of Hitler's fixed obsessions was with the need to obtain
Lebensraum in Russia to allow a supposedly overpopulated Germany a huge area of western Russian land to the
west of the Ural Mountains for German resettlement. He envisaged that the bulk of the Russian population would be
pushed to the other side of the Urals. He had counted on the supposed rottenness of the Bolshevik regime, which he
had calculated would collapse entirely after the German invasion, and on the inadequacies of the Red Army after the
purges, as witnessed by its miserable performance against Finland in 1939. He had justified the invasion in 1941 on
the grounds of the “window of opportunity” which presented itself before reforms of the Red Army in which Stalin was
then engaged had time to become effective, and on the need to seize Russian food and oil and other raw materials
quickly. He also believed that, deprived of the Soviet Union as a potential ally, the British would soon make peace.
He nearly succeeded, but for the superhuman efforts of the Soviet people, Stalin's stoicism (after an initial
breakdown), and his appeal to Russian sentiment by emphasizing “The Great Patriotic War”. Of even more
importance to Russia's survival was Stalin's decision in the late 1930s to shift Russia's military and industrial plants
to the Urals and Siberia, a process hastened by the events of 1941. Hitler's hope of an ample supply of food and raw
materials from a conquered Russia was not realized: Russian railways were destroyed by the retreating Russians,
as were crops, cattle, and mines, and most of Russia's roads were primitive. American Lend-Lease aid to Russia
carried in British convoys (which suffered heavy losses) to north Russian ports contained valuable radar, radio, and
other sophisticated equipment which Russia lacked. Hitler's intelligence sources on Russia served him badly; while,
during the autumn and winter of 1941, when the Russian war was supposed to have been concluded, the Russian
weather was worse than it had been for many previous years, another factor contributing to the setback. Of course,
the series of German victories in the West made him overconfident in engaging in a conflict in which a quick victory
was essential.
The Beginning of the War in the Pacific
The seeming imminence of a Soviet defeat in the summer and autumn of 1941 had created dilemmas for Japan and
the United States. The Japanese thought they then had the best opportunity to seize the petroleum and other
resources of South East Asia and the adjacent islands; on the other hand, they knew they could not win the war with
the United States that would probably ensue. The US government wanted to stop Japanese expansion, but doubted
whether the American people would be willing to go to war to do so. Moreover, the United States did not want to get
embroiled in a war with Japan while it faced the ghastly possibility of being alone in the world with a triumphant
Germany. After the oil embargo, the Japanese, also under pressure of time, resolved to move in South East Asia
and the nearby islands.
Pearl Harbor
Until December 1941 the Japanese leadership pursued two courses: they tried to get the oil embargo lifted on terms
that would still let them take the territory they wanted, and they prepared for war. The United States demanded that
Japan withdraw from China and Indochina, but would very likely have settled for a token withdrawal and a promise
not to take more territory. After he became Japan's premier in mid-October, General Tojo Hideki set November 29 as
the last day on which Japan would accept a settlement without war. Tojo's deadline, which was kept secret, meant
that war was practically certain.
The Japanese army and navy had, in fact, devised a war plan in which they had great confidence. They proposed to
make fast sweeps into Burma, Malaya, the East Indies, and the Philippines and, at the same time, set up a defensive
perimeter in the central and south-western Pacific. They expected the United States to declare war but not to be
willing to fight long or hard enough to win. Their greatest concern was the US Pacific Fleet, based at Pearl Harbor,
Hawaii. If it reacted quickly, it could upset their very tight timetable. Thus, the key to the entire Japanese strategy
was the plan devised by Admiral Yamamoto Isoroku, commander of the combined Japanese fleet, to launch a
surprise attack by carrier-borne planes on Pearl Harbor and destroy the Pacific Fleet. The Japanese believed that
the US response would not be significant, a calculation based on American passivity over Japanese aggression in
China. Yamamoto had doubts about this—he knew the US and its strength from personal experience—but allowed
his fellow officers to persuade him.
A few minutes before 8 a.m. on December 7, 1941, Japanese carrier-based aircraft struck Pearl Harbor. In a raid
lasting less than two hours, they sank four battleships and damaged four more. (However, they missed three US
aircraft carriers, at sea at the time.) The US authorities had broken the Japanese diplomatic code and knew an
attack was imminent. A warning had been sent from Washington, but, owing to delays in transmission, it arrived after
the raid had begun. A Japanese communiqué severing diplomatic ties with the United States, sent to the Japanese
Embassy in Washington and timed to arrive shortly before the attack, was accidentally held up by the embassy staff,
leaving the impression that Japan had attacked completely without warning. In one stroke, the Japanese navy
scored a brilliant success—and assured the Axis defeat in World War II. The Japanese attack brought the United
States into the war on December 8—and brought it in determined to fight to the finish. Germany and Italy declared
war on the United States on December 11.
Japanese Conquests in Asia and the Pacific
In the vast area of land and ocean they had marked for conquest, the Japanese seemed to be everywhere at once.
Before the end of December, they took British Hong Kong and the Gilbert Islands (now Kiribati) and Guam and Wake
Island (US possessions), and they had invaded British Burma, Malaya, Borneo, and the American-held Philippines.
Britain, her naval resources stretched by the war in Europe, managed to send a naval squadron to Singapore in
early December: it was caught by Japanese planes and destroyed. British Singapore, long regarded as one of the
world's strongest fortresses, fell to them in February 1942 in one of the greatest humiliations in British military
history, with the British garrison surrendering to a much smaller Japanese force. In March they occupied the
Netherlands Indies and landed on New Guinea. The American and Philippine forces surrendered at Bataan on April
9, and resistance in the Philippines ended with the surrender of Corregidor on May 6.
According to the Japanese plan, it would be time for them to take a defensive stance when they had captured
northern New Guinea (an Australian possession), the Bismarck Archipelago, the Gilberts, and Wake Island, which
they did by mid-March. However, they had done so well that they decided to expand their defensive perimeter north
into the Aleutian Islands, east to Midway Island, and south through the Solomon Islands and southern New Guinea.
Their first move was by sea, to take Port Moresby on the south-eastern tip of New Guinea. The Americans, using
17
their ability to read the Japanese code, had a naval task force on the scene. In the ensuing Battle of the Coral Sea
(May 7-8), fought entirely by aircraft carriers, the Japanese were forced to abandon their designs on Port Moresby.
The Battle of Midway
A powerful Japanese force, nine battleships and four carriers under Admiral Yamamoto, steamed towards Midway in
the first week of June. Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, who had taken command of the Pacific Fleet after Pearl Harbor,
could only muster three carriers and seven heavy cruisers, but he was reading the Japanese radio messages.
Yamamoto had planned another surprise: this time, however, it was he who was surprised. In the Battle of Midway,
on the morning of June 4, US dive-bombers destroyed three of the Japanese carriers in one five-minute strike. The
fourth went down later in the day, after its planes had battered the US carrier Yorktown, which sank two days later.
Yamamoto ordered a general retreat on June 5. On June 6 to 7, a secondary Japanese force took Kiska and Attu in
the Aleutians, but those were no recompense for the defeat at Midway, from which the Japanese navy would never
recover. Their battleships were intact, but the Coral Sea and Midway had shown carriers to be the true capital ships
of the war, and four of those were gone. Furthermore, the US could produce them by the dozen, whereas the
Japanese lacked the resources to build more.
The Third Phase: Turn of the Tide
In late December 1941 Roosevelt and Churchill and their chief advisers met in Washington. They reaffirmed the
strategy of defeating Germany first, and because it appeared that the British would have all they could do to fight in
Europe, the war against Japan became almost solely a US responsibility. They also created the Combined Chiefs of
Staff (CCS), a top-level British-American military committee seated in Washington, to develop and execute a
common strategy. On January 1, 1942, the United States, Great Britain, the USSR, and 23 other countries signed
the United Nations Declaration in which they pledged not to make a separate peace. The United Nations (UN)
became the official name for the anti-Axis coalition, but the term used more often was the Allies, taken over from
World War I.
Development of Allied Strategy
As a practical matter, the United States could not take much action in Europe in early 1942. It had no troops there,
and it was in the midst of building forces and converting industry at home. In North Africa, the British appeared to be
more than holding their own. They had relieved Tobruk on December 10, 1941, and taken Benghz in Libya two
weeks later. Rommel counter-attacked in late January 1942 and drove them back 300 km (185 mi) to Al-Gazala and
Bir Hacheim, but there, well forward of Tobruk and the Egyptian border, a lull set in.
Europe
The big question in the war was whether the USSR could survive a second German summer offensive, and the
Russians were urging the United States and Britain to relieve the pressure on them by starting an offensive in the
west. General George C. Marshall, the US Army chief of staff, believed the best way to help the Russians and bring
an early end to the war was to stage a build-up in England and attack across the English Channel into north-western
Europe. He wanted to act in the spring of 1943, or even in 1942 if the USSR appeared about to collapse. The British
did not want involvement elsewhere until North Africa was settled and did not believe a force strong enough for a
cross-channel attack could be assembled in England by 1943. The dispute between the British and American chiefs
of staff over the cross-channel invasion versus a Mediterranean strategy reached crisis proportions in 1943. The
Americans accused the British of dragging their feet over the invasion of north-western Europe, and of trying to
involve American troops in a desperate effort to restore the British Empire in the Mediterranean and North Africa, a
region which the American military regarded as peripheral to the war effort. The British believed that the Americans
grossly underestimated the difficulties of a premature cross-channel invasion, without adequate preparation and
insufficient troops, which might lead to an appalling disaster, like that which had befallen the Allied raid on Dieppe in
August 1942, which would put back any prospect of an Allied return to Europe for many years. Even if a relatively
weak Allied army did secure a lodgement on the French coast, they might then be faced with a grinding war of
attrition along the lines of the Western Front in World War I, with the massive human sacrifices which that struggle
had entailed.
Rommel settled the issue. In June he captured Tobruk and drove 380 km (235 mi) into Egypt, to El Alamein. After
that, the Americans agreed to shelve the cross-channel attack and ready the troops en route to England for an
invasion of French North Africa.
The Pacific
Meanwhile, despite the Germany-first strategy, the Americans were moving towards an active pursuit of the war
against Japan. The US Navy saw the Pacific as an arena in which it could perform more effectively than in the
Atlantic or the Mediterranean. General Douglas MacArthur, who had commanded in the Philippines and been
evacuated to Australia by submarine before the surrender, was the country's best-known military figure, and as such
too valuable to be left with an inconsequential mission. The Battle of Midway had stopped the Japanese in the
central Pacific, but they continued to advance in the south-western Pacific along the Solomons chain and overland
on New Guinea. On July 2, 1942, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) directed the naval and ground forces in the
south and south-western Pacific to halt the Japanese, drive them out of the Solomons and north-eastern New
Guinea, and eliminate the great base the Japanese had established at Rabaul, on New Britain in the Bismarck
Archipelago (now in Papua New Guinea).
The Russian Front: Summer 1942
In the most immediately critical area of the war, the USSR, the initiative had passed to the Germans again by
summer 1942. The Soviet successes in the winter had been followed by disasters in the spring. Setbacks south of
Leningrad, near Kharkov, and in the Crimea had cost well more than a half-million men in prisoners alone. The
Germans had not sustained such massive losses, but the fighting had been expensive for them too, especially since
the Soviets had three times the human resources at their disposal. Moreover, Hitler's overconfidence had led him
into a colossal error. He had been so sure of victory in 1941 that he had stopped most kinds of weapons and
ammunition production for the army and shifted the industries to work for the air force and navy, with which he
proposed to finish off the British. He had resumed production for the army in January 1942, but the flow would not
reach the front until late summer. Soviet weapons output, on the other hand, after having dropped low in November
and December 1941, had increased steadily since the turn of the year, and the Soviet industrial base also was larger
than the German.
Looking ahead to the summer, Hitler knew he could not again mount an all-out, three-pronged offensive. Some of
the generals talked about waiting a year until the army could be rebuilt, but Hitler was determined to have the victory
in 1942. He had sufficient troops and weapons to bring the southern flank of the Eastern Front nearly to full strength,
and he believed he could compel the Soviet command to sacrifice its main forces trying to defend the coal mines of
the Donets Basin and the oilfields of the Caucasus.
The German Drive Towards the Caucasus
The offensive began east of Kharkov on June 28, and in less than four weeks the armies had taken the Donets
Basin and advanced east to the River Don. The distances covered were spectacular, but the numbers of enemy
killed or captured were relatively small. Stalin and his generals had made the luckiest mistake of the war. Believing
the Germans were going to aim a second, more powerful, attack on Moscow, they had held their reserves back and
allowed the armies in the south to retreat.
Hitler, emboldened by the ease and speed of the advance, altered his plan in the last week of July. He had originally
proposed to drive due east to Stalingrad (now Volgograd), seize a firm hold on the River Volga there, and only then
send a force south into the Caucasus. On July 23 he ordered two armies to continue the advance towards Stalingrad
and two to strike south across the lower Don and take the oilfields at Maikop, Groznyy, and Baku.
The Russians appeared to be heading towards disaster, as the German thrust into the Caucasus covered 300 km
(185 mi) to Maikop by August 9. Hitler's strategy, however, presented a problem: two forces moving away from each
other could not be sustained equally over the badly damaged railways of the occupied territory. In the second half of
August, he diverted more supplies to the attack towards Stalingrad, and the march into the Caucasus slowed.
Nevertheless, success seemed to be in sight when the Sixth Army and Fourth Panzer Army (formerly group) closed
near the Stalingrad suburbs on September 3.
The Russian Stand at Stalingrad
The USSR reached its low point in the war at the end of July 1942. The retreat was almost out of hand, and the
Germans were getting into position to strike north along the Volga behind Moscow as well as into the Caucasus. On
18
July 28 Stalin issued his most famous order of the war, “Not a step back!” While threatening Draconian punishments
for slackers and defeatists, he relegated Communism to the background and called on the troops to fight a “patriotic”
war for Russia. Like Hitler, he had thus far conducted the war as he saw fit. In late August he called on his two best
military professionals, Zhukov, who had organized the Moscow counter-offensive in December 1941, and the army
chief of the General Staff, General Aleksandr M. Vasilyevsky, to deal with the situation at Stalingrad. They proposed
to wear the enemy down by locking its troops in a bloody fight for the city while they assembled the means for a
counter-attack. The Battle of Stalingrad had begun.
Guadalcanal
The Axis was riding a high tide in midsummer 1942. Stalingrad and the Caucasus oil were seemingly within Hitler's
grasp, and Rommel was within striking distance of the Suez Canal. The Japanese had occupied Guadalcanal at the
southern end of the Solomons chain and were marching on Port Moresby. Within the next six months, however, the
Axis had been stopped and turned back in the USSR, North Africa, and the south-western Pacific.
US Marines landed on Guadalcanal on August 7, 1942. Against a small Japanese garrison, the landing was easy.
Afterwards nothing was easy. The Japanese responded swiftly and violently by sea and by air. The outcome hinged
on the Japanese navy's ability to bring in reinforcements, which was substantial, and the US Navy's ability to keep
the Marines supplied, which was at times in some doubt. While the Marines battled a determined foe in a debilitating
tropical climate, between August 24 and November 30 the navy fought six major engagements in the waters
surrounding the island. The losses in ships and aircraft were heavy on both sides, but the Japanese were more
seriously hurt because they could not afford to accept a war of attrition with the Americans. Their warships did not
come out again after the end of November, and the Americans declared the island secure on February 9, 1943.
Anglo-American Offensive in North Africa
The turnabout in North Africa began on August 31, 1942, when Rommel attacked through the southern flank of the
British line west of El Alamein, was stopped at the Alam El Halfa Ridge, and was thrown back by September 7 in the
first Battle of El Alamein. The newly appointed British commander, General Bernard Law Montgomery, hit the north
flank on October 23 with a methodically prepared offensive and, by November 5, forced Rommel into a retreat.
American, British, and Free French troops fighting together under General Dwight D. Eisenhower began landing in
Morocco and Algeria on November 8, the Americans at Casablanca and Oran, the British at Algiers. The Germans
sent reinforcements into Tunis and occupied Vichy France. They managed to get the Fifth Panzer Army under
General Jürgen von Arnim on the scene in time to stop Eisenhower in western Tunisia by mid-December. Rommel
went into the Mareth Line in south-eastern Tunisia in early February 1943 and launched an attack against the
Americans on February 14 that drove them back 80 km (50 mi) and out of the vital Kasserine Pass. It was his last
success and one he could not exploit. Hitler recalled him in March, as the Americans and British closed in from the
west and south. After being cut off from their bases at Bizerte and Tunis and driven back into pockets on the Cape
Bon Peninsula, 275,000 Germans and Italians surrendered by May 13.
Soviet Victory at Stalingrad
On the eastern front the Germans' advances to Stalingrad and into the Caucasus had added about 1,100 km (680
mi) to their line. No German troops were available to hold that extra distance, so Hitler had to use troops contributed
by his allies. Consequently, while Sixth and Fourth Panzer armies were tied down at Stalingrad in September and
October 1942, they were flanked on the left and right by Romanian armies. An Italian and a Hungarian army were
deployed farther upstream on the River Don. Trial manoeuvres had exposed serious weaknesses in some of the
Axis's armies.
On the morning of November 19, in snow and fog, Soviet armoured spearheads hit the Romanians west and south
of Stalingrad. Their points met three days later at Kalach on the River Don, encircling the Sixth Army, about half of
the Fourth Panzer Army, and a number of Romanian units. Hitler ordered the Sixth Army commander, General
Friedrich von Paulus, to hold the pocket, promised him air supply, and sent Manstein, by then a field marshal, to
organize a relief. The airlift failed to provide the 300 tonnes of supplies that von Paulus needed each day, and
Manstein's relief operation was halted 55 km (34 mi) short of the pocket in late December. The Sixth Army was
doomed if it did not attempt a break-out, which Hitler refused to permit.
The Russians pushed in on the pocket from three sides in January 1943, and von Paulus surrendered on January
31. The battle cost Germany about 200,000 troops. In the aftermath of Stalingrad, in part owing to the collapse of the
Italian and Hungarian armies, the Germans were forced to retreat from the Caucasus and back approximately to the
line from which they had started the 1942 summer offensive.
The Casablanca Conference
From January 14-24, 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill and their staffs met in Casablanca to lay out a strategy for the
period after the North African campaign. The American military chiefs wanted to proceed to the direct, cross-channel
assault on Germany. The British, eloquently spoken for by Churchill, argued the advantages of gathering in the
“great prizes” to be had in the Mediterranean, in Sicily and Italy for a start. Roosevelt supported the British, and the
American military succeeded only (several months later) in getting an agreement that no more troops would be put
into the Mediterranean area than were already there, all others being assembled in England for a cross-channel
attack in 1944. Roosevelt gave his commanders another shock when he announced that nothing short of
unconditional surrender would be accepted from any of the Axis powers. The policy was meant to reassure the
Russians, who would have to wait at least another year for a full-fledged second front, but was likely also to stiffen
Axis resistance.
Air Raids on Germany
As a prelude to the postponed cross-channel attack, the British and Americans decided at Casablanca to open a
strategic air offensive (bombing) against Germany. In this instance they agreed on timing but not on method. The
British, as a result of a discouraging experience with daylight bombing early in the war, had built their heavy
bombers, the Lancasters and Halifaxes, for night bombing, which meant area bombing. The Americans believed
their B-17 Flying Fortresses and B-24 Liberators were armed and armoured heavily enough and were fitted with
sufficiently accurate bombsights to fly by daylight and strike pinpoint targets. The difference was resolved by letting
each nation conduct its own offensive in its own way and calling the result round-the-clock bombing. The British
method was exemplified by four fire-bomb raids on Hamburg in late July 1943, in which much of the city was burned
out and 50,000 people died. American losses of planes and crews increased sharply as the bombers penetrated
deeper into Germany. After early October 1943, when strikes at ball-bearing plants in Schweinfurt incurred nearly 25
per cent losses, the daylight offensive had to be curtailed until long-range fighters became available.
Battle of Kursk
Before the winter fighting on the Eastern Front ended in March 1943, Hitler knew he could not manage another
summer offensive, and he talked about setting up an east wall comparable to the fortified Atlantic wall he was
building along the western European coast. The long winter's retreat, however, had shortened the front enough to
give him a surplus of almost two armies. It also left a large westward bulge in the front around the city of Kursk. To
Hitler, the opportunity for one more grand encirclement was too good to let pass.
After waiting three months for more new tanks to come off the assembly lines, Hitler opened the Battle of Kursk on
July 5 with attacks north and south across the open eastern end of the bulge. Zhukov and Vasilyevsky had also had
their eyes on Kursk, and they had heavily reinforced the front around it. In the war's greatest tank battle, the
Russians fought the Germans nearly to a standstill by July 12. Hitler then called off the operation because the
Americans and British had landed on Sicily, and he needed to transfer divisions to Italy. With that, the strategic
initiative in the east passed permanently to the Soviet forces.
The Invasion of Italy
Three American, one Canadian, and three British divisions landed on Sicily on July 10. They pushed across the
island from beachheads on the south coast in five weeks, against four Italian and two German divisions, and
overcame the last Axis resistance on August 17. In the meantime, Mussolini had been stripped of power on July 25,
and the Italian government had entered into negotiations that resulted in an armistice signed in secret on September
3 and made public on September 8. Allied dithering about the armistice terms gave the Germans time to occupy
northern Italy, demobilize the Italian army, and force the Italian government to flee to the Allied-occupied south. They
rescued Mussolini from prison and set him up as ruler of the short-lived Republic of Salo in the south.
19
On September 3 elements of Montgomery's British Eighth Army crossed the Strait of Messina from Sicily to the toe
of the Italian boot. The US Fifth Army, under General Mark W. Clark, staged a landing near Salerno on September 9;
and by October 12, the British and Americans had a fairly solid line across the peninsula from the River Volturno,
north of Naples, to Termoli on the Adriatic coast. The Italian surrender brought little military benefit to the Allies, and
by the end of the year, the Germans stopped them on the Gustav Line about 100 km (60 mi) south of Rome. A
landing at Anzio on January 22, 1944, failed to shake the Gustav Line, which was solidly anchored on the River Liri
and Monte Cassino.
Allied Strategy Against Japan
Strategy in the war with Japan evolved by stages during 1943. In the first, the goal was to secure bases on the coast
of China (from which Japan could be bombed and later invaded) by British and Chinese drives through Burma and
eastern China and by American thrusts through the islands of the central and south-western Pacific to Formosa
(Taiwan) and China. By the middle of the year, it was apparent that neither the British nor the Chinese drive was
likely to materialize. Thereafter, only the two American thrusts remained. Their objectives were still Formosa and the
Chinese coast.
US Advances in the Pacific
In the Pacific, US troops retook Attu, in the Aleutians, in a hard-fought, three-week battle beginning on May 23. (The
Japanese evacuated Kiska before Americans and Canadians landed there in August.) The main action was in the
south-western Pacific. There, US and Anzac troops under Admiral William Halsey advanced through the Solomons,
taking New Georgia in August and a large beachhead on Bougainville in November. Australians and Americans
under MacArthur drove the Japanese back along the East Coast of New Guinea and took Lae and Salamaua in
September. MacArthur's and Halsey's mission, as set by the JCS in 1942, had been to take Rabaul, but they
discovered in the Solomons that having command of the air and sea around them was enough to neutralize the
Japanese island garrisons and render them useless. Landings on Cape Gloucester, New Britain, in December, in the
Admiralty Islands in February 1944, and at Emirau Island in March 1944 effectively sealed off Rabaul. Its 100,000man garrison could not thereafter be either adequately supplied or evacuated.
The central Pacific thrust was slower in getting started. The south-western Pacific islands were relatively close
together; airfields on one could furnish support for the move to the next; and the Japanese navy was wary of risking
its ships within range of land-based aircraft. In the central Pacific, however, the islands were scattered over vast
stretches of ocean, and powerful naval forces were needed to support the landings, particularly aircraft carriers,
which were not available in sufficient numbers until late 1943.
The first central Pacific landings were in the Gilbert Islands, at Makin and Tarawa in November 1943. Betio Island in
the Tarawa Atoll, 117.8 hectares (291 acres) of coral sand and concrete and coconut log bunkers, cost the 2nd
Marine Division 3,000 casualties in three days. More intensive preliminary bombardments and larger numbers of
amphibious tractors capable of crossing the surrounding reefs made the taking of Kwajalein and Eniwetok in the
Marshall Islands in February 1944 somewhat less expensive.
The Fourth Phase: Allied Victory
After the Battle of Kursk, the last lingering doubt about the Soviet forces was whether they could conduct a
successful summer offensive. It was dispelled in the first week of August 1943, when slashing attacks hit the
German line north and west of Kharkov. On August 12 Hitler ordered work to be started on an east wall along the
River Narva and lakes Pskov and Peipus, behind Army Group North, and the Desna and Dnepr rivers, behind Army
Groups Centre and South. In the second half of the month, the Soviet offensive expanded south along the River
Donets and north into the Army Group Centre sector.
On September 15, Hitler permitted Army Group South to retreat to the River Dnepr; otherwise it was likely to be
destroyed. He also ordered everything in the area east of the Dnepr that could be of any use to the enemy to be
hauled away, burnt, or blown up. This “scorched-earth” policy, as it was called, could only be partially carried out
before the army group crossed the river at the end of the month. Henceforth, that policy would be applied in all
territory surrendered to the Russians.
Behind the river, the German troops found no trace of an east wall, and they had to contend from the first with five
Soviet bridgeheads. The high west bank of the river was the best defensive line left in the Soviet Union, and the
Soviet armies, under Zhukov and Vasilyevsky, fought furiously to prevent the Germans from gaining a foothold there.
They expanded the bridgeheads, isolated a German army in the Crimea in October, took Kiev on November 6, and
stayed on the offensive into the winter with hardly a pause.
The Tehrn Conference
At the end of November, Roosevelt and Churchill journeyed to Tehrn for their first meeting with Stalin. The
President and the Prime Minister had already approved, under the code-name Overlord, a plan for a cross-channel
attack. Roosevelt wholeheartedly favoured executing Overlord as early in 1944 as the weather permitted. At the
Tehrn Conference, Churchill argued for giving priority to Italy and possible new offensives in the Balkans or
southern France, but he was outvoted by Roosevelt and Stalin. Overlord was set for May 1944. After the meeting,
the CCS recalled Eisenhower from the Mediterranean and gave him command of the Supreme Headquarters Allied
Expeditionary Forces, which was to organize and carry out Overlord.
The Tehrn Conference marked the high point of the East-West wartime alliance. Stalin came to the meeting as a
victorious war leader; large quantities of US Lend-Lease aid were flowing into the Soviet Union through Murmansk
and the Persian Gulf; and the decision on Overlord satisfied the long-standing Soviet demand for a second front. At
the same time, strains were developing as the Soviet armies approached the borders of the smaller eastern
European states. In April 1943 the Germans had produced evidence linking the USSR to the deaths of thousands of
Polish officers found buried in mass graves in the Katyn Forest near Smolensk. Stalin had severed relations with the
Polish government in exile in London, and he insisted at Tehrn, as he had before, that the post-war Soviet-Polish
boundary would have to be the one established after the Polish defeat in 1939. He also reacted with barely
concealed hostility to Churchill's proposal of a British-American thrust into the Balkans.
German Preparations for Overlord
Hitler expected an invasion of north-western Europe in the spring of 1944, and he welcomed it as a chance to win
the war. If he could throw the Americans and British off the beaches, he reasoned, they would not soon try again. He
could then throw all of his forces, nearly half of which were in the west, against the USSR. In November 1943 he told
the commanders on the Eastern Front that they would get no more reinforcements until after the invasion had been
defeated.
In January 1944 a Soviet offensive raised the siege of Leningrad and drove Army Group North back to the Narva
River-Lake Peipus line. There the Germans found a tenuous refuge in the one segment of the east wall that had
been to some extent fortified. On the south flank, successive offensives, the last in March and April, pushed the
Germans in the broad stretch between the Pripyat' Marshes and the Black Sea off of all but a few shreds of Soviet
territory. The greater part of 150,000 Germans and Romanians in the Crimea died or passed into Soviet captivity in
May after a belated sealift failed to get them out of Sevastopol'. On the other hand, enough tanks and weapons had
been turned out to equip new divisions for the west and replace some of those lost in the east; the German Luftwaffe
had 40 per cent more planes than at the same time a year earlier; and synthetic oil production reached its wartime
peak in April 1944.
The Normandy Invasion
On June 6, 1944, D-Day, the day of invasion for Overlord, the US First Army, under General Omar N. Bradley, and
the British Second Army, under General Miles C. Dempsey, established beachheads in Normandy, on the French
channel coast, beginning the Normandy Campaign. The German resistance was strong, and the footholds for Allied
armies were not nearly as good as they had expected. Nevertheless, the powerful counter-attack with which Hitler
had proposed to throw the Allies off the beaches did not materialize, neither on D-Day nor later. Enormous Allied air
superiority over northern France made it difficult for Rommel, who was in command on the scene, to move his limited
reserves. Moreover, Hitler became convinced—thanks to Allied deception techniques—that the Normandy landings
were a feint and the main assault would come north of the River Seine. Consequently, he refused to release the
divisions he had there and insisted on drawing in reinforcements from more distant areas. By the end of June,
Eisenhower had 850,000 men and 150,000 vehicles ashore in Normandy.
20
Soviet Reconquest of Belorussia
The German Eastern Front was quiet during the first three weeks of June 1944. Hitler fully expected a Soviet
summer offensive, which he and his military advisers believed would come on the southern flank. Since Stalingrad
the Soviets had concentrated their main effort there, and the Germans thought Stalin would be eager to push into the
Balkans, the historic object of Russian ambition. Although Army Group Centre was holding Belorussia (now
Belarus)—the only large piece of Soviet territory still in German hands—and although signs of a Soviet build-up
against the army group multiplied in June, they did not believe it was in real danger. On June 22-23, four Soviet army
groups, two controlled by Zhukov and two by Vasilyevsky, hit Army Group Centre. Outnumbered by about ten to one
at the points of attack, and under orders from Hitler not to retreat, the army group began to disintegrate almost at
once. By July 3, when Soviet spearheads coming from the north-east and south-east met at Minsk, the Belorussian
capital, Army Group Centre had lost two thirds of its divisions. By the third week of the month, Zhukov and
Vasilyevsky's fronts had advanced about 300 km (200 mi). The Soviet command celebrated on July 17 with a daylong march by 57,000 German prisoners, including 19 generals, through the streets of Moscow.
The Plot Against Hitler
A group of German officers and civilians concluded in July that getting rid of Hitler offered the last remaining chance
to end the war before it swept on to German soil from two directions. On July 20 they tried to kill him by placing a
bomb in his headquarters in east Prussia. The bomb exploded, wounding a number of officers—several fatally—but
inflicting only minor injuries on Hitler. Afterwards, the Gestapo hunted down and slaughtered everyone suspected of
complicity in the plot. One of the suspects was Rommel, who committed suicide. Hitler emerged from the
assassination attempt more secure in his power than ever before.
Liberation of France
On July 24 the Americans and British were still confined in the Normandy beachhead, which they had expanded
somewhat to take in Saint-Lô and Caen. Bradley began the break-out the next day with an attack south from SaintLô. Thereafter, the front expanded rapidly, and Eisenhower regrouped his forces. Montgomery took over the British
Second Army and the Canadian First Army. Bradley assumed command of a newly activated Twelfth Army Group
consisting of US First and Third armies under General Courtney H. Hodges and General George S. Patton.
After the Americans had turned east from Avranches in the first week of August, a pocket developed around the
German Fifth Panzer and Seventh armies west of Falaise. The Germans held out until August 20 but then retreated
across the Seine. On August 25 the Americans, in conjunction with Free French and Resistance forces under
General Charles de Gaulle, liberated Paris.
Meanwhile, on August 15, American and French forces had landed on the southern coast of France east of Marseille
and were pushing north along the valley of the River Rhône. They made contact with Bradley's forces near Dijon in
the second week of September.
Pause in the Western Offensive
Bradley and Montgomery sent their army groups north and east across the Seine on August 25, the British going
along the coast towards Belgium, the Americans towards the Franco-German border. Montgomery's troops seized
Antwerp on September 3, and the first American patrols crossed the German border on September 11. However, the
pursuit was ending. The German armies shattered in the break-out were being rebuilt, and Hitler sent as commander
Field Marshal Walther Model, who had earned a reputation as the so-called “lion of the defence” on the Eastern
Front. Montgomery had reached formidable water barriers—the Meuse and lower Rhine—and the Americans were
coming up against the west wall, which had been built in the 1930s as the German counterpart to the Maginot Line.
Although most of its big guns had been removed, the west wall's concrete bunkers and anti-tank barriers would
make it tough to crack. Montgomery's attempt to force the barrier, the Battle of Arnhem in September, was a
complete failure. The Allies' most serious problem was that they had outrun their supplies. Fuel and ammunition in
particular were scarce and were being brought from French ports on the Channel coast over as much as 800 km
(500 mi) of war-damaged roads and railways. Until the port of Antwerp could be cleared and put into operation,
major advances like those in August and early September were out of the question.
Warsaw Uprising
The Soviet offensive had spread to the flanks of Army Group Centre in July. On July 29 a spearhead reached the
Baltic coast near Riga and severed Army Group North's land contact with the German main front. Powerful thrusts
past Army Group Centre's south flank reached the line of the Wisa upstream from Warsaw by the end of the month.
In Warsaw on July 31 the Polish underground Home Army commanded by General Tadeusz Komorowski (known as
General Bor) staged the Warsaw Uprising. The insurgents, who were loyal to the anti-Communist exile government
in London, disrupted the Germans for several days. The Soviet forces held fast on the east side of the Wisa,
however, and Stalin refused to let US planes use Soviet airfields for making supply flights for the insurgents. He did,
finally, allow one flight by 110 B-17s, which was made on September 18. By then it was too late; the Germans had
the upper hand; and Komorowski surrendered on October 2. Stalin insisted that his forces could not have crossed
into Warsaw because they were too weak, which was probably not true. On the other hand, the line of the Wisa
was as far as the Soviet armies could go on a broad front without pausing to replenish their supplies.
Defeat of Germany's Allies in the East
While the Soviet Union was letting the Warsaw Uprising run its tragic course, it was gathering in a plentiful harvest of
successes elsewhere. An offensive between the Carpathian Mountains and the Black Sea, opened on August 20,
resulted in Romania's asking for an armistice three days later. Bulgaria, which had never declared war on the Soviet
Union, surrendered on September 9, Finland on September 19. Soviet troops took Belgrade on October 20 and
installed a Communist government under Tito in Yugoslavia. In Hungary, the Russians were at the gates of
Budapest by late November.
Allied Advances in Italy
The Italian campaign passed into the shadow of Overlord in the summer of 1944. Clark's Fifth Army, comprising
French and Poles as well as Americans, took Monte Cassino on May 18. A break-out from the Anzio beachhead five
days later forced the Germans to abandon the whole Gustav Line, and the Fifth Army entered Rome, an open city
since June 4. The advance went well for some distance north of Rome, but it was bound to lose momentum because
US and French divisions would soon be withdrawn for the invasion of southern France. After taking Ancona on the
east and Florence on the west coast in the second week of August, the Allies were at the German Gothic Line. An
offensive late in the month demolished the Gothic Line but failed in three months to carry through to the Po valley
and was stopped for the winter in the mountains.
Battle of the Philippine Sea
Operations against Japan in the Pacific picked up speed in 1944. In the spring, the JCS projected advances by
MacArthur through north-western New Guinea and into the Philippines and by Nimitz across the central Pacific to the
Marianas and Caroline Islands. The Japanese, on their part, were getting ready for a decisive naval battle east of the
Philippines.
After making leaps along the New Guinea coast to Aitape, Hollandia, and Wakde Island in April and May,
MacArthur's troops landed on Biak Island on May 27. Airfields on Biak would enable US planes to harass the
Japanese fleet in the Philippines. A strike force built around the world's two largest battleships, Yamato and
Musashi, was steaming towards Biak on June 13 when the US Navy began bombing and shelling Saipan in the
Marianas. The Japanese ships were then ordered to turn north and join the First Mobile Fleet of Admiral Ozawa
Jisaburo, which was heading out of the Philippines towards the Marianas.
On June 19 and 20, Ozawa met US Task Force 58, under Admiral Marc A. Mitscher, in the Battle of the Philippine
Sea. The outcome was decided in the air and under the sea. Ozawa had five heavy and four light carriers; Mitscher
had nine heavy and six light carriers. On the first day, in what was called the “Marianas Turkey Shoot”, US fighters
downed 219 of the 326 Japanese planes sent against them. While the air battle was going on, US submarines sank
Ozawa's two largest carriers, one of them his flagship; and on the second day, dive-bombers sank a third big carrier.
After that, Ozawa steered north towards Okinawa with just 35 planes left. It was the end for Japanese carrier
aviation. Mitscher lost 26 planes, and 3 of his ships suffered minor damage.
Strategic Shift in the Pacific
US forces landed on Saipan on June 15. The Americans had possession of Saipan, Tinian, and Guam by August 10,
giving them the key to a strategy for ending the war. The islands could accommodate bases for the new American
long-range bombers, the B-29 Superfortresses, which could reach Tokyo and the other main Japanese cities at least
21
as well from the islands as they would have been able to from bases in China. Moreover, US naval superiority in the
Pacific was rapidly becoming sufficient to sustain an invasion of Japan itself across the open ocean. That invasion,
however, would have to wait for the defeat of Germany and the subsequent release of ground troops from Europe for
use in the Pacific. The regular bombing of Japan began in November 1944.
Although the shift in strategy raised some doubts about the need for the operations in the Carolines and Philippines,
they went ahead as planned, with landings in the western Carolines at Peleliu (September 15), Ulithi (September
23), and Ngulu (October 16), and in the central Philippines on Leyte (October 20). The invasion of the Philippines
brought the Japanese navy out in force for the last time in the war. In the three-day Battle of Leyte Gulf (October 2325), the outcome of which was at times more in doubt than the final result would seem to indicate, the Japanese lost
26 ships, including the giant battleship Musashi, and the Americans lost 7 ships.
Air War in Europe
The main action against Germany during the autumn of 1944 was in the air. Escorted by long-range fighters,
particularly P-51 Mustangs, US bombers hit industrial targets by day, while the German cities crumbled under British
bombing by night. Hitler had responded by bombarding England, beginning in June, with V-1 flying bombs and in
September with V-2 rockets; but the best launching sites, those in north-western France and in Belgium, were lost in
October. The effects of the Allied strategic bombing were less clear-cut than had been expected. The bombing did
not destroy civilian morale, and German fighter plane and armoured vehicle production reached their wartime peaks
in the second half of 1944. On the other hand, iron and steel output dropped by half between September and
December, and continued bombing of the synthetic oil plants, coupled with loss of the Ploieti oilfields in Romania,
severely limited the fuel that would be available for the tanks and planes coming off the assembly lines.
The shortening of the fronts on the east and the west and the late-year lull in the ground fighting gave Hitler one
more chance to create a reserve of about 25 divisions. He resolved to use them offensively against the British and
Americans by cutting across Belgium to Antwerp in an action similar to the sweep through the Ardennes that had
brought the British and French to disaster at Dunkirk in May 1940.
Battle of the Bulge
The German Ardennes offensive, soon to be known to the Allies as the Battle of the Bulge, began on December 16.
The Americans were taken completely by surprise. They put up a strong resistance, however, and were able to hold
the critical road centres of Saint-Vith and Bastogne. The German effort was doomed after December 23, when good
flying weather allowed the overwhelming Allied air superiority to make itself felt. Nevertheless, it was not until the end
of January that the last of the 80-km (50-mi) deep “bulge” in the Allied lines was eliminated. The Allied advance into
Germany was not resumed until February.
Yalta Conference
By then the Soviet armies were on the River Oder, 60 km (35 mi) east of Berlin. They had smashed the German line
on the Wisa and reached the Baltic coast east of Danzig (Gdask) in January 1945 and had a tight hold on the
Oder by February 3. Stalin would meet Roosevelt and Churchill at Yalta in the Crimea (February 4-11) with all of
Poland in his pocket and with Berlin and, for all anybody then knew, most of Germany as well within his grasp. At the
Yalta Conference, Stalin agreed to enter the war against Japan within three months after the German surrender in
return for territorial concessions in the Far East.
The Americans and British disagreed on how to proceed against Germany. In a meeting at Malta shortly before the
Yalta Conference, Montgomery and the British members of the CCS argued for a fast single thrust by Montgomery's
army group across the north German plain to Berlin. To sustain such a thrust, they wanted the bulk of Allied supplies
to go to Montgomery, which meant the American armies would have to stay on the defensive. Eisenhower's plan,
which prevailed, was to give Montgomery first priority but also keep the American armies on the move.
Crossing the Rhine
The first stage for all of the Allied armies was to reach the Rhine. To accomplish that, they had to break through the
west wall in the south and cross the Ruhr on the north. The Germans had flooded the Ruhr Valley by opening dams.
After waiting nearly two weeks for the water to subside, the US Ninth and First armies crossed the Ruhr on February
23.
In early March, the armies closed up to the Rhine. The bridges were down everywhere—everywhere, that is, except
at the small city of Remagen, where units of the US First Army captured the Ludendorff railway bridge on March 7.
By March 24, when Montgomery sent elements of the British Second Army and the US Ninth Army across the river,
the US First Army was occupying a sprawling bridgehead between Bonn and Koblenz. On March 22 the US Third
Army had seized a bridgehead south of Mainz. Thus, the whole barrier of the river was broken, and Eisenhower
ordered the armies to strike east on a broad front.
Allied Objectives in Germany
Advancing at times over 80 km (50 mi) a day, the US First and Ninth armies closed an encirclement around the
industrial heart of Germany, the Ruhr, on April 1. They trapped 325,000 German troops in the pocket. The British
Second Army crossed the Weser, halfway between the Rhine and the Elbe, on April 5. On April 11 the Ninth Army
reached the Elbe near Magdeburg and the next day took a bridgehead on the east side, thereby putting itself within
striking distance (120 km/75 mi) of Berlin.
The Ninth Army's arrival on the Elbe raised a question of a “race for Berlin”. The British, especially Churchill and
Montgomery, and some Americans contended that Berlin was the most important objective in Germany because the
world, and the German people especially, would regard the forces that took Berlin as the real victors in the war.
Eisenhower, supported by the JCS, insisted that, militarily, Berlin was not worth the possible cost of taking it, and a
junction with the Russians could be made just as well farther south in the vicinity of Leipzig and Dresden. Moreover,
he believed Nazi die-hards were going to take refuge in a redoubt in the Bavarian mountains, and he wanted,
therefore, to direct the main weight of his American forces into southern Germany.
The Soviet front, meanwhile, had remained stationary on the River Oder since February, which raised another
question. The post-war Soviet explanation was that their flanks on the north and south were threatened and had to
be cleared. The sequence of events after February 1945 indicates that Stalin did not believe the British and
Americans could cross Germany as fast as they did and, consequently, assumed he would have ample time to
complete his conquest of eastern Europe before heading into central Germany. Although he told Eisenhower
differently, he obviously did not regard Berlin as unimportant. In the first week of April, his armies went into a
whirlwind redeployment for a Berlin offensive.
The Final Battles in Europe
Hitler's last, faint hope, strengthened briefly by Roosevelt's death on April 12, was for a falling-out between the
Western powers and the Soviet Union. The East-West alliance was, in fact, strained, but the break would not come
in time to benefit Nazi Germany. On April 14 and 16 the US Fifth and British Eighth armies launched attacks that
brought them to the River Po in a week. The Soviet advance towards Berlin began on April 16. The US Seventh
Army captured Nuremberg, the site of Nazi party rallies in the 1930s, on April 20. Four days later Soviet armies
closed a ring around Berlin. The next day the Soviet Fifth Guards Army and the US First Army made contact at
Torgau on the Elbe north-east of Leipzig, and Germany was split into two parts. In the last week of the month,
organized resistance against the Americans and British practically ceased, but the German troops facing east battled
desperately to avoid falling into Soviet captivity.
The German Surrender
Hitler decided to await the end in Berlin, where he could still manipulate what was left of the command apparatus.
Most of his political and military associates chose to leave the capital for places in north and south Germany likely to
be out of the Soviet reach. On the afternoon of April 30, Hitler committed suicide in his Berlin bunker. As his last
significant official act, he named Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz to succeed him as Chief of State.
Doenitz, who had been loyal to Hitler, had no course open to him other than surrender. His representative, General
Alfred Jodl, signed an unconditional surrender of all German armed forces at Eisenhower's headquarters in Reims
early on May 7. By then the German forces in Italy had already surrendered (on May 2), as had those in Holland,
northern Germany, and Denmark (May 4). The British and United States governments declared May 8 V-E (Victory
in Europe) Day. The full unconditional surrender took effect at one minute past midnight after a second signing in
Berlin with Soviet participation.
The Defeat of Japan
22
Although Japan's position was hopeless by early 1945, an early end to the war was not in sight. The Japanese navy
would not be able to come out in force again, but the bulk of the army was intact and was deployed in the home
islands and China. The Japanese gave a foretaste of what was yet in store by resorting to kamikaze (Japanese,
“divine wind”) suicide air attacks, during the fighting for Luzon in the Philippines. On January 4-13, 1945, quickly
trained kamikaze pilots flying obsolete planes had sunk 17 US ships and damaged 50.
Iwo Jima and Okinawa
While the final assault on Japan awaited reinforcements from Europe, the island-hopping approach continued, first,
with a landing on Iwo Jima on February 19. That small, barren island cost the lives of over 6,000 US Marines in the
Battle of Iwo Jima before it was secured on March 16. Situated almost halfway between the Marianas and Tokyo, the
island played an important part in the air war. Its two airfields provided landing sites for damaged B-29s and enabled
fighters to give the bombers cover during their raids on Japanese cities.
On April 1, the US Tenth Army, composed of four army and four Marine divisions under General Simon B. Buckner,
Jr., landed on Okinawa, 500 km (310 mi) south of the southernmost Japanese island, Kyushu. The Japanese did not
defend the beaches. They proposed to make their stand on the southern tip of the island, across which they had
constructed three strong lines. The northern three fifths of the island were secured in less than two weeks, the third
line in the south could not be breached until June 14, and the fighting continued to June 21, with the deaths of
around a third of the island's population.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki
The next attack was scheduled for Kyushu in November 1945. An easy success seemed unlikely. The Japanese had
fought practically to the last man on Iwo Jima, and hundreds of soldiers and civilians had jumped off cliffs at the
southern end of Okinawa rather than surrender. Kamikaze planes had sunk 15 naval vessels and damaged 200 off
Okinawa. Emperor Hirohito and others in Japan's government realized that defeat was inevitable, but could not
bypass the military, which was divided and unable to admit defeat.
The Kyushu landing was never made. Throughout the war, the US government and the British had maintained a
massive scientific and industrial project to develop nuclear weapons, believing Germany was doing the same. The
chief ingredients, fissionable uranium and plutonium, had not been available in sufficient quantity before the war in
Europe ended. The first bomb was exploded in a test at Alamogordo, New Mexico, on July 16, 1945.
Two more bombs had been built, and the possibility arose of using them to convince the Japanese to surrender.
President Harry S. Truman, who had succeeded Roosevelt in April, decided to allow the bombs to be dropped
because, he said, he believed they might save thousands of American lives. Some historians have speculated that
the decision was influenced by a desire to exhibit the new weapon to the Soviets in preparation for post-war power
struggles. However, it is now generally accepted that Truman's decision was based on the need to end the war
quickly, without the loss of American lives involved in a conquest of Japan. Effects on Soviet opinion were not a
paramount calculation, and indeed Stalin became more inflexible after the atomic bombs were used. For maximum
psychological impact, they were used in quick succession, one over Hiroshima on August 6, the other over Nagasaki
on August 9. These cities had not previously been bombed, and thus the bombs' damage could be accurately
assessed. US estimates put the number killed in Hiroshima at 66,000 to 78,000 and in Nagasaki at 39,000.
Japanese estimates gave a combined total of 240,000. The USSR declared war on Japan on August 8 and invaded
Manchuria the next day, breaking the last inhibitions of the Japanese High Command, which was terrified at the
prospect of Communist invasion.
The Japanese Surrender
On August 14 Japan announced its surrender, which was not quite unconditional because the Allies had agreed to
allow the country to keep its emperor. The formal signing took place on September 2 in Tokyo Bay aboard the
battleship Missouri. The Allied delegation was headed by General MacArthur, who became the military governor of
occupied Japan.
Cost of the War
World War II's basic statistics qualify it as by far the greatest war in history in terms of human and material resources
expended. In all, 61 countries with 1.7 billion people, three quarters of the world's population, took part. A total of 110
million people were mobilized for military service, more than half of those by the USSR (22-30 million), Germany (17
million), and the United States (16 million). The largest numbers of active-duty personnel at any one time were:
USSR 12,500,000; the United States 12,245,000; Germany 10,938,000; British Empire 8,720,000; Japan 7,193,000;
and China 5,000,000.
Most statistics on the war can only be estimates. The war's vast and chaotic sweep made accurate record-keeping
impossible. Some governments lost control of the data, and some resorted to manipulating it for political reasons.
However, there is a rough consensus on the total cost of the war. In terms of money spent, it has been put at more
than US$1 trillion, which makes it more expensive than all other wars combined.
The United States spent the most money on the war, an estimated $341 billion, including $50 billion of Lend-Lease
supplies which were distributed as follows: Britain $31 billion; USSR $11 billion; China $5 billion; and all others $3
billion. The expenditure of other belligerents (in US dollars) was as follows: Germany $272 billion; USSR $192
billion; Britain $120 billion; Italy $94 billion; and Japan $56 billion. Except for the United States and some of the less
militarily active Allies, the money spent does not come close to the war's true costs. The former Soviet government
calculated that the USSR lost 30 per cent of its national wealth, while Nazi exactions and looting in the Soviet Union
and other occupied countries are incalculable. The full cost to Japan has been estimated at US$562 billion.
Clearly the major factor in the Allied victory was the possession of vastly superior resources in comparison to those
of the Axis powers. All economic indices attest to this superiority—in manpower, manufacturing output, raw
materials, education, etc. The United States eventually surpassed all the belligerents economically, but the Soviet
Union and Britain proved equally capable of prodigious efforts in the production of weapons of all kinds. The Axis
powers could not hope to match this in the long run, despite the vast territorial gains they had made in the early
stages of the war.
The Effects of the War on Civilians
Technological and scientific developments made the war one of unparalleled ferocity. It reached a level of bestiality
and horror never before seen in the history of humankind. Civilians in the vast war zones became part of the fighting
fronts, and suffered from disease, malnutrition, and often actual starvation, destruction of their towns and cities, and
appalling injuries and death.
The air war accounted for much of this civilian suffering. The Nazi aerial blitz on Warsaw in 1939 and Rotterdam in
1940 was followed by much larger-scale night bombing of London and other British towns and cities in 1940 and
1941. Britain's Bomber Command retaliated after 1942 with a massive night bombing campaign against Germany's
towns and cities, the only means until 1944 by which Britain could strike directly at the heartland of Germany. By the
end of the war, most large German cities and towns had been reduced to rubble, with an ever-increasing civilian
death toll from direct hits, blasts, and fire-storms.
Contrary to the expectations of many pre-war air strategists, aerial war did not undermine enemy morale to the
extent that it would force its government to sue for peace. Assisted by government exhortation and efforts to
ameliorate the worst effects of the bombing by provision of shelters, first aid, and other measures (and in Germany
by a ferocious and ever-present police apparatus), the civilian populations in Britain and Germany, while undeniably
depressed by the destruction inflicted on them, held firm, despite occasional panic in places like Southampton where
shelters were inadequate and the local administration collapsed. Indeed, in Germany in 1944, despite Allied bombing
by day and night, military industrial production rose sharply, a result of the innovations of Albert Speer, Hitler's
energetic and ruthless Minister of Armaments after 1942, who discovered plenty of slack and wastage in German
industry.
Air historians remain divided about the effectiveness of the RAF's aerial night bombing of Germany. Many suggest
that it largely failed in its objectives, and the resources devoted to bombing might have been better invested
elsewhere, such as in the Middle East or Far East or in the Battle of the Atlantic. Others insist that in its collateral
effects on German communications and industries it made a decisive impact on Germany's war potential—that
without it Germany's military-industrial resurgence after 1943 might have been even more impressive. There is little
doubt that, despite its immense losses, the US Army Air Force's “precision” bombing of Germany's industrial
infrastructure, particularly oil and communications, and its progressive destruction of the German fighter defence
forces did have a major impact on Germany's fighting capabilities. However when the Americans began the aerial
bombing of Japanese towns and cities in 1944 and 1945 this seemed to have little effect on the Japanese people's
23
will to continue fighting, until the dropping of the atomic bombs and the Soviet Union's declaration of war convinced
the Emperor and his closest advisers that Japan must surrender or be totally obliterated.
Civilians were also adversely affected in other ways. Many were forced into slave labour in Germany's factories and
armaments industries, while French, Belgian, Dutch, and Italian citizens were shipped to Germany to work in its
factories. Many of the slave labourers were starved to death. The Germans also ruthlessly pillaged the resources of
occupied countries like France and the Benelux countries until they belatedly realized that it was more profitable to
the German war effort to keep the workers and resources of these countries in place to produce essential
armaments and other goods. Civilians, as well as former soldiers, in the occupied countries also joined guerrilla
bands—such as the Marquis in France, the underground in Singapore, and the partisans in Yugoslavia—to harry
communications and sabotage Axis-controlled industries.
The Holocaust
By far the most horrifying event was the deliberate murder of 5 million Jewish men, women, and children, deported
from Germany, Poland, and other occupied countries to Nazi concentration camps. This was Hitler's “Final Solution”
to the Jewish “problem”. Before the war the persecution of the Jews in Germany, and later in Austria and
Czechoslovakia, had taken the form of banning them from their employment, the seizure of their property, and
arbitrary arrest and various other humiliations, such as being forced to wear the Star of David in public. Before 1942
special German units had indiscriminately murdered Jews, Poles, and Russian Bolshevik commissars captured in
Poland and Russia. In 1942 a conference of German officials drew up plans for a more “scientific” approach, the
Holocaust, which involved herding these people—as well as other target groups such as Gypsies and
homosexuals—into killing camps, where they were exterminated in gas chambers and then cremated. In some
camps 10,000 of these unfortunates could be gassed every day. It is not known how many Germans and their
collaborators in occupied territories were involved or connived in this mass slaughter, but certainly it was not
restricted, as was believed immediately after the war, to Heinrich Himmler and his entourage and a few German civil
servants and police officials, with the bulk of the German population unaware of what was going on—the network of
the guilty appears to have been much wider than that.
Human Losses
As well as this monstrous programme of extermination, the human cost of the war was appalling for most of the
belligerents. The USSR lost the most—at least 20 million civilian and military personnel killed—including large
numbers of Russian prisoners deliberately starved to death in German prisoner-of-war camps. Poland lost around a
fifth of its civilian population. Allied civilian losses were 44 million; Axis losses, 11 million. The military deaths on both
sides in Europe numbered 19 million, and in the war against Japan, 6 million (which included a sizeable number of
Allied prisoners-of-war starved or tortured to death in Japanese forced-labour camps in Burma and elsewhere). Only
the United States was spared any significant civilian losses, with 292,131 military deaths in battle and 115,187
military deaths from other causes.
The highest numbers of deaths, military and civilian, were as follows: USSR more than 10 million military and 10
million civilian; China 3.5 million and 10 million; Germany 3.5 million and 3.8 million; Poland 120,000 and 5.3 million;
Japan 1.7 million and 380,000; Yugoslavia 300,000 and 1.3 million; Romania 200,000 and 465,000; France 250,000
and 360,000; British Empire 452,000 and 60,000; Italy 330,000 and 80,000; Hungary 120,000 and 280,000; and
Czechoslovakia 10,000 and 330,000.
Conclusion
In its early stages the war was depicted in the West as a struggle of the democracies (France and Britain) against a
fanatical and evil German National Socialist dictatorship. This perception was magnified after the entry of the USSR
and the United States on the side of Britain in 1941, and Italy and Japan on the side of Germany in 1940 and 1941.
From then on the Western powers proclaimed the war as a fight to the finish against the totalitarian Axis, a view
reinforced by Roosevelt's call for the unconditional surrender of the Axis powers in 1943. As the war dragged on, the
distinction between the belligerent peoples and their “evil” governments became increasingly blurred in the Allied
mind—if it ever had been in the case of the Japanese people, towards whom a crude racialist attitude was adopted
from the outset. This depiction of the war as a life-or-death struggle between democracy and fascism was a
convenient fiction—the USSR was anything but democratic, although Stalin made some cosmetic changes, such as
the abolition of the Comintern, relaxation of religious and anti-Semitic persecution, and portrayal of the war as “The
Great Patriotic War” (thus downplaying Communist ideology for the duration), to appeal to the West. America's Far
Eastern ally, Nationalist China under Chiang Kai-shek was corrupt and dictatorial, however much Roosevelt
pretended otherwise.
Indeed, while Britain and the United States maintained the outward semblances of democracy—Parliament and
Congress respectively—both Winston Churchill after 1940 and Roosevelt after 1941 conferred on themselves
immense powers which would have been unthinkable in peace time. In both states, civil liberties were restricted as
never before in an effort to enforce uniformity and unity. In Britain, for instance, the Defence of the Realm Act could
be utilized to justify any arbitrary State action, as in the case of Oswald Mosley and his Fascist Party, many of whose
leaders were rounded up and imprisoned in 1940. The internment of German and Italian refugees in Britain and of
Japanese-Americans, in the western United States could equally be justified in the name of the security of the State,
despite the fact that most were either refugees from fascist persecution or, in the case of the Japanese-Americans
were mostly patriotic Americans. In general, however, British and American authorities ruled with a light hand, since
the overwhelming majority of their citizens supported the war. In both the USSR and Germany, Stalin and Hitler had
already consolidated their power, and during the war both dictators became the supreme commanders of their
armed forces, interfering both in strategic and tactical matters, often ignoring military advice. Internally, loyalty to
their respective regimes was maintained by Draconian police measures, coupled with skilful propaganda that
emphasized patriotism and hatred of the enemy as a means of keeping their populations in line. Democracy had
long ceased to exist in Italy (Mussolini was overthrown in 1943 by an internal coup), while Japan was governed by a
succession of Cabinets dominated by the Army and the Navy, who were very often at cross purposes over their
objectives, presided over by an emperor who kept a discreet silence until the end of the war.
The war's end was a total victory for the “democratic” coalition. Fascism and Japanese militarism had been crushed,
and for Roosevelt a future peaceful world order could now be guaranteed by the UN, presided over by the four major
victor powers, the United States, the USSR, Great Britain, and China. His vision soon faded after his death on April
12, 1945. China collapsed into civil war. Britain attempted to assert its continuing great-power status as a victor, but
by 1945, having lost the bulk of its overseas assets and nearly bankrupted by its war effort, this was to be an uphill,
and ultimately fruitless, task. The loss of Singapore had been a fatal blow to Britain's already tottering prestige in
Asia. The war also created serious rifts between Britain and its Commonwealth partners. At the outbreak of the war
the White Dominions—Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—had rallied to the British cause, sending troops to the
British Isles and, in the case of Australia and New Zealand, to the Middle East. South Africa also declared war on
Germany, although rather reluctantly and not without considerable unrest among the Boer population. With the rising
Japanese threat in the Far East in 1941, the Australian and New Zealand governments began to demand the
repatriation of their troops from the Middle East. Churchill ignored or evaded their requests. The loss of British ships
off Singapore demonstrated to the two Commonwealth governments that Britain's pre-war promises to send a
powerful fleet to the Far East in the event of Japanese aggression had been entirely bogus. The fall of Singapore,
without any major British resistance, was the final blow to what little Australasian confidence remained in British
military prowess. Around 14,000 Australian troops, some of whom had only recently arrived in Singapore, were
captured, and half of them died in Japan's prisoner-of-war camps. Thereafter, both countries turned to the United
States for their future defence. The Singapore debacle was also the death knell for Britain's already shaky hold on
India. Indian troops—the British Viceroy had declared war on Germany on behalf of India in 1939 without any
consultation with Indian nationalist leaders—formed the bulk of the British army in Malaya and Burma. Indeed, the
feeble resistance to the Japanese invaders by the British, Dutch, and French colonialists in South East Asia ignited
nationalist passions across Asia; although Japanese behaviour in the conquered territories hardly endeared them to
the indigenous populations, despite Japan's call for “Asia for the Asiatics”. Canadian troops remained in the British
Isles until they embarked for Normandy on D-Day in 1944.
By 1945 the pre-1939 status quo had disappeared beyond recall. France, Germany, and Western Europe were in
ruins, and the devastated lands of Eastern and Central Europe were under Soviet control. The United States had
emerged as the predominant global power, rich in human skills, boundless energy, and natural resources, with her
homeland barely touched by the ravages of war. When the United States and the USSR quarrelled after 1946 the
stage was set for a new conflict—the Cold War.
HISTORY AND HISTORIOGRAPHY.
24
History, in its broadest sense, is the totality of all past events, although a more realistic definition would limit it to the
known past. Historiography is the written record of what is known of human lives and societies in the past and how
historians have attempted to understand them. Of all the fields of serious study and literary effort, history may be the
hardest to define precisely, because the attempt to uncover past events and formulate an intelligible account of them
necessarily involves the use and influence of many auxiliary disciplines and literary forms. The concern of all serious
historians has been to collect and record facts about the human past and often to discover new facts. They have
known that the information they have is incomplete, partly incorrect, or biased and requires careful attention. All have
tried to discover in the facts patterns of meaning addressed to the enduring questions of human life.
The Historian's Craft
Except for the special circumstance in which historians record events they themselves have witnessed, historical
facts can only be known through intermediary sources. These include testimony from living witnesses; narrative
records, such as previous histories, memoirs, letters, and imaginative literature; the legal and financial records of
courts, legislatures, religious institutions, or businesses; and the unwritten information derived from the physical
remains of past civilizations, such as architecture, arts and crafts, burial grounds, and cultivated land. All these, and
many more, sources of information provide the evidence from which the historian deciphers historical facts. The
relation between evidence and fact, however, is rarely simple and direct. The evidence may be biased or mistaken,
fragmentary, or nearly unintelligible after long periods of cultural or linguistic change. Historians, therefore, have to
assess their evidence with a critical eye.
Interpretation and Form
Moreover, the purpose of history as a serious endeavour to understand human life is never fulfilled by the mere
sifting of evidence for facts. Fact-finding is only the foundation for the selection, arrangement, and explanation that
constitute historical interpretation. The process of interpretation informs all aspects of historical inquiry, beginning
with the selection of a subject for investigation, because the very choice of a particular event or society or institution
is itself an act of judgement that asserts the importance of the subject. Once chosen, the subject itself suggests a
provisional model or hypothesis that guides research and helps the historian to assess and classify the available
evidence and to present a detailed and coherent account of the subject. The historian must respect the facts, avoid
ignorance and error as far as possible, and create a convincing, intellectually satisfying interpretation.
Until modern times, history was regarded primarily as a special kind of literature that shared many techniques and
effects with fictional narrative. Historians were committed to factual materials and personal truthfulness, but like
writers of fiction they wrote detailed narratives of events and vivid character sketches with great attention to
language and style. The complex relations between literary art and historiography have been and continue to be a
subject of serious debate.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Explosive devices, designed to release nuclear energy on a large scale, used primarily in military applications. The
first atomic bomb (or A-bomb), which was tested on July 16, 1945, near Alamogordo, New Mexico, represented a
completely new type of artificial explosive. All explosives prior to that time derived their power from the rapid burning
or decomposition of some chemical compound. Such chemical processes release only the energy of the outermost
electrons in the atom.
Nuclear explosives, on the other hand, involve energy sources within the core, or nucleus, of the atom. The A-bomb
gained its power from the splitting, or fission, of all the atomic nuclei in several kilograms of plutonium. A sphere
about the size of a tennis ball produced an explosion equal to 20,000 tons of TNT (see Trinitrotoluene). Nuclear
weapons were the first true weapons of mass destruction and their first use in warfare, at the end of World War II,
and their subsequent deployment, changed the nature of international relations for all time. This article focuses on
how the weapons work, and their effects.
The first nuclear weapons were developed, constructed, and tested by the Manhattan Project, a massive United
States enterprise that was established in August 1942 during World War II. Many prominent scientists, including the
physicists Enrico Fermi, Richard Feynman, Isador Rabi, and Edward Teller, and the chemist Harold Urey, as well as
scientists from Britain, were associated with what was, to date, the world’s biggest scientific project, whose military
head was US Army engineer Major General Leslie Groves. The scientific director of the project—which was based at
Los Alamos, New Mexico—was physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer.
Work had already started during the Manhattan Project on even more powerful bombs, chiefly to tap the energy of
light elements, such as hydrogen. In these bombs the source of energy is the fusion process, in which nuclei of the
isotopes of hydrogen combine to form a heavier helium nucleus (see Thermonuclear, or Fusion, Weapons below).
This fusion research, begun largely by Edmund Teller, resulted in the production of bombs that range in power from
a fraction of a kiloton (1,000 tons of TNT equivalent) to many megatons (1 million tons of TNT equivalent).
Furthermore, the physical size of nuclear bombs was drastically reduced, permitting the development of battlefield
nuclear weapons, such as nuclear artillery shells and small missiles that can be fired from portable launchers in the
field. This allowed strategists to consider the possibility of waging a limited nuclear war.
After the war, the US Atomic Energy Commission became responsible for the supervision of all nuclear matters in
the United States, including weapons research. Although nuclear bombs were originally developed as strategic
weapons to be carried by large bombers, such as the B-29 and B-52, from the 1950s nuclear weapons were
produced for both strategic and tactical applications. Not only can they be delivered by different types of military
aircraft, but rockets and guided missiles of many sizes were built to carry nuclear warheads, to be launched from the
ground, the air, or under the sea. Intercontinental ballistic missiles are large rockets capable of carrying multiple
warheads for delivery to separate targets thousands of kilometres from launch.
Research in nuclear weapons continues in the United States at Los Alamos; at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory,
California; in Britain, at Aldermaston; and in Russia, France, and China. Reduction in superpower nuclear forces, as
a result of treaties such as the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties (START) I and II, has produced a need for labs to
apply research to the decommissioning and refitting of weapons.
Fission Weapons
In 1905 the renowned physicist Albert Einstein published his special theory of relativity. According to this theory, the
relation between mass and energy is expressed by the equation E = mc2, which states that a given mass (m) is
associated with an amount of energy (E) equal to this mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light (c). A very
small amount of matter is equivalent to a vast amount of energy. For example, 1 kg (2.2 lb) of matter converted
completely into energy would be equivalent to the energy released by exploding 22 megatons of TNT.
In 1939, in a series of experiments, the German chemists Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann split the uranium atom
into two roughly equal parts by bombardment with neutrons. As a result, the Austrian physicist Lise Meitner, with her
nephew, Austrian physicist Otto Frisch, identified the process of nuclear fission, which placed the release of atomic
energy within reach.
The Chain Reaction
When the uranium nucleus fissions, it breaks up into a pair of nuclear fragments and releases energy. At the same
time, the nucleus emits very quickly a number of fast neutrons, the same type of particle that initiated the fission of
the uranium nucleus. This makes it possible to achieve a self-sustaining series of nuclear fissions; the neutrons that
are emitted in fission produce a chain reaction, with a continuous release of energy.
The light isotope of uranium, uranium-235, is easily split by the fission neutrons and, upon fission, emits an average
of about 2.5 neutrons. One neutron per generation of nuclear fissions is necessary to sustain the chain reactions.
Others may be lost by escape from the mass of chain-reacting material, or they may be absorbed in impurities or in
the heavy uranium isotope, uranium-238, if it is present. Any substance capable of sustaining a fission chain reaction
is known as a fissile material.
Critical Mass
A small sphere of pure fissile material, such as uranium-235, about the size of a golf ball, would not sustain a chain
reaction. Too many neutrons escape through the surface area, which is relatively large compared with its volume,
and thus are lost to the chain reaction. In a mass of uranium-235 about the size of a tennis ball, however, the
number of neutrons lost through the surface is compensated for by the neutrons generated in additional fissions
taking place within the sphere.
25
The minimum amount of fissile material (of a given shape) required to maintain the chain reaction is known as the
critical mass. Increasing the size of the sphere produces a supercritical assembly, in which the successive
generations of fissions increase very quickly, leading to a possible explosion as a result of the extremely rapid
release of a large amount of energy. In an atomic bomb, therefore, a mass of fissile material greater than the critical
size must be assembled instantaneously and held together for about a millionth of a second to permit the chain
reaction to propagate before the bomb explodes. A heavy material, called a tamper, surrounds the fissile mass and
prevents its premature disruption. The tamper also reduces the number of neutrons that escape.
If every atom in 0.5 kg (1 lb) of uranium were to split, the energy produced would equal the explosive power of
9.9 kilotons of TNT. In this hypothetical case, the efficiency of the process would be 100 per cent. In the first A-bomb
tests, this kind of efficiency was not approached. Moreover, a 0.5-kg (1-lb) mass is too small for a critical
assembly.
Detonation of Atomic Bombs
Gun Method
Various systems were devised to detonate the prototype atomic bombs. The simplest system is the gun-type
weapon, in which a projectile made of fissile material is fired at a target of the same material so that the two weld
together into a supercritical assembly. The atomic bomb exploded by the United States over Hiroshima, Japan, on
August 6, 1945, was a gun-type weapon. It had the energy equivalent of about 13 kilotons of TNT.
Implosion Method
A more complex method, known as implosion, is utilized in a spherically shaped weapon. The outer part of the
sphere consists of a layer of closely fitted and specially shaped lenses, which are composed of high explosive and
designed to concentrate the blast towards the centre of the bomb. Each segment of the high explosive is equipped
with a detonator, which in turn is wired to all other segments. An electrical impulse explodes all the chunks of high
explosive simultaneously, resulting in a detonation wave that converges towards the core of the weapon. At the core
is a sphere of fissile material, which is compressed by the powerful, inwardly directed pressure, or implosion. The
density of the metal is increased, and a supercritical assembly is produced. The Trinity test bomb exploded near
Alamogordo, as well as the one dropped by the United States on Nagasaki, Japan, on August 9, 1945, was of the
implosion type. Each was equivalent to about 20 kilotons of TNT.
Regardless of the method used to attain a supercritical assembly, the chain reaction proceeds for about a millionth of
a second, liberating vast amounts of heat energy. The extremely fast release of a very large amount of energy in a
relatively small volume causes the temperature to rise to tens of millions of degrees. The resulting rapid expansion
and vaporization of the bomb material causes the explosion.
Production of Fissile Material
Much experimentation was necessary to make the production of fissile material practical.
Separation of Uranium Isotopes
The fissile uranium-235 isotope accounts for only 0.7 per cent of natural uranium; the remainder is composed of the
heavier uranium-238. No chemical methods suffice to separate uranium-235 from ordinary uranium, because both
uranium isotopes are chemically identical. A number of techniques, such as gaseous diffusion, were devised to
separate the two, all of which depend in principle on the slight difference in weight between the two types of uranium
atoms.
A huge gaseous-diffusion plant was built during World War II at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This plant was enlarged
after the war, and two similar plants were built near Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio. The feed material for
this type of plant consisted of extremely corrosive uranium hexafluoride gas. The gas is pumped against barriers that
have many millions of tiny holes, through which the lighter molecules, which contain uranium-235 atoms, pass by
diffusion at a slightly greater rate than the heavier molecules, containing uranium-238. After the gas has been cycled
through thousands of barriers, known as stages, it is highly enriched in the lighter isotope of uranium. The final
product is weapons-grade uranium containing more than 90 per cent uranium-235.
Producing Plutonium
Although the heavy uranium isotope uranium-238 will not sustain a chain reaction, it can be converted into a fissile
material by being bombarded with neutrons. This transforms it into a new species of element. When the uranium-238
atom captures a neutron in its nucleus, it is transformed into the heavier isotope uranium-239. This nuclear species
quickly disintegrates to form neptunium-239, an isotope of element 93. Another disintegration transmutes this
isotope into an isotope of element 94, which is plutonium-239. Plutonium-239, like uranium-235, undergoes fission
after the absorption of a neutron and can be used as bomb material. Producing plutonium-239 in large quantities
requires an intense source of neutrons; the source is provided by the controlled chain reaction in a nuclear reactor.
See Nuclear Physics.
During World War II nuclear reactors built in the United States, and later in Britain, were designed to provide
neutrons to produce plutonium. Reactors capable of manufacturing large quantities of plutonium were established at
a vast site in Hanford, Washington, which is now in the process of a large-scale environmental clear-up.
Thermonuclear (Fusion) Weapons
Even before the first atomic bomb was developed, scientists realized that a type of nuclear reaction different from the
fission process was theoretically possible as a source of nuclear energy. Instead of using the energy released as a
result of a chain reaction in fissile material, nuclear weapons could utilize the energy liberated in the fusion of light
elements. This process is the opposite of fission, since it involves the fusing together of the nuclei of isotopes of light
atoms such as hydrogen. It is for this reason that the weapons based on nuclear-fusion reactions are often called
hydrogen bombs, or H-bombs.
Of the three isotopes of hydrogen the two heaviest species, deuterium and tritium, combine most readily to form
helium. Although the energy release in the fusion process is less per nuclear reaction than in fission, 0.5 kg (1 lb)
of the heavier material contains many more atoms; thus, energy liberated from 0.5 kg (1 lb) of hydrogen-isotope
fuel is equivalent to that of about 29 kilotons of TNT, or almost three times as much as from uranium. This estimate,
however, is based on complete fusion of all hydrogen atoms.
Fusion reactions—the same processes that take place inside the Sun—occur only at temperatures of several
millions of degrees, the rate increasing enormously with rising temperature. Such reactions consequently are known
as thermonuclear (heat-induced) reactions. Strictly speaking, the term “thermonuclear” implies that the nuclei have a
range (or distribution) of energies characteristic of the temperature. This plays an important role in making rapid
fusion reactions possible by an increase in temperature.
Development of the hydrogen bomb was impossible before the perfection of A-bombs, for only the latter could yield
the tremendous heat necessary to achieve fusion of hydrogen atoms. Atomic scientists used an atomic bomb to act
as the trigger of the projected thermonuclear device.
Thermonuclear Tests
Following developmental tests in the spring of 1951 at the Enewetak atoll in the Marshall Islands, a full-scale,
successful experiment with a fusion-type device was conducted on November 1, 1952. This test, code-named Mike,
produced an explosion with power equivalent to several megatons of TNT. The Soviet Union detonated a
thermonuclear weapon in the megaton range in August 1953. As with the Soviet A-bomb, exploded in 1949, this
happened many years earlier than expected. On March 1, 1954, the United States exploded a fusion bomb with a
power of 15 megatons. It created a glowing fireball more than 4.8 km (3 mi) wide, and a huge mushroom cloud,
which quickly rose into the stratosphere.
The March 1954 explosion led to worldwide recognition of the nature of radioactive fallout. The fallout of radioactive
debris from the huge bomb cloud also revealed much about the nature of the thermonuclear bomb. Had the bomb
been a weapon consisting of an A-bomb trigger and a core of hydrogen isotopes, the only persistent radioactivity
from the explosion would have been the result of the fission debris from the trigger and from the radioactivity induced
by neutrons in coral and seawater. Testing of radioactive debris that fell on the unfortunate Japanese vessel the
Lucky Dragon, which was tuna-fishing about 160 km (100 mi) from the test site, demonstrated that the bomb that
dusted the vessel with fallout, with its subsequent casualties, was more than just an H-bomb.
Fission-Fusion-Fission Bomb
The thermonuclear bomb exploded in 1954 was a three-stage weapon. The first stage consisted of a large A-bomb,
which acted as a trigger. The second stage was the H-bomb phase resulting from the fusion of deuterium and tritium
26
within the bomb. In the process helium and high-energy neutrons were formed. The third stage resulted from the
impact of these high-speed neutrons on the outer jacket of the bomb, which consisted of natural uranium, or
uranium-238. No chain reaction was produced, but the fusion neutrons had sufficient energy to cause fission of the
uranium nuclei and thus added to the explosive yield and also to the radioactivity of the bomb residues.
Neutron Bomb
The enhanced radiation fusion bomb, also called the neutron bomb, which has been tested by the United States and
other nuclear powers, does not release long-lasting radioactive fission products; however, the large number of
neutrons released in thermonuclear reactions is known to induce radioactivity in materials, especially earth and
water, within a relatively small area around the explosion. Thus the neutron bomb is considered a tactical weapon
because it can do serious damage on the battlefield, penetrating tanks and other armoured vehicles and causing
death or serious injury to exposed combatants, without, in theory, producing the radioactive fallout that endangers
people or structures miles away.
Effects of Nuclear Weapons
The effects of nuclear weapons are analysed according to blast; heat; radiation; and effects on climate and ecology.
Blast Effects
As is the case with explosions caused by conventional weapons, most of the damage to buildings and other
structures from a nuclear explosion results, directly or indirectly, from the effects of blast. The very rapid expansion
of the bomb materials produces a high-pressure pulse, or shock wave, that moves rapidly outward from the
exploding bomb. In air, this shock wave is known as a blast wave because it is equivalent to and is accompanied by
powerful winds of much greater than hurricane force.
Damage is caused both by the high excess (or overpressure) of air at the front of the blast wave and by the
extremely strong winds that persist after the wave front has passed. The degree of blast damage suffered on the
ground depends on the TNT equivalent of the explosion; the altitude at which the bomb is exploded, referred to as
the height of burst; and the distance of the structure from ground zero—that is, the point directly under the bomb. For
the 13- and 20-kiloton A-bombs detonated over Japan, the height of burst was about 550 m (1,800 ft), because it
was estimated that this height would produce a maximum area of damage. If the TNT equivalent had been larger, a
greater height of burst would have been chosen.
Assuming a height of burst that will maximize the damage area, a 10-kiloton bomb will cause severe damage to
lighter structures such as wood-frame houses (such as are common in Japan and the United States) to a distance of
more than 1.6 km (1 mi) from ground zero. It will cause moderate damage as far as 2.4 km (1 mi); a severely
damaged house probably would be beyond repair.
The damage radius increases with the power of the bomb approximately in proportion to its cube root. If exploded at
the optimum height, therefore, a 10-megaton weapon, which is 1,000 times as powerful as a 10-kiloton weapon, will
increase the distance tenfold—that is, to 17.7 km (11 mi) for severe damage and 24 km (15 mi) for moderate
damage of a frame house.
Thermal Effects
The very high temperatures attained in a nuclear explosion result in the formation of a fireball—an extremely hot
incandescent mass of gas. For a 10-kiloton explosion in the air, the fireball will attain a maximum diameter of about
300 m (1,000 ft); for a 10-megaton weapon the fireball may be 4.8 km (3 mi) across. A flash of thermal (heat)
radiation is emitted from the fireball and spreads out over a large area, but with steadily decreasing intensity.
The amount of heat energy received a certain distance from the nuclear explosion depends on the power of the
weapon and the state of the atmosphere. If the visibility is poor or the explosion takes place above clouds, the
effectiveness of the heat flash is decreased. The thermal radiation falling on exposed skin will cause flash burns. A
10-kiloton explosion in the air will produce moderate (second-degree) flash burns, which require medical attention,
as far as 2.4 km (1 mi) from ground zero; for a 10-megaton bomb, the corresponding distance would be more
than 32 km (20 mi). Milder burns of bare skin would be experienced even further out. Most ordinary clothing provides
protection from the heat radiation, as does almost any opaque object. Flash burns occur when the bare skin is
directly exposed, or if the clothing is too thin to absorb the thermal radiation.
The heat radiation can start fires in dry, flammable materials such as paper and some fabrics; these fires spread in
typically urban conditions. In the A-bomb explosions over Japan many fires, especially in the area near ground zero,
originated from secondary causes, such as electrical short circuits, broken gas lines, and upset furnaces and boilers
in industrial plants. The blast damage produced debris that helped to maintain the fires.
Under some conditions, such as existed at Hiroshima but not at Nagasaki, many individual fires can combine to
produce a firestorm similar to those that accompany some large forest fires. The heat of the fire causes a strong
updraught, which produces strong winds drawn in towards the centre of the burning area. These winds fan the
flames and convert the area into a holocaust in which everything flammable is destroyed. Inasmuch as the flames
are drawn inward, however, the area over which such a fire spreads may be limited.
Penetrating Radiation
Besides heat and blast, an exploding nuclear bomb has a unique effect—it releases penetrating nuclear radiation,
which is quite different from thermal (or heat) radiation. The nature of radioactivity and the immense areas
contaminable by a single bomb undoubtedly make radioactive fallout potentially one of the most lethal effects of
nuclear weapons. When absorbed by the body, nuclear radiation causes serious injury. For an explosion high in the
air, the injury range for these radiations is less than for blast and fire damage or flash burns. In Japan, however,
many individuals who were protected from blast and burns succumbed later to radiation sickness.
Nuclear radiation from an explosion may be divided into two categories, namely, prompt radiation and residual
radiation. Prompt radiation consists of an instantaneous burst of neutrons and gamma rays, which travel over an
area of several square kilometres. Gamma rays are identical in effect to X-rays. Both neutrons and gamma rays
have the ability to penetrate solid matter, so that substantial thicknesses of shielding materials are required.
Residual nuclear radiation, generally known as fallout, is a hazard that affects very large areas that are completely
free from other effects of a nuclear explosion. In bombs that gain their energy from fission of uranium-235 or
plutonium-239, two radioactive nuclei are produced for every fissile nucleus split. These fission products account for
the persistent radioactivity in bomb debris, because many of the atoms have half-lives measured in days, months, or
years.
Two distinct categories of fallout—namely, early and delayed—are known. If a nuclear explosion occurs near the
surface, earth or water is taken up into a mushroom-shaped cloud and becomes contaminated with the radioactive
weapon residues. The contaminated material begins to descend within a few minutes and may continue for about 24
hours, covering an area of thousands of square miles downwind from the explosion. This constitutes the early fallout,
which is an immediate hazard to human beings. No early fallout is associated with high-altitude explosions. If a
nuclear bomb is exploded well above the ground, the radioactive residues rise to a great height in the mushroom
cloud and descend gradually over a large area.
Human experience with radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons is based on case histories resulting from the
Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and from the exposure of the Marshall islanders and the Lucky Dragon fishermen to
the fallout from the March 1954 15-megaton H-bomb test.
Electromagnetic Pulse
A nuclear explosion also produces a very powerful surge of electromagnetic energy capable of overloading power
supply systems and burning out transistors and capacitors. A single 10-megaton nuclear bomb exploded high above
ground would destroy or disrupt telecommunications and all electronic and electrical systems on a nationwide scale.
Climatic Effects
Besides the widespread blast, radiation, and fire damage from individual bombs, a large-scale nuclear exchange
between nations could conceivably have a catastrophic global effect on climate. This possibility, initially proposed in
a paper published by an international group of scientists in December 1983, became known as the nuclear winter
theory. According to this theory, the explosion of not even one half of the combined number of warheads in the
United States and Russia would throw enormous quantities of dust and smoke into the atmosphere, sufficient to
block out sunlight for several months, particularly in the Northern hemisphere. This would destroy plant life and
create a sub-freezing climate until the dust dispersed. The ozone layer would also be affected, permitting further
27
damage as a result of the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation. Were the results sufficiently prolonged, they could spell the
virtual end of human civilization.
ASTRONOMY
Science dealing with all the celestial bodies in the universe, including the planets and their satellites, comets and
meteors, the stars and interstellar matter, the star systems known as galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and quasars.
Modern astronomy is divided into several branches: astrometry, the observational study of the positions and motions
of these bodies; celestial mechanics, the mathematical study of their motions as explained by the theory of
gravitation; astrophysics, the study of their chemical composition and physical condition from spectrum analysis and
the laws of physics; and cosmology, the study of the universe as a whole.
Ancient Origins
The curiosity of ancient peoples concerning day and night and the Sun, Moon, and stars led eventually to the
observation that the heavenly bodies appear to move in a regular manner that is useful in defining time and direction
on the Earth. Astronomy grew out of problems originating with the first civilizations, the need to establish the proper
times for planting and harvesting crops and for religious celebrations and to find bearings and positions on long
trading journeys or voyages. See Archaeoastronomy.
To ancient peoples the sky showed many regularities of behaviour. The bright Sun, which divided day from night,
rose every morning from one direction, the east, moved steadily across the sky during the day, and set in a nearly
opposite direction, the west. At night the stars could be seen to follow a similar course, seeming to rotate in
permanent groupings, called constellations, around a fixed point in the sky, which is known as the celestial pole.
People noticed that daytime and night-time were unequal in length. On long days, seen from the North Temperate
Zone, the Sun rose north of east and climbed high in the sky at noon; on days with long nights the Sun rose south of
east and did not climb so high. Observation of the stars that appear in the west after sunset or in the east before
sunrise showed that the relative position of the Sun among the stars changes gradually. The Egyptians may have
been the first to discover that the Sun moves completely around the sphere of the fixed stars in approximately 365
days and nights. See Ecliptic.
Further study showed that the Sun, Moon, and five bright planets move around the star sphere within a narrow belt
called the zodiac. The Moon traverses the zodiac quickly, overtaking the Sun about once every 29.5 days, the period
known as the synodic month. Star-watchers in ancient times attempted to arrange the days and either the months or
the years into a consistent time system, or calendar. Because neither an entire month nor an entire year contains an
exact number of days the calendar-makers assigned to different months or years different numbers of days, having a
long-range average that is close to the true value. The modern calendar provides for 97 leap years in every 400-year
period, so that the average number of days per year is 365.2425, very close to the astronomically determined
number, which is 365.24220.
The Sun and Moon always traverse the zodiac from west to east. However, the five bright planets Mercury, Mars,
Venus, Jupiter, and Saturn, which also have a generally eastward motion against the background of the stars,
sometimes move westward, or retrograde, for varying durations. The planets seem to follow an eastward course
erratically, with periodic loops in their paths. Since ancient times, people have imagined that celestial events,
especially the planetary motions, were connected with their own fortunes. This belief, called astrology, encouraged
the development of mathematical schemes for predicting the planetary motions, but has no scientific basis.
Babylonian Astronomy
Interesting constellation maps and useful calendars were developed by several ancient peoples, notably the
Egyptians, the Mayans, and the Chinese, but the Babylonians went further. To perfect their calendar, they studied
the motions of the Sun and Moon. It was their custom to designate as the beginning of each month the day after the
new moon, when the lunar crescent first appears after sunset. Originally this day was determined by observations,
but later the Babylonians wanted to calculate it in advance. About 400 BC they realized that the apparent motions of
the Sun and Moon from west to east around the zodiac do not have a constant speed. These bodies appear to move
with increasing speed for half of each revolution to a definite maximum and then to decrease in speed to the former
minimum. The Babylonians found how to represent this cycle arithmetically and could predict the time of the new
moon and the day on which the new month would begin. As a by-product, they knew the daily positions of the Moon
and Sun for every day during the month.
In a similar manner the planetary positions were calculated, with both their eastward and retrograde motions
represented. Archaeologists have unearthed hundreds of cuneiform tablets that show these calculations. A few of
these tablets, which originated in the cities of Babylon and Erech (Uruk) on the Euphrates River, bear the name of
Naburiannu, who flourished around 491 BC, or Kidinnu, who flourished around 379 BC—astrologers who may have
invented the systems of calculation.
Greek Astronomy
The ancient Greeks made important theoretical contributions to astronomy. The Odyssey of Homer refers to such
constellations as the Great Bear, Orion, and the Pleiades and describes how the stars may serve as a guide in
navigation. The poem Works and Days by Hesiod informs the farmer which constellations rise before dawn at
different seasons of the year to indicate the proper times for ploughing, sowing, and harvesting.
Scientific contributions are associated with the names of the Greek philosophers Thales of Miletus and Pythagoras
of Samos, but none of their own writings survive. About 450 BC the Greeks began a fruitful study of planetary
motions. Philolaus, who flourished during the 5th century BC and was a follower of Pythagoras, believed that the
Earth, Sun, Moon, and planets all moved around a central fire hidden from view by an interposed counter-Earth.
According to his theory, the revolution of the Earth around the fire every 24 hours accounted for the daily motions of
the Sun and stars. About 370 BC the astronomer Eudoxus of Cnidus explained observed motions by the supposition
that a huge sphere bearing the stars on its inner surface revolved around the Earth, rotating daily. In addition, to
account for solar, lunar, and planetary motions, he assumed that inside the star sphere were many interconnected
transparent spheres that revolved in various ways.
Another Greek, Aristarchus of Samos, believed that motions in the sky could be explained by the hypothesis that the
Earth turns on its axis once every 24 hours and, along with the other planets, moves around the Sun. This
explanation was rejected by most Greek philosophers, who regarded the large, heavy Earth as a motionless globe
around which the light, incorporeal celestial bodies revolve. This theory, known as the geocentric system, remained
largely unchallenged for about 2,000 years.
The Greeks combined their celestial theories with carefully planned observations. The astronomers Hipparchus, in
the 2nd century BC, and Ptolemy, in the 2nd century AD, determined the positions of about 1,000 bright stars and
used this star chart as a background for measuring the planetary motions. They postulated that the planets, Sun,
and Moon moved around a series of eccentric circles, with the Earth near a common centre. To explain the periodic
variations in the speed of the Sun and Moon and the retrograde motions of the planets, they proposed that each of
these bodies revolved uniformly around a second circle, called an epicycle, the centre of which moved around the
first circle. By proper choice of the diameters and speeds for the two circular motions ascribed to each body, its
observed motion could usually be represented. In some cases a third circle was required. This technique was
described by Ptolemy in his great work the Almagest (see Ptolemaic System). Another thinker, who, like Ptolemy,
kept the tradition of Greek astronomy alive in Alexandria in the early centuries of the Christian era, was Hypatia, a
follower of Plato. She wrote commentaries on mathematical and astronomical topics and is regarded today as the
first noteworthy female scientist and philosopher of the West.
Greek astronomy was later transmitted eastward to the Syrians, the Hindus, and the Arabs. The Arabian
astronomers compiled new star catalogues in the 9th and 10th centuries and subsequently developed tables of
planetary motion. The Arabs were good observers, but they made few useful contributions to astronomical theory.
Medieval European astronomy began to flourish in the 13th century, when Arabic translations of Ptolemy’s Almagest
filtered into Western Europe. Initially, Europeans were content to make tables of planetary motions, based on
Ptolemy’s system, or to write short popular digests of his theory. Later the German philosopher and mathematician
Nicholas of Cusa and the Italian artist and scientist Leonardo da Vinci questioned the basic assumptions of the
centrality and immobility of the Earth.
The Copernican Theory
The history of astronomy took a dramatic turn in the 16th century as a result of the contributions of the Polish
astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus. He was educated in Italy and was a canon of the Roman Catholic Church. He
spent most of his life investigating astronomy, however, and he made a new star catalogue from personal
28
observations. He is most famous for his great work On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies (1543), in which he
analysed critically the Ptolemaic theory of an Earth-centred universe and showed that the planetary motions can be
explained by assuming a central position for the Sun rather than for the Earth.
Little attention was paid to the Copernican, or heliocentric, system until the Italian physicist Galileo found evidence to
support it. Long an admirer of Copernicus’s work, Galileo found evidence to support the idea after the invention, or
reinvention, of the telescope in the Netherlands early in the 17th century. He made (1609) a small refracting
telescope, turned it skyward, and discovered the phases of Venus, indicating that this planet revolves around the
Sun; he also discovered four moons orbiting around Jupiter, forming a miniature version of the Copernican solar
system. Galileo also made the sensational discovery that the Milky Way is made up of a myriad of individual stars.
He began to speak and write in favour of the Copernican system, but ran into trouble with the ecclesiastical
authorities, and was tried in Rome for heresy in 1632. Although he was found guilty and forced to repudiate his
beliefs and writings, large parts of Europe were by then no longer under the influence of the Catholic Church, and
the powerful theory could not be suppressed.
The Newtonian Theory
From the scientific viewpoint, the Copernican theory was only a rearrangement of the planetary orbits, as conceived
by Ptolemy. The ancient Greek theory of planets moving around circles at fixed speeds was retained in the
Copernican system. From 1580 to 1597 the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe observed the Sun, Moon, and planets
at his island observatory near Copenhagen and later in Germany. Using the data compiled by Brahe, his German
assistant, Johannes Kepler, formulated the laws of planetary motion, after discovering that the planets revolve
around the Sun, not in circular orbits with uniform motion but in elliptical orbits at varying speeds, and that their
relative distances from the Sun are related to their periods of revolution.
The English physicist Isaac Newton advanced a simple principle to explain Kepler’s laws of planetary motion. He
argued that an attractive force exists between the Sun and each of the planets. This force, which depends on the
masses of the Sun and planets and inversely on the squares of the distances between them, provides the basis for
the physical interpretation of Kepler’s laws. Although others had speculated that an inverse square law might explain
the elliptical orbits of the planets, it was Newton who proved mathematically that only such a law could do so, and
who introduced the idea that this law of gravitation applies to every object in the universe.
Astronomy Becomes a Science
In the 18th century Edmund Halley used a combination of Newton’s and Kepler’s laws to explain the orbits of
comets, and successfully predicted the return of the comet that now bears his name. Telescopes also improved
rapidly, and made new observations possible—as early as 1659, the Dutch polymath Christiaan Huygens had
discovered the true nature of the rings of Saturn, explaining them as rings around the planet, not pieces sticking out
of the planet. In 1675 Giovanni Cassini, an Italian-born astronomer, discovered the gap in the rings of Saturn that is
still known as the Cassini division.
Newton had left one great puzzle in his theory of planetary orbits. Although one planet on its own would orbit the Sun
forever in an elliptical orbit, Newton himself had not been able to prove that the orbit would still be stable when it was
influenced by the gravitational pull of other planets, as well as the Sun. The French mathematician and astronomer
Pierre Laplace solved this puzzle in the mid-1780s. He showed that although the orbits of the planets are affected by
the gravity of the other planets, the changes are cyclic. For example, at that time the orbit of Jupiter was slowly
getting smaller, while the orbit of Saturn was slowly getting bigger. Laplace proved that this is part of a cycle 929
years long in which the orbits grow larger and smaller.
In 1773, from studies of the way stars seem to be moving across the sky, William Herschel inferred that the Sun and
solar system are all moving through space in the direction of the constellation Hercules, and in 1781 Herschel
discovered the seventh planet of the solar system, Uranus. The first known asteroid, or minor planet, Ceres, was
discovered in 1801; Neptune, the eighth major planet, was discovered in 1846. The first stellar distance, determined
by parallax, was measured in 1838, to the star 61 Cygni. However, the greatest change in astronomy in the 19th
century (apart from continuing improvements in telescopes) was the development of spectroscopy by the German
physicists Gustav Kirchhoff and Robert Bunsen, building on the work of Joseph von Fraunhofer, which made it
possible to study the composition of the stars and determine their temperatures from the lines that can be seen in
their light when it is spread out to form a spectrum using a prism. Thanks to the Doppler effect, the changing
positions of the lines in the spectrum even make it possible to measure the speed with which a star is moving.
Knowledge of the solar system continued to grow. The ninth planet, Pluto, as discovered in 1930 by the American
astronomer Clyde William Tombaugh. The number of known natural satellites increased dramatically when
unmanned probes flew past the outer planets. The present tally of known natural moons is: Earth, 1; Mars, 2; Jupiter,
16; Saturn, more than 20; Uranus, 15; Neptune, 8; and Pluto, 1. These numbers may continue to increase as
astronomers get better views of the planets. Thousands of asteroids have been followed as they move around the
Sun, mostly between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. Several hundred comets have been catalogued. Countless
smaller bodies exist as stony and metallic meteoroids. Yet in the 20th century, the greatest development of
astronomy has been in our understanding of objects beyond the solar system.
Modern Astronomy
During the 20th century, larger and larger reflecting telescopes have been built. Early studies with these instruments
showed, in the 1920s, that the entire Milky Way system, containing hundreds of billions of stars, is just one galaxy
among many millions of similar “islands in space”. In the second half of the 20th century, developments in physics
led to new kinds of astronomical instruments, some of which have been placed on unmanned Earth-orbiting satellite
observatories. These instruments are sensitive to a wide range of wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation,
including the gamma-ray, X-ray, ultraviolet, infrared, and radio regions of the spectrum. Astronomers now study not
only planets, stars, and galaxies but also interstellar clouds that are the birthplaces of new stars, cold dust grains
that are invisible in the optical regions, dim failed stars called brown dwarfs, quasars, which are energetic nuclei of
galaxies that almost certainly contain black holes, and background radiation originating from the big bang that is
beginning to yield information about the origin of the universe. See Gamma-Ray Astronomy; Infrared Astronomy;
Radar Astronomy; Radio Astronomy; Space Exploration; Ultraviolet Astronomy; X-Ray Astronomy.
Stars
The nearest star, Alpha Centauri, is about 260,000 times farther from the Earth than is the Sun. It is 4.3 light years
away; a light year is the distance light would travel in one year, at a speed of 300,000 km/s. The entire Milky Way
Galaxy is about 100,000 light years across, but only some 1,000 light years thick.
All stars are hot, gaseous bodies like the Sun, but differ from it and from one another in minor ways. The most
important physical data about a star are its intrinsic brightness, size, mass, and chemical composition. Although all
stars seem much fainter than the Sun because of their great distances from the Earth, some of them are intrinsically
brighter than the Sun (see Magnitude). Star masses can be determined directly for the Sun and for pairs of stars, in
binary systems, that are seen to orbit around each other. Astronomers apply the law of gravitation and Kepler’s laws
to determine the stellar masses mathematically. Of the 50 nearest stars for which information is fairly complete, 10
per cent are brighter, larger, and more massive than the Sun. Spectroscopic studies show that the stars are
composed largely of hydrogen.
The source of the vast quantities of energy radiated by the Sun was long a mystery. The Sun emits energy at the
rate of 3.8 × 1026 watts. Geological evidence shows that life has existed on Earth for billions of years, indicating that
solar energy must have been expended at about its present rate for that long. Even before the processes by which
the Sun generates energy were understood, however, the pioneering astrophysicist Arthur Eddington was able, in
the 1920s, to work out the internal structure of stars from the laws of physics. No matter how the Sun generates its
energy, for example, it is straightforward to calculate how hot it must be inside from its known mass and the rate at
which it is radiating. This enabled Eddington to work out the temperature at the heart of the Sun, about 15 million
degrees C (27 million degrees F).
In the 1930s it was clear that the energy generation process must involve the conversion of hydrogen into helium
inside the Sun, and in 1938 the American physicist Hans Bethe showed how this could be achieved in a series of
nuclear interactions called the proton-proton chain. This process involves the conversion of some of the mass of the
original hydrogen nuclei into energy. Overall, over 4 million tonnes of mass are converted into pure energy at the
heart of the Sun each second, in line with the equation, devised by Albert Einstein, E = mc2. This says that mass and
energy are interchangeable, and that the energy E locked up in a mass m is equal to the mass multiplied by the
square of c, the speed of light.
29
Observation and theory combine to reveal the principal steps in the life cycle of a star. The protostar begins to
condense from inside a relatively dense and cool cloud of interstellar gas. This contraction converts gravitational
energy into heat, and this internal heating increases the temperature at the heart of the star to the point where
nuclear reactions can begin (a temperature of about 15 million degrees C/27 million degrees F). The heat generated
by these reactions then halts the contraction, and the star settles down to a period as a hydrogen-burning mainsequence star. In the case of a star with about the same mass as the Sun, the main-sequence phase lasts about 10
billion years. Near the end of its lifetime, such a star expands to a red giant state, expels gas from its atmosphere,
contracts again, and then shrinks and cools as a dense white dwarf star, containing about as much mass as the Sun
in a volume roughly the same as the Earth. Stars with more mass run through their life cycles more quickly; those
that end their time on the main sequence with more than about ten times as much mass as the Sun explode as
supernovae. See Star: Evolution of Stars.
In 1967 a British radio astronomer, Jocelyn Bell, discovered rapidly varying radio signals coming from well-defined
points on the sky. The objects producing this noise were named pulsars, a contraction of pulsating radio sources, but
were soon shown to be rotating compact objects, spinning several times a second and sweeping beams of radio
noise around the sky like a radio lighthouse. In order to spin so rapidly without breaking apart, pulsars must consist
of matter even more condensed than white dwarfs, with about as much mass as our Sun packed into a sphere less
than 10 km (6 mi) across, about as big as a large mountain on Earth. A pulsar is a fast-spinning neutron star, a
tightly packed mass of neutrons, like a single huge atomic nucleus. It is the densest object in the universe apart from
a black hole. Pulsars are formed as the remnants of supernova explosions.
Even a mass of neutrons cannot hold itself up against the inward tug of gravity if the mass left over from the
supernova explosion is more than about three times the mass of Sun. Any neutron star that tries to form with more
mass than this will collapse to form a black hole, which has such a strong gravitational field that nothing, not even
radiation, can escape from it. In 1974 the existence of a black hole in the constellation Cygnus was suggested by
detection of X-radiation from hot gas swirling in a ring as it fell into the black hole. The X-ray source was a member
of a binary system, so its mass could be estimated, and turned out to be above the limit of stability for a neutron star.
Since then several black hole candidates have been identified. There is also strong evidence that much larger black
holes, containing hundreds of millions of times as much mass as our Sun, lie at the hearts of many galaxies, and
may provide the power source for quasars.
The Galaxy
In the late 18th century Sir William Herschel constructed the largest reflecting telescopes of his day and used them
to explore the heavens. He discovered not only the planet Uranus but also several satellites and many double stars,
in addition to myriad star clusters and nebulae. His counts of stars in different regions of the heavens convinced
Herschel that the Sun is one of a vast cloud of stars, a cloud shaped like a grindstone. According to his analogy, a
person living on a small planet near the Sun deep inside the “grindstone” looks towards its rim and is able to see a
belt of faint, distant stars, which is called the Milky Way, stretching completely around the sky; looking above or
below, the person is able to see relatively few nearby stars.
Modern investigations confirm this picture, except that the solar system is now known to be about two thirds of the
way out from the centre. The name “Milky Way” or “galaxy” is often applied to the whole system. The stars in the
system are all gravitationally bound and orbiting about a distant centre. A knowledge of star distances is of primary
importance in studying the structure of the Milky Way. The parallax method of determining these distances can be
applied only to the nearest stars. A particular class of stars exists, the Cepheid variables, which vary in brightness
with periods that depend on their intrinsic intensities. Comparison of the observed brightness of such a star with the
intrinsic brightness calculated from its period provides a means of determining its distance. Following the discovery
of the relation between period and luminosity by Henrietta Swan Leavitt, Harlow Shapley used the Cepheid variables
scattered throughout the Milky Way to measure its size. A ray of light, moving at a speed of about 300,000 km/s
(186,300 mi/s), would require 400,000 years to traverse the Milky Way from edge to edge of its extended halo
(described below). The visible spiral is approximately 100,000 light years across. Altogether, the Milky Way consists
of about 100 billion stars orbiting about a common centre. The Sun, located about 30,000 light years from the centre
of the Milky Way, travels at a speed of about 210 km/s (130 mi/s) and completes an entire revolution approximately
every 250 million years.
The Milky Way includes great quantities of dust and gas scattered between the stars. This interstellar matter
intercepts the visible light emitted by distant stars so that observers on Earth cannot view in detail distant parts of the
Milky Way. A new branch of astronomy was initiated when the American electronics engineer Karl G. Jansky
discovered in 1931-1932 that radio waves are emitted from the Milky Way. Later study traced this radiation partly to
interstellar matter and partly to discrete sources, originally called radio stars. Radio waves emitted by distant parts of
the Milky Way can penetrate interstellar matter that is opaque to visible light, and thus enable astronomers to
observe regions hidden to optical instruments. Such observations have revealed the Milky Way to be a spiral galaxy
with a flattened central bulge of old stars, an outer disc of both older stars and hot young stars that make up the
spiral arms, and a large, extended halo of faint stars.
The nucleus of the Milky Way was until recently a mysterious region, obscured from view by dark clouds of
interstellar dust. Astronomers began getting their first detailed picture of the region in 1983, when the Infrared
Astronomy Satellite (IRAS) was launched. Freed from the obscuring effects of the Earth’s atmosphere, sensors
aboard IRAS recorded in unprecedented detail the positions and shapes of the myriad sources of infrared energy
that occupy the heart of the Milky Way. Among these was discovered one massive object, not a star and too
compact to be a star cluster, that may yet prove to be a black hole.
The Cosmos
The Milky Way is only one of many galaxies that populate the known universe. By 1924 studies conducted by the
American astronomer Edwin Hubble had shown that the spiral nebulae are individual galaxies like the Milky Way,
located at very great distances. Although some galaxies have a spiral form, like the Milky Way, other galaxies are
ellipsoidal, without spiral arms; others still are of irregular shape, sometimes showing traces of spiral arms.
Spectral analysis of the light from the galaxies shows that the stars making up these systems are composed of the
chemical elements known on Earth, dominated, like the Sun, by hydrogen. Such analysis also demonstrates a red
shift, indicating that the galaxies (or rather, clusters of galaxies) are all moving away from each other: the more
distant a galaxy, the faster its recession. Although this red shift is analogous to the Doppler effect, it is explained by
the general theory of relativity as evidence that the universe is expanding, with space itself stretching, not that the
galaxies are flying apart through space. This means that the universe originated from an extremely hot, dense state
in an outburst called the big bang. Space and time, as well as energy and matter, were created in the big bang,
which was not an explosion at a point in space.
Radiation filling the universe has been cooling ever since the big bang; its present temperature is about 3 K (3° C
above absolute zero, or about -454° F). Radiation of this temperature, coming from all directions in the sky, was
discovered in 1965 by the American physicists Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, and is the best indicator of the early
history of the universe. Einstein’s theory of gravitation, the general theory of relativity, predicted that the universe
would be found to be expanding, although Einstein himself resisted this conclusion; the big bang description of the
universe is essentially based on general relativity. A combination of theory and observation indicates that the big
bang occurred at least 13 billion years ago.
Quasars, discovered in the 1960s, are the energetic nuclei of very distant galaxies. They are so bright that a quasar
masks the light from the surrounding galaxy, just as the light from a pocket torch could not be seen in the glare from
a searchlight. Often quasars occur in extremely distant clusters of galaxies. The spectral lines of quasars display
very large red shifts, which indicates that some of these objects are receding from us at speeds of 80 per cent of the
speed of light or more. Because the red shift is proportional to distance, this means that they are among the most
distant of cosmological objects, and that we see them by light that left them when the universe was only 20 per cent
of its present age, some 3 billion years after the big bang.
However, everything described above may be no more than the tip of the universal iceberg. From the way that
galaxies move within clusters, astronomers calculate that they are being held in the gravitational grip of at least 10
times, and perhaps 100 times, as much matter as we can see in the form of bright stars and galaxies. The nature of
this dark matter is still a mystery, and determining its composition will be one of the most important problems facing
astronomers at the beginning of the 21st century.
30
UNITED NATIONS
(UN), international organization of nation-states, based on the sovereign equality of its members. Under its charter,
the UN was established “to maintain international peace and security”; “to develop friendly relations among nations”;
and “to achieve international cooperation in solving … economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian [problems]” and in
“encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms”. Members are pledged to fulfil the obligations
they have assumed, to settle international disputes by peaceful means, to refrain from the threat or use of force, to
assist the UN in actions ordered under the charter and to refrain from assisting any country against which such UN
action is being taken, and to act according to the charter's principles.
Development of the UN
The United Nations is usually considered the successor to the League of Nations, the international organization
formed after World War I to serve many of the same purposes. The league, however, failed to maintain peace and
grew progressively weaker in the years just before World War II.
Origins
The first commitment to establish a new international organization was made in the Atlantic Charter, signed by
President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States and Prime Minister Winston Churchill of Great Britain on August
14, 1941, at a conference held on a warship off the coast of Newfoundland. They pledged to establish a “wider and
permanent system of general security” and expressed their desire “to bring about the fullest collaboration between all
nations in the economic field”. The principles of the Atlantic Charter were more widely accepted in the Declaration by
United Nations, signed on January 1, 1942, by representatives of 26 allied nations that were fighting against the Axis
powers during World War II. In this document the term United Nations, suggested by Roosevelt, was first used
formally.
Direct action to form the new organization was taken at a 1943 conference in Moscow. On October 30,
representatives of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), Great Britain, China, and the United States
signed a declaration in which they recognized the need to establish “at the earliest practicable date a general
international organization”. Meeting in Tehrn a month later, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin
reaffirmed “the supreme responsibility resting upon us and all the United Nations to make a peace which will …
banish the scourge and terror of war”.
Following up on the Moscow declaration, representatives of the four powers met at the Dumbarton Oaks estate in
Washington, D.C., in the autumn of 1944, to work out a series of proposals for an international organization. They
agreed on a draft charter that specified its purposes, structure, and methods of operation, but they could not agree
on a method of voting in the proposed Security Council, which was to have the major responsibility for peace and
security.
The voting issue was settled at the Yalta conference in February 1945, when Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin met for
the last of their wartime negotiating summits. Essentially, the Soviet leader accepted the Anglo-American position
that limited great-power prerogatives on procedural matters, but retained the right of veto on substantive issues. At
the same time, the allied leaders called for a conference of United Nations to prepare the charter of the new
organization.
Delegates from 50 nations met in San Francisco on April 25, 1945, for what was officially known as the United
Nations Conference on International Organization. During a two-month period, they completed a charter consisting
of 111 articles, based on the draft developed at Dumbarton Oaks. The charter was approved on June 25 and signed
the next day; it became effective on October 24, 1945, after ratification by a majority of the signatories. The bonds of
the wartime alliance against common enemies undoubtedly hastened agreement on establishing the new
organization.
Headquarters
On December 10, 1945, the United States Congress invited the UN to establish its headquarters in the United
States. The organization accepted and in August 1946 moved to a temporary location in Lake Success, New York.
Later that year a site was purchased bordering the East River in Manhattan, and plans for a permanent headquarters
were drawn up. The site was granted a measure of extraterritoriality under an agreement between the United States
and the UN. The complex, completed in mid-1952, includes the General Assembly Hall, the Secretariat Building, the
Conference Building, and the Dag Hammarskjöld Library.
Membership
Under the charter, UN membership is open to all “peace-loving” states that accept the obligations of the
organization. The 50 nations that attended the San Francisco conference, with the addition of Poland, became
founding members of the UN. Until 1971 China was represented by a delegation from the Nationalist government of
Taiwan; in October of that year, however, the General Assembly voted to seat the delegation from the People's
Republic of China in its stead.
New members are admitted by a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security
Council. Since 1945, membership has increased more than threefold, mainly with the admission of many new
African and Asian countries that had been European colonies. As of May 1994, the UN had 184 members.
Organization
The charter established six principal UN organs: the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and
Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, the International Court of Justice, and the Secretariat.
All member states are represented in the General Assembly, which is the main deliberative body of the UN. The
General Assembly meets annually in regular sessions and in special sessions at the request of a majority of its
members or of the Security Council. The assembly has no enforcement authority; its resolutions are
recommendations to member states that carry the political and moral force of majority approval but lack power of
direct implementation. The charter, however, permits the assembly to establish agencies and programmes to carry
out its recommendations; among the most important of these are the following: the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and the United Nations
Children's Fund (UNICEF).
The Security Council, which is in continuous session, is the UN's central organ for maintaining peace. The council
has 15 members, of which 5—China, France, Great Britain, Russia, and the United States—have been accorded
permanent seats. Periodically proposals have been made for new permanent members to be added (e.g. Germany,
Japan), and old ones removed (e.g. France, Britain) to reflect the changing balance of world power, but to date no
substantive revision has been made. Nonpermanent members serve for two years, with five new members elected
by the General Assembly every year. Decisions of the council require nine votes, including the concurring votes of
the permanent members on substantive issues. This rule of “great-power unanimity” does not apply to procedural
matters.
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which meets annually, has 54 members; 18 members are elected
each year by the General Assembly for 3-year terms. ECOSOC coordinates the economic and social activities of the
UN and its specialized agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO); the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO); and the International
Labour Organization (ILO). In practice, ECOSOC's functions are limited because each specialized agency is
organized separately and is governed by its own constitution and elected bodies; the agencies submit annual reports
to ECOSOC. The UN and the specialized agencies together are called the United Nations System.
The Trusteeship Council originally was responsible for supervising 11 territories placed under international trust at
the end of World War II. By the early 1990s all of the original trust territories had been dissolved, and all of the
dependencies had achieved either full sovereignty or self-government as part of a larger state. The remaining
trusteeship, the Palau Islands, became an independent republic in 1994, and the Trusteeship Council ceased to
exist. Other colonial questions have been transferred to the General Assembly and special subsidiary bodies.
The International Court of Justice, situated in The Hague, the Netherlands, is the judicial body of the UN. The court
hears cases referred to it by UN members, who retain the right to decide whether they will accept the court's ruling
as binding. When asked to do so by the UN, its principal organs, or the specialized agencies, the International Court
of Justice may also render advisory opinions. Fifteen judges sit as members of the court; they are elected for 9-year
terms by the General Assembly and the Security Council.
31
The Secretariat serves the other UN organs and carries out the programmes and policies of the organization. The
body is headed by the secretary-general, who is appointed by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the
Security Council. Since the founding of the UN seven secretaries-general have held office: Trygve Lie (Norway),
1946-1953; Dag Hammarskjöld (Sweden), 1953-1961; U Thant (Burma), 1961-1971; Kurt Waldheim (Austria), 19721981; Javier Pérez de Cuéllar (Peru), 1982-1991; Boutros Boutros-Ghali (Egypt), 1992-1996; and Kofi Annan
(Ghana), beginning in 1997.
Financing
The UN's operating costs are met by contributions from member states in accordance with a schedule of
assessments approved by the General Assembly. Only the regular budget, constituting ongoing activities under the
charter, is covered by fixed assessments; special programmes such as UNICEF and the UNDP are usually financed
through voluntary contributions. For the 1990 and 1991 period, the regular budget appropriations totalled more than
US$2.1 billion. Under the 1990 and 1991 schedule, most members paid less than 1 per cent of the budget; only 15
countries contributed more than 1 per cent. The largest contributors were the United States (25 per cent) and the
former USSR (10 per cent). Of the other members, only Japan, Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy, and Canada
contributed more than 2 per cent. In the mid-1980s the UN underwent a serious financial crisis. Many member
states, including the United States and the USSR, withheld part of their contributions due to national fiscal problems
and dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the UN system.
The UN and Peace and Security
Under the charter, the Security Council is primarily responsible for matters of peace and security, with the General
Assembly retaining only residual authority. Articles 33-38 of the charter authorize the Security Council to encourage
disputing nations to settle their differences through peaceful means, including negotiations, inquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, and judicial settlement. In carrying out this responsibility, the council may delegate
representatives or set up special committees to investigate disputes and recommend means of settlement.
When the council determines that a dispute threatens peace, it may, under Articles 39-51, enforce its
recommendations, either by non-military means, such as economic or diplomatic sanctions, or by the use of military
forces. This is the only place where the charter authorizes enforcement action. Such action is subject to the
concurring votes of the five permanent council members, however, and thus emphasizes the significance of the
great-power veto on important issues. Military action is also subject to the availability of armed forces, a condition
that has been difficult to fulfil.
Finally, under Article 26, the Security Council is responsible for formulating plans “for the establishment of a system
for the regulation of armaments”. The UN Charter places less emphasis on international arms control and
disarmament as means of achieving peace than did the League of Nations Covenant. Because of events between
the two world wars, many world leaders concluded that peace could be achieved only through the cooperation of the
major powers acting, as Roosevelt put it, as the world's “policemen”. This idea is incorporated in the requirement for
great-power unanimity; it also explains why the charter has been called a system of “limited” collective security, as
enforcement action cannot be taken against the will of any country that holds a permanent seat on the council.
Impact of the Cold War
Shortly after World War II and the establishment of the UN, political cooperation among the major powers—and
especially between the United States and the USSR—broke down, and the world entered into the period of the Cold
War. As the interests of the United States and the USSR clashed, the ability of the UN to maintain peace was
limited.
Under Article 43 of the charter, the Security Council was to negotiate agreements with member states to provide
military units that could enforce its decisions. Negotiations, which began in 1946, soon became deadlocked on
questions of the size, composition, and stationing of military forces. The United States proposed that each
permanent council member provide specialized troops, with the Americans, for example, offering air force units, the
British providing naval units, and the Soviets sending land troops. The USSR, however, argued for “equality”, with
each country providing equal numbers of troops across the board. These differences were never settled.
A similar stalemate soon developed in the UN Atomic Energy Commission, created by the first resolution passed by
the General Assembly on January 24, 1946. The commission's mandate was to develop a system to control atomic
energy and limit it to peaceful uses. The United States presented a comprehensive plan for international control of
atomic energy, including an agreement to dispose of its own nuclear weapons and facilities once an international
system for inspection became operative. The USSR insisted that the United States destroy all existing nuclear
weapons immediately and objected to any international inspection as an infringement on national sovereignty. Again,
the differences between the two nations proved irreconcilable.
The original intentions of the charter have, in fact, never been implemented. The Security Council was not
completely stalled, however; it was able to bring about the settlement of disputes, largely through mediation and
good offices, in situations in which the interests of the permanent members, especially the United States and the
USSR, converged. One such case involved the withdrawal of the Dutch from Indonesia in 1949; another in that same
year concerned ending the Six-Day War in 1967. In 1950, however, strong differences arose among the great
powers when forces from North Korea attacked South Korea, precipitating the Korean War.
Korea
Korea, which had been under Japanese control since 1905, was divided after World War II at the 38th parallel in the
Korean Peninsula. Separate governments were formed—the one in the north sponsored by the USSR and the other
by the United States. UN efforts to unify Korea through nationwide free elections failed. When North Korean forces
attacked the South on June 25, 1950, the Security Council declared the attack a breach of the peace and called for
withdrawal of North Korean troops north of the 38th parallel. In two other resolutions, the council established a UN
command under US auspices and asked member nations to provide military units to assist in repelling the armed
attack on the Republic of Korea.
Two elements of the Korean case were unusual. The first was the USSR's absence from the Security Council. Six
months earlier, the Soviet representative had left the council in protest against the continued presence of the
Nationalist Chinese delegate in the seat designated for China, despite the defeat of the Nationalists and the
establishment of a Communist government on the mainland. The USSR thus was not present to veto the council's
actions against the Soviet-sponsored North Korean regime. When the Soviet delegate returned to the council in July,
he declared the Korean action illegal because it was undertaken without the agreement of all the permanent council
members. The United States responded that the issue had been decided with the agreement of those permanent
members who were present and voting. In this argument, the USSR took a “strict” interpretation, and the United
States a “broad” interpretation, of the charter's provisions, each motivated by political interests.
A second unusual element in the Korean case was the establishment of a UN command that was, in effect, a United
States military command, composed of troops from 16 member nations and the Republic of Korea. Because no
previous agreements had been reached to provide military forces to the UN, the Security Council took ad hoc action
by asking the United States to use its already established military structure as the base for UN action. Otherwise, the
UN would have been unable to act quickly and expeditiously.
The conflict continued for more than three years; on July 27, 1953, an armistice was signed. More than 40 years
later, the country is still divided despite acceptance by both sides of the principle of reunification. The Korean
question has remained on the General Assembly agenda. Resolutions have been passed urging the two sides to
replace the long armistice with a stable peace. In 1991 North Korea and South Korea were admitted to the UN.
One major consequence of the Korean conflict was the “Uniting for Peace” resolution. After the USSR returned to
the Security Council, the United States presented to the General Assembly a resolution authorizing the assembly to
consider cases that threaten peace when a veto has prevented council action. This “Uniting for Peace” resolution,
adopted on November 3, 1950, made explicit an expansion of General Assembly authority in matters of peace and
security.
UN Peacekeeping Forces
Since the early 1950s the UN role in maintaining peace and security around the world has expanded. UN-sponsored
forces have been especially active in areas where decolonization has led to instability. In many cases, the
withdrawal of the former colonial power left a political vacuum, and a struggle for domination ensued. In response,
the UN developed a strategy of what Secretary-General Hammarskjöld called “preventive diplomacy”—the
deployment of peacekeeping forces with two main purposes: to separate antagonists, providing time and opportunity
32
for negotiation, and to keep local conflicts from spreading over an entire region. In 1988 the peacekeeping forces
were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
UN peacekeeping operations have been carried out in the Middle East since 1956 and in Cyprus since 1964. In
Africa a force was maintained in the Congo (now Zaïre) from 1960 to 1964; since then, peacekeeping missions have
been sent to Angola, Western Sahara, South Africa, and Mozambique. In 1992 the UN began a major operation in
Somalia, involving about 30,000 troops by early 1993, to provide protection for humanitarian operations—particularly
food deliveries to areas of famine. Two other major areas of UN involvement in the early 1990s were Cambodia,
where the UN monitored elections, and the former Yugoslavia, where civil war among Serbs, Croats, and Muslims in
the republics of Croatia and Bosnia has left tens of thousands of people dead and millions homeless. Under the rules
originally formulated by Hammarskjöld, the great powers were excluded from UN peacekeeping forces, preventing
them from advancing their own interests under cover of the UN flag. With the end of the cold war, British and French
troops had prominent roles in the former Yugoslavia, and a large US force was initially sent to pacify Somalia. In
1992 a contingent of Japanese troops joined the Cambodian operation.
Middle East
The first UN peacekeeping force was organized in the Middle East in response to the Suez crisis of 1956. The
Middle East had been an area of bitter rivalries since 1948, when hostilities broke out between the Arab countries in
the region and the new nation of Israel, created in accordance with a UN plan that partitioned Palestine into two
separate states, one Jewish and one Arab. In 1949 a UN mediator, acting under the authority of the Security
Council, negotiated a series of armistice agreements between Israel, on the one hand, and Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon,
and Syria, on the other. A United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) was formed to help the parties
supervise the terms of the agreements; for a time the region remained in a state of uneasy truce.
Suez Crisis
Fighting broke out again on October 29, 1956, when Israel moved troops into the Sinai Peninsula, forcing Egyptian
soldiers back to the Suez Canal. Earlier that year, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser had nationalized the
canal, evoking concern in Great Britain and France that the canal might be closed to their shipping. The Middle East
situation was complicated greatly when the British and the French attacked Egypt on October 31, landing forces in
the Suez Canal area. Britain and France also vetoed a Security Council resolution that called on Israel to withdraw
its forces behind the 1949 armistice line.
Under the authority of the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, the General Assembly, in a series of resolutions, urged an
end to hostilities and set up a United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) to supervise compliance by all parties. By
late December, British and French forces had withdrawn from Egypt, and by March 1957 arrangements had been
made for the withdrawal of Israeli troops. The first UNEF unit arrived in Egypt on November 15, 1956, and by
February 1957 some 6,000 troops from ten member states were positioned in three zones: along the frontier
between Egypt and Israel; in the Gaza Strip; and near the Strait of Tiran to monitor passage into the Gulf of Aqaba,
which was vital for Israeli shipping.
Further Hostilities
In May 1967 UNEF was withdrawn at the request of Egypt, and on June 5 Israel launched what became known as
the Six-Day War, a coordinated attack on all fronts to secure stronger defensive positions along its borders. By June
10 Israel occupied the Sinai and the Gaza Strip, the territory on the West Bank of the River Jordan, and part of the
Golan Heights on the Syrian border. The Security Council on November 22 unanimously approved Resolution 242,
setting down a series of principles for securing peace in the region. In essence, the resolution proposed that Israel
withdraw from the occupied territories in return for recognition of its independence by the Arab states and the
establishment of secure borders.
Hostilities broke out once again in October 1973, when Egypt attacked Israeli positions in the Sinai, and Syria struck
against those along the Golan Heights. The Security Council, after calling for a ceasefire, again urged the parties to
seek a broader settlement of their dispute by implementing Resolution 242. In the Sinai, a new peacekeeping force,
UNEF II, was set up to patrol a buffer zone between Israeli and Egyptian troops. By March 1974 both sides had
disengaged. In the north, along the Golan Heights, sporadic fighting continued until June, when a United Nations
Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) was put into place. However, the sources of the Arab-Israeli conflict
remained unchanged.
Since 1974 the Middle East has been an annual item on the UN agenda. Yet another peacekeeping force was set up
in March 1978 to help stabilize the situation in southern Lebanon after Israeli forces crossed the border to retaliate
against a Palestinian raid. A United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) was established with 6,000 troops
from ten countries.
United States Mediation
Efforts outside the UN to seek a broader settlement achieved some success when, in March 1979, Egypt and Israel,
through US mediation, signed a formal peace treaty providing for a phased Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai, the
restoration of diplomatic relations between the two countries, and a general framework for extending the peace
process to other Arab states. Withdrawal of Israel from the Sinai led to the discontinuation of UNEF II; its mandate
was permitted to lapse on July 24, 1979.
The 1980s
UNTSO observers continued to function between Egypt and Israel under the terms of the 1949 agreement, and both
UNDOF and UNIFIL were still operating in the 1990s. Southern Lebanon remained turbulent. The region was a
stronghold of Palestinian commando bases until the Israeli invasion of June 1982; subsequently, Israeli and Syrian
forces remained in Lebanon, along with Palestinian guerrillas.
Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip and of the territories on the West Bank of the River Jordan came under
increasingly severe attack in both the Security Council and the General Assembly. Resolutions recognized the rights
of the Palestinian Arabs, and their representatives were given opportunities to bring their case to the world forum.
Expansion of Israeli settlements in the territories further complicated the problem. In 1993 leaders of Israel and the
Palestine Liberation Organization signed a peace agreement calling for the Palestinians to gradually assume
responsibility for civil administration of the occupied lands, beginning with the Gaza Strip and Jericho area. The first
stages of the agreement were implemented in 1994.
The Gulf Conflict
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, which began the Gulf War brought an immediate response from the
Security Council. A series of resolutions passed between August and November condemned the occupation and
annexation of Kuwait; imposed an extensive embargo on commercial and financial dealings with Iraq and Iraqioccupied Kuwait; sanctioned the use of military force to ensure compliance with the embargo; and, finally, authorized
member states to use “all necessary means” to expel Iraq from Kuwait if Iraq had not already withdrawn by January
15, 1991. In response, Iraq called for an international peace conference to consider a broad range of regional
conflicts, including the Israeli-Palestinian dispute; the United States and its allies insistently opposed such linkage.
After the US-led coalition in the Gulf War quickly defeated Iraq and restored Kuwaiti independence, a UN
peacekeeping force moved in to monitor a demilitarized zone along the Iraq-Kuwait border. Further UN presence
was called on in northern Iraq to protect Kurds who had rebelled against the regime of Saddam Hussein.
Africa
The first major operation in Africa began in 1960 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (now Zaïre) shortly after it
became independent of Belgium. A mutiny among Congolese troops led to a breakdown in public order. Belgium
quickly dispatched military forces to the area; at the same time, the province of Katanga (now Shaba), led by its
premier Moise Tshombe, declared its independence. Congolese President Joseph Kasavubu and Prime Minister
Patrice Lumumba asked the UN for assistance. With authorization from the Security Council the secretary-general
organized an economic programme and an international peacekeeping force that, at its peak, totalled more than
20,000 troops. On February 21, 1961, the Security Council authorized the UN troops to use force.
The UN's task was complex: to help maintain order without even the appearance of taking sides, and to exercise
military authority carefully for defensive purposes without launching offensive programmes. The UN undoubtedly
helped the Congo to emerge as a united country. A heavy loss was incurred in 1961, however, when SecretaryGeneral Hammarskjöld was killed in an aeroplane crash while trying to bring about a ceasefire between the central
government and Katanga.
The UN peacekeepers in Western Sahara, South Africa, Angola, and Mozambique were mostly observers. The
mission to Somalia, begun late in 1992, was much more complex. After the defeat of Somalia's longtime leader,
33
Muhammed Siad Barre, by rebels in 1991, the nation descended into anarchy. International famine-relief agencies
found it increasingly difficult to operate, and massive starvation was imminent. In April 1992 the Security Council
voted to establish an operation in Somalia. But when 500 troops arrived in September, they were unable to operate.
On December 3 the council voted to accept an offer from the United States to provide a large force to safeguard
relief operations. Within a month about 15,000 US troops were in Somalia, and food supplies had begun to reach
most of the people. The UN took command of the operation from the United States in May 1993, but in June, in an
ambush, 23 Pakistani soldiers were killed by Somali rebels thought to be controlled by Mohammad Farrah Aidid, a
clan leader. The United States sent in reinforcements with the goal of capturing Aidid and pacifying his forces. After
several failed missions, the United States and the UN re-emphasized attempts to reach a political solution.
Cyprus
The United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) has been stationed there since March 1964 to serve
as a deterrent to open fighting between the Greek and Turkish communities. Cyprus gained independence from
Great Britain in 1960 under a constitution that sought to balance the rights and interests of the two ethnic groups in
the population, the Greeks being heavily in the majority. After three years of relative peace, violence broke out
between the two communities late in 1963. On March 4, 1964, the Security Council recommended UN mediation and
authorized the formation of a peacekeeping force. The force reached almost 7,000 later that year, but has been
progressively reduced, numbering some 2,100 troops in the late 1980s.
The most difficult period occurred in 1974, when Turkey intervened in support of the Turkish Cypriots after a change
of government threatened to shift the constitutional balance in favour of those Greek Cypriots who desired union with
Greece. A ceasefire was achieved by mid-August and was followed the next year by a transfer of more than 8,000
Turkish Cypriots to the Turkish-controlled north of the island with the assistance of UNFICYP. Since then UNFICYP
has patrolled a strip separating the northern sector from the Greek sector in the south.
Meanwhile, the secretary-general has continually been involved in discussions to negotiate a settlement between the
Greek and Turkish Cypriots. In recent years, these discussions have focused on guidelines necessary to bring about
a bizonal state and guarantee the security of the Turkish Cypriot community. In late 1983, with the talks still
stalemated, the northern region (occupied by Turkish forces) declared its independence as the Turkish Republic of
Northern Cyprus. The UN refused to recognize the new Turkish Cypriot state, and UNFICYP personnel continued to
serve as a barrier between the two sides.
Decolonization
Providing peacekeeping forces in areas of conflict has been only one of the UN contributions to the process of
decolonization. The UN trusteeship system, following the lines of the League of Nations mandates, was limited to the
former colonies of ex-enemy states and to former league mandates that had not reached self-government. An early
proposal to place all colonial territories under UN trusteeship was opposed by the colonial powers. A far-reaching
commitment towards self-government nonetheless emerged in Article 73 of the charter, which constituted a
Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories and was universal in scope, applying to all colonial territories.
Article 73 was only a statement of long-range intent, but it permitted the broadly based General Assembly, rather
than the more limited Trusteeship Council, to become the central arena for colonial questions. The declaration called
on colonial regimes to submit reports on economic and social conditions in their territories. As early as 1946, a
committee was set up by the assembly to review those reports; it grew into a permanent Committee on Information
from Non-Self-Governing Territories, which increasingly acted as an instrument of international accountability and
pressured the colonial powers to hasten the granting of independence.
With the addition of newly independent states as members of the UN by 1960, a broad majority in the assembly
voted to expand the objectives of Article 73 through a new Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial
Countries and Peoples. The 1960 declaration asserts that colonialism “constitutes a denial of fundamental human
rights” and that “inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a
pretext for delaying independence”.
With or without the UN, the old colonial empires were doomed to break up; the process had already begun by the
end of World War II. The UN, however, provided an organized structure in which opposition to colonialism could be
energized and in which new nations, emerging from colonialism, could be mobilized for a common cause. The UN
also provided a forum to deal with colonial questions. The trusteeship system, and even the original Article 73, was
based on the idea that self-government was a limited and long-range objective. Through the General Assembly, now
dominated by a majority of formerly colonized states, independence has been identified as an immediate right of all
peoples and international support of the struggle for self-determination has been organized.
The problems of decolonization in southern Africa have had a particularly long history of controversy in the UN. They
have included several issues involving the former Portuguese-administered territories, the efforts of the white
majority to retain control in Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), conflict with South Africa over the former mandate
of South West Africa (now Namibia), and the policy of apartheid (racial segregation) enforced by the South African
government from 1948 to 1991.
Portuguese Territories
From the time it joined the UN in 1955, Portugal refused to comply with Article 73 and submit information about its
territories, arguing that its “overseas provinces” were part of Portugal itself and thus could not be subject to
international regulation. A special committee, set up in 1960, concluded that Portugal's relationship with its territories
was colonial in nature; it affirmed the rights of the people in the territories to self-determination. Throughout the
1960s both the Security Council and the General Assembly condemned Portugal for repressive acts against the
liberation groups that had emerged in all the territories. Portuguese policies changed only after a revolutionary
upheaval in Portugal itself. In August 1974 the new Portuguese government began a process that, by the end of
1975, led to the independence of its territories: Guinea-Bissau on September 10, 1974; and, in 1975, Mozambique
on June 25, Cape Verde on July 5, São Tomé and Príncipe on July 12, and Angola on November 11.
Southern Rhodesia
In 1965 the white minority government of Southern Rhodesia, already under limited self-rule, issued a “unilateral
declaration of independence” from Great Britain. The British had earlier resisted pressures to grant independence to
the territory until a broadly based government could be established. The white minority government was immediately
condemned by the General Assembly. In a series of subsequent resolutions, the Security Council voted mandatory
economic sanctions aimed at cutting off Southern Rhodesia's trade and communications. The assembly also
supported liberation groups organized to resist the minority regime and recommended that they be given material
assistance by UN agencies. The minority regime, largely supported by South Africa, was able to withstand both
internal and external pressures until 1980, when, after a long struggle and a period of complex political transition, a
new government, ruled by the black majority, took office. On April 17, 1980, Southern Rhodesia became an
independent nation as the Republic of Zimbabwe.
Namibia (South West Africa)
The process of decolonization in Namibia, formerly South West Africa, was not completed until 1990. Originally a
German colony, South West Africa was mandated to the Union (now Republic) of South Africa after World War I.
Following World War II South Africa chose to maintain the status quo rather than administer the territory under the
trusteeship system and refused to allow UN surveillance over its administration.
In 1950 the International Court of Justice determined that South Africa had an obligation to submit reports to the UN.
The court, in 1962, declared the application of apartheid policies in Namibia illegal. In 1971 the court ruled that the
continued presence of South Africa in the territory was illegal because a General Assembly resolution in 1966 had
terminated its mandate, turning over the administration of the territory to a UN Council for South West Africa
(subsequently named the Council for Namibia) the following year.
During the late 1970s and the 1980s, negotiations with South Africa were based on Security Council Resolution 385,
calling for UN-supervised elections in the territory. Negotiations to prepare for elections were carried out through a
group of five Western nations, in cooperation with key African governments, and through the secretary-general and
the UN special representative for Namibia. These negotiations were complicated by open fighting between the South
African government and liberation groups and by disagreement over the role to be played by the South West Africa
People's Organization (SWAPO), a black African nationalist group. In December 1988, South Africa formally agreed
to allow Namibia to become independent in a compromise that also included the removal of Cuban troops from
Angola. Open elections for a constituent assembly were held under UN supervision in November 1989, and Namibia
attained independence on March 21, 1990.
34
South African Apartheid
The end of the Portuguese Empire and the emergence of Zimbabwe created pressures on South Africa to settle the
Namibia question. The conditions for settlement, however, were related to South African determination to maintain
its discriminatory policies of apartheid within its own borders despite condemnation from the world community and
the bitter antagonism of the black states of Africa, most of which have gained their independence since 1960. The
problem of apartheid was on the UN agenda from the time it was propagated by the South African government in
1948 as an official policy. It was consistently condemned as a crime against humanity despite the South African
argument that it was a domestic matter and therefore outside UN jurisdiction.
Although South Africa remained a member of the UN, since 1970 its delegations' credentials were not accepted,
thus barring its participation in the General Assembly. The assembly also recommended that South Africa be
excluded from all international organizations and conferences. These efforts to ostracize the nation in order to bring
about desired changes were centred in the UN Special Committee Against Apartheid, which coordinated worldwide
efforts against the discriminatory policy. In 1977 the Security Council established a mandatory arms embargo on
South Africa, and the General Assembly later called for wider economic sanctions.
The attack on apartheid was a central, unifying issue for the black African states, the single largest regional voting
group in the UN. The UN provided a world forum to put pressure on those countries that continued to have
diplomatic and economic relations with South Africa, as well as on the nation itself. By the end of 1991 the legal
basis of apartheid had been abolished, but blacks still lacked political rights, including the right to vote. By 1993
blacks and whites were meeting to negotiate a new constitution, and in October the UN voted to lift all sanctions.
South Africa held its first democratic elections in which blacks could vote in April 1994, and African National
Congress leader Nelson Mandela was elected as the country's first black president.
The UN and Trade and Development
The UN has frequently been involved in the difficult early stages of political independence, when most new nations
have requested large-scale economic and social assistance. Economic and social activities now constitute the most
extensive part of the UN's work; more than 85 per cent of the budget and staff are devoted to activities that fall into
three broad categories. First, the ECOSOC serves as a forum for broad discussions of economic and social
problems and for coordination of the UN programmes and those of the specialized agencies. Second, to support
both ECOSOC and the General Assembly, information and investigatory services are provided by a staff and special
study groups, including standing bodies of ECOSOC such as the Statistical, Population, and Human Rights
commissions. Third, the UN is responsible for operating programmes such as UNDP and UNICEF and for subsidiary
organs such as UNCTAD, created to carry out specific responsibilities approved by the General Assembly.
The economic activities also must be seen as part of the entire UN System, including subsidiary organs and
committees and the specialized agencies. In turn, the specialized agencies can be divided into two groups. The
financial institutions—the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD; part of the World Bank group)—are responsible for making loans to member states. The IMF
permits UN members to support the value of their currencies by covering temporary deficits in their balance of
payments. The World Bank helps to finance long-range development projects. The functional agencies—such as
UNESCO, WHO, and the FAO—are responsible for international cooperation and technical assistance in their fields
of expertise.
Funding and Development
The first development programme in the UN was a modestly funded programme of technical assistance, established
in 1949. In 1952, largely on the initiative of Asian and Middle Eastern member states, a UN committee proposed a
Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development (SUNFED) to provide grants-in-aid and low-interest loans to
supplement the limited, relatively high-interest loans available through the World Bank. The SUNFED proposal was
rejected by the industrialized countries whose financial contributions were essential for its success. In response to
the increasing financial needs of developing nations, however, the International Development Association (IDA) was
established in 1960 as an affiliate of the World Bank, mainly was to provide long-term, low-interest loans.
The industrialized countries preferred to provide aid through the mechanism of the World Bank because of the
difference in voting procedures between the UN and the financial institutions. The UN proceeds on the basis of one
nation, one vote; in the financial institutions, voting is weighted by monetary contributions. As countries in Asia and
Africa have gained political independence, developing nations have been increasingly able to wield majority control
in the UN, particularly in the General Assembly; in the financial institutions, however, the industrial countries, as the
major contributors, retain a voting majority. Thus, Third World countries have sought to shift greater authority for
development financing from the World Bank and the IMF to the UN, a move that the major powers have opposed.
This is one of the main points of contention between the two groups.
In 1959 a Special Fund was created as a limited version of the SUNFED proposal. The Special Fund was restricted
to relatively small preinvestment grants to be used in the first stage of larger projects that might later become eligible
for more extensive funding from the World Bank, IDA, or other sources. In 1966 the Special Fund and the earlier
technical assistance programme were combined into the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). By the
mid-1980s, UNDP was carrying out more than 5,000 projects funded through voluntary contributions from member
states.
UNDP is an example of an agency that handles funding, operational, and coordinating functions. It operates under a
governing council composed of representatives of 48 member states (21 industrialized and 27 developing countries),
which meets twice a year to approve new projects. UNDP projects form part of 3- to 5-year “country programmes”
that are drawn up by recipient countries in connection with their national development plans. The projects are then
usually executed by other departments of the UN or by the specialized agencies; educational projects, for example,
will be executed by UNESCO and health projects by WHO.
Since the 1960s the General Assembly has tried to give greater direction to development programmes by
establishing goals and procedures in a series of so-called development decades for the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.
For each decade, the General Assembly passed a broadly conceived resolution to serve as a set of guidelines for
the 10-year period. A major goal of these resolutions has been to increase the amount of development funding
available from all sources.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UN development programmes are part of a much wider network of assistance that also includes regional and
nationally organized programmes. At the same time, developing countries must still supply most of the capital,
through savings and foreign earnings, for their economic growth. Therefore, development assistance has been
increasingly related to general conditions in the world economy—especially those conditions under which developing
nations engage in foreign trade and earn foreign capital from exporting raw materials and manufactured goods.
The relation between development assistance and trade was particularly emphasized in the work carried out in the
UN Economic Commission for Latin America in the 1950s. By the early 1960s the connection was widely accepted
by the developing countries that took the initiative in the General Assembly for establishing UNCTAD in 1964. Just
before the first session of UNCTAD, 77 developing nations issued a statement of goals, saying that “International
trade could become a more powerful instrument . . . of economic development not only through the expansion of the
traditional exports of the developing countries, but also through the development of markets for their share of world
exports under improved terms of trade”.
UNCTAD is a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, the purpose of which is to promote international trade,
especially in order to accelerate development in the countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. All UN members
belong to UNCTAD, which meets once every four years in a general conference. Besides the staff, the permanent
machinery includes a Trade and Development Board made up of members proportionally representing four groups of
states: the Afro-Asian group; the industrialized states with market economies; Latin American countries; and the
republics of Eastern Europe and the former USSR.
In negotiations within UNCTAD or in the General Assembly, the Afro-Asian and Latin American countries traditionally
constituted the “South” in contending with the position taken by the industrialized market economies of the “North”. In
this “North-South” dialogue over world economic relations, the USSR and its allies participated only marginally.
Consistent with Communist ideology, the USSR generally argued that the state of the world economy was the result
of earlier imperialist conditions; thus, it was the Western powers' responsibility to compensate for the exploitation of
their former colonies. The terms of this debate, and its protagonists, have changed with the collapse of European
Communism and accelerating economic development in certain areas of the “South”.
35
Since 1964 UNCTAD activities have largely focused on reforms of the world economy that would enhance the
position of developing countries. The first is the Integrated Programme for Commodities (IPC), which involves the
negotiation of agreements to ensure stable prices for primary commodities exported by developing nations. Sudden
drops in the world prices of tin, copper, or coffee, for example, can drastically reduce the foreign earnings of
countries for which these might be the sole exportable commodities. Related to the IPC, another reform is the
establishment of a Common Fund to be used to finance stocks of such commodities so that the world supply can
also be regulated to avoid fluctuations in prices. UNCTAD also advocates a lessening of protectionist measures
directed against exports of manufactured products from developing countries. The world's major trading nations
have generally lowered tariffs over the years through arrangements worked out under the auspices of theGeneral
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). These, however, operate on the
basis of reciprocal tariff reductions, a condition that places developing nations, which are only in an early stage of
industrialization, at a disadvantage.
Although the position of the major powers on the UNCTAD proposals has shifted over the years from complete
rejection to a reluctant acceptance in principle, actual implementation of these measures has been delayed.
Agreements on individual commodities have provided no assurance of stable prices; the Common Fund has not
been financed; and governments in many industrialized nations have been increasingly reluctant to allow imports on
a preferential basis that would compete with the products of their own industries. In response, the developing
countries have launched a bolder, more political attack on the structure of the world economy by calling for a new
international economic order.
The New International Economic Order
The elements of a new order were spelled out in resolutions passed during two special sessions of the General
Assembly in 1974 and 1975. The resolutions were preceded, however, by two profound changes in economic
conditions.
The first change was a general deterioration of the world economy beginning in the late 1960s and continuing into
the 1970s. From the end of World War II until the mid-1960s, a historic period of growth had occurred in the world
economy, especially in the Western market economies and Japan, under US leadership. The rate of growth began to
slacken by the end of the 1960s, when the United States suffered a series of deficits in balance of payments,
severely weakening its own economy and those of its major trading partners, as well as its capability to dominate the
world economy. This recession also affected the developing countries that depended on the Western nations not
only for development assistance but also as markets for their exports and sources of finished goods, especially
technologically advanced items.
A second change began in 1973, with the drastic rise in oil prices initiated by the members of the Organization of
Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC. First created in 1960, OPEC represents the world's major producers of
petroleum—a group of developing countries from the Middle East, Africa, and South America that controlled a
resource critical to the highly industrialized economies. Their dependence on this vital resource was dramatized by
the price hike at the very time when the structure of economic relations among the industrialized nations was
changing. The success of OPEC gave developing nations the incentive to demand a restructuring of economic
relations in which they could gain greater influence over the rules governing international trade.
The New International Economic Order (NIEO) is embodied in four General Assembly resolutions that, taken as a
whole, incorporate the goal of the development decades to increase the level of financial assistance with the
UNCTAD programme for stabilizing commodity prices and opening new markets to developing countries. The other
aims of the NIEO for developing nations include greater self-sufficiency, fuller participation in the IMF and World
Bank, an increased share of world trade and level of industrialization, protection of their resources through
international codes governing the conduct of multinational corporations, and a gradual shifting of the pattern of
exchange to reflect more fully the interdependence of nations.
The NIEO represents a long-range set of so-called Third World aspirations that challenge the more established
interests of the industrialized nations. In 1980 the General Assembly voted to convene another special session to
review progress towards the NIEO and prepare for a new set of global negotiations on economic issues. After almost
a year of preliminary discussions, the assembly could not agree on an agenda and procedures for a global
conference, and the special session ended with no concrete results. Substantial differences remain on procedural
issues, including the use of the UN, as opposed to the IMF and World Bank, as the main forum for negotiation on
financial matters. The relevance of the whole NIED programme is also now subject to review with many Third World
nations in the Pacific Rim and Latin America developing at speed in the 1990s and a general shift in economic
thinking in favour of the free market as a motor for development.
The Role of the UN
The UN today is both more and less than its founders anticipated. It is less because, from the close of World War II
to the end of the 1980s, the rivalry between the United States and the USSR exposed the weakness of great-power
unanimity in matters of peace and security. It is more because the rapid breakup of colonial empires from the 1940s
to the 1970s created a void in the structure of international relations that the UN, in many areas, was able to fill.
Even during the period of superpower rivalry, the UN helped ease East-West tensions. Through its peacekeeping
operations, for example, it was able to insulate certain areas of tension from direct great-power intervention. The UN
also established several committees on disarmament and was involved in negotiating treaties to ban nuclear
weapons in outer space and the development of biological weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency has
helped to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons by inspecting nuclear installations to monitor their use. Major
arms-control measures, however, such as the Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963), the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (1968), the Strategic Arms Limitation talks (SALT) of 1972 and 1979, and the Strategic Arms
Reduction treaties (START) of 1991 and 1993 were achieved through direct negotiations between the superpowers.
Beyond providing peacekeeping forces, the UN has played a wider role in the transition to statehood in a few critical
areas. It has been a major forum through which newly independent states have begun to participate in international
relations, giving them opportunities to represent their interests outside their immediate regions, to join coalitions of
nations with similar interests, and to escape the limited relationships of their earlier colonial connections. One
problem facing the UN in the 1990s is the feeling in some Western nations that it has become an instrument of the
developing countries and thus is no longer a viable forum for fruitful negotiations.
Many global problems have been considered in a series of special UN-sponsored conferences, including the
Conference on the Human Environment (1972), the World Population Conference (1974), the World Conference of
the International Women's Year (1975), the Conference on Human Settlements, or Habitat (1976), the Conference
on Desertification (1977), the World Assembly on Ageing (1982), and the World Summit for Children (1990). In 1992
more than 100 heads of state and government—the largest assemblage of national leaders in history—met in Rio de
Janeiro for the Conference on Environment and Development, or Earth Summit.
The collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe and the USSR between 1989 and 1991 posed new challenges and
opportunities for the UN. On the one hand, the end of the rivalry between the United States and USSR enabled the
UN to assume a more active role in seeking to resolve disputes in Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia, Western
Sahara, and the Persian Gulf. On the other hand, the Yugoslav civil war and the ethnic conflicts within and between
the former Soviet republics exemplified the threats to peace and stability presented by the breakup of the Communist
world. How to pay for an expanded peacekeeping role and how to accommodate the increased political and
economic influence of Germany and Japan were also challenges for the UN in the 1990s. After more than 40 years
of international discussion, the establishment of a new post—High Commissioner for Human Rights—was approved
in 1993. Appointed by the secretary-general, the commissioner would be responsible for monitoring worldwide
respect for fundamental human rights.
The United Nations is not a world government; rather, it is a very flexible instrument through which nations can
cooperate to solve their mutual problems. Whether they do cooperate and use the UN creatively depends on how
both their governments and their peoples view relations with others and how they envision their place in the future of
humankind.
Organization of the United Nations
The United Nations is composed of six main administrative organs that direct the functions of a wide array of
committees, agencies, and funds. Though the General Assembly supervises the work of the other five administrative
organs, the Security Council is the most powerful branch of the United Nations. The Council makes final decisions on
actions the United Nations should take and has the authority to approve or disapprove new members. While the
36
Security Council has only 15 members, the General Assembly includes representatives from all the member nations.
The chart above shows the organization of the six organs and their subordinate committees, agencies, and funds.
Afghanistan
Germany
Norway
Albania
Ghana
Oman
Algeria
Greece
Pakistan
Andorra
Grenada
Palau
Angola
Guatemala
Panama
Antigua and Barbuda
Guinea
Papua New Guinea
Argentina
Guinea-Bissau
Paraguay
Armenia
Guyana
Peru
Australia
Haiti
Philippines
Austria
Honduras
Poland
Azerbaijan
Hungary
Portugal
Bahamas
Iceland
Qatar
Bahrain
India
Romania
Bangladesh
Indonesia
Russia
Barbados
Iran
Rwanda
Belarus
Iraq
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Belgium
Ireland
Saint Lucia
Belize
Israel
Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines
Benin
Italy
Samoa
Bhutan
Jamaica
San Marino
Bolivia
Japan
São Tomé and Príncipe
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Jordan
Saudi Arabia
Botswana
Kazakhstan
Senegal
Brazil
Kenya
Seychelles
Brunei Darussalam
Korea, Democratic People's
Republic of
Sierra Leone
Bulgaria
Korea, Republic of
Singapore
Burkina Faso
Kuwait
Slovakia
Burundi
Kyrgyzstan
Slovenia
Cambodia
Laos
Solomon Islands
Cameroon
Latvia
Somalia
Canada
Lebanon
South Africa
Cape Verde
Lesotho
Spain
Central African Republic
Liberia
Sri Lanka
Chad
Libya
Sudan
Chile
Liechtenstein
Suriname
China, People's Republic of
Lithuania
Swaziland
Colombia
Luxembourg
Sweden
Comoros
Macedonia, Former Yugoslav
Republic of
Syria
Congo, Democratic Republic of
Madagascar
Tajikistan
Congo, Republic of
Malawi
Tanzania
Costa Rica
Malaysia
Thailand
Côte d'Ivoire
Maldives
Togo
Croatia
Mali
Trinidad and Tobago
Cuba
Malta
Tunisia
Cyprus
Marshall Islands
Turkey
Czech Republic
Mauritania
Turkmenistan
Denmark
Mauritius
Uganda
Djibouti
Mexico
Ukraine
Dominica
Micronesia
United Arab Emirates
Dominican Republic
Moldova
United Kingdom
Ecuador
Monaco
United States of America
Egypt
Mongolia
Uruguay
El Salvador
Morocco
Uzbekistan
Equatorial Guinea
Mozambique
Vanuatu
Eritrea
Myanmar (Burma)
Venezuela
Estonia
Namibia
Vietnam
Ethiopia
Nepal
Yemen
Fiji
Netherlands
Yugoslavia
Finland
New Zealand
Zambia
France
Nicaragua
Zimbabwe
Gabon
Niger
Gambia
Nigeria
Georgia
JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Commonly known as Kashmir, territory in the north-western part of the Indian subcontinent bounded on the northwest by Afghanistan, on the north-east by China, on the south by the Indian states of Himachal Pradesh and Punjab,
and on the west by the North-West Frontier and Punjab provinces of Pakistan. Kashmir has an area of about
222,236 sq km (85,806 sq mi).
Both India and Pakistan claim all of Kashmir, but the territory has been partitioned between them since 1947. India
controls the southern half of Kashmir, which it has organized as the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Before India's
defeat in the 1962 Sino-Indian War, the state of Jammu and Kashmir also included the north-eastern section of the
territory, which India still claims as part of Jammu and Kashmir State, but which has since been occupied by China.
Pakistan controls the northern and western portion of Kashmir which is organized into three main regions: Azad
(Free) Kashmir, occupying the crescent of land on the western border of Kashmir, between the state of Jammu and
Kashmir on the east and Pakistan on the west; and Gilgit, and Baltistan located in the Karakorum Range in the far
north-west. Azad Kashmir has a government protected and financed by Pakistan; Gilgit and Baltistan are notionally
autonomous, but in practice are administered by political agents of the Pakistani government. The capital of the state
of Jammu and Kashmir is Srnagar. The administrative centre of Azad Kashmir is Muzaffarabad; Gilgit town and
Skardu are respectively the capitals of Gilgit and Baltistan. The area of Jammu and Kashmir State was about
138,200 sq km (53,448 sq mi), before the Sino-Indian war; excluding the area occupied by China it is now about
101,387 sq km (39,145 sq mi). It has a population (1991 census) of about 7.72 million. The area controlled by
37
Pakistan is about 84,100 sq km (32,494 sq mi), of which Azad Kashmir comprises about 1,680 sq km (650 sq mi).
The population (1985 estimate) of the three Pakistani-controlled areas is about 2.8 million.
Kashmir is an ancient country, much fought over because of its strategic location. According to tradition, its name
derives from the Khasi, a people who lived in the northern mountains several centuries before the Christian era. The
country was originally a stronghold of Hinduism; Buddhism was introduced about 245 BC. Beginning in the mid-14th
century AD, Muslim sultans controlled the area for two centuries. Akbar, the Mughal emperor of Hindustan,
conquered Kashmir between 1586 and 1592, and it became a part of the Mughal empire. Between 1756 and 1819 it
was under Afghan rule; in the latter year, Kashmir was conquered by Ranjit Singh, the Sikh maharaja of the Punjab.
In 1846 Kashmir was annexed to the (Hindu) Dogra kingdom of Jammu; the Dogra dynasty continued to rule the
region until August 1947, when British India was partitioned into a predominantly Muslim Pakistan and a
predominantly Hindu India.
Following partition, a section of the Muslim population of Kashmir demanded accession to Pakistan. The reigning
maharaja, Sir Hari Singh, a Hindu, resisted the pro-Pakistani movement. Pakistan invaded the area, after which the
maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession to the Indian Union. India thereupon dispatched troops to Kashmir, and
in the ensuing conflict forced the Pakistanis to yield ground. Through mediation organized by the United Nations, a
ceasefire agreement between the two nations was concluded in January 1949. Subsequent UN efforts to secure
troop withdrawals and develop a plebiscitary plan satisfactory to both sides were unsuccessful. Heavy border fighting
broke out in 1965 and again in 1971, and led to the “line of control” which has since formed the boundary between
the Indian- and Pakistani-controlled sections of Kashmir. China began conducting military manoeuvres in the border
areas of eastern Kashmir in the 1950s. Since India's defeat in the Sino-Indian war of October 1962, the northeastern part of Ladakh, in Jammu and Kashmir state, has been occupied by China. The Chinese authorities have
since built a strategic road throughout the disputed territory, connecting Sinkiang with Tibet.
Following the bitterly contested state elections in 1987 unrest in Jammu and Kashmir increased. Unrest further
increased after 1988 as Muslim Kashmiri separatists began guerrilla attacks against Indian officials and troops
deployed in the state. India responded by increasing its troop deployment in the region. Tensions increased sharply,
beginning in early 1990 with violent clashes between Indian troops and proindependence demonstrators. President's
Rule was imposed by the Indian government in Jammu and Kashmir State on July 1990. Clashes between the
guerrillas and Indian troops continued throughout the early 1990s. The situation further strained relations between
India and Pakistan; Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto gave her public, verbal support to the rebels. In January
1994 the two governments held talks concerning Kashmir, but no real progress was made. In 1994 and in the first
half of 1995 there was a new upsurge in guerrilla activity, including the kidnapping of foreign tourists, as well as
reports of severe measures by Indian troops. Elections were held in Jammu and Kashmir in May 1996, for the first
time since the imposition of direct rule in 1990, in the face of calls by several separatist groups for an electoral
boycott.
GUIDED MISSILES
Self-propelled aerial projectiles, usually containing conventional or nuclear explosives, guided in flight towards a
target either by remote control or by internal mechanisms. Guided missiles vary widely in size and type, ranging from
large strategic ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads to small, portable rockets carried by foot soldiers. Although
most are military weapons with explosive warheads, others may carry scientific instruments for gathering information
within or above the Earth’s atmosphere.
Guided missiles consist of three separate systems: power source, guidance and control mechanism, and warhead or
payload. Power sources normally are either self-contained rocket motors or air-breathing jet engines, but may also
be airfoils or outside booster charges from ramp or tube launchers. The type of guidance and control system
employed depends on the type of missile and the nature of the target. Inertial guidance systems sense the position
of the flight path in relation to a fixed target; other guidance systems use a variety of more active sensors to help
direct the missile towards a moving objective. Payloads are generally warheads (bombs) designed for specific
missions, from piercing armour plate to destroying entire urban areas (see Missile Warfare).
Before World War II guided missiles were limited to experimental, pilotless aircraft controlled by radio. During the
war, however, rapid technological advances in such fields as aerodynamics, electronics, rocket and jet propulsion,
radar, servo-mechanisms, inertial guidance and control systems, and aircraft structures, coupled with the intensive
search for better weapons, led to the construction, testing, and finally mass production of the modern guided missile.
Warheads
Military guided missiles carry either high-explosive or nuclear warheads. Short-range tactical missiles employ highexplosive charges that produce damage through their force of impact and blast or through fragmentation. Anti-tank
missiles, for example, normally depend on a concentrated blast effect to penetrate or splinter armour; warheads
used against less protected targets such as aircraft rely more on fragmentation to produce the greatest damage.
Nuclear warheads are weapons of mass destruction carried primarily by an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).
To enhance the effectiveness of these long-range delivery systems, several types of warheads were developed in
the 1970s. The multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicle (MIRV) dispatches several nuclear warheads from a
single missile while in flight; the rocket-powered manoeuvrable alternative-target re-entry vehicle enables an
individual warhead to change course as it falls. The Soviet-built fractional orbit bombardment system (FOBS) allows
missiles or warheads to remain in Earth orbit before beginning their descent. FOBS gave the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (USSR) the ability to launch a mass attack against the United States from any direction rather
than just depending on a ballistic pathway arching over the North Pole.
The 1993 START II arms control agreement banned all ICBMs with MIRV but it has still to be ratified by the United
States and Russia. It also limits submarine-launched ballistic missiles and calls for the elimination of all multiplewarhead land-based missiles.
Nuclear warheads are also used in several US air defence missiles with the intention of breaking up mass bomber
formations. Most large tactical missiles are designed to carry nuclear warheads to destroy military concentrations on
or behind the battlefield. In the 1980s, Soviet airborne or shipboard nuclear-tipped cruise missiles posed a threat to
US Navy carrier task forces. A new type of nuclear weapon, the first to be added to the US arsenal since 1989, is
being deployed by the United States. The weapons laboratory at Los Alamos has created the B61 “Mod 11”, an
earth-penetrating warhead designed to destroy underground command and control installations.
Guidance and Control
Missiles are guided towards targets by remote control or by internal guidance mechanisms. Remote-control missiles
are linked to a human or mechanical target locator through trailing wires, wireless radio, or some other type of signal
system. Internal guidance mechanisms have optical, radar, infrared, or some other type of sensor that can detect
heat, light, or electronic emissions from the target. Most missiles have some type of movable fins or airfoil that can
be used to direct the course of the missile towards the target while in flight.
The inertial guidance systems of ballistic missiles are more complex. Missile velocity, pitch, yaw, and roll are sensed
by internal gyroscopes and accelerometers, and course corrections are made mechanically by slightly altering the
thrust of the rocket exhaust by means of movable vanes or deflectors. In larger rockets, small external jets are also
used to alter direction.
Missile Proliferation
The range and relative low cost of missiles make them the preferred means of delivery system for proliferating
nations—those believed to be in the process of developing weapons of mass destruction. The Missile Technology
Control Regime (MTCR) consists of 25 nations that have agreed to control exports of missile technology and
equipment. Ukraine and China are as yet not members of the MTCR, but are in the process of agreeing to its
requirements, which refer to weapons of range 300 km (186 mi) or more, and carrying payloads of at least 500 kg
(1,100 lb).
The United States and the former Soviet Union have in the past provided missiles to other powers, such as Israel
and other Middle Eastern countries. India and Pakistan are said to have developed their own systems. China and
Argentina, among others, are suspected of having been suppliers to other countries.
The Middle East, Far East, and Indian subcontinent are the prime areas threatened by missile proliferation. In the
Gulf War, there was widespread fear that Iraq’s Russian-made Scud missiles, of 600 km (372 mi) range, may have
been carrying chemical warheads; over 800 Scuds were fired during the conflict—ten of which had a range of 900
km (560 mi). The 600-km Scud-C is now made in Iraq. Israel has its own Jericho missiles, which have ranges of 650
38
km (403 mi) and 1,500 km (930 mi). North Korea, at the same time as being suspected of nuclear proliferation, has
tested missiles based on the Scud of ranges 500 km (310 mi) and 1,500 km (930 mi); other nations in the region are
feared to be developing or advancing their own programmes as a countermeasure.
Types of Missiles
Guided missiles today are grouped into five launch-to-target categories: surface-to-surface, surface-to-air, air-tosurface, air-to-ground, and air-to-air. “Surface” in each case signifies on as well as below the surface of the land or
sea. Missiles may also be grouped by their area of operation. Tactical missiles are used by military forces in direct
combat on and above the battlefield; support missiles are employed behind the main battle area; and strategic
missiles are designed for intercontinental warfare.
Missiles may also be differentiated by their flight characteristics. Aerodynamic missiles are supported in flight by air
pressure around their wing and body surfaces, similar to conventional piloted aircraft, whereas ballistic missiles
depend solely on their internal power source, usually a rocket engine, to remain airborne. Aerodynamic missiles
normally travel on a straight-line or flat trajectory towards their target, and ballistic missiles are usually surface-tosurface weapons that follow curved or arched trajectories similar to that of an artillery projectile.
Surface-to-Surface Missiles
V-1 and V-2
The first successful guided missiles were the German V-1 and V-2 Vengeance weapons launched against Antwerp
and London during World War II. The V-1, or buzz bomb, was an aerodynamic missile powered by a pulse jet engine
with a pre-set guidance system that could sense and correct deviations in altitude and direction. Its average range
was about 240 km (150 mi), after which the missile automatically sent itself into a steep dive and detonated its 1tonne high-explosive warhead upon impact. The V-2, on the other hand, was a true ballistic missile fuelled by a
mixture of alcohol and liquid oxygen that produced a 25,000-kg (55,000-lb) thrust for about one minute after take-off.
With a maximum range of about 320 km (200 mi), the V-2 carried its 730-kg (1,600-lb) warhead through an arching
trajectory, reaching a maximum altitude of 95 to 110 km (about 60 to 70 mi) and a speed of more than 1.6 km (1 mi)
per second.
Both missiles were relatively inaccurate and were used only against large cities. The V-1 could be destroyed easily
in flight by conventional fighters, but no defence existed against the V-2. Allied attempts to destroy their mobile
launching sites proved ineffective. Germany managed to launch about 4,000 V-2s before the end of the war. Wireguided anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles and air-to-air guided missiles were tested by German scientists but were
never produced.
Appreciating the great potential of the German efforts in guided and ballistic missiles, Allied intelligence teams
scoured Germany in 1945 for technical data, design drawings, and missiles, and they interrogated key German
scientists and engineers. During the war the Allied powers had made little progress in these fields; they were quick,
however, to integrate German research and technicians into their own development programmes, and most post-war
research was based on the work done in wartime Germany. The German V-2, in fact, served as the prototype for all
large space and missile rockets built in the United States and the USSR.
Land-Based Strategic Missiles
After World War II, the US defensive policy of strategic deterrence depended on a large fleet of long-range bombers
that could deliver nuclear weapons accurately to their targets thousands of miles away. Defence planners also
experimented with air-breathing subsonic missiles similar to the V-1. Three developments in the mid-1950s,
however, led to the ICBM: (1) development of the thermonuclear bomb with a much greater destructive power than
the original atomic bomb; (2) the rapid refinement of inertial guidance systems for ballistic missiles; and (3) the
development of powerful booster engines for multi-stage rockets, greatly increasing their size and range. As a result,
ballistic missiles became sufficiently accurate and powerful to destroy targets 8,000 km (5,000 mi) away.
Atlas, the United States’ first successful ICBM, was tested in 1959 and was followed one year later by the Titan. Both
were multi-stage liquid-fuelled rockets using extremely low-temperature propellants that had to be added just before
launching. The US Minuteman ICBM that first went into service in 1961 used solid fuels stored within the missile,
could be launched on short notice, and was sheltered in underground concrete silos. Minuteman II missiles have
now been phased out according to the START I treaty, and if START II comes into force, Minuteman III missiles are
to be converted to carry one warhead instead of three and their guidance systems upgraded. The US Missile X, or
MX (also known as Peacekeeper), that was developed in the 1980s, was designed to carry a larger warhead and to
have a mobile launching site capability.
Sea-Based Strategic Missiles
Strategic delivery systems went through the same evolution in the US Navy, as slow air-breathing missiles, liquidfuelled rockets, and carrier-based piloted bombers were abandoned for the two-stage, solid-propellant Polaris ICBM.
Carried in two parallel rows of eight aboard large nuclear-powered submarines, these sea-launched ballistic missiles
(SLBMs) were launched from underwater.
The US Navy replaced Polaris with the longer-range Poseidon ICBM, and developed an entirely new ICBM, the
Trident C-4, to be compatible with the new, large Trident submarines. The ICBMs currently in service in the US Navy
include the Trident D-5, deployed in 1989, which carries eight nuclear warheads, has a range of 12,000 km (7,440
mi), and has the capability to attack a series of different targets. Trident D-5 missiles have a megaton yield per
warhead of 300 to 475 kilotons. Plans by the Pentagon to build and install over 450 are under consideration; with the
approval in 1995 of a strategic retargeting system, Trident submarines will be able to re-target the missiles to any
point on Earth.
Cruise Missiles
The United States also designed the air-breathing cruise missile for both strategic and tactical missions. Cruise
missiles can be nuclear or conventional (that is dual-capable); the Tomahawk can be launched from ground, ship,
air, or submarine against short-range tactical targets such as ships, or against strategic targets several thousand
kilometres away.
The anti-ship version, the sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM), travels a few metres above sea level towards the
general area of a target. It then climbs, locates the target through its own sensing devices, and dodges before
making a final, high-speed diving attack. All US and Russian SLCMs have been withdrawn from ships.
The land version of this missile can also travel at a low altitude to avoid radar detection, guided by an internal terrain
contour navigation system.
Tactical Missiles
Tactical surface-to-surface guided missiles range from hand-portable anti-tank rockets to large ballistic missiles able
to attack airfields, supply lines, and communications hundreds of kilometres behind the battlefield. Small missiles
often employ line-of-sight guidance systems that relay corrections in the flight path of the missile by means of trailing
wires or infrared signals.
In the US Copperhead guided projectile the target is marked by a laser beam on the battlefield. The missile is then
launched several kilometres to the rear and searches for the marked target while in flight. On a larger scale
battlefield support missiles were developed, including short-to-medium range ballistic weapons such as the US
Pershing, and tactical cruise missiles, both of which have been banned under the terms of the 1987 Intermediate
Nuclear Forces treaty (see International Arms Control). All tactical missiles are mobile, carry nuclear or highexplosive warheads, and have a range of about 160 to 640 km (100 to 400 mi).
Air-Launched Missiles
Air-to-air and air-to-surface guided missiles are generally short-range, light, rocket-powered projectiles with
sophisticated internal guidance systems. Both types were tested in wartime Germany, and German radio-controlled
glide bombs were responsible for sinking numerous Allied ships. Although these early missile weapons relied on
optical tracking and control from parent aircraft, most current air-to-ground guided missiles depend on their own
target-sensing mechanism once launched. The US Walleye and Maverick use a miniature television homing system,
the Shrike follows radar emissions from hostile positions, and others, such as the unpowered “smart bombs” that
were employed in South East Asia, use laser or infrared target designators to help guide the missile to its objective.
The USSR developed several versions of large, air-breathing missiles similar to US cruise missiles, designed to be
used against shipping or as a nuclear delivery system for strategic bombers.
Air-to-air guided missiles are used to destroy hostile aircraft and are generally smaller, lighter, and faster than air-toground projectiles. Most employ infrared or radar homing devices, and have replaced automatic gunfire as the main
39
armament of fighter aircraft. Like almost all tactical missiles, however, their success depends on the skill of the
operator, in this case the aircraft pilot, to identify hostile targets visually or by radar and to manoeuvre the launching
platform in order to place the missile in the vicinity of the moving target.
Surface-to-Air Missiles
This type of missile was developed to protect ground areas from hostile air attack, especially from high-altitude
bombers flying above the range of conventional anti-aircraft artillery. During the 1950s and 1960s batteries of NikeAjax and the improved Nike-Hercules provided strategic air defence for the United States against long-range Soviet
bombers. Subsequently, with the replacement of piloted bombers by the ICBM as the Soviet Union’s primary nuclear
delivery system, and with the signing of an agreement between the United States and the USSR to limit the
deployment of defensive anti-ballistic missiles, most research and development went into shorter-range, tactical
surface-to-air missiles to protect ground combat units and warships against low-flying aircraft and hostile missiles.
Air Defence
Most air defence missiles employ separate radars to locate, track, and guide the missile towards hostile aircraft; final
interception is accomplished by the internal guidance system of the missile itself. Some of these missiles are air-toair weapons adapted for ground units; others can also be used against ground targets.
After 1970 almost all the major industrial nations developed many different types of these weapons to cover
overlapping areas above the battlefield, including the hand-portable anti-aircraft missile, sighted optically and using
an internal infrared homing device.
More important was the development of integrated fire-control systems for ground units, enabling them to separate
friendly from hostile aircraft and to engage them with the most appropriate air defence systems available. Patriot
Advanced Capability-2 (PAC-2) missiles were used in the Gulf War to intercept Scud missiles fired by Iraqi forces
against targets in Saudi Arabia and Israel. Upgraded PAC-2s are now entering service with the US Army. See also
Strategic Defense Initiative.
NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION
(NATO), regional defence alliance, formed under Article 9 of the North Atlantic Treaty signed on April 4, 1949. The
original signatories were Belgium, Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,
Norway, Portugal, and the United States. Greece and Turkey were admitted to the alliance in 1952, West Germany
in 1955, and Spain in 1982. NATO's purpose is to enhance the stability, well-being, and freedom of its members by
means of a system of collective security. In 1990 the newly unified Germany replaced West Germany as a NATO
member.
Background
In the years after World War II (1939-1945), many Western leaders saw the policies of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics (USSR) as threatening the stability and peace in Europe. The forcible installation of Communist
governments throughout Eastern Europe, territorial demands by the USSR (the former Soviet Union), and their
support of guerrilla war in Greece and regional separatism in Iran appeared to many as the first steps of World War
III. Such events prompted the signing of the Dunkirk Treaty in 1947 between Britain and France, pledging common
defence against aggression. Subsequent events, including the rejection by Eastern European nations of the
European Recovery Program (Marshall Plan) and the creation of Cominform, a European Communist organization in
1947, led to the Brussels Treaty signed by most Western European countries in 1948. Among the goals of that pact
was the collective defence of its members. The Berlin blockade that began in March 1948 led to negotiations
between Western Europe, Canada, and the United States that resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty.
Treaty Provisions
The treaty consists of a preamble and 14 articles. The preamble states its purpose: to promote the common values
of its members and to “unite their efforts for collective defence”. Article 1 calls for peaceful resolution of disputes.
Article 2 pledges the parties to economic and political cooperation. Article 3 calls for development of the capacity for
defence. Article 4 provides for joint consultations when a member is threatened. Article 5 promises the use of the
members' armed forces for “collective self-defence”. Article 6 defines the areas covered by the treaty. Article 7
affirms the precedence of members' obligations under the United Nations Charter. Article 8 safeguards against
conflict with any other treaties of the signatories. Article 9 creates a council to oversee implementation of the treaty.
Article 10 describes admission procedures for other nations. Article 11 states the ratification procedure. Article 12
allows for reconsideration of the treaty. Article 13 outlines withdrawal procedures. Article 14 calls for the deposition
of the official copies of the treaty in the US Archives.
Structure
The highest authority within NATO is the North Atlantic Council, composed of permanent delegates from all
members, headed by a secretary-general. It is responsible for general policy, budgetary outlines, and administrative
actions. Subordinate to the council are the Secretariat, various temporary committees, and the Military Committee.
The secretary-general runs the Secretariat, which handles all the non-military functions of the alliance. The
temporary committees deal with specific assignments of the council. The Military Committee consists of the chiefs of
staff of the various armed forces; it meets twice a year. Between such meetings the Military Committee, in
permanent session with representatives of the members, defines military policies. Below the Military Committee are
the various geographical commands: Allied Command Europe, Allied Command Atlantic, Allied Command Channel,
and the Regional Planning Group (for North America). These commands are in charge of deploying armed forces in
their areas.
History
Until 1950 NATO consisted primarily of a pledge by the United States to aid its members under the terms of Article 5
of the treaty. There was no effective machinery, however, for implementation of this pledge. The outbreak of the
Korean War in June 1950 convinced the allies that the Soviets might act against a divided Germany. The result was
not only the creation of a military command system, but also the expansion of the organization. In 1952 Greece and
Turkey joined the alliance, and in 1955 West Germany was accepted under a complicated arrangement whereby
Germany would not be allowed to manufacture nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. In its first decade NATO
was mainly a military organization dominated by US power, which provided a security blanket for the revival of
Europe's economy and polity.
Soviet achievement of parity in nuclear weaponry with the West resulted in concern among Europeans that the
United States would not honour its pledge. The 1960s were characterized by two consequent developments in
NATO: the withdrawal of France, under President Charles de Gaulle, from the organization but not from the alliance
in 1966; and the rising influence of the smaller nations, which sought to use NATO as an instrument of détente as
well as defence. America's involvement in Vietnam further diminished US authority and contributed to dissatisfaction
within NATO. Although the 1970s began with some agreements as a result of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks
(SALT I), the decade ended in disillusionment as the Soviets rapidly built up their military arsenal. NATO resolved
this problem with the dual-track programme of 1979, in which new defence efforts were accompanied by new efforts
at détente. The 1980s opened with a deepening crisis between the East and West. In 1983 the USSR failed to
prevent the deployment of intermediate-range ballistic missiles, designed to cope with Soviet weapons targeted on
European cities. This issue became irrelevant, however, after the signing of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Force
(INF) Treaty in 1987 (see Arms Control, International). The INF treaty presaged the breakdown of the Warsaw Pact.
The decade ended with the apparent success of NATO in surmounting the challenge of the Communist bloc.
The end of the Cold War and the disintegration of the USSR brought new challenges for NATO. Some former
Warsaw Pact states, particularly Poland, were anxious to join NATO as a safeguard against any future Russian
aggression. Russia itself, meanwhile, opposed any extension of NATO into Central and Eastern Europe, taking the
position that NATO remained an anti-Russian alliance. The Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian War of 1991-1995 was a
particularly drastic test of NATO in the post-Cold War world: acting outside the territory of member states for the first
time, under United Nations auspices, NATO forces were criticized by Russia for being too active in the former
Yugoslavia, and by others for not being active enough. NATO attacks on Bosnian Serb positions around Sarajevo in
September 1995 were instrumental in ending hostilities, while the Implementation Force (I-For) charged with policing
the peace provisions agreed in the Dayton accord in November 1995 was drawn from NATO.
Achievements
Over the years the existence of NATO has led to closer ties between its members and to a growing community of
interests. The treaty itself has provided a model for other collective security agreements. It is possible that NATO
dissuaded the USSR from attempting direct assault on Western Europe. On the other hand, the rearmament of West
40
Germany and its admission to the alliance were the apparent causes of the establishment of the Warsaw Pact in
1955.
In the early 1990s, the political transformation of the USSR and Eastern Europe, including the absorption of East
Germany into the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, drastically
reduced the military threat to NATO. Nevertheless, many Western observers see NATO in the post-Cold War era as
an umbrella of security in a Europe buffeted by the nationalist passions unleashed in Eastern Europe and the former
USSR. The North Atlantic Cooperation Council, established in November, 1991, provides a forum for consultations
between NATO members, East European nations, and the former Soviet republics. In 1993 NATO members
endorsed a proposal to offer former Warsaw Pact members limited associations with NATO. Under the plan, known
as Partnership for Peace, non-members could be invited to participate in information sharing, joint exercises, and
peacekeeping operations. In May 1997 the leaders of Russia and the 16 countries in NATO signed an agreement
intended to improve their relations and ease NATO's eastward expansion.
WARFARE
The use of armed force by states or other organized groups to impose their will on opponents. Organized military
forces developed in ancient times when the armies of ancient Assyria and Persia began to deploy spear-wielding
regular infantry and cavalry to smash their enemies. Subsequently the Greeks deployed heavily armoured militia (or
hoplites) in squares or phalanxes for shock action, using bows and arrows, spears and swords. These were
impregnable in frontal assaults, but were difficult to manoeuvre. Alexander the Great welded phalanxes of heavy and
light infantry and cavalry into a powerful assault force which destroyed the Persian army in 333 BC.
The Romans outclassed all these early forces in military prowess and tactical skill. The infantry legions of the Roman
Empire were armed with shields, a short sword, and a javelin, and divided into three lines of about six ranks deep.
They were rigorously drilled and well disciplined, and capable of marching long distances. By AD 14 the Roman
armies had extended the power of the Roman Empire across Europe and the Mediterranean Sea. After 400,
however, the Roman Empire in the west collapsed under the weight of successive barbarian invasions from the east
and north. Not until 800 was the former Western European Roman empire reunited for a time under the Merovingian
and Carolingian Franks, whose cavalry horses were fitted with the stirrup, which enabled the horseman for the first
time to wield sword and lance accurately to mow down the enemy infantry.
During the Middle Ages the infantry tended to be neglected in favour of the mounted knight with his code of honour
and chivalry. However, in the 14th century, light infantry began to adopt the crossbow, slower in rate of fire than the
ordinary bow, but with much greater penetrative power and requiring less skill to aim and less strength to pull. This
weapon had a pulverizing effect on advancing enemy cavalry. The role of the mounted knight was further
undermined when gunpowder was developed in 14th-century Europe. It was first applied to the cannon, which
became a battlefield weapon when the French army placed their cannons on wheeled carriages. Smoothbore small
arms—the matchlock or arquebus—were developed in the mid-15th century, but they were slow to load and had
limited range and penetrative power. They were, however cheaper to produce than the crossbow, which eventually
disappeared during the 16th century when European armies replaced the arquebus with the more powerful and
longer-range musket.
By 1600 the rulers of the newly emerging nation-states of Europe were hiring mercenaries on short-term contracts to
man their armies. This method of recruitment inhibited long-drawn-out battles—such soldiers had little motivation or
loyalty, and when the ruler ran out of money to pay them the mercenaries tended to desert in large numbers. During
the Thirty Years War (1618-1648), Gustav II Adolf (Gustavus Adolphus) of Sweden revolutionized European warfare
by dividing his infantry into smaller units and placing them in lines, with continuous volleys of fire made possible by
the rapid rotation of the lines of musketeers. This method of fighting meant that drill was essential if the men were to
march together in good order and load and fire when commanded. The battalion became the basic infantry unit, with
600 men five ranks deep. Armies remained dependent on mercenaries, but they now signed up for much longer
periods of service and were subjected to brutal discipline to prevent desertion.
During the 18th century the infantry began to form hollow squares for all-round defence, while its firepower was
enhanced by the introduction of the flintlock and the cartridge, which enabled the foot soldier to fire at a much faster
rate than hitherto. Battalions were subdivided into platoons for greater fire control. These improvements in weaponry
strengthened the power of the defensive, and as a result long battles of attrition developed, although the well-drilled,
disciplined, and efficient Prussian infantry began to dominate the battlefield, especially during the Seven Years War
(1756-1763).
At the end of the 18th century the French revolutionary armies proved to be much more dynamic and innovative in
their tactics than any of their immediate predecessors. These armies, raised by universal conscription and imbued
with the ideals of the French Revolution, were organized after 1794 into divisions for greater control, and the troops
were deployed in columns which gave them greater manoeuvrability. Napoleon Bonaparte transformed these
revolutionary forces into an aggressive and conquering army in the late 1790s and early 1800s. He further divided
his armies into corps (two divisions of about 7,000 men each), which were virtually self-contained units, with their
own cavalry, artillery, and infantry divided in turn into brigades, regiments, and battalions. Each corps was capable of
holding its own against an enemy army until other corps arrived on the battlefield to assist them. Rapid deployment
and tactical mobility were the keys to Napoleon's string of victories over Prussia, Austria and Russia in the
Napoleonic Wars down to 1812.
After the Napoleonic Wars, little changed in infantry tactics and weaponry until the 1860s, when the development of
the breech-loading rifle vastly increased the infantrymen's rate of fire, and enabled soldiers to fire from a prone
position, making them less vulnerable to enemy retaliation. Artillery and infantry weapons were also equipped with
rifled barrels, which dramatically increased their accuracy and range. The Prussian army established a general staff
to coordinate and control the large armies which Prussia raised by conscription of most of the country's young men,
a practice which spread to all European armies, except the British, after 1870. Prussia's officer class was more
highly trained and more professional than any of its rivals. The development of the telegraph and the railway
completed the revolution in late 19th-century warfare. Armies could now be dispatched more quickly to the battlefield
with less fatigue. Prussia's victories over Austria in the Seven Weeks' War (1866) and France in the Franco-Prussian
War (1870-1871) demonstrated the crucial impact of the efficient utilization of railways by Prussia as well as of the
superior leadership and organization of the Prussian army. The other European powers thereafter adopted Prussia's
military methods. Down to 1914 there were continuous improvements in the velocity, range and accuracy of infantry
and artillery weapons. However European military leaders believed that these developments would aid the offensive,
since the defending forces would be first overwhelmed by the dense mass of artillery bombardment, then mopped up
by the advancing infantry armed with bayonet and rifle. In fact, as the American Civil War had indicated, and World
War I was to prove, the opposite was true: the defensive became almost impregnable as a result of the new
weaponry.
All the belligerents in World War I planned to take the offensive at the outset, using the vastly improved railway
systems of Europe to convey their mass conscript armies rapidly to the front. The German Schlieffen plan was the
most ambitious, seeking to destroy the French armies by a rapid offensive through Belgium and northern France to
envelop the French. The German army would then be switched to the eastern front to defeat the slowly advancing
Russians. However, as it approached Paris in late August and early September 1914, the German army was
suffering from severe exhaustion as a result of its long march from Belgium and from an increasing shortage of
supplies. (The retreating French and Belgians had destroyed their railways behind them.) The French rallied and
counter-attacked the Germans on September 6 in the First Battle of the Marne and forced them to retreat to the
Aisne. Both sides began to dig entrenchments, and eventually a continuous parallel line of defensive works stretched
from the North Sea to Switzerland. Thereafter, until 1918, despite suicidal offensives by both sides, these trench
lines could not be penetrated. The war became a long attritional struggle with the battlefield dominated by barbed
wire, heavy artillery, rifles, machine-guns, and siege weapons of all kinds, with appalling losses on both sides as a
result of the sheer intensity of firepower. In March 1918, the German army launched an offensive against the British
army using assault or storm troops to infiltrate the Allied lines before the main wave of infantry descended. This
technique achieved initial successes: the British were driven back towards the English Channel ports and the French
towards Amiens, but in August the tide turned as the Allies counter-attacked using tanks, aeroplanes, and infantry in
coordinated assaults to push the Germans back to their frontier.
With the end of the war on November 11, 1918, the European victors, Britain and France, tended to rest on the
laurels of their victories, while the Germans, in the 1930s, developed strong shock forces which combined modern
and relatively fast-moving tanks with aeroplanes and mobile infantry. The French concentrated on preparing for a
long defensive war after 1929, when they began to construct the Maginot Line— a network of fortifications and
41
entrenchments running from Luxembourg to the Swiss border which, they believed, would prove impregnable if
Germany invaded France. During this period the pace of technological change gathered speed. The primitive fighting
and bombing planes of World War I became faster and infinitely more sophisticated. Radar and improved radio
communications were developed.
World War II, which broke out in September 1939, became increasingly a war of competing technologies. Germany's
lightning victories over Belgium, Holland and France in the spring of 1940 were miracles of inspired leadership and
innovative military technology over opponents who were poorly led and badly organized. Blitzkrieg warfare—heavy
and coordinated German tank and aerial assaults on the Allied forces, in advance of the main German infantry—took
the Allies completely by surprise. However, after the entry of the Soviet Union and the United States into the war in
1941, the enemy forces were eventually ground down by the superior resources of the United States and the dogged
resistance of the Red Army to the German invader. Despite some belated German successes—in rocketry and the
jet aircraft, for instance—the Anglo-Americans were far superior in technological innovation, and their well-equipped
armies eventually overcame the fanatical resistance of the German and Japanese armies as the advancing Allies
closed in on their homelands. It was a war of unparalleled destructiveness and slaughter. European and Asian cities
were laid to waste by massive aerial bombing while millions of Germans and Russians were killed in the vicious
fighting on the Eastern Front. In this kind of warfare distinctions between civilians and combatants disappeared: all
were equally engaged in the war effort and were equally subject to death and destruction. Germany surrendered
unconditionally in May 1945 after German armies had been totally defeated by the Western Allies and the Russians.
The Japanese surrendered on August 15, 1945 after Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been totally destroyed by nuclear
weapons—an awesome example of the superiority of Western technology. This event altered the potential scale of
war forever and consequently its political and social significance.
In retrospect it may have been salutary—it was certainly significant—that the new atomic weapons were actually
used in the closing stages of the war, for this gave the world a practical example of the destructive power of nuclear
warfare, small though they were by the standards of later technology, without breaking the taboo against such use
which has so far characterized the post-war era.
If nuclear weapons have never been used since 1945, theorizing about their significance and building them into
politico-military strategies has proceeded constantly. The first reaction of theorists was that these were “absolute”
weapons that could never be employed in war as a rational political strategy. Nevertheless the United States, which
for some years had a monopoly of such weapons, proceeded on the assumption that if it were involved in a major
war with its new adversary, the Soviet Union, nuclear weapons would be used to ensure a decisive victory. The early
acquisition of nuclear weapons by the Soviet Union, however, led to an appreciation of the mutually destructive
nature nuclear war would assume. Emphasis therefore fell upon a strategy of deterrence. Some believed nuclear
weapons could deter any aggression against a nuclear power or its allies, and the United States adopted a strategy
of Massive Retaliation. Further thought inhibited such plans, and nuclear strategy tended to divide into two schools:
those who thought the mere existence of nuclear weapons would stabilize balances of power, and those who
thought that under such a deadlock “conventional” wars would resume. An intermediate view was that the smaller
nuclear weapons becoming available might permit controlled uses of nuclear weapons in “limited” nuclear wars that
need not necessarily “escalate” into all-out mutual destruction. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization built such
weapons into its strategy of flexible response in the hope that it would make the stabilizing deterrent threats of
nuclear war more credible. Soviet strategists never conceded that nuclear weapons were unusable.
Nuclear weapons had secured their reputation as unbeatable weapons of mass destruction because the marriage of
the more powerful fusion or hydrogen weapons to ballistic missiles seemed to preclude any active or passive
defence. By the 1960s the possibility of intercepting missiles gave rise to hopes of building effective antiballistic
missile (ABM) defences. This alarmed those who believed that mutual vulnerability was the essential basis of
stability. Similar fears that the deterrent forces of one power might be destroyed in a pre-emptive strike had led to
great efforts to preserve a “secure second strike” by such devices as putting weapons in hardened silos or in elusive
nuclear-propelled submarines. Also in the 1960s the idea of maintaining stability by agreed limitations upon nuclear
forces initiated the series of arms control negotiations that led to the Strategic Arms Limitation (SALT) and Strategic
Arms Reduction (START) talks and agreements.
While the superpowers and their nuclear allies, Britain, China, and France, were thus attempting to avoid nuclear
war, warfare of a more familiar kind continued on a large scale in the post-1945 era. Countries outside the
confrontation between the American and Soviet-led blocs, such as Israel and Arab states, and India and Pakistan,
fought several large-scale, so-called conventional wars involving big armoured and aerial forces. The two large
military blocs assembled around the United States and the Soviet Union found ways to fight with each other
indirectly by supporting one or other so-called “proxies”. Thus the United States, and South Korea, with lesser
contributions by other allies under the banner of the United Nations, fought the long Korean War (1950-1953) of
traditional type against Communist forces based in North Korea. The Vietnam War waged by South Vietnam and its
United States and other allies against Communist forces during the 1960s attained very large dimensions, costing
some 50,000 American lives. Much later in 1992 the United States led large conventional forces against Iraq in
defence of Kuwait during the Gulf War. A little earlier Iraq was engaged in another prolonged conventional war
against Iran, in the Iran-Iraq War.
In other places prolonged guerrilla wars raged. Guerrilla tactics, usually involving informal insurgent forces fighting
wars of attrition against stronger governmental or occupying forces, had occurred in many historical periods, but in
the latter half of the 20th century such campaigns were commonly linked to leftist, usually Communist, ideology and
given a much more explicit theoretical base. One of the most influential exponents was Mao Zedong, who used the
strategy against both the Japanese and the Nationalist Kuomintang of Chiang Kai-shek. The success of Fidel Castro
in Cuba spawned a set of Latin-American theorists. Later, both the United States in Vietnam and the Soviet Union in
Afghanistan were defeated by guerrilla campaigns. Guerrilla tactics played a major part in expelling the vestiges of
European colonial governments from their overseas possessions.One of the few successes of government forces
quelling a guerrilla operation was achieved by Great Britain against Communist insurgency in the Malayan
Emergency. This success was partly attributable to clever, patient tactics, but also to the lack of enthusiasm for the
mostly ethnically Chinese guerrillas by the Malay majority, and the promise of early independence offered to them by
the British.
A major factor in several of the defeats inflicted by insurgent forces was the effect of modern media coverage of the
wars on public opinion in the intervening powers. As the 20th century came to a close with an explosion of mass
media, particularly television, the management of news about successes, failures, and especially casualties, including
those inflicted on enemies, became an important new dimension of war.
Another qualitative change in warfare was produced by the rapid technological advances in weaponry. While there were important
advances in such fields as explosives and armour, the most dramatic effects stemmed from electronics. In particular, satellites and
other intelligence devices removed much of the “fog of war”, and simultaneously permitted much more complex and rapid
command and control of forces. At the same time electronic guidance permitted vast improvements in accuracy. This not only
made weapons more effective, but also greatly reduced, at least potentially, unintended or “collateral” damage. In an age of public
scrutiny, the opportunities for less destructive success had added significance. By the end of the century this consideration had
become so important that “non-lethal” weapons were developed with the aim of incapacitating enemy forces without killing them.
For centuries one of the most important distinctions between lesser military powers and the greater has been the capacity of the
latter to project their power over long distances by the use of effective transport and the organizational capability to use it. Longrange air and missile forces offer a modern extension of this capability to launch direct attacks from far away and large transport
aircraft, aircraft carriers and other means enable a few nations to deploy air and ground forces over long distances. By the end of
the 20th century satellite reconnaissance and high accuracy in guidance systems added a further dimension by making possible
previously unimaginably accurate and effective attacks to be launched on such key targets as headquarters and command centres
without entailing much associated damage to surrounding areas. All of this, however, demanded a high and expensive level of
technological sophistication, making capability for “power projection” a continued and important characteristic distinguishing a
few great military powers. For perhaps the first time in history much of the new military technology is led by developments in the
civilian economy rather than the other way around.
While the most technologically advanced powers are naturally able to exploit such technology best, the balance is not wholly in
their favour. Some modern devices, such as the notorious plastic explosives of which Semtex is the best known, offer many
opportunities to terrorists. Missiles and even so-called weapons of mass destruction, such as nuclear devices, and chemical or
biological weapons, were within the grasp of numerous states far from being among the most technologically sophisticated.
Moreover, the will to inflict and suffer casualties remained an important military factor which less advanced countries often
preserved more than the more socially and technologically advanced powers. Thus, a spate of new technology has combined with
new political and social circumstance to create a very fluid and uncertain balance between great and smaller powers and between
the forces of order and disorder, both within and between states. Contrary to contemporary belief, the end of the Cold War
revealed it to have been in many respects a stabilizing force. Despite the hopes that an era of peaceful relations supervised by the
United Nations would ensue, warfare continues in many places as a common instrument of policy.
NAVY
Organized maritime military force of a nation. It includes not only ships and personnel but also air and missile forces,
and shipyards and shore bases for the building and maintenance of fleets.
42
Unlike the merchant marine, or merchant navy, which is engaged in seaborne commerce, military navies are used
primarily for defence and, in former eras, conquest. In peace, navies have diplomatic functions, such as showing the
national flag, and they have often played valuable roles in exploration. In war, modern navies operate under and
over the sea as well as on its surface. They protect a nation’s coast and merchant shipping; launch attacks against
enemy coasts and commerce; reinforce allies; land amphibious forces on hostile shores; and, through the use of
aircraft and missiles, project their power into the interior of an enemy nation.
Historical Development
Sea power has helped shape history since ancient times. Organized naval forces first made an appearance in the
Mediterranean, where over the course of many centuries Egypt, Phoenicia, Persia, Greece, and Carthage
maintained navies. Although basically a land power, Rome built a fleet during the Punic Wars (264-146 BC), and
Roman sea power helped bring about the ultimate destruction of Carthage. Their earliest warships were galleys,
vessels propelled by banks of oars augmented by sail. The principal weapon with which they were equipped was a
pointed beak, or ram, used to pierce the side of an enemy vessel. This was supplemented by archers and
swordsmen who attempted to capture an enemy vessel by boarding it.
In the 7th century AD, the Byzantines developed Greek fire, an incendiary substance that was catapulted at enemy
ships to set them ablaze. Although the galley was usually confined to protected waters, the Vikings used oared
longships to swoop down on unwary targets along the Atlantic coast of Europe.
Defence of Sea Routes
The age of exploration and nationalism that began in the 15th century coincided with the development of larger and
handier sailing ships, as well as with the invention of gunpowder and instruments for navigation that enabled sailors
to venture out of sight of land. The discovery of sea routes to India, China, and the Americas in the 15th and 16th
centuries led to a growing volume of trade, and national rivalries for control of these routes created the need for
navies.
Until the end of the 18th century, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, France, and Britain were almost permanently
engaged in maritime wars to win mastery of the seas and control of the vital trade routes that linked their overseas
colonies to the parent country. Great Britain emerged victorious from this struggle and, following the defeat of the
combined fleets of France and Spain off Cape Trafalgar in 1805 during the Napoleonic Wars, remained
unchallenged for more than a century.
From Sail to Steam
Throughout the great maritime wars, into the second half of the 19th century, wooden fighting ships became larger
and more heavily armed, some carrying as many as 120 guns. An established ranking of professional naval officers
from midshipman to admiral was created. Regular government agencies such as admiralties and navy departments
were also organized to administer the increasingly complex affairs of these navies.
The Industrial Revolution of the 19th century completely changed the fighting ship. Steam replaced sail as the
means of propulsion; iron and later steel replaced the wooden hull; and long-range, breech-loading rifled cannon
replaced the muzzle-loading smoothbore gun. The invention of the mine, the torpedo, and the submarine also
revolutionized warfare at sea.
World Wars I and II
Germany’s decision to challenge Britain’s control of the sea was one of the major causes of World War I. Several
naval battles were fought, and submarines were used extensively by the Germans to attack British trade. In World
War II, the aircraft carrier, along with carrier-borne aircraft, and other military aircraft became the dominant weapons
of sea warfare. Battles were fought without the opposing fleets coming in sight of each other, as bombers and
torpedo planes inflicted heavy losses on surface ships.
As in World War I, German submarines (U-boats) were a threat to the Allied trade lifeline across the Atlantic, but
aircraft proved effective in combating them. In the Pacific, the United States Navy’s submarines took a heavy toll on
Japanese shipping, cutting Japan off from the source of raw materials. Radar and other advancements in electronic
surveillance and communications, also introduced during the war, have since advanced the effectiveness of naval
vessels.
Comparative Modern Naval Strengths
During World War II, the US Navy replaced the British Navy as the world’s strongest fleet. Until the 1960s the Soviet
Union had relied on its vast army for defence. After the end of World War II, naval warfare underwent a technological
revolution as sweeping as that of the 19th century. Nuclear propulsion, introduced in the first nuclear submarine in
1954, greatly enhances the speed and endurance of warships and submarines, which no longer have to surface to
recharge their electric batteries. Guided missiles replaced guns as the warship’s primary weapon, and the nuclearpowered strategic submarine (SSBN), fitted with nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles that can be fired
from beneath the sea, became a major component of the nuclear deterrent of the United States, Britain, and France.
In 1996 the US Navy had 8 SSBNs armed with 24 Trident C-4 missiles of range 7,400 km (4,600 mi), and 9 with 24
Trident D-5s, of range 12,000 km (7,452 mi). Britain’s first Trident SSBN, HMS Vanguard, armed with 16 Trident D-5
missiles, put to sea in December 1994; the second, HMS Victorious, entered Royal Navy service in December 1995.
The third, HMS Vigilant, after its launch in October 1995, will enter service in 1998; the fourth and final submarine,
Vengeance, which is under construction, is due to enter service in 2001. Each submarine will carry 16 Trident D-5
missiles. While the submarines and (an estimated 240) warheads for British Trident are designed and made in
Britain, the missiles are purchased from the United States.
France had 5 SSBNs with a total missile complement of 80. France, like Britain, is modernizing its sea-based nuclear
deterrent. Its lead SSBN, Le Triomphant, was launched in 1993, with the second in a series of four scheduled for
1999.
Accurate cruise missiles and torpedoes of increasingly long range and deadly potential have made large ships highly
vulnerable. Modern navies can be increasingly expected to deploy their strike power under water, with the surface
fleet concentrated on small but powerful and highly versatile vessels.
Naval Vessels, ships designed for the various operations involved in modern naval warfare. The modern navy is
made up of a wide range of increasingly specialist vessels, recognizing the rapidly changing strategy and tactics of
modern naval warfare. Although the world's superpower navies have grown from long traditions dating back to the
days of sail and oak, the role of the modern navy is very different. Until the early years of this century, a country's
navy was its primary means of projecting power around the globe—typified by Britain's largely unchallenged 150year domination of the world's oceans. Since World War II, though, long-range aircraft have the capacity to strike at
any point on the globe in a few hours; nuclear submarines carry missiles capable of devastating more than a
hundred cities in a single strike; and the pre-eminence of the surface ship has been eroded. Today's navies perform
other functions as a component of a country's military activity.
There are three major strategic uses of a surface navy: first, to seek and destroy the submarines carrying an
enemy's nuclear deterrent; second, to carry an aircraft strike force to parts of the world where large land airbases are
unavailable or inadequate; and third, to deliver and support ground troops through amphibious landings. These
distinct functions have resulted in modern navies operating in task forces rather than a combined fleet, each task
force equipped with vessels appropriate to its mission. (See Aircraft Carriers.)
The changing technology of modern war has had as great an effect on naval vessels as on tanks and aircraft. Until
the end of World War I great fleets of armoured battleships, mounting guns of up to 40 cm calibre, steamed the
oceans searching for one another. When battle was joined, the fleets would form up into lines and pound each other
at relatively close range, much as Nelson's navy did at Trafalgar.
The technological advances in armaments in World War II paved the way for today's navy. Radar meant that
captains no longer depended on a sharp-eyed look-out to spot smoke on the horizon and aimed guns more
effectively; early computers also ensured that shellfire was more accurate and more deadly; and the German V-1
was the first step towards the cruise missile, which now dominates modern naval warfare.
Today, naval warfare is much more like aerial dog-fighting than the fleet actions of the past. Ships bristle with
sensors to find their enemy and use precision guided missiles to deliver the killer blow. Ship's guns are virtually a
thing of the past, and most ships, of whatever size, mount only small-calibre, rapid-fire weapons for anti-aircraft
defence and as a last-ditch screen against missiles. Unlike a highly manoeuvrable fighter plane, a ship capable of
only 72 km/hr (45 mph) has no chance of dodging an incoming 800 km/hr (500 mph) missile launched by a
43
supersonic aircraft. Precision guidance and a warhead containing up to 200 kg (440 lb) of high explosive ensure that
a hit from a missile will certainly render the target incapable of its mission, and quite possibly sink it. The ship's only
chance is to avoid being targeted, or to destroy the missile in flight, which is no easy task. The basic tactic of modern
naval warfare is to find the enemy, and then fire missiles effectively first.
Task force vessels are also vulnerable to attack from beneath the waves, with by far the majority of submarines
being specialist hunter-killers, capable of tracking and destroying both surface vessels and the ballistic missile
submarines that are the hunter-killers' primary target. For these reasons, naval vessels are often equipped
specifically for air defence or antisubmarine warfare, and a task force will include vessels capable of each mission.
Although vessels are classified in part by their mission, the traditional classification by size remains, although the
names “cruiser”, “destroyer”, or “frigate” have very different meanings today from those that a 19th-century admiral
would have recognised.
Battleships
Few battleships exist today. In the 1980s, the US Navy recommissioned four giant Iowa-class ships, displacing
54,000 tonnes each and carrying nine 41-cm (16-in) guns. The ships were also fitted with launchers for Tomahawk
cruise missiles. Both the guns and the missiles are primarily used for shore bombardment, a role which they carried
out during the Gulf War of 1991. Despite the recommissioning of the Iowa-class vessels, the reasons for the
abandonment of the battleship remain. They are big (and hence easy to find); slow; and despite carrying steel
armour up to 40 cm (15 in) thick, they are still vulnerable to hits from missiles which can pack a punch many times
greater than the shells the armour was designed to withstand in the 1940s. Today, the Iowa class carries a crew of
only 1,800, compared to their World War II complement of 6,000. The Iowa class was recommissioned to reflect the
changing requirement of a world in which the Russian Navy threat was decreasing: the battleships were extremely
vulnerable and of little tactical use in a possible task-force-versus-task-force naval action in the North Atlantic.
Cruisers
Cruisers are large warships, displacing over 10,000 tonnes of water. Some, such as Russia's Moskva class, and
Britain's “through-deck” cruiser Invincible, carry fixed-wing aircraft; most support several helicopters for
reconnaissance and submarine-hunting. The largest cruisers of all are the Russian Kirov class, which displace
around 28,000 tonnes. The Kirov class vessels are armed both with missiles for surface warfare and an extensive
suite of antisubmarine sensors and weapons. They are designed to add a powerful punch to a carrier group or lead
an antisubmarine warfare (ASW) task force of their own. Smaller cruisers in the Russian Navy, such as the Slava or
Kara class, are once again more specialized, usually taking on either a surface warfare or ASW role. In the US Navy,
most cruisers are air defence vessels, protecting the giant nuclear-powered aircraft carriers that are the heart of a
carrier battle group. Some, like the USS Virginia class, are also nuclear-powered, so that their speed and endurance
match those of the carriers they escort. Others carry sophisticated air-to-air weapons systems. The Aegis class, for
example, has a powerful phased-array radar providing 360° coverage and is able to track up to 200 targets
simultaneously. Computers select the appropriate weapons to target from loaded missiles or Phalanx multibarrel
close-defence guns and fire automatically after clearance from the weapons officers. The system can work wholly
autonomously in a high-threat environment: Aegis gained notoriety when a vessel using the system accidentally shot
down an Iranian civilian airliner in 1988. Cruisers have a top speed of about 30 knots, and a crew of roughly 600.
Destroyers
The dividing line between destroyers and cruisers is blurred. Destroyers are usually vessels between 5,000-10,000
tonnes: however, the US Spruance-class destroyers share an identical hull design with the 9,600-tonne
Ticonderoga-class cruisers. In NATO navies, destroyers are mainly air defence vessels, although most carry some
antisubmarine capability. Russian destroyers, such as the 8,000 tonne-Sovremenny and Udaloy classes, are mainly
used for surface and antisubmarine warfare. European destroyers tend to be smaller, with Britain's HMS Bristol
displacing 7,000 tonnes and the Manchester about 5,000 tonnes. Destroyers usually carry at least one gun turret for
surface warfare and mount guns of up to 12.5-cm calibre, reflecting the occasional need to close with other vessels
in potential combat situations. More typically, though, destroyers form a “screen” around a task force, deployed
between the high-value carrier or amphibious assault ships and the most threatening air or submarine threats.
Destroyers can manage up to 35 knots, and have crews of about 400.
Frigates
Frigates are the most common vessels in today's navies. Many smaller European nations have no vessels larger
than a frigate: the ships they have are deployed as a vital part of combined NATO task forces. Most frigates are
between 3,000-4,000 tonnes. In Nelson's day, frigates were the “eyes of the fleet”: lightly armed and designed for
speed, they were intended to find the enemy's line of battle and summon the fleet to action, but avoid combat with
larger ships themselves. Today, frigates still form the outer layer of a task force's defensive screen, but most NATO
vessels are highly specialized for the antisubmarine role. However, because they can find themselves operating at a
considerable distance from the main defences of the task force, many frigates, like the British Broadsword class,
carry sophisticated antimissile defence systems for close-in use. Russian frigates, on the other hand, are almost
entirely designed for air defence or surface warfare, since the antisubmarine role is taken by larger vessels. One
exception is the 4,000-tonne Krivak class, which is now described as an “escort” vessel, since it combines ASW
capability with a heavy gun and anti-aircraft armament. Frigates cruise at less than 30 knots, and carry crews of
between 200 and 300.
Cruisers, destroyers, and frigates are the components used by Admirals when they are building task forces. Between
them, these vessels can protect the high value ships at the core of the task force from most threats, and can launch
attacks on the ships of an enemy task force. Other, more specialist, vessels are needed to round out the strategic
and tactical capabilities of a modern navy.
Amphibious Warfare Vessels
The ability to land ground troops on hostile shores has been a vital part of naval strategy since the 19th century. But
the Pacific campaign of World War II emphasized the importance of amphibious operations, and with the collapse of
the Warsaw Pact and its standing armies, it has become increasingly clear that tomorrow's armies may be needed
anywhere in the world, at short notice. Sealift is one way of getting them there—especially if local inhabitants are
unable to provide runways for air transport.
Amphibious assault ships must be equipped to carry smaller landing craft to work inshore in shallow and confined
waters; possess a flight deck capable of supporting a small fleet of helicopters for airborne troop delivery; and, most
importantly, have sufficient space to transport hundreds of troops and their equipment, which may include tanks,
artillery and vehicles. The largest such vessels in the world are the US Navy's Tarawa class. At 40,000 tonnes, they
are nearly half the size of its biggest aircraft carriers. They can carry 30 large helicopters and United States Marine
Corps Harrier jump-jets, as well as several hundred armed Marines. The Royal Navy has two 12,000-tonne assault
ships, Fearless and Intrepid, both with a large helicopter landing platform and an internal dock which can be flooded
to release landing craft from a hinged stern gate.
Mine Countermeasures Vessels
Mines are one of the most potent threats to shipping in coastal waters. These floating charges can be used to close
an enemy's ports in times of war, and most navies have a fleet of small vessels intended to combat the threat.
Minehunters seek out mines with sonar, and explode them by firing explosive charges to trigger the mine.
Minesweepers use a variety of techniques such as towed arrays that cut the mine's anchors and allow it to float to
the surface, where it can be destroyed by gunfire. Because mines are designed to be triggered by the presence of
ships, detected magnetically or acoustically, it is essential that mine countermeasures vessels be undetectable. They
are therefore small—usually under 500 tonnes—and made of glass-reinforced plastic to avoid triggering magnetic
mines. The Royal Navy's Brecon class are, at 725 tonnes and 60 m (192 ft) in length, the largest glass-reinforced
plastic vessels ever built.
Auxiliary Vessels
Most task forces operating in the deep ocean rely to a greater or lesser extent on auxiliary vessels carrying vital
supplies. Fuel tankers, ammunition ships, and stores vessels are all needed to fight an extended campaign. They
are also particularly vulnerable to enemy attack, and must be protected in time of war. This vulnerability is partly
responsible for the US Navy's use of nuclear power for many of its large vessels, freeing its biggest aircraft carriers
from the need to refuel between dockyard refits carried out every few years.
Navies all over the world are reducing the number of ships in their fleets, making each one an increasingly valuable
asset. Sophisticated computer systems and missiles ensure that each ship is more capable, more flexible, and
harder to sink. Many vessels are equipped with sophisticated electronic warfare suites to help prevent enemy
44
missiles locking on to them as targets; stealth technology is increasingly used in naval vessels. Initially, sheets of
radar-absorbing plastics were fitted to ships in service; new ships, however, are increasingly designed with sloping
surfaces to scatter the radar signals like the facets of the Lockheed F-117 stealth fighter. Lockheed recently unveiled
the Sea Shadow, an angular catamaran that resembles a truncated floating pyramid. Such a virtually invisible ship is
likely to be ideal for operations as a long-range air defence vessel, deployed in a screen far away from a task force.
Surface warships will continue to play a vital role in naval strategy for the foreseeable future.
AIR Warfare
Military operations carried out above the surface of the Earth. Tactically, these operations include support of land
and sea forces by aerial observation of the enemy; directing the fire of naval and ground weapons; and transporting
troops, equipment, and supplies. Strategically, air warfare includes combat between fighter planes and
bombardment of enemy factories, communications systems, and population centres.
Balloon Observations
The idea of warfare conducted from an aerial ship was proposed as early as 1670 by the Italian Jesuit, Francesco de
Lana Terzi, in his book of inventions Prodromo Overo Saggio di Alcune Invenzioni Nuove. A balloon was first used
for military purposes in 1794, during the French Revolution, when French army observers stationed in a balloon
directed ground fire against Austrian forces. Contemporary engravings illustrate another military application: a
fanciful proposal to employ balloons as troop carriers to invade England. In 1862 and 1863, during the American
Civil War, the Army of the Potomac used balloons to observe movements of Southern Confederate forces.
World War I
As the threat of war in Europe grew before 1914, potential German use of zeppelins (see Airship) for military
purposes led Britain's military authorities to look seriously at military aviation; early in World War I, Paris and London
were first bombed by zeppelins, which were subsequently withdrawn from use because of their extreme vulnerability.
The first United States military aircraft, built by Wilbur and Orville Wright, was tested and accepted in 1909.
The future of air warfare lay with propeller-driven aircraft, first used by the Italian army during the Italo-Turkish War of
1911-1912 to observe movements of the Turkish forces. Britain founded the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) in 1912.
When hostilities broke out in 1914, the Allies and the Germans had about 200 aircraft each on the Western Front.
The first planes were primarily scout and reconnaissance types, such as the Vickers FB5, slow and vulnerable to
anti-aircraft fire. In 1915 the French flying ace Roland Garros became the first person to shoot down a plane by firing
a machine-gun through his propeller. The Dutch aircraft designer Anthony Fokker, working with the Germans,
developed the Fokker Eindecker, using an interrupter gear to permit machine-guns permanently mounted on a plane
to fire through the propeller without damaging the blades; with this modification, and the development of speedier
planes, the era of fighter aircraft was born.
Aerial combat produced the aces whose fame became legendary: Germany's Baron Manfred von Richthofen (known
as the Red Baron), Georges Guynemer and Charles Nungesser of France, Britain's Albert Ball, William Bishop of
Canada, and Eddie Rickenbacker of the United States.
Earlier in the war, bombs were dropped by hand over the side of the cockpit. Later, heavier aircraft were developed,
and bombsights and standardized bomb fittings ensured greater effectiveness in striking military and civilian targets.
By the war's end in 1918, 254 tonnes of bombs had been dropped in raids over England, causing 9,000 casualties.
Although not to be compared with World War II statistics, these raids were psychologically and strategically
important, resulting in the diversion of aircraft from the front for air defence at home. The use of massed air power at
the front reached its peak in 1918 in the battles of Château-Thierry, St Mihiel, and the Meuse-Argonne. The effect of
raids by the RFC on the German forces in March 1918 helped to stop them breaking through.
Between the Wars
After World War I, the chief European proponents of the development of air power were Hugh Trenchard, leader of
the Royal Flying Corps and first commander of the Royal Air Force (RAF) on its creation in April 1918, and Giulio
Douhet, an Italian army officer who commanded his nation's first aviation unit from 1912 to 1915. In 1921 Douhet
proposed the idea of strategic bombing of enemy centres. As the war ended, Trenchard and the US general, Billy
Mitchell were planning extensive attacks on German war production sites and dropping soldiers behind German
lines. Mitchell's attempts to focus attention on the effectiveness of bombing by means of demonstrations conducted
in 1921 and 1923 (several battleships were sunk in these tests) led to his gaining national prominence as a prophet
of air power. His ideas bore fruit in World War II.
Between 1935 and 1936, Britain and Germany developed the prototypes of the Hawker Hurricane and Supermarine
Spitfire, and Messerschmitt Me 109 fighters; the Junkers Ju 87, better known as the Stuka dive bomber; and the
Bristol Blenheim and Heinkel He 111 bombers. The development of high-speed offence bombers during the 1930s
culminated in America's long-range Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress. Fighter aircraft did not receive the same attention in
the United States, because design modifications made bombers self-defending. The United States thus entered
World War II in 1941 with the P-39 and P-40 as its main fighter planes. In 1935 Ethiopia became the first victim of
fascist aggression when Italy attacked it using sophisticated weaponry, mustard gas, and aircraft. The war in
Ethiopia and Spanish Civil War air battles, starting in 1938, served as testing grounds for aircraft design and tactics.
World War II
World War II began in 1939 with the invasion of Poland, the bombing of its major cities, and the immediate
destruction of the Polish air force by the German Luftwaffe (air force). In 1940 the defeat of Denmark, Norway,
Holland, Belgium, and France was effected partly through air support. The Battle of Britain, from July to September
1940, concluded with the RAF Fighter Command beating off the Luftwaffe. Strategic bombing efforts to destroy
British factories, cities, and civilian morale had failed. The entry of the United States into the war began with the
Japanese carrier-borne aircraft attacks on Pearl Harbor and the Philippines. These surprise attacks quickly
destroyed most American land-based combat aircraft in the Pacific.
In the European theatre of operations, British air-defence systems were greatly aided by the development of radar to
guide interception, as well as by the inability of German fighter planes to escort their bombers because of low fuel
capacity. The development of night-fighter systems by the Germans did not begin until after British night bombers
began large-scale raids on Germany, such as the 1,000-plane raid over Cologne in May 1942. The Lancaster
bomber had a bomb capacity of 10,000 kg (22,000 lb) by the end of the war. At the same time, American bombers
were carrying out early daylight attacks on specific industrial and military targets. This Combined Bomber Offensive
included the costly Ploesti mission of August 1, 1943 (planes launched from Africa to bomb Romanian oil fields) and
the Regensburg-Schweinfurt mission of August 17 (the first large-scale American attack on Germany, launched from
bases in England).
In 1944, long-range P-47 and P-51 escort fighters became available and made it possible for bombers to reach sites
deep within Germany in relative safety. The Allies then gained air superiority by destroying German aircraft and
aircraft-production facilities. On D-Day (June 6, 1944), Allied air superiority permitted only a few sorties by the
Luftwaffe against land invasion forces.
German developments, however, indicated the future of air warfare. Their V-1, or “buzz bomb”, a pilotless jetpropelled plane carrying 907 kg (2,000 lb) of explosives, was directed mainly against civilian targets in England in
June 1944. The V-2, a true guided missile capable of carrying 748 kg (1,650 lb) of explosives some 320 km (200 mi),
was first launched in September 1944. These attacks came too late to affect the final outcome of the war, as did the
failure of the Germans to use the Me 262 as a jet fighter until late 1944.
In the early days of the war, the China-Burma-India theatre was the site of the efforts of the American Volunteer
Group, better known as the Flying Tigers. After the Japanese conquest of Burma, supply flights from India to China
over the “Hump” (the Himalaya) were as important as combat efforts. Bases in China later served in launching
bombing operations against Japan.
In the Pacific theatre, the Battle of Midway in June 1942 marked a victory for American carrier-based naval air
power. The battles for the Gilbert, Marshall, and Mariana islands eventually provided bases for bomber attacks on
Japan. The Japanese had not developed strong air defences at home, and the use of the Boeing B-29
Superfortress, beginning in 1944, caught them unprepared to detect bombers or to coordinate army and navy efforts.
On March 9, 1945, a massive incendiary raid destroyed about a quarter of the buildings in Tokyo, and on August 6, a
B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay, dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima.
The use of air power resulted in the defeat of Japan without an invasion and indicated to some that, in a future
general war, ultimate defeat or victory could be determined by air battles. Some 20 years later, in 1967, this was
45
demonstrated in the Six-Day War between forces from several Arab nations and Israel, decided in the first three
hours when the Arab forces lost 452 aircraft.
Post-World War II
By the 1950s, significant advances in missile technology had led to surface-to-air, surface-to-surface, air-to-air, and
air-to-surface missiles, as well as missiles fired from under water, being adopted by the major powers. During the
1950s Cold War interception of big nuclear bombers was a major role for fighter strike aircraft. Low-flying strike
aircraft were developed for air-to-air combat and close support of ground forces. With the development of land- and
sea-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) the importance of long-range strategic bombers lessened. The
tactical use of piloted aircraft was, however, continued in the so-called limited wars fought after World War II.
The United States entered the Korean War using World War II propeller-driven aircraft, but soon employed the US F80 and F-86 against the Russian-built MiG-15 in the first aerial combats between jet fighters. For political reasons,
any air strikes by the US Air Force and Navy were limited to interdiction—that is, the prevention of enemy
movements and destruction of their communications and supply lines by gunfire and bombing. In 1954 the doctrine
of massive retaliation suggested that in future conflicts the superpowers would not necessarily confine air strikes to
the local area of hostilities, but might strike at the enemy's homeland.
The Vietnam War
Weaponry used in the Vietnam War included supersonic jets; the Russian-built MiG-17 and MiG-21 opposed the US
F-105 and F-4. American pilots faced the substantial new menace of surface-to-air (SAM) missiles used for air
defence. Electronic technology, however, provided them with laser-guided and optically guided bombs, missiledetection and radar-jamming countermeasures, and air-to-air and air-to-ground rockets. Avionics (electronics used in
aviation) was a vital development in modern fighter aircraft. The development of aerial refuelling helped to extend the
range of combat aircraft. On the other hand, the efforts of carrier-based aircraft were largely wasteful compared with
their successes in World War II. It was in Vietnam that helicopters, initially used for observation, transport, and
medical evacuation, became a significant combat weapon, and where the World War II C-47 cargo plane was
converted into a gunship.
The Gulf War
In January 1991, the role of air power in modern warfare was dramatically demonstrated during the Gulf War.
Adhering to the military doctrine “Airland Battle”, behind-the-lines attacks were made on Iraqi command and control
centres, communication facilities, supply depots, and reinforcement forces, and air superiority was established
before armoured ground units moved in.
The initial attacks included Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from warships in the Gulf, F-117A Stealth fighterbombers armed with laser-guided smart bombs, and F-4G Wild Weasel aircraft loaded with HARM anti-radar
missiles. Timed to eliminate or reduce the effectiveness of Iraq's ground radar defences, these attacks permitted the
F-14, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, and Tornado fighter bombers to achieve air superiority and drop TV- and laser-guided
bombs. The A-10 Thunderbolt, with its Gatling gun and heat-seeking or optically guided Maverick missiles, provided
support for ground units and destroyed Iraqi armour. The AH-64 Apache and the AH-1 Cobra helicopters fired laserguided Hellfire missiles, guided to tanks by ground observers or scout helicopters. Also essential to the allied air fleet
were the E-3A Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS), and an ageing fleet of B-52Gs.
Over 2,250 combat aircraft, including 1,800 US craft, participated against Iraq's approximately 500 Soviet-built MiG29s and French-made Mirage F-1s. By the end of the fifth week, more than 88,000 combat missions had been flown
by allied forces, with over 88,000 tons of bombs dropped.
PTBT, NPT, CTBT AND ITS EFFECTS ON SOUTH ASIAN REGION
Introduction
1.
The period since 1945, when the first atomic bomb was exploded is popularly known as "Nuclear Age”. This
period witnessed the discovery of the new sources of physical power by the Scientists and Engineers and is
characterised by the production of a set of terrifying weapons of mass destruction for use against the adversaries.
2.
It is generally held that the nuclear age has brought a radical change in international affairs and has enlarged
the quantity of power. Eversince the use of atom bomb in 1945 the peace loving nations of the world have been
making efforts in different shapes to control the nuclear arms race. These efforts proved fruitless as the inhabitants of
this world witnessed 2045 nuclear explosions in 51 years including USA, Russia, UK, France, China and India.It meant
a nuclear bomb exploded after every 9 days.
Historical Background (From PTBT, NPT To CTBT)
3.
Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT). USA, USSR, UK signed PTBT in Aug 1963,also known as the Treaty Banning
Nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and underwater. The treaty did not ban the countries for
underground explosions unless they caused radioactive debris. This treaty came into force in 10 Oct, 1963.The founding
members expected that ultimately this treaty would lead to complete elimination of nuclear weapons tests. By Jan 1987 the
number of signatory states had risen to 116.But covertly this treaty was designed to ensure permanent domination position
of the existing nuclear powers. The treaty was also defective, as it did not make a provision for control through posts, spot
inspection or international bodies. It made no bid to reduce the nuclear stockpiles and merely prohibited those tests, which
could be detected. However China, France and Pakistan opposed such treaty, which did not insist on the destruction of
existing nuclear stockpiles of USA, and USSR.It has been estimated that between Aug 1963 and Dec 1986 USSR
conducted 412 tests. USA conducted 484 tests. All these tests were conducted underground. Likewise the other nuclear
powers have also persisted with nuclear explosions. Thus UK made 17 nuclear explosions (underground) during this
period. France made 91 underground and 41 atmospheric explosions while China made 7 underground and 22
atmospheric nuclear explosions.
4.
It is evident from the above that the main intention of the two superpowers has been to control the spread of
nuclear weapons as well as nuclear technology rather than to effect nuclear disarmament. This is further borne by the
fact that despite repeated resolutions of the UN general assembly calling for a comprehensive test ban, the nuclear
states have continued underground tests. The non-nuclear countries have argued that unless the nuclear powers stop
their vertical proliferation, it would not be possible to prevent the horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons.
5.
In 1985-86 the UN general assembly recommended the parties of PTBT to convert it through an amendment
into a comprehensive treaty, but judging by the attitude of the powers on the stoppage of nuclear weapons test unless
they have attained the capability of laboratory testing techniques.
6.
NonProliferationTreaty (NPT). The term "Non Proliferation" came into surface, around 1965. Initially it was used
to cover the concept of dissemination (spread of nuclear weapons by the nuclear powers) and acquisition (manufacture
or otherwise obtaining of nuclear weapons by non-nuclear powers). However in course of time it also included further
development accumulation and development of nuclear weapons by the nuclear powers.
7.
As noted above, the PTBT of 1963 was designed by the superpowers to retain their monopoly in nuclear
technology and to ensure their dominant position and they were certainly not interested in CTBT and nuclear
disarmament. In June 1965 the Disarmament Commission of UN adopted a resolution and called upon the Eighteen
Nations Disarmament Conference (ENDC) to meet and accord special priority to the consideration of the question of a
treaty or convention to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. On 17th Aug 1965 USA and USSR submitted a
draft treaty to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. The General Assembly ultimately adopted the treaty on 12th
June 1968 by 95 to 4 votes with 21 abstentions.
8.
The treaty of Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapon was simultaneously signed at London, Moscow and
Washington on 1st July, 1968 and actually came into force on 5th March 1970.In all 136 states signed this treaty by 1
Jan, 1987. According to NPT both Pakistan and India can not be declared as nuclear state, according to para 3rd of
article 9 all those states that tested their nuclear capability before Jan 1967 were known or declared nuclear states, it
included USA, UK, Russia, France and China. Treaty contained 11 articles and an elaborate preamble.
9.
Reaction to treaty.
It produced a mixed reaction. Pakistan along with India, Israel, Egypt, South
Africa, Spain, Argentina, Brazil etc. refused to ratify the NPT.Even China, France two nuclear powers refused to sign
calling it discriminatory. The NPR of 1968 also accepted the inalienable right of all parties to the treaty to develop, research
production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purpose with out discrimination.
10.
What is CTBT ? It envisages complete cessation of all nuclear testing. Unlike the NPT, the CTBT does not
distinguish between and group of countries and bans all future test explosions for nuclear weapons states and non-nuclear
weapons states. This goal was reiterated in the statement of "Principle and objects of Nuclear Non-Proliferation and
Disarmament" adopted at the NPT conference.
11.
CTBT is a brainchild of USA and other nuclear states to arrange full implementation of nuclear Non
Proliferation Treaty. It calls for imposing total ban on conducting any nuclear test by any new entrant in the exclusive
club, irrespective of the level of threshold already obtained by any United Nations Organization member. Extensive
political and diplomatic efforts were made during 1996 at Geneva and New York to get the treaty ratified unanimously
by member states through voluntary commitment. But
these efforts did not succeed. The text of CTBT calls for: a.
Ban on all types of nuclear tests including underground tests.
46
The nuclear programs of non nuclear weapons states, owing to lack of capability to conduct computer
simulation and laboratory experiments and other non-explosive tests, should be frozen at their current
levels.
c.
Complete disarmament of nuclear weapons by the declared five states at some later stage.
d.
Exchange of information between the threshold states and the declared states and inspection of
nuclear plants by international observers.
Main Objectives of the Permanent Security Council Members
12.
The main objectives are as follows: a.
Control and reduction of weapon of mass destruction.
b.
Achieved unfinished agenda of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
c.
Freeze nuclear capability of nuclear threshold states.
d.
Deny testing facility to any new nuclear aspirant state.
Nuclear Proliferation in South Asian
13.
With the Pokharan explosion and development of Kahuta project nuclear factor has become a part of the
South Asian Security threat. India's weapon oriented programs and Pakistan's peaceful nuclear response have caused
apprehensions that nuclear programs of these traditional rivals would eventually disturb the world peace. Fears have
also appeared on the Euro-American horizon about the nature of Pakistan's nuclear programs. The Islamic Bomb
allegedly being fabricated by Pakistan with the financial assistance of some Arab countries has disturbed the peace of
mind of Christians, Jews and Hindus. In view of any potential threat of Islamic fundamentalism to the so called
emerging "New world order", the US and its western allies have been denying the nuclear technology to Pakistan on
the pretext that nuclear weapons in the hands of such traditional rivals like India and Pakistan would not be in the
interest of world peace. This policy is based on dishonesty and discrimination too. India was allowed to find a soft
corner in Jewish lobby in the America in the pretext of Chinese nuclear threat. Previously it was the communist threat
which served as an excuse and now the threat of Islamic fundamentalism is being used by India as an excuse which is
more appealing to Christian and Jewish lobby.
14.
India started its nuclear programs with the assistance of France, USA, UK, Canada and the former Soviet
Union. It made a rapid progress in this field. At last India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974.Since then India has
been continuously developing its nuclear capability. In view of Indian foreign policy aims, Pakistan perceived a serious
threat to its security and decided not to be intimated by Indian nuclear blackmail. Thus Pakistan embarked upon its
peaceful nuclear program. The USA and the Western world that did not take any serious notice of Indian nuclear
explosion became restless and have been showing grave concern about the potentials and programs of Kahuta
Project.
15.
Pakistan’s stance regarding the on going nuclear arms race in the region is very clear and based on a very
sound rational. Pakistan has also proposed to control the nuclear proliferation in South Asia by adopting a just policy
equally binding for India and Pakistan. The world has appreciated Pakistan's sincere efforts but India has not
responded positively. However the fate of the proposal regarding the extension of the Pressler amendment to India
has given clear indication that USA is not willing to abandon its policy of discrimination with regard to nuclear issue in
South Asia.
The Genesis of Nuclear Program in the Region
16.
India’s foremost scientist Dr. Homi Bhaba on whose recommendations the Tata Institute of Fundamental
Research was established in 1945 took the first step towards the atomic program in South Asia. ON 15 Aug 1948 the
Indian Government set up the Atomic Energy Commission. Progress was slow at first because much prep work had to
be done, including the laying of an infrastructure and the training abroad of nuclear scientists and engineers. India was
also able to install its first nuclear reactor at Trombay (near Bombay), which did Pundit Lal Nehru inaugurate in 1957.
Pundit Nehru declared that India would never use nuclear energy for evil purposes whatever might be the
circumstances.
17.
The progress continued under Nehru and then his daughter Indira Gandhi. The Western countries and US
gave India technical assistance in nuclear reactors. The Canadians build a nuclear research reactor named "Cirrus " at
Trombay in 1960. The Americans build two reactors at Tarapur, Tarapur--Tarapur-II, and I which went critical in 1969
and were inaugurated by Indira Gandhi. India had already set up a reprocessing plant in 1964 to feed its research
reactors. Moreover, The Russians also lent a helping hand by providing India with heavy water and related technology.
The First Nuclear Explosion In The Region
18.
In 1966, Indira Gandhi became the Prime Minister of India, with her accession to power the entire complexion
of the Indian nuclear program changed. It was no longer a matter of scientific research or a quest for nuclear energy
for peaceful purposes as originally claimed by Nehru and Shastri. Nuclear power now became an instrument of power
politics to gratify those who had been dreaming of reviving the Hindu Empire of the past. Over the past several years
the Indians have been stealing Plutonium from the apparently safeguarded Canadian reactor and had accumulated
enough to carry out an explosion of respectable magnitude. When they have got enough of it to put together a critical
mass, they exploded it at Pokharan in the Rajistan desert in May 1947 It was only about 10 kilotons in terms of
fissionable material, but the political and emotional impact of the explosion was measurable in megatons. The Indians
went wild with joy. The successful nuclear explosion gave them confidence, assurance and pride. It made them think
of themselves the sixth nuclear power of the world. Mrs. Gandhi was hailed by the masses as a great leader. She
became a Devi to the Indians of whom they could justly be proud.
The Second Proposed Nuclear Explosion
19.
India went for 2nd nuclear explosion in 1996 at Pokharan (Rajistan) but could not do so due to the opposition
by G-7, USA and European Union. Pakistan also declared to embark upon the war oriented nuclear program instead of
peaceful orientation, if India resorted to second nuclear explosion. Few factors are listed below which forced India to
go for second nuclear explosion: a.
Domestic compulsion due to congress BJP Political rifts.
b.
Permanent seat in the UN security council.
c.
To judge / test the important features of the bomb and develop safety procedures for weapons.
d.
To carry out thermonuclear test at Bhaba Atomic Energy center.
e.
To reach to a secret understanding with western countries and US.
f.
Pakistan-China secret collaboration in transfer of missile technology, sale of ring magnets and
construction of missile factory near Rawalpindi.
Pakistan's Nuclear Programme.Its Imperatives and Objects
2o.
While India was moving ahead in nuclear technology, Pakistan was at a stand still on this road. Pakistan was
too involved in its internal political problems, which hardly allowed the country's borders to focus their attention on
more pressing national interests. It was not until the early sixties that country turned seriously to face nuclear realities.
The US helped to install a small Research reactor-PINSTECH, near Rawalpindi.Another small nuclear power reactor
KANUPP was installed at Karachi with the help of Canada.It was after the Pokharan explosion by India that Pakistan
turned more seriously to nuclear energy. It planned a nuclear power plant at Chashma on the Indus river, which would
provide a 600 MV of electricity and meet the sizeable proportion of national energy requirement. Pakistan signed a
contract with France for the acquisition of a reprocessing plant to be installed at Chashma as a part of power
generating system. Everything was set and the winds promised smooth sailing. But soon our dreams of energy selfsufficiency were shattered when France regretted to provide reprocessing plant under USA pressure and Chashma
project consequently came to a stand still.
b.
21.
The west was singling out Pakistan for discriminatory treatment without paying any attention to India, South
Africa and Israel. The west demanded of Pakistan's submission to the NPT and to safeguards without imposing these
conditions on others. When Pakistan protested that it was prepared to fulfil all the conditions, which were imposed on
everybody else, its protest fell on deaf ears? Canadians had out off fuel supplies from KANUPP and now US blocked
progress on the Chashma project. All this led to a clear-cut decision by Pakistan that it would not depend on the tender
mercies of the west. Pakistan would stand on its own feet, generate its nuclear energy by its own efforts, and without
asking anyone else for help. It would do so in a quicker and cheaper way, in other words take a short cut that is
uranium enrichment.
The Kahuta Project
22.
The project rose from the ashes of Chashma to assert the national will and determination to have what the nation
needed. Within a few years, un-aided by anybody, Pakistan had achieved uranium enrichment capability. It was away
ahead of India in uranium enrichment, as India was ahead in the field of reprocessing. It was really surprising the world that
a country which could not make sewing needles or even ordinary durable metalled roads was embarking on one of the
latest and most difficult technologies. Only seven countries in the world (USA, UK, RUSSIA, FRANCE, CHINA, GERMANY
and HOLLAND) possessed this technology. “It is a Herculean task and an ultracentrifuge is undoubtedly a mechanical
miracle. Naturally, the western world was fully aware of these problems and was sure that an underdeveloped country like
Pakistan could never master this technology we proved otherwise, “said Dr. A. Q Khan in his speech at an award
ceremony in Lahore in Sept, 1990 and published in Frontier post, Peshawar, 12 Sep, 1990.
23.
The Pakistan enrichment experience has demonstrated that it a nation is sincere and determined to achieve a
certain goal she would do it and will do so much sooner than anticipated. Others unattainable considered what we
achieved in five years at a much lower cost by us in 50 years.
Imperatives and Objectives
24.
Pakistan being a developing country urgently needs nuclear energy to meet its basic requirements for country's
industrial growth and economic development. According to a nuclear study conducted by the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Pakistan would need 20 nuclear power plants to meet her power needs by the year 2000. On 23 rd Sept
1982, Chairman of Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission Dr. Munir Ahmed Khan addressed the 26 Th. annual session of
the IAEA General Conference at Vienna. He said that the "use of nuclear energy in Pakistan is imperative to meet the
growing demands of power in the country”. The importance of nuclear energy for a developing country like Pakistan is also
greater because the power generated by nuclear reactors is 33 % cheaper than the power by ordinary measures. It is,
therefore indispensable for Pakistan to continue its nuclear program for peaceful purposes and to achieve the obj of
accelerating her economy.
25.
Pakistan’s nuclear break through at Kahuta caused wide spread unrest in India. Volumes are written about our
nuclear programme which some described as the Islamic bomb and others as Pakistani bomb. The hard line Press in
India, supported and instigated by the government, maintained a steady flow of propaganda to show that Pakistan was
rapidly approaching the nuclear weapon stage, if it had not reached already, and that it was either about to detonate a
nuclear device or would acquire an Israeli –like capability of having bombs, which only needed to have their wires
connected. An interesting scenario used by this propaganda lobby was that Pakistan wove soon have a nuclear bomb,
47
and when that happened Pakistan would start a war by invading Jammu and Kashmir. The vocal group of nuclear
hawks in India, therefore, suggested that India must hurry up and acquire a nuclear weapons capability in preparation
for the day when Pakistan would put this perfidious plan into operation.
26.
Far from securing Pakistan ‘s nuclear efforts as they had done in the past, the Americans, the Russians and
the Western countries denounced Pakistan’s nuclear intentions. Every now and then they would announce that
Pakistan was about to explode a nuclear device. There were even suggestions in the American media of a possible air
strike by India at Kahuta to take out the nuclear plant as the Israeli had done with the Qsiris reactor in Iraq, and not
surprisingly the Indian high command even studied the proposals. The proposal was given up not only because of
natural and military defences of Kahuta, which was one important factor, but also because Trombay and Tarapur,
among others, were well within the striking range of the Pakistan Air Force. Moreover, many Indians feared that
Pakistanis were mad enough to launch on way mission.
27.
On the other side, the Jewish lobby in the West which more or less controls the Americans media and
exercises considerable influence over the media of Western Europe, orchestrated a campaign designed to give the
image of rising nuclear peril from Pakistan which would have a devastating effects on the peace of the world. The
bomb allegedly being fabricated by Pakistan was happily flaunted as the Islamic Bomb. This created a disturbing
picture in the minds of the Christians, and later also of the Hindus, of a great nuclear on -slaught to be launched by
Islamic fundamentalists against the rest of the world with obvious shattering results. The Indians also tried to involve
USA in its campaign against Pakistan by putting pressure on the Americans to do something about Islamic Bomb. The
USA came down heavily on Pakistan. They first tried threats, then sent warnings and finally stopped aid. When
Pakistan refused to be intimated, the US turned to France to break the contract and cancel the deal for the supply of
the reprocessing plant which they did after some resistance, the Canadians had already cut off fuel supplies for
KANUPP at Karachi which they themselves had installed for us, and they did so because the Indians had stolen
Plutonium from a Canadian build reactor for Pokharan explosion. Later, USA also blocked progress on the Chashma
project. In this way, India and the West showed their reaction to Pakistan’s nuclear programme. It is the fourth time
that the USA has again stopped its aid to Pakistan under Pressler Amendment due to non-certification from US
President about Pakistan’s Nuclear programme. Previously, in 1989, the certification followed after assurances about
Pakistan’s nuclear programme given by the then PM of Pakistan.
Indian Present Position Towards CTBT
28.
India traditionally has been one of the strong proponent of CTBT but has recently taken a turn in policy, based
on afresh review of current geopolitical environment of the world. India has already carried out one underground test.
Her leadership sees CTBT against her political aspirations. Some of the reasons given are: a.
India will not be able to enjoy equal status with China and other nuclear states.
b.
Treaty forbids any new testing while it does not lay down a timetable for destruction of existing
stockpiles of nuclear states.
c.
India will never achieve a status in world policies based on her size and population.
d.
She may be asked/ forced to role back her nuclear programme and will have to open the nuclear
facilities for international inspection.
e.
The treaty should be improved as its present text has loopholes, permitting existing nuclear states to
improve the technology and quality of their weapons through laboratory tests.
f.
Though India does not wish to block the treaty, She will not sign it unless a clear timetable is included
for destruction of all nuclear weapons by nuclear states.
29.
Immediate and Long term Effects of Indian Stance.
a.
The treaty has been effectively blocked for the time being.
b.
Nuclear power states have been brought on weaker political stand.
c.
All 44 members holding Nuclear power stations have not yet signed the proposed treaty.
d.
India has achieved moral, political and ethical ascendancy over others.
e.
India may be able to bargain on the issue and get permanent Security Council Seat under give and
take arrangement.
f.
Nuclear power states may be morally compelled to shed away some or all of their stockpiles.
g.
Pakistan and India will be able to get sufficient time to complete their research work and requisite
advancement of their programmes.
h.
Nuclear race between India and Pakistan shall continue with its security and economic implications.
30.
Indian proposes to make the CTBT a genuine step towards disarmament as against the US and its allies who
are determined to turn it into an instrument of non-proliferation rather than disarmament. India has resolved to support
a truly / comprehensive treaty with no hidden agenda. This stance of India has left her in state of isolation as 173
nations including over 100 non—aligned states have abjured their nuclear option, legitimising it in the hands of the five
nuclear weapons states. India has vetoed the deliberations at Geneva and much to the annoyance of Western powers,
she has also refused to sponsor the UN resolution during its annual session of 1996.
Pakistan’s Stand On Nuclear Proliferation In South Asia
31.
The official stand of Pakistan regarding the nuclear issue is very clear and based on principles. Time and
again the national leaders have solemnly declared that Pakistan ‘s nuclear programme is peaceful and dedicated
solely for economic, technical and social development and bringing the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear
energy to its 100 million people. Moreover Pakistan is ready to subscribe to any non-—proliferation arrangements in
our region which is non-—discriminatory. Pakistan strongly supports the idea of solving the problems of proliferation on
nuclear weapons through constructive political dialogue, which addresses the security and development concerns of
the countries involved. In this connection, in late 1985, The late President Zia-ul -Haq, went so far as to make the
following proposals to India on the floor of the UN: -a.
To declare South Asia a nuclear Free Zone
b.
To sign the NPT simultaneously.
c.
To agree to an international inspection team to visit and inspect each and every nuclear facility in each
of the two countries , and
d.
To renounce mutually the use of nuclear weapons.
32.
Now most recently the PM of Pakistan has given seven proposals for non-—proliferation in South Asia These
proposals also include some points of the previous proposals given by Zia—ul—Haq. Following are the proposals: -a.
Establishment of a nuclear weapons Free Zone in South Asia.
b.
Pakistan and India should issue a joint declaration renouncing the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
c.
An agreement with India on a system of bilateral inspection of all
Nuclear facilities on reciprocal basis.
d.
Simultaneous acceptance of IAEA safeguards by Pakistan and India on
Nuclear facilities.
e.
Signing of NPT by India and Pakistan simultaneously
f.
Conclusion of a bilateral or regional nuclear test ban treaty.
g.
Convening of a conference on nuclear non- proliferation in South Asia
under the auspices of the UN with the participation of regional and
other interested states.
33.
Regarding the last proposal the PM Nawaz Sharif proposed convening of the five-nation conference to resolve
the issue of nuclear proliferation in the region. According to the proposal the USA, Russia and China to consult and
meet with India and Pakistan to discuss and resolve the issue of nuclear proliferation in South Asia. The aim of the
meeting should be to arrive at an agreement for keeping this region free of nuclear weapons on the basis of proposals
already made or new ideas that may engage .The PM also reminded that the nuclear non proliferation regime to be
negotiated during the proposed multilateral consultations should be equitable and non discriminating.
Pakistan ‘s View About Pressler Amendment.
34.
Pakistan has invariably made it clear that it regards the Pressler Law as discriminatory and inequitable in its
application, since it singles out and actually name one country, Pakistan. Moreover, it seeks to punish the country
while letting off the hook other countries like India, Israel and South Africa, which have nuclear programmes exceeding
Pakistan’s. Following is the text of the Pressler Amendment: -“ No assistance shall be furnished to PAKISTAN and no military equipment or technology shall be sold or
transferred to Pakistan pursuant to the authorities contained in this Act or any other Act unless the President
shall have certified in writing to the chairman of the committee of Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives during the year in which assistance to be furnished or military
equipment or technology is to be sold or transferred, that Pakistan does not posses a nuclear explosive
device,and that the proposed US assistance programme will reduce significantly the risk that Pakistan will
posses a nuclear device. “
USA Objectives in South Asian Regions
35.
Non - Proliferation. A major goal of USA strategic and foreign policy. CTBT have been taken up as a crusade
by US Clinton administration for establishment of New World Order (NWO). A handful of nuclear weapons states by
virtue of their existing nuclear potentials would become the arbitrators in all-global disputes. Russia still in a shambles
and China embroiled in its domestic matters, uncertain about its hydro testing facilities it would be Pan American on
large scale.
36.
US Strategic Objectives. As a result of advancement in computer simulation and the ability to conduct micro
nuclear explosions in the laboratories USA would be able to develop new nuclear weapons without underground
testing thus the treaty would in no way be a constraint to USA strategic objectives.
37.
Threshed States. India, Pakistan, Israel and South Africa would be totally retrained from joining the nuclear
club and these countries making serious efforts to acquire nuclear technology would also be totally prohibited.
USA Approach Towards CTBT.
38.
USA is using all its tested tools, which were also used during the NPT. It includes demarches, political
pressure, cajoling and coercing. Its eagerness to conclude an unconditional CTBT was hampered by France. She
carried out series of nuclear tests in the Pacific, which proved Chirac’s bid to win the race of political supremacy in the
west. China having agreed in principal to abide by the CTBT (with some amendments to its text) has conducted two
nuclear tests and fired three medium and short range missiles with plans to conduct more before Sep, 1996.
Pakistan, s Approach Towards CTBT
39.
Pakistan finds herself in a political and military dilemma. Where nuclear power status provides national
security, strong stance on Kashmir and creditability on regional and world scene, any voluntary effort to agree on
becoming the signatory of treaty will be suicidal in every sense of the word. Pakistan had initially linked her signature
with the
signing of India, which had closed all options for Pakistan after the fateful decision by India that her stance had been
modified in the rejoined contest of security and peace.
48
Pakistan has yet to develop her foreign policy objectives towards CTBT, keeping her
security aspects in view. Pakistan and India’s view converge on the verification statutes, involving on site inspection.
Pakistan’s principle position is that it would not sign the CTBT unless India does so. But if secret understanding is
reached between India and USA then what approach Pakistan will adopt? Then instead of India, Pakistan will be
singled out.
Policy Options with Pakistan
40.
Following are the policy options available with Pakistan: a.
Pakistan Govt should hold a referendum on this dire security issue to win moral ground for national
stance.
b.
Pakistan should link the signing of treaty with the following: (1)
When the Kashmir issue is resolved underUnited Nation resolution.
(2)
When India agrees to reduce the conventional weapon inventory to a certain level.
(3)
When abolition of nuclear weapons is finally undertaken by all
nuclear power states.
Conclusion.
41.
After seeing all the facts it is clear that to keep Pakistan without Nuclear weapons USA has tried all her
options. She is still trying harder to do more in this regard. God has given us this nuclear power as a gift. Now only we
require is stability in our political system and high level of patriotic feelings towards our motherland. Otherwise we
know that without political stability we will loose our political independence, which is indeed very dear to all of us.
(NIA DIARY)
1968
NPT that emerged with the efforts of USA, USSR, UK, France and China is now in Aug 1998
is signed by 186 countries.
10Sep1996
Australian resolution for CTBT was presented at UNGA & adopted by 156 states including
Pakistan. India, Libya and Bhutan voted against the resolution.
04Apr1998
Nuclear weapons states spend $ 80 million every hour to maintain
the capability
06 May 2017
44 countries including 4 threshold states i.e. Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea are
required to ratify the CTBT to enforce it. By now 149 states have signed the treaty.
06 May 2017
since 1945
USA conducted highest Nuclear explosions ---- 1032
France --- 210
UK --- 45
China --- 47
Russia
India --- 6
Pakistan --- 6
PTBT --- Partial Test Ban Treaty
NPT --- Non-proliferation Treaty
CTBT --- Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
MTCR --- Missile Technology Control Regime
FMCT --- Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty
MCRT – Missile Control Regime Treaty
06 May 2017
21Jul1998
321 monitoring stations will be established world-wide under CTBT
This 1994 article from National Geographic discusses the accident that occurred in 1986 at the nuclear power plant in
Chernobyl’, Ukraine, when it was still part of the Soviet Union. The effects of the accident were major and were noticed
in areas far removed from Ukraine. Spellings in the article may reflect conventions different from those used in
Encarta.
Living With the Monster
CHERNOBYL
By Mike Edwards
Near the end of a half-mile-long hallway connecting the four reactors of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, graph
bars and squiggles flash on a monitor.
Only a few yards away rises the concrete-and-steel sarcophagus sheathing the remains of reactor No. 4, which blew
up on April 26, 1986. An estimated 180 tons of uranium fuel remains in the rubble, scattered or fused with melted
concrete and steel. Ten tons of radioactive dust coats everything.
Sensors relay information from the debris: neutron activity, radiation, temperature. In the monitoring room the situation
report appears on the screen in traffic-signal colors. As I watched, the display was green. If the debris warms up, the
monitor shows orange. “If all the indicators turn red, it's dangerous,” shift chief Anatoly Tasenko said. “It happens
sometimes.” He added this nonchalantly, wanting me to know he's a pro.
At condition red, engineers turn on sprinklers, spraying a boron solution that reduces neutron activity and thus the
release of radiation. So far, it works.
In fact, Western as well as Ukrainian scientists believe the rubble probably can't reach a critical state—can't explode.
But no one knows for sure what's going on within the ruins of the worst nuclear accident in history.
A new study suggests that the explosion threw out 100 million curies of dangerous radionuclides, such as cesium
137—twice as much as previous estimates. The World Health Organization reckons that 4.9 million people in Ukraine,
Belarus, and Russia were affected. But the consequences, though obviously tragic in some aspects, remain unclear.
What is clear at Chornobyl, monitor Tasenko's nonchalance notwithstanding, is that the monster is far from tamed.
One major concern of the engineers and physicists watching No. 4 is the sarcophagus itself. Hastily erected after the
accident, the 24-story-high shell is leaky and structurally unsound; conceivably it could topple in an earthquake or
extreme winds. The reactor building walls, explosion damaged, are unstable too. And the 2,000-ton reactor lid leans on
rubble. “If it fell, it could shake everything loose,” said physicist Vadim Hrischenko.
In particular, it would shake loose the radioactive dust, which is increasing as the rubble breaks down. A violent
upheaval would spread the dust over the countryside—though not so widely as the initial accident, which also
contaminated parts of Western Europe.
Finally, experts know that still-working reactors Nos. 1 and 3 are unsafe. No. 2 was shut down after a fire in 1991; its
companions continue to run because Ukraine's energy shortage is so dire.
The Chernobyl (in Russian, Chernobyl) power complex, 65 miles northwest of Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, is ground
zero in a fenced 40-mile-wide circle. Cleared of its 116,000 residents, it is called the Zone of Estrangement.
My first look inside the zone was upon a landscape that fit the dolorous name. Barn doors hung open and rampant
birches grew in flower beds once splashed with hollyhocks. But a few miles farther inside, the zone seemed not so
estranged. Despite low-level radiation the 800-year-old city of Chernobyl lives. Its 50,000 inhabitants were evacuated,
but in their place have arrived about 6,000 people —guards, drivers, safety technicians, and enough miscellaneous
bureaucrats to administer a city of Chernobyl’s original size.
Featherbedding, a familiar Soviet labor practice, also prevails at the power station, where engineers admit that the
workforce—5,600—is twice as large as needed.
Some workers relish zone jobs because the tasks are challenging, and some, surely, for the recklessness of it all. I put
my driver, Sasha, in the latter category when he told me, “I've got boar steaks in my refrigerator.” To dine on Chernobyl
pig is to dine on cesium and other radionuclides that concentrate at the top of the food chain. But most people work
here because, as one woman said, “We've got to work somewhere.” In economically crippled Ukraine the choices are
few.
The bloated payrolls are one more burden for the Ukrainian government, already pressed by Chernobyl-related
expenses such as health care for victims and early retirement pensions for the “liquidators,” the hundreds of thousands
who cleaned up and raised No. 4's shelter. In all, Chernobyl’s aftermath consumes 15 percent of Ukraine's budget.
Beyond Chernobyl city, which is nine miles from ground zero, I passed through a checkpoint with changing rooms.
Workers issued me a gauze mask that would filter radioactive particles, plus shoes, pants, jacket, and gloves, so that
my own clothes wouldn't take contamination home.
Soon I stood 300 yards from the sarcophagus, listening to the agitated buzz of my radiation meter. If I stayed about
two months, I'd receive the five rem of radiation permitted yearly for an U. S. nuclear worker. Many Chernobyl workers
have received far more; to hold down the cumulative dose, most work only two weeks in a month.
The sarcophagus is the highest structure on this flat landscape, a sore thumb rising gunmetal gray at one end of the
long concrete building that houses reactors and turbines. Perhaps it stands out, too, because the landscape has been
thoroughly scalped. Cleanup workers not only trucked away contaminated soil for burial in some 800 sites around the
zone but even knocked down and interred nearby pine forests killed by radiation.
I came upon a reminder of the desperate cleanup effort—a motor pool posted off-limits with red-and-yellow radiation
signs. Armored personnel carriers bore slabs of lead that had helped protect their passengers. From tanks poked not
cannon but cranes for lifting “hot” debris. Thousands of tons of such equipment still await burial, one more task in an
onerous chain reaction triggered by the accident.
In the power station I was admitted to the control room of reactor No. 3, where white-smocked engineers watched a
wall of gauges. It is virtually identical to the control room of No. 4, where other operators triggered the 1986 disaster
while reducing reactor power.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, exonerating truths emerged. The graphite-core reactor had, as suspected,
serious design flaws. And manuals made no mention of its ironic instability at low power.
Now the rules prohibit operators from dipping below one-quarter power. Some safety improvements have been
made—but not enough, contend Western experts, who to no avail have recommended backup water systems for
cooling and such fire-protection measures as steel doors.
“It's ridiculous that the reactors are still operating,” Valentin Kupniy, deputy zone administrator, acknowledged. His
hands are tied on that; it's a decision for the Ukrainian government, which last spring announced its determination to
shut down Chernobyl—but not until other ways are found to meet the national energy shortage.
New in his job when I met him, Kupniy hoped he could do something about other problems. The first, surely, is inertia.
“Years have passed,” he said, “and we're just starting to talk about what needs to be done.” For example, dikes must
be built to block runoff from fields; it carries cesium, albeit in modest quantities, to the Dnieper River, the Kiev drinking
49
supply. To safely bed down No. 4, a super-sarcophagus needs to be built over the present one. Officials hope an
international agency such as the World Bank will provide the necessary billion dollars or so.
One day in the zone, I met some “partisans.” That's the name given to such people as Nikolai Pavlenko, one of 700
evacuees who have come home. Wrinkled and 71, Nikolai resides in the log house that he built as a young man in the
village of Opachychi, 15 miles from ground zero.
Removed to a town many miles distant, he and his wife, Katia, came back three years later. “Everybody wants his own
home,” Nikolai said simply, as if the matter needed no further explanation. Zone officials have treated the partisans
tolerantly, knowing that their families had dwelled for centuries in these now collapsing villages.
Nikolai grows potatoes and cabbages and fishes the streams. “When I need something, I just sort of help myself,” he
said, nodding toward the empty houses. Radiation? “We don't feel anything,” he said.
On the outskirts of Kiev, in a former tuberculosis sanatorium converted to a hospital for Chernobyl children, I met a
“firefly.” That's the name thoughtless kids apply to evacuees such as 15-year-old Roman, as if they might glow from
radiation.
“I have dizzy spells and headaches,” Roman told me. And: “My heart hurts.”
“It is stress,” Dr. Evgenia Stepanova, the chief pediatrician, said later. “He feels his heart racing. He can't run or play
sports.”
Roman told me wistfully, “We had a nice apartment in Chernobyl—six rooms. It was beautiful there.” Evacuated, his
family ended up in a Kiev suburb. “They gave us a three-room apartment. We've been trying to get more space
because there are three children. They keep offering lousy apartments on the first floor, where it's cold.” His father has
ulcers, his mother headaches.
Dr. Stepanova intended to calm Roman's racing heart with tender care, rest, and a nutritious diet. It's about all the
hospital can offer.
According to rumors circulating in Kiev, 5,000, even 10,000 Ukrainians have died from various ailments somehow
connected with the accident. But because records were carelessly gathered or may not exist, the medical arithmetic
can't be summed. Cautious researchers say only: “We don't know how many died.”
One of the most tragic consequences evident thus far is a large increase in thyroid cancer in children. In Ukraine,
Belarus, and Russia this once extremely rare condition totals more than 300 cases. What other afflictions radiation
exposure will bring is a matter of debate. Estimates of the future number of cancer cases range from 5,000 to 20 times
that.
I beheld one consequence in a Kiev laboratory under the microscope of Dr. Maria Pilinskaya: chromosomes, magnified
a thousand times, broken and mangled. “It is serious,” she said. “It indicates risk of leukemia or other cancers.”
She discovered this chromosome damage in blood samples from children in seven towns outside the zone. All the
towns had been sprinkled with radiation, but because the quantity was presumed not to be serious, people were not
evacuated. It is impossible to say how many people are so affected. Dr. Pilinskaya could sample only 25 to 30 children
per town; most of them were seriously damaged.
For now, according to Western as well as Ukrainian investigators, stress such as afflicts Roman is a more serious
concern than cancer or chromosome damage. The psychological and social problems stemming from disrupted lives
and radiation phobia lead to real diseases, several researchers told me, including chronic bronchitis, digestive-system
problems, and hypertension, and may compromise the immune system. This may explain why, as is reported to be the
case, the death rate among irradiated people is far higher than average. By one estimate, 70 percent higher, which
indeed would translate into thousands of deaths.
No town I saw was so full of stress—and aching hearts—as Narodychi, whose whitewashed houses stand 45 miles
west of ground zero. “Our parents and grandparents built these houses with their own hands,” a nurse said. “Let the
house be little, but it was ours. It will never be the same anywhere else.”
Narodychi is one of the many towns beyond the zone where the local fallout was not considered serious. Then thyroid
disorders appeared in children, and Dr. Pilinskaya detected chromosome damage.
So, finally Narodychi was emptying. On a somber winter day I came on a family loading furniture on a truck. “There's
no future here,” said a woman bringing out dishes. “There's no food to buy, and it's not safe to eat anything you grow.”
Across the way, an old man named Sasha, pouring generously from his flask of samohon—moonshine—said defiantly:
“The only place I'm going is the cemetery.”
No one received greater doses of radiation than the first of the liquidators, the Chernobyl cleanup army that may have
numbered as many as 750,000 workers. Some got more than 200 rem, enough, physicians say, to cause acute
radiation sickness, a breakdown of body systems characterized by nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Survivors face an
increased risk of cancer.
Other liquidators got little radiation but nevertheless presumed that they were terribly afflicted. In a group of Russian
cleanup workers tracked by researchers, stress led to suicides and alcohol abuse. “Everybody told them that because
of radiation they couldn't have a normal sex life,” a doctor said. “It's a case of bad information causing death.”
Dr. Ilya Likhtarev, Ukraine's expert on dosimetry, knows of 3,000 liquidators who received more than the “acceptable”
onetime dose of 25 rem, and of 400 who received 75 rem or more. “That multiplies the chances that they will have
cancer,” he told me.
For most of the liquidators, doses are simply unknown. These include army recruits who did some of the most
dangerous work; for example, removing debris from the reactor building roof. “They didn't have radiation badges to
record what they received,” Dr. Likhtarev said. “So their lieutenants estimated the dosage. But they were under orders
not to report a dose of 25 rem, to hide the seriousness. So the dose was recorded as 24.9. It came to be known as the
‘administrative dose.’”
Dr. Likhtarev would like to know how these men fared. “But they left the army and went back to Kazakhstan or
wherever. Some may have had acute radiation sickness and not known what was wrong.” Some may be dead.
Teeth may help scientists construct estimates of the doses that victims received, since radiation causes measurable
changes in the enamel. Researchers are collecting teeth from dentists to evaluate enamel's usefulness as an exposure
meter.
“If dose and health can be correlated, it would help in the future,” said Armin Weinberg of the Baylor College of
Medicine in Texas, a participant in one of the several Chernobyl studies now under way. “We're sure to have more
accidents.”
At Eastertide, tradition demands that Ukrainians visit their forebears. So back to the zone, with government
permission, just for a day, came busloads of villagers who had been scattered far and wide—people of communities
atomized, in more ways than one.
In the hillside cemetery in Opachychi, shawled babushkas placed tokens of remembrance—decorated eggs and
Easter cakes—among the crosses. Families sat upon the graves, the traditional communion. They ate chicken and
drank samohon, greeted friends and cousins, cursed the atom, and wept.
In late afternoon thunder rumbled and raindrops drilled the earth. The people looked about wistfully, policed the trash,
and streamed down from the hill that holds their fathers and mothers. And their hearts.
Source: National Geographic, August 1994.
Town in north central Ukraine, located approximately 130 km (approximately 80 mi) north of Kyiv (Kiev) and 20 km
(12 mi) from the nuclear power plant of the same name. On April 26, 1986, one of the four nuclear reactors at this
plant went out of control and caused the world's worst known reactor disaster to date. An improperly supervised
experiment conducted with the water-cooling system turned off led to the uncontrolled reaction, which in turn caused
a steam explosion. The reactor's protective covering was blown off, and approximately 100 million curies of
radionuclides were released into the atmosphere. Some of the radiation spread across northern Europe and into
Great Britain. Statements from the Soviet Union, to which Ukraine belonged at the time, indicated that 31 persons
died as a result of the accident, but the number of radiation-caused deaths was projected to be much higher. More
than 100,000 Soviet citizens were evacuated from areas around the reactor site, and Chernobyl' and some other
settled regions remained unoccupied one year later. Officials who were responsible for the reactor were tried in
1987, and six persons were sentenced to labor camps. The other three Chernobyl' reactors were returned to
operation that same year, and the immediate evacuation zone of the disaster was later declared a national park. In
1991 the government pledged to close down the entire Chernobyl' plant, but energy demands and economic
problems in Ukraine delayed the move. In mid-1994 Western nations developed an aid package to help close the
unsafe plant, and a year later the Ukrainian government finally agreed to a plan that would shut down the remaining
reactors by the year 2000.
Near the end of World War II, on August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States government exploded a new weapon, the
atomic bomb, over the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. A departure from conventional explosives, the
bombs used the nuclear power stored in the atomic structure of matter, rather than chemical reactions, to produce a
devastating explosion. The blast destroyed more than 10 sq km (4 sq mi) of the city, completely destroying 68 percent
of Hiroshima's buildings, another 24 percent were damaged. Nearly 130,000 people were killed; more than 60,000
were incinerated almost instantaneously in a tremendous fireball. In Nagasaki one-third of the city was destroyed and
nearly 66,000 people were killed.
Over the next 50 years, nuclear weapons were developed that dwarfed the 1945 bombs in destructiveness, and major
military powers stocked their arsenals with these arms. Yet during those years, nuclear weapons were never again
used against human targets. The world learned to live in the shadow of these powerful weapons. In the process, the
atomic bomb became a symbol of fear, achievement, and even amusement—a complex and contradictory presence,
permanently tied to the fate of humanity.
NUCLEAR BOMBS
Nuclear weapons are the most powerful and destructive explosives in existence. Modern nuclear weapons, which may
have the power of several million tons of TNT, generally have 8 to 40 times more explosive power than the “Little Boy”
and “Fat Man” bombs that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The devices shown here are nuclear bombs
used in periodic exercises of the United States Air Force (USAF) strategic air command.
Hiroshima, city on southwestern Honshu Island, Japan, capital of Hiroshima Prefecture, at the head of Hiroshima Bay.
The city was founded in 1594 on six islands in the Ota River delta. Hiroshima grew rapidly as a castle town and
commercial city, and after 1868 it was developed as a military center. On August 6, 1945, during World War II (19391945), the first atomic bomb to be used against an enemy position was dropped on the city by the United States Army
Air Forces (see Nuclear Weapons). The Supreme Allied Headquarters reported that 129,558 people were killed,
injured, or missing and 176,987 made homeless by the bombing. (In 1940 the population of Hiroshima had been
343,698.) The blast also destroyed more than 10 sq km (4 sq mi) of the city, completely destroying 68 percent of
Hiroshima's buildings; another 24 percent were damaged. Every August 6 since 1947, thousands participate in
50
interfaith services in the Peace Memorial Park built on the site where the bomb exploded. In 1949 the Japanese
dedicated Hiroshima as an international shrine of peace.
After the war, the city was largely rebuilt, and commercial activities were resumed. Machinery, automobiles, food
processing, and the brewing of sake are the main industries. The surrounding area, although mountainous, has fertile
valleys where silk, rice, and wheat are produced. Population (1990) 1,085,705.
This National Geographic article records some of the perspectives of survivors on the 50th anniversary of the World
War II bombing of Hiroshima. The impact of the atomic blast on individual lives is documented, as are the modern
city's efforts to deal with reminders of the past. This account mentions that Japan surrendered only nine days after the
bombing on August 15, 1945, although the emperor had formally agreed to terms the previous day.
Hiroshima:
Up From Ground Zero
By Ted Gup
It is on the third floor of Hiroshima's Funairi Mutsumi Nursing Home that I first hear the name of Akiko Osato, spoken
by her 85-year-old mother, Shima Sonoda. A frail, dignified woman with close-cropped black hair, she closes her eyes
to remember that distant summer morning in 1945.
Shima, a widow, had asked her three elder children to mind the stationery shop in the front of their wood-frame house
while she and Akiko, her four-year-old daughter, readied a wartime breakfast of soybeans, radish leaves, and rice
porridge. Shima did so with a sense of relief. A few minutes earlier the air-raid sirens had sounded the all clear, and
she and the children had climbed out of their makeshift bomb shelter, a shallow pit behind the house. So far Hiroshima
had been spared the firebombings that had disfigured Tokyo, Yokohama, and other cities. It was as if Hiroshima
enjoyed some special immunity.
On that morning, as on so many before, Akiko pleaded with her mother to open the coveted tin of tangerines that had
been set aside in the event of an aerial attack. “No,” Shima told her daughter, “we must save the tangerines.”
At the moment the atomic bomb exploded, Akiko was in her mother's arms, less than a mile from ground zero.
Tears run down Shima's wrinkled cheeks as she recalls her children digging her out of the rubble. Her eyes are tightly
closed, her hands uplifted as if in supplication. “I prayed, ‘I have four children, please save me!’ and I heard the
command ‘Stand up!’ It was the voice of my long-dead husband.” When she was free they began a frantic—and vain—
search for Akiko before the firestorm reached their neighborhood, forcing them to flee barefoot toward the Ota River.
Like so many, Shima has always wondered why she lived and her daughter did not. Not a single photograph of Akiko
survived, but Shima still carries her image everywhere, just below the surface, like the tiny shards of glass embedded
in her scalp. “My greatest regret,” she says, “is that I didn't let my daughter have the tangerines.” And so every morning
the mother kneels at the Buddhist altar by her bed and offers up a can of tangerines to the soul of her lost daughter.
For Shima Sonoda and countless others in Hiroshima and throughout the world, 1995 is an anniversary of special
significance—the 50th year since the epochal first use of an atomic bomb. The commemoration of this event provides
a somber occasion to take stock of losses. It also gives an opportunity to explore the rebirth of Hiroshima, which
stands at once as a symbol of humanity's capacity to destroy and of its indomitable will to rebuild.
Shima Sonoda is one of the 100,000 hibakusha—bomb survivors—living in Hiroshima today. An ever shrinking
minority in this city of more than a million, they mingle with the young and with newcomers drawn to a vibrant
metropolis, a place almost entirely devoid of physical scars.
“Have Fun in Hiroshima,” invites a brochure put out by city boosters, a collage of images of enthusiastic Westerners
amid red azaleas, bottles of sake, fireworks, smiling Japanese children giving the peace sign. “Hiroshima,” these
promoters write, “has so much to offer: beautiful parks, ancient shrines, engaging museums, breathtaking landscapes,
and exciting nightlife.”
Yet for all this, ultramodern and full of promise as the city surely is, it is something else too—a place of deep and
abiding sorrow. Indeed it would not be an exaggeration to say that half a century after the bomb, Hiroshima is not one
city but two: one that can never forget and the other that can never know.
For an entire generation of Japanese and Americans the circumstances of 50 years ago are remote. Some find it hard
to imagine how the decision to bomb Hiroshima could have been made. But the world was at war, and the A-bomb
was said to be a way to hasten an end to the conflict, thereby saving the lives of American servicemen who might
otherwise have been doomed in a protracted invasion of the Japanese homeland. Japan's capitulation on August 15,
1945—nine days after the bombing of Hiroshima and six days after the bombing of Nagasaki—confirmed the efficacy
of the decision.
Though I had never been to Hiroshima, it felt as if I were returning. As a boy I had read Hiroshima, John Hersey's
account of the bombing, and I had always wondered what became of the city and its people. I was not alone. Last year
more than 65,000 Americans visited Hiroshima.
Like many of them, I am drawn to ground zero, a narrow street in the heart of the city where I stand before a simple
red granite monument festooned with thousands of tiny paper cranes folded by schoolchildren. (In Japan the crane is a
symbol of longevity.) Behind me shoppers sweep past, oblivious of the monument and its brass engraving of a city
flattened by the bomb. In front rises the rebuilt Shima Surgical Clinic, where some survivors come for treatment. I look
up into a cloudless sky and feel, with a shiver, 50 years gone.
August 6, 1945. Eight-sixteen in the morning. Nineteen hundred feet above Hiroshima a single uranium bomb dropped
from the B-29 Enola Gay detonated with the force of 15,000 tons of TNT. Where I stand, the temperature rose almost
instantly to 5400°F. Then came the shock wave, firestorm, cyclonic winds, and radioactive rain as black as ink. Some
80,000 men, women, and children died. Among them were at least 23 American prisoners of war and thousands of
Koreans whom the Japanese had forced into wartime labor. Nature compounded the misery when scarcely more than
a month later the Makurazaki typhoon raked Hiroshima.
By the end of the year the city's death count had reached 140,000, as radiation, burns, and infection took their toll. The
population then stood at 137,000, down from a wartime high of 419,000. Seventy thousand buildings—hospitals, police
stations, post offices, and schools as well as houses and apartments—had been reduced to rubble. Survivors
scanning the atomic wasteland concluded that no plant would take root in the poisoned earth for 70 years or more.
Yet even that first spring the blackened stumps of camphor and willow put out new growth. Buds and blossoms
reappeared, offering hope. Shacks sprouted along the Motoyasu River. Limited trolley service boosted morale, despite
the fact that most residents had no place to go. A black market flourished.
Although Americans with the Allied Occupation Force provided technical help, financial assistance for reconstruction
was not forthcoming: The United States was committed to helping rehabilitate its allies in Europe. By November 1946
plans had been drafted for new roads and parks. Schools were open again, albeit in temporary buildings, and movie
theaters and dance halls were doing a brisk business. By 1953 the water and sewage systems had been fully restored.
A decade later Hiroshima had grown to half a million people.
Today lush pink and white oleanders line broad avenues, and stately sycamores and ginkgo trees extend their shade
to pedestrians wilting in the August heat. Out of the ashes has arisen a fully modern city with an unwavering sense of
destiny. Before the bomb Hiroshima had been a seat of Japanese militarism; its port, bristling with wartime industry,
had dispatched relentless invasions, notably of China and Korea. The new Hiroshima is a self-proclaimed City of
Peace, with a towering skyline, cosmopolitan shopping arcades, and more than 700 manicured parks. Its port sends
out to New York, Shanghai, and London not soldiers but the latest in consumer and industrial products. Last year the
city was host to the Asian Games, marking its coming of age.
Hiroshima stretches from the Inland Sea across the broad plain of the Ota and up into the foothills of the forested
Chugoku Mountains. It occupies the site of a castle town that emerged in the late 1500s, replacing earlier farming and
fishing villages in the Ota Delta.
On the southern side of the city, near the sea, rises a single peak, Ogonzan, with a serpentine road to its summit.
From an overlook where vendors hawk souvenirs, I scan the spreading quilt of neighborhoods and commercial areas.
To the south the gargantuan headquarters of Mazda, one of the world's largest auto production sites, can turn out
830,000 vehicles a year. Beyond my sight to the southwest is another behemoth, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.,
which produces bridge girders, boilers, turbines, and machinery used in manufacturing iron and steel. When the bomb
fell, this plant was part of the Mitsubishi powerhouse of wartime shipbuilding and machine manufacturing—manned in
part by forced laborers from Korea.
It is not only heavy industry that busies the city. Workers turn out soccer balls, intricately carved Buddhist altars,
elegant fude, or writing brushes used for calligraphy, even sewing needles, an item that has been made here for more
than 300 years.
When I first arrived in Hiroshima on the highway from Osaka, I searched the skyline for the skeleton of the Industrial
Promotion Hall—better known as the A-bomb Dome—which I had expected to be a prominent landmark. But my eye
was drawn to the familiar signs of home, a rotating golden arch and a blazing Coca-Cola sign. Overhead zipped cars
of the ASTRAM, Hiroshima's ultramodern electric transit system. In the distance a gigantic bowling pin loomed amid
convenience stores and shopping malls.
I drove along one of the six deltaic fingers of the Ota, on whose banks the dying had once clustered, salving their
burns in the cool water. On these same banks joggers now weave among luxuriant public gardens. On one street
corner I spotted a National Football League shop, with a jersey of the Kansas City Chiefs and a poster of ace
quarterback Joe Montana displayed in the window.
Finally I reached the A-bomb Dome, a puny structure of twisted concrete and steel that resembles a parasol stripped
of its cover by a gust of wind. As one of few buildings near ground zero to have partly withstood the blast, it is
cordoned off, preserved for all time as a cautionary statement, a plea for restraint in a nuclear world.
Scientists who first came to Hiroshima to study the effects of the bomb plotted concentric circles of destruction from
ground zero. Today different circles mark the lingering impact—rings of memory spreading out from August 6, 1945.
Japan claims some 333,000 registered atomic bomb survivors, including those from Nagasaki. In Hiroshima, many of
the 100,000 hibakusha cling tenaciously to their memories.
Take Yoshiki Yamauchi. Yamauchi is one of Hiroshima's estimated 5,000 A-bomb orphans, a hundred of whom were
brought to the island of Ninoshima, 20 minutes away from the city by ferry. Over the years Ninoshima came to be
known as the “island of boys.” A peaceful spot only 15 miles in circumference, it strikes me as an oasis: Shiro palm
trees and Susuki grass fringe the shore, giving way to the verdant slopes of a lone peak, Little Mount Fuji.
By midmorning, when I meet Yamauchi at Ninoshima Gakuen, the school that now occupies the orphanage where he
grew up, the sea breeze barely nudges the summer heat. Yamauchi works as the school's maintenance man. Wearing
loose-fitting green trousers, he is a muscular 60-year-old with a bull neck and stringy hair slicked down with sweat. But
his manner is childlike.
That morning in 1945 his widowed mother had boarded a trolley for the ill-fated Industrial Promotion Hall. Yamauchi,
who was then ten years old, was standing near the Hiroshima railroad station when the bomb went off. Even now
Yamauchi puts out his hands to break the fall in his mind's eye. Sand filled his mouth. Heat seared his limbs, and he
leaped into one of the tubs of water for use in an emergency fire.
His memory of the turmoil that followed is hazy. Days later, in the confusion, he became separated from his sister. It
would be 29 years before they found each other, following her emotional appeal on television.
51
After the blast he wandered the stricken city, scavenging for food and earning what he could by shining shoes. He
slept in empty train cars. One day in the fall of 1946, he and other parentless children were rounded up by the police
and brought to the orphanage. Yamauchi sets a dog-eared photo album on the table in front of me and opens it as
reverently as if it were an ancient scroll. “There I am,” he says simply, pointing to a snapshot of a boy with a baseball
bat across his lap.
“I wanted to get married when I was 25 or 30,” he continues. Then, as if to ask, “What woman would have me?”
Yamauchi shows me the scar from a fibrous tumor that was removed from his leg. I am reminded of Philoctetes, the
archer in Greek mythology whose shipmates abandoned him on an island because they were repelled by a wound that
would not heal. The difference, though, is that Yamauchi's continuing exile is in some measure self-imposed.
These days he often plays softball with the schoolchildren, many of whom are mentally retarded or disabled. “I envy
these children because they have a parent,” he says. “I am an orphan. No one ever came to visit me with a box or a
gift.”
When it is time for me to leave, Yamauchi insists on showing me the way to the ferry. He pedals his bicycle furiously,
keeping well ahead of my van on the twisting road. At the harbor turnoff he waves good-bye, smiling for the first time,
much like a lonely child who at last has had a visitor.
Even hibakusha who sought to integrate themselves into society often concealed their identities as bomb survivors.
Many employers refused to hire hibakusha because they were prone to cancer and other ailments or because they
suffered from exhaustion and depression. They also carried a social stigma. People went out of their way to avoid
marrying either hibakusha or their children, for fear of genetic abnormalities induced by radiation.
It was not unusual for some parents to hire private investigators to find out if prospective in-laws were hibakusha. And
although researchers at the city's Radiation Effects Research Foundation in Hijiyama Park insist they see no evidence
of intergenerational effects of radiation, they concede that current analytical techniques are not refined enough to
detect variations. The foundation is therefore collecting cells from a thousand hibakusha families and preserving the
samples in huge stainless steel vats of liquid nitrogen, to be thawed sometime in the future, when more precise
methods are at hand.
Furtherance of peace is a recurrent theme in Hiroshima. People like Akihiro Takahashi, who was a 14-year-old
schoolboy at the time of the bomb, now lecture on the subject as part of an outreach program in a building in Peace
Memorial Park, bordered by the hundred-yard-wide expanse of Peace Boulevard. “We have to tell what happened,” he
said. “This must be handed down from one generation to the next.”
Takahashi and those like him are on a mission to bear witness in the name of peace. They constitute a powerful lobby,
whose influence gives city politics a global reach. No nuclear test anywhere in the world is reported without a telegram
of protest signed by the mayor of Hiroshima; at one time or another the leaders of China, France, the U.S., and the
former Soviet Union have all received such telegrams. And in the heart of the peace park a flame will be kept burning
until the world is free of nuclear weapons.
Peace education is an integral part of the curriculum in public schools throughout the city, and schoolchildren on field
trips are frequent visitors to the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. “I want to make Japan a peaceful country,” said
11-year-old Maho Shichijo, pulling up her Mickey Mouse socks.
When I met Maho, she was standing with her mother in the playground of the Fukuromachi Primary School, where 300
children had died in the nuclear inferno. Maho has read more than ten books on the bomb, written school reports about
it, and badgered the custodian of her apartment building, a hibakusha, to tell her all about how he survived. Her
mother, Tomoko Shichijo, who moved here from Nagasaki, nodded approvingly at this interest. “This is the best peace
education. To know the reality. If we lived somewhere else, we would never feel it firsthand.”
I met another newcomer, Sakiko Ume, a housewife from the island of Shikoku, who also told me that to be in
Hiroshima is to feel its past. “On the surface,” she said, “Hiroshima looks bright, but deep inside it's sad.”
At no time is the sadness more palpable than on the day of remembrance. Early in the morning of August 6, 1994, I
join thousands of hibakusha gathering in the peace park, a triangular swath of green between the Honkawa and
Motoyasu Rivers. Here the idea of peace is enshrined in numerous monuments—among them fountains, clock tower,
bell, and cenotaph. The throng presses toward the altar at the Cenotaph for the A-bomb Victims, in front of which rises
a mountain of flowers. Every few minutes attendants cart off armfuls of bouquets to prevent the mound from collapsing
under its own weight. Mourners, many dressed in black and clutching prayer beads, drift like apparitions through a
white veil of incense. “Forgive me! Forgive me!” sobs one aged woman, dropping to her knees. Is she, perhaps,
blaming herself for having survived?
Behind a sign that reads A-bomb Survivors (With Invitations), we take seats to hear the remarks of dignitaries. At
precisely 8:15 there is a minute of unearthly silence. I am aware only of the sound of cicadas. The Peace Bell tolls, and
a cloud of doves is released beside the cenotaph. The flutter of their wings fills the void left by 50,000 silent prayers.
In the Hondori Shopping Arcade, 200 yards or so from ground zero, it is business as usual this morning at Cats
Pachinko Parlor. Cats is a hot spot for young people, who congregate here to while away the hours amid a barrage of
flashing lights and throbbing music. Part pinball, part slot machine, pachinko is a mesmerizing game: Every one of the
scores of machines is in play. Drawers full of silver balls, representing winnings, are neatly stacked on the floor.
Outside, knots of youths trade compact discs and take stock of one another's outfits.
On the opposite side of the arcade, in a trendy clothing boutique, Mieko Nagafuji folds shirts to the beat of the Rolling
Stones. “I never think about the A-bomb,” says Mieko, a pixieish 21-year-old wearing a necklace of pewter beads.
For her, World War II must seem as remote as the time of the shoguns. Although she has lived in Hiroshima for three
years, she knows no hibakusha and has never set foot in the peace museum. Even Peace Memorial Park, where the
anniversary observations are still going on a few blocks away, is merely a romantic retreat: She and her boyfriend take
quiet walks there on Sunday afternoons. I ask Mieko if she knows when the bomb fell. “I learned it in school,” she says,
blushing, “but I've forgotten. Was it 1935?”
Enough time has passed now for Hiroshima to feel at ease with its new affluence. Indeed the city is something of a
sybaritic haven, celebrated for its fine sake and delectable oysters, best eaten in winter.
Nightlife centers on the downtown districts of Nagaregawa and Yagenbori, warrens of narrow streets and alleys awash
in the neon light of more than 3,500 bars, restaurants, and discos. In Yagenbori my interpreter, Kunio Kadowaki, and I
duck through cotton curtains into a smoky little café. We join patrons, many of them regulars, who come here to
indulge their taste for grilled octopus from the Inland Sea, marinated chicken on a skewer, or crispy fried lionfish. Late
into the night, as the sake and beer flow, the level of laughter rises. Smoke from the grill and the ubiquitous cigarettes
forms a thick cloud. This is the other Hiroshima, vital yet relaxed and congenial.
Many transplants are drawn to this city by its proximity to the sea and to ski resorts. Yukihiro Masukawa makes a tidy
profit selling sportfishing vessels, which well-to-do clients ply in the Inland Sea in pursuit of bonito, mackerel, and
marlin. In his office by Hiroshima Bay we sip barley tea with Koichi Aoki, owner of a computer-supply business. Aoki,
46 and already silver haired, gazes out the window at his $500,000 boat, Marici, in dry dock for cleaning. “That's like
my religion,” he laughs. Above us, tacked to the ceiling, is a white sheet with the inked outline of one of Aoki's recent
catches—a 440-pound marlin. His retriever, Tabasa, curls up at his feet. “Life is good,” he says, patting his ample
belly.
Even for those of ordinary means Hiroshima offers abundant diversions. Just north of the A-bomb Dome is the 32,000seat baseball stadium, home to the Hiroshima Toyo Carp. Every season more than a million fans show up for the
games. Among those they come to see is a 31-year-old American named Luis Medina, who at six-foot-three dwarfs his
Japanese teammates. Medina, a first baseman, is the sole Yank on the team; only three foreigners are allowed under
the rules. He once played for the Cleveland Indians and has moved 37 times in the past decade.
After a stint in the outfield shagging flies in hundred-degree heat, Medina decides to take a break. He stoops to clear
the dugout's ceiling. “Yesterday I hit my head four times,” he says with a grin. He is happy to be a Carp—not only
because he signed a lucrative two-year contract but also because he and his wife could unpack their bags at last.
During games Medina is coached through an interpreter, but the fans don't mind. Sometimes they jump to their feet,
yelling Med-in-a! He admits to being moved.
“Here, in the place we bombed 50 years ago, it sort of freaks me out to get up at bat and see there's somebody out
there, a Japanese, waving the American flag. It's a really good feeling.”
When I met him Luis Medina had not yet joined the 1.5 million people who stream through the halls of the peace
museum each year. Half a million of them are students, and all but 80,000 are Japanese. On my first visit I stood
behind Yoshihisa Hirano and his daughter, Mariko, and son, Hiroyuki.
“It's scary,” said Hiroyuki, transfixed by a diorama depicting a woman, a girl, and a boy picking their way through a fireravaged landscape. “I think all nuclear weapons should be abolished as quickly as possible,” added his father, who, it
turned out, is a nuclear-reactor operator with the Chugoku Electric Power Company. His reactor is one of two that
supply a sixth of the area's electricity.
Many visitors record their impressions in a book on a table near the museum exit. American remarks vary. Some
wonder how many more Japanese civilians might have perished had the war continued. “Maybe the Japanese should
visit the Pearl Harbor Museum,” suggested a U.S. marine. Another American wrote, “I never really knew the full effects
of the bomb until now. I am sorry.”
In the basement of the museum complex, stretching along the length of the wall, a catalog of index cards is displayed
every August. Each card has the name of someone who died as a result of the bombing. The clerk offers to search out
one name for me. I choose Akiko Osato, the girl remembered daily in her mother's prayers. Minutes later he returns
with a pink card. It has Akiko's name on one line, and on the next, under the heading “cause of death,” is the word
“crushed.” On the line below that is the name Yoshiharu Agari—apparently the man who found Akiko's body.
I cannot bring myself to tell her grieving mother about the card. Her pain still seems too deep.
Healing, for many, comes with faith, and that is the concern of Shoin Aso, a Buddhist priest at the medieval Fudoin
Temple. Except for a few lost roof tiles, this national treasure, which is located on the northern fringe of the city,
escaped the bomb. In August, during the season of remembrance, Aso invites the grieving to participate in the
traditional Bon dance, through which the faithful welcome the souls of the dead and send them on to a place of greater
peace. Aso hears many stories of loss. “Year by year we forget the grief, but the guilt of surviving doesn't disappear
even as the years pass.”
On a hill overlooking the temple are the graves of some of those who died in the bombing. Many of the funeral urns
contain only rocks, because no remains of the deceased were ever found.
The extent of the losses—in some instances the elimination of entire bloodlines—explains why the past still hangs in
the air over the City of Peace. But, Aso insists, “People shouldn't think Hiroshima is a sad or sorry town. We should
overcome self-pity. We cannot live unless we think about the future. Hand, eye, and nose are all forward looking.”
Source: National Geographic, August 1995.
Nagasaki, city, Japan, western Kyushu Island, capital of Nagasaki Prefecture, at the head of Nagasaki Bay. Nagasaki
Bay, about 5 km (about 3 mi) long and sheltered on all sides, is one of the best natural harbors of Japan. The city has
important coal-mining and fishing industries, shipyards and steelworks, and plants manufacturing electrical equipment.
It is the site of Nagasaki University (1949). On August 9, 1945, during World War II, three days after Hiroshima was
destroyed, a U.S. Army Air Force plane released an atomic bomb on Nagasaki. About one-third of the city was
52
destroyed, and some 66,000 people were killed or injured. A memorial now marks the location over which the bomb
exploded. Population (1990) 444,599.
------------------------------------------------------------REGIONAL ORGANISATIONS
ARAB LEAGUE
Feb98
Secretary General -- Ismat Abdul Majid
10Feb98
All Arabs countries are under debt by $ 136 billion and there is an
increase of $ 50,000 per minute. By the end of this century this figure will reach to $ 262.8
billion. Reasons are: 1. Import of food grains ( Arabs imports 60% of food grains )
2. 7% of Sugar
3. 30% meat
4. Misc. food items worth of 100 million tons
Where as Arabs has got at their disposal following sources: 1. Petroleum deposits ----- 62%
2. Gas----20%
3. Phosphate----50%
4. Olive Oil---15%
5. Gum
75%
6. Cotton
8%
10Feb98
FDI in Arab countries is almost 1% only. Their maximum
investment is to purchase Arms which they purchase 40 % of total
World production.
6-May-17
Total Membership --- 22
AFRO-ASIAN MOVEMENT
1954
Bandung Conference at Indonesia. Attended by Chu En Lai,
Nehru,
1956 Movement dissolved due to Indian attitude. Last summit held at Algeria
ASEM-Asia
Europe
Meeting
03Apr1998
members (25)
1. Brunei
2. Indonesia
3. Japan
4. Malaysia
5. Philippines
6. Singapore
7. South Korea
8. Thailand
9. Vietnam
10. –25 All members of European Union (15 States)
04Apr1998
ASEM – 2 was held at London
06Apr1998
Future contender for the membership are
1. Pakistan
2. India
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
Their considerations have been postponed till the year 2000.
APEC --- ASIA PACIFIC ECONOMIC COUNCIL
16Sep1998
Membership ---- 18
ASEAN – Present And Future Prospects
Introduction
1.
The Association of South East Asian Nations is regional organisation formed by the governments of Indonesia,
Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand through the Bangkok Declaration, which was signed by the foreign
ministers of ASEAN countries in Aug 1967. Brunei joined in 1984 with Laos, Papua New Guinea and Vietnam had
observer status. Later Vietnam became the full member of this organisation. Now in 1997 Burma, Laos and Cambodia
have been inducted as new members to this organisation, against the protests made by European Union and USA
regarding the military regime of Burma and her human rights records.
2.
The leaders of these countries felt the need of the organisation because the situation in Vietnam as a result of
US imperialist action, political crisis in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos and Burma convinced them that their interest could
be the best served only if they united. The end of confrontation between Indonesia and Malaysia and the strong antiChinese stance of military regime of Indonesia also facilitated the creation of this organisation However, Burma and
Cambodia did not join the organisation on account of its anti-Chinese stance.
Organisation
3.
ASEAN as having now ten members and one observer (Papua New Guinea) the highest authority in ASEAN
are the heads of government of the member countries who meet as and when necessary to give necessary directions
to ASEAN. The highest policy making body is the meeting of foreign ministers commonly known as the Annual
Ministerial Meeting, which convene in each of the ASEAN member countries on a rational basis in alphabetical order.
The standing committee comprising the foreign minister of the country hosting the ministerial meeting in that particular
year and the ambassadors of their member countries, carries out the work of Association in between the Ministerial
meetings and handle the routine matters to ensure continuity and to make decisions based on the guide -lines or
policies set by the Ministerial meetings and submit the considerations of the
foreign ministers of all reports and recommendations of the various ASEAN committees. There are five economic
committees under the ASEAN economic ministers and five non-economic committees that recommend and drop
programmes for ASEAN co-operation. These committees are responsible for the operation and implementation of
ASEAN
projects in their respective fields. Each ASEAN capital an ASEAN National Secretariat. The central secretariat for
ASEAN is located in Jakarta, Indonesia, and is headed by a Secretary General, a post that revolves among the
member states in alphabetical order every three years. Bureau directors and other officers of the ASEAN Secretariat
remain in office for three years. The ASEAN also has a permanent Secretariat with its headquarters at Jakarta
(INDONESIA). The secretariat was set up in 1976, in addition to these organs the ASEAN has one permanent
committee with headquarters in Singapore and ten special committees, viz., Navigation, Trade and Tourism;
Industrial Mineral and Energy; Food, Agriculture and forestry; Transportation and Communications; Finance and
Banking; Science and Technology; Social Development Cultural and Information and Budget. In addition there are
eight ad hoc committees.
Objectives
4.
The main objectives are: a.
To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development
b.
To promote active collaboration and mutual assistant in matters of common interest in the economic,
social, cultural, technical, scientific and administrative fields.
c.
To ensure the stability of south-east Asian Region and
d.
To maintain close co-operation with existing international and regional organisations with similar aims.
Principal projects concern economic co-operation and development with the intensification of inter
ASEAN trade and trade between the region and the rest of the world. Joint research and technological
programme co-operation transportation and communication of tourism and South East Asian Studies
including cultural, scientific, educational and administrative changes. The ASEAN Free Trade Area
was set up by all member states I Oct., 1991 with the aim of creating a common market in 15 years,
with a common tariff regime for manufactured and processed agricultural good as a first step. In
Oct.1992, it was agreed that common effective preferential Tariff, (CEPT) would be put up in to effect
on 1st Jan 1993 with progressive Tariff reduction.
e.
To promote regional peace and stability.
f.
To provide assistance to each other in the form of training and research
facilities in educational, technical and administrative sphere.
g.
To promote Southeast Asian studies.
Future Prospects
53
5.
During the first few years of its existence the ASEAN made little progress towards any substantial regional
co-operation beyond laying down the framework for the five member countries to work out their consensus through
periodic consultation. However, after 1975 ASEAN underwent a transformation and it really began to move. It not
only enlarged its administrative machinery but also made serious proposals in respect of economic co-operation and
took unified stand on extra-regional affairs. As one writer has put it “ without doubt the machinery has been refined,
the framework strengthened, and the momentum created, for a more serious approach to regionalism.”
6.
The significance of ASEAN in international affairs lies in the fact that it represents an effort to develop Asian
solution to the Asian problem in a co-operative arrangement consisting wholly of nations in the region. Although, it is
mainly concerned with the economic and social problems, it has also tried to reduce the foreign influence in the
region and assert that all foreign bases in the region are temporary. The Association has also undertaken projects
with a view to improve tourism, shipping, fishing, trade, etc.
Conclusion
7.
ASEAN is a regional organisation for promoting economic growth and social and cultural developments among
the member countries. The highest policy makes body of Foreign Ministers commonly known as the annual ministerial
meeting. There are five economic committees under the economic ministers. The main aim of the organisation is to
extend maximum economic co-operation among the member states. Pakistan was given as observer status in the
1996 to attend i
ASEAN
Burma (Myanmar) and Laos participated first time once membered.
Jul1996
Dec1997

Summit held at Malaysia. First session after expansion. Member
Countries are
1) Brunei
2) Burma
3) Cambodia (will join in Dec,1998)
4) Indonesia
5) Laos
6) Malaysia
7) Philippines
8) Singapore
9) Thailand
10) Vietnam
11) Papua New Guinea as observer
other attending members or partners are
15Mar1998
1) Australia
2) Canada
3) China
4) EU
5) India
6) Japan
7) New Zealand
8) Russia
9) South Korea
10)
USA
Group of 22 consist of APEC countries like USA, Japan, UK,
France, Germany, Russia, China, Italy, Canada, Argentine,
Australia, Brazil, Hong Kong, Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia,
Mexico, Poland, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand
4.
6th ASEAN Summit. 6th ASEAN Summit was held at Hanoi the capital of
Vietnam from 15 to 16 Dec 98. All permanent members of the organization have
attended the Summit. Representatives of UNO, EU, USA, Japan and Campuchia have
also attended the Summit as observers. In order to stabilize the ailing economic conditions of member states
measures were discussed at length and finally Japan offered $35 billion aid as soft loan. Japan's Prime Minister
Obuchi's policy speech to audience focused on the economic crisis that Japan and members of the association are
battling to overcome. The members of ASEAN, ie Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand are
now in recession. The other ASEAN members Brunei, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam have also not been spared the fall
out. ASEAN members have also declared to admit the Kingdom of Campuchia as its 10th member.
Common Wealth
06 May 2017
Members --- 68
ECO
Introduction
1.
The post world war-II period gave birth to a large number of states who could retain their independence by
towing the policies of the super powers. This strategy resulted in economic deprivation of these states who gradually
started pursuing economic policies which could reduce their dependence on advanced nations and drifted towards
formation of regional associations for collective economic benefits by pooling up their energies and resources. The
indigenous regionalisation based on complementary needs brightened their prospects of progress towards the
shared goals. At present, no less than 23 regional organisations like ASEAN, EU, NAFTA, APEC and Free Trade
Zones exist in the world.
2.
ECO is the new name of the RCD, which was formed nearly thirty years ago at Istanbul between three Muslim
brother countries Iran, Turkey, and Pakistan in 1964. The RCD, however, could not achieve its objectives due to
certain political events befalling the member’s countries, completing only 17 projects out of 49 approved by its member
governments during its 15 years history. It was because of Turkish obsession to become a member of the EU, while
Iran remained immersed in its desire to emerge as a regional power.
3.
In order to revitalise the RCD; the member’s states concluded the Treaty of Izmir in 1977. The treaty was
basically meant to provide juridical basis to the RCD. The Treaty of Izmir, too, couldn’t be operated with full force
because of the political upheavals in Pakistan and Iran during this period. Iran demanded inclusion of Iraq, Afghanistan
and India in it, for which Pakistan had certain reservations. Under these circumstances RCD was dissolved on 6 Jul
1982.
Resurrection of RCD as ECO
4.
Despite the termination of RCD, the bilateral co-operation particularly in political and trade fields, between
the member countries continued. The outbreak of Iran-Iraq war and consequent Iranian isolation in the world
community compelled Iran to look towards its natural allies. As a result, the ECO was formed in 1985 as a successor
to moribund RCD when Pakistan, Iran and Turkey revived their old links in the economic field. It was in 1990 that the
original members of the RCD got together in Islamabad to reactivate the Treaty of Izmir, which became the start of
the ECO. However a breakthrough was achieved at Tehran meeting of Council of Minister of ECO in May 1991.
Expansion of ECO
5.
The organisation for Economic Co-operation (E C O) is a regional organisation comprising Pakistan, Iran,
Turkey, Afghanistan, Turkmenistsn, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Kirghistan, Kazakistan. It was established in
1985 as a consequence of Treaty of Izmir, replacing the Regional Co-operation for Development, which had become
redundant and almost aimless. Pakistan, Iran and Turkey were its original members but later on, the five Central Asian
States, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan were admitted to it after the collapse of Soviet Union. It received a big boost in
1992 during its first summit meeting and became the largest economic alliance after European Union..
Aims and Objectives.
6.
ECO emphasises the economic dimensions of its relations amongst member countries with following common
objectives : a.
The reduction of trade barriers in the ECO areas at an appropriate time in
the light of experience gained within ECO preferential tariff system.
b.
Industrial collaboration through establishment joint ventures, regional
Market through inter industry co-operation and specialisation in
components production.
c.
Establishment of ECO investment and development Bank with the
Participation of private sector of member states.
d.
Conversion of the integrated ECO reinsurance pool into ECO reinsurance
Company.
e.
Promotion of inters regional tourism.
f.
Provision of efficient postal and telephone communication services within
the region.
54
P
g.
Provision of efficient transportation and transit system in the region. To this
end, member states shall give priority to construction, completion and
improvement of highways and railways.
h.
To take measures to ensure adequate shipping services and formation of an
ECO shipping company.
j.
Expansion of air travel and movement of air cargo.
k.
To provide technical assistance and expertise to each other in various fields.
l.
To establish institutions for training personnel in technical fields.
m
To establish ECO Science Foundation with its Headquarters at Islamabad
With a view to build up a pool of highly skilled, scientific and technical
manpower.
n.
Creation of ECO Youth Foundation to promote cultural exchange, friendship and greater contact
among the youth.
o.
Promotion of cultural co-operation.
Establishment of close co-operation among media agencies.
Future Potentials.
7.
a.
There has been a partial increase in trade amongst ECO partners. This
Increasein trade between members countries of the organisation is mainly
attributable tointernational economic compulsions rather than their own
efforts. While theECO countries are slow in developing intra-regional cooperation in trade andother economic fields, other regions have been
moving fast towards economicIntegration, promotion of trade through
institutions and building up barriers inthe way of trade with their world
countries as have been the case of EuropeanUnion.
b.
The organisation carries prospects for Pakistan in various fields as under: (1)
Can facilitate improving relations with international community
through Co-operation of member states.
(2)
Trade amongst member’s countries can be enhanced thus giving
Substantial boost to national economy.
(3)
Imports and exports are likely to increase.
(4)
Exchange of technology from Central Asian States and technical
Experts from other member countries may work for prosperity of the nations.
(5)
The member countries can work collectively for peace in the region. The response is likely to
be positive for collective goals of member Countries.
Geography of ECO States
8.
ECO states cover a vast area second only to European Community. A profile of ECO member countries is
given in the succeeding paragraphs.
Name
Loc
Area
Population
Natural Resources
Islamic
Republic
of Iran
Western
Asia
1,648,000
sq. km
60 million
Crude oil, natural gas, hard
coal, iron ore, petroleum
related industries, electronic
industries, wheat, rice, barely,
cotton & fruit
The
Republic
of Turkey
SE
Europe
&
Western
Asia
779,452
sq. km
57
million
Economy
GNP(1989) --- $ 3200,
principle export is petrol
and petroleum products,
machinery, motor vehicle,
paper,
textiles,
iron,
steel,mineral products,
Coal,Iron ore,oil ,Mining,Wheat,cotton,tobaco,
GNP (1990) --- $1630
Fruit, nuts, barley, sugar beat.
Manufacturing Industries
78.2% of total export.
Principal
exports
are
textile goods, metals,
Trading Partner
Germany, Jap
UK, USA, Turke
Germany,USA,F
ce,Italy,Uk & Sa
Arab
EUROPEAN UNION
1618---48
Thirty Years war or wars of religion between Catholic and Protestant
1648
Treaty of Westphalia
1945—1958
France was politically unstable country but kept on progressing on
economic and cultural fronts. Even one government stayed for hours only finally Degaule took
over the power.
1993
Maastricht Treaty was signed
------------
Present Membership ---- 15 + 6 = 21
6 future contender are: 1. Cyprus
2. Check Democratic
3. Litonia
4. Hungary
5. Poland
6. Slovenia
EU is planning to give billions of dollars to these contenders within 6 to 5 years to induct them
as members
Dec1997
Lexhumberg Conference decided to expand EU.New EU conference will be held in March
1998 in which present 15 and proposed 12 will be united. Majority of proposed members
belongs to Eastern Europe. At first stage EU has agreed to accept Estonia, Poland,
Democratic Check Republic, Hungary and Cyprus. At second stage next year Latvia,
Lithuania, Slovak, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey applications will be considered.
Jan1998
Poland to share 248, 000 troops beside providing 2.48 % share of
NATO budget. Check Democratic to share 90 % of her army I. e;
70, 000 troops.
01Jan1999
Euro, European single currency will be effective but 11 countries will keep their own
currencies till 30th June 1999. 11 out of 15 have
given the approval. UK, Denmark and Sweden will not implement new currency system.
Greece being the only country failed to come up to the standard of Euro financial system.
Holland will be the first President of the Europe Bank.
1.
Germany
2.
Italy
3.
Spain
4.
Holland
5.
Austria
6.
Ireland
7.
Finland
8.
Portugal
55
9.
10.
11.
France
Belgium
Luxembourg
European worst racist people or states are Belgium, France and
Austria. Luxembourg is the lowest in the list.
6 May, 2017
Highest mountain in Europe --- Mount Blanc on the borders of Italy and France
GCC
1981
Established
---------
Members--- 6
1.
KSA
2.
Bahrain
3.
Qatar
4.
Kuwait
5.
Oman
6.
UAE

08Mar1998
Final Declaration
 Non-proliferation of Nuclear weapons of Israel.
 Iraq to implement the peace deal
 return of Arabs occupied areas
 Return of Golans Heights
 Peace

Israeli forces to Withdraw from South of Lebanon

and friendly relations with Iran
 Iran to settle outstanding issues with UAE ( return of three Islands )
G-8
-----
Group of 8 developed nations of the world
1. USA
2.Canada
3. Italy
4. Japan
6. Russia
7. UK
8. France
G-8 gathering at London was joined by reps from Argentina, Brazil, South Africa and Ukraine
.All states have given up their nuclear status and signed the NPT as non-nuclear weapons
stares. China’s ambassador and an envoy from the Philippines representing ASEAN also
joined talks.
13Jun1998
G-15
----06 May 2017
1993
1994
------
Group of 15 developing nations of the world.
Session concluded at Cairo. New President of the organisation will be Jamaica. Other
members are Egypt, Indonesia, and Malaysia. Sri Lanka has applied for the membership.
INDIAN OCEAN RIM-LAND COUNTRIES
Idea first presented by South African Foreign Minister Pick Botha
Mauritius was the first country to arrange the conference which was attended by 7 countries
(Australia, India, Kenya, Mauritius, Oman, Singapore and south Africa)
Total members ----14 but Pakistan has been denied the membership due to Indian pressure.
1994
Pakistan first times took part in the Perth Conference that was attended by 23 states.
May 1995
At Mauritius it was decided that member states representations would be doubled. Later
Indonesia, Madagascar, alaysia, Mozambique, SriLanka, Tanzania and Yemen were given the
memberships.
08Mar1997
Operational Charter and Action Plan were given the final shape.
1994
06 May. 17
Organisation Of American Continent
organisation was established
Declaration of Santiago
--Forum of North and South American States
--Establishment of American biggest Free Trade Area by 2005
--No inclusion of undemocratic Govt in the organisation
--34 member states
--Expansion of Education
--War against Drugs
OIC
8 TH OIC SUMMIT AT TEHRAN (9-12 DEC 1997)
General
1.
The organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) presently comprises of 55 member countries representing
almost one-fifth of the world population. It was established on the wake of desecration of the Al Aqsa Mosque in
Jerusalem by the Zionists in Aug 69, with an aim to promote Islamic solidarity, consolidation of bilateral co-operation in
the economic / scientific fields, co-ordination of efforts for the safeguard of the Holy Places and help the struggle of
Palestinians/other Muslim liberation movements around the world. The 1 st O(C summit was held at Rabat in Sep 69
and the 7 th Extra-ordinary Summit at Islamabad on 23 Mar97.
2.
The 8th and the latest OIC Summit was held at Tehran from 9 to 12 Dec 97, in which delegations from all the
member states including 20 Presidents and 6 Prime Ministers attended. Kashmiri representatives invited by Iranian
government were prevented by the Indian government to proceed to Tehran. However, Washington based Kashmiri
leader Ghulam Nabi attended the moot as an observer. The seat of Afghanistan remained vacant in accordance with
the decision of the OIC Foreign Ministers meeting at Jakarta (Indonesia) on 9 Dec 96.
Agenda
3.
The Foreign Ministers of participating countries, through deliberations prior to summit, (7 Dec 97) agreed upon
142 resolutions including Afghanistan issue, violence in IHK and the Middle East peace process. Other main points
agreed upon included measures to enhance the role of Islamic countries/OIC in global affairs, resolutions of conflicts
among Muslims States, protections of the rights of Muslims minorities, economic/scientific/technological and cultural
co-operation and social development and enhancing the role of communications in promotion of the just cause and the
image of Islam.
4.
Inaugural speeches. Iran’s spiritual leader Ayatullah Khamenei, in inaugural address, urged OIC members
to unite to thwart designs of Israel and the US and demanded a permanent seat for the Muslim bloc in the UN Security
Council. The UN Security Council .The UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, also attending the conference,
expressed the concern over the increasing violence by the extremist groups in the name of Islam. The Secretary
General of the Arab League, Esmat Abdul Meguid, criticised Turkey for its military co-operation accords with Israel.
Saudi Arabian Crown Prince, Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz, stated that the Muslim world reject Islamic militancy as it was
against the Islamic spirit of justice and tolerance. The Amir of Kuwait stressed the need to promote friendship between
the Muslim countries. Prime Minister of Pakistan, Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, called for the srengthening of relations
between the OIC countries and criticised the inconsistent Middle East peace process. He demanded resolution of the
Kashmir problem as enshrined in the UN resolutions and supported the proposals of the OIC/UN to establish a broadbased government in Afghanistan.
Results/Achievements
5.
the OIC Summit adopted following resolutions before its conclusion:a.
Supported Kashmiris’ right to self-determination in accordance with the UN resolutions.
b.
Endorsed intra-Afghan dialogue, formation of a broad-based government and establishment of lasting
peace in that country.
c.
Pledged to promote solidarity and peace within the Islamic World and called for liberation of all
occupied Muslim territories/restoration of rights of Palestinians. Also expressed determination to
establish an independent Palestinian state.
d.
Expressed solidarity with the Muslims of Bosnia and criticised aggression by Armenia against
Azerbaijan.
e.
Criticised tendencies to portray Islam as a threat to the world and called for peaceful co-existence with
the western world. Entrusted the “Group of Experts on the Image of Islam” to formulate and
recommend pragmatic and constructive steps to counter negative propaganda.
f.
Rejected the UN/US sanctions against Iran and Libya.
g.
Condemned terrorism and reaffirmed commitment / adherence to a code of conduct approved by the
OIC at Casablanca in 1994 to fight terrorism. Recognised the right of self-determination of the people
under colonial / alien domination or foreign occupation.
h.
Accorded top priority to solidarity / security in the Islamic world by pursuing consultations on a forum
for security co-operation and entrusting the intra-government “ Expert Group” to evolve strategy.
j.
Emphasised need to establish an Islamic Common Market.
56
k.
Demanded declaring Middle East as a nuclear weapons free zone and Israel be compelled to sign NPT by
subjecting all its nuclear installations under the IAEA safeguards.
l.
To initiate collective efforts to increase trade / investments within the Islamic world and enhance its role in
the global economic system.
m.
Reaffirmed respect, dignity and rights of the Muslim women.
6.
Effects On Pakistan.
The OIC Summit accorded many benefits to Pakistan at diplomatic level as its
following resolutions / proposals were unanimously adopted: a.
Kashmir.
The summit provided an excellent opportunity to Pakistan to gain support of the entire
Muslim world for the Kashmir cause. All the resolutions moved by the Pakistan were passed. The
refusal of Indian government to permit the IHK delegation to attend the Summit tarnished its image at
international level.
b.
Afghanistan. The convergence of Pak – Iran views with regard to establishment of a broad-based
government and political solution of the Afghan problem was another positive step. The Prime
Minister’s meeting with Iranian Rahbar and President, helped in narrowing differences on Afghanistan.
c.
Issues Of Indian And Russian Attendance . Prior to commencement of the Summit, Iranian press
reported that India and Russia would be invited to attend the conference as observer. However, after
strong reaction from Pakistan, Iranian government denied any such intention and simply termed it as a
printing error. Moreover, the statement of Iranian Ambassador to India, in which he described the
Kashmir issue as a matter of great concern for the entire Muslim World seems quite significant.
Conclusion
7.
On the whole, the OIC Tehran Summit was a successful event for the Muslim Ummah. The summit helped
Iran to show to the world that the US policy of isolating her has failed. Bilateral talks between the Saudi Crown
Prince and the Iranian President helped reduced tension between the two countries and generated a desire to come
closer to each other. However, absence of leaders of Egypt, UAE, Iraq, Bahrain, Algeria and Uzbekistan reflected
reservations of some countries towards Iranian leadership/ policies. Most Arab countries attended the summit to
indicate to the US their concern regarding Washington’s bias towards Israel in the Middle East peace process.
However, they did not tow the Iranian line of condemning the peace process as a whole, and no declaration /
resolution opposing the peace process was adopted in the summit.
8.
Passing of two resolutions criticising Turkey for enhancing military co-operation with Israel and support for the
territorial integrity of Iraq clearly isolated turkey in the summit.
9.
Iraq’s plea to soften OIC ‘s stand regarding compliance with the UN Security Council resolutions remained
unheeded due to strong opposition from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The Security Council‘s sanctions against Sudan and
Libya were also criticised by the participants. However, unilateral US sanctions against Iraq and Iran were also
rejected. Apart from anything else, the OIC Summit provided an opportunity to Muslim Ummah to restate its position on
many crucial issues like Kashmir , Afghanistan , Middle East, Israel and Bosnia. It also provided a boost to Iranian
image at international level irrespective of the US concerted efforts to the contrary.
OIC
1926
Efforts to unite Muslims started
Feb1949
Maulana Sabbir Ahmed Usmani laid the foundation of World Conference at Karachi.
Dec1949
Establishment of International Islamic Economics Conference under the Chairman ship of
Pakistan.
Feb1951
World Muslim Conference third session was arranged in Pakistan and attended by large
number of Head of States along with Liaqat Ali Khan.
17Mar1952
World Muslim Congress was organised at Karachi .It was decided to establish the
commonwealth of Muslim States.
-----------
Akhwan-ul-Muslaymeen arranged a conference at Baith-ul-Muqadas later it was named as AlMothamir –ul-Islami. It was demanded to establish separate Muslim bloc and to award all the
Muslims a sought of international nationality irrespective of states.
08Aug1954
All Muslims head of states met at Mecca.
Dec1964
Mogadishu (Somalia) all head of the states again met. Shah Faisal of KSA favoured the
deliberations
1969
Islamic Summit was arranged with the efforts of Malaysian Prime Minister Tinko Abdur
Rehman. Later on OIC was raised.
22Sep1969
OIC was established in Rabat, Morocco after the Arab-Israel
War of 1967.
24Feb1974
Lahore (2nd)
May1980
Foreign Ministers Meeting of 42 members was held at Islamabad and war against Soviet
Aggression was decided in order to help Afghanistan. 4 points agenda passed were as
under:  USSR should pull back her forces from Afghanistan unconditionally
 Afghan refugees should be returned to their homeland honourably
 Afghan should decide themselves about their future political system and government
 Afghanistan Islamic status be maintained
Jan1981
Taif, KSA (3rd)
16Jan1984
13-14Dec1994 4th & 7th Morocco at Casablanca
--------------
Secretariat ---
Dec1991
6th Islamic summit at Dakar
Mar1997
Extra Ordinary session of OIC at Islamabad.
9-12Dec1997
8th Islamic Summit held at Tehran. Attended by 27 presidents, 7
Prime ministers, 4 kings and 3 crown princes
Feb1998
Secretary General ---Aza-ud-din Laraki
-----------
Issues faced by Muslim Ummah
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Jeddah
Afghanistan
Kashmir
Middle East
New World Order (NWO)
Internal Conflicts
Islamic Fundamentalism (Terrorism)
Iran, Iraq, Libya, Bosnia,
Security Council Permanent Seat for Muslim Ummah
(1)
Muslims are 25 ---30 % or 1.3 billion of Total World population whereas EU is
5% of total world population.
(2)
j.
55 Muslim Countries among the 185 UNO members and there is no
Permanent seat in Security Council for this 30% of world population.
Christians are 35 % of total world population and this 35 % have got 80 % of
their representation in the Security Council. They have simply denied any
representation to rest of the 30 %.
(3)
Muslims are 1 / 4 of world population and 1 / 3 of the sovereign States.
Common Economic Market of Muslim Ummah
k.
Rights of Muslim minorities in other parts of the world like India, Palestinians, Eritrea,
Burma, Cyprus, Kashmir, Philippines, etc.
l.
preserves the rights of children, women, youths, and challenges to Islam.
57
19Mar1998
OIC permanent representative in UN is Mr. Mukhtar Lamani
6 May, 2017
Recommendations for OIC future development
1.
Commonwealth of Independent States
2.
Islamic Common Market
3.
Islamic Common Bank
4.
Economic Co-operation within Muslims States
5.
Military Co-operation within Muslims states
Statistics Of Muslim World
-----------
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) fought 26 battles in 10 years, 56 Missions were Sent by him (MPBUH)
and total 82 battles were fought by Muslims in 10 Years.
570AD
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) born at Mecca
622AD
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) left for Madina and became centre of all
activities. Islamic state started spreading with 274 square miles
per day.
-----------
Agreement of Madina was the first ever written agreement of the
world.
---------
Gazwa-e-Mauta in which Holy Prophet (MPBUH) sent 3000 Muslims to fight against the army
of 100,000 Christians.
637
During Hazrat Ummar (RATH) period Muslims captured Yarusalem
656—1258
Khalafat-e-Rashida.
---------
Hazrat Abu Bakar (RATH) sent Hazrat Khalid Bin Walid (RATH) with 13.000 men to fight
against Musailma Kizab who has the standing army of 40,000 men.
--------
During the battles of “JAMAL” & “SUFAINS” 10,000 AND 70,000 Muslims died. Reasons
behind the battles was to escape the punishment of killing Hazrat Usman (RATH)
Period of Bannu Ummaya
Period of Banu Abbas.
1. Baghdad was kept as new capital
2.
3. Conqueror of Iran --- Hazrat Saad Bin Abu Waqas (RATH)
“ “ Rome --- Hazrat Khalid Bin Walid (RATH) faced
Qaiser-e-Rome
“ “ Egypt --- Hazrat Umro Bin Alaass (RATH) with
4000 of army men.
700
Muslims reached to South Asia
700--- 1400
Islam
712
Muhammad Bin Qasim entered Sind
713---801
Hazrat Rabia Basri
750
First Arabic book on geography was written by a Muslim scholar Muhammad Bin Musa Alkhawarzi with the name of “Sura-tu-Alurz
997—1030
Period of Ghaznavi Family. Mehmood Ghaznavi faced Anand Pal
and Raja Nandu. He first time attacked India on 1001
1010
Hazrat Data Ganj Baksh was born at Gazni (Afghanistan)
1095
Period of Crusade wars
1175-1202
Period of Muhammad Ghauri
1202-1206
Qutab-ud-din Aaibak took over from Muhammad Ghauri
---------------
Muslims ruled over Europe for 1000 years. Indian, Iran, Rome were under their domination.
1888
Ubaid Ullah Khirdazbah wrote book on geography “ Almasalik and Almumalik which was
spread all over the world
published from Leaden
18Dec1998
Total national income of all 57Muslim state is $ 1100 Billion. Germany National income is $
2000Billion. France national income is $ 1200 billion.
Hijra Period
2 Hijree
Gazwa-e-Badar (Sura-e-Anfal)
6Hijree
Hadaybeea Agreement was signed
8 Hijra
Mecca was conquered.
Ruler of Persia died and a lady with the name of Boran was made
the ruler
Battle of Moouta
9Hijree
Hazrat Abu Bakar (RTHH) was made Amir of Haj
Gazwa-e-Tabuk (Sura-e-Touba)
10Hijree
23Hijra
26Zill-Haj
29 Hijra
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) performed Haj
Shahadat of Hazrat Ummar (RATH). During Fajjar prayer he was
attacked by Feroze Lolo an Iranian slave captured during battle of Nahawand and given under
the supervision of Hazrat Mugheera Bin Shahbah. Many others came forward to save him and
6 0r 9 others also died. Later he also committed suicide.
Masjid Nabvi was expanded during the period of Hazrat Usman (RATH)
35Hijra
Shahdat of Hazrat Usman (RATH) at the age of 82 when his house 18Zill-Haj
siege for 40 days by 12 mutants.
-----------
kept
During the period of Hazrat Ali (RATH) he fought three battles as under: 1. Hazrat Ayisha(RATH) whom he defeated during the battle of Jammal(camel)
2. Hazrat Maviah, he was demanding for Qisas of Hazrat Usman(RATH)
3. Khuraaj
61Hijra
02Muharram
Hazrat Immam Hussain (RATH) reached Karbla (IRAQ)
under
58
88-91 Hijra
Walid Bin Abdul Malik expanded the Masjid Nabvi
93Hijra
On 10th of Ramadan Muhammad Bin Qaasim entered Sind (Babul-Islam)
161 Hijra
Abbas Mehdi & Almusthaseem expanded the Nabvi Mosque
309Hijra
Hussein Bin Mansoor Hilaj Bezawi—Ana-ul-Haq, later he was hanged.
400 -Hijra
Rise of Samani Family era. Prominent leader was Nasar –Bin
-Ahmed who conquered Kurasan. Neeshahpur is the city of
Khurasan.
400-465Hijra
Hazrat Data Ganj Baksh was born at Gazni(Afghanistan) and died at Lahore. He came to
Lahore on 431-Hijra.
416 Hijra
Moved from Gaznavi to capture and destroy Somnath Temple
10Shaban
608 Hijra

1213
633-Hijra
Hazrat Khawaja Moeen-ud-din Chisti died
654 Hijra
fire destroyed the secred belongings of Holy Prophet (MPBUH)
786Hijra
Shah of Hamdan, Mir Syed Ali Hamdani
1034Hijra
Hazrat Sheikh Ahmed Mujadad Alf Sani also remained arrested in the period of Jehangir the
Mughal Empire.
1265-77-Hijra
Sultan Abdul Majid expanded the Nabvi Mosque
1352-Hijra
Egyptian Govt expanded the Nabvi Mosque
1368-1416 Hijra
Saudi Govt expanded the Nabvi Masjid
1388Hijra, 1968AD
1411Hijra, 1947 Pakistan came into being.
59
N A T O - EXPANSION
Introduction

signed during foreign Ministers conference of (1) USA ,(2) UK ,(3) France ,(4) Canada , (5)Italy ,(6) Ireland ,(7)
Luxembourg ,(8) The Netherlands,(9) Denmark ,(10) Norway , (11)Belgium , and (12)Portugal on 4 Apr 1949 (
(13) Greece and (14)Turkey were admitted on 22 Oct 1951 )
Co-operation in economic, military, scientific and political fields against Warsaw Pact.
Dissolution of Warsaw Pact (created on 14 May 1955) in 1991.
Enlargement strategy of world ‘s free market democracies.
Expansion of EU and NATO




Historical Background
 BI-polar system
Organisational Pattern
 16 member states
 Secretary General is the Chairman
 each year Foreign Minister of member state is nominated as President.
 Decision by consent and not by majority
 work by committees and sub- committees
NATO and The Changing World Scenario
 increased security of Europe.
 Rome Declaration of Nov 1991
 integrated command structure
Nato’s Expansion



Enhanced Euro- Atlantic area.
New Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council ( EAPC)
Partnership for Peace
Madrid Summit








issued by 16 Heads of the states on 8 Jul 1997
invited (15) Poland ,(16) Hungary and(17) Czech Republic
ratification to be completed by 1999 to celebrate 50th anniversary of NATO
the NATO/Russian founding Act
NATO / Ukraine Charter
Peace in Bosnia - Herzegovina.
support to OSCE
non-proliferation , Arms control and Disarmament
NATO / Russian Founding Act



signed on 27 May 1997
standing joint council
Russian greater influence in NATO
NATO / Ukraine Charter
 signed during Madrid conference on 8 / 9 Jul 1997.
 Ukraine special status in European security recognised.
Romanian ‘s Concerns


excluded countries Romania and Slovenia
piecemeal expansion
Russian Suspicions

to keep a check
Critical Evaluation of NATO’s Expansion
two systems and one organisation (East & West Europe)
Conclusion
 primary task -military force
NATO
(NIA DIARY)
1949
Established (will celebrate her 50 years in 1999) and Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania will join at
that moment (1999)
1982
Spain was admitted to NATO
6-May-17
Present Permanent Members --- 13
1999
Poland, Check Republic and Hungary (North Europe) will become the Regular member of this
organisation (Membership granted to them in Dec 1997).
4.
50 Years of NATO. NATO will celebrate her 50th anniversary in April next
year in USA. The US is using its Europeans allies in the NATO to make combating
international terrorism led by people like Osama-bin-Ladin and threats of
weapons of mass destruction from countries like Iran and Iraq as its main
targets for the next century. France, Germany and some other important members
of the NATO object to a globalised NATO which was created to protect Europe from
Soviet threat.
NON- ALIGN MOVEMENT
Sep1998
12th Summit held at Durban (South Africa)
SAARC: PRESENT STATUS AND FUTURE PROSPECT
Emergence of SAARC
1.
The idea of regional co-operation in South Asia was first floated by the late President Zia-ur -Rehman of
Bangladesh in Nov 80. Following consultations amongst the regional states, Foreign Secretaries of the seven
countries (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Maldives) met for the first time in Colombo in
Apr 81 and identified five broad areas for regional co-operation. Foreign Ministers of these countries, in their first
meeting in New Delhi in Aug 83, formally launched an Integrated Programme of Action (IPA) to evolve the Declaration
of South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SARRC). Later they also met at Mali in July 1984 and at
Thimpu in May 1985. In the first Dhaka Summit held on 7-8 Dec 85, the Charter establishing the SARRC was signed
by the seven member countries. The basic aim of the SARRC was to accelerate the process of economic and social
development in member states through joint action in the agreed areas of co-operation.
Factors responsible for the creation of SAARC
2.
a.
25% of world population live in 3.3% of land area mostly on starvation diet
or extreme poverty.
b.
Decline of pactomenia
c.
Worsening of trade terms with developed countries.
d.
Developing countries trade
e.
Political will for regional co-operation.
Aims, Objectives and Areas of Co-operation
2.
3.
Major areas of co-operation by SAARC countries are the following : a.
Agriculture.
b.
Communications.
c.
Education and Culture.
d.
Environment.
e.
Health and Population Activities.
f.
Meteorology.
g.
Rural Development.
h.
j.
k.
L.
m.
n.
o.
p.
q.
r.
60
Science and Technology.
Tourism.
Transport.
Women Development.
Poverty Eradication.
Counter trade and economic co-operation.
Promotion of people-to-people contact
New World Economic Order
Regional security
Drug Trafficking
Progress
4.
The first SARRC summit that held in Dec 85 in Dhaka devoted itself to signing of an agreement and to adopt its
charter. The second summit held in New Delhi in Nov 86 added two more areas of co-operation namely, prevention of
drug- trafficking and establishment of liaison with other international organisations. At the third SAARC conference
held in Nov 87 at Kathmandu, it was decided to establish a SAARC Food Security Reserve with an initial quantity of
125,000 metric tonnes, with the participation of all the member countries. The members also discussed possibility of
including certain key areas, like inter-regional trade and joint ventures in agriculture, industry and energy. The fourth
SAARC moot was held in Islamabad in Dec 88 and called on the members to identify ‘ specific targets ‘ to be achieved
in key interest areas in respective national development plans by the year 2000. Another notable feature of this summit
was the idea of involving regional non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and professional bodies in SAARC
activities. The fifth summit was that held in Male from 21 to 23 Nov 90 after Sri Lanka refused to hold it, demanding
withdrawal of Indian troops from the country. The sixth SAARC meeting held at Colombo on 21 Dec 91, called for the
resumption of the North-South dialogue in order to tackle the problems being faced by the developing countries and
establishment of Common Market by the year 1997. Sri Lanka President Premadasa proposed to create a SAARC
Commission to fight poverty in the region. The Prime Minister of Pakistan and India also held a meeting to discuss
bilateral issues, including Kashmir. During the seventh conference held at Dhaka in Apr 93, South Asia Preferential
Trade Agreement (SAPTA) was adopted to lower the trade barriers in certain commodities and granting of special
treatment to the lesser developed member states in order to protect the economic interests of all the member states. It
was agreed to give preferential treatment to a fixed number of items imported from the rest of the member countries.
Under this arrangement, India will preferential treatment to 106 items while Pakistan, to 35.The 8 Th. summit at New
Delhi from 2 to 4 May 95, merely deliberated upon matters relating to economic development and SAPTA. The last in
series of SAARC conferences was held in Male from 12 to 14 May 97. It adopted a declaration to transform the
SAARC into a free trade area by the year 2001, removal of all trade barriers and structural impediments and inception
of a South Asian Economy Community after 2001.
Achievements
5. Major achievements of SAARC so far are: -a.
Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism.
b.
Regional Convention on Narcotics, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.
c.
Establishment of SAARC Agriculture Information Centre (SAIC) at
Dhaka.
d.
Establishment of SAARC Food Security Reserve.
e.
Special SAARC Visa.
f.
Three regional SAARC Centres dealing Documentation (SDC, New
Delhi), Tuberculosis (STC, Kathmandu) and Meteorological
Research (SMRC, Dhaka) have been established.
g.
US $ 5 million, South Asian Development Fund (SADF)
Impediments.
6.
SAARC was created to foster bilateral relationship and co-operation amongst the member countries but over a
period of time it has failed to attain the desired goals. Following are some of the main impediments in the way of
SAARC to realise its goals: a.
Lack Of Symmetry.
The biggest drawback in South Asia is the
inherent lack of t together (both in terms of area and population), a preponderance that is
reflected in its economy, technological development and military strength.
b.
Indian hegemonic attitude/ designs.
India ‘s inherent urge to dominate the region in the light of
so- called ‘ Indira Doctrine ‘, which was propounded, in the early 1980s. According to this doctrine
although India will not intervene in internal security conflict in any South Asian state, it could not
remain indifferent also and help any regional state, which required external security assistance in
dealing with a security problem. India’s perceptions,
goals, hegemonic policies and attitudes are generally regarded as major hurdles to SAARC’s progress
towards greater effectiveness. The despatch of an Indian Peace –Keeping Force to Sri Lanka in 1987,
reflected this Indian attitude towards other regional states and caused strain in relation between India
and Sri Lanka. This also adversely affected the SAARC progress.
c.
Pakistan ‘s Stand.
Pakistan ‘s refusal to accept Indian hegemonic designs in South Asia has
caused a strain in its with India. Kashmir issue, also, has cast shadows on their bilateral relations.
d.
Lack Of Political Will and serious political differences.
The member states lack requisite
political will to foster economic ties and harbour mutual apprehensions about the attitude of big
neighbours.
e.
Lack Of Interaction with Other Regional Organisations.
SAARC has negligible economic
interaction with other regional organisations to expand its sphere of influence.
f.
Concerns To Safeguard Industries.
Lack of regulations and apprehensions of countries about
import of certain goods from other member countries (to safeguard their own industries) has also
affected SAARC progress.
g.
h.
Sub—Regional Economic Co-operation. India after realising that viability of SAPTA was bleak, is
now trying to induce the neighbouring countries i.e. Nepal and Sri Lanka, to enter into sub—regional
bilateral or trilateral economic agreements.
Mistrust and understanding
Sub-Regional Grouping
7.
India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan have agreed in principle to form a sub- regional co-operation group
called South Asia Growth Quadrangle (SAGQ) to create an amicable environment to effect rapid economic
development through identification and implementation of specific projects in the core economic sectors including
transport / communication, Energy /trade, investment, tourism and natural resources.
Future Prospects
8.
SAARC members have been emphasising the need to foster greater understanding on political and economic
matters as different political perception can seriously undermine the growth of the organisation. The most common
criticism about SAARC relates to its ‘futility’ in resolving serious contentious issues between the member states. For
instance, in presence of outstanding disputes and other irritants between India and Pakistan, SAARC ‘s future is likely
to remain in jeopardy. India ‘s recent strategy to effect bilateral or trilateral sub-regional arrangements with SAARC ‘s
smaller nations have further polarised the association.
9.
SAARC ‘s past activities have mainly revolved around seminars, workshops, studies / exchange of reports,
meetings of the Council of Ministers and the Head of States or Governments. It merely provided a useful forum to
discuss the bilateral, regional and political matters without any concrete outcome. These periodic meetings facilitated
/ provided informal discussion fora to discuss bilateral differences and contentious issues that otherwise cannot be
deliberated upon officially due to rigid official stand. These exchanges outside the conference venues and perhaps
more useful as they help to defuse tensions, remove misunderstandings, and formulate remedial actions where
conflicting interests are encountered. Primarily, the attitude of India towards the SAARC would largely determine the
future prospects of progress of the organisation.
Conclusion.
9.
To make SAARC more effective it should be expanded to dilute the overwhelming preponderance of India.
Regional countries like Afghanistan, Iran, China and Burma may be granted membership. SAARC should enhance
interaction and links with other regional organisations like ASEAN. Besides, major industrial powers can also be
given ‘ Observer Status ‘ in SAARC summits, as done by ASEAN, whose summits are regularly attended by
representatives of the US, Japan, the European Community and Australia.
GCC
61
----- 81
---------
Established
Members--- 6
6.
1.
KSA
2.
Bahrain
3.
5.
Oman 6.
UAE
 08Mar98
Iraq to implement the peace deal
Return of Arabs occupied areas
Return of Golans Heights
Israeli forces to Withdraw from South of Lebanon
Peace and friendly relations with Iran
Iran to settle outstanding issues with UAE ( return of three Islands )
OIC
22Sep1969
in Rabat, Morocco OIC was established after the Arab-Israel
War of 1967.
24Feb1974
Lahore (2nd)
--Jan1981
Taif, KSA (3rd)
16Jan1984
& Dec1994 4th & 7th at Casablanca
Secretariat
Jeddah
--Dec1991
6th Islamic summit at Dakar
--Mar1997
Extra Ordinary session of OIC at Islamabad.
Qatar
4.
Kuwait
9-11Dec1997 8th Islamic Summit held at Tehran. Attended by 27 presidents, 7ministers, 4
kings and 3 crown princes
--Feb1998
Secretary General ---Aza-ud-din Laraki
Issues faced by Muslim Ummah
a.
Afghanistan
b.
Kashmir
c.
Middle East
d.
New World Order (NWO)
e.
Internal Conflicts
f.
Islamic Fundamentalism (Terrorism)
g.
Iran, Iraq, Libya, Bosnia,
h.
Security Council Permanent Seat for Muslim Ummah
(1)
Muslims are 25 ---30 % of Total World population
(4)
55 Muslim Countries among the 185 UNO members and
(5)
there is no Permanent seat in Security Council for this
(6)
30% of world population. Christians are 35 % of total
(7)
world population and this 35 % have got 80 % of there
(8)
representation in the Security Council. They have simply
(9)
denied any representation to rest of the 30 %.
(10)
Muslims are 1 / 4 of world population and 1 / 3 of the
(11)
sovereign States.
j.
Common Economic Market of Muslim Ummah
m.
Rights of Muslim minorities in other parts of the world like India,
n.
Palestinians, Eritrea, Burma, Cyprus, Kashmir, Philippines, etc.
o.
preserves the rights of children, women, youths, and challenges to Islam.
19Mar1998
OIC permanent representative in UN is Mr. Mukhtar Lamani
Statistics Of Muslim World
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) fought 26 battles in 10 years, 56 Missions were Sent by him (MPBUH) and
total 82 battles were fought by Muslims in 10
Years.
570
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) born at Mecca
622
Holy Prophet (MPBUH) left for Madina and became centre of all
activities
-------6Hijree
Hadaybeea Agreement was signed
-------8 “
Mecca was conquered.
Ruler of Persia died and a lady with the name of Boran was made
the ruler
-------9Hijree
Hazrat Abu Bakar(RTHH) was made Amir of Haj
------10Hijree Holy Prophet (MPBUH) performed Haj
700--- 1400
Islam spread all over the world
 712
Muhammad Bin Qasim entered Sind
 713---801
Hazrat Rabia Basri
 Muslims ruled over Europe for 1000 years. Indian, Iran, Rome were under their domination.

10Shaban416 Hijree
Moved from Gaznavi to capture and destroy Somnath Temple
ARABLEAGUE
--Feb98
Secretary General -- Ismat Abdul Majid
10Feb98
All Arabs countries are under debt by $ 136 billion and there is an
increase of $ 50,000 per minute . By the end of this century this
figure will reach to $ 262.8 billion. Reasons are: 5. Import of food grains ( Arabs imports 60% of food grains )
6. 7% of Sugar
7. 30% meat
Misc. food items worth of 100 million tons Where as Arabs has got to their disposal
7. Petroleum deposits
62%
8. Gas
----20%
9. Phosphate
----50%
10. Olive Oil
---15%
11. Gum
75%
12. Cotton
8%
10Feb98
FDI in Arab countries is almost 1% only. Their maximum
investment is to purchase Arms which they purchase 40 % of total
World production.
ASEM-Asia Europe Meeting
03Apr1998
members(25)
11. Brunei
12. Indonesia
13. Japan
14. Malaysia
15. Philippines
16. Singapore
17. South Korea
18. Thailand
19. Vietnam
20. –25 All members of European Union (15 States)
04Apr1998
ASEM – 2 was held at London
06Apr1998
Future contender for the membership are
5. Pakistan
6. India
7. Australia
8. New Zealand
Their considerations have been postponed till the year 2000.
SOUTH AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
Members Countries
 Angola
 Botswana
 Lesotho
 Mauritius
 Malawi
 Mozambique
 Lampia
 South Africa
 Swaziland
 Tanzania
 Zambia
 Zimbabwe
 Saishlasius
International Organisations
a.
History of UN
01May1885
08Mar1908
62
World Trade Organisation (WTO)
Salient features of the agreement.
15Dec1993 --- 117 countries (accounting for more than 90 % of world Trade)
concluded 7 years trade talks on GATT. It includes: -- UNO
Chicago riots took place. Now May day is celebrated every year
New York—Women day is celebrated when women took out the
Procession for equal rights. In 1985 first women convention was
Held at Mexico.
UNO was established
Mr. Dock Humber Shoaled Secretary General Of UNO was kill in an air crash, a known
conspiracy of CIA and MI6 so that peace is not established in Congo.
“Uniting For Peace” resolution was passed.
UN commission prepared the Human Rights Charter and so far
161 countries have signed the charter
No of members states --- 186
World Population Day ($ 5-7 billion kept for survey)
7th new secretary general of UN –Kofi Atta Anan from Ghana
IHK is among 5 regions where worst kind of atrocities are being committed. China is the 16 th
country facing terrorism. Other
countries are Afghanistan, Bhutan, Burma, Ecuador, Ghana, Iraq,
Libya, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Turkmenistan,
and Vietnam where atrocities are being committed by the rulers.
Terrorist effected countries are Taimur (Indonesia), Komoof
(Yugoslavia) Tibet (China) and West Papua (Indonesia). In 81
Christian countries 74 are giving full protection to human rights.
Report of
(Freedom Institution established in 1940 at Washington and
NewYork)
70 % of world water reservoir is based at Antarctica
UNOCHA --- United Nations Office for the Co-ordination
Humanitarian Assistance
1945
1945
1950
1948
Sep1996
Dec1996
1997
1998
1998
12Mar1998
25Oct1998
USA is the No-1 defaulter of UN, as it has to pay $ 1Arab & 60 Lac. According to UN law a
country can not participate in any
deliberations or can take part in any voting due to non-payments.
This amount was spent in UN operations at Somalia, Bosnia etc
USA demands are: 
permanent reduction in USA share

new reforms be introduced to UN
 Abortion issue
UNGA
52nd session
Sep1997
UNSC
1946-1990
1997
08Jun1998
06 May 2017
29Apr1997
26Mar1975
1996
19Mar1998
UNSC passed 847 resolutions (44 years).
 646 were accepted
 201 were vetoed (majority of vetoes were used by former USSR)
10 non –permanent members selected for 2 years
1.
Coastarica
6.
Sweden
2.
Japan
7.
Honduras
3.
Kenya
8.
Indonesia
4.
Portugal
9.
Italy
5.
Botswana
10.
Germany
UN SC. resolution No.1172 in which both India and Pakistan have been demanded to:  not to make nuclear weapons
 no deployment of nuclear weapons
 impose maximum restraints
 Kashmir to be resolved bilaterally
 No test of any kind of nuclear devices
 To enter into a 30 years old NPT as non –nuclear state and further sign CTBT
UNSC 5 permanent members represent 2.7 % of UN total membership. These 2.7 % enjoy: 1. 60% of world economic wealth
2. 80% of military potential
Anti Personnel Mines Conventions
a.
Ottawa (Canada) Agreement of 3 Dec 1997 attended by 125
countries and 600 NGOs. Only 40 countries are required to
ratify it to make it a law. Only four countries Including USA, China, India and Russia
refused to sign Judy William, an American Lady won 1997 Nobel Prize for Peace
b.
Heart (Afghanistan) is the world largest mine city. Cambodia, Laos, Angola,
Mozambique, Bosnia are other countries. Estimated 4 crore mines are buried in these
countries.
Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)
CWC entered into force. 100 countries have ratified the conventions and 167 have signed so
far but India and Arab countries have not ratified it. Pakistan also signed in 1992 and ratified.
Under international treaty ban were imposed over the manufacturing and usage’s of Chemical
and Biological weapons. By the year 2008 all signatories will destroy their chemical weapons.
Russia alone needed $5 billion.
Start of the agreement
Pakistan (signed in Oct1997), India (signed in Sep, 1996), Russia in Nov1997. Including
China, Iran and KSA, so far 167 countries have signed the agreement
Environment and Global Warming
1972
First Environmental Conference under UN was convened at Stalk Homes
(Sweden)
Japan (Kyoto), Global warming Conference. Gases emission
by Industrial states will be brought down by 6--8 % to that existing level of 1990 . USA
will not ratify unless signed by India and China
Dec1997
UNHCR
23Mar1998
Among total refuges of the world 80% are Muslims
UNDCP
-----------
United Nations Department for Drug Control and Crime prevention
UNCHR & UNCHR
-------------------
---------
United Nations Centre for Human Rights
United Nations Commission on Human Rights
 52 sessions has been arranged so far
 53 members (Pakistan is also a member)
 84 observer states and NGOs
UN convention on rights of child has been ratified by all except USA, UAE and Coke Islands.
UNICEF
---------
United Nations Fund for Children
UNDP
---------
United Nations Development Fund
UN-Hague Tribunal
17Apr1998
ICTY --- United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for former
Yugoslavia in the Hague.
WFP
--------16Oct1998
1982
1994
30Mar1998
-----------------------29Sep1998
UN World Food Programme
International world food Day
WHO
International Seabed Authority
Law of sea convention
International Seabed Authority was established under UN
Pakistan selected member of the council for 4 years. Council consists of 36 states
137 members countries
UN Conference on Human Settlements
Held at Istanbul (Turkey)
IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency (established—1957)
PLO was granted the status of observer with 80 votes in favour and 2 against (USA & Israel)
Oct1986
63
International court of Justice
international mediator resolved between Israel and Egypt over “Tayyiba Resort”
IMF
1945
Set up to rebuild global financial system.
$ 200 Billion pool of money to help the needier.
 Members nations ----188
 Central Headquarters --- Washington (near White House)
Feb1998
1.
Managing Director ---- Mishal Kamdees, a French national
2.
Deputy Director ---- Stanley Fisher, a American national
3.
Executive Board members -------- Members 24
4.
Total number of employees -------- 1200 (including 800 world best economists)
5.
Funding Countries ---------------- 6 countries provide annual subscription as under
a. USA---$ 38 billion
b. UK ----$ 10 billion
c . France--$ 9 billion
d. Germany --- $ 11 billion
e. Japan ---- $ 10 billion
f. KSA---$ 7 billion
6.
Few receiving countries
a.
Mexico-----$ 18 billion
b. Russia -----$ 10 billion
c. Philippines ---- $ 700 Million
d. South Korea ----$ 20 Billion
e. Indonesia------- $ 20 Billion
f.
Thailand-------- $ 17 billions
19Oct1998
IMF contribution in international economic development is only 2% and by the year 1999 it will
be only 2.5 %. In 1996-97 this ratio was 4%
Pakistan’s Relations With IMF



Concluded 1st agreement in Dec 1958 worth $ 25 Million. So far Pakistan has entered 10 short-term agreements
with IMF.
a.
1980, Nov 1268 million
b.
1988, Dec, 28 ---Benazir Bhutto signed 273.15
Million loans extended upto 30 Nov 1990.
c.
1993, Sep 16---Moeen Qureshi signed an
Agreement 265.40 million
Impact on Economy.
Trap to weaken Pakistan.
World Statistics
168—90
1930
1935-1945
1941
Feb1945
1945-1990
-------
First ever book on geography was written by Battmaluwas with the name of “ Al-Maqadamatu-Algeographia”
FIFA --- Federation Of International Football Association
World war II
New World Order under Atlantic Charter attended by
 Roosevelt (USA)
 Churchill (UK)
Yalta Conference held at Crimea (USSR) it was attended by
 Roosevelt (USA)
 Churchill (UK)
 Stalin (USSR)
There was 2340 weeks out of which only 3 weeks peace prevailed.
World most populated countries
1.
China (1232M)
6.
Russia
2.
India
7.
Pakistan
3.
America
8.
Japan
4.
Indonesia
9.
Bangladesh
5.
Brazil
10.
Nigeria
ENERGY CRISES
Introduction
1.
For a long time man depended on coal as a source of energy. To a large extent the industrial revolution was
also the outcome of the use of coal energy. Even thereafter coal continued to be a dominant source of energy.
However, in 1960s coal lost its position to oil because of its lower cost and convenient use. By 1970 oil provided more
than half the total energy consumed by the world.
The Seriousness of the Crises
2.
a.
In the first place it is said that the global demand for oil is increasing at
such a pace that within 10 to 20 years the demand would outstrip the supply.
b.
Developing countries constitute two-third of the total world population, are consuming only one
seventh of the total energy. Their process of development will increase in demand of oil.
c.
40 % of timber resources in the developing countries will be reduced to ashes during next two
decades.
Efforts to resolve the crises
3.
a.
In view of the energy crises many developing countries came to feel that
the issue should be discussed not only in the Committee on Natural Resources but also in the General
assembly in the context of global negotiations.
b.
In 1981 the Conference on New and Renewable Sources of Energy was held at Nairobi and called for
the development and introduction of new and renewable energy sources in order to meet future
energy requirements particularly in developing countries.
c.
The Department of Technical Co-operation for Development, which was set up in 1978, has also done
commendable job in resolving the energy problem.
Steps to deal with Energy Crises
4.
No doubt alternative energy sources are available in the form of coal, nuclear energy and replaceable
hydroelectric power. We may deal with these aspects in details: -a. Energy Conservation
b. Alternative sources of Energy
c. Coal
d. Natural Gas
e. Oil Shale
f. Fuel Wood
g. Electricity
h. Nuclear energy
j. Bio-gas Plants
k. Solar Energy
l. Geo-thermal Energy
m. Wind Energy
Conclusion
5.
According to the Kegley, Wittkopf and Denis Hayes most energy policies around the world are still framed as
though they are addressing a problem that our grandchildren will inherit, but the energy crisis is our crisis. Oil and
Natural Gas are our principal means of bridging today and tomorrow and we are burning our bridges.
ENGLAND
(in Latin, Anglia), country and constituent part of the island of Great Britain, comprising, with the principality of Wales,
the principal division of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. England occupies all of the island
east of Wales and south of Scotland, another country and division of the United Kingdom. United as an independent
monarchy in the 10th century, England in time achieved political control over the rest of the island, all the British
Isles, and vast sections of the world, becoming the nucleus of one of the largest empires in history. The capital,
largest city, and chief port of England is London, with a population (1995 estimate) of 7,007,100. It is also the capital
of the United Kingdom, and the site of the headquarters of the Commonwealth of Nations.
England is very roughly triangular in shape, with its apex at the mouth of the River Tweed on the north-eastern
border with Scotland. The eastern side, bounded by the North Sea, extends generally south-east, via East Anglia, to
the North Foreland in Kent, the northern extremity of the chalk uplands in south-eastern England called the Downs.
The western side of the triangle extends generally south-west from the mouth of the Tweed along the border with
Scotland, via the Irish Sea coast, the border with Wales, and the Atlantic Ocean coast to Land’s End, the
westernmost extremity of mainland England and of the island of Great Britain. The northern frontier with Scotland
extends from the Solway Firth in the west along the Cheviot Hills to the mouth of the Tweed on the east. The base of
the triangle fronts the English Channel and the Strait of Dover along the south-western and southern coast of
England. The total area of England is 130,423 sq km (50,356 sq mi), equivalent to 57 per cent of the area of Great
Britain and 54 per cent of the area of the United Kingdom. This total includes the region of the Scilly Isles, located
south-west of Land’s End in the Atlantic Ocean; the Isle of Wight, located off the southern coast; and the Isle of Man,
located in the Irish Sea between England and Northern Ireland.
64
United Kingdom, officially the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, island nation and constitutional
monarchy in north-western Europe, member of the EU and Commonwealth of Nations. The United Kingdom lies
entirely within and constitutes the greater part of the British Isles. Great Britain is the largest of the British Isles and
so called to distinguish it from Brittany, or “Little Britain”.
It comprises, together with numerous smaller islands—including the Isle of Wight, Anglesey, and the Scilly, Orkney,
Shetland, and Hebridean archipelagos—the formerly separate realms of England and Scotland, and the principality
of Wales. Northern Ireland, also known as Ulster, occupies the north-eastern part of the island of Ireland. The United
Kingdom is bordered to the south by the English Channel, which separates it from continental Europe, to the east by
the North Sea, and to the west by the Irish Sea and the Atlantic Ocean; the only land border is between Northern
Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The total area of the United Kingdom is 241,752 sq km (93,341 sq mi). The
capital and largest city is London.
The names “United Kingdom”, “Great Britain”, and “England” are often used interchangeably. The use of “Great
Britain”, often shortened to “Britain”, to describe the whole kingdom is common and widely accepted, although strictly
it does not include Northern Ireland. However, the use of “England” to mean the “United Kingdom” is not acceptable
to members of the other constituent countries, especially the Scots and the Welsh. In this article “United Kingdom”
and “Britain” are used synonymously; “Great Britain” is used only in reference to England, Wales, and Scotland.
England and Wales were united administratively, politically, and legally by 1543. The crowns of England and
Scotland were united in 1603, but the two countries remained separate political entities until the 1707 Act of Union,
which formed the Kingdom of Great Britain with a single legislature. From 1801, when Great Britain and Ireland were
united, until the formal establishment of the Irish Free State in 1922, the kingdom was officially designated the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
The Isle of Man and the Channel Islands are direct dependencies of the British Crown, and not part of the United
Kingdom. They have their own legislatures and legal systems; the British government is responsible only for their
external affairs and defence. The defence, external affairs, internal security, and public services of the various British
dependent territories are also a responsibility of the government, normally exercised through governors appointed by
the Crown.
The dependent territories are: Anguilla; Bermuda; the British Antarctic Territory; the British Indian Ocean Territory
(BIOT); the British Virgin Islands; the Cayman Islands; the Falkland Islands; Gibraltar; Montserrat; Pitcairn, Ducie,
Henderson, and Oeno; St Helena and the St Helena Dependencies (Ascension and Tristan da Cunha); South
Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands; and the Turks and Caicos Islands. Virtually all are internally self-governing
and have opted for various political and economic reasons to remain under British control. The exceptions are the
British Antarctic Territory, which has no permanent population; and the BIOT, which comprises the Chagos
Archipelago, and particularly Diego Garcia, which is leased to the United States and is an important US naval base.
Hong Kong, formerly a dependent territory, which contained all but 200,000 of what was then the 6 million combined
population of the dependencies, was returned to China when Britain’s lease on the territory ran out in July 1997.
Included in the following account of the United Kingdom are sections on the land and resources, population,
education, art and culture, economy, government, and history (since 1707) of the nation. Except where otherwise
stated, all figures cited include England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Relevant material covered
elsewhere in Encarta may be summarized or omitted in this article; the topic headings under which such material
may be found are indicated. Numerous other articles containing additional and more-detailed information on
important aspects of the United Kingdom are cited at appropriate points in the text.
Religious freedom in the United Kingdom is guaranteed by various laws passed between the 17th and early 20th
centuries. Religion has played a minimal role in politics in Great Britain since the 18th century. However, in Northern
Ireland religion came to symbolize the political and cultural differences between the descendants of the original Irish
inhabitants and the descendants of the Scottish and English settlers—which in the 1970s erupted into sectarian
violence and terrorism (see History section below, and Northern Ireland: History). The latter group, in a majority, are
overwhelmingly Protestant and in favour of remaining part of the United Kingdom; the former are overwhelmingly
Roman Catholic and the majority are in favour of a united Ireland.
Most of the world’s religions are represented in the United Kingdom, but it is still predominantly a Christian nation, at
least nominally. There are two established Churches, the Church of England and the Church of Scotland
(Presbyterian). About 47 per cent of people say they belong to the Anglican communion, represented primarily by
the Church of England, but also including the Church in Wales, the Scottish Episcopal Church, and the Church of
Ireland.
The decision by the 1992 General Synod of the Church of England to admit women to ordination to the priesthood
threatened for a while to split the Church. A compromise was reached for congregations and priests opposed to the
change, but on the ordination of the first female priests in March 1994, 136 Anglican clerics converted to Roman
Catholicism; many more clerics and lay members have converted since. The ordination of women was rejected by
the Church in Wales in 1994, but approved by the Church of Scotland.
About 9 per cent of the British people are Roman Catholic, 4 per cent belong to one of the Presbyterian Churches,
and 1 per cent are Methodists. About 3 per cent of the population is Muslim, and there are also large Hindu, Jewish,
and Sikh communities; Britain’s Jewish population, numbering about 300,000, is the second-largest in Europe. There
are smaller communities of Jains, Zoroastrians, and Bahais. Islam and evangelical Christianity are the fastestgrowing faiths in the United Kingdom. However, an increasing percentage of the population professes no religious
faith, and may be represented by bodies like the British Humanist Association and National Secular Society.
he kingdom of Great Britain was formed by the Act of Union (1707) between England and Scotland. England
(including the principality of Wales, annexed in the 14th century and legally unified with England in the 16th century)
and Scotland had been separate kingdoms since the early Middle Ages. However, since the death of Elizabeth I in
1603 the same monarch had ruled both lands. In 1707 they gained a single legislature and London became the
capital of the entire island. Great Britain from then on had not only a single Parliament, but also a single system of
national administration, taxation, and weights and measures. All tariff barriers within the island were ended. England
and Scotland continued, however, to have separate traditions of law and separate established Churches—the
Presbyterian in Scotland, the Anglican in England and Wales. For the history of Great Britain before 1707, see
Britain, Ancient; England; Scotland; Wales.
A Century of Conflicts
One of the chief purposes of the Act of Union was to strengthen a land preoccupied with the War of the Spanish
Succession (1701-1714). Under the leadership of John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough, England, and then Great
Britain, and its allies had won many battles against France, then the most populous and powerful European state. By
1710, however, it seemed clear that not even Marlborough could prevent Louis XIV of France installing a Bourbon
relation on the Spanish throne. Marlborough and his political allies were replaced by members of the Tory Party, who
in due course made peace with France. In the Treaty of Utrecht (1713), Great Britain acknowledged the right of the
Bourbon dynasty to the Spanish Crown (see Utrecht, Peace of). At the same time France ceded to Great Britain the
North American areas of Hudson Bay, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland. Spain ceded Gibraltar and the
Mediterranean island of Minorca, and granted British merchants a limited right to trade with Spain’s American
colonies; until 1750 the Spanish concession included the asiento—the right to import African slaves into Spanish
America.
Because Queen Anne had no surviving children, she was succeeded, according to the Act of Settlement (1701), by
her nearest Protestant relative. This was the Elector of Hanover, who came from Germany in 1714 and was
accepted as George I of Great Britain. A new era of British history began.
Government in the 18th Century
Although the first years of George I’s reign were marked by two major crises—the Jacobite Rebellion of 1715 by
followers of Queen Anne’s half-brother, James Edward Stuart, and the South Sea Bubble, a stock market crash of
1720—Great Britain was actually entering two decades of relative peace and stability. Local government was left
largely in the hands of country gentlemen owning large estates. As justices of the peace they settled the majority of
legal disputes. They also administered roads, bridges, inns, and markets, and supervised the local operation of the
Poor Laws—aid to orphans, paupers, the very old, and those too ill to work.
At the national level, many Britons came to take pride in their mixed government, which combined monarchical (the
hereditary ruler), aristocratic (the hereditary House of Lords), and democratic (the elected House of Commons)
elements, and also provided for an independent judiciary. The reign of Queen Anne had been marked by
65
parliamentary elections every three years and by keen rivalry between Whig and Tory factions. With the coming of
George I, the Whigs were given preference over the Tories, many of whom were sympathetic to the claims of the
Stuart pretenders.
Under the Septennial Act of 1716, parliamentary elections were required every seven years rather than every three,
and direct political participation declined. Parliament was made up of 122 county members and 436 borough
members. Virtually all counties and boroughs sent two members to Parliament, but each borough, whether large city
or tiny village, had its own tradition of choosing its members of Parliament. Those Britons (a majority) who lacked the
right to vote could claim the rights of petition, jury trial, and freedom from arbitrary arrest. Full political privileges were
granted only to members of the Anglican Church, but non-Anglican Protestants could legally hold office if they were
willing to take Anglican communion once a year.
The Era of Robert Walpole
Although the king could appoint whomsoever he wished to his government, he found it convenient to select
members of Parliament who could exercise influence there. Such was the case of Robert Walpole, who was
appointed First Lord of the Treasury (and came to be known as Prime Minister) in 1721 in the aftermath of the South
Sea Bubble. The Bubble was sparked by the financial collapse of the giant South Sea Company. The crash slowed
down the commercial boom of the previous three decades, a time when the Bank of England had been founded, the
concept of a long-term national debt formulated, and many large joint-stock companies established.
George I could not speak English and both he and his son, the future King George II, were often in Hanover,
Germany, which they continued to rule. As a result, Walpole was able to build up and dominate a government
machine. He presided over an informal group of ministers that came to be known as the Cabinet, and he controlled
Parliament by his personality, his policies, and his use of patronage. His influence, however, had limits. Hoping to
curb smuggling, Walpole in 1732 and 1733 sought to replace a land tax and customs duties on imports with an
excise tax on wine and tobacco collected from retailers. Parliamentary critics and popular rioters protested against
the army of tax collectors which the bill would have created, and Walpole was ultimately forced to give up his plan.
During his administration (1721-1742), Walpole was largely successful in keeping Great Britain out of war, and even
Anglo-French relations remained cordial. In the late 1730s, however, a war party emerged in Parliament. Its
members sought revenge against Spain for the harassment by Spanish coast guards of British merchants wishing to
trade with Spanish colonists in the Americas. In 1739, against Walpole’s better judgement, Great Britain declared
war on Spain; almost three years later parliamentary pressure forced Walpole to resign.
Two Decades of Conflict
Between 1739 and 1763, Great Britain was almost continuously at war. The war against Spain, known as the War of
Jenkins’s Ear, soon merged with the War of the Austrian Succession, which began in 1740, pitting Prussia, France,
and Spain against Austria. Great Britain became Austria’s chief ally, and British armies and ships fought the French
in Europe, in North America, on the high seas, and in India, where the English and French East India companies
competed for influence.
In 1745 the Scottish Jacobites, taking advantage of Great Britain’s involvement on the Continent, made their last
attempt to recover the British throne for the Stuart dynasty (see The Forty-Five). Prince Charles Edward Stuart
(“Bonnie Prince Charlie”) landed in Scotland, won the allegiance of thousands of Highlanders, and in September
captured Edinburgh and proclaimed his father King James III. Marching south with his army, Charles came within
161 km (100 mi) of London, but failed to attract many English or lowland Scots supporters. In December he retreated
to Scotland. The following April he and his Jacobites were defeated at the Battle of Culloden and he fled to France.
The War of the Austrian Succession ended with the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748), which, as far as Great Britain
was concerned, restored the territorial status quo. By then, a series of short-lived ministries had given way to the
relatively stable administration (1748-1754) of Henry Pelham. During the mid-1750s the British found themselves
fighting an undeclared war against France both in North America (see French and Indian War) and in India.
In 1756 formal war broke out again. The Seven Years’ War (1756-1763) pitted Great Britain, allied with Prussia,
against France in alliance with Austria and Russia. For Great Britain the war began with a series of defeats in North
America, in India, in the Mediterranean, and on the Continent, where the French overran Hanover. Under strong
popular pressure, George II then appointed the fiery William Pitt the Elder as the minister to run the war abroad,
while his colleague, Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle, and brother of Henry Pelham, oiled the political
wheels at home. Pitt was an expert strategist and conducted the war with vigour. The French fleet was defeated off
the coast of Portugal, the British East India Company triumphed over its French counterpart in Bengal and
elsewhere, and British and colonial troops in North America captured Fort Duquesne (on the site of present-day
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania), and Quebec and Montreal in Canada.
Although Pitt was forced from office in 1761 and Great Britain negotiated separately from Prussia, the Treaty of Paris
(1763) was a diplomatic triumph. All French claims to Canada and to lands east of the Mississippi River were ceded
to Great Britain, as were most French claims to India. Spain, which had entered the war on the French side in 1762,
ceded Florida. The Treaty of Paris established Great Britain’s 18th-century empire at its height.
Population Growth, Urbanization, and Industrialization
During the first half of the 18th century, the population of Great Britain increased by less than 15 per cent. Between
1751 and 1801, the year of the first official census, the number rose by two thirds to 10.7 million. Between 1801 and
1851, the population doubled. The reasons include a decline in deaths from infectious diseases, especially smallpox
after Edward Jenner developed a smallpox vaccine in 1796; an improved diet made possible by more efficient
farming practices and the large-scale use of the potato; and earlier marriages and larger families, especially in those
areas where new industries were starting up.
A quickening of economic change was noticeable by the 1780s, when James Watt, the Scottish engineer, perfected
the steam engine as a new source of power. New inventions mechanized the spinning and weaving of imported
cotton. Between 1760 and 1830 the production of cotton textiles increased twelvefold, making the product Great
Britain’s leading export. At the same time, other inventions raised the production of iron by similar amounts, while the
amount of coal mined increased fourfold. By 1830 this Industrial Revolution had turned Great Britain into the
“workshop of the world”.
The towns that spread across north-western England, lowland Scotland, and southern Wales accustomed a
generation of workers to factory life. The advantages were more regular hours, higher wages than those received by
handicraft workers or farm labourers, and less dependence on human muscle power; many machines could be
operated by women and children. The disadvantages included the devaluation of old artisan skills; poor and often
dangerous working conditions; a novel emphasis on discipline and punctuality; less personal working relationships;
long hours; and in many areas an almost feudal dependence on the local industrialist. For several decades also,
such civic amenities as water and sewerage systems did not keep pace with population growth.
London remained Great Britain’s largest city, a centre of commerce, shipping, justice, and administration more than
of industry. Its population, estimated at 600,000 in 1701, had grown to 950,000 by 1801, and to 4.5 million by 1881,
making it the largest city in the world. By then, Great Britain had become the first nation to have more urban than
rural inhabitants.
The Early Years of George III
In 1760, the 76-year-old George II died and was succeeded by his 22-year-old grandson, George III. The new,
British-born king had a deep sense of moral duty and tried to play a direct role in governing his country. To this end
he appointed men he trusted, such as his one-time Scottish tutor, John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute, who became the
prime minister in 1762. Bute was not a success, however, and four short-lived ministries followed. In 1770, George
III found in Lord North a leader pleasing both to him and to the majority of Parliament.
During the 1760s, politicians out of office spurred a campaign of criticism against George III’s use of his patronage
powers. A sharply critical newspaper publisher, John Wilkes, was convicted of seditious libel (1764), imprisoned, and
barred from the parliamentary seat to which he had been repeatedly elected. An organization of his followers, the
Society of Supporters of the Bill of Rights, provided a model for subsequent radical reform movements. Their
programme included freedom of the press, the abolition of “rotten boroughs” a widening of the franchise (right to
vote), and an increase in the frequency of meetings of Parliament.
American War of Independence
The fears expressed by Wilkes’s supporters confirmed the more radical American colonial leaders in their suspicion
of the British government. Long accustomed to a considerable degree of self-government and freed, after 1763, from
66
the French danger, they resented the attempts by successive British ministries to make them pay a share of the cost
of imperial defence in the form of assorted taxes and duties. They also resented British attempts to enforce
mercantilistic regulations and to treat colonial legislatures as secondary to the government in London. American
resistance led in due course to the calling of the First Continental Congress (1774) and the beginning of hostilities
(1775). Although parliamentary critics such as Edmund Burke continued to urge conciliation, George III and Lord
North felt the rebellious colonists had to be brought to their senses.
British governmental authority in the 13 colonies collapsed in 1775 at the start of the American War of
Independence. Although British forces were able to occupy first Boston and later New York (1776) and Philadelphia
(1777), the Americans did not give up. After the defeat of General John Burgoyne at Saratoga (1777), the civil war
within the British Empire became an international conflict. First the French (1778), then the Spanish (1779), and the
Dutch (1780) joined the anti-British side, while other powers formed a League of Armed Neutrality.
For the first time in more than a century, Great Britain was diplomatically isolated. Following the surrender of General
Charles Cornwallis after the Siege of Yorktown (1781), opposition at home to the frustrations and high taxation
brought on by the American war compelled Lord North to resign (1782) and his successors to sign a new Treaty of
Paris (1783). The 13 colonies were recognized as independent states and were granted all British territory south of
the Great Lakes. Florida and Minorca were ceded to Spain and some islands in the West Indies and some African
ports to France.
Pitt, Reform, and Revolution
In the wake of the war, many old institutions were re-examined. The Economical Reform Act (1782) reduced the
patronage powers of the king and his ministers. The Irish Parliament, controlled by Anglo-Irish Protestants, won a
greater degree of independence. The India Act (1784) gave ultimate authority over British India to the government
instead of the British East India Company. The India Act was sponsored by William Pitt the Younger, who late in
1783 became Britain’s youngest-ever prime minister at the age of 24.
Pitt remained in office for most of the rest of his life (1783-1801 and 1804-1806) and did much to shape the modern
prime-ministership. In the aftermath of the American War of Independence, he restored faith in the government’s
ability to pay interest on the much-increased national debt, and he set up the first consolidated annual budget. Pitt
was also sympathetic to political reform, to the repeal of restrictions on non-Anglican Protestants, and to the abolition
of the slave trade, but when these measures failed to win a parliamentary majority he dropped them.
Reformers such as Charles James Fox and Thomas Paine were inspired by the revolution that began in France in
1789; others, such as Edmund Burke, became fearful of all radical change. Pitt was less concerned with French
ideas than actions, and when the French revolutionary army invaded the Austrian Netherlands (Belgium) and
declared war on Great Britain in February 1793, a decade of moderate reform in Britain gave way to 22 years of allout war.
Napoleonic Wars
In the 1790s, the wars of the French Revolution merged into the Napoleonic Wars, as Napoleon I (Napoleon
Bonaparte) took over the French revolutionary government. Pitt’s First Coalition (with Prussia, Austria, and Russia)
against the French collapsed in 1796, and in 1797 Great Britain was beset by naval defeat and mutiny, and by
French invasion attempts.
The war caused a boom in farm production and in certain industries. At the same time it caused rapid inflation: wage
rates lagged behind prices, and Poor Law expenses grew. In 1797 the Bank of England was forced to take Britain off
the gold standard (that is, the system of fully backing paper money with an equivalent amount of gold), and
Parliament voted the first tax on income.
Rebellion and a French invasion threat led to the Act of Union with Ireland (1801), and the formation of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The Dublin legislature was abolished and the 100 Irish representatives
became members of the Parliament in London; only an Irish viceroy and a London-appointed administration
remained in Dublin.
Despite the defeat of the French at the Battle of the Nile (1798), the war did not go well for Britain. The Second
Coalition collapsed in 1801, and in the Treaty of Amiens (1802) Britain made peace with Napoleon. War broke out
again the following year, but between 1805 and 1807 the Third Coalition also collapsed. Napoleon’s plans to invade
Britain were foiled by the British naval victory under Horatio Nelson at Trafalgar (1805).
Napoleon then sought to drive the United Kingdom into bankruptcy with his policy of trade blockage known as the
Continental System. Difficulties in enforcing the blockade prompted Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812. This led
to the Fourth Coalition (Britain, Russia, Austria, and Prussia) and to Napoleon’s downfall two years later. Britain’s
contribution included an army led by Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, fighting in Spain (1809-1813), and,
after Napoleon’s return from exile in Elba, the Battle of Waterloo in June 1815. The War of 1812 with the United
States was for the United Kingdom a sideshow that brought no territorial changes.
A Century of Peace
In 1811 George III, by then suffering apparent delirium probably caused by the metabolic disorder porphyria, was
succeeded by his eldest son, who reigned first as Prince Regent and then from 1820, as George IV. Although a
patron of art and Regency architecture, George IV became unpopular partly because of his profligacy and
extravagance, but mainly because of his treatment of his wife, Caroline of Brunswick, including his attempt to divorce
her in 1820 and his refusal to allow her to attend his coronation in 1821.
Post-War Government (1815-1830)
Robert Banks Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool, presided as Tory prime minister (1812-1827) over a Cabinet of
luminaries including Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh, the Foreign Secretary, who represented Britain at the
Congress of Vienna (1815). Former Dutch possessions such as Cape Colony and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) were
added to the British Empire, and a balance of power was restored to continental Europe. Although eager to consult
its European partners about possible territorial changes, Britain soon made it clear that it had no desire to join the
Holy Alliance (Russia, Austria, and Prussia) and become a policeman of Europe.
Rapid demobilization after the wars, economic depression, and bad harvests led to rioting in 1816. The Liverpool
government sought to aid landlords with protective tariffs (the Corn Laws of 1815), and to aid other supporters by
repealing the wartime income tax (1817) and restoring the gold standard (1819). The so-called Six Acts (1819)
curbed the freedom of the press and the rights of assembly. A huge political reform demonstration near Manchester
(1819) was broken up and 11 people were killed by the militia in an incident which came to be known as the Peterloo
Massacre. The economy recovered during the early 1820s, and government policies became more moderate.
George Canning, who replaced Castlereagh as Foreign Secretary (1822-1827), welcomed the independence of
Spain’s South American colonies and aided the Greek rebellion against Turkish rule—a cause also supported by the
Romantic poet Lord Byron. William Huskisson at the Board of Trade cut tariffs and eased international trade. Sir
Robert Peel, the Home Secretary, reformed the criminal law and instituted (1829) a modern police force in London.
Barriers to trade union organization were also reduced (1824-1825).
Despite an early 19th-century religious revival, especially among Methodists and other non-Anglican Protestants,
Tory ministries remained reluctant to challenge religious and political fundamentals. In 1828 Parliament agreed,
however, to end political restrictions on Protestant dissenters; one year later the government of the Duke of
Wellington (1828-1830) was challenged in Ireland by a mass movement called the Catholic Association to press for
the full emancipation of Catholics tacitly promised by Pitt at the time of the Act of Union. Wellington, fearing civil
unrest in Ireland, granted Roman Catholics the right to become members of Parliament and to hold public office
(1828, 1829), but in so doing split the Tory Party (see Catholic Emancipation Act). In November 1830, after the
election prompted by the death of George IV and by the accession of his brother, William IV, a predominantly Whig
ministry headed by Charles Grey, the 2nd Earl Grey, took over.
Reforms of the 1830s
The great political issue of 1831 and 1832 was the Whig Reform Bill. After much debate in and out of the House of
Commons, and after a threat by the government to swamp a reluctant House of Lords with new and sympathetic
peers, the measure became law in June 1832. It provided for a redistribution of seats in favour of the growing
industrial cities and a single property test that gave the vote to upper-middle-class men. In England and Wales the
electorate grew by 50 per cent. In Ireland it more than doubled, and in Scotland it increased by 15 times. The bill set
up a system of registration that encouraged political party organization, both locally and nationally. The measure
weakened the influence of the monarch and the House of Lords.
67
Other reforms followed (see Factory Reform Acts). The Factory Act (1833) limited the working hours of women and
children and provided for central inspectors. Slavery was abolished in the same year, and the controversial New
Poor Law (1834) also involved supervision by a central board. The Municipal Corporations Act (1835) provided for
elected representative town councils. An Ecclesiastical Commission was set up in 1836 to reform the established
Church, and a separate statute (1836) placed the registration of births, deaths, and marriages in State rather than
Church hands.
In 1837 the elderly William IV died and was succeeded as monarch by his 18-year-old niece, Victoria. She and her
husband, Albert, ultimately came to symbolize the so-called Victorian virtues: a close-knit family life, a sense of
public duty, and respectability. Victorian beliefs and attitudes were also moulded by the revival of evangelical
religion, and by utilitarian notions of efficiency and good business practice (see Victorian Britain).
Chartism, the Corn Laws, and the Irish Famine
The Whig reform spirit ebbed during the ministry of Lord Melbourne (1835-1841), and an economic depression in
1837 brought to public attention two powerful protest organizations. The supporters of Chartism, known as Chartists,
urged the immediate adoption of the People’s Charter, which would have transformed Britain into a near political
democracy (with universal male suffrage, equal electoral districts, and secret ballots) and which was somehow
expected to improve living standards as well. Millions of workers signed Charter petitions in 1839, 1842, and 1848,
and some Chartist demonstrations turned into riots. Parliament repeatedly rejected the People’s Charter, but it
proved more receptive to the creed of the Manchester-based Anti-Corn Law League. League leaders such as
Richard Cobden expected the repeal of tariffs on imported food to advance the welfare of manufacturers and
workers alike, while promoting international trade and peace among nations.
Sir Robert Peel’s Conservative ministry (1841-1846) became active in reducing Britain’s tariffs but brought back
income tax to make up for lost revenue. In the winter of 1845-1846, spurred on by a disastrous outbreak of potato
blight in Ireland and the consequent Irish Famine, Peel proposed the complete repeal of the Corn Laws. With Whig
aid the measure passed, but two thirds of Peel’s fellow Conservatives condemned the action as a sell-out of the
party’s agricultural supporters. The Conservatives divided between Peelites and protectionists, and the Whigs
returned (1846) to power under John Russell, 1st Earl Russell.
The repeal of the Corn Laws did nothing to alleviate the suffering in Ireland. The blight returned in the winter of 1846,
and the wheat harvest in Great Britain and continental Europe was poor. Weakened by starvation and eviction by
absentee landlords, an estimated one million people are thought to have died between 1847 and 1851, despite the
return of good potato harvests for one quarter of the population. An estimated further two to three million emigrated,
many of whom died en route.
During the Peel and Russell years the trend towards free trade continued, aided by the repeal (1849) of the
Navigation Acts, and a system of administrative regulation was gradually established. Women and children were
barred from underground work in mines (1842) and limited to 10-hour working days in factories (1847). Regulations
were also imposed on urban sanitation facilities (1842) and passenger-carrying railways (1844). Commissions were
set up to oversee prisons, asylums for the insane, merchant shipping, and private charities. Attempts to subsidize
elementary education, however, were hampered by conflict over the Anglican Church’s role in running schools.
Mid-Victorian Prosperity
From the late 1840s until the late 1860s, the British people were less concerned with domestic conflict than with an
economic boom that was only occasionally affected by wars and threats of war on the Continent and overseas. The
Great Exhibition of 1851 in London symbolized Great Britain’s industrial supremacy. The 10,600-km (6,600-mi)
railway network of 1850 more than doubled during the mid-Victorian years, and the number of passengers carried
each year went up sevenfold. It was a period of great inventions; the telegraph provided instant long-distance
communication; inexpensive steel was made possible by the process invented by Sir Henry Bessemer (1856); and a
boom in steamship building began in the 1860s. The value of British exports tripled, and overseas capital
investments quadrupled. Working-class living standards also improved, and the growth of trade unionism among
engineers, carpenters, and others led to the founding of the Trades Union Congress in 1868.
In the aftermath of the Continental revolutions of 1848, a Britain governed by the Peelite-Liberal coalition (18521855) of Lord Aberdeen drifted into war with an autocratic, expansionist Russia. In alliance with the France of
Napoleon III, Britain entered the Crimean War in 1854. Parliamentary criticism of army mismanagement, however,
caused the downfall of Aberdeen. He was replaced by Lord Palmerston, a staunch British nationalist and champion
of European liberalism, who saw the war to its conclusion—a limited Anglo-French victory in 1856.
In 1858 the Indian Mutiny was for the most part suppressed, and Britain enacted legislation that made British India a
Crown Colony, abolishing the rule of the East India Company. In contrast, domestic self-government was
encouraged in Britain’s white settler colonies: Canada (federated under the British North America Act of 1867),
Australia, New Zealand, and Cape Colony (South Africa). Britain maintained a difficult neutrality during the American
Civil War (1861-1865). It encouraged the unification of Italy, but witnessed with apprehension the creation of a
German empire under Prussian domination by Prince Otto von Bismarck.
The Gladstone-Disraeli Rivalry
During the 16 years after Palmerston’s death in 1865, the rivalry between William Ewart Gladstone and Benjamin
Disraeli dominated British politics. Both had begun as Tories, but in 1846 Gladstone had become a Peelite and had
thereafter gradually moved towards liberalism. As Palmerston’s Chancellor of the Exchequer, he had won popular
appeal by ending the paper tax (thereby making cheaper newspapers possible) and by advocating an expansion of
the franchise.
Disraeli had become the Conservative leader of the protectionists in the House of Commons in the late 1840s, and
had served in the brief minority ministries of Lord Derby in the 1850s. After a political reform bill proposed during
Lord Russell’s second ministry (1865-1866) and introduced by Gladstone was defeated, a Conservative Cabinet
headed by Lord Derby (1866-1868) ultimately came up with the Reform Bill of 1867, which Disraeli successfully
piloted through the House of Commons. The measure enfranchised more than one million male urban workers. It
almost doubled the English and Welsh electorates and more than doubled the Scottish. It also launched the era of
mass political organization and of increasingly polarized and disciplined parliamentary parties.
Reforms of Gladstone and Disraeli
Disraeli succeeded Derby as the nation’s prime minister early in 1868, but a Liberal election victory in December of
that year gave the post to Gladstone. Gladstone’s first Cabinet (1868-1874) was responsible for numerous reforms:
the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland; the creation of a national system of elementary education; the full
admission of religious dissenters to the universities of Oxford and Cambridge; a merit-based civil service; the secret
ballot; and judicial and army reform. During the Disraeli ministry that followed (1874-1880), the Conservatives
passed legislation advancing “Tory democracy”—trade union legalization, slum clearance, and public health—but
Disraeli became more concerned with upholding the British Empire in Africa and Asia, and scoring a diplomatic
triumph at the Congress of Berlin (1878).
A whistle-stop campaign by Gladstone in 1879 and 1880 restored him to the prime ministership. His second Cabinet
(1880-1885) curbed electoral corruption (1883) and, with the Reform Act of 1884, extended the vote to almost all
males who owned or rented housing, including some two million agricultural labourers. The measure made the
single-member parliamentary constituency the general rule.
The Question of Home Rule
Gladstone became increasingly concerned with bringing peace and land reform to Ireland, which was represented in
Parliament by the Irish Nationalist Party of Charles Stewart Parnell. When Gladstone became a convert to the cause
of home rule—the creation of a semi-independent Irish legislature and Cabinet—he divided the Liberal Party and led
his brief third ministry (1886) to defeat. A second effort to enact Irish home rule during Gladstone’s fourth ministry
(1892-1894) was blocked by the House of Lords.
Late Victorian Economic and Social Change
The same agricultural depression that led to unrest among Irish tenant farmers in the second half of the 19th century
also undermined British agriculture and the prosperity of the country squires. The mid-Victorian boom gave way to
an era of deflation, falling profit margins, and occasional large-scale unemployment. Both the United States and
Germany overtook Great Britain in the production of steel and other manufactured goods.
At the same time, Britain remained the world’s prime shipbuilder, shipper, and banker, and a majority of British
workers gained in purchasing power. Trade union membership grew, and significant attempts were made to organize
68
the semi-skilled; the London Dockers’ Strike (1889) was the result of one such effort. Social investigators and
professed socialists discovered large pockets of poverty in the slums of London and other cities, and the national
government as well as voluntary agencies were called on to remedy social evils and disease.
Despite a high level of emigration to British colonies and the United States—more than 200,000 people each year
during the 1880s—the population of England and Wales doubled between 1851 and 1911 to more than 36 million;
that of Scotland grew by more than 60 per cent to almost 5 million. In Ireland, where emigration was highest, the
population was reduced by migration to about 2 million; between 1847 and 1861, in the aftermath of the famine,
more than 2 million people crossed the Atlantic to the United States. Both death rates and birth rates in Great Britain
declined somewhat, and a series of changes in the law made it possible for a tiny minority of women to enter
universities, vote in local elections, and keep control of their property when they married.
The Late Victorian Empire
A relative lack of interest in empire during the mid-Victorian years gave way to increased concern during the 1880s
and 1890s. The raising of tariff barriers by the United States, Germany, and France made colonies valuable again as
trade outlets, ushering in an era of rivalry with Russia in the Middle East and along the Indian frontier, and a
“scramble for Africa” that involved the carving out of large claims by Great Britain, France, and Germany. Hong Kong
and Singapore served as centres of British trade and influence in China and the South Pacific.
The completion of the Suez Canal (1869) led indirectly to a British protectorate over Egypt in 1882. Queen Victoria
became Empress of India in 1877, and both Victoria’s golden jubilee (1887) and her diamond jubilee (1897)
celebrated imperial unity. The Conservative ministries of Lord Salisbury (1885, 1886-1892, and 1895-1902) were
preoccupied with imperial concerns as well. The policies of Salisbury’s colonial secretary, Joseph Chamberlain,
contributed to the outbreak of the South African Wars (Boer Wars) in 1899. Britain suffered initial reverses in this war
but then captured Johannesburg and Pretoria in 1900. Only after protracted guerrilla warfare, however, was the
conflict brought to an end in 1902. By then Queen Victoria was dead.
The Edwardian Age (1901-1914)
In the aftermath of the South African Wars, the United Kingdom signed a treaty of alliance with Japan (1902) and
ended several decades of overseas rivalry with France in the Entente Cordiale (1904). After Anglo-Russian disputes
had also been settled, this link became the Triple Entente (1907), which faced the Triple Alliance of Germany,
Austria, and Italy.
As the reign of Edward VII began, however, most Britons were more concerned with domestic matters. The
Education Act (1902), introduced by the administration of Conservative prime minister Arthur Balfour, helped meet a
demand for national efficiency with the beginnings of a national system of secondary education, but the measure
stirred old passions. In the course of Balfour’s ministry (1902-1905) the Conservative Party was divided between
tariff reformers, who wanted to restore protective duties, and free traders.
The general election of 1906 gave the Liberals an overwhelming majority. Trade union influence led to the
appearance of a small separate parliamentary Labour Party of 29 members as well. The Liberal government, headed
first by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman (1905-1908) and then by Herbert Henry Asquith (1908-1916), gave internal
self-government to the new Union of South Africa (1910) and partial provincial self-government to British India
(1909).
Under the inspiration of David Lloyd George and Sir Winston Churchill, it also laid the foundations of the welfare
state. Its programme included the introduction of old-age pensions (1908), government employment offices (1909),
unemployment insurance (1911), a contributory programme of national medical insurance for most workers (1911),
and boards to fix minimum wages for miners and others (1909, 1912). Lloyd George’s controversial, so-called
people’s budget (1909), designed to pay the costs of social welfare and naval rearmament, was blocked by the
House of Lords and led in due course to the Parliament Act of 1911, which left the Lords with no more than a
temporary veto over legislation. The Conservatives made a comeback, however, in the general elections of 1910,
and the Liberals were thereafter dependent on the Irish Nationalists to stay in power.
Although the economy seemed to be booming, wages scarcely kept up with rising prices, and the years 1911 to
1914 were marked by major and divisive strikes of miners, dock workers, and transport workers. Women in the
suffragette movement staged violent demonstrations in favour of female enfranchisement. When the Liberals sought
to enact home rule for Ireland, non-Catholic Irish from the northern province of Ulster threatened force to prevent the
British government from compelling them to become part of a semi-independent Ireland. In the midst of these
domestic disputes, a crisis in the Balkans exploded into World War I.
The Era of World Wars
Although the competitive naval build-up of Great Britain and Germany is often cited as a cause of World War I,
Anglo-German relations were actually cordial in early 1914, and Britain was Germany’s best customer. It was
Germany’s threat to France and its invasion of neutral Belgium that prompted Great Britain to declare war.
Great Britain in World War I
A British expeditionary force was immediately sent to France and helped stem the German advance at the Marne.
Fighting on the Western Front soon became mired in a bloody stalemate, amid muddy trenches, barbed wire, and
machine-gun emplacements. Battles to push the Germans back failed repeatedly at the cost of hundreds of
thousands of lives. Efforts to outflank the Central Powers (Germany, Austria, and Turkey) in the Balkans, notably the
Gallipoli Campaign (1915-1916), also failed. At the Battle of Jutland (1916), British forces prevented the German
fleet from venturing into the North Sea and beyond, but German submarines threatened Britain with starvation early
in 1917; merchant-ship convoys guarded by destroyers helped avert this danger.
In May 1915 Asquith’s Liberal ministry became a coalition of Liberals, Conservatives, and a few Labour Party
members. Lloyd George became Minister of Munitions. Continued frustration with the nation’s inability to win the war,
however, led in December 1916 to the replacement of Asquith by Lloyd George, heading a predominantly
Conservative coalition. The 1916 Easter Rising in Ireland, resulted in several hundred dead. By 1918 the United
Kingdom’s annual budget was 13 times that of 1913; tax rates had risen fivefold, and the total national debt,
fourteenfold.
Although many British people welcomed the end (1917) of tsarist rule in Russia, they saw the Bolshevik decision to
make a separate peace with Germany (1918) as a sell-out. However, the entry of the United States into the war in
April 1917 tipped the balance of power, making possible the successful tank offensive engineered by General
Douglas Haig in the summer of 1918, and the German surrender in November.
The election called immediately after the armistice gave the Lloyd George coalition an overwhelming mandate. The
Labour Party, now formally pledged to socialism, became the largest opposition party, while the Asquith wing of a
divided Liberal Party was almost wiped out. By then the Reform Act of 1918 had granted the vote to all men over the
age of 21 and all women over 30.
Changes Wrought by the War
Lloyd George represented Britain as one of the Big Three (together with France and the United States) at the Paris
Peace Conference in 1919. The resulting treaties enlarged the British Empire as former German colonies in Africa
and Turkish holdings in the Middle East became British mandates. At the same time, Britain’s self-governing
dominions—Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa—became separate treaty signatories and separate
members of the new League of Nations.
The fight for independence and an intermittent, bitter civil war in Ireland ended with a treaty negotiated by Lloyd
George, and finalized in December 1921. Most of the island became, in 1922, the Irish Free State, independent of
British rule in all but name and allegiance to the Crown. The six counties of Northern Ireland continued to be
represented in the British Parliament, and they were also granted their own provincial parliament (see Partition of
Ireland). The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland.
The immediate post-war years were marked by economic boom, rapid demobilization, and much labour unrest. By
1922, however, the boom had petered out. In that year a rebellion by a group of Conservative members of
Parliament ended the prime ministership of Lloyd George, which was succeeded by the wholly Conservative ministry
of Andrew Bonar Law.
The Inter-War Era
69
During the early 1920s a major political shift took place in Britain. The general election of 1922 gave victory to the
Conservatives; a second election, called a year later by Stanley Baldwin, Bonar Law’s successor as Conservative
leader, left no party with a clear majority. As a consequence, Ramsay MacDonald, the Labour Party leader, became
the first professed socialist to serve as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. His first ministry (1924) rested on
Liberal acquiescence and lasted less than a year. Yet another election brought back Baldwin’s Conservatives. Lloyd
George’s and Asquith’s efforts at Liberal reunion failed to restore the party’s fortunes, and it has remained a minor
party in British politics.
The General Strike
The Baldwin ministry (1924-1929) had to face an unprecedented demonstration of trade union solidarity in the form
of the 1926 General Strike. Undertaken in support of the miners who were resisting the imposition of lower pay and
longer hours, the strike was frustrated by the use of troops to maintain essential services, and in the event lasted
only nine days. At the time, however, it was interpreted as a direct challenge to the state and led to changes in trade
union legislation requiring workers to contract into a union, rather than having a membership levy automatically
deducted from their pay.
The Baldwin government, however, also enacted several social reform measures, including the Widows’, Orphans’,
and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act (1925), established a national electric power network (1926), and reformed
local government (1929). In 1928 women were given equal voting rights to men.
The Great Depression
Between 1929 and 1932 the effects of the severe economic recession known as the Great Depression were to more
than double an already high rate of unemployment in Britain. In the course of the three years, both the levels of
industrial activity and of prices declined by a quarter, while industries such as shipbuilding collapsed almost entirely.
Ramsay MacDonald’s second Labour government (1929-1931) found itself unable to cope with the depression. In
1931 it gave way to a national government headed first by MacDonald and then by Baldwin (1935-1937), and made
up mostly of Conservatives. The Labour Party denounced MacDonald as a traitor, but the national government won
an overwhelming mandate in the general election of 1931. It took the United Kingdom off the gold standard, restored
protective tariffs, and subsidized the building of houses.
Between 1933 and 1937 the economy recovered steadily, with the car, construction, and electrical industries leading
the way. Unemployment remained high, however, especially in Wales, Scotland, and northern England. Inter-war
society was influenced by the radio (monopolized by the BBC, founded in 1927) and the cinema, but British life was
little affected by the Continental ideologies of communism and fascism. The empire remained a fact, even though the
Statute of Westminster (1931) proclaimed the equality of Commonwealth nations such as Canada and Australia.
Religious attendance declined, but George V (reigned 1910-1936) maintained the prestige of the monarchy. When
his son, Edward VIII, insisted on marrying a twice-divorced American, abdication (1936) proved to be the only
acceptable solution. Under Edward’s brother, George VI, the monarchy again provided the model family of the land.
The United Kingdom and World War II
Memories of World War I left Britons with an overwhelming desire to avoid another conflict, and the country played a
leading role in the League of Nations and at inter-war disarmament conferences, such as those in Washington
(1921-1922) and London (1930) which limited naval size. Conscious also that Germany might have been unfairly
treated at the 1919 peace conference and Treaty of Versailles, the British government followed a policy of
appeasement in dealing after 1933 with Germany and its leader, Adolf Hitler.
Hitler’s decisions to leave the League of Nations (1934), rearm (1935), and remilitarize the Rhineland (1936) in
defiance of the Treaty of Versailles were accepted. So was the German annexation of Austria (1938) in pursuit of
Anschluss. In his efforts to keep the peace at all costs, the prime minister Neville Chamberlain also acquiesced to
the Munich Pact of 1938, which gave Germany the Sudetenland portion of Czechoslovakia. Only after the German
annexation of Prague (March 1939) did the United Kingdom make pledges of military support to Poland and
Romania.
When Hitler invaded Poland in September 1939, Britain and France declared war (see World War II). The defeat of
Poland and half a year of relative quiet (“the phoney war”) were followed in the spring of 1940 by the German
invasion of Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, and France. In May of that year, Winston Churchill, a
leading opponent of appeasement who had rejoined the Cabinet in 1939, replaced Chamberlain as head of a W ar
Cabinet (1940-1945) that included all three main political parties. After the surrender of France in June 1940, the
United Kingdom stood alone. Under Churchill’s direction, war mobilization in Britain became more comprehensive
than that achieved by any other power. Although a German invasion plan was foiled by British air supremacy, large
parts of London and many other cities were destroyed in the Blitz—bombing raids that killed 60,000 civilians.
Beginning early in 1941, the still-neutral United States granted Lend-Lease aid to Britain.
The direction of the war changed with the German invasion of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in
June 1941 and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Churchill then forged the “Grand Alliance”
with Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and US President Franklin D. Roosevelt against Germany, Italy, and Japan, the socalled Axis Powers. In the immediate aftermath of the Japanese entry into the war, much of the British Empire in
South East Asia was overrun, but late in 1942 the tide turned. The British contribution included the Battle of the
Atlantic against the German submarine menace and the campaign led by General Bernard Montgomery, later
Viscount Montgomery of Alamein, against the German army in North Africa. Britain’s alliance with the United States
strengthened, and British forces were heavily involved in the invasion of Sicily and Italy (1943), the invasion of
France (1944), and the ultimate defeat of the Axis Powers in 1945.
The Winds of Change
The general election of 1945 gave the Labour Party for the first time a majority of the popular vote and an
overwhelming parliamentary majority. The result was less a rebuke of Churchill’s wartime leadership than a popular
desire to ensure that the return of peace would see reforms benefiting the majority of Britons, in contrast to the
aftermath of World War I, when the government failed to live up to its promises to build a “land fit for heroes”.
Clement Attlee’s Ministry (1945-1951)
During the years that followed, Labour, led by Clement Attlee, sought to promote social equality in Britain, while
surviving post-war austerity, dismantling the empire, and adjusting to the Cold War with the USSR.
The Welfare State and the NHS
The two measures that established a welfare state in Britain, the National Insurance Act of 1946 (a consolidation of
benefit laws involving maternity, unemployment, disability, old age, and death) and the National Health Service, set
up in 1948, were widely popular. Both drew on the wartime reports of William Beveridge, 1st Baron Beveridge of
Tuggal, a Liberal. The nationalization of the Bank of England, the coal industry, gas and electricity, the railways, and
most airlines proved relatively non-controversial, but the Conservatives vigorously if vainly opposed the
nationalization of the road-freight, and the iron and steel industries.
In 1948 Labour eliminated the last remnants of plural voting (that is, the right to vote in more than one constituency)
by abolishing the university seats, and reduced the delaying powers of the House of Lords from two years to one.
Post-War Austerity
These changes were instituted in the midst of a post-war era of austerity. As a result of the war, the national debt
had tripled, and for the first time since the 18th century Britain had become a debtor nation. With the end of US
Lend-Lease aid in 1945, the British import bill had risen abruptly long before military demobilization and reconversion
to peacetime industry had been accomplished. Wartime regulations, therefore, had been kept; food-rationing in 1946
and 1947 was more restrictive than during the war.
Post-war Germany was divided into occupation zones among the USSR, the United States, the United Kingdom, and
France, but efforts to reach agreement on a peace treaty with Germany broke down as it became clear that the
USSR was converting all of eastern Europe into a Soviet sphere of influence. Britain, assisted by the US-sponsored
Marshall Plan (1948-1952), joined other Western powers and the United States in NATO in 1949 in order to counter
the Soviet threat.
The British government felt less able, however, to play an independent role in the Middle East; in 1948 it gave up its
Palestinian mandate, which led to the establishment of Israel and the first Arab-Israeli War. Aware of the country’s
depleted coffers and unable to withstand the widespread demand for self-rule, the Labour government granted
independence to India and Pakistan in 1947, and to Burma and Ceylon in 1948.
Conservative Rule (1951-1964)
70
Its programme of social reform apparently accomplished, the Labour government’s parliamentary majority was
sharply reduced in the general election of 1950, and the election of 1951 enabled the Conservatives under Winston
Churchill to slip back into power. Except for denationalizing iron and steel, the Conservatives made no attempt to
reverse the legislation or the welfare-state programme enacted by Labour. The early 1950s brought steady
economic recovery. As income tax rates were reduced and the framework of wartime and post-war regulation largely
dismantled, housing construction boomed and international trade flourished.
With a veteran world statesman heading Britain’s government, the accession of a young queen drew the attention
(and the still-novel television cameras) of the world to London for the coronation of Elizabeth II in June 1953. During
these years Britain perfected its own atomic and hydrogen bombs and was a pioneer in the generation of electricity
by nuclear power. Churchill’s hopes for another diplomatic summit meeting were disappointed, but the death in 1953
of Joseph Stalin, leader of the USSR, led to a slight easing of the Cold War tension, which never reached the levels
felt in the United States, which had replaced Britain as the world’s most powerful nation.
Eden and Macmillan
Churchill’s successor, Foreign Secretary Sir Anthony Eden (1955-1957), led his party to a second election victory in
the spring of 1955. In the same year he helped negotiate an Austrian peace treaty and participated in a summit
conference at Geneva.
Eden’s tenure as prime minister, however, was cut short by the crisis that followed Egypt’s nationalization of the
Suez Canal in 1956. British forces had been withdrawn from the canal only a year earlier, and an Anglo-French
reoccupation in 1956 was halted by Soviet-US pressure. The Suez Crisis led both to the loss of much of Britain’s
remaining influence in the Middle East and to Eden’s resignation. His successor, Harold Macmillan (1957-1963),
later Earl of Stockton, presided over a period of renewed consumer affluence. In 1959 he led his party to its third
successive election victory.
Decolonization
Macmillan’s government followed a deliberate policy of decolonization in Africa. The Sudan had already become
independent in 1956, and during the next seven years Ghana, Nigeria, Somalia, Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Uganda,
and Kenya followed suit. Most of these states remained members of a highly decentralized multiracial
Commonwealth of Nations, but the Union of South Africa, dominated by a white minority, left the Commonwealth in
1961 and declared itself a republic. Independence was also given to Malaysia, Cyprus, and Jamaica during
Macmillan’s tenure.
Even as imperial ties loosened, large numbers of immigrants—especially from the West Indies and Pakistan—
arrived in Britain, many persuaded to come by active recruitment campaigns to work in, for example, public
transport. They found themselves less than welcome in many areas, however. The heightening of racial tensions led
to government efforts to limit sharply further immigration, while ensuring legal equality for the immigrants and their
descendants.
As British people turned their attention away from their overseas empire, they became increasingly aware that their
economy, although prospering, was growing less rapidly than those of their Continental neighbours. In 1961
Macmillan applied for British membership in the European Community (EC), or Common Market (now called the
EU). Many Britons felt unprepared to cast their lot with continental Europe, but for the moment their feelings proved
immaterial because the application was vetoed by President Charles de Gaulle of France. In 1963 Macmillan was
replaced as Conservative prime minister by Sir Alec Douglas-Home. In the general election of 1964, however, the
latter was narrowly defeated by the Labour Party, headed by Harold Wilson.
Britain in the 1960s
During the 1960s, Britain experienced a widespread mood of change. Much of this centred on young people, who
had spending power for the first time. Opposition to conventions of the past—in dress, in music, in popular
entertainment, and in social behaviour—did not only come from the young, however, but from designers, authors,
and other celebrities. The phenomenon had its positive consequences in helping to make “swinging” London a world
capital of popular music, media, theatre, and fashion. With the worldwide popularity of the Beatles, Liverpool became
for a time as well-known. Among the negative side-effects, however, were a rising crime rate and a spreading drug
culture.
Harold Wilson’s Labour government (1964-1970) sympathized with some of these trends. It sought both to expand
higher education opportunities and to end a secondary school system that separated the academically inclined from
other students. During the later 1960s, laws on divorce were eased, abortion was legalized, curbs on homosexual
practices were eased, capital punishment was abolished, equal pay for equal work was prescribed for women, and
the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18.
In economic life, the Labour government became more rigorous. A persistent trend towards inflation, an
unfavourable balance of trade, and unbalanced government budgets led to a wage-and-price freeze in 1966 and
attempts thereafter to secure so-called severe restraint. These actions eased certain economic problems, but at the
price of alienating many of Labour’s trade union supporters. In 1970 the Conservatives returned to power under
Edward Heath.
The 1970s
Heath, Inflation, and the Miners
A major theme of British history since the mid-1960s has been the battle to eliminate double-digit inflation. Heath’s
policy of deliberate economic expansion did not accomplish this goal, however, and the attempt to curb the legal
powers of trade unions (1971) evoked a mood of civil disobedience among union leaders. More working days were
lost because of strikes in 1972 than in any year since the General Strike of 1926. The world oil crisis served to
compound economic problems. Heath hoped to solve some of them by floating the pound, that is, by freeing Britain’s
currency from earlier fixed rates of exchange with other currencies, and by again seeking British admission to the
EC.
Britain did join the EC in 1973, and two years later the first national referendum in British history approved the step
by a 2-1 margin. An attempt by Heath in 1972 and 1973 first to freeze and then sharply to restrain wage and price
increases was defied by the miners. When Heath appealed to the public in the general election of February 1974 the
result was indecisive. A revival in the popular vote of the Liberal Party, enabled Harold Wilson to form a minority
Labour government that under his leadership and, from 1976, that of James Callaghan, lasted five years.
Northern Ireland
During the 1970s successive British governments faced mounting difficulties in Northern Ireland. A civil rights
movement supporting social equality for the Roman Catholic minority there clashed violently with Protestant
extremists. In 1969 the British government sent troops to keep order, and in 1972 it suspended Northern Ireland’s
autonomous parliament. A campaign of terrorism by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) followed. Its aim was to unite
Northern Ireland with the Irish Republic; the Protestant majority continued to support Northern Ireland remaining part
of the United Kingdom. British measures, such as internment, failed to halt the wave of bombings and killings in
Northern Ireland and England. The troops remain, although their numbers were reduced during the IRA ceasefire in
1994.
Scottish Nationalism
In Scotland, the Scottish National Party scored impressive gains in the elections of 1974, and Callaghan’s ministry
(1976-1979) attempted to set up a semi-independent parliament in Edinburgh (see Scottish Nationalism). When only
33 per cent of the Scottish electorate supported the plan in a 1979 referendum, however, the project died, at least
temporarily.
Economic Difficulties Under Labour
The Labour government of 1974 to 1979 began by ending all legal restrictions on wage and price rises. However,
after the annual inflation rate topped 25 per cent in 1975, the government succeeded in obtaining some trade union
restraints on wage claims in return for an end to legal restraints on union power and more government finance for
housing and other social services. The inflation rate declined somewhat between 1976 and 1979.
By the late 1970s, British politics seemed to be polarizing between the left wing of the Labour Party, which sought a
larger role for the state in order to create greater social equality, and the Conservatives, who hoped to restore a
greater role to private enterprise and to reduce the public sector. By the beginning of 1979 Callaghan’s government
was dependent on two minority parties. A winter of labour unrest and a series of damaging strikes undercut his
claims to be able to deal successfully with the unions, and a vote of no-confidence in March 1979 went against him.
71
The 1980s and 1990s
The Thatcher Decade
In the election of April 1979, the Conservative Party under its new leader Margaret Thatcher emerged with a
substantial majority of parliamentary seats. Thatcher, the first woman prime minister in British or European history,
remained in office for the next 11 years, making her the longest continuously serving prime minister since the end of
the Napoleonic Wars.
Thatcher’s first years were difficult. She sought to halt inflation by a policy of high interest rates and government
budget cuts, rather than one of wage and price freezes. By 1981 and 1982 those policies were showing some
success, but only at the cost of the highest unemployment rates since the 1930s. The government was jolted in April
1982 when Argentina forcibly occupied the Falkland Islands, a British-held archipelago in the South Atlantic that
Argentina had long claimed. Thatcher sent a British counter-invasion force which succeeded in recapturing the
islands in June (see Falklands War). She strengthened Britain’s “special relationship” with the United States, notably
by the stationing by US forces of intermediate-range nuclear missiles at the Greenham Common airbase at the end
of 1983.
The decisive Conservative victories in the elections of June 1983 and June 1987 were the consequence not only of
widespread popular support for the government’s Falklands policy, but also of a sharp division in the ranks of the
political opposition. In 1980 a group of Labour Party members headed by Roy Jenkins and David Owen broke away,
and in 1981 formed the Social Democratic Party. The new party joined with the Liberals to constitute an influential
alliance that ultimately won relatively few parliamentary seats, but did garner 25 per cent of the total popular vote in
1983 and 23 per cent in 1987—splitting the opposition to the Conservatives and influencing Tory victories. In the
1983 and 1987 elections Labour gained 28 and 31 per cent of the vote respectively; the Conservatives 42 per cent
on both occasions.
The years between 1982 and 1988 were depicted by many as economic boom years for the United Kingdom. Much
of this boom was consumption-led. The living standards of many British people rose, particularly for those in the
category known as “middle England” voters, and among entrepreneurs and in lower-middle-class occupations.
However, poverty increased for many. In addition, compared to many European countries, the quality of life declined
in Britain’s inner cities—the phenomenon often called “private wealth, public squalor”.
The rate of unemployment remained at a peak of more than 3 million for much of the decade. British industries
became more efficient, although the manufacturing sector shrank as many companies closed. London maintained its
role as one of the world’s top financial centres. The direct participation of government in the economy declined as
Thatcher promoted privatization—the turning over to private investors of government monopolies such as British
Airways, the telephone service, and the distribution of gas, electricity, and water. Council-house tenants were
strongly encouraged to buy the houses they rented. In the meantime, the power of trade unions was severely
curtailed by legislation, and membership declined as a result of high unemployment and the shrinking of the
industrial sector.
Although Thatcher had not abolished the welfare state, in the eyes of her opposition critics the “Iron Lady” had shortchanged social services such as education and the NHS. Policies such as the abolition of the metropolitan councils,
notably the Greater London Council, were also viewed as dictatorial. Her resignation in November 1990 was the
result of a revolt within the Conservative Party. Thatcher’s downfall, however, was primarily attributed to the
enactment of an unpopular “poll tax” (as a substitute for local government property-based taxes), and the alienation
of some members of her Cabinet over the prime minister’s increasingly critical attitude towards cooperation with her
EU (previously the EC) colleagues.
The Major Government (1990-1997)
Thatcher was succeeded as Conservative Party leader and prime minister by John Major, who continued all her
policies, including that of maintaining close ties with the United States. British troops fought as part of the
multinational coalition in the Gulf War. In 1992, despite a deepening economic recession, Major led his party to
victory in the April general election, although with a substantially reduced majority. Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock,
who had gradually moved his party back from the far left towards the ideological centre, resigned after the election
and was replaced by John Smith.
1990s Recession
Following the election, Major’s government faced a growing financial crisis exacerbated by the pound’s weakening in
the currency market, high inflation and unemployment, and a nationwide recession. As a result, Major received the
lowest approval rating, 14 per cent, of any prime minister in British history.
In 1993 news of contacts between the Major government and Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA, appeared in
the press.
The IRA Ceasefire and Beyond
On August 31, 1994, the IRA declared an unconditional ceasefire, agreeing to suspend all military operations in
favour of Sinn Fein participating in peace talks. In October, Loyalist (Protestant) paramilitaries also announced a
ceasefire. In response to the ending of terrorist activity, British troop patrols in Northern Ireland were gradually
reduced; in March 1995 regular daytime patrols were completely suspended throughout the province. However,
moves towards a full round-table discussion on the future of Northern Ireland, including all parties, were slowed by
the hostility of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to countenance change and by the insistence by the Major
government that the IRA give up its weapons. Nevertheless, direct talks between the British government and Sinn
Fein were initiated in December 1994.
In February 1995 John Major and the Irish prime minister John Bruton announced a joint framework document on allparty talks on the future of Northern Ireland, with the British government insisting that Sinn Fein participation was
conditional on the decommissioning of IRA weapons. With the IRA and Sinn Fein refusing to concede, in November
1995 both governments announced a forum chaired by former US Senator George Mitchell to discuss the issue; and
US President Bill Clinton visited Northern Ireland to great acclaim. Mitchell’s report of late January 1996 did not
support the British position, and the British government rejected its disarmament plan.
In February 1996, the IRA ended its 17-month ceasefire by exploding a huge bomb in London’s Docklands, killing 2
people and injuring more than 100: Sinn Fein blamed British procrastination over the promised peace talks. In
response, the British and Irish governments announced a timetable for negotiations and a specific date for the start
of all-party talks. This was viewed as a concession by Major, but the plan also included an elected assembly, a
concession to Unionists. Both governments agreed that, with no decommissioning of arms, Sinn Fein could only
attend the all-party talks and proximity talks to discuss details of the assembly. However, the IRA did not renew its
ceasefire.
In elections in May to the elected “forum”, intended to discuss Northern Irish affairs and select negotiating teams for
all-party talks, Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionist Party, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, and the DUP scored the
best results. Despite its electoral success, the IRA’s continuing refusal to resume the ceasefire kept Sinn Fein out of
the forum, while the DUP leader Ian Paisley threatened to boycott the talks if they were chaired as planned by
George Mitchell.
In the 1997 general election Sinn Fein candidates won an increased share of the vote (16 per cent) in Northern
Ireland, including two constituency gains for its main candidates, Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness. However,
due to their refusal to swear the oath of allegiance to the Crown, as required of all new MPs, it is unlikely that they
will take their seats in the House of Commons.
Blair Becomes Labour Leader
In May 1994, Labour Party leader John Smith died suddenly from a heart attack. His successor, Tony Blair,
completed the work of transforming the Labour Party into a centre-left organization, begun by Kinnock and furthered
by Smith. In April 1995, at a special conference, the party voted to end its traditional commitment to nationalization,
enshrined in Clause IV of the Labour Party constitution. This and other changes, notably the distancing of the party
from the trade unions, were widely considered to have made Labour once more a potential party of government.
Tory Problems over Europe
The Conservatives, meanwhile, were beset by persistently low opinion polls, resounding defeats in local elections in
April and May 1995, and a series of scandals that persisted up until, and including, the 1997 general election.
However, their most serious problem was the growing rift within the party over policy towards Europe. In November
72
1994 eight so-called “Euro-rebel” Conservative members of Parliament lost the party “whip”, and another voluntarily
resigned it, after refusing to support the government on a vote over British financial contributions to the EU. In June
1995, in an effort to restore cohesion within the Conservative parliamentary party, John Major resigned as leader of
the party, forcing an election for a new leader, held on July 4. Major won against an anti-European opponent, but
one third of the party voted against him or abstained.
The Conservative Party remained split between a pro-European left wing and an anti-European (“Eurosceptic”) right,
with the latter especially pressuring Major over policy, while deaths and defections eroded the Conservatives’ slim
Commons majority. One MP left the party in protest over government handling of the report by High Court judge
Richard Scott, commissioned to investigate government complicity in arms sales to Iraq contravening a UN
embargo. The report, released in February 1996, found that ministers had misled Parliament and the public, but
exonerated them of conspiracy. After careful management of its release and intensive lobbying of MPs, the
government won a vote on the report by one vote, just avoiding an early general election.
The BSE Crisis
In March 1996 the government announced new findings by an independent committee, based on ten fatalities
apparently caused by a new strain of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD), over apparent links between CJD in humans
and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (“mad cow” disease) in British cattle. This statement, directly contradicting
previous government assurances, caused the collapse of the domestic and export markets for British beef. On
March 27 the European Commission imposed a global ban on exports of British beef and cattle products. Despite
some British measures including limited culling, by mid-1997 the EU ban on British beef exports had still not been
relaxed. However, in June 1996, EU governments had agreed on a plan to gradually reduce the ban on the various
categories of British beef exports, in return for a much greater culling of the British beef herd. A further 51,574 cattle
were destroyed by December 1997, and by early 1998 the European Commission gave Northern Ireland the green
light to resume export of at least some beef. The government banned the sale of beef on the bone in December after
research showed there was a risk that BSE could be transmitted through bones. It is estimated that by 1999 the BSE
crisis will have cost the British government £5 billion.
Labour Party Victory at the Polls
On May 1, 1997, following Britain’s longest-ever general election campaign, Labour won its biggest-ever majority of
179 seats. The Conservative Party suffered its worst electoral defeat of the century and John Major resigned as
Conservative Party leader. The main Cabinet appointments made by the new prime minister, Tony Blair, included
Gordon Brown (Chancellor of the Exchequer); Robin Cook (Foreign Secretary); George Robertson (Defence
Secretary); Jack Straw (Home Secretary); Margaret Beckett (President of the Board of Trade); John Prescott
(Deputy Prime Minister, Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport, and the Regions). In June 1997 the
Conservative Party chose a Eurosceptic candidate, William Hague, as its new leader, rather than his closest rival,
the more experienced and pro-European Kenneth Clarke. At 36, Mr Hague became the youngest party leader this
century.
Labour Government
A month after electoral victory, the new prime minister Tony Blair and Foreign Secretary Robin Cook went to Hong
Kong to witness the end of British rule in the colony as it returned to Chinese control. In August politics were pushed
to the back of the national agenda with news of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. The Princess was fatally
injured in a car crash in Paris, and both she and her friend and fellow passenger Dodi Fayed were killed. Her death
provoked an unprecedented outpouring of national grief, and the funeral service, held at Westminster Abbey, was
watched by 1 billion people worldwide.
In September the government put to the test its manifesto promise for devolution in Scotland and Wales. In
referendums on the issue, Scotland voted overwhelmingly for the proposal of a Scottish parliament (74.3 per cent for
and 25.7 per cent against) and for the parliament to have tax-varying powers (63.5 per cent for and 36.5 per cent
against). The Welsh voted only by the narrowest of margins for the proposed Welsh assembly (50.3 per cent for and
49.7 per cent against), which was to have fewer powers than the Scottish parliament. Plans for the election of a
London mayor and a Greater London assembly were also given the green light following a strong “yes” vote from
Londoners in the May 1998 referendum.
In the autumn of 1997, the Labour government, like the Conservatives before them, was harried in the Commons
following speculation on government policy on European Monetary Union (EMU). The Chancellor Gordon Brown was
forced to make a statement on the issue in October. He stated that the government was committed to taking the
United Kingdom into the EMU, but would not enter in the first wave of January 1, 1999, but at a later date after
further economic convergence with fellow European countries and after a referendum on the issue.
The honeymoon period of the new administration was fairly short-lived and various criticisms of the government
included some of its plans for the reform of the welfare state. The left of the Labour Party was strongly opposed to
some of the suggested measures, particularly the plan to cut some of the financial provisions for lone parents, which
was eventually withdrawn. The Foreign Secretary Robin Cook also came under fire, in May 1998, over arms
shipments to Sierra Leone. The arms were supplied to Sierra Leone’s deposed president by a British-registered
company in contravention of a UN arms embargo. Cook denied that he or his officials had approved gun-running.
Northern Ireland Peace Agreement
The Northern Ireland peace process was given fresh impetus when the IRA restored its 1994 ceasefire in July 1997.
The way was finally cleared for peace talks in September when the Unionists abandoned their demand for
guaranteed IRA disarmament. In October Tony Blair met Gerry Adams, the first encounter between British and Sinn
Fein leaders in 76 years. The new Northern Ireland secretary of state Mo Mowlam sought to keep Protestants within
the peace talks when she met imprisoned Protestant paramilitaries in early 1998. The peace talks were strained
throughout the first half of 1998, and Sinn Fein was temporarily expelled when the IRA was officially held responsible
for two murders in Belfast. However, in April 1998 agreement was reached on radical new arrangements for an
Ulster assembly, a council of ministers linking Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, and limited cross-border
bodies to facilitate joint decision-making. A British-Irish council linking devolved assemblies in the United Kingdom
and the London and Dublin governments was also proposed. It was agreed that all terrorist prisoners linked to the
IRA and mainstream loyalist groups would be released within two years. The so-called “Good Friday” agreement
was endorsed by referendums in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland on May 22. In the north the “Yes”
vote was 70 per cent of the poll