the first step in the reunification of east and west germany was uniting their

Discussions immediately began on an emergency merger of the German economies. On 18 May 1990, the two German states signed a treaty agreeing on monetary, economic and social union. This treaty is called Vertrag über die Schaffung einer Währungs-, Wirtschafts- und Sozialunion zwischen der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland ("Treaty Establishing a Monetary, Economic and Social Union between the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany");[5] it came into force on 1 July 1990, with the West German Deutsche Mark replacing the East German mark as the official currency of East Germany. The Deutsche Mark had a very high reputation among the East Germans and was considered stable.[6] While the GDR transferred its financial policy sovereignty to West Germany, the West started granting subsidies for the GDR budget and social security system.[7] At the same time many West German laws came into force in the GDR. This created a suitable framework for a political union by diminishing the huge gap between the two existing political, social, and economic systems.[7]

German reunification

The German reunification (German: Deutsche Wiedervereinigung) was the process in 1990 in which the German Democratic Republic (GDR, colloquially East Germany; German: Deutsche Demokratische Republik/DDR) became part of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG, colloquially West Germany; German: Bundesrepublik Deutschland/BRD) to form the reunited nation of Germany, and when Berlin reunited into a single city, as provided by its then Grundgesetz (constitution) Article 23. The end of the unification process is officially referred to as German unity (German: Deutsche Einheit), celebrated on 3 October (German Unity Day) (German: Tag der deutschen Einheit).[1] Following German reunification, Berlin was once again designated as the capital of united Germany.

The East German government started to falter in May 1989, when the removal of Hungary's border fence with Austria opened a hole in the Iron Curtain. It caused an exodus of thousands of East Germans fleeing to West Germany and Austria via Hungary. The Peaceful Revolution, a series of protests by East Germans, led to the GDR's first free elections on 18 March 1990, and to the negotiations between the GDR and FRG that culminated in a Unification Treaty.[1] Other negotiations between the GDR and FRG and the four occupying powers produced the so-called "Two Plus Four Treaty" (Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany) granting full sovereignty to a unified German state, whose two parts were previously bound by a number of limitations stemming from their post-World War II status as occupied regions.

The 1945 Potsdam Agreement had specified that a full peace treaty concluding World War II, including the exact delimitation of Germany's postwar boundaries, required to be "accepted by the Government of Germany when a government adequate for the purpose is established." The Federal Republic had always maintained that no such government could be said to have been established until East and West Germany had been united within a free democratic state; but in 1990 a range of opinions continued to be maintained over whether a unified West Germany, East Germany and Berlin could be said to represent "Germany as a whole" for this purpose. The key question was whether a Germany that remained bounded to the east by the Oder-Neisse Line could act as a "united Germany" in signing the peace treaty without qualification. Under the "Two Plus Four Treaty" both the Federal Republic and the Democratic Republic committed themselves and their unified continuation to the principle that their joint pre-1990 boundaries constituted the entire territory that could be claimed by a Government of Germany, and hence that there were no further lands outside those boundaries that were parts of Germany as a whole.

The united Germany is not a successor state, but an enlarged continuation of the former West Germany. As such, the enlarged Federal Republic of Germany retained the West German seats in international organizations including the European Community (later the European Union) and NATO, while relinquishing membership in the Warsaw Pact and other international organizations to which only East Germany belonged. It also maintains the United Nations membership of the old West Germany.

For political and diplomatic reasons, West German politicians carefully avoided the term "reunification" during the run-up to what Germans frequently refer to as die Wende. The official[1] and most common term in German is "Deutsche Einheit" ("German unity"); this is the term that Hans-Dietrich Genscher used in front of international journalists to correct them when they asked him about "reunification" in 1990.

After 1990, the term "die Wende" became more common. The term generally refers to the events (mostly in Eastern Europe) that led up to the actual reunification; in its usual context, this term loosely translates to "the turning point", without any further meaning. When referring to the events surrounding reunification, however, it carries the cultural connotation of the time and the events in the GDR that brought about this "turnaround" in German history. However, anti-communist activists from Eastern Germany rejected the term Wende as it was introduced by SED's (Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands, Socialist Unity Party of Germany) Secretary General Egon Krenz.[2]

In 1945, the Third Reich ended in defeat and Germany was divided into four occupation zones, under the Soviet Union, the United States, the United Kingdom and France. The capital city of Berlin was similarly divided into four zones. Between 1947 and 1949, the three zones of the western allies were merged, forming the Federal Republic of Germany and West Berlin, aligned with capitalist Europe (which later developed into the European Community). The Soviet zone became the German Democratic Republic with its capital in East Berlin, part of the communist Soviet Bloc. The FRG was a member of the western military alliance, NATO and the GDR was a member of the Warsaw Pact. Germans lived under such imposed divisions throughout the ensuing Cold War.

Into the 1980s, the Soviet Union experienced a period of economic and political stagnation, and correspondingly decreased intervention in Eastern Bloc politics. In 1987, US President Ronald Reagan gave a speech at the Brandenburg Gate, challenging Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to "tear down the wall" which divided Berlin. The wall had stood as an icon for the political and economic division between East and West, a division that Churchill had referred to as the "Iron Curtain". In early 1989, under a new era of Soviet policies of glasnost (openness), perestroika (economic restructuring) and taken to even more progressive levels by Gorbachev, the Solidarity movement took hold in Poland. Further inspired by other images of brave defiance, a wave of revolutions swept throughout the Eastern Bloc that year. In May 1989, Hungary removed their border fence and thousands of East Germans escaped to the West â€” although even then, very many people inside and outside Germany still believed that a real reunification would never happen in the foreseeable future.[3]

The turning point in Germany, called "Die Wende", was marked by the "Peaceful Revolution" leading to the removal of the Berlin Wall, with East and West Germany subsequently entering into negotiations toward eliminating the division that had been imposed upon Germans more than four decades earlier.

On 28 November 1989—two weeks after the fall of the Berlin Wall—West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl announced a 10-point program calling for the two Germanys to expand their cooperation with a view toward eventual reunification.[4]

Initially, no timetable was proposed. However, events rapidly came to a head in early 1990. First, in March, the Party of Democratic Socialism—the former Socialist Unity Party of Germany—was heavily defeated in East Germany's first free elections. A grand coalition was formed under Lothar de Maizière, leader of the East German wing of Kohl's Christian Democratic Union, on a platform of speedy reunification. Second, East Germany's economy and infrastructure underwent a swift and near-total collapse. While East Germany was long reckoned as having the most robust economy in the Soviet bloc, the removal of Communist hegemony revealed the ramshackle foundations of that system. The East German mark had been almost worthless outside East Germany for some time before the events of 1989–90, and the collapse of the East German economy further magnified the problem.

The Volkskammer, the Parliament of East Germany, passed a resolution on 23 August 1990 declaring the accession (Beitritt) of the German Democratic Republic to the Federal Republic of Germany, and the extension of the field of application of the Federal Republic's Basic Law to the territory of East Germany as allowed by article 23 of the West German Basic Law, effective 3 October 1990.[8][9][10] The East German Declaration of Accession (BeitrittserklÃ¤rung) to the Federal Republic, as provided by article 23 of the West German Basic Law, was approved by the Volkskammer on 23 August, and formally presented by its President to the President of the West German Bundestag by means of a letter dated 25 August 1990.[11] Thus, formally, the procedure of reunification by means of the accession of East Germany to West Germany, and of East Germany's acceptance of the Basic Law already in force in West Germany, was initiated as the unilateral, sovereign decision of East Germany, as allowed by the then existing provision of article 23 of the West German Basic Law.

In the wake of that resolution of accession, the "German reunification treaty",[12][13][14] commonly known in German as "Einigungsvertrag" (Unification Treaty) or "Wiedervereinigungsvertrag" (Reunification Treaty), that had been negotiated between the two German states since 2 July 1990, was signed by representatives of the two Governments on 31 August 1990.  This Treaty, officially titled Vertrag zwischen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik über die Herstellung der Einheit Deutschlands (Treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic on the Establishment of German Unity), was approved by large majorities in the legislative chambers of both countries on 20 September 1990[15] (442–47 in the West German Bundestag and 299–80 in the East German Volkskammer). The Treaty passed the West German Bundesrat on the following day, 21 September 1990. The amendments to the Federal Republic's Basic Law that were foreseen in the Unification Treaty or necessary for its implementation were adopted by the Federal Statute of 23 September 1990, that enacted the incorporation of the Treaty as part of the Law of the Federal Republic of Germany. The said Federal Statute, containing the whole text of the Treaty and its Protocols as an annex, was published in the Bundesgesetzblatt (the official journal for the publication of the laws of the Federal Republic) on 28 September 1990.[16] In the German Democratic Republic, the constitutional law (Verfassungsgesetz) giving effect to the Treaty was also published on 28 September 1990.[17] With the adoption of the Treaty as part of its Constitution, East Germany legislated its own abolition as a State.

Under article 45 of the Treaty,[18] it entered into force according to international law on 29 September 1990, upon the exchange of notices regarding the completion of the respective internal constitutional requirements for the adoption of the treaty in both East Germany and West Germany. With that last step, and in accordance with article 1 of the Treaty, and in conformity with East Germany's Declaration of Accession presented to the Federal Republic, Germany was officially reunited at 00:00 CEST on 3 October 1990. East Germany joined the Federal Republic as the five Länder (states) of Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia. These states were the five original states of East Germany, but were abolished in 1952 in favour of a centralised system. As part of the 18 May treaty, the five East German states were reconstituted on 23 August. At the same time, East and West Berlin reunited into one city, which became a city-state along the lines of the existing city-states of Bremen and Hamburg. Berlin was still formally under Allied occupation (that would only be terminated later, as a result of the provisions of the Two Plus Four Treaty), but the city's administrative merger and inclusion in the Federal Republic of Germany, effective on 3 October 1990, had been greenlighted by the Allies, and were formally approved in a meeting of the Allied Control Council on 2 October 1990. In an emotional ceremony, at the stroke of midnight on 3 October 1990, the black-red-gold flag of West Germany—now the flag of a reunited Germany—was raised above the Brandenburg Gate marking the moment of German reunification.

The process chosen was one of two options implemented in the West German constitution (Basic Law) of 1949 to facilitate eventual reunification.  The Basic Law stated that it was only intended for temporary use until a permanent constitution could be adopted by the German people as a whole.  Via that document's (then-existing) Article 23, any new prospective LÃ¤nder could adhere to the Basic Law by a simple majority vote. The initial eleven joining states of 1949 constituted the Trizone. West Berlin had been proposed as the 12th state, but was legally inhibited by Allied objections since Berlin as a whole was legally a quadripartite occupied area. Despite this, West Berlin's political affiliation was with West Germany, and in many fields it functioned de facto as if it were a component state of West Germany. In 1957 the Saar Protectorate joined West Germany under the Article 23 procedure as Saarland.

The other option was Article 146, which provided a mechanism for a permanent constitution for a reunified Germany. This route would have entailed a formal union between two German states that then would have had to, amongst other things, create a new constitution for the newly established country. However, by the spring of 1990 it was apparent that drafting a new constitution would require protracted negotiations that would open up numerous issues in West Germany. Even without this to consider, by the start of 1990 East Germany was in a state of utter collapse. In contrast, reunification under Article 23 could be implemented in as little as six months.

Ultimately, when the treaty on monetary, economic and social union was signed, it was decided to use the quicker process of Article 23. By this process, East Germany voted to dissolve itself and to join West Germany as five new states, and the area in which the Basic Law was in force simply extended to include them.[19]  Thus, while legally East Germany as a whole acceded to the Federal Republic, the constituent parts of East Germany entered into the Federal Republic as separate states.   The five new states held their first elections on 14 October 1990.

Nevertheless, although the Volkskammer's declaration of accession to the Federal Republic had initiated the process of reunification, the act of reunification itself (with its many specific terms, conditions and qualifications, some of which required amendments to the Basic Law itself) was achieved constitutionally by the subsequent Unification Treaty of 31 August 1990; that is through a binding agreement between the former GDR and the Federal Republic now recognising each another as separate sovereign states in international law.[20] This treaty was then voted into effect by both the Volkskammer and the Bundestag by the constitutionally required two-thirds majorities, effecting on the one hand, the extinction of the GDR, and on the other, the agreed amendments to the Basic Law of the Federal Republic.  Hence, although the GDR declared its accession to the Federal Republic under Article 23 of the Basic Law, this did not imply its acceptance of the Basic Law as it then stood, but rather, of the Basic Law as subsequently amended in line with the Unification Treaty.

The reunification was not a merger that created a third state out of the two.  Rather, West Germany effectively absorbed East Germany. Accordingly, on Unification Day, 3 October 1990, the German Democratic Republic ceased to exist, and five new Federal States on its former territory joined the Federal Republic of Germany. East and West Berlin were reunited and joined the Federal Republic as a full-fledged Federal City-State. Under this model, the Federal Republic of Germany, now enlarged to include the five states of the former German Democratic Republic plus the reunified Berlin, continued legally to exist under the same legal personality that was founded in May 1949.

While the Basic Law was modified, rather than replaced by a constitution as such, it still permits the adoption of a formal constitution by the German people at some time in the future.

The practical result of that model is that the now-expanded Federal Republic of Germany inherited the old West Germany's seats at the UN, NATO, the European Communities and other international organizations.  It also continued to be a party to all the treaties the old West Germany signed prior to the moment of reunification.  The Basic Law and statutory laws that were in force in the Federal Republic, as amended in accordance with the Unification Treaty, continued automatically in force, but now applied to the expanded territory. Also, the same President, Chancellor (Prime Minister) and Government of the Federal Republic remained in office, but their jurisdiction now included the newly acquired territory of the former East Germany.

To facilitate this process and to reassure other countries, fundamental changes were made to the "Basic Law" (constitution). The Preamble and Article 146 were amended, and Article 23 was replaced, but the deleted former Article 23 was applied as the constitutional model to be used for the 1990 reunification. Hence, prior to the five "New Länder" of East Germany joining, the Basic Law was amended to indicate that all parts of Germany would then be unified such that Germany could now no longer consider itself constitutionally open to further extension to include the former eastern territories of Germany, that were now Polish, Russian or Lithuanian. The changes effectively formalised the Oder–Neisse line as Germany's permanent eastern border. These amendments to the Basic Law were mandated by Article I, section 4 of the Two Plus Four Treaty.[citation needed]

To commemorate the day that marks the official unification of the former East and West Germany in 1990, 3 October has since then been the official German national holiday, the Day of German Unity (Tag der deutschen Einheit). It replaced the previous national holiday held in West Germany on 17 June commemorating the Uprising of 1953 in East Germany and the national holiday on 7 October in the GDR, that commemorated the foundation of the East German state.[7]

For decades, West Germany's allies stated their support for reunification. Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, who speculated that a country that "decided to kill millions of Jewish people" in the Holocaust "will try to do it again", was one of the few world leaders to publicly oppose it. As reunification became a realistic possibility, however, significant NATO and European opposition emerged in private.[21]

A poll of four countries in January 1990 found that a majority of surveyed Americans and French supported reunification, while British and Poles were more divided. 69% of Poles and 50% of French and British stated that they worried about a reunified Germany becoming "the dominant power in Europe". Those surveyed stated several concerns, including Germany again attempting to expand its territory, a revival of Nazism, and the German economy becoming too powerful. While British, French and Americans favored Germany remaining a member of NATO, a majority of Poles supported neutrality for the reunified nation.[22]

Before the fall of the Berlin Wall, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher told Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev that neither the United Kingdom nor Western Europe wanted the reunification of Germany. Thatcher also clarified she wanted the Soviet leader to do what he could to stop it, telling Gorbachev "We do not want a united Germany".[23] Although she welcomed East German democracy, Thatcher worried that a rapid reunification might weaken Gorbachev,[24] and favoured Soviet troops staying in East Germany as long as possible to act as a counterweight to a united Germany.[21]

Thatcher, who carried in her handbag a map of Germany's 1937 borders to show others the "German problem", feared that its "national character", size and central location in Europe would cause the nation to be a "destabilizing rather than a stabilizing force in Europe".[24] In December 1989, she warned fellow European Community leaders at a Strasbourg summit that Kohl attended, "We defeated the Germans twice! And now they're back!"[25][21] Although Thatcher had stated her support for German self-determination in 1985,[24] she now argued that Germany's allies only supported reunification because they did not believe it would ever happen.[21] Thatcher favoured a transition period of five years for reunification, during which the two Germanys would remain separate states. Although she gradually softened her opposition, as late as March 1990 Thatcher summoned historians and diplomats to a seminar at Chequers[24] to ask "How dangerous are the Germans?"[25] and the French ambassador in London reported that Thatcher told him, "France and Great Britain should pull together today in the face of the German threat."[26][27]

The pace of events surprised the French, whose Foreign Ministry had concluded in October 1989 that reunification "does not appear realistic at this moment".[28] A representative of French President François Mitterrand reportedly told an aide to Gorbachev, "France by no means wants German reunification, although it realises that in the end it is inevitable."[23] At the Strasbourg summit, Mitterrand and Thatcher discussed the fluidity of Germany's historical borders.[21] On 20 January 1990, Mitterrand told Thatcher that a unified Germany could "make more ground than even Hitler had".[26] He predicted that "bad" Germans would reemerge,[25] who might seek to regain former German territory lost after World War II[24] and would likely dominate Hungary, Poland, and Czechoslovakia, leaving "only Romania and Bulgaria for the rest of us". The two leaders saw no way to prevent reunification, however, as "None of us was going to declare war on Germany".[21] Mitterrand recognized before Thatcher that reunification was inevitable and adjusted his views accordingly; unlike her, he was hopeful that participation in a single currency[24] and other European institutions could control a united Germany. Mitterrand still wanted Thatcher to publicly oppose unification, however, to obtain more concessions from Germany.[25]

Ireland's Taoiseach, Charles Haughey supported German reunification and he took advantage of Ireland's presidency of the European Economic Community to call for an extraordinary European summit in Dublin in April 1990 to calm the fears held of fellow members of the EEC.[29][30][31] Haughey saw similarities between Ireland and Germany, and said, "I have expressed a personal view that coming as we do from a country which is also divided many of us would have sympathy with any wish of the people of the two German States for unification".[32] Der Spiegel later described other European leaders' opinion of reunification at the time as "icy". Italy's Giulio Andreotti warned against a revival of "pan-Germanism" and joked "I love Germany so much that I prefer to see two of them", and the Netherlands' Ruud Lubbers questioned the German right to self-determination. They shared Britain and France's concerns over a return to German militarism and the economic power of a reunified nation. The consensus opinion was that reunification, if it must occur, should not occur until at least 1995 and preferably much later.[21]

The victors of World War II — France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States, comprising the Four-Power Authorities—retained authority over Berlin, such as control over air travel and its political status. From the onset, the Soviet Union sought to use reunification as a way to push Germany out of NATO into neutrality, removing nuclear weapons from its territory. However, West Germany misinterpreted a 21 November 1989 diplomatic message on the topic to mean that the Soviet leadership already anticipated reunification only two weeks after the Wall's collapse. This belief, and the worry that his rival Genscher might act first, encouraged Kohl on 28 November to announce a detailed "Ten Point Program for Overcoming the Division of Germany and Europe". While his speech was very popular within West Germany, it caused concern among other European governments, with whom he had not discussed the plan.[21][34]

The Americans did not share the Europeans' and Russians' historical fears over German expansionism; Condoleezza Rice later recalled, "Any issues that existed in 1945, it seemed perfectly reasonable to lay them to rest".[33] They wished to ensure, however, that Germany would stay within NATO. In December 1989, the administration of President George H. W. Bush made a united Germany's continued NATO membership a requirement for supporting reunification. Kohl agreed, although less than 20% of West Germans supported remaining within NATO. Kohl also wished to avoid a neutral Germany, as he believed that would destroy NATO, cause the United States and Canada to leave Europe, and cause Britain and France to form an anti-German alliance. The United States increased its support of Kohl's policies, as it feared that otherwise Oskar Lafontaine, a critic of NATO, might become Chancellor.[21]

Horst Teltschik, Kohl's foreign policy advisor, later recalled that Germany would have paid "100 billion deutschmarks" if the Soviets demanded it. The USSR did not make such great demands, however, with Gorbachev stating in February 1990 that "The Germans must decide for themselves what path they choose to follow". In May 1990 he repeated his remark in the context of NATO membership while meeting Bush, amazing both the Americans and Germans.[21] This removed the last significant roadblock to Germany being free to choose its international alignments, though Kohl made no secret that he intended for the reunified Germany to inherit West Germany's seats in NATO and the EC.

During a NATO–Warsaw Pact conference in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Genscher persuaded the four powers to treat the two Germanys as equals instead of defeated junior partners, and for the six nations to negotiate alone. Although the Dutch, Italians, Spanish, and other NATO powers opposed such a structure, which meant that the alliance's boundaries would change without their participation, the six nations began negotiations in March 1990. After Gorbachev's May agreement on German NATO membership, the Soviets further agreed that Germany would be treated as an ordinary NATO country, with the exception that former East German territory would not have foreign NATO troops or nuclear weapons. In exchange, Kohl agreed to reduce the sizes of the militaries of both West and East Germany, renounce weapons of mass destruction, and accept the postwar Oder–Neisse line as Germany's eastern border. In addition, Germany agreed to pay about 55 billion deutschmarks to the Soviet Union in gifts and loans, the equivalent of eight days of the West German GDP.[21]

The British insisted to the end, against Soviet opposition, that NATO be allowed to hold manoevres in the former East Germany. After the Americans intervened,[21] both the UK and France ratified the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany in September 1990, thus finalizing the reunification for purposes of international law. Thatcher later wrote that her opposition to reunification had been an "unambiguous failure".[24]

On 14 November 1990, Germany and Poland, signed the German–Polish Border Treaty, finalizing Germany's boundaries as permanent along the Oder–Neisse line, and thus, renouncing any claims to Silesia, East Brandenburg, Farther Pomerania, and the southern area of the former province of East Prussia.[35] The subsequent German-Polish Treaty of Good Neighbourship that supplemented the Border Treaty also granted certain rights for political minorities on either side of the border.[36] The following month, the first all-German free elections since 1932 were held, resulting in an increased majority for the coalition government of Chancellor Helmut Kohl.

On 15 March 1991, the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany—that had been signed in Moscow back on 12 September 1990 by the two German states that then existed (East and West Germany) on one side, and by the four principal Allied powers (the United Kingdom, France, the Soviet Union and the United States) on the other—entered into force, having been ratified by the Federal Republic of Germany (after the unification, as the united Germany) and by the four Allied nations. The entry into force of that treaty (also known as the "Two Plus Four Treaty", in reference to the two German states and four Allied nations that signed it) put an end to the then-remaining limitations on German sovereignty that resulted from the post World War II arrangements.

Even prior to the ratification of the Treaty, the operation of all quadripartite Allied institutions in Germany was suspended, with effect from the reunification of Germany on 3 October 1990 and pending the final ratification of the Two Plus Four Treaty, pursuant to a declaration signed in New York on 1 October 1990 by the foreign ministers of the four Allied Powers, that was witnessed by ministers of the two German states then in existence, and that was appended text of the Two Plus Four Treaty.[37]

In accordance with Article 9 of the Treaty, it entered into force as soon as all ratifications were deposited with the Government of Germany. The last party to ratify the treaty was the Soviet Union, that deposited its instrument of ratification on 15 March 1991. The Supreme Soviet of the USSR only gave its approval to the ratification of the treaty on 4 March 1991, after a hefty debate.

Under that treaty (which should not be confused with the Unification Treaty that was signed only between the two German states), the last Allied forces still present in Germany left in 1994, in accordance with article 4 of the treaty, that set 31 December 1994 as the deadline for the withdrawal of the remaining Allied forces. The bulk of Russian ground forces left Germany on 25 June 1994 with a military parade of the 6th Guards Motor Rifle Brigade in Berlin. The withdrawal of the last Russian troops (the Russian Army's Western Group of Forces) was completed on 31 August 1994, and the event was marked by a military ceremony in the Treptow Park in Berlin, with the presence of Russian President Yeltsin and German Chancellor Kohl.[38] Although the bulk of the British, American, and French Forces had left Germany even before the departure of the Russians, the ceremony marking the withdrawal of the remaining Forces of the Western Allies was the last to take place: on 8 September 1994,[39] a Farewell Ceremony in the courtyard of the Charlottenburg Palace, with the presence of British Prime Minister John Major, American Secretary of State Warren Cristopher, French President FranÃ§ois Mitterrand, and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, marked the withdrawal of the British, American and French Occupation Forces from Berlin, and the termination of the Allied occupation in Germany.[40] Thus, the removal of the Allied presence took place a few months before the final deadline.

As for the Germanâ€“Polish Border Treaty, it was approved by the Polish Sejm on 26 November 1991 and the German Bundestag on 16 December 1991, and entered into force with the exchange of the instruments of ratification on 16 January 1992. The confirmation of the border between Germany and Poland was required of Germany by the Allied Powers in the Two Plus Four Treaty.

The subsequent economic restructuring and reconstruction of eastern Germany resulted in significant costs, especially for western Germany, which paid large sums of money in the form of the Solidaritätszuschlag (Solidarity Surcharge) in order to rebuild the east German infrastructure. Peer Steinbrück is quoted as saying in a 2011 interview,  "Over a period of 20 years, German reunification has cost 2 trillion euros, or an average of 100 billion euros a year. So, we have to ask ourselves 'Aren't we willing to pay a tenth of that over several years for Europe's unity?'"[41]

Vast differences between the former East Germany and West Germany in lifestyle, wealth, political beliefs, and other matters remain, and it is therefore still common to speak of eastern and western Germany distinctly. The eastern German economy has struggled since unification, and large subsidies are still transferred from west to east. The former East Germany area has often been compared to the underdeveloped Southern Italy and the Southern United States during Reconstruction after the American Civil War. While the East German economy has recovered recently, the differences between East and West remain present.[42][43]

Politicians and scholars have frequently called for a process of "inner reunification" of the two countries and asked whether there is "inner unification or continued separation".[44] "The process of German unity has not ended yet", proclaimed Chancellor Angela Merkel, who grew up in East Germany, in 2009.[45] Nevertheless, the question of this "inner reunification" has been widely discussed in the German public, politically, economically, culturally, and also constitutionally since 1989.

Politically, since the fall of the Wall, the successor party of the former East German socialist state party has become a major force in German politics. It was renamed PDS, and, later, merged with the Western leftist party WASG to form the party The Left (Die Linke).

Constitutionally, the Basic Law (Grundgesetz), the West German constitution, provided two pathways for a unification. The first was the implementation of a new all-German constitution, safeguarded by a popular referendum. Actually, this was the original idea of the "Grundgesetz" in 1949: it was named a "basic law" instead of a "constitution" because it was considered provisional.[46] The second way was more technical: the implementation of the constitution in the East, using a paragraph originally designed for the West German states (BundeslÃ¤nder) in case of internal re-organization like the merger of two states. While this latter option was chosen as the most feasible one, the first option was partly regarded as a means to foster the "inner reunification".[47][48]

A public manifestation of coming to terms with the past (Vergangenheitsbewältigung) is the existence of the so-called Birthler-Behörde, the Federal Commissioner for the Stasi Records, which collects and maintains the files of the East German security apparatus.[49]

The economic reconstruction of the former East Germany following the reunification required large amounts of public funding which turned some areas into boom regions, although overall unemployment remains higher than in the former West.[50]
Unemployment was part of a process of deindustrialization starting rapidly after 1990. Causes for this process are disputed in political conflicts up to the present day. Most times bureaucracy and lack of efficiency of the East German economy are highlighted and the de-industrialization seen as inevitable outcome of the "Wende". But many critics from East Germany point out that it was the shock-therapy style of privatization which did not leave room for East German enterprises to adapt, and that alternatives like a slow transition had been possible.[51]

Reunification did, however, lead to a large rise in the average standard of living in former East Germany and a stagnation in the West as $2 trillion in public spending was transferred East.[52] Between 1990 and 1995, gross wages in the east rose from 35% to 74% of western levels, while pensions rose from 40% to 79%.[53] Unemployment reached double the western level as well. West German cities close to the new border of East and West Germany experienced a disproportionate loss of market access[clarification needed] relative to other West German cities which were not as greatly affected by the reunification of East Germany.[54]

In terms of media usage and reception, the country remains partially divided especially among the older generations. Mentality gaps between East and West persist, but so does sympathy.[45] Additionally, the integration between Easterners and Westerners is not happening on as large a scale as was expected.[55][56] Young people have on average very little knowledge of the former East Germany.[57] Some people in Eastern Germany engage in "Ostalgie", which is a certain nostalgia for the time before the wall came down.[58]

Today, there are several prominent people of East German origin, including Michael Ballack, Katarina Witt, Paul van Dyk, and Angela Merkel.

While the fall of the Berlin Wall had broad economic, political and social impacts globally, it also had significant consequence for the local urban environment. In fact, the events of
9 November 1989 saw East Berlin and West Berlin, two halves of a single city that had ignored one another for the better part of 40 years, finally "in confrontation with one another".[59]
As expressed by Grésillon[60] "the fall of the Berlin Wall [marked] the end of 40 years of divided political, economic and cultural histories" and was "accompanied by a strong belief that [the city] was now back on its 'natural' way to become again a major metropolis"[61]

In the context of urban planning, in addition to a wealth of new opportunity and the symbolism of two former independent nations being re-joined, the reunification of Berlin presented numerous challenges. The city underwent massive redevelopment, involving the political, economic and cultural environment of both East and West Berlin. However, the "scar" left by the Wall, which ran directly through the very heart of the city[62] had consequences for the urban environment that planning still needs to address. Despite planning efforts, significant disparity between East and West remain.[citation needed]

The reunification of Berlin presented legal, political and technical challenges for the urban environment. The political division and physical separation of the city for more than 30 years saw the East and the West develop their own distinct urban forms, with many of these differences still visible to this day.[63]
East and West Berlin were directed by two separate political and urban agendas. East Berlin developed a mono-centric structure with lower level density and a functional mix in the city's core, while West Berlin was poly-centric in nature, with a high-density, multi-functional city centre.[64]
The two political systems allocated funds to post-war reconstruction differently, based on political priorities,[65] and this had consequences for the reunification of the city. West Berlin had received considerably more financial assistance for reconstruction and refurbishment.[65] There was considerable disparity in the general condition of many of the buildings; at the time of reunification, East Berlin still contained many leveled areas, which were previous sites of destroyed buildings from World War II, as well as damaged buildings that had not been repaired.[65]
An immediate challenge facing the reunified city was the need for physical connectivity between the East and the West, specifically the organisation of infrastructure.[65] In the period following World War II, approximately half of the railway lines were removed in East Berlin.[66]

As urban planning in Germany is the responsibility of city government,[65] the integration of East and West Berlin was in part complicated by the fact that the existing planning frameworks became obsolete with the fall of the Wall.[67]
Prior to the reunification of the city, the Land Use Plan of 1988 and General Development Plan of 1980 defined the spatial planning criteria for West and East Berlin, respectively.[67] These were replaced by the new, unified Land Use Plan in 1994.[67] Termed "Critical Reconstruction", the new policy aimed to revive Berlin's pre-WWII aesthetic;[61] it was complemented by a strategic planning document for downtown Berlin, entitled "Inner City Planning Framework".[61]

Following the dissolution of the German Democratic Republic on 3 October 1990, all planning projects under the socialist regime were abandoned.[68]
Vacant lots, open areas and empty fields in East Berlin were subject to redevelopment, in addition to space previously occupied by the Wall and associated buffering zone.[65] Many of these sites were positioned in central, strategic locations of the reunified city.[67]

Berlin's urban organisation experienced significant upheaval following the physical and metaphorical collapse of the Wall, as the city sought to "re-invent itself as a 'Western' metropolis".[61]

Redevelopment of vacant lots, open areas and empty fields as well as space previously occupied by the Wall and associated buffering zone[65] were based on land use priorities as reflected in "Critical Reconstruction" policies. Green space and recreational areas were allocated 38% of freed land; 6% of freed land was dedicated to mass-transit systems to address transport inadequacies.[65]

Reunification initiatives also included construction of major office and commercial projects, as well as the renovation of housing estates in East Berlin.

Another key priority was reestablishing Berlin as the capital of Germany, and this required buildings to serve government needs, including the "redevelopment of sites for scores of foreign embassies".[65]

With respect to redefining the city's identity, emphasis was placed on restoring Berlin's traditional landscape. "Critical Reconstruction" policies sought to disassociate the city's identity from its Nazi and socialist legacy, though some remnants were preserved, with walkways and bicycle paths established along the border strip to preserve the memory of the Wall.[65] In the centre of East Berlin much of the modernist heritage of the East German state was gradually removed.[68] Reunification saw the removal of politically motivated street names and monuments in the East in an attempt to reduce the socialist legacy from the face of East Berlin.[61]

Immediately following the fall of the Wall, Berlin experienced a boom in the construction industry.[63] Redevelopment initiatives saw Berlin turn into one of the largest construction sites in the world through the 1990s and early 2000s.[67]

The fall of the Berlin Wall also had economic consequences. Two German systems covering distinctly divergent degrees of economic opportunity suddenly came into intimate contact.[69] Despite development of sites for commercial purposes, Berlin struggled to compete in economic terms with key West German centres such as Stuttgart and Düsseldorf.[70][71] The intensive building activity directed by planning policy resulted in the over-expansion of office space, "with a high level of vacancies in spite of the move of most administrations and government agencies from Bonn".[72][73]

Berlin was marred by disjointed economic restructuring, associated with massive deindustrialisation.[70][71] Economist Hartwich asserts that while the East undoubtedly improved economically, it was "at a much slower pace than [then Chancellor Helmut] Kohl had predicted".[74] Wealth and income inequality between former East and West Germany continues today even after reunification. On average adults in the former West Germany have assets worth 94,000 euros as compared to the adults in the former communist East Germany which have just over 40,000 euros in assets.[75]

Facilitation of economic development through planning measures failed to close the disparity between East and West, not only in terms of the economic opportunity but also housing conditions and transport options.[63] Tölle states that "the initial euphoria about having become one unified people again was increasingly replaced by a growing sense of difference between Easterners ("Ossis") and Westerners ("Wessis")".[76] The fall of the Wall also instigated immediate cultural change.[60] The first consequence was the closure in East Berlin of politically oriented cultural institutions.[60]

The fall of the Berlin Wall and the factors described above led to mass migration from East Berlin and East Germany, producing a large labour supply shock in the West.[69] Emigration from the East, totaling 870,000 people between 1989 and 1992 alone,[77] led to worse employment outcomes for the least-educated workers, for blue-collar workers, for men and for foreign nationals.[69]

At the close of the century, it became evident that despite significant investment and planning, Berlin was yet to retake "its seat between the European Global Cities of London and Paris."[61] Yet ultimately, the disparity between East and West portions of Berlin has led to the city achieving a new urban identity.

A number of locales of East Berlin, characterised by dwellings of in-between use of abandoned space for little to no rent, have become the focal point and foundation of Berlin's burgeoning creative activities.[78] According to Berlin Mayor Klaus Wowereit, "the best that Berlin has to offer, its unique creativity. Creativity is Berlin's future."[79] Overall, the Berlin government's engagement in creativity is strongly centered on marketing and promotional initiatives instead of creative production.[80]

Creativity has been the catalyst for the city's "thriving music scene, active nightlife, and bustling street scene"[81] all of which have become important attractions for the German capital. The industry is a key component of the city's economic make-up with more than 10% of all Berlin residents employed in cultural sectors.[82]

Germany was not the only state that had been separated through the aftermaths of World War II. For example, Korea as well as Vietnam have been separated through the occupation of "Western-Capitalistic" and "Eastern-Communistic" forces, after the defeat of the Japanese Empire. Both countries suffered severely from this separation in the Korean War (1950–53) and the Vietnam War (1955–75) respectively, which caused heavy economic and civilian damage.[83][84] However, German separation did not result in another war. Moreover, Germany is the only one of these countries that has managed to achieve a peaceful reunification. For instance, Vietnam achieved reunification only at the end of the Vietnam War in 1975, while North and South Korea still struggle with high political tensions and huge economic disparities, making a possible reunification an enormous challenge.[85]


gangs of wasseypur 2 box office collection till date

Gangs of Wasseypur – Part 2 opened to a poor to medium response at most places in the country. The opening was around the 30% mark on average.The business of two days including paid previews is ₹55.0 million (US$800,000) nett. The film showed a little growth on its third day and collected around ₹32.5 million (US$470,000).The film has collected around ₹185.0 million (US$2.7 million) nett in nine days plus paid previews. The first part of Gangs of Wasseypur was not a huge hit and this has led to the second part doing lesser business.[49] Its net collection stands at ₹229.6 million (US$3.3 million)
Although not a huge hit by any standard, the meagre combined budget of ₹185 million (US$2.7 million)[2] allowed the 2 films to be commercially successful, with net domestic earnings of ₹508.1 million (US$7.4 million) (of the 2 parts combined). Even on its own, the net domestic collections of ₹229.6 million (US$3.3 million) far exceeds the individual budget of Part 2 i.e. ₹92 million (US$1.3 million), making it a successful commercial venture.[50][51]

Gangs of Wasseypur – Part 2

Gangs of Wasseypur – Part 2 (stylised as Gangs of वासेपुर II ) is a 2012 Indian crime film co-written, produced and directed by Anurag Kashyap. It is the second installment of the Gangs of Wasseypur series centered on the coal mafia of Dhanbad, Jharkhand, and the underlying power struggles, politics and vengeance between three crime families. Part 2 features an ensemble cast with Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Richa Chadda, Huma Qureshi, Tigmanshu Dhulia, Pankaj Tripathi, Rajkummar Rao  and Zeishan Quadri in the major roles. Its story spans from the 1990s to 2009.

Both parts were originally shot as a single film measuring a total of 319 minutes and screened at the 2012 Cannes Directors' Fortnight[6][7][8] but since no Indian theatre would volunteer to screen a five plus hour movie, it was divided into two parts (160 mins and 159 mins respectively) for the Indian market.

The film received an Adults Only certification from the Indian Censor Board but is still unusually explicit for Indian standards as it contained vulgar lingo and violence generally suppressed by mainstream Indian movies.[9] The film's soundtrack is heavily influenced by traditional Indian folk songs tending to be philosophical and liberal with its heavy use of sexual innuendos.
Part 2 was released on 8 Aug 2012 across India and had some paid previews on 7 August 2012.[10]

Both parts of the film were acclaimed by the critics upon release. The combined film won the
Best Audiography, Re-recordist's of the Final Mixed Track
(Alok De, Sinoy Joseph and Shreejesh Nair) and Special Mention for acting (Nawazuddin Siddiqui) at the 60th National Film Awards.[11] The film won four Filmfare Awards, including Best Film (Critics) and Best Actress (Critics), at the 58th Filmfare Awards[12] Although not a huge hit by any financial standard, the meagre combined budget of ₹18.5cr allowed the 2 films to be commercially successful, with net domestic earnings of ₹50.81cr (of the 2 parts combined). It is regarded by many as a modern cult film.

The film resumes with the murder of Sardar Khan by Sultan Qureshi and three of his men. When Danish (Vineet Kumar Singh) (Sardar's eldest son), Faizal (Nawazuddin Siddiqui) (Sardar's second son) and Asgar (Jameel Khan) (Sardar's cousin) go to retrieve his body, Danish instantly kills the lone captured killer and vows to kill the other three. Danish and Asgar explain to Faizal that his friend Fazlu Ahmed had doped Faizal with marijuana the night before Sardar's death and had informed Sultan that Sardar would be travelling without bodyguards the next day. Faizal later meets Fazlu, and overhears him on the phone talking to another of Sardar Khan's killers, Saggir. Faizal learns that Saggir would be at the shopping centre the next morning. The next day Danish and Asgar go to the shopping centre, and Danish kills Saggir. Sultan and Fazlu then kill Danish outside a courthouse. At Danish's funeral, Nagma doubts Faizal's ability to exact revenge, but Faizal promises her that he will.

Faizal lies low and waits for right opportunity. When Fazlu wins a local election Faizal meets him on the pretext of congratulating him, but instead beheads him. By doing so, Faizal makes his mark and becomes so feared that illegal iron traders become his cronies. Faizal then makes a truce with Ramadhir Singh. According to their agreement, Ramadhir would provide political support to Faizal's business in Wasseypur on the condition that Faizal would not avenge his father, brother and grandfather. As Faizal's business grows, he marries his sweetheart Mohsina Hamid. Faizal's gang then determines the whereabouts of Sardar's third killer, Khalid, through an aide. Faizal has Khalid's head shaved and then shoots him, enraging Sultan.

Babu Khan (Aditya Kumar) (Sardar's third son, known as Perpendicular) and Definite Khan (Zieshan Quadri) (Sardar's son with Durga) are then introduced. Perpendicular is a 14-year old who manages to get away with looting shops because no one is willing to testify against him in fear of Faizal, and Definite is an up-and-coming goon. Meanwhile, Wasseypur has spawned a new generation of money squandering lobbyists that turn into gangsters overnight. A small-time goon named Shamshad Alam (Rajkummar Rao) has his own transport business and then moves to trading iron, in doing so making an alliance with Faizal. Shamshad offers to increase Faizal's profits with his astute knowledge of the scrap iron business. However, Shamshad begins to keep increasingly significant portions of the profit for himself. When this is revealed to Faizal, Shamshad goes to the police and provides phone calls as evidence of Faizal's involvement in the illegal iron trade. Meanwhile, local shopkeepers lose their patience with Perpendicular's antics and hire Sultan to kill him. Ramadhir meanwhile is losing his faith in his son J.P's ability to run his empire and J.P often finds himself in line of fire for his inability. This results in waning  of J.P.'s prominence and influence.

Sultan's men chase Perpendicular and his friend Tangent after they watch a film. Tangent manages to get back to Faizal's house but Sultan catches Perpendicular and kills him by some railway tracks. Faizal and his gang arrive at the scene and as they are removing Perpendicular's body, the police turn up and arrest Faizal. With Faizal in jail, Definite decides to kill Shamshad before Shamshad tries to fill Faizal's vacant position. However, Definite's pistol jams in the middle of the assassination attempt and he is forced to run. Shamshad and his friend chase him, but Definite manages to jump onto a train. However, the train is full of Indian Army soldiers and Definite is arrested. He is sent to jail, where he meets Faizal.

Ramadhir advises Shamshad to bail Definite out of the jail and then instigate him against his own brother for his empire. Durga worked as a cook for Ramadhir after Sardar's death, and thus Ramadhir feels that he has the influence to put Definite up against Faizal. Faizal is aware of Shamshad's plan and cautions Definite before he leaves the jail. Definite visits Shamshad's office and throws in a grenade, causing Shamshad to lose his leg. Sultan, who was also at Shamshad's office, chases Definite and goes to Faizal's house looking for him. There Sultan doesn't find Definite but finds his sister Shama instead. Although Shama is happy to see him, Sultan shoots her in the head and she falls into a coma. When Faizal is about to be released from jail, J.P cautions Sultan and advises him to kill Faizal in a pre-emptive strike. Sultan along with his gang attacks Faizal's house, but Faizal and his entire family have a lucky escape. As Sultan's gang is leaving, they find a police checkpoint waiting for them and realise that they were double crossed by J.P. Sultan escapes in the ensuing firefight. A few days later, Sultan's men kill Nagma and Asgar in a market in broad daylight. Definite and some other members of Faizal's gang track Sultan to Bhagalpur and kill him. Upon realising that Definite has avenged Danish, Shama, Nagma and Asgar, Faizal tells him to surrender to cement his reputation. With Definite in jail, Ramadhir then aims to create a rift between Definite and Faizal.

Iqlakh, an educated English-speaker, enters Faizal's gang. Iqlakh actually wants to exact revenge and is Ramadhir's mole. Iqlakh's father raped a Wasseypur woman in 1985 and when Sardar Khan found out, he forced Iqlakh's father to divorce his wife and marry the woman he raped (depicted in Part 1). Iqlakh is his father's son with the first wife, whom he divorced. Faizal is initially impressed with Iqlakh's skills and is later made aware of Iqlakh's background, but decides to ignore it. Iqlakh has an astute knowledge of business and bags scrap auctions by force. This brings in a lot of profit for Faizal without any risk, and causes him to neglect Definite. Iqlakh advises Faizal to enter politics in order to provide political protection to all his activities. Faizal decides to contest from Ramadhir's constituency to exact his own revenge.

Ramadhir, feeling threatened, tries to use Definite against Faizal. He releases Definite from jail and sends J.P to broker a deal. J.P, however, is tired of his father's insults and wants to use Faizal to kill him. Ramadhir's plan is that Iqlakh will kill Faizal on the polling day and if he is unable, Definite will take the shot. Definite goes straight to Faizal and informs him of the plan. On the polling day Definite's gang disrupts the elections by force in an effort to prevent Faizal from winning. Iqlakh leads Faizal to an isolated place and tries to kill them, but Definite arrives, double crosses Iqlakh and kills him. Definite explains that Ramadhir changed the plan.

Faizal decides to attack Ramadhir. He knows that Ramadhir is meeting with Shamshad in hospital. Faizal, Definite and other gang members take an ambulance with a large cache of weapons and head towards the hospital. They enter the hospital, and Faizal kills all of Ramadhir's men as the police arrive. He lets other civilians out of the hospital but kills Shamshad. Faizal then finds Ramadhir in a bathroom and kills him, emptying multiple magazines of ammunition into his body. In the meantime the police kill most of Faizal's gang. Faizal and Definite, the only survivors, are arrested. En route to prison the police halts at roadside restaurant for refreshments, leaving Faizal alone in the police van. Faizal is then shot dead by Definite. It is revealed that J.P was the architect of the massacre and Definite is seen free, walking towards his mother.

Four years later, Mohsina and Nasir have moved to Mumbai with Faizal's young son, Firoz. Definite now rules Wasseypur. Nasir describes that Wasseypur was not affected by Ramadhir's and Faizal's deaths and concludes that it is still a battlefield like before.

Anurag Kashyap had wanted to make a film set in Bihar with the name 'Bihar' for some time, but the project didn't take off. In 2008, he met Zeishan Quadri, writer of GANGS who told him about Wasseypur's story. The lawlessness of Dhanbhad and Wasseypur captured his imagination. Zeishan narrated a wide panoply of stories but what really attracted him was not the gang war itself, but the bigger story of the emergence of the mafia. According to Kashyap, telling the story through  the eyes of a few families is what interested him but that also meant a longer reel. "We all know mafia exists but what they do, how they operate, why they do we don't know and that is something which forms the basis of the film".[13] Anurag Kashyap celebrated the success of Gangs of Wasseypur â€“ Part 2, by throwing an iftaar party at a suburban hotel at Bandra in Mumbai on Friday, 17 August, late evening.[14][15][16]

While filming in Varanasi in December 2010, the film's chief assistant director Sahil Shah was killed on shoot while performing a stunt scene.[17] The Movie has been dedicated to Sahil Shah. Initial parts of the movie were shot in madhankhorchi, Kerla.
The film finished production in late March 2011, with Anurag Kashyap moving on to direct his next film immediately due to the accident.[18] Major portions of the film were shot in villages near Bihar.[19][20] Shooting of film also took place in Chunar.[21] Anurag Kashyap, who co-produced the film with Sunil Bohra, has said that it is his most expensive film and he reportedly had to spend ₹150 million on paying the actors.[22] Both parts of Gangs of Wasseypur together cost just ₹ 184 million to make, which makes one film at ₹92 million. Anurag Kashyap, the director of film has declared on Twitter: "45 crores as reported in the media is false." ₹260 million was spent on marketing the film.[23]

The Gangs of Wasseypur franchise promoted a fake electoral campaign through the streets of Mumbai and Delhi to market the second instalment of the political thriller. In several areas of the two cities, political posters had been plastered, in which the two opposing contestants from the movie Ramadhir Singh and Faizal Khan, vied for votes.[24][25]

The main cast of Gangs of Wasseypur – Part 2  shot with the cast of Afsar Bitiya. Actors Nawazuddin Siddiqui (Faisal Khan) and Huma Qureshi (Mohsina)  made a special appearance on the show.[26][27][28] The show was aired on 7–8 August 2012.[29]

As a part of the marketing campaign, the 'Wasseypur Patrika', a fictitious newspaper was made available online.[30]

Gangs of Wasseypur â€“ Part 2 received mostly positive reviews. It is rated 7/10 on the Hindi film review aggregator website ReviewGang.[31]

Mayank Shekhar rated the movie 4/5 stars on Daily Bhaskar[32] and his review at theW14.com reads, "This is India's equivalent of; take your pick, Sergio Leone's Once Upon A Time in America (1984), or Robert Rodriguez's Once Upon A Time in Mexico (2003), though I suppose it could possibly be better than both. It's the definitive "litti western" to borrow the stock phrase "spaghetti western" for Leone's film. With 320 minutes broken into two parts, allows Kashyap the scope to seriously self-indulge and unabashedly entertain. The reason you prefer this sequel to the first installment, besides it being more contemporary is, well, this is where the beginning ties up with the end. You get a full sense of the film's ambitions."[33]

Jaykumar Shah of Planet Bollywood gave the movie 8.5/10 stars, saying that "All in all, this is the best movie to come out from India this year so far. It is gritty, well-paced, extremely well-acted, genre defining, path breaking work of art. The movie is not for the ones who are not comfortable with violence being depicted graphically. If you can digest violence on screen, it is a sure winner."[34]

Taran Adarsh of Bollywood Hungama gave the movie 4/5 stars, saying that "On the whole, Gangs of Wasseypur â€“ Part 2 is an Anurag Kashyap show all through and without an iota of doubt, can easily be listed as one amongst his paramount works. An engaging movie with several bravura moments. Watch it for its absolute cinematic brilliancy!"[35]

Saibal Chatterjee of NDTV gave the movie 4/5 stars, stating that "The revenge, filmed with an operatic slo-mo rhythm, is bloodier than anything you would have seen before. But if you liked Gangs Of Wasseypur, there is no reason why won’t have another blast watching Gangs of Wasseypur – Part 2. But be warned: be sure that your stomach for blood and gore doesn’t give way."[36]

Blessy Chettiar of DNA India gave the movie 4/5 stars, commenting that "Guns speak where abusive language fails. Patience and a real kaleja will see you through this fast-paced, exhilarating blood fest. Kashyap makes sure the gore is beyond redemption. If youâ€™re turned off by it, not his fault."[37]

Madhureeta Mukherjee of Times Of India gave the movie 4/5 stars, saying that "With excellent performances, a screenplay that's strung together beautifully (Zeishan Quadri, Akhilesh, Sachin Ladia, Anurag Kashyap) a revenge story that touches a dramatic crescendo and music that plays out perfectly in sync with tragic twists of tale –'GOW II' is an interesting watch, for the brave-hearted. Like the first part, the movie slows down at times (with pointless pistols, hordes of characters and wasted sub-plots); the length needs to be shot down desperately. But otherwise, it's revenge on a platter – served cold (heartedly) and definitely worth a'second' helping."[38]

Ananya Bhattacharya of Zee News gave the movie 4/5 stars, concluding that "While watching ‘Wasseypur’, the entire film takes your life away! Gangs of Wasseypur 2 is a film, which, with its predecessor, is one that is here to stay, to break conceptions, to demolish structures. With the history of Wasseypur, ‘Wasseypur’ has created another history." [39]

Raja Sen of Rediff gave the movie 3.5/5 stars, stating that "Anurag Kashyap shines once again in the concluding part of Gangs of Wasseypur even though the film is a tad too long. For all its folly – and the fact that an hour could have been lopped off its running length, easy – Gangs Of Wasseypur II provides enough cinematic memorabilia to single-handedly last us the summer." [40]

Kunal Guha of Yahoo! gave the movie 3/5 stars, commenting that "While it would be nice to inherit the right amount of angst for this revenge sequel, this one intermittently recaps what led whom to get where and why. In fact, the first part wasted a lot of time in flagging historical landmarks, in introducing characters and was much scattered with the number of elements and periods to be covered. This one has characters ready to dive into action with a quick backgrounder for new additions, leaving much time to weave a tighter and telling story. Chhi Chha Leather, definitely one that weathers."[41]

Conversely, Prathamesh Jadhav of Bollywood Life gave the movie 2.5/5 stars, saying that "In totality, Anurag Kashyap’s Gangs Of Wassepur II is murkier than its first outing, but it certainly isn’t spicier."[42]

Roshni Devi of Koimoi gave the movie 2/5 stars, stating that "Itâ€™s only the actors and the music of Gangs Of Wasseypur 2 that would make it worth the watch."[43]

Martin D'Souza of Glamsham gave the movie 1.5/5 stars, concluding that "In short, Part 2 'Definitely' does not have a 'Perpendicular' rise. It is off 'Tangent'!"[44]

Gaurav Mokhasi of SecondBaseCritics heaped praise on Part 2 saying, "One needs to realise that GoW was never meant to be the expeditious Lamborghini that speeds past you in an instant and leaves you gasping. Rather, it is the Rolls Royce that cruises slowly by your side, instilling in you a prolonged feeling of awe. The movie deliberately slows down on more than one occasion as the director indulges in it and draws you into his larger than life vision."[45]

International critics have given Gangs of Wasseypur, the first mainstream Bollywood film to be selected for the Director's Fortnight, rave reviews following its world premiere at the 65th Cannes Film Festival. Gangs of Wasseypur premiered at the 65th Cannes Film Festival on the evening of 22 May 2012 as the most highly anticipated Indian film. Deborah Young of The Hollywood Reporter called the film "an extraordinary ride through Bollywood's spectacular, over-the-top filmmaking".

Kashyap, whose reputation as a screenwriter and controversial director reach a culmination in this film, is the real behind-the-scenes godfather, never losing control over the story-telling or hundreds of actors, and allowing tongue-in-cheek diversions in the second half that confirm his command over the sprawling material. In the spirit of Bollywood, Rajiv Ravi's lensing is fast on its feet, with a continually moving camera that always seems to be in the right spot to capture the action. Referring to the violence and pace of the film she says "Gangs of Wasseypur puts Tarantino in a corner with its cool command of cinematically-inspired and referenced violence, ironic characters and breathless pace".[46]

Maggie Lee of Variety notes Kashyap never lets his diverse influences of old-school Italo-American mafia classics a la Coppola, Scorsese and Leone, as well as David Michod's taut crime thriller "Animal Kingdom, override the distinct Indian color. Calling the film "the love child of Bollywood and Hollywood," she felt the film was "by turns pulverizing and poetic in its depiction of violence."[47]

Lee Marshall of Screen International writes "the script alternates engagingly between scenes of sometimes stomach-churning violence and moments of domestic comedy, made more tasty by hard-boiled lines of dialogue like “in Wasseypur even the pigeons fly with one wing, because they need the other to cover their arse” ". He describes song lyrics "as if mouthed by a Greek chorus of street punks" commenting sarcastically on what's happening onscreen.[48]

Gangs of Wasseypur holds a current rating of 89 on the popular critic website Metacritic, thereby receiving a "Universal Acclaim" status from it.

Music composed by Sneha Khanwalkar, with lyrics by Varun Grover. Music is on T-Series.

Sneha Khanwalkar had been nominated for various awards for the music of the 2 parts, including the prestigious Best Music Director award at the 58th Filmfare Awards.[53]

The film mainly draws its story from the real life gang wars that took place in the Dhanbad area. There are several events in the film which differ from the actual documented events. The character of Faizal Khan, played by Nawazuddin Siddiqui, dies in the climax. The character is based on Fahim Khan, who was not killed but is currently in jail in Hazaribagh and has been sentenced to life imprisonment.[54] In the film, Sardar Khan marries a Bengali Hindu woman but in real life, the woman was maintained as a mistress. Most of the gang wars were between the gangs of Wasseypur and not with the Singh family led by Ramadhir Singh (played by Tigmanshu Dhulia) as depicted. The Singhs had been instrumental in instigating the gang wars, but never participated in them.[54]

Another scene in the movie depicts a Muslim girl being kidnapped by Singhâ€™s men. In reality, the victim was a local Hindu girl and the kidnappers were a few goons from Wasseypur. Members of the Singh family threatened all Wasseypur residents with retaliation if the girl was not returned within 24 hours. The girl was eventually returned as the Singhs were regarded with fear in Wasseypur.[54]

The character of Ramadhir Singh is based on Surajdeo Singh. In the film's climax, Singh is brutally killed by Faizal Khan but in real life, Surajdeo Singh was poisoned in his native village during an election campaign in June 1991. Allegedly, Suresh Singh had him poisoned both to avenge the murder of BP Sinha and so that Suresh could become the undisputed coal king of Dhanbad.[citation needed]

The character of Faizal Khan's friend Fazlu is based on Sabir Alam. In the film, Fazlu is killed and decapitated by Faizal Khan. In real life, Sabir Alam and Fahim Khan were childhood friends turned enemies. Sabir was awarded the life sentence in 2007 for the murder of Fahim Khan's mother and aunt, and is currently out on bail in Wasseypur.[55]

The mafia's downfall in Dhanbad didn't come from gang wars but rather it came from the differences between Kunti Singh, the widow of Surajdeo Singh, and his three brothers – Baccha Singh, Rajan Singh and Ram Dhani Singh – which gave others an opportunity to make space for themselves.[56]

Director Kashyap confirmed there will be third part of the franchise, named Gangs of Wasseypur 1.25.[57]


who played cory matthews in girl meets world

Bennett Joseph Savage (born September 13, 1980) is an American actor. He played the lead role of Cory Matthews on the ABC sitcom Boy Meets World (1993–2000) and its Disney Channel sequel series Girl Meets World (2014–2017).

Ben Savage

Savage was born in Chicago, Illinois, the son of Joanne and Lewis Savage, who were an industrial real estate broker and a consultant.[1] His elder brother is actor/director Fred Savage, and his elder sister is actress/musician Kala Savage. His grandparents were Jewish and from Poland, Ukraine, Germany, and Latvia, and Savage was raised in Reform Judaism.[2]

Savage made his film debut at the age of 9 in his elder brother Fred Savage's Little Monsters (1989) and appeared in the feature films Big Girls Don't Cry... They Get Even (1992), as Sam, the brainy little brother, and as a 10-year-old in Clifford (1994), the latter starring Martin Short. Savage's stage debut was in The Laughter Epidemic at the Pasadena Playhouse. He also guest starred on his brother Fred's TV series The Wonder Years in the Valentine's Day episode.

His first major speaking role on network television was playing the recurring role of Matthew, son of the Judd Hirsch character, on the comedy series Dear John (1988). Then he was one of a family of orphans who con Robert Mitchum into being their guardian in A Family For Joe (NBC, 1990).

Ben is best known for his role as lead character Cory Matthews on the hit TV sitcom Boy Meets World from 1993 until 2000. Savage's brother Fred appeared alongside him in one episode of Boy Meets World, guest starring as a lecherous college professor pursuing Cory's girlfriend. In the following season, Fred directed his brother and the cast of Boy Meets World in the episode "Family Trees," as Shawn (Rider Strong) discovers that the woman who raised him is not his biological mother.

Ben has also worked in several TV movies, including She Woke Up (1992) with Lindsay Wagner, and McDonald's Family Theatre Presents: Aliens for Breakfast (1995), as a young teen whose breakfast cereal figure comes alive.

Savage received critical recognition for his portrayal of "Coty Wyckoff", an angel-faced boy with the soul of a killer, in the ABC Event Series, Wild Palms (1993).[3]

In May 1998, Savage again received critical acclaim, this time for playing "Roddy Stern" in Tony Award-winner Israel Horovitz's rarely seen play Unexpected Tenderness at the Marilyn Monroe Theater. He received an Ovation Award for his performance.[4]

In 2002, Savage starred in the PG-13 film Swimming Upstream playing the best friend who was slightly immature but very supportive to his terminally ill friend.

Savage took a break from acting in both film and television for three years, but he later made a guest appearance in Still Standing as Seth Cosella, the boss of Bill Miller, played by Mark Addy. That same year he starred as Ford Davis in the independent feature Car Babes, which was shot on location in Los Gatos, California, and also guest starred as himself in an episode of the Disney Channel original series Phil of the Future.

In 2006, he starred in the critically acclaimed independent film Palo Alto, which first premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2007.[5]

In 2007, he starred in the ABC pilot from Sachs/Judah Making it Legal alongside Scott Wolf and Robert Wagner.

In 2008, he starred as Mark Ratner in an episode of the NBC series Chuck, as well as murder suspect 'Kirby Morris' in an episode of Without a Trace.

In 2011, he appeared in an episode of the Fox series Bones. He also guest starred on the Disney Channel series Shake It Up playing Andy Burns.

In November 2012, Savage announced via his Twitter account that he had signed on to the Boy Meets World spin-off series, Girl Meets World.[6] The series premiered on Disney Channel on June 27, 2014, and features Savage's character Cory and his Boy Meets World love interest Topanga (Danielle Fishel) married in their adult years with two children. The series follows Cory and Topanga's daughter Riley (Rowan Blanchard) as she enters middle school and tries to navigate through life. Besides being Riley's father, Cory is also her history teacher in this series; in addition to his on-screen role, Savage also directed some episodes of the series. On August 6, 2014, it was announced that the series was renewed for a second season. On November 25, 2015, the show was renewed for a third season.[7]

Savage interned for U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA at the time) in 2003 as a requirement for completing his studies at Stanford University, where he graduated in 2004 with a degree in Political Science and as a member of the Sigma Chi fraternity.[8]


who was the leader of solidarity movement in poland

Solidarity (Polish: Solidarność, pronounced [sɔliˈdarnɔɕt͡ɕ] ( listen); full name: Independent Self-governing Labour Union "Solidarity"—Niezależny Samorządny Związek Zawodowy „Solidarność” [ɲezaˈlɛʐnɨ samɔˈʐɔndnɨ ˈzvjɔ̃zɛk zavɔˈdɔvɨ sɔliˈdarnɔɕt͡ɕ]) is a Polish labour union that was founded on 17 September 1980 at the Lenin Shipyard under the leadership of Lech Wałęsa.[1] It was the first trade union in a Warsaw Pact country that was not controlled by a communist party. Its membership reached 9.5 million members before its September 1981 Congress (when it reached 10 million),[2][3] which constituted one third of the total working-age population of Poland.[4]

Solidarity (Polish trade union)

In the 1980s, Solidarity was a broad anti-bureaucratic social movement, using the methods of civil resistance to advance the causes of workers' rights and social change.[5] The government attempted to destroy the union by imposing martial law in Poland, which lasted from December 1981 to July 1983 and was followed by several years of political repression from 8 October 1982, but in the end it was forced to negotiate with Solidarity. In the union's clandestine years, Pope Saint John Paul II and the United States provided significant financial support, estimated to be as much as 50 million US dollars.[6]

The round table talks between the government and the Solidarity-led opposition led to semi-free elections in 1989. By the end of August, a Solidarity-led coalition government was formed. In December 1990, Wałęsa was elected President of Poland. Since then Solidarity has become a more traditional, liberal trade union. Its membership had dropped to 680,000 by 2010[3] and 400,000 by 2011.[2]

In the 1970s Poland's government raised food prices while wages stagnated. This and other stresses led to the June 1976 protests and subsequent government crackdown on dissent. The KOR, the ROPCIO, and other groups began to form underground networks to monitor and oppose the government's behavior. Labour unions formed an important part of this network.[7]

In 1979, the Polish economy shrank for the first time since World War II by 2 percent. The foreign debt reached around $18 billion by 1980.[8]

For participation in the illegal trade union, Anna Walentynowicz was fired from work at the GdaÅ„sk Shipyard on 7 August 1980, 5 months before she was due to retire. This management decision enraged the workers of the Shipyard, who staged a strike action on 14 August defending Anna Walentynowicz and demanding her return. Anna Waletynowicz and Alina Pienkowska transformed a strike over bread and butter issues into a solidarity strike in sympathy with strikes on other establishments.

Solidarity emerged on 31 August 1980 in Gdańsk at the Lenin Shipyards when the communist government of Poland signed the agreement allowing for its existence. On 17 September 1980, over 20 Inter-factory Founding Committees of free trade unions merged at the congress into one national organization NSZZ Solidarity.[4] It officially registered on 10 November 1980.[9]

Wałęsa and others formed a broad anti-Soviet social movement ranging from people associated with the Catholic Church[10] to members of the anti-Soviet left. Solidarity advocated non-violence in its members' activities.[11][12][self-published source] In September 1981 Solidarity's first national congress elected Wałęsa as a president[9] and adopted a republican program, the "Self-governing Republic".[13] The government attempted to destroy the union with the martial law of 1981 and several years of repression, but in the end it had to start negotiating with the union.

In Poland, the Roundtable Talks between the government and Solidarity-led opposition led to semi-free elections in 1989. By the end of August a Solidarity-led coalition government was formed and in December Tadeusz Mazowiecki was elected Prime Minister. Since 1989 Solidarity has become a more traditional trade union, and had relatively little impact on the political scene of Poland in the early 1990s. A political arm founded in 1996 as Solidarity Electoral Action (AWS) won the parliamentary election in 1997, but lost the following 2001 election. Currently, as a political party Solidarity has little influence on modern Polish politics.

Unlike the Carter Administration, the Reagan policies supported the Solidarity movement in Poland, and—based on CIA intelligence—waged a public relations campaign to deter what the Carter administration felt was "an imminent move by large Soviet military forces into Poland."[14] Michael Reisman from Yale Law School named operations in Poland as one of the covert actions of CIA during Cold War.[15] Colonel Ryszard Kukliński, a senior officer on the Polish General Staff was secretly sending reports to the CIA.[16] The CIA transferred around $2 million yearly in cash to Solidarity, for a total of $10 million over five years. There were no direct links between the CIA and Solidarnosc, and all money was channeled through third parties.[17] CIA officers were barred from meeting Solidarity leaders, and the CIA's contacts with Solidarnosc activists were weaker than those of the AFL-CIO, which raised $300,000 from its members, which were used to provide material and cash directly to Solidarity, with no control of Solidarity's use of it. The U.S. Congress authorized the National Endowment for Democracy to promote democracy, and the NED allocated $10 million to Solidarity.[18]

When the Polish government launched martial law in December 1981, however, Solidarity was not alerted. Potential explanations for this vary; some believe that the CIA was caught off guard, while others suggest that American policy-makers viewed an internal crackdown as preferable to an "inevitable Soviet intervention."[19] CIA support for Solidarity included money, equipment and training, which was coordinated by Special Operations.[20] Henry Hyde, U.S. House intelligence committee member, stated that the USA provided "supplies and technical assistance in terms of clandestine newspapers, broadcasting, propaganda, money, organizational help and advice".[21] Initial funds for covert actions by CIA were $2 million, but soon after authorization were increased and by 1985 CIA successfully infiltrated Poland.[22]

In Sollicitudo rei socialis, a major document of Catholic Social Teaching, Pope John Paul II identifies the concept of solidarity with the poor and marginalized as a constitutive element of the Gospel and human participation in the common good. The Roman Catholic Church, under the leadership of Pope John Paul II, was a very powerful supporter of the union and was greatly responsible for its success. Wałęsa, who himself publicly displayed Catholic piety, confirmed the Pope's influence, saying: "The Holy Father, through his meetings, demonstrated how numerous we were. He told us not to be afraid."[23]

In addition, the priest Jerzy Popiełuszko, who regularly gave sermons to the striking workers, was eventually killed by the Communist regime for his association with Solidarity. Polish workers themselves were closely associated with the Church, which can be seen in the photographs taken during strikes in the 1980s. On the walls of several factories, portraits of the Virgin Mary or John Paul II were visible.

In 2017, Solidarity backed a proposal to instate blue laws that would prohibit Sunday shopping, a move supported by Polish bishops.[24]

The survival of Solidarity was an unprecedented event not only in Poland, a satellite state of the USSR ruled (in practice) by a one-party Communist regime, but the whole of the Eastern bloc. It meant a break in the hard-line stance of the communist Polish United Workers' Party, which had bloodily ended a 1970 protest with machine gun fire (killing dozens and injuring over 1,000), and the broader Soviet communist regime in the Eastern Bloc, which had quelled both the 1956 Hungarian Uprising and the 1968 Prague Spring with Soviet-led invasions.

Solidarity's influence led to the intensification and spread of anti-communist ideals and movements throughout the countries of the Eastern Bloc, weakening their communist governments. As a result of the Round Table Agreement between the Polish government and the Solidarity-led opposition, elections were held in Poland on 4 June 1989, in which the opposition were allowed to field candidates against the Communist Party—the first free elections in any Soviet bloc country. A new upper chamber (the Senate) was created in the Polish parliament and all of its 100 seats were contestable in the election, as well as one third of the seats in the more important lower chamber (the Sejm). Solidarity won 99 of the 100 Senate seats and all 161 contestable seats in the Sejm—a victory that also triggered a chain reaction across the Soviet Union’s satellite states, leading to almost entirely peaceful anti-communist revolutions in Central and Eastern Europe[10] known as the Revolutions of 1989 (Jesień Ludów or Wiosna Obywatelów), which ended in the overthrow of each Moscow-imposed regime, and ultimately to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.

Given the union's support from many western governments, relations with trade unions in capitalist countries could be complicated. For example, during the UK miners' strike of 1984-85, Wałęsa said that "The miners should fight, but with common sense—not with destruction" and said of Margaret Thatcher "With such a wise and brave woman, Britain will find a solution to the strike." However, David Jastrzębski, the president of Upper Silesia Solidarity, voiced his support of the striking miners: "Neither the British government’s mounted police charges nor its truncheon blows, any more than the Polish junta’s tanks or rifle fire, can break our common will to struggle for a better future for the working class."[25] This was despite the fact that Arthur Scargill, president of the British National Union of Mineworkers had been highly critical of Solidarity, condemning it as an "anti-socialist organization which desires the overthrow of a socialist state".[26]

In late 2008, several democratic opposition groups in the Russian Federation formed a Solidarity movement.[27]

In the United States, the American Solidarity Party (formerly the Christian Democratic Party USA), a Christian democratic political party, attributes its namesake to Solidarity.[28]

Although Leszek Kołakowski's works were officially banned in Poland and he lived outside the country from the late 1960s, the philosopher's ideas nonetheless exerted an influence on the Solidarity movement. Underground copies of his books and essays shaped the opinions of the Polish intellectual opposition. His 1971 essay Theses on Hope and Hopelessness, which suggested that self-organized social groups could gradually expand the spheres of civil society in a totalitarian state, helped inspire the dissident movements of the 1970s that led to the creation of Solidarity and provided a philosophical underpinning for the movement.

KoÅ‚akowski later described Solidarity as "perhaps [the] closest to the working class revolution" that Karl Marx had predicted in the mid-1800s. Ironically, however, Solidarity featured many elements contrary to socialism as conceived by Marx: "[workers organized] against the exploiters, that is to say, the state. And this solitary example of a working class revolution (if even this may be counted) was directed against a socialist state, and carried out under the sign of the cross, with the blessing of the Pope."[29]

The union was officially founded on 17 September 1980,[1] the union's supreme powers were vested in a legislative body, the Convention of Delegates (Zjazd Delegatów). The executive branch was the National Coordinating Commission (Krajowa Komisja Porozumiewawcza), later renamed the National Commission (Komisja Krajowa). The Union had a regional structure, comprising 38 regions (region) and two districts (okręg). At its highest, the Union had over 10 million members, which became the largest union membership in the world. During the communist era the 38 regional delegates were arrested and jailed when martial law came into effect on 13 December 1981 under General Wojciech Jaruzelski. After a one-year prison term the high-ranking members of the union were offered one way trips to any country accepting them (including Canada, the United States, and nations in the Middle East).

Solidarity was organized as an industrial union, or more specifically according to the One Big Union principle, along the lines of the Industrial Workers of the World and the Spanish Confederación Nacional del Trabajo (workers in every trade were organized by region, rather than by craft).[30]

In 2010, Solidarity had more than 400,000 members.[2] National Commission of Independent Self-Governing Trade Union is located in Gdańsk and is composed of Delegates from Regional General Congresses.

Solidarity is divided into 37 regions, and the territorial structure to a large degree reflects the shape of Polish voivodeships, established in 1975 and annulled in 1998 (see: Administrative division of People's Republic of Poland). The regions are:

The network of Solidarity branches of the key factories of Poland was created on 14 April 1981 in GdaÅ„sk. It was made of representatives of seventeen factories; each stood for the most important factory of every voivodeship of the pre-1975 Poland (see: Administrative division of People's Republic of Poland). However, there were two exceptions. There was no representative of the Koszalin Voivodeship, and the Katowice Voivodeship was represented by two factories:


who was amy dowden partner on strictly 2017

In 2017, Dowden appeared as a professional dancer in the fifteenth series of the British BBC TV talent show Strictly Come Dancing, partnered with comedian Brian Conley.[8] She is the first Welsh professional to take part in the show.[2] Following her elimination with Conley, Dowden won the Children in Need Special partnered with Blue Peter presenter Mark Curry.[citation needed]

Amy Dowden

Amy Dowden (born 10 August 1991)[6] is a Welsh ballroom and Latin American dancer. Dowden and her dancing partner Ben Jones are the current British National Champions in Latin American Dance.[7][2]

She returned for her second series in 2018[9] where she is partnered with Danny John-Jules. The couple were awarded the first 10 score of the series when Darcey Bussell marked their Jive to "Flip, Flop and Fly" in week 5.

Green number indicates Danny & Amy were at the top of the leaderboard

Dowden is from Caerphilly, South Wales and began dancing at the age of eight.[10]


who plays donna on bold and the beautiful

Jennifer Gareis (born August 1, 1970[1]) is an American actress and former beauty queen. She is best known for her roles as Grace Turner on The Young and the Restless (1997–2004, 2014) and as Donna Logan on The Bold and the Beautiful (2006–2015, 2016, 2017, 2018).

Jennifer Gareis

Gareis was born in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and graduated from J. P. McCaskey High School in 1988.[2][3] She graduated from Franklin and Marshall College in 1993 with a Bachelor of Science degree in accounting, then earned a Master's of Business Administration degree from Pepperdine University.[1][3] She is of part Italian descent.[4] Her great-grandmother Sebastiana Tringali came from Militello in Val di Catania, and the city gave her the honorary citizenship.[5]

Gareis competed in her first beauty pageant in 1992 when she placed second runner-up at Miss Pennsylvania USA. She later competed in New York, winning the Miss New York USA 1994 title, and representing New York in the Miss USA 1994 pageant held in South Padre Island, Texas on February 11, 1994. Gareis placed in the top six of the nationally televised pageant, which was won by Lu Parker of South Carolina.[6]

Gareis later began an acting career and landed the role of Grace Turner on CBS soap opera The Young and the Restless, which she played from 1997 to 2000 and again in 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2014. She is best known for her current role as Donna Logan on The Bold and the Beautiful, a role she has held since July 2006. She was taken off contract in late 2014 and her last appearance in the show was on February 18, 2015. She later returned for a few episodes in October 2016, in December 2017 and in February 2018. [7] She was ranked #90 on the Maxim Hot 100 Women of 2002.[citation needed]

Gareis married Bobby Ghassemieh on March 7, 2010. On June 11, 2010, Gareis gave birth to a son,[8] Gavin Blaze Gareis Ghassemieh.[2] Daughter Sophia Rose Gareis Ghassemieh was born June 29, 2012.[9]