Latest news with #WestminsterCollege
Yahoo
03-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
The bombed London church that was reborn in the USA
As Londoners celebrated VE Day nearly 80 years ago much of the city in which they lived lay in ruins, not least the historic places of worship built by Sir Christopher Wren in the late 1600s in the aftermath of the Great Fire of London. While some would be repaired or rebuilt, others remained as shells, transformed into small public parks surrounded by a single wall or tower. However, one had a very different ending, being moved brick by charred brick more than 4,000 miles away and rebuilt at a college in the US Midwest. Why did St Mary Aldermanbury end up across the pond and what is it used for now? While St Mary Aldermanbury may have been destroyed in the Blitz, it wasn't the first time disaster had struck. Having been founded around the start of the 12th Century, the original medieval church was destroyed in the Great Fire in 1666, then became one of the 52 sites, including St Paul's Cathedral, rebuilt by Wren. On 29 December 1940, St Mary Aldermanbury and seven other City churches were badly damaged during a particularly devastating night of the Blitz as waves of Luftwaffe planes dropped bombs over London in what some coined as "the Second Great Fire". With limited finances available in post-war Britain to do anything with it, the church remained a charred husk for two decades - until an unusual proposal arrived from Missouri. "It really dates back to the end of the war on VE Day, when Sir Winston Churchill gave his famous speech on the balcony saying 'this is your victory' to the British people," explains Timothy Riley, director and chief curator of America's National Churchill Museum. "It was a triumphant moment for all at the end of the war. But not long after there was a general election and Churchill's party lost." In the wake of that defeat, Britain's wartime leader received a letter from Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, inviting him to give a speech, which included a message from US President Harry Truman saying: "This is a wonderful school in my home state. If you come, I'll introduce you." "I'm convinced that letter would normally have been given to a secretary by Churchill with the instruction to politely decline or refuse," Mr Riley says. "However, when he saw this handwritten note... having just lost an election and knowing that he had more to say, he anxiously/eagerly accepted the invitation and made his way to Fulton to give the Iron Curtain speech." The famous address, delivered on 5 March 1946, spelt out the deepening tensions between the West and the Soviet Union, and called for a special relationship to be forged between the US and UK. Fifteen years on from the speech, and with Churchill now in his 80s, thoughts turned to how the college could commemorate it. "Someone suggested a garden, someone suggested a statue, a plaque, and then the president of the college Robert Davidson said: 'Why don't we bring a ruined Christopher Wren church that was bombed in the Blitz, left abandoned for nearly 20 years in the City of London and rebuild it in Fulton?'," says Mr Riley. "The reaction, of course, was bafflement; how could we do such a thing? But that's what happened in the 1960s." After the initial suggestion was made in spring 1961, efforts began in earnest to gain permission to relocate the building and raise the $1.5m (the equivalent of more than $16m or £12m today) needed to do so. Backing was gained from several influential sources. President John F Kennedy became the project's honorary chairman until he was assassinated in 1963, with his successor Lyndon B Johnson then taking on the role. Previous presidents Truman and Dwight Eisenhower also publicly supported the cause. Back in the UK, Churchill endorsed the scheme, writing in a letter that it was an "imaginative concept", and following extensive discussions both the City of London and Diocese of London approved the move. In 1965 what remained of the church was dismantled piece by piece, with each of the 7,000 stones cleaned and then numbered so they could be placed in the same formation in their new home. Weighing more than 600 tonnes in total, they were taken by ship to Virginia, before being transported by rail to Missouri where the tricky task of rebuilding a wrecked 300-year-old building began. The Times branded it "one of the most intricate jigsaw puzzles in the history of architecture" and the project's mason, Eris Lytle, later described how he had to learn skills once used by Renaissance craftsmen to complete the project. With the monument completed in 1969, a service was held on 7 May to rededicate the church, attended by dignitaries from both sides of the Atlantic - although not Churchill who had died in 1965. Today, St Mary Aldermanbury isn't an active church but forms part of America's National Churchill Museum, based on the Westminster College campus. Yet as Mr Riley points out, it does maintain at least one link to its previous life. The bridge that crossed an ocean "It's a popular destination wedding venue - and also where you don't have to have a passport to get married in a 'British' church." He says the building is "perhaps the top tourist attraction in the middle of Missouri", and while those living in the area generally know about its history, "we still have a lot of people saying: 'I had no idea, it's extraordinary.'" As for the church's original site, beside the Guildhall, today it is a small park tucked among towers and modern office blocks of the City of London. Benches, trees and plant life surround a few remaining stones, while a large granite slab marks where the altar once stood. The site was refurbished last year with some of the funding coming from the museum, which also recently completed restoration work at St Mary Aldermanbury. "We've invested nearly $6m (£4.5m) into the preservation of the church so that we continue to be good stewards, so that it'll thrive and inspire and inform generations to come," says Mr Riley. Reflecting on the relocation of a bombed church to another continent, he believes it has become much more than a memorial to Churchill's Iron Curtain speech. "It is, I think, an extraordinary symbol of the Anglo-American relationship... and a constant reminder of the bond that our two countries continue to share in our own histories." Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to Churchill's favourite spy: Aristocrat who risked her life in WW2 Family visit fire boat named after Blitz heroine 'Mum was embarrassed about her WW2 bravery medal' America's National Churchill Museum St Mary Aldermanbury Garden
BBC News
03-05-2025
- General
- BBC News
St Mary Aldermanbury: The bombed London church rebuilt in the USA
As Londoners celebrated VE Day nearly 80 years ago much of the city in which they lived lay in ruins, not least the historic places of worship built by Sir Christopher Wren in the late 1600s in the aftermath of the Great Fire of some would be repaired or rebuilt, others remained as shells, transformed into small public parks surrounded by a single wall or tower. However, one had a very different ending, being moved brick by charred brick more than 4,000 miles away and rebuilt at a college in the US did St Mary Aldermanbury end up across the pond and what is it used for now? While St Mary Aldermanbury may have been destroyed in the Blitz, it wasn't the first time disaster had been founded around the start of the 12th Century, the original medieval church was destroyed in the Great Fire in 1666, then became one of the 52 sites, including St Paul's Cathedral, rebuilt by 29 December 1940, St Mary Aldermanbury and seven other City churches were badly damaged during a particularly devastating night of the Blitz as waves of Luftwaffe planes dropped bombs over London in what some coined as "the Second Great Fire".With limited finances available in post-war Britain to do anything with it, the church remained a charred husk for two decades - until an unusual proposal arrived from Missouri."It really dates back to the end of the war on VE Day, when Sir Winston Churchill gave his famous speech on the balcony saying 'this is your victory' to the British people," explains Timothy Riley, director and chief curator of America's National Churchill Museum."It was a triumphant moment for all at the end of the war. But not long after there was a general election and Churchill's party lost." In the wake of that defeat, Britain's wartime leader received a letter from Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, inviting him to give a speech, which included a message from US President Harry Truman saying: "This is a wonderful school in my home state. If you come, I'll introduce you.""I'm convinced that letter would normally have been given to a secretary by Churchill with the instruction to politely decline or refuse," Mr Riley says."However, when he saw this handwritten note... having just lost an election and knowing that he had more to say, he anxiously/eagerly accepted the invitation and made his way to Fulton to give the Iron Curtain speech."The famous address, delivered on 5 March 1946, spelt out the deepening tensions between the West and the Soviet Union, and called for a special relationship to be forged between the US and UK. Fifteen years on from the speech, and with Churchill now in his 80s, thoughts turned to how the college could commemorate it."Someone suggested a garden, someone suggested a statue, a plaque, and then the president of the college Robert Davidson said: 'Why don't we bring a ruined Christopher Wren church that was bombed in the Blitz, left abandoned for nearly 20 years in the City of London and rebuild it in Fulton?'," says Mr Riley."The reaction, of course, was bafflement; how could we do such a thing? But that's what happened in the 1960s."After the initial suggestion was made in spring 1961, efforts began in earnest to gain permission to relocate the building and raise the $1.5m (the equivalent of more than $16m or £12m today) needed to do was gained from several influential sources. President John F Kennedy became the project's honorary chairman until he was assassinated in 1963, with his successor Lyndon B Johnson then taking on the role. Previous presidents Truman and Dwight Eisenhower also publicly supported the in the UK, Churchill endorsed the scheme, writing in a letter that it was an "imaginative concept", and following extensive discussions both the City of London and Diocese of London approved the move. In 1965 what remained of the church was dismantled piece by piece, with each of the 7,000 stones cleaned and then numbered so they could be placed in the same formation in their new more than 600 tonnes in total, they were taken by ship to Virginia, before being transported by rail to Missouri where the tricky task of rebuilding a wrecked 300-year-old building Times branded it "one of the most intricate jigsaw puzzles in the history of architecture" and the project's mason, Eris Lytle, later described how he had to learn skills once used by Renaissance craftsmen to complete the project. With the monument completed in 1969, a service was held on 7 May to rededicate the church, attended by dignitaries from both sides of the Atlantic - although not Churchill who had died in St Mary Aldermanbury isn't an active church but forms part of America's National Churchill Museum, based on the Westminster College campus. Yet as Mr Riley points out, it does maintain at least one link to its previous life. "It's a popular destination wedding venue - and also where you don't have to have a passport to get married in a 'British' church."He says the building is "perhaps the top tourist attraction in the middle of Missouri", and while those living in the area generally know about its history, "we still have a lot of people saying: 'I had no idea, it's extraordinary.'" As for the church's original site, beside the Guildhall, today it is a small park tucked among towers and modern office blocks of the City of London. Benches, trees and plant life surround a few remaining stones, while a large granite slab marks where the altar once site was refurbished last year with some of the funding coming from the museum, which also recently completed restoration work at St Mary Aldermanbury."We've invested nearly $6m (£4.5m) into the preservation of the church so that we continue to be good stewards, so that it'll thrive and inspire and inform generations to come," says Mr on the relocation of a bombed church to another continent, he believes it has become much more than a memorial to Churchill's Iron Curtain speech."It is, I think, an extraordinary symbol of the Anglo-American relationship... and a constant reminder of the bond that our two countries continue to share in our own histories."
Yahoo
30-03-2025
- General
- Yahoo
150 years old: Salt Lake City's Westminster University celebrates its sesquicentennial
Any commemoration of Westminster University's 150th anniversary should begin with a historical question: How did a private university nestled in Salt Lake City's Sugar House neighborhood — 4,800 miles from Westminster, England — end up with its unusual and very specific name? The answer, local history buffs likely know, stretches back to the school's Protestant roots. In 1902, the school was renamed 'Westminster' as a nod to England's Westminster Confession of Faith. But the origins of the school's unusual name only adds to Westminster University's rich Utah history as students, faculty, staff, alums and Griffins sports fans celebrate its sesquicentennial this year. 'It's a great year, and I think it speaks to our enduring value and resilience,' Westminster President Beth Dobkin told the Deseret News. 'We've been through a lot — and we're capable of going through a lot more. And it's going to be a fantastic next 150 years.' Founded by the First Presbyterian Church in 1875 as the Salt Lake Collegiate Institute with an enrollment of 27 students, the school was originally a preparatory school. Later, it began offering college courses at what was then known then as Sheldon Jackson College, named for the school's founder, according to the university. A guiding Sheldon Jackson College principle was to enroll students 'without distinction of race, sex or religious belief'. That institutional commitment to welcoming students and faculty of all backgrounds , said Dobkin, remains fundamental at Westminster University. 'Part of our value comes from our inclusivity,' she said. 'We were one of the first institutions to pay women as teachers. That kind of thing is so embedded in the fabric of Westminster. It's part of what contributes greatly to our strength.' Originally located in downtown Salt Lake City, the school moved to its current Sugar House campus location in 1911 — nine years after adopting the name Westminster College. The fledgling school made regional higher education history when Westminster College became the first accredited two-year junior college in the Intermountain West region, according to the school. By 1935, it was a four-year junior college and, in 1949, began offering bachelor degrees in several majors. The school ended its denominational relationship with the Presbyterian Church in 1974. Then in 2023, the school became Westminster University, reflecting its wide range of graduate and professional degree offerings. Utahns living along the Wasatch Front have a variety of higher education choices, from the state's public flagship school — the University of Utah — to several other public, private, for-profit and religious schools. But Westminster continues to enjoy its own unique campus profile. With an enrollment of just over 1,100 student and a 8:1 student-to-faculty ratio, the school remains an ideal spot to enjoy a full college experience without getting lost in a massive campus filled with tens of thousands of students. Almost every Westminster student attends full-time. A fun, local side note: More than 50 Olympians have studied at Westminster University. At the most recent Winter Games in Beijing, eight athletes with ties to the Salt Lake City school competed in China. Westminster University's 150-year-old legacy of providing students with a broad education within the personable confines of a small school remains strong in 2025, said Dobkin. 'Students have long chose Westminster as a distinctive place where they can find not just a high-quality education, but one where they can apply what they're learning and be in close contact with faculty and other support systems,' the president added. Meanwhile, an institution of higher learning does not function for 150 years without developing a symbiotic relationship with its host community. Study old black-and-white photos and it's evident that Sugar House has physically grown up around Westminster. 'But along with that, there's a long history of service and connection to workplaces and industries,' said Dobkin. The service components defining, say, Westminster's Center for Civic Engagement, along with internships and local corporate partnerships, extends the student life cycle. 'Our students become embedded in the surrounding communities and workplaces as part of their education — and then nearly 90% of them stay and work in the surrounding areas once they graduate,' noted Dobkin. 'That kind of interplay between nonprofit and for-profit communities has been part of Westminster's history and will continue as its legacy.' While Utah offers a vast choice of higher education institutions, 'some students really need a smaller environment to thrive, and they need that ability to apply what they're learning immediately.' said Dobkin. The university's 19th president points to Westminster's nursing program as an example of the school's 'ethos of inclusion and access' that make it a solid fit for many. 'It's the opportunities to get deep-learning with other students and with their faculty that they can use right away.' Socially, Westminster's small size also allow student to engage and lead. 'If you have a club you want to start, or a business you want to launch, you can actually build it yourself here. That's something that's hard to find,' said Dobkin. The president remembers joining several faculty members for lunch not long after she was appointed Westminster's president in 2018. A fellow educator acknowledged that it's possible to get a solid education at an any of the local colleges and universities. 'But at Westminster,' the faculty member added, 'it inescapable.' That observation, said Dobkin, 'speaks to how faculty and staff care for students here.' Like all higher learning institutions, Westminster faces challenges in the coming years and decades. The school must adapt to and incorporate evolving technologies such as AI — along with the ever-changing needs of their students and the industries awaiting graduates. Dobkin believes Westminster University is positioned to meet those challenges — all while remaining committed to lessons that retain humanity, empathy and connection. She repeats what she frequently told students when she was teaching in the college classroom: 'It's not my job to tell you how to behave. It's my job to have you think about how your behavior matches your values — because that's where you start getting wisdom.' A school such as Westminster University, she added, doubles as a response to some who say higher education is no longer worth the time or the money. Financially, said Dobkin, the cost of education at private institutions has shifted downward over the past few decades. Westminster offers generous financial aid opportunities for students — particularly Utah residents from low-income families. Plus the school boasts a high four-year-graduation rate. 'For the last couple years, 97% or 98% of our students say that their degree added value to their professional pursuits. They are saying it was worth it.' But beyond the financial benefits, Dobkin believes Westminster continues to be place where one's beliefs and opinions are challenged. That environment offers a less tangible — yet equally critical — return on investment. 'Colleges and universities (remain) one of the best places to create responsibility, agency, maturity and the ability to build connections with people you wouldn't otherwise encounter. 'That's a building block to a democratic society.' Westminster University will host a series of sesquicentennial events throughout the year. Visit for details.
Asia Times
27-03-2025
- Business
- Asia Times
Don't expect a US Marshall Plan to rebuild Ukraine
President Donald Trump wants Ukraine to repay the United States for helping to defend the country against Russia's invasion. Since 2022, Congress has provided about US$174 billion to Ukraine and neighboring countries to assist in its war effort. Trump inflated this figure to US$350 billion in a March 2025 White House meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron. Separately, he has suggested Ukraine could reimburse the US by giving America access to its minerals. Ukraine is rich in titanium, graphite, manganese and other rare earth metals used to produce electric vehicle batteries and other tech devices. Mining and refining these critical mineral resources would require major investment in infrastructure and economic development, including in parts of Ukraine severely damaged by fighting. Some analysts are calling for a return to the European Recovery Program, commonly known as the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan used $13.3 billion in US funds – roughly $171 billion in today's dollars – to rebuild war-torn Western Europe from 1948 to late 1951. It is often evoked as a solution for reconstruction following global crises. Yet, as a military historian and curator, I find that the Marshall Plan is not well understood. For the US, the economic gains of the Marshall Plan did not come from European countries' repaying loans or allowing the US to extract their raw materials. Rather, the US has benefited enormously from a half-century of goodwill, democratic stability and economic success in Europe. After World War II ended in 1945, Western Europe faced a staggering burden of destruction and upheaval. Allied bombardment of major industrial areas and German cities such as Berlin, Hamburg and Cologne had created massive housing shortages. Meanwhile, fighting through agricultural areas and a critical manpower shortage had curtailed food production. What harvest there was could not get to hungry civilians because so many of Europe's roads, bridges and ports had been destroyed. The United Kingdom, Italy, France, Germany and other European governments were buried in debt after so many years of war. They could not afford to rebuild on their own. Yet, rather than cooperating on their mutual economic reconstruction, European nations looked inward, focusing primarily on their own political challenges. The continent was politically and militarily divided, too. Europe's western half was influenced by the democratic, capitalistic forces led by the US Eastern Europe was beholden to the communist, command-economy forces of the Soviet Union. In a 1946 speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill articulated Europe's growing postwar divide. Over the ruins of proud nations, he said, 'an iron curtain' had 'descended across the continent.' Unlike Europe, the US emerged from World War II as the wealthiest nation in the world, with its territory intact and unharmed. Its steel and oil industries were booming. By 1947, the US was the clear successor to Great Britain as the world's superpower. But President Harry Truman feared the ambitions of the war's other great victor – the Soviet Union. In March 1947, he announced a new doctrine to contain communist expansion southward across Europe by giving $400 million in military and economic aid to Greece and Turkey. Around the same time, US Secretary of State George Marshall met with Soviet officials to plan Germany's future. Following the Nazis' surrender in May 1945, Germany had been divided into four occupied zones administered by US, British, French and Soviet forces. Each nation had its own goals for its section of Germany. The US wanted to revitalize Germany politically and economically, believing that a moribund Germany would thwart the economic reconstruction of all of Europe. Marshall hoped that the Soviets would cooperate, but Soviet ruler Josef Stalin preferred extracting reparations from a prostrate Germany to investing in its recovery. A vibrant German economic engine, the Soviets felt, could just as easily rearm to attack the Russian countryside for the third time that century. The Truman administration chose to unilaterally rebuild the three Western Allied sectors of Germany – and Western Europe. Marshall outlined his plan at a commencement address at Harvard University in June 1947. American action to restore global economic health, he said, would provide the foundation for political stability and peace in Europe. And an economically healthy Western Europe, in turn, would inhibit the spread of communism by plainly demonstrating the benefits of capitalism. 'Our policy is not directed against any country,' Marshall said, 'but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos.' Marshall invited all European nations to participate in drafting a plan to first address the immediate humanitarian aid of Europe's people, then rebuild its infrastructure. The US would pay for it all. For nearly bankrupt European nations, it was a lifeline. In September 1947, the new Committee for European Economic Co-operation, composed of 16 Western – but not Eastern – European nations, delivered its proposal to Washington. It would take a masterful legislative strategy for the Democratic Truman administration to persuade the Republican-led Congress to pass this $13 billion bill. It succeeded thanks to the dedicated effort of Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg, who convinced his isolationist colleagues that the Marshall Plan would halt the expansion of communism and benefit American economic growth. In April 1948, Truman signed the Economic Cooperation Act. By year's end, over $2 billion had reached Europe, and its industrial production had finally surpassed prewar levels seen in 1939. Along with economic stability, the Truman administration recognized that Europe needed military security to defend against communist encroachment by the Soviet Union. In July 1949, 12 European countries, the US and Canada established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO committed each member country to the mutual defense of fellow NATO members. Since 1947, NATO has steadily expanded eastward to include Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and other former Soviet satellite states directly bordering Russia. Ukraine, which declared its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, is not yet a NATO member. But it desperately wants to be. Ukraine applied for NATO membership in 2022 after Russia's invasion. Its application is pending. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said any peace deal with Ukraine must bar NATO membership. Modern-day Ukraine mirrors the Western European countries of the Marshall Plan era in meaningful ways. It suffers from the physical devastation of war, with its major cities heavily damaged. The threat of military attack from hostile neighbors remains urgent. And it has a functional, democratic government that would – in peacetime – be capable of receiving and distributing aid to develop the nation's economic growth and stability. US global leadership, however, has changed dramatically since 1948. Outright American taxpayer financing of Ukraine's reconstruction seems impossible. Any plan to reconstruct the country after war will likely require public funding from multiple nations and substantial private investment. That private investment could well include mineral extraction and refinement ventures. Ultimately, Ukraine's recovery will most likely involve Ukraine and neighboring nations reaching agreement to restore its economic and military security. The European Union, which Ukraine also seeks to join, has the bureaucratic and economic resources necessary to reconstruct Ukraine, restore peace and ease tensions on the continent. Any future Marshall Plan for Ukraine will probably be European. Frank A Blazich Jr is curator of military history, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The U.S. won't likely lead Ukraine's postwar recovery
March 24 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump wants Ukraine to repay the United States for helping to defend the country against Russia's invasion. Since 2022, Congress has provided about $174 billion to Ukraine and neighboring countries to assist its war effort. Trump inflated this figure to $350 billion in a March 2025 White House meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron. Separately, he has suggested Ukraine could reimburse the U.S. by giving America access to its minerals. Ukraine is rich in titanium, graphite, manganese and other rare earth metals used to produce electric vehicle batteries and other tech devices. Mining and refining these critical mineral resources would require major investment in infrastructure and economic development, including in parts of Ukraine severely damaged by fighting. Some analysts are calling for a return to the European Recovery Program, commonly known as the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan used $13.3 billion in U.S. funds -- roughly $171 billion in today's dollars -- to rebuild war-torn Western Europe from 1948 to late 1951. It is often evoked as a solution for reconstruction following global crises. Yet as a military historian and curator, I find that the Marshall Plan is not well understood. For the U.S., the economic gains of the Marshall Plan did not come from European countries' repaying loans or allowing the U.S. to extract their raw materials. Rather, the U.S. has benefited enormously from a half-century of goodwill, democratic stability and economic success in Europe. European nations turn inward After World War II ended in 1945, Western Europe faced a staggering burden of destruction and upheaval. Allied bombardment of major industrial areas and German cities such as Berlin, Hamburg and Cologne had created massive housing shortages. Meanwhile, fighting through agricultural areas and a critical manpower shortage had curtailed food production. What harvest there was could not get to hungry civilians because so many of Europe's roads, bridges and ports had been destroyed. The United Kingdom, Italy, France, Germany and other European governments were buried in debt after so many years of war. They could not afford to rebuild on their own. Yet rather than cooperating on their mutual economic reconstruction, European nations looked inward, focusing primarily on their own political challenges. The continent was politically and militarily divided, too. Europe's western half was influenced by the democratic, capitalistic forces led by the U.S. Eastern Europe was beholden to the communist, command-economy forces of the Soviet Union. In a 1946 speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill articulated Europe's growing postwar divide. Over the ruins of proud nations, he said, "an iron curtain" had "descended across the continent." U.S. looks abroad Unlike Europe, the U.S. emerged from World War II as the wealthiest nation in the world, with its territory intact and unharmed. Its steel and oil industries were booming. By 1947, the U.S. was the clear successor to Great Britain as the world's superpower. But President Harry Truman feared the ambitions of the war's other great victor - the Soviet Union. In March 1947, he announced a new doctrine to contain communist expansion southward across Europe by giving $400 million in military and economic aid to Greece and Turkey. Around the same time, U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall met with Soviet officials to plan Germany's future. Following the Nazis' surrender in May 1945, Germany had been divided into four occupied zones administered by U.S., British, French and Soviet forces. Each nation had its own goals for its section of Germany. The U.S. wanted to revitalize Germany politically and economically, believing that a moribund Germany would thwart the economic reconstruction of all of Europe. Marshall hoped that the Soviets would cooperate, but Soviet ruler Josef Stalin preferred extracting reparations from a prostrate Germany to investing in its recovery. A vibrant German economic engine, the Soviets felt, could just as easily rearm to attack the Russian countryside for the third time that century. The Truman administration chose to unilaterally rebuild the three western Allied sectors of Germany - and Western Europe. Marshall outlined his plan at a commencement address at Harvard University in June 1947. American action to restore global economic health, he said, would provide the foundation for political stability and peace in Europe. And an economically healthy Western Europe, in turn, would inhibit the spread of communism by plainly demonstrating the benefits of capitalism. "Our policy is not directed against any country," Marshall said, "but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos." Marshall's plan Marshall invited all European nations to participate in drafting a plan to first address the immediate humanitarian aid of Europe's people, then rebuild its infrastructure. The U.S. would pay for it all. For nearly bankrupt European nations, it was a lifeline. In September 1947, the new Committee for European Economic Co-operation, composed of 16 Western - but not Eastern - European nations, delivered its proposal to Washington. It would take a masterful legislative strategy for the Democratic Truman administration to persuade the Republican-led Congress to pass this $13 billion bill. It succeeded thanks to the dedicated effort of Republican Sen. Arthur Vandenberg, who convinced his isolationist colleagues that the Marshall Plan would halt the expansion of communism and benefit American economic growth. In April 1948, Truman signed the Economic Cooperation Act. By year's end, over $2 billion had reached Europe, and its industrial production had finally surpassed prewar levels seen in 1939. NATO is born Along with economic stability, the Truman administration recognized that Europe needed military security to defend against communist encroachment by the Soviet Union. In July 1949, 12 European countries, the U.S. and Canada established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO committed each member country to the mutual defense of fellow NATO members. Since 1947, NATO has steadily expanded eastward to include Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and other former Soviet satellite states directly bordering Russia. Ukraine, which declared its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, is not yet a NATO member. But it desperately wants to be. Ukraine applied for NATO membership in 2022 after Russia's invasion. Its application is pending. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said any peace deal with Ukraine must bar NATO membership. Would a Marshall Plan work for Ukraine? Modern-day Ukraine mirrors the Western European countries of the Marshall Plan era in meaningful ways. It suffers from the physical devastation of war, with its major cities heavily damaged. The threat of military attack from hostile neighbors remains urgent. And it has a functional, democratic government that would - in peacetime - be capable of receiving and distributing aid to develop the nation's economic growth and stability. U.S. global leadership, however, has changed dramatically since 1948. Outright American taxpayer financing of Ukraine's reconstruction seems impossible. Any plan to reconstruct the country after war will likely require public funding from multiple nations and substantial private investment. That private investment could well include mineral extraction and refinement ventures. Ultimately, Ukraine's recovery will most likely involve Ukraine and neighboring nations reaching agreement to restore its economic and military security. The European Union, which Ukraine also seeks to join, has the bureaucratic and economic resources necessary to reconstruct Ukraine, restore peace and ease tensions on the continent. Any future Marshall Plan for Ukraine will probably be European. Frank A. Blazich Jr. is a curator of military history at the National Museum of American History at the Smithsonian Institution. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely the views of the author.
