The Causes of World War I
Bibliography:
Niall Ferguson, The Pity of War (New York: Basic Books, 1998)
----"Public Finance and National Security," Past and Present (1994)
Michael R. Gordon: "Domestic Conflict and the Origins of the First World War: The British and the German Cases," Journal of Modern History (June, 1974)
Mark Hewitson "Germany and France Before the First World War: A Reassesment of Wilhelmine Foreign Policy," English Historical Review (June, 2000)
David E. Kaiser, "Germany and the Origins of the First World War," Journal of Modern History
(September, 1983)
Samuel R. Williamson, Jr. "The Origins of World War I," Journ. of Interdisciplinary History (Spring, 1988)
--- "Vienna and July 1914" in Essays on World War I (New York: Brooklyn College P, 1983)
Why such a fraught Question: Treaty of Versailles and World War II; Devastation of the War: Battle of the Somme 420,000 British Soldiers died; Trench Warfare: begs question why did they fight and what was at stake.
I Outline of Key events:
A) Pre-Existing Tensions:
1) Franco Prussian War: Alsace Lorraine, feelings of shame
2) Imperialism:
1885 Partition of Africa
1897 Fashoda Incident
1905-1906 First Morocco Crisis
1911 Second Morocco Crisis
3) What to do with crumbling Ottoman Empire
1912 First Balkan War
1913 2nd Balkan War
B) Such Tensions caused each country to be wary of going on its own so
they formed alliances
1879 Germany allies with Austria-Hungary
1882 Italy joins Triple Alliance
1894 Franco Russian Alliance
1907 Formation of Triple Entente (Russia, England and France)
C) July Crisis (see Timeline)
II The Primacy of Domestic Politics?
ALL NATIONS WERE EAGER FOR WAR (EXCEPT UK) : WHY?
B) Germany more complex--especially because they were on the rise growing more powerfully in economics, population, industry
1) Economics--rate of industrialization, before 1871 Germany was primarily agrarian, after 1871 it industrialized at an incredibly rapid rate--2nd most powerful industrial country in the world by 1914
2) this caused a great deal of turmoil rural dwellers in Germany in the 1890s alone declined from 57% to 45%
3) this also put pressure on the Bismarckian state--Bismarck had created universal suffrage judging correctly that the overwhelmingly rural population would remain conservative and support the Junker ideals. He did not count on the effects of rapid industrialization which created a continually growing and continually more radical working class. Working class component of Germany 1871 20%, 1882 25%, 1907 33 %. This working class more over began to feel more and more disfranchised because on the one hand they were not adequately represented districts not redrawn according to population rural reps represented 36,000, urban reps represented 140,000. They also felt disenfranchised because their needs were not met. Unions outlawed and the laws were made to favor the interests of Junkers and industrial baron. Finally, power of Diet unclear, even if Socialists won, unsure they could possibly influence government
4) tariff policies--industrialization was state fomented (in fact German elites of two minds of industrialization they liked the increased power and prestige, hated the social transformations) preferences for large plants and enterprises that lent themselves to monopolies and state welfare--also lent itself to tariff policies that protected these great state interests (in fact state largest owner of private property in Germany) kept cheap grain out with high tariffs (from Russia) and wanted to force Russia to accept German industrial goods this caused problems with relations with Russia and Britain.
5) Need for military build-up to insure that the armaments plants kept on working to give places to the Junkers--dreadnoughts
6) Imperialist ventures as diversionary tactics
a) key because Germany lacked a national identity-Reichsfeindlich--much divided country only in 1871--contained 2.2 million Poles 80,000 Danes, 60,000 Lithuanians 1.5 million Alsace Lorraine plus working classes
b) incidents--colonial policy at first Bismarck Europe is my Africa
the scramble for Africa
Livingstone Stanley and Leopold
Conference of 1885 came up with the idea of rules for the partition
Germany wanted to challenge the rules 2 incidents
c) German governments "with terrific centrifugal forces at home were constantly tempted to fall back on their ultimate stratagem--the diversion of the conflict outward, the manipulation of foreign and colonial policy as a means of domestic control"
--Freidrich von Holstein member of the German foreign office "reactionary governments always try to divert the internal struggle to the foreign sphere"
--Johannes von Miquel Prussian minister of finance"national questions, questions of foreign policy had to be introduced to the Reichstag to turn our attention outwards...for in foreign affairs the sentiments of the nation could usually be united"
--Buelow "Only a successful foreign policy can help to reconcile, pacify rally
unify. The threat of war in our own times lies in the internal politics of those
countries in which a weak government is confronted by a strong nationalist
movement"
--Bethman Hollweg "The earlier errors: simultaneously Turkish policy against
Russia, Morocco against France, the navy against England; challenge everybody
put yourself in everybody's path, and actually weaken no one in this fashion.
Reason: aimlessness, the need for little prestige successes and solicitude for every
current of public opinion. The national parties which with their racket about
foreign policy want to preserve and strengthen their party position
C) France
Franco- Prussian War (Answers question why the French were eager for war)
1) Alsace Lorraine
2) War would be short
Joffre in November of 1914 turned down a project to make steel helmets claiming "We shall not have time to make them for I shall twist the Boche"s neck before 2 months are up."[1]
3) Desire on the part of the French to redeem their honor
a) Imperialism
2nd largest foreign possessions, increased revenue, also soldiers
b) military
1) New organization for studying war
2) draft
3) mobilization
4) morale strong: only .5% desertion rate
5) offensive spirit de Grandmaison "In the offensive imprudence is the best of assurances...Let us go even to excess, and that perhaps will not be far enough....For the attack only two things are necessary: to know where the enemy is and to decide what to do . What the enemy intends to do is of no consequences"[2]
"Should the enemy dare
to seize the initiative even for a moment,
every inch of terrain must be defended to the death and, if lost, regained by an
immediate counter attack
however, inopportune
--Colonel Petain "firepower killed"--- for suggesting this was never promoted
c) loans to Russia
D) Russia
1) Pan Slavism
2) Desire for a warm water port
3) Balance of Power
E) England-wishy washy on the war
1) Ireland
2) Compare to Germany in terms of industrialization, working classes, idea of national unity, Parliament's power, Imperialist ventures--fear of lack of balance of power on the continent and powerful country gaining ports of the low countries, protect India, dreadnought
III The Blame Game: Germany, Austria Hungary, Serbia
Where’s Austria-Hungary
The role of Austria-Hungary:
I) Held the Initiative at every point in the conflict:
1) the decision for a showdown in Serbia
2) approach to Berlin
3) framing and timing of the ultimatum
4) Rejection of the “Halt in Belgrade Plan”
–“During the Crisis Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Sazonov made it clear again and again that he was more than willing to see Serbia severely chastised if only Vienna would agree to modify its ultimatum and treat the crisis in Serbia as a European Question.”
4) Start of war in Serbia
Sidney Fay “The Kaiser and his advisers on July 5 and 6 were not criminals plotting the World war; they were simpletons putting ‘a noose around their necks’ and handing the other end of the rope to a stupid and clumsy adventurer who now felt free to go as far as he liked”
II) Why so eager for war:
A) Progressive use of diplomacy of abruptness and threat
1) From 1912-1914 involved in three Balkan crises 1st didn’t use threat got nothing–2nd threatened force got their demands
2) Belief that the only way to solve the south Slav issue was through military force
B) Desperation about prospects
1) Lack of Finances
2) Triple alliance losing coherence arguing over:
a) who to ally with Bulgaria (Vienna’s choice) or Rumania (Berlin’s choice)
b) Austria’s right to land in case Turkey falls
3) Russia getting stronger
C) Role of personality
1) Conrad von Hötzendorf–wanted war with Serbia–to cover his errors, part of his social Darwinism, to marry Gina von Reininghaus
D) Loss of Franz Ferdinand
1) Lost check of heir apparent (separate staff etc.)
2) Lost cautious voice
3) pretext
4) Disquiet following the assassination would be calmed by martial law
Where’s Serbia?
Head of Serbian Military Intelligence Colonel Apis had links with the Black Hand which had links to the Mlada Bosna
Serbian Foreign minister: “Ah yes, if the disintegration of Austria Hungary can take place
at the same time as the liquidation of Turkey the solution would be greatly simplified
Serbian Journalist “we live in the hope of getting something for ourselves out of the general conflagration whenever it takes place”
Does Foreign Policy adventurousness mean a desire for war and was such brinkmanship caused by domestic policy?
Complicated answer both Bulow and Bethman Hollweg believed that a war would exacerbate the problems of Germany: Bethman Hollweg “On the contrary a World War with its incalcuable consequences would strengthen tremendously the power of Social Democracy because they preached peace, and would topple many a throne.”
Riezler “a war would bring a Revolution of everything existing”
Nevertheless–brink of war
Bulow: believed that war would exacerbate the problems of Germany not help them; Bulow didn’t want war–wanted small gains and started Weltpolitik in order to pacify the disparate elements
both saw foreign policy as a minor weapon
Bulow consistently thought war a bad idea
October 1908 during a minor crisis over Morocco Crown prince said that Bulow loved peace too much adding a great part of the nation thinks as I do and the whole army is longing to get at em” bulow’s reply “I entirely agree with your Imperial and Royal Highness that it is inadvisable to express one’s love of peace, since this gives others too great a feeling of self assurance. I too am convinced that if a case involves one’s country’s honor it is necessary to strike, coute que coute, and whatever the chances seem to be. But, unless our honor is engaged, we should always ask ourselves what is to be expected from a war. No war in Europe can bring us much. There would be nothing for us to gain in the conquest of any fresh Slav or French territory. If we annex small countries in Europe we shall only strengthen those centrifugal forces which, alas, are never wanting in Germany. (Explain)
Bethman Hollweg
Bethman Hollweg wanted major expansion on its own–and perhaps desired a war, but he did so, not for any domestic political reasons but from a vague idea of German’s right to a place in the sun
“For forty years, France has pursued a grandiose policy. It has secured an immense empire for itself in the world. It is everywhere. During this time, an inactive Germany did not follow this example and today it needs its place in the sun.. Every day Germany sees its population growing by leaps and bounds; its navy, its trade and industry are making unparalleled developments...it is forced to expand somehow or the other; it has not yet found that place in the sun which is its due”
Bethman Hollweg believed that German expansion was necessary and that chances for success in war was diminishing
Bethman Hollweg–also there’s something to be said for the fact that they no longer saw foreign policy as domestic, but rather as a means in itself in fact, perhaps turned against the conservative elements liberal resurgence in 1909 including more equal taxation
Why then were they eager for war? Place in the sun–get it and preserve it what started as a way to divert the populace became an end in and of its own.....tied up with the honor of Germany pace
historians argue–sense of decline or sense of strength
Fergurson–sense of decline--inadequate state structure and a fear of the democratization of the army resulted in less percentage of German resources going to war
Hewitson–brinkmanship–ministers and generals have come to assume during the1900s and 1910s that they could use the threat of a continental war against France in order to gain concessions form the Entente powers in the Near East or overseas.
IV The Plans
A) The Schlieffen Plan (Show on Map)
1) Take Care of France first
2) Series of Forts
3) Deathbed statement keep the right strong
B) Plan XVII (Based on Grandmaison's ideas)
1) 4 of 5 French Armies (800,000 men) should charge forward not worrying about enemies intentions--deluded by kaiser's pledge no married man would be called up
2) Wore red
3) Maps of Germany few of France
4) No heavy Guns 300 for France 3000 for Germany (Guns slow you down)
V Mobilization
1) France --mobilized quickly 2,000,000 men 4200 trains 19 late
2) Incredible support for war, England all volunteers, feeling of getting in before it was over they were yearning for the great experience, one draftee "The war had entered into us like wine. There was no lovelier death in the world...anything rather than rest at home"
VI The
implementation of the Plans
A) Schlieffen Plan--modified to protect Germany in East and South not as strong did not allow for the French army to attack--British enter the war
B) Plan XVII
Went straight into machine gunners lost 300,000 men in 2 weeks. mass retreat . miracle of Marne von Kluck wheeled inwards as opposed to outwards race to the sea
VII Trench Warfare (Verdun)
1) War of attrition--French General Headquarters for every 2 French Killed 3 Germans--idea of nibbling away--always going to the next trench--bombardment--tanks--mass offensive
VIII The final victory-airplanes, tanks, will to fight, never entered into Germany
Timeline
1870 Franco Prussian War
1871 Germany annexes Alsace-Lorraine
1878 Berlin Congress hosted by Bismarck to divert Anglo Russian WarBOttoman Empire divvied
up: independence for Serbs and RomaniaBBulgaria three zones of autonomy all within Ottoman Empire (Russian demands); Austria and Hungary right
to occupy and administer Bosnia; Bismarck simply an honest broker
1879 Germany makes an alliance with Austria-Hungary
1882 Italy joins Triple Alliance
1885 Partition of Africa (real occupation)
1894 Franco-Russian Alliance
1897 Fashoda Incident
1898 Germany begins Naval program
1905-6 First Morocco crisis (William II makes speech in favor of Moroccan independence, solved by international conference)
1907 formation of triple entente (Russia, England, and France)
1908 Austria declares annexation of Bosnia (Secret deal with Russia)
Bulgarians declare independence--Russia rebuffed in plans to conquer Constantinople, not supported by fellow members of Entente
1911 Second Morocco Crisis (gunboat to Agadir, demand French Congo, get some acessions)
Italy declares war on Turkey
1912 SPD become largest party in Reichstag (German Legislature)
1st Balkan War (Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece vs. Turkey)
2nd Balkan War (Serbia, Greece Romania and Turkey vs. Bulgaria)
June 28 1914 assassination of archduke Francis Ferdinand by Gavrilo Princip
July 3, Count Hoyos travels to Berlin
July 5-6 German administration gives the famous blank Check
July 23rd Austria issues 48 hours ultimatum to Serbia demanding:
suppression of anti Austrian publications, punishment of all teachers who speak up against Habsburgs, entry of Austrian officials-Serbians conciliatory all demands except officials and send to the court
July 28 Austria declares war on Serbia
July 30th Germany hears Russia has mobilized
August 1, 1914 Germany declares war on Russia
August 3, 1914 Germany declares war on France, invades Belgium
August 4, 1914 Britain declares war on Germany