How the Marshall Plan helped avoid World War 3

As victor of WWII, America set out with its allies to rebuild the broken world through its greatest diplomatic effort in history: The Marshall Plan.

We're all too familiar with the apocalyptic tales, horrendous death tolls and inhumanity that was exposed during World War II. From the far reaches of the Pacific Islands to the heart of Europe, WWII left no corner of Earth untouched and its wake is still evident in how the world is organized today.

The United States of America's gallant war efforts is the stuff of legend and fills our history books and television screens. But as victor of WWII, America also set out with its allies to rebuild the broken world.

Through the combined efforts of the Marshall Plan, Western Europe was brought back into action by the end of the decade. The subsequent occupation of Japan led to the eventual rebuilding of the entire country. Today, the United Nations stands as a valiant reminder of the need to honor diplomacy over all-out war. America's most positive influence on the world has been through diplomatic foreign policy.

Revisiting the Marshall Plan

Due to a number of factors, America emerged as an economic powerhouse after the war ended. While many countries in the main war zones were left decimated, the infrastructure and financial system was left intact back in the States. As one of the richest nations in the world, it issued a financial aid program for Europe titled the Marshall Plan.

Former general and and esteemed statesman, Secretary of State George C. Marshall spearheaded the plan that was given his namesake. On June 5, 1947 he gave a speech outlining the European Recovery Program (ERP)—the official name of the Marshall Plan.

Marshall presented the plan to the American people and to legislators in Congress. Poor post-WWI diplomatic relations had been one of the main causes for the eruption of World War II. Circumventing these types of foreign policy mishaps was paramount if humanity were to maintain relative global peace during this time. A lot of this was due to American isolationism and the disaster of the Treaty of Versailles, which saw the failure of the League of Nations to materialize, embittered nationalism being fueled and Americans opting out of further diplomatic relations, which led to the violent breeding grounds for WWII.

Marshall touched upon this during his speech at Harvard:

“Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all. It is logical that the United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace.
"Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist. Such assistance, I am convinced, must not be on a piecemeal basis as various crises develop. Any assistance that this Government may render in the future should provide a cure rather than a mere palliative."

Roughly $12 billion (~$126 billion in 2018 dollars) was spent to facilitate this effort in 17 European countries. The program started in April 1948 and spanned for four years.

In 1953, Marshall was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. While these diplomatic efforts paid off, the post-WWII era was not without its fair share of problems. The breakdown of foreign policy between America and its strongest ally in the war, the Soviet Union, led to the Cold War and many subsequent proxy wars.

Left: A map of former Eastern Bloc countries. Right: Joseph Stalin, ruler of the Soviet Union from 1922 to his death in 1953. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons)

In direct contrast to the United States' post-war efforts, the Soviets instead demanded reparations from their occupied countries. The Soviets and Eastern Bloc countries turned down the economic aid offered by the United States as part of the Marshall Plan. This outright denial fostered a further divide between the two differing philosophies of governance.

While this was occurring in the post-war theater of Europe, Japan was in the midst of its own kind of revival.

American occupation and rebuilding of Japan

In September, 1945, General Douglas MacArthur was tasked with taking control over the Supreme Command of Allied Powers (SCAP). Along with the occupation of Japan, they took charge with the work of rebuilding Japan. The United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and Republic of China were all part of the Allied council, but in the end it all came down to MacArthur who had the final decision.

General Douglas MacArthur signs as Supreme Allied Commander during formal surrender ceremonies on the USS MISSOURI in Tokyo Bay. Behind General MacArthur are Lieutenant General Jonathan Wainwright and Lieutenant General A. E. Percival. (Public domain)

The process of rebuilding Japan occurred in three phases over roughly five years until 1950. With complete dominion over the defeated country, the Allies punished Japan by convening for war crime trials in Tokyo. The Japanese Army was dismantled and former military officers barred from running for political office in the newly formed government. This also eliminated non-defensive military forces and any right to wage war. SCAP also led many economic reforms that benefited low-income tenant farmers and helped break up Japanese business conglomerates. It also successful in relegating the emperor's status to something of a figurehead who had no control over the nation. The parliamentary system was built from the ground up.

Over the years many wartime companies shifted into a peaceful economic focus. These Japanese private companies were able to expand quickly and abided by the full support of Allied forces. Companies such as Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi all were early upstarts here. Throughout the years, the efforts the Japanese had once so ferociously dedicated to war had been completely switched to new peaceful economic development. Old weapon factories began to produce cameras and the devastation of the infrastructure led to rapid advancements in technology.

On a global scale, these changes were met with opportunities for trade and cheap materials. America had now become one of Japan's greatest allies. As the looming threat of communism creeped up on the West, priorities had changed drastically in less than a decade. Even the remilitarization of Japan was no longer seen as a problem to the U.S. Positive economic foreign policy had superseded the wounds of WWII.

It was during the Korean War that Japan became a central supply depot for UN forces for the United States. This was just a sign of things to come and the power that the newly created UN would have over future world affairs.

The United Nations emerges from the rubble

It's somewhat fitting that out of the worst war to ever strike the world, we developed some of the most cohesive foreign policies that led the way for a newly globalized society. President Franklin D. Roosevelt felt that the U.S. refusing to be a part of the League of Nations contributed to the shaky circumstances that led to WWII breaking out. At the time of the United Nations creation, he believed that the UN would serve as a new post-war system and would ensure world security backed by the strongest nation on Earth.

In a radio address on United Flag Day, June 14, 1942 Roosevelt stated:

“These freedoms are the rights of men of every creed and every race, wherever they live. This is their heritage, long withheld. We of the United Nations have the power and the men and the will at last to assure man's heritage."

The United States was responsible for contributing 40 percent of the UN budget. The headquarters was created and established firmly in the United States in New York City. It was within this system that the United States showed its acumen for worldwide foreign policy. The UN's charter strives for conflict prevention, a basic upholding for human rights, worldwide cooperation and international social and economic progress.

This was a time when the United States set the precedent for what it meant to be a world leader, led by diplomatic restraint. History is showing that the U.S. had its greatest successes with diplomacy, while military interventions with non-allies land the nation and the world into hot water.


Big Think
Sponsored by Lumina Foundation

Upvote/downvote each of the videos below!

As you vote, keep in mind that we are looking for a winner with the most engaging social venture pitch - an idea you would want to invest in.

Keep reading Show less

Essential financial life skills for 21st-century Americans

Having these financial life skills can help you navigate challenging economic environments.

Photo by Jp Valery on Unsplash
Personal Growth
  • Americans are swimming in increasingly higher amounts of debt, even the upper middle class.
  • For many, this burden can be alleviated by becoming familiar with some straightforward financial concepts.
  • Here's some essential financial life skills needed to ensure your economic wellbeing.
Keep reading Show less

Scientists create a "lifelike" material that has metabolism and can self-reproduce

An innovation may lead to lifelike evolving machines.

Shogo Hamada/Cornell University
Surprising Science
  • Scientists at Cornell University devise a material with 3 key traits of life.
  • The goal for the researchers is not to create life but lifelike machines.
  • The researchers were able to program metabolism into the material's DNA.
Keep reading Show less

New fossils suggest human ancestors evolved in Europe, not Africa

Experts argue the jaws of an ancient European ape reveal a key human ancestor.

Surprising Science
  • The jaw bones of an 8-million-year-old ape were discovered at Nikiti, Greece, in the '90s.
  • Researchers speculate it could be a previously unknown species and one of humanity's earliest evolutionary ancestors.
  • These fossils may change how we view the evolution of our species.

Homo sapiens have been on earth for 200,000 years — give or take a few ten-thousand-year stretches. Much of that time is shrouded in the fog of prehistory. What we do know has been pieced together by deciphering the fossil record through the principles of evolutionary theory. Yet new discoveries contain the potential to refashion that knowledge and lead scientists to new, previously unconsidered conclusions.

A set of 8-million-year-old teeth may have done just that. Researchers recently inspected the upper and lower jaw of an ancient European ape. Their conclusions suggest that humanity's forebearers may have arisen in Europe before migrating to Africa, potentially upending a scientific consensus that has stood since Darwin's day.

Rethinking humanity's origin story

The frontispiece of Thomas Huxley's Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature (1863) sketched by natural history artist Benjamin Waterhouse Hawkins. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

As reported in New Scientist, the 8- to 9-million-year-old hominin jaw bones were found at Nikiti, northern Greece, in the '90s. Scientists originally pegged the chompers as belonging to a member of Ouranopithecus, an genus of extinct Eurasian ape.

David Begun, an anthropologist at the University of Toronto, and his team recently reexamined the jaw bones. They argue that the original identification was incorrect. Based on the fossil's hominin-like canines and premolar roots, they identify that the ape belongs to a previously unknown proto-hominin.

The researchers hypothesize that these proto-hominins were the evolutionary ancestors of another European great ape Graecopithecus, which the same team tentatively identified as an early hominin in 2017. Graecopithecus lived in south-east Europe 7.2 million years ago. If the premise is correct, these hominins would have migrated to Africa 7 million years ago, after undergoing much of their evolutionary development in Europe.

Begun points out that south-east Europe was once occupied by the ancestors of animals like the giraffe and rhino, too. "It's widely agreed that this was the found fauna of most of what we see in Africa today," he told New Scientists. "If the antelopes and giraffes could get into Africa 7 million years ago, why not the apes?"

He recently outlined this idea at a conference of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.

It's worth noting that Begun has made similar hypotheses before. Writing for the Journal of Human Evolution in 2002, Begun and Elmar Heizmann of the Natural history Museum of Stuttgart discussed a great ape fossil found in Germany that they argued could be the ancestor (broadly speaking) of all living great apes and humans.

"Found in Germany 20 years ago, this specimen is about 16.5 million years old, some 1.5 million years older than similar species from East Africa," Begun said in a statement then. "It suggests that the great ape and human lineage first appeared in Eurasia and not Africa."

Migrating out of Africa

In the Descent of Man, Charles Darwin proposed that hominins descended out of Africa. Considering the relatively few fossils available at the time, it is a testament to Darwin's astuteness that his hypothesis remains the leading theory.

Since Darwin's time, we have unearthed many more fossils and discovered new evidence in genetics. As such, our African-origin story has undergone many updates and revisions since 1871. Today, it has splintered into two theories: the "out of Africa" theory and the "multi-regional" theory.

The out of Africa theory suggests that the cradle of all humanity was Africa. Homo sapiens evolved exclusively and recently on that continent. At some point in prehistory, our ancestors migrated from Africa to Eurasia and replaced other subspecies of the genus Homo, such as Neanderthals. This is the dominant theory among scientists, and current evidence seems to support it best — though, say that in some circles and be prepared for a late-night debate that goes well past last call.

The multi-regional theory suggests that humans evolved in parallel across various regions. According to this model, the hominins Homo erectus left Africa to settle across Eurasia and (maybe) Australia. These disparate populations eventually evolved into modern humans thanks to a helping dollop of gene flow.

Of course, there are the broad strokes of very nuanced models, and we're leaving a lot of discussion out. There is, for example, a debate as to whether African Homo erectus fossils should be considered alongside Asian ones or should be labeled as a different subspecies, Homo ergaster.

Proponents of the out-of-Africa model aren't sure whether non-African humans descended from a single migration out of Africa or at least two major waves of migration followed by a lot of interbreeding.

Did we head east or south of Eden?

Not all anthropologists agree with Begun and his team's conclusions. As noted by New Scientist, it is possible that the Nikiti ape is not related to hominins at all. It may have evolved similar features independently, developing teeth to eat similar foods or chew in a similar manner as early hominins.

Ultimately, Nikiti ape alone doesn't offer enough evidence to upend the out of Africa model, which is supported by a more robust fossil record and DNA evidence. But additional evidence may be uncovered to lend further credence to Begun's hypothesis or lead us to yet unconsidered ideas about humanity's evolution.