Channels, Fall 2018

Channels • 2018 • Volume 3 • Number 1 Page 65 expansion of the Soviet Union and in creating a strong, democratic Europe not disposed to Communism. The Marshall Plan, named for its chief originator, George Marshall, called for nearly $17 billion in American funds to assist in the rebuilding of Europe. The majority of funds went to Great Britain and France, the two nations who expended the most resources during the war. Britain and France also represented the two largest economies in Europe and their economic rehabilitation was imperative to the success of the Marshall Plan throughout the continent. The war devastated the industrial capabilities of Western Europe, weakening their economic capabilities severely. The Marshall plan operated under the belief that economic instability leads to political instability, leaving countries open to communist revolutions. If they did not fall to Communism, the resulting weak economic output would cause a dip in production, which would plunge the continent into a depression it could not handle. American policy operated under a combination of altruism and self-interest; a sincere desire to help their Allies rebuild coupled with a desire to prevent a worldwide depression that the United States would inevitably experience as well. The Marshall Plan called for an astronomical amount of funds, a call that Congress heavily debated. Truman and his advisors ultimately swayed Congress, however, arguing that the funds were necessary to check Soviet expansion. Ironically, Marshall Plan dollars were offered to the Soviet Union and the states under their sphere of influence. Consistent with the information presented by Kennan in 1946, however, the USSR turned down the offer and refused to allow any of the Eastern European countries to accept any money from the Western nations. Stalin refused to allow any “capitalist” influence in regions under his control. The West vs. East schism continued, affirming the predictions of Truman’s political advisors. How did these developments in Europe, however, effect the landscape in Southeast Asia? While Europe took precedence both economically and politically, Southeast Asia remained intimately connected with the evolving situation in Europe. The colonial holdings of Great Britain and France would play a substantial role in rebuilding after the war. French influence first arrived in Indochina through a Jesuit preacher named Father Alexander de Rhodes. The Jesuits, characterized by a sincere desire to spread the Catholic message, sent missionaries around the world, including Asia and South America. French colonization of Indochina, however, began in the 1870’s following the creation of the Third French Republic. Their intent, however, was to acquire resources, not to spread the Catholic message. Decades passed before Indochina became a valuable portion of the French Empire. The French developed rubber colonies in Indochina which proved to be extremely valuable (rubber was a precious commodity of the time). By the 1920’s, French Indochina became the largest rubber producer in the world, creating a valuable industry for the French that hired 80,000 Indochinese. Unrest grew in Indochina, however, as many inhabitants decried poor working conditions and their inferior status compared to the French living in the region. In response, the French significantly improved the plantations, making working conditions more tolerable. In addition, the French created opportunities for the Indochinese to receive a French education. These advances placated the unrest of the Indochinese for a time, but desires for independence soon enveloped the country, creating a turbulent situation for the French. Meanwhile, a Vietnamese nationalist named