Question Demands:
The key issue is an assessment of the weaknesses of the Congress System which contributed to its short life span.
The key issue is an assessment of the weaknesses of the Congress System which contributed to its short life span.
Introduction
The Congress System had a short life span because of the
inherent weaknesses within it. From its inception, the Congress System
shoed that it was doomed, its downfall was inevitable. Great power
politics rather principles governed the actions of the delegates at
every congress and it was this that undid what seemed to be a good
system if it had been properly followed.
The reasons for the collapse of the Congress System
-different ideologies-some wanted to stop revolutions
-They distrusted each other for instance France was admitted later she was vied as a possible enemy.
-differences over the policy of intervention in the domestic affairs of other states. Britain was against intervention while Austria, Russia and Prussia favoured the policy of intervention.
-there were no common aims e.g. at Aix-la-Chapelle, Alexander’s suggestions were rejected for example, disarmament and the formation of an international army. Also Britain did not help in the suppression of revolts in Spain; she did not attend the Congress of Troppau and Laibach in 1820 and 1821.
-Different forms of governments hence they could not agree on one thing e.g. on the terms of the Holy Alliance. Britain was a Constitutional Monarch and was thus bound to be sympathetic to revolutions while other powers such as Austria, Russia and Prussia were autocratic and thus hostile to revolutionary cause.
-Smaller powers were not represented like the Sultan and the Pope.
-they tried to suppress nationalism of which Napoleon 1 had raised this spirit and it could not be suppressed.
-The contribution of Canning of Britain-was greatly opposed to the Congress System. He destroyed the system by openly refusing to participate. He remarked “Things are coming to a wholesome state again, each man for himself and God for us all.”
-They distrusted each other for instance France was admitted later she was vied as a possible enemy.
-differences over the policy of intervention in the domestic affairs of other states. Britain was against intervention while Austria, Russia and Prussia favoured the policy of intervention.
-there were no common aims e.g. at Aix-la-Chapelle, Alexander’s suggestions were rejected for example, disarmament and the formation of an international army. Also Britain did not help in the suppression of revolts in Spain; she did not attend the Congress of Troppau and Laibach in 1820 and 1821.
-Different forms of governments hence they could not agree on one thing e.g. on the terms of the Holy Alliance. Britain was a Constitutional Monarch and was thus bound to be sympathetic to revolutions while other powers such as Austria, Russia and Prussia were autocratic and thus hostile to revolutionary cause.
-Smaller powers were not represented like the Sultan and the Pope.
-they tried to suppress nationalism of which Napoleon 1 had raised this spirit and it could not be suppressed.
-The contribution of Canning of Britain-was greatly opposed to the Congress System. He destroyed the system by openly refusing to participate. He remarked “Things are coming to a wholesome state again, each man for himself and God for us all.”
Conclusion
After the above analysis one should clearly note that the
Congress System did not last for a long time because the great powers
had different ideologies. They could not agree on one thing. Distrust
and self-interests were always evident in their congress. The situation
was exacerbated by the coming to power of George Canning who damaged and
ultimately killed the system. Thus, the Congress System could not last
no more than ten years because of various factors.
No comments:
Post a Comment