Causes of the Great War

Discussions on all aspects of the First World War not covered in the other sections. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
Lord Gort
Member
Posts: 2014
Joined: 07 Apr 2002, 15:44
Location: United Kingdom: The Land of Hope and Glory

Causes of the Great War

#1

Post by Lord Gort » 27 Jul 2003, 14:48

Hello, I have chosen for my A-level personal study to look at the causes of the great war.

I was hoping for detailed hlp on the topic from you guys. I have a pile of books here as well, and as well you helping myself with information I was hoping you would go over the study too. :)

I have come up with these causes so far, can anyone give detail on any of them or add more causes?

1. Nationalism
2. Economic rivalry
3. Colonial rivalry
4. Alliance systems
5. Arms race

Also can people provide reasons why war shouldnt have happened, so far I have....

1. British and German co-operation over the future partition of Portuguese colonies.
2. The closeness of Royal dynasties.

Which nations do you feel had guilt attached to them?


Here is an extract.



In the sweltering summer of 1914 over seven million soldiers began a journey that would end four years later being the most costly and devastating war in the history of mankind. That summer would see the ushering in of a new kind of war made more terrible and more peverted by the likes of burning industry and twisted science. Peoples would be uprooted, revolutions ignited. Whole swathes of Europe would be savaged and left desolate, and dynasties and nations that had survived previous tides of history would be swept away with the map of Europe re-drawn. The fabric of European civilisation would be changed forever.
The ceasless rattle of the guns has long been replaced by the ceaseless rattle of keyboards and typewriters as well as the flurry of pens, as historians argue over the causes of the “war to end all wars”. I hope to disect some of the complex reasons why the nations of Europe entered war, and give an over view of some of the many reasons which caused the conflict.



War between all the great powers in Europe had not occurred since the Napoleonic era, indeed general war between any two of the great powers had not occurred since the Franco-Prussian war of 1870. It was in the roots of this earlier conflict that the seeds of next would be sewn. The humiliating treaty of Frankfurt had stripped France of Alsace-Lorraine and forced her to pay a large indemnity to the new Germany. The consequences of the war were a revengeful France left bitter at the new Germany, which was now the premier power in Europe and in possesion of two of its provinces. The policy of France would be to recover the provinces and ensure that she was never again forced into a solitary war with Germany. German policy would revolve around keeping France isolated and ensuring that she herself had allies for any future conflict





regards,

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#2

Post by Andy H » 27 Jul 2003, 16:22

Hi Gorty

It's WW1 Day on the UK History Channel today, all day. I've watched some 3 hours worth and I've learn't a few things.

It mentioned a 1912 German General staff meeting where they were actively planning and wanting a Great War ASAP, and the Austro-Hungarian war with the Serbs was seen as the best ideal to get things moving.

Andy H


User avatar
Lord Gort
Member
Posts: 2014
Joined: 07 Apr 2002, 15:44
Location: United Kingdom: The Land of Hope and Glory

#3

Post by Lord Gort » 27 Jul 2003, 16:33

Cheers Andy, the meeting you mention I have the quote of.



Have you been watching the "day the guns went silent". Because I found it particularly interesting. The subect of the war cemetaries reminded me of your question regarding servicemen lost in Iraq.



regards,

User avatar
Kraut!
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 25 Jul 2003, 05:48
Location: Houston

#4

Post by Kraut! » 28 Jul 2003, 03:52

Details for the nationalistic cause.

1.Nationalism
Nationalistic Beliefs: Strong feelings of nationalism fed the fires of hatred in pre-war Europe. It turned Frenchman against German and Russian against Austrian. Nationalistic speeches and writings (especially in countries like Germany) hastened the war by painting it as the best test for proof of national superiority.


These general causes created an atmosphere in Europe which made war a likelihood. The spark which ignited the flame and transformed these underlying problems into a frenzy of hostilities happened in the Balkans. On June 28, 1914, Archduke Francis Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated while visiting Serbia. At first, it appeared to be another Balkan crisis that might pass without a major disturbance, but a month later, Austria severed relations with Serbia, a move that preceded war by only a few days.


Germany stood back of Austria's actions, while Russia stepped forward to defend it small Balkan friend. Despite frantic efforts by would-be peacemakers to localize the war, it spread rapidly, involving next France and Belgium, and soon Great Britain. As the world looked on, Europe erupted into war almost overnight.


American relations with European nations were at the time generally friendly, especially with Great Britain. President Woodrow Wilson called upon his countrymen to take no sides and to be impartial. But neutrality for America was not possible. Wilson decided to ask Congress to recognize that a state of war existed between the U.S. and Germany on April 6, 1917. The resolution passed both houses and the President signed it, thus the neutrality ended.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

#5

Post by Peter H » 28 Jul 2003, 04:24

Don't forget the Naval Race between Britain and Germany as a key influence as well.

The problem with the Portugese colonies was that they were still to function as colonies(up to the mid 1970s) and hence not a dead loss to Portugal as it was until much later.

The December 1912 meeting has been seen in some quarters as just a general pow-wow between Wilhelm and his clique,but the fear of Russian economic and thus military take-off was apparent.

The Balkan Wars also need also to be seen in the following context--up to 1913 Slavic desires for liberation from the Ottoman yoke channeled a lot of effort by the radical groups in that direction.After Turkey was 98% expelled from Europe such groups as the Black Hand eyed things north,slav lands under Austro-Hungarian domination.

Gungnir
Member
Posts: 629
Joined: 04 Jul 2003, 02:45
Location: USA

...

#6

Post by Gungnir » 28 Jul 2003, 08:04

Note: this is long (very long) so please be patient
I did my best to intertwine all the 5 causes
1. Nationalism
2. Economic rivalry
3. Colonial rivalry
4. Alliance systems
5. Arms race


The Great Powers of Europe
1871- these Great Powers: Germany, France, Great Britain, Austria, Italy, and Russia.

Germany had achieved its national unification and according to the ChancelloR, Otto von Bismarck no further territorial ambitions existed. Instead Germany should consolidate its domestic institutions, promote its economic development, and maintain its position as the most powerful country in Europe. To acheive such goals peace and stability was required in Europe...which in Bismarcks view could occur if France was isolated. Bismarck later realized to gain major power status, overseas colonies were needed for economic gais, in 1884, Germany acquired Togoland ad the Cameroons in West Africa, as well as German Southwest Africa. in 1885, germany established control over German east africa. In addition to Samoa, part of New Guinea (1884), Mariana Isalnds (1899), Kiao-chow (very small area in China, 1898), Caroline Islands (1898) all of whicch are in the Pacific

France wanted to regain the lost provinces of Alsace and Lorraine which it had lost in 1871 (Franco-Prussian War). However, France was too weak to challenge the powerful Germany by itself and therefore needed an ally. At the time French had colonies in Africa and Asia, which satisfied France.

Great Britain was isolated from the European continent and sought to maintain that isolation from the affairs of Europe and instead focus its attention on the Empire. Britians strong imperialism in Africa and Asia conflicted witht he imperialistic interest of France and Russia.

Austria sought to limit the growth of Slavic nationalism within its own borders and the southeast of the Balkans, this Slavic nationalism threatened Austria's survival (Austro/Austrian-Hungarian Empire)

Russia continued its traditional expansionist polices in order to advance its power in East Asia and in the Balkans. Austrian and Russian (imperialism) interest in the Balkans led to disputes.

Italy wanted to advance its claims to great power status. French and Italian (imperialism) interest in North Africa led to disputes.
---
1872- the Dreikaiserbund, Bismarck's efforts to preserve European peace/stability by keeping France isolated led to the formation of the Three Emperors' League. Germany (Emperor William I), Austria (Emperor Francis Joseph), Russia (Tsar Alexander II) promised to cooperate to maintain peace/stability.
---
The Austro-Russian rivarly (and interest) in the Balkans was a threat to Bismarck (Germanys) efforts to keep/have ties with both Austria and Russa. 1876- revolt against the Ottoman Empire occured in Bulgaria. The Turks slaughtered thousands inorder to supress the revolt. Serbia and Montenegro declared war on the Ottoman Empire. Russia asserted thier self-proclaimed role as protectors of the Slavs and Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire and went to war against Turkey. In the treaty of San Stefano (1878), This treaty (forced on the Turks by Russia) established the independence of Serbia, Montenegro, Romania, and granted independence to a large Bulgaria including most of Macedonia. Bulgaria would be under Russian domain. Russia was also awarded Batum, Kars and other Turkish lands in the Caucasus.
This treaty increased Russian power in the Balkans, and therefore threatend Austrian interest in the region. Britain also feared (and were threatened) by the advance of Russian power toward the eastern Mediterannean (sp?). British naval forces were sent down to the Turkish Straits (joined the black and Aegean seas)and threatened war against Russia.
---
Bismarck wanted to prevent a major war (remember Germany needed peace/stability to stay and increase in power). In the Treaty of Berlin (1878), the independence of Serbia, Montenegro, and Romaina was confirmed, it also recognized Batum and Kars as Russian acquistions. Bulgaria was reduced. NOrth-autonomous, in the south (eastern rumelia) would be semiautonomous. Further south the turks would have full control over Macedonia. Austria had the right to occupy and administer the Turkish provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina (but NOT allowed to annex them). British gained the right to occupy Cyprus.
---
The Austrian and Russian dispute in the Balkans ended the Three Emperors' League. However in 1879, the Dual Alliance was created by Bismarck (in secret) involving Germany and Austria. The Austrian and German alliance provided mutual aid in the event either nations was attacked by Russia.
---
In 1881, Bismarck was able to restore an alliance with Russia and revived the Three Emperors' League. This however, was fragile due to the continuing Austro-Russian dispute over the Balkans
---
in 1881, France became a protectorate over Tunisia, this angered the Italians (remember both countries had imperialistic interest in North Africa). Italy sought closer ties with Austria and Germany. In 1882, The Triple Alliance (also created in secret) was established (secretly), this alliance invovled Germany, Austria, and Italy. Bismarck had ties with ITaly, Russia, and Austria, and Germany had good relations with Britain. France was isolated (remember that was the German/Bismarck plan for power)
---
In 1887, Austrian and Russian tension in the Balkans forced Russia to NOT renew the Three Emperors' League. But Russia wanted to keep ties with Germany and so they signed the Reinsurance Treaty of 1887. This treaty- provided neutrality in case either partner was at war unless German attaked France or Rssia attacked Austria. Germany had no intentions of attacking france.
---
In 1890 (Bismarck was dismissed as Chancellor), the Germans did not renew the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia fearing it would be impossible for Germany to balance its commitments to Russia and Austria. Germany believed that the governments/politics of France (revolutionary, republican) and Russia (autocratic) were so different that in no way an alliance would form (France would remain isolated)...
---
...In 1894 the Franco-Russian Alliance was created in secret, at the time this new (and unexpected) alliance seemed to primarily threaten Britain, which was the main rival if both France and Russia in the Mediterrannean (sp?) and Asia.
---
Around the 1890's British and German ties slowly ended, Germany was becoming interested in an overseas empire (refer to the beginning where i name a few places) Germany also developed a strong interest in establishing a high-seas fleet (necessary to have an advanced and powerful navy if overseas empire is desired) this German interest in a navy angered, alarmed, and scared the British (who possessed a powerful navy amd was proud of it). Because of this later 1800's arms race the relationship between Germany and Britain ended.
---
Britain realized its own isolationsim (which it desired) was/could be harmful, so to remedy this in 1902, the Anglo-Japanese Alliance was created, which directed primarily against Russian expansion in Asia. Eventhough france and britain had colonial disputes, France believed Germany was a greater threat than Britain. So in 1904, the Entente Cordiale (or the Ango-French Entente) was created, creating an alliance between France and Britian.
---
France also wanted to improve relations with Italy, so in 1902 Italy and France established a secret alliance. (Italo-French Agreement), Italy promised to support French efforts in establishing a protectorate over MOrocco. France promissed to support Italian ambitions in North africa...Austria became Germanys only reliable ally.
---
In 1905, Because of the complex and crazy alliances Britain, Russia, and iTALY supported France (a problem for Germany)...Germany only support came from Austria. Germany tried to disrupt this alliance by provoking a crisis over Morocco, Germany though Russia (fighting and losing to the Japanese in the Ruso-Japanese war) would not support France...and britian would only give symbolic support...however Germany failed and the ties between Italy, France, Britain, and Russia drew closer.
---
In 1907 the war between Russia and Japan (1904-1905) caused a difficult situation fro France (France was allied with Russia...Russia was at war with Japan, a British ally). Dispite this the Anglo-French Entente was created. Japans victory over Russia reduced British fears of Russian imperialism in Asia. Britain and Russian interest continued in Afghanistan and Persia. But differences was solved...in 1907 the Anglo-Russian Entente was created. So now the alliance get even more complex and crazier.
---
The Anglo-Russian Entente help created the Triple Entente consisting of Britain, France, and Russia. And then the Triple Alliance was created to combat the Triple Entente because those in the Entente were allied against those allied in the Alliance...the Triple Alliance consited of Germany, Austria, and Italy (Italy was the less faithful, and uneasy partnership).
---
1908- Austria proclaimed the annexation of Bosnia and Herzeogovina...Russia was angered...as was Serbia who also had future interest in anexing Bosnia and Herzeogovina. Germanysupported Austria...Russia backed down in 1909 in the face of the German-Austrian threat.
---
1911- Germany renewed is objections to the establishment of a French protectorate over Morocco. In order to protect German interest Germany sent down the warship Panther. France agreed to cede part of French Congo to Germany in retrun for the German recognition of French protectorate in Morroco...tensions eased
1912-British navy concentrated its warships in the North Sea, and France put their vessels to the Mediteranean. The Entente Cordiale (1904) almost converted into a full alliance.
1911-1912- Italo-Turkis War, the victorious Italians gained Tripoli
1912-1913- The First Balkan War, THE Balkan League (Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece [formed with help from Russia]) went to war against Turkey. The defeated Turks lost all its territory in Europe except the area adjacent to the Turkish straits
Russia supported serbias demand for access to the Adriatic Sea while Austria supported/urged the creation of Albania (to end Serbias expansion). Albania was formed and caused setbacks for Serbia and Russia.
1913-Second Balkan War- Serbia demandd part of Bulgarias share of Macedonia as compensation for havng been denied access to the Adriatic. Serbia, Montenegro, Greece, Romania, and Turkey joined to defeat Bulgaria. Bulgaria under the Treaty of Bucharest forced Bulgaria to cede territory to Romania while Serbia and Greece gained most of Macedonia.
---
28 June 1914- assassination on Archduke Ferdinand by South Slav nationalist. ...


1. Nationalism - Germany had plenty of nationalism aftet unification, the vicotry in the Austro-Prussian War and Franco-Prussian war. Serbia also had a surge of nationalism. the mixture of alliances andnationalism increased tensions
2. Economic rivalry and colonial rivalry sorta ties together, the great powers of Europe all wanted and had imperialistic ambitions. So the need to establish colonies was necessary for economic development. As seen with Germany inorder to be a great power need strong economy and therefore need overseas colonies.
3. Colonial rivalry
4. Alliance systems the alliance system was crazyand complex, this combined with the tensions of imperialistic ambitions and surging nationalsim and other reasons (explained throughout the piece) led to the developement of the numerous and complex (and crazy ) alliances
5. Arms race- germany desire for an overseas empire called for a strong navy...britain known for having (one) of the best navies and for being rulers of the seas felt threatend by german maritime development.

It was a combintion of all these situations that caused/led to world war I. Economic rivalry, colonial rivalry, arms race, alliances, and nationalism are all roled together: nationalism led to colonial needs for economic strenght, cant have colonies without military so that develpemed need allies to support and defend (what ever way you put it, all these things intertwined together, cant have one without the other led to the great war)

for instance im a powerful kid a school, want to build a gang but need to get rid of other gangs to make mine the best and strongest so i get invovled with alliances...why do i want the gang to have a handle on acquiring money from little kids (economy= money, empire/imperialism/colonies = kids) so establish a strong "militaRY" (get some big guys to join) my big guys threaten (because of size, numbers, power) the other gangs so they get big guys...but to get further support the gangs allign themselves with other gangs and until someone snaps then its a gang war.
I problably caused more confusion with my last paragraphy...but ignore it if youmust and read the actualy factual information i presented.

Gwynn Compton
Member
Posts: 2840
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 23:46
Location: United Kingdom

#7

Post by Gwynn Compton » 29 Jul 2003, 05:33

Gungnir has done a brilliant job there, but I'd like to add a bit to it.

Firstly I'd like to examine nationalism in a bit more detail...

The Serbian case of nationalism, must be considered more an immediate trigger for war, rather than an overall cause of the Great War. The Great War, by 1914, could have been triggered by any number of events. The assassination of the Archduke, and Austria-Hungary's subsequent declaration of war on Serbia, was only one possible scenario out of many that threatened war.

It is true that Serbian nationalism greatly magnified tensions in the Balkans, and that Austria and Russia's competing interests in the region could lead to another localised war. Yet, Serbian nationalism alone was never enough to trigger a general European war.

France, still bitter about their defeat in the Franco-Prussian war, were also feeling rather nationalistic, especially with the aim of regarding their lost provinces, and generally taking revenge on the Germans. (The shelling of Paris following the French defeat at Sedan left a sizable scar on the French psyche at the time it seems). Essentially, the French were waiting for favourable conditions to snatch back their lost provinces, and the situation of 1914 was perfect for their aims.

Germany had no territorial ambitions in regards to France. German ambitions lay more with a unificaiton with Austria (thus removing the Austro from Austro-Hungarian) or for a very small minority, expanding German rule further eastwards to include other German minorities. The only other territorial ambitions left for Germany were colonies, which by the time the Germans came to the colony race, were very limited. It was not so much German nationalism that fueled the desire for colonies, though it undoubtadly had an effect, but economic and political power.

Now for economics and colonial rivalry.

By the start of the 19th century, Germany was quickly becoming the dominant European economy. Infact, the notion that German produced goods are of high quality dates back to this time. German industrialisation required markets to sell goods to, as well as to extract raw materials from, thus the need for colonies, leading to conflict with Britian and France materialised. Provided Germany wanted to remain a leading economic power in Europe, it had to acquire the colonies, and the rising tension, fueled by Germany's naval expansion, only helped to move Europe closer to the brink of war. France and Britian, though having their own conflicts, seem to have seen Germany as the greater threat, and reacted accordingly.

Russia's threat in the far east, as has been pointed out, had already been largely discredited by the Japanese victory in the 1904-05 war (and for those who are interested, the realization that the "superior" europeans could be beaten by "inferior" Asians was a great shock to all colonial powers, leading to an alignment of interests against Japan following the Great War). The Russian defeat also helped to alay British fears of Russian interests in Persia, thus Russian colonialism was by 1914, not generally considered a threat.

I'll leave the alliance system and the arms race, the former has been excellently covered, and the latter is not strictly my area of expertise.

Yet one other minor area might be of interest for you to consider. War plans...

Germany, Russia, Britain, France and Austria all had plans to attack other people in event of war breaking out. The German Great General Staff were fixated with the Schlieffen Plan, invading through Belgian territory to end the war in 6 weeks. The belief that the war would be short, that superior German railways would prevail as they had the previous century, all these combined to make the General Staff see no other possibility than to commit to the Schieffen Plan. Even when war could have been averted, as urgent telegrams passed between Germany and Russia, the General Staff refused to stop the process of mobilization. Their obsession to strike the first blow made them not consider any other option.

Likewise in France, the ill-fated Plan 17 was the similiar obsession of French military thinkers. Though knowing they had British support, and Germany was fighting a two front war, they were somewhat more justified in their belief that Germany would collapse, but even so, any chance peace might have had in France would have been lost on the French Army.

As soon as mobilisation was ordered, leaders found it impossible to pull their military machines back from the brink, it was a recipe for massacre.

Gwynn

Jon Sutton
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: 12 Apr 2003, 19:10
Location: Trier, Germany

Bismarck's views on colonies

#8

Post by Jon Sutton » 29 Jul 2003, 19:49

According to the author Holger Herwig in his book ''Luxury' Fleet - The Imperial German Navy 1888-1918' Bismarck was totally against the idea of Germany acquiring colonial possessions. When it was suggested after the Franco-Prussian War in 1870 that Germany should take over such French colonial possessions as Saigon, Martinique, St. Pierre and Miquelon he is quoted as saying:" But I do not want colonies. They are only suitable as supply bases..." and in 1881 he stated:"as long as I am chancellor we will carry on no colonial policies". In 1889 he stated:"From the start I have not been a colonial person". When he did extend protectorates over Togoland, the Camerouns, German South-west Africa etc. in 1884 he intended that they should be administered by chartered companies rather than by Governmental departments to avoid any costs falling on the Government.
Did the Germans ever obtain any ecenomic benefits from their colonies? I believe that there is a reference to 'excellent Shangtung coal' in the story of S.M.S. Emden's exploits but a lot of lives were lost in suppressing native rebellions from Africa to the South Seas. Kiachow alone absorbed 200 million Goldmarks by the year 1913 according to the author John Schrecker in his book 'Imperialism and German Nationalism. Germany in Shangtung' of which only 36 million were earned 'in situ'. Moreover the German attempts to expand in the Pacific antagonised the Americans especially in Manila in 1898.
The irony of the German desire for bases, which was supposed to enable Germany to become a first-rate Naval Power, and which was backed by Admiral Tirpitz in his position as State Secretary of the Navy Office, was that the navy created to project this power was quite incapable of defending these bases. The Kaiser may have said to Bülow in October 1898 that "Germany's misery stemmed from her lack of sea power...after twenty years when the battle fleet will be ready I will adopt a different tone...", but the navy that Tirpitz was building for him was designed to fight in the North Sea, and the southern North Sea at that, and all the naval bases in Africa and elsewhere that it was hoped to build would not make the slightest difference to the new fleet's ability to counter the Royal Navy. The only effect of this desire for power at sea on the part of a country which already had the strongest army in Europe was to antagonise the British into giving up the idea of 'splendid isolation' and actively look for allies.

Erich Ludendorff
Member
Posts: 23
Joined: 30 Jun 2003, 14:15
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

#9

Post by Erich Ludendorff » 29 Jul 2003, 23:55

First,I want to apologize to Lord Gort,I was off the web for some time,and by the time i read your message much of the things has been already said.What I want to remaind you is that the whole German generations on 1870-1914 were raised on the stories of unification wars(Denmark 1864,Austria 1866,France 1870-1871)and they had great faith in Kaiser.You must remeber that Germany was the great place to live until the WW1 brought misery,hunger,and economic crisis.On the other hand French were eager for revenge after 1870.I will quote Bismarck:"Generation that had the beating is always followed by the generation that deals one."

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7051
Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 01:58
Location: Mississippi

#10

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 30 Jul 2003, 00:05

So Lord Gort , Did you ever buy that book? "Dreadnought" by Robert Massie, I gather you have not.

As I have stated before, WWI was caused by Kaiser Wilhelm being envious(because of numerous personal idiosyncracies) of his Uncle the king of England and the Royal Navy.

Champymiddle
Banned
Posts: 346
Joined: 10 Feb 2003, 15:30
Location: Bangkok

#11

Post by Champymiddle » 30 Jul 2003, 01:05

Don't forget the enttangling alliances! If Germany did not stand with Austria Hungary. Austria Hungary may have not begun the war, since she will have to face russia, serbia, france (not england for she only went to war because germany violated belgian neutrality) single handed!

Champymiddle
Banned
Posts: 346
Joined: 10 Feb 2003, 15:30
Location: Bangkok

#12

Post by Champymiddle » 30 Jul 2003, 01:10

I suggest you get this book: "The complete idiot's guide to World War 1"
Not only is it easy to read, it has some very good analysis on battles and generals. There are many biographical sketches on government officials and generals. And is also very enjoyable to any one who is interested in ww1. :)

User avatar
Beowulf
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: 18 Feb 2003, 11:20
Location: USA

#13

Post by Beowulf » 01 Aug 2003, 10:43

ChristopherPerrien wrote:So Lord Gort , Did you ever buy that book? "Dreadnought" by Robert Massie, I gather you have not.

As I have stated before, WWI was caused by Kaiser Wilhelm being envious(because of numerous personal idiosyncracies) of his Uncle the king of England and the Royal Navy.
Imagine that! Things were this simple, and yet even an anglophile like Massie was able to write 900 pages about it! If you really read this book closely, you will understand that Massie was quite a bit more critical of those around the Kaiser than he was of William himself. He also made such folks as Winston Churchill seem like paranoid lunatics, afraid that Germany would attack Britain "out of the blue," which of course did not happen. This paranoid attitude was the inspiration for the Kaiser's remark in the Telegraph that "You are all mad as march hares!" He was, of course, too naive to realize how the press would make this look, but he was merely emoting his very real feeling of incredulity that Germany would ever attack Britain, and indeed it was Britain who made an enemy out of Germany in the summer of 1914, not the other way around. It's truly amazing how so many point an accusatory finger at Germany for causing the war simply by building a navy, or that they should have built this or that sort of navy instead so as not to antagonize Britain.. that Tirpitz built the High Seas Fleet with one purpose.. to fight the Royal Navy, when on the other side of the channel, the Admiralty was just as guilty of aggressive war-planning as Tirpitz was. EVERY country was planning for what they would do in the eventuality of war, it was not some strange thing that only "those militaristic Prussians" were doing. :roll: Had you considered that the building of the High Seas Fleet was meant as a deterrent? As being primarily for defense? Of course Tirpitz planned on fighting the Royal Navy.. he would have been direlect in his duties not to. Jacky Fisher planned on fighting the High Seas Fleet as well. Whenever a finger gets pointed at Germany for all this, really it's the pot calling the kettle black, and the winners write the history books.

Kind Regards,

B.

Champymiddle
Banned
Posts: 346
Joined: 10 Feb 2003, 15:30
Location: Bangkok

#14

Post by Champymiddle » 01 Aug 2003, 18:57

You are absolutely right but germany did make britain an enemy by violating belgian neutrality.

User avatar
Kraut!
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 25 Jul 2003, 05:48
Location: Houston

#15

Post by Kraut! » 02 Aug 2003, 01:53

Nice article I found on HistoryChannel.com.
World War I



World War I, 1914-18, also known as the Great War, conflict, chiefly in Europe, among most of the great Western powers. It was the largest war the world had yet seen.
Causes

World War I was immediately precipitated by the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary by a Serbian nationalist in 1914. There were, however, many factors that had led toward war. Prominent causes were the imperialistic, territorial, and economic rivalries that had been intensifying from the late 19th cent., particularly among Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, and Austria-Hungary.

Of equal importance was the rampant spirit of nationalism, especially unsettling in the empire of Austria-Hungary and perhaps also in France. Nationalism had brought the unification of Germany by blood and iron, and France, deprived of Alsace and Lorraine by the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, had been left with its own nationalistic cult seeking revenge against Germany. While French nationalists were hostile to Germany, which sought to maintain its gains by militarism and alliances, nationalism was creating violent tensions in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy; there the large Slavic national groups had grown increasingly restive, and Serbia as well as Russia fanned Slavic hopes for freedom and Pan-Slavism.

Imperialist rivalry had grown more intense with the new imperialism of the late 19th and early 20th cent. The great powers had come into conflict over spheres of influence in China and over territories in Africa, and the Eastern Question, created by the decline of the Ottoman Empire, had produced several disturbing controversies. Particularly unsettling was the policy of Germany. It embarked late but aggressively on colonial expansion under Emperor William II, came into conflict with France over Morocco, and seemed to threaten Great Britain by its rapid naval expansion.

These issues, imperialist and nationalist, resulted in a hardening of alliance systems in the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente and in a general armaments race. Nonetheless, a false optimism regarding peace prevailed almost until the onset of the war, an optimism stimulated by the long period during which major wars had been avoided, by the close dynastic ties and cultural intercourse in Europe, and by the advance of industrialization and economic prosperity. Many Europeans counted on the deterrent of war's destructiveness to preserve the peace.

War's Outbreak

The Austrian annexation (1908) of Bosnia and Hercegovina created an international crisis, but war was avoided. The Balkan Wars (1912-13) remained localized but increased Austria's concern for its territorial integrity, while the solidification of the Triple Alliance made Germany more yielding to the demands of Austria, now its one close ally. The assassination (June 28, 1914) of Archduke Francis Ferdinand at Sarajevo set in motion the diplomatic maneuvers that ended in war.

The Austrian military party, headed by Count Berchtold, won over the government to a punitive policy toward Serbia. On July 23, Serbia was given a nearly unacceptable ultimatum. With Russian support assured by Sergei Sazonov, Serbia accepted some of the terms but hedged on others and rejected those infringing upon its sovereignty. Austria-Hungary, supported by Germany, rejected the British proposal of Sir Edward Grey (later Lord Grey of Fallodon) and declared war (July 28) on Serbia.

Russian mobilization precipitated a German ultimatum (July 31) that, when unanswered, was followed by a German declaration of war on Russia (Aug. 1). Convinced that France was about to attack its western frontier, Germany declared war (Aug. 3) on France and sent troops against France through Belgium and Luxembourg. Germany had hoped for British neutrality, but German violation of Belgian neutrality gave the British government the pretext and popular support necessary for entry into the war. In the following weeks Montenegro and Japan joined the Allies (Great Britain, France, Russia, Serbia, and Belgium) and the Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers (Germany and Austria-Hungary). The war had become general. Whether it might have been avoided or localized and which persons and nations were most responsible for its outbreak are questions still debated by historians.

From the Marne to Verdun

The German strategy, planned by Alfred von Schlieffen, called for an attack on the weak left flank of the French army by a massive German force approaching through Belgium, while maintaining a defensive stance toward Russia, whose army, Schlieffen assumed, would require six weeks to mobilize. By that time, Germany would have captured France and would be ready to meet the forces on the Eastern Front. The Schlieffen plan was weakened from the start when the German commander Helmuth von Moltke detached forces from the all-important German right wing, which was supposed to smash through Belgium, in order to reinforce the left wing in Alsace-Lorraine. Nevertheless, the Germans quickly occupied most of Belgium and advanced on Paris.

In Sept., 1914, the first battle of the Marne (see Marne, battle of the) took place. For reasons still disputed, a general German retreat was ordered after the battle, and the Germans entrenched themselves behind the Aisne River. The Germans then advanced toward the Channel ports but were stopped in the first battle of Ypres (see Ypres, battles of); grueling trench warfare ensued along the entire Western Front. Over the next three years the battle line remained virtually stationary. It ran, approximately, from Ostend past Armentières, Douai, Saint-Quentin, Reims, Verdun, and Saint-Mihiel to Luneville.

Meanwhile, on the Eastern Front, the Russians invaded East Prussia but were decisively defeated (Aug.-Sept., 1914) by the Germans under generals Hindenburg, Ludendorff, and Mackensen at Tannenberg and the Masurian Lakes (see under Masuria). The Germans advanced on Warsaw, but farther south a Russian offensive drove back the Austrians. However, by the autumn of 1915 combined Austro-German efforts had driven the Russians out of most of Poland and were holding a line extending from Riga to Chernovtsy (Chernivtsi). The Russians counterattacked in 1916 in a powerful drive directed by General Brusilov, but by the year's end the offensive had collapsed, after costing Russia many thousands of lives. Soon afterward the Russian Revolution eliminated Russia as an effective participant in the war. Although the Austro-Hungarians were unsuccessful in their attacks on Serbia and Montenegro in the first year of the war, these two countries were overrun in 1915 by the Bulgarians (who had joined the Central Powers in Oct., 1915) and by Austro-German forces.

Another blow to the Allied cause was the failure in 1915 of the Gallipoli campaign, an attempt to force Turkey out of the war and to open a supply route to S Russia. The Allies, however, won a diplomatic battle when Italy, after renouncing its partnership in the Triple Alliance and after being promised vast territorial gains, entered the war on the Allied side in May, 1915. Fighting between Austria and Italy along the Isonzo River was inconclusive until late 1917, when the rout of the Italians at Caporetto made Italy a liability rather than an asset to the Allies.

Except for the conquest of most of Germany's overseas colonies by the British and Japanese, the year 1916 opened with a dark outlook for the Allies. The stalemate on the Western Front had not been affected in 1915 by the second battle of Ypres, in which the Germans used poison gas for the first time on the Western Front, nor by the French offensive in Artois-in which a slight advance of the French under Henri Petain was paid for with heavy losses-nor by the offensive of Marshal Joffre in Champagne, nor by the British advance toward Lens and Loos.

In Feb., 1916, the Germans tried to break the deadlock by mounting a massive assault on Verdun (see Verdun, battle of). The French, rallying with the cry, They shall not pass! held fast despite enormous losses, and in July the British and French took the offensive along the Somme River where tanks were used for the first time by the British. By November they had gained a few thousand yards and lost thousands of men. By December, a French counteroffensive at Verdun had restored the approximate positions of Jan., 1916.

Despite signs of exhaustion on both sides, the war went on, drawing ever more nations into the maelstrom. Portugal and Romania joined the Allies in 1916; Greece, involved in the war by the Allied Salonica campaigns on its soil, declared war on the Central Powers in 1917.

From America's Entry to Allied Victory

The neutrality of the United States had been seriously imperiled after the sinking of the Lusitania (1915). At the end of 1916, Germany, whose surface fleet had been bottled up since the indecisive battle of Jutland (see Jutland, battle of), announced that it would begin unrestricted submarine warfare in an effort to break British control of the seas. In protest the United States broke off relations with Germany (Feb., 1917), and on Apr. 6 it entered the war. American participation meant that the Allies now had at their command almost unlimited industrial and manpower resources, which were to be decisive in winning the war. It also served from the start to lift Allied morale, and the insistence of President Woodrow Wilson on a war to make the world safe for democracy was to weaken the Central Powers by encouraging revolutionary groups at home.

The war on the Western Front continued to be bloody and stalemated. But in the Middle East the British, who had stopped a Turkish drive on the Suez Canal, proceeded to destroy the Ottoman Empire; T. E. Lawrence stirred the Arabs to revolt, Baghdad fell (Mar., 1917), and Field Marshal Allenby took Jerusalem (Dec., 1917). The first troops of the American Expeditionary Forces (AEF), commanded by General Pershing, landed in France in June, 1917, and were rushed to the Château-Thierry area to help stem a new German offensive.

A unified Allied command in the West was created in Apr., 1918. It was headed by Marshal Foch, but under him the national commanders (Sir Douglas Haig for Britain, King Albert I for Belgium, and General Pershing for the United States) retained considerable authority. The Central Powers, however, had gained new strength through the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (Mar., 1918) with Russia. The resources of Ukraine seemed at their disposal, enabling them to balance to some extent the effects of the Allied blockade; most important, their forces could now be concentrated on the Western Front.

The critical German counteroffensive, known as the second battle of the Marne, was stopped just short of Paris (July-Aug., 1918). At this point Foch ordered a general counterattack that soon pushed the Germans back to their initial line (the so-called Hindenburg Line). The Allied push continued, with the British advancing in the north and the Americans attacking through the Argonne region of France. While the Germans were thus losing their forces on the Western Front, Bulgaria, invaded by the Allies under General Franchet d'Esperey, capitulated on Sept. 30, and Turkey concluded an armistice on Oct. 30. Austria-Hungary, in the process of disintegration, surrendered on Nov. 4 after the Italian victory at Vittorio Veneto.

German resources were exhausted and German morale had collapsed. President Wilson's Fourteen Points were accepted by the new German chancellor, Maximilian, prince of Baden, as the basis of peace negotiations, but it was only after revolution had broken out in Germany that the armistice was at last signed (Nov. 11) at Compiègne. Germany was to evacuate its troops immediately from all territory W of the Rhine, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was declared void. The war ended without a single truly decisive battle having been fought, and Germany lost the war while its troops were still occupying territory from France to Crimea. This paradox became important in subsequent German history, when nationalists and militarists sought to blame the defeat on traitors on the home front rather than on the utter exhaustion of the German war machine and war economy.

Aftermath and Reckoning

World War I and the resulting peace treaties (see Versailles, Treaty of; Saint-Germain, Treaty of; Trianon, Treaty of; Neuilly, Treaty of; Sèvres, Treaty of) radically changed the face of Europe and precipitated political, social, and economic changes. By the Treaty of Versailles Germany was forced to acknowledge guilt for the war. Later, prompted by the Bolshevik publication of the secret diplomacy of the czarist Russian government, the warring powers gradually released their own state papers, and the long historical debate on war guilt began. It has with some justice been claimed that the conditions of the peace treaties were partially responsible for World War II. Yet when World War I ended, the immense suffering it had caused gave rise to a general revulsion to any kind of war, and a large part of mankind placed its hopes in the newly created League of Nations.

To calculate the total losses caused by the war is impossible. About 10 million dead and 20 million wounded is a conservative estimate. Starvation and epidemics raised the total in the immediate postwar years. Warfare itself had been revolutionized by the conflict (see air forces; chemical warfare; mechanized warfare; tank).

Post Reply

Return to “First World War”