What Caused World War I?
Question: Why did a general European war break out in 1914?
Historical investigation is important because it reveals to us our past mistakes and how we might avoid them in the future. Determining the cause of World War I is necessary for this very reason: we ought to know how it came about so as not to repeat it. Imperialism – the policy of acquiring and holding colonies to extend the authority of an empire – explains why a general European war broke out in 1914. Other causes of war (e.g., nationalism and militarism) did exist, but were not decisive nor effectual on their own.
Alliances motivated by imperial expansion laid the groundwork for World War I. The Entente Cordial (1904), for instance, was a colonial recognition treaty between Britain and France - official recognition of each other's imperial holdings. Moreover, the Franco-Russian alliance (1894) was signed to counter German imperialism. These and other alliances explain why a regional conflict between Serbia and Austria-Hungary (i.e., the July Crisis) developed into a world war. Retaliating to Serbian nationalists who kill the archduke of Austria Franz Ferdinand, Austria attacks Serbia. Russia, drawn in from its nationalist fervor for ethnic Serbians, attacks Austria. Germany then attacks Russia because of its obligation to Austria in the Dual Alliance. So as to avoid a two-front war with Russia and France – a guaranteed outcome per the Franco-Russian alliance - Germany adopts the Schlieffen plan and attacks France through Belgium. This transgression of Belgian neutrality violates the terms of the Treaty of London (1839) and prompts Britain to declare war on Germany. World war has thus begun. In short, behind the outbreak of war stands alliances, and behind alliances stands imperialism.
Various events also explain why a general European war broke out in 1914. The First Moroccan Crisis (1905) is a good illustration. The crisis begins with France assuming political control of Morocco, and acknowledging British claims to Egypt. Germany, feeling threatened by this close relationship, calls for a conference in which it declares that it will support Moroccan resistance to French rule. Britain, however, stands strong behind France, vowing to support its ally in a military conflict. Embarrassed, Germany is forced to relent. Moreover, in the Second Moroccan Crisis (1911), a revolution against the Moroccan sultan develops, and the sultan seeks military aid from France, who promptly agrees. With this action, France practically annexes Morocco. In response, Germany demands the French Congo as compensation, but only gets a tiny sliver thereof. These events illustrate imperialism at work in Europe. France and Britain seek to carve out as much as they can for themselves with Germany the odd man out. Moreover, in its embarrassed and defensive state, Germany would not hesitate to attack France - given sufficient prompting. When the July Crisis broke out and France refused to declare neutrality, Germany had just the prompting it needed.
On a deeper level, German reaction to Russian imperialism caused the outbreak of war. In the aftermath of the Russo-Turkish war (1877-1878), for instance, Russia defeats the Ottoman Empire, annexing various lands within the Balkans. Austria-Hungary and Germany ally with one another (the so-called Dual Alliance) in order to subdue Russian imperialism. Or again, Germany’s adopts the policy of Weltpolitick (a convoluted name for imperial expansion) to further counter Russian imperialism. If Germany has all the land, Russia can have none. The Dual Alliance, more than any other treaty, turned a simple regional conflict (i.e., Austria attacking Serbia) into a world war. Germany’s Weltpolitick put every other nation in Europe on the defensive, giving them justification for entering the fray of war after Austria declares war amidst the July Crisis.
Not all historians regard imperialism as the primary reason for the outbreak of war. Some think that nationalism - the policy of asserting one’s own nation above all others - was fundamental. They argue that (1) Austria-Hungary’s annexation of Bosnia in 1908 enraged the Serbian Black Hand movement (Bosnia was predominantly Serbian) and pushed them to assassinate Austria’s archduke, and (2) Russia attacks Austria because it too has strong Serbian sentiments. Other historians hold militarism - the maintenance of a large military establishment – accountable for the war. These historians cite (1) the emergence of standing armies prior to 1914, and (2) British creation of the dreadnought (a mammoth-sized ship), arguing that these events led to a military arms race in Europe that could only end in war. Finally, a few historians believe that revenge caused World War I. They point to (1) France, who declares war on Germany out of revenge for Germany’s annexation of French Alsace-Lorraine in 1871, and (2) the United States entering the war because Germany destroys its cargo ships.
These arguments, however, do not hold water. Nationalism was merely a motive for imperialism. What counts is the actions that come from motives (i.e., imperialism). Militarism, moreover, arose because empires needed to protect their colonial holdings and their growing national borders. Militarism is therefore a byproduct of imperialism. Finally, the “revenge hypothesis” fails because Germany declares war on France, not vice versa, and World War I had already begun by the time the United States was drawn in. In short, imperialism is the only satisfying explanation for the outbreak of a general European war in 1914.
Historical investigation is important because it reveals to us our past mistakes and how we might avoid them in the future. Determining the cause of World War I is necessary for this very reason: we ought to know how it came about so as not to repeat it. Imperialism – the policy of acquiring and holding colonies to extend the authority of an empire – explains why a general European war broke out in 1914. Other causes of war (e.g., nationalism and militarism) did exist, but were not decisive nor effectual on their own.
Alliances motivated by imperial expansion laid the groundwork for World War I. The Entente Cordial (1904), for instance, was a colonial recognition treaty between Britain and France - official recognition of each other's imperial holdings. Moreover, the Franco-Russian alliance (1894) was signed to counter German imperialism. These and other alliances explain why a regional conflict between Serbia and Austria-Hungary (i.e., the July Crisis) developed into a world war. Retaliating to Serbian nationalists who kill the archduke of Austria Franz Ferdinand, Austria attacks Serbia. Russia, drawn in from its nationalist fervor for ethnic Serbians, attacks Austria. Germany then attacks Russia because of its obligation to Austria in the Dual Alliance. So as to avoid a two-front war with Russia and France – a guaranteed outcome per the Franco-Russian alliance - Germany adopts the Schlieffen plan and attacks France through Belgium. This transgression of Belgian neutrality violates the terms of the Treaty of London (1839) and prompts Britain to declare war on Germany. World war has thus begun. In short, behind the outbreak of war stands alliances, and behind alliances stands imperialism.
Various events also explain why a general European war broke out in 1914. The First Moroccan Crisis (1905) is a good illustration. The crisis begins with France assuming political control of Morocco, and acknowledging British claims to Egypt. Germany, feeling threatened by this close relationship, calls for a conference in which it declares that it will support Moroccan resistance to French rule. Britain, however, stands strong behind France, vowing to support its ally in a military conflict. Embarrassed, Germany is forced to relent. Moreover, in the Second Moroccan Crisis (1911), a revolution against the Moroccan sultan develops, and the sultan seeks military aid from France, who promptly agrees. With this action, France practically annexes Morocco. In response, Germany demands the French Congo as compensation, but only gets a tiny sliver thereof. These events illustrate imperialism at work in Europe. France and Britain seek to carve out as much as they can for themselves with Germany the odd man out. Moreover, in its embarrassed and defensive state, Germany would not hesitate to attack France - given sufficient prompting. When the July Crisis broke out and France refused to declare neutrality, Germany had just the prompting it needed.
On a deeper level, German reaction to Russian imperialism caused the outbreak of war. In the aftermath of the Russo-Turkish war (1877-1878), for instance, Russia defeats the Ottoman Empire, annexing various lands within the Balkans. Austria-Hungary and Germany ally with one another (the so-called Dual Alliance) in order to subdue Russian imperialism. Or again, Germany’s adopts the policy of Weltpolitick (a convoluted name for imperial expansion) to further counter Russian imperialism. If Germany has all the land, Russia can have none. The Dual Alliance, more than any other treaty, turned a simple regional conflict (i.e., Austria attacking Serbia) into a world war. Germany’s Weltpolitick put every other nation in Europe on the defensive, giving them justification for entering the fray of war after Austria declares war amidst the July Crisis.
Not all historians regard imperialism as the primary reason for the outbreak of war. Some think that nationalism - the policy of asserting one’s own nation above all others - was fundamental. They argue that (1) Austria-Hungary’s annexation of Bosnia in 1908 enraged the Serbian Black Hand movement (Bosnia was predominantly Serbian) and pushed them to assassinate Austria’s archduke, and (2) Russia attacks Austria because it too has strong Serbian sentiments. Other historians hold militarism - the maintenance of a large military establishment – accountable for the war. These historians cite (1) the emergence of standing armies prior to 1914, and (2) British creation of the dreadnought (a mammoth-sized ship), arguing that these events led to a military arms race in Europe that could only end in war. Finally, a few historians believe that revenge caused World War I. They point to (1) France, who declares war on Germany out of revenge for Germany’s annexation of French Alsace-Lorraine in 1871, and (2) the United States entering the war because Germany destroys its cargo ships.
These arguments, however, do not hold water. Nationalism was merely a motive for imperialism. What counts is the actions that come from motives (i.e., imperialism). Militarism, moreover, arose because empires needed to protect their colonial holdings and their growing national borders. Militarism is therefore a byproduct of imperialism. Finally, the “revenge hypothesis” fails because Germany declares war on France, not vice versa, and World War I had already begun by the time the United States was drawn in. In short, imperialism is the only satisfying explanation for the outbreak of a general European war in 1914.
Comments
Post a Comment