Spartacus Educational: Francisco Franco, Essay Example

First, Assess the significance of such key figures as Lech Walesa in bringing about the fall of the Soviet Empire and the creation of independent nation-states in Eastern Europe (in particular, Poland). To what extent can an individual effect significant change?

Lech Walesa’s record speaks for itself. His leadership and vision were instrumental in the economic and political revolutions in Poland, helping change it from communist satellite to developed, free-market, democratic nation in a non-violent manner. The trade union he founded, ‘Solidarity,’ survives today and was internationally recognized as a milestone in human socio-economic development with Walesa’s reception of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983 (Harris 2001)

Walesa’s success is summed up in comments by the 2009 president of Germany, T, Hosrt Koehler. He describes the inspiration found in Walesa’s actions, aptly stating the significant change the electrician turned politician has effected: “[The success of the Solidarity movement] led to the unification of Europe, led to a united Germany. … Poles freed not just themselves – they launched a process which radiates until today” (Harris 2001).

Second, what actions of Charles de Gaulle reflected his attitude toward his country’s relationship with the United States? What accounts for the ambivalent attitude Americans have had about France in general?

De Gaulle ensured his country’s exemption from NATO, wanting to France to remain militarily independent each of the superpowers of his time (though clearly France sided against communism fundamentally). He was also a vocal critic of the Vietnam War. During his time as leader of the French resistance in World War II, De Gaulle was seen by many in Washington as a diplomatic obstacle and a potential dictator, given his assertive nationalistic stance (Colton 1998). Any time De Gaulle’s relationship with the United States came into conflict with his country’s national interest, he would gladly put the former at risk in favor of the latter. France’s standoffish relationship with America during the better part of the Cold War accounts in part for the ambivalence many Americans have felt towards France

Third, Francisco Franco ruled Spain as absolute dictator from 1939 to 1975. What accounts for the contradictory views historians have about him? And why/how did Spain turn so quickly to democratic reforms after he died?

Franco led a fascist coup against a left wing, democratically elected government from 1936 to 1939. An estimated 200,000 political prisoners died as a result of “starvation, overwork and execution” under his yoke. Franco accepted essential logistical support from Goering’s Luftwaffe in his military campaign against the ruling communists. The dictatorship that he maintained once he secured power lasted from 1939 until his death in 1975 (Simkin 2003). Franco’s anti-democratic, iron-fisted authoritarianism is difficult to reconcile to the freedom enjoyed and ‘propagated’ by the West.

On the contrary, Franco declined to support Nazi forces in any major way during World War II, agreeing only to “to provide logistical and intelligence support…[sending] a volunteer force, the Spanish Blue Division, to help the fight against communism in Europe.” Franco declared neutrality, given that his only foreign policy objective relevant to the war was the appropriation of Gibraltar, and the Allied blockade of Spain that would’ve resulted from siding with the Axis would have cost him more than Gibraltar was worth. When the war was won, and America became entrenched against the threat of communism, Franco became a useful ally for his hatred of the ideology; the U.S.A ensured Spain’s entry into the U.N. in 1950 and protection from NATO in exchange for the permission to establish American military bases on Spanish soil (Simkin 2003).

Franco did one thing above all, and that is served his vision of Spain. This led his policy decisions at times against Western interests, and at times it aligned them, making him at diplomatic liability turned asset. Spain, well behind the rest of the West in terms of social progress, immediately joined with convention through democratic reform once the main obstructing force of Franco’s powerful persona was out of the picture.

Fourth, the European Union has succeeded in lowering tariffs and borders between member countries but this has also had a negative effect on the dairy and fishing industries. To what extent can and should governments attempt to regulate these industries? Should governments give long-term subsidies to support agriculture?

Governments have a responsibility to keep food prices low and to support their own workers. Therefore, in times of economic difficulty, it is right for them to subsidize their own industries preferentially against foreign competition in both domestic and international markets. Despite this, prolonged government subsidy has the negative side effect of creating complete industrial dependency and artificially reducing the gross cost of farm produce; it can also create an artificially strong industrial sector in a country, which unfairly out-competes other producers and in a case such as France’s (EU Business 2009), triggers a diplomatic storm.

References

EU Business. (2009). Fruit and veg crisis ruins French minister’s summer. Retrieved September 28^th 2010 from http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1249474621.14

Colton, Joel. (1998). Charles De Gaulle. The Academic American Encyclopedia (electronic edition). Retrieved September 28^th 2010 from http://gi.grolier.com/gi/service/custserv.html

Harris, Bruce. (2001). Lech Walesa Hero File. Retrieved September 28^th 2010 from http://www.moreorless.au.com/heroes/walesa.html

Simkin, John. (2003). Spartacus Educational: Francisco Franco. Retrieved September 28^th 2010 from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWfranco.htm