Christian Figueroa Rivera MILH 498 Senior Seminar World War I: Whos Responsible?

? Professor Melinda M Zupon April 24, 2013

Christian Figueroa Rivera

Digitally signed by Christian Figueroa Rivera DN: cn=Christian Figueroa Rivera, o, ou, email=christian.figueroarivera00@gmail.com, c=US Date: 2013.06.29 13:04:33 -04'00'

World War I was one of the important events that took place in the twentieth century. It began in Central Europe in late July 1914, and there were a number of interrelated causes that led to the conflict; aspects such as imperialism, nationalism and militarism were also very important. Some of the powerful European countries such as France, Russia, Germany and the United Kingdom had tried to deal with various conflicting interests for a long time, but the direct origins of the War can be directly attributed to decisions taken by various statesmen and generals during the Crisis of 1914, following the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand of Austria and his wife by the Serbian, Gavrilo Princip. 1 It was the first war when different countries locked horns with one another over different issues, but in simple words most of the super powers were motivated to gain supreme control over the European colonies that were spread across the World. However, it is clear from research and historical evidence that even though all the major powers of Europe were to some degree responsible for World War I, it is obvious that it is Germany that should be fundamentally held responsible for the mayhem. World War I was first modern war to take place at the beginning of the 20th century. From the point of view of nature as well as the course of the War, the characteristics of this war were drastically different from any other previous war. The biggest influences of World War I were the effects it had on international politics and the economic conditions of the countries that participated in the war, both directly and indirectly. 2 The struggle was chiefly between the

Samuel R. Williamson and Ernest R. May. "An Identity of Opinion: Historians and July 1914," (Journal of Modern History vol. 79, no. 2, June 2007), 345.
2

Frank Turner, Origins of the First World War, (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1970), 42.

Central European powers and their controlled lands all over the world.3 In 1913, Europe was a tense as well as a warmongering place, where many thinkers foresaw a war in Europe coming which ultimately became a fact. In simple terms, the biggest motivation behind World War I was the struggle for the control of Europe, but it was more of a global conflict that had spread across three different continents and five oceans. Previously, no single war had such a vast battlefield and that is why, it was apt to characterize it as a World War. After its origins in the Balkans, the main theaters of World War I were the battlefields of Western and Eastern Europe. The important power of the war was Germany, who had made huge advancements in military endeavors at that time, and yet failed to secure the final victory. Initially, Germany planned to defeat France through Belgium but ultimately they failed to execute this plan completely. Throughout the course of World War I, the Western Front saw the development of futile trench warfare and the associated battle strategies. 4 The German offensive began in 1914 in parts of Northern France, and it strangely coincided with the Russian victory at Galicia. A very important aspect of World War I was that for the first time technology and modern communication systems played an integral part. In addition, the growth in the power of the state was very important, and that is why every party directly associated with World War I was able to make allies with one or more countries with similar intentions. These associations had previously been historically important but from the
3

Aaron Gillette, "Why Did They Fight the Great War? A Multi-Level Class Analysis of the Causes of the First World War," (History Teacher vol. 40 no. 1, November 2006), 49.
4

Frank Turner, Origins of the First World War, (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1970), 63.

point of view of battle strategies, these associations played a key role in the elusiveness of victory for any side fighting the war. Every countries army had been expanded and each army could not be defeated in a single military campaign or even in a single battle. The death toll increased dramatically but still countries were able to recover from their losses easily (by introducing the compulsory enlistment of men i.e. conscription) and prepare again for another bloody campaign. While armies became exhausted on the home fronts and on the battlefield, each skirmish was inconclusive even though every side tried to mobilize their full resources in each and every campaign. 5 World War I was the first armed struggle in history where the relationship between industrial development and scientific advancements became closely associated with victory. But the developments had to be regular, because of the chance that the secrets could fall in enemy hands. For example, Russia, one of the important European super powers at that time, had an advantage over opponents such as Turkey and Austria-Hungary, another very important joint force of that period, but suffered defeats at the hands of Germany, who continued their technological advances during the war. But finally by 1918, the joint forces of the United Kingdom, the United States and France defeated Germany. For the first time in history, the Allied victory in the World War represented the victory of a collective large community as both the British and French Empires were spread widely across the world. These two super powers had effortlessly combined their empires in the World War to defeat a common enemy. After the Crusades (the Holy Wars), this was the most wide

Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962), 32.

reaching war on European soil but the heat of the battle reached other continents such as Asia and Africa. About thirty years later, World War II began, which was bigger in both scale and destruction, but still World War I is thought of as the first great war of the modern era, the war to end all wars. It is noteworthy that the success of the Allied Forces was limited in both strategic and technical ways. The Russian army was devastated as the country was going through the great Russian Revolution of 1917 and there were signs of an impending civil war in Russia. As Willmott stated: "Russia was defeated and driven from the ranks of Germany's enemies and thus had no direct part in that country's defeat in autumn 1918". 6 The US Army had by now dispatched forces to help the Allies. In 1918, the Germans began their Spring Offensive but the Americans arrived with a significant army that turned the tide of war in favor of the Allied Forces. Though Germany was initially successful in defeating the British in a number of campaigns, finally, exhausted, their resources depleted, they were forced to surrender. 7 The great powers of Europe, the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary were at loggerheads for a long period of time in diplomatic clashes over European and colonial issues. The beginning of the clashes can be traced back to the 1870s when these powers were trying to gain more substantial colonial footings across the world as well as trying to garner business in rich European markets. There was always some tension in the Balkan territories, where Austria-

Hedley P. Willmott, "World War I: Russia (Opponent Overview)," World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society, (ABC-CLIO, 2013).
7

Aaron Gillette, "Why Did They Fight the Great War? A Multi-Level Class Analysis of the Causes of the First World War," (History Teacher vol. 40 no. 1, November 2006), 52.

Hungary forces fought with the joint armies of Serbia and Russia to exert control over the region. 8 In this war, all the other super powers of Europe got involved directly and their alliances and treaties were tested during these times. The chain of events was accelerated by the assassination, but the origins of the war go much deeper than that event. 9 One of the widely discussed reasons for the outbreak of World War I was the sudden rise of nationalism in Europe. There were a number of unresolved territorial disputes between the great powers, not only in Europe but throughout the World, and the intricate alliance systems that had dominated European politics for so long. Apart from these issues, imperial as well as political rivalries for power, wealth and the control as well as the military played roles in the conclusion of the war. Along with these issues, misunderstandings in different diplomatic quarters, as well as delays in different process making decisions were involved. 10 In Germany, the Socialist Party had made huge progress in the 1912 elections and it gave the ruling Prussian Class shivers down their spines, and that is why this ruling class was hoping for an external war which would have the power to distract the attention of the population. The rulers thought they would directly benefit from patriotic support, while France believed that any war was a huge gamble for them both politically and financially. A major part of the French population was accordingly very angry over the loss of Alsace-Lorraine. However, slowly by the

8 9

Arno Mayer, The Persistence of the Old Regime: Europe to the Great War, (Boston: Croom Helm, 1981), 112. Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 154.

10

Leonard V. Smith, "The 'Culture De Guerre' and French Historiography of the Great War of 1914-1918," (History Compass vol. 5 no. 6, 2007), 1978.

active participation of Germany, France became alienated from Germany in the tense political atmosphere then rife in Europe. 11 Also the French leaders were aware of the military advantage Germany had over them who clearly had a better army. Both the crisis in Tangiers as well as the Agadir Crisis of 1911 made France believe that Germany would always try to restrict the expansion of French colonialism; France was trying to avoid a war like situation, which would not have been in its best interests. In France, there were violent clashes between the Right Wing and Left Wing parties, while social reforms were directed towards the creation of social instability. Another important European power, the Austrian Empire, had changed its political workings thoroughly from 1867 onwards and assumed dual monarchy with Hungary. Earlier, the country was ran by German speaking autocrats and the deal made the German autocrats, as well as the leaders in Germany, unhappy to say the least.12 Problems began to emerge and for a period of fifty years there was no permanent solution. Austria at that time believed in social Darwinism and wanted to begin an armed struggle between different European nations to settle the struggle for power in Europe once and for all. To begin with they were ready to initiate an armed clash against the Serbians. Many historians have emphasized the role of Austria-Hungary in triggering World War I, but in reality they had hoped that there would be a limited war, and that Germany would support them and

11

David Fromkin, Europe's Last Summer: Who Started The Great War in 1914?, (Auckland: Knopf 2004), 76.

Samuel R. Williamson, Austria-Hungary and the Origins of the First World War, (Auckland: St. Martin's Press, 1999), 43.

12

stop Russia and France from joining in; the Balkan prestige would be broken. It was a direct cause of World War I. 13 Another angle stresses imperialism as an important reason for the start of World War I. Some European countries, such as the United Kingdom and France, had accumulated great wealth throughout the 19th century by their imperialistic endeavors and it gave them a great financial advantage over their competitors. The main source of wealth was the natural resources these powers had obtained from their colonies and they used these resources to their benefit. Africa is very rich in different natural resources and at that time gold and diamond mines were being discovered in Africa. The continent also contained abundant natural resources such as ivory (in those days it was political correct to collect ivory), rubber and other natural products. Other European colonial countries like Germany, Italy and Russia always wanted to take advantage of the UK and French colonies. It was clear that the British Government was trying to focus their advantages by creating tensions in different parts of the world to keep the other countries forces busy. 14 Other European countries did not have limited natural resources and they were always seeking new territories rich in natural resources to exploit; this was the beginning of the AngloGerman conflict over the control of Africa. Germany was way behind Britain and France in building up colonies in Africa and the German-English African Treaty only created more tension

13 14

Dennis Showalter, "The Great War and Its Historiography," (Historian Vol. 68, no. 4, Winter 2006), 719. Hans-Ulrich Wehler, The German Empire, 1871-1918, (Berlin: Berg Publishers, 1985), 41.

between these countries. 15 This can be viewed as one of the most important conflicts over commercial interests at that time. Basically, Africa was divided into two different parts by the colonial rulers the most prominent part being known as the business partition located in the southern part of Africa. Naturally, the discovery of gold and diamonds in this area made it one of the most sought after places by colonial rulers. The British-South Africa Company, De Beers, a prominent mining company of the UK, and others were the controllers of these partitions. The goldfields of Africa were a very popular hunting ground for British capitalists when Germany was trying to gain control over the economy of South Africa. They even established a railroad in the country to facilitate business. 16 The control of colonial trade routes by established as well as emerging economic powers was a very important part of the conflict process. For example, one can take the example of the Berlin-Baghdad Railroad. This route gave the opportunity for Germany to control the Iraqi oil fields and accordingly they developed a port in the southern Persian Gulf. Thus, the history of railroads in general had great importance in the growing conflicts all over the world that would ultimately have a major impact on World War I. 17 Germany was interested in wrestling some of the colonies from the British while Turkey, a small power, was focused on confronting the Russian colonial machinery on a regional scale.18
15

Mildred Wertheimer, Program of the Pan-German League, 1890-1898,, (Fordham University: Internet Modern History Sourcebook, 1998).
16

Adam R Seipp, "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War," (Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, October 2006), 762.
17

Annika Mombauer, "The First World War: Inevitable, Avoidable, Improbable Or Desirable? Recent Interpretations On War Guilt and the War's Origins," (German History vol. 25, no. 1, January 2007), 88.
18

Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 98.

Germany was determined to control important African cities such as Cairo (Egypt), and Middle Eastern cities such as Baghdad (Iraq) and Tehran (Iran) to block British trade in these highly lucrative markets. In 1914, no colonial conflicts were in sight as Africa was completely claimed by different colonial powers, except for a small part of Ethiopia.19 However, the competitive mentality had been stoked to fuel the Great War itself. The participation of the United States in World War I was very important. The United States joined the war effort to support the Allied forces and this participation greatly enhanced the firepower of the British and French armies. The United States military was a huge support for them and the morale of the two countries forces rose accordingly. The United States army ensured that the Anglo-French troops became stronger at a time when the German forces were growing weaker because of the long duration of the war. Historians often say that if World War I had continued until 1919, the United States forces would become the important component of the Allied Forces fighting on the Western Front. 20 After the United States army joined the Allied forces, the offensives changed in form, enriched by the superior artillery and tanks belonging to the United States army. The campaigns lasted for short durations but were staged with finesse to make sure that the enemy was off balance and ultimately it was the biggest reason for the comprehensive defeat of Germany. Notably, the allies of Germany were also suffering and in September 1918, the Allied Forces attacked the Germans at Salonika and later conquered Bulgaria and Turkey after only one month.
19 20

Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962), 91.

Hedley P. Willmott, "World War I: Russia (Overview)," World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society, (ABC-CLIO, 2013).

10

The Italian Army also attacked the Austria-Hungary axis, and ultimately these combined actions led to the conclusion of World War I. 21 In the period before the war, a number of complex treaties bound different countries to one another, and the majority of the contemporary political leaders completely failed to understand the real potential of them. Some were localized treaties and some, like the Triple Entente between Russia, France and the United Kingdom was a non-military treaty. 22 One of several examples of the misinterpretation of the treaties was the crisis between Serbia, Austria and Hungary. It could have been handled as a localized issue but it escalated into international proportions and later became the direct cause of the World War I. 23 The Balkan wars (1912-13) were enough to increase military tension throughout the European powers and also create huge international tension. The Balkan crisis demonstrated that even apparently firm, formal alliances were not guaranteed support and co-operation under all circumstances. 24 In the wake of the wars, Serbia became militarily strong while countries like Turkey and Bulgaria became weaker. Here the balance of power was directly disrupted and changed in favor of Russia. 25 Initially, the Russian Government had agreed to take every

21 22 23 24

Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962), 31. Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 104. Frank Turner, Origins of the First World War, (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1970), 116. James Joll, The origins of the First World War, (New York: Longman, 1992), 64. Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962), 76.

25

11

necessary step so that any issues associated with territorial change could be avoided, but in 1912 they ignored this stance and supported the Serbian demand for an Albanian port. 26 At that time, an international conference was held in London where a unanimous decision was taken to create an independent Albania, but Serbia and Montenegro did not support this decision. They even backed away from joint military action and the Austrian government decided to issue an ultimatum that gave Montenegro one last chance to comply with the edict of the international council. Austria was also beginning to prepare their military for the impending war. Serbia, after failing to gain control over Albania, wanted to obtain other benefits from the first Balkan war that were not supported by mighty Russia. Serbia joined forces with Greece and attacked Bulgaria to begin the second Balkan war. The Bulgarian army quickly crumbled and at that time Turkey and Romania joined the war in favor of Bulgaria. Basically both the Balkan wars had heavily strained the alliance between Germany and Austria-Hungary. The German Imperial War Council made it clear that they would not support Austria and Hungary in their offensive against Serbia or any of her allies. 27 Britain at the beginning of the 20th century was afraid of several security issues and this insecurity was because they feared that Germany was becoming economically stronger than them. This was an important reason for Britain to join the war. In Africa, the economic trade imperialism was initially dominated by Britain, but they were always suspicious of German antics over there. Historically, both countries have confronted each other several times in the

26 27

Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 175.

Aaron Gillette, "Why Did They Fight the Great War? A Multi-Level Class Analysis of the Causes of the First World War," (History Teacher vol. 40 no. 1, November 2006), 5051.

12

war fields of Eastern Europe, as well as in political meetings. Both had allies who had their own domestic pressure groups to create pressure on each other over trade related issues. Britain took a mature step as it had successfully judged the invasion of Belgium as a necessary military strategy by the Germans; it made them to prepare their army for war against the Germans. 28 Actually, more than the situation in Belgium, Britain was much more concerned about the conditions in France. After the joint forces of Prussia and Germany had defeated France, Britain understood that Germany would try and control the English Channel with their powerful navy. British policy makers readily understood that this would surely be a huge security risk for Britain and therefore they became directly involved in the war. 29 Russia played a very important role in the course of events that led to World War I in the first place. For about four score years before World War I, Russia was a troubled land and had suffered mightily from Germany oppression. Actually, at the point of time when Germany was finally defeated, Russia had withdrawn from World War I. Another very important factor was the Russian Revolution of 1917, and the ideological changes that were associated with it. 30 Basically, Russia was a crucial piece of the puzzle in the context of the Allied cause between 1914 and 1917, and specifically in the year 1916. Basically at this time point, Russia had successfully helped its allies with offensives that were designed to deter all enemy resources from close war zones. Also there was a point of time, when Russia had successfully inflicted a series of defeats on Turkey and Austria-Hungary, and from these defeats the later could not
28 29

Zara Steiner, Britain and the Origins of the First World War, (LA: Macmillan Press, 1977), 17. Ibid. Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 124.

30

13

recover. 31 The Russian forces also tasted success in their mission in the Black Sea in sharp contrast to their failure in Gallipoli. But still nothing could compensate them for their suffering at the hands of the Germans. 32 The historical idea persists that all the major nations were involved in World War I had a large percentage of their populations who did not support the idea of going to war. However, government propaganda bizarrely tried to make the populations believe that war was nothing but a good thing. It had to be carried out for the countrys honor, and ultimately the war involved millions of soldiers who went to the battlefields and paid the ultimate price for the noble cause.33 In the second half of the 19th century after the Industrial Revolution, Europe was divided into two different kinds of nations. Though most European countries had imperialist dreams, not many of them had as many colonies as the UK and France. Basically, a type of globalization was being enacted then.34 However, at the same time, these European powers were getting ready for more prosperity and were always prepared for war to achieve this aim as the worldwide struggle for resources intensified. At that time, the arms race was massive and hideously expensive. For example, both Britain and Germany always competed against one another to develop better and bigger ships. 35 Another very important thing to remember about this time is that a large part of

31

Hedley P. Willmott, "World War I: Russia (Opponent Overview)," World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society, (ABC-CLIO, 2013).
32 33

Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 141.

Adam R Seipp, "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War," (Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, October 2006), 761.
34 35

Dennis Showalter, "The Great War and Its Historiography," (Historian Vol. 68, no. 4, Winter 2006), 718. Zara Steiner, Britain and the Origins of the First World War, (LA: Macmillan Press, 1977), 55.

14

the population had direct military experience. Education had a much wider reach and the common people were aware of concepts like Nationalism, Elitism and other different sociopolitical thoughts. One can safely say that before the beginning of World War I, the social structure of Europe was breaking down and hence great changes were occurring in the format of alliances and structures between countries. New urban cultures were developing and ultimately challenging the existing social order. Basically, Europe was primed for people who needed an act of destruction to create a new social order and World War I provided such an opportunity. 36 One of the important powers of the contemporary European scene was the Ottoman Empire who joined the Central Powers to form a Triple Alliance when the Turco-German Alliance was signed in 1914. Turkey entered World War I on 28th October 1914 after they had bombed the various Black Sea Ports controlled by the Russians. After this event, the Triple Entente of the Allied Powers declared war on the Ottoman Empire.37 Historically speaking, there were two very important factors that led the Ottoman Empire to get involved in World War I. The German think tank continuously pressured the Ottoman Empire to get involved in the War. In addition, the opportunist Turkish minister of war, Enver Pasha tried to involve the very prosperous empire in the war. German forces had been winning initially and directly motivated them to increase their number of allies. Germany had a clear motive, to prevent Turkey from joining the enemy camp. As they gained the trust of the Ottoman

36

Samuel R. Williamson and Ernest R. May. "An Identity of Opinion: Historians and July 1914," (Journal of Modern History vol. 79, no. 2, June 2007), 344.
37

Arno Mayer, The Persistence of the Old Regime: Europe to the Great War (Boston: Croom Helm, 1981), 110.

15

Empire, Romania and Bulgaria also joined the alliance, and hence Germany had a formidable group of allies. The German military sent a mission to Turkey in 1913, under the command of Liman Von Sanders, to help the Turkish Government organize the Turkish army and navy. This was the main highlight of the Turco-Germany alliance and it was a secret treaty that was signed on 2nd August, 1914. 38 The Allies also had strategic interests in the Turkish straits but were disturbed when they realized that Germany had made Turkey a strong ally. Though Turkey had made a treaty with Germany, their leadership was afraid of any kind of disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and was always ready to take appropriate decisive action. The Turkish Ambassador, Rifat Pasha, believed that neither Germany nor Turkey would hesitate to dismantle the Empire during at any point in time. To be frank, Germany was not as strong as its allies believed and also Turkey, from every point of view was nothing but a pawn in the ploy, which was designed to hold various ports to control strategic balance over important trade routes. 39

38

Annika Mombauer, "The First World War: Inevitable, Avoidable, Improbable Or Desirable? Recent Interpretations On War Guilt and the War's Origins," (German History vol. 25, no. 1, January 2007), 89.
39

Adam R Seipp, "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War," (Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, October 2006), 761.

16

The Turkey Straits where a sought out goal for Russias Naval expansion. 40

Enver Pasha justified the alliance on the basis of Germanys initial success and stressed the fact that it would surely stop the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. This alliance had many benefits; Turkey provided secure harbors for German warships well away from the Russian army that wanted to control Turkey and its harbors. Russia had a long standing obsession over the possession of the territory and after the Balkan wars in 1912 was afraid that they might loss control of these strategic straits. In 1913, Russia had threatened to occupy the Ottoman Empire if it stayed under the command of the German military; however, the military control was not removed. At that time, the Allied Powers were not that strong and Russia was

40

F.X. Pizon, The Turkish Straits Vessel Traffic Service (TSVTS),, image, Association Francaise Des Capitaines De Navires. http://www.afcan.org/dossiers_techniques/tsvts_gb.html (accessed April 20, 2013).

17

considered as an archenemy of both the Germans and the Ottoman Empire. Empirically speaking, the Ottoman Empire was a very important power at the beginning of World War I. 41 Austria-Hungary was not satisfied with the actions of Serbia. They were waiting for a reason to mount a full-fledged war against Serbia and the assassination of the Archduke provided them with an ideal excuse. Along with some other minor grievances, they declared war against Serbia on July 28, 1914. Russia, on the other hand, had a treaty with Serbia, which did not involve the military. That is why Russia mobilized their army to defend their country in the event of attack. However, Russia was quite a weak power at that time and the mobilization process took longer than expected being completed in about six weeks. 42 This mobilization of the Russian army did not go unnoticed. Germany was an ally of Austria-Hungary but they gave Russia an inadequate warning and declared war against Russia on 3rd August. They also swiftly invaded Belgium, a neutral country, to reach Paris by the shortest possible route. Britain had a treaty with France, but it was more of a moral obligation because both Britain and France were leaders in colonial endeavors around the World. France suddenly found itself at war when Germany invaded France. That was the time when Britain declared war on Germany as the Belgian King requested assistance from Britain when Germany invaded Belgium. Like France, Britain found itself in a war begun by Austria-Hungary, which was

41

Leonard V. Smith, "The 'Culture De Guerre' and French Historiography of the Great War of 1914-1918," (History Compass vol. 5 no. 6, 2007), 1969.
42

Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 176.

18

fundamentally "intended to be a strictly limited war between accuser and accused, AustriaHungary and Serbia but it rapidly escalated into a global conflict". 43 As Britain entered the war, her colonies such as Canada, India and Australia-New Zealand were also reluctantly drawn into the war. The United States was a late entrant into World War I, as late as April 1917; from the beginning of World War I, President Woodrow Wilson had tried to keep the United States neutral. Basically, the average United States citizen had no idea about the turmoil consuming Europe in the summer of 1914, and many United States tourists were surprised to watch the developing mayhem when they naively visited. Wilson as well as his government firmly supported the idea of neutrality in both thoughts and deeds, and it was clear that when public opinion was canvassed they also preferred neutrality. The general United States public always viewed the Germans as the stereotypical villains of the world. This view was crystallized further when they were told about the German atrocities in Belgium in 1914.44 Crucially, a German U-boat sunk the British RMS Lusitania, a passenger ship, without warning and therefore violated international laws. Though the United States was appeared to remain neutral, the United States Government sanctioned long term loans to both the UK and France during the time of World War I. But still the United States army was not prepared for war and mostly was kept on a peacetime state of readiness. 45
Martin H. Levinson, "Mapping the Causes of World War I to Avoid Armageddon Today," et Cetera 62.2, (Apr 2005), 158.
44 43

Ruth Henig, The Origins of the First World War, (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), 28.

45

Adam R Seipp, "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War," (Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, October 2006), 761.

19

However, in early 1917, Germany decided to go for all out submarine warfare against any commercial ships heading towards Britain, an action that clearly hurt the trade and commercial aspirations of the United States. Germany belatedly and rather stupidly realized that these attacks on shipping would ultimately result in a war with the United States. The German authorities sent a telegram to the Mexican Government (The Zimmerman Telegram) to seek a military alliance and this just outraged the United States Government. It was now that Wilson decided to enter the war and Congress finally voted to declare war on Germany on April 6, 1917. 46 In 1917, the United States was divided into three separate classes of elites; the anti-war people who did not want to join in any battle; the Liberal internationalists like President Woodrow Wilson and former President William Howard Taft who wanted that their armed forces go and create a collective security system; Atlanticists who wanted to create a secure relationship with Britain and hence wanted to wage all-out war on Germany. Even upper middle class businessmen stressed the importance of entering into World War I if only to maintain the role, stability and balance of the United States on the world stage. A number of members of the German military high command as well as the government strongly believed that a German-Russia alliance was inevitable as both countries had conflicting interests on land issues and the Balkan situation. Germany knew that Russia had a weaker military and it gave Germany the opportunity to continue the modernization of their military and industrial capabilities. France, another very important competitor of Germany, was also steadily increasing its military capacity under a stable political government.

46

Dennis Showalter, "The Great War and Its Historiography," (Historian Vol. 68, no. 4, Winter 2006), 718.

20

Germany, for a long time, had been involved in a naval race for supremacy with Britain. Many German leaders believed that Germany was surrounded and were involved in an armed race that was destined to end up in Britains favor, if they did not take an offensive stand. So the German think tank believed that war was inevitable and it must be fought sooner or later, and won in the shortest possible time. 47 Also it was clear to the Germans that victory in this war would give them the power to dominate most parts of Europe and ultimately expand the core of their empire from East to West. At this time, the German empire lacked colonial lands, in contrast to other big empires of Britain and France. Both Britain and France controlled large colonies spread throughout the world; even Russia had colonies in Asia. These countries were able to harvest the natural resources of their colonies and the steady flow of income from them was huge. 48 Germany always wanted a place in the sun and their government believed that if they won the war, they would surely gain much land from their competitors. Another threatening situation developed during Ems Telegram episode when Bismarck fabricated a telegram from the Kaisers and released it to the press, igniting fresh diplomatic agitation between France and Prussia. This telegram discussed diplomatic issues with France in relation to Spain. The intention was to unite the German speaking populations within the Prussian Empire but the end result was that France was offended and the Prussian population

47

Adam R Seipp, "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War," (Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, October 2006), 761.
48

Vincent Ferraro, Statistics on the Extent of Colonialism, (Mount Holyoke College: International Politics, 2010).

21

agitated. This was a prime reason for the Franco-Prussian war of 1870. 49 Again, much like the Ems Telegram to France, Germany also created similar problems with Austria-Hungary due to a telegram known as the Blank Check. 50 It clearly stated that Germany would support AustriaHungary if they attacked Serbia. This was a lucrative incentive to make these nations declare war in near future. Russia began to believe that both the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary Empire, two big European powers of the past century were collapsing, and they further believed that powerful European countries would try to conquer them sooner rather than later. They also thought that ultimately the Balkans would become a pan-Slavic alliance that could be successfully dominated by Russia, and then they could turn against Germany. Government officials and military professionals together with the educated middle class of Russia all believed that Russia should directly enter this war and win it. In reality, Russian officials were afraid that if they did not enter into the conflict and act decisively in favor of the Slavs, ultimately they would become destabilized. Historically, Russia had long waited to capture Constantinople as around half of their foreign trade used to pass through this region controlled by the Ottoman Empire. Hence a war would ensure greater trade security and prosperity for Russia. 51 Tsar Nicholas II thought cautiously before committing Russia to war, though there was a part of his court that advised him it would be the wrong move, as the Russian people were

49

Michael Duffy, Ems Telegram, 1870,, Firstworldwar.com.

50

Bethmann Hollweg, The Blank Check., July 6, 1914. Letter. (Brigham Young University: World War I Document Archive, 2013).
51

Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, (New York: Harvard University Press, 2011), 141.

22

against the war. These advisors believed that going to war might trigger a revolution by the people. But the Tsar stuck to his plan as he, along with major political officials, believed that if they did not participate in the war, it would undermine the imperial government and could lead to invasion or revolution in Russia. France was humiliated in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 when Paris was besieged by the Prussian army, and the French empire had to surrender. France waited patiently for the opportunity to restore their reputation on the world stage. Germany had conquered rich industrial lands such as Alsace and Lorraine in France. At the basic level, France for reasons of French pride, wanted wage war against Germany to regain these defiled regions above anything else. 52 In the context of the Moroccan Crisis the issue of miscommunication, lack of pragmatism, and German arrogance was clear once again. The German Kaiser visited Morocco without prior warning and without following the proper protocol decided to initiate a trade agreement that created a tense situation between France and Morocco. The Kaiser also stated that his visit gave an opportunity to create an equal independent country, and he also stated that France was in favors of this. This was a diplomatic disaster and it lead to a failure of French diplomatic policy and enhanced the likelihood of future war. 53 Britain was the biggest European power at this time and it was the country least tied into different treaties that aimed to divide Europe into two sides. Actually, throughout much of the nineteenth century, Britain had consciously kept herself out of the majority of common European
52

Leonard V. Smith, "The 'Culture De Guerre' and French Historiography of the Great War of 1914-1918," (History Compass vol. 5 no. 6, 2007), 1979.

Councillor von Schoen, The First Moroccan Crisis,, March 31, 1905, Letter. (Brigham Young University: World War I Document Archive, 2009).

53

23

affairs, and completely focused on the formation of its Global Empire. But Britain never took its eye of the maintenance of the balance of power in Europe. Germany was first to challenge this position as Germany, like Britain, had ambitions to create a Global Empire; in the process they began to form a mighty navy. 54 This event marked the beginning of the naval arms race between Germany and Britain to gain military superiority on the seas. Many believed that the aspirations of Germany should be forcibly stopped as their basic tone of competition was violence. 55 Another important concern of Britain was that Europe would be dominated by an enlarged Germany, and if Germany won any war it would surely upset the balance of power in Europe. Actually, Britain had a moral obligation to both Russia and France, though in the treaties Britain had signed they were not required to use any kind of military force. Nevertheless, Britain wanted to make sure that her allies would remain victorious in any battle. They believed that it would help them maintain their status of being a great superpower. 56

54 55

Zara Steiner, Britain and the Origins of the First World War, (LA: Macmillan Press, 1977), 63. Ruth Henig, The Origins of the First World War, (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), 33. Zara Steiner, Britain and the Origins of the First World War, (LA: Macmillan Press, 1977), 41.

56

24

After the Ottoman Empire lost their grips off the Balkans, a vacuum of power between the local nations went out of control. 57

Austria-Hungary was desperate to conquer the Balkans and to use successfully the power vacuum created after the decline of the Ottoman Empire. There were a number of nationalist movements taking place about this time. Austria was already angry at Serbia and the situation was quite similar when rising Pan-Slavic Nationalism was trying to enable Russian dominance in the region permanently. Russian dominance in the Balkans would ensure total ousting of the Austria-Hungary influence in this region. 58 They understood that it was very important to destroy Serbia completely to stay in the power struggle.

57

War Atlas, The Balkans,, image, WorldWar1.com. http://www.worldwar1.com/atbalk.htm (accessed April 20, 2013).
58

Michael Duffy, The Causes of World War One,, Firstworldwar.com.

25

Turkey held secret negotiations with Germany and then they went on to declare war on the Triple Entente in October, 1914. The idea was to regain the land they had lost while fighting both the Balkans and the Caucuses. Even they had dreamt of gaining Egypt and Cyprus, two strategically important countries, from Britain and to justify their war ambitions they had proposed a Holy War agenda, which was similar to the Crusades. 59 The majority of the participating nations at the start of World War I are relative to some of the responsibility for initiating it. While percentages are too broad to represent an assessment of the responsibility, history still portrays Germany within the 100% rate. However, through a better analysis, one can clearly indicates that Austria-Hungary had about 30% responsibility, Serbia about 10% and Germany circa 30%. It is obvious that Austria-Hungary should be held responsible to a great extent for the war as the origin of the tension was related to the Balkan territories issue; the initial cause of the war falls upon these countries and their intension of completely destroying Serbia makes them the chief culprit in this case. Serbia is held responsible to some degree because they invited Russia into the conflict together with Austria-Hungary and paved the way towards a greater political crisis in the immediate future. It is obvious that Serbia had little choice as Austria-Hungary was a much more powerful force. Nevertheless, with diplomatic failure, a wish to control Albania and the invitation of a powerful nation like Russia, Serbia should be held responsible, even though the allotment of 10% responsibility is rather of low extremities, but this is due to their scale of involvement throughout the war.
59

Adam R Seipp, "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War," (Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, October 2006), 761.

26

Germany initially remained outside the parameters of direct action and war mobilization in the initial phases of the Great War but it was Germany who created inflammatory doctored telegrams, forceful colonization, demanded obedience from Austria-Hungary, displayed arrogance, and initiated diplomatic calamities. In many ways Germany is the main party responsible for World War I. Germany together with Austria- Hungary were the main culprits in causing the War. It is, thus, not a surprise that 30% of the cause of World War I should be attributed to Germany alone. In addition, Russia, France and Britain can be blamed together for about 10% of the cause, due to their diplomatic failure to deescalate the extreme tensions that were clearly present throughout decades. Also, the remaining 10% can be attributed to all other nations who had participated in the Great War (such as the Ottoman Empire), but had little relevance to its originating consequences. Country Germany Austria- Hungary Serbia France Russia Britain Other Countries Responsible for World War I (%) 30 20 10 10 10 10 10

The question then remains on what were the real causes of World War I? This has been one of the most important historical questions debated during the last ninety years or so, and 27

there have been many more or less rational explanations. Immediately after World War I was over all of the victorious nations jointly agreed that Germany was the main cause of the war, and in the Treaty of Versailles, the War Guilt clause was stated as follows: The Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to the allied and associated governments. 60 The Treaty of Versailles also specified that the nationals of these governments "have been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them to the aggression of Germany and her allies". 61 After a few years, the general situation became quite stable, and the War Guilt Section of the German Government published all the documents regarding the foreign policy of Germany but they aimed to prove that the Germans should not be solely blamed for starting the war, and this policy example was reiterated by Russia. Marxist historians believed that World War I was a direct result of the competition between the interests of different capitalist businessmen and that Imperialism had played a major role in the development of the conflict. Even political leaders were blamed for their failure to understand the devastating effects that a war on this level would have from a socio-economical point of view. Emil Ludwig said: A peaceable, industrious, sensible mass of 500 million (European people), was hounded by a few dozen incapable leaders, by falsified documents, lying stories of threats, and chauvinistic catchwords, into a war which in no way was destined or inevitable. 62

60

Marshall Dill, Germany: a modern history, (Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1970), 273.

61

Allied and Associated Governments, Treaty of Versailles, June 28, 1919. Fordham University: Internet Modern History Sourcebook, 1997.
62

Robert John Unstead, A Century of Change, (London: Black, 1966), 62.

28

The British Prime Minister, David Lloyd George, accepted this blame in his autobiography and said that Britain muddled its way into World War I, and carried on until the very end of the horrific conflict. A number of revisionist historians do stress that World War I was the direct result of an amalgamation of interests of several very powerful forces operating in Europe at that time, like Imperialism, the ideas of Nationalism, the shadowy system of alliance between different countries, and finally militarism. After the end of World War II, the historians view of the causes of World War I had changed dramatically. During World War II, the whole world came under the dark shadow of a man called Adolf Hitler, and his horrific influence made most historians believe that like World War II, World War I was also the direct result of German actions. Germany had a number of ambitions and aspirations that were instrumental in creating the conflict and tension in Europe. The Germans had always sought continental supremacy and wanted to gain the upper hand over the British and French; they were ready to go to any lengths to achieve this goal. Luigi Albertini, an Italian journalist supported AJP Taylors assertion of German responsibility for World War I. Albertini believed that the German plans for massive military mobilization was the primary reason for the war; it gave many countries a disturbing shiver up their spines. The German Schlieffen Plan was aggressively offensive, which was markedly different from any other countries army mobilization plans. Germany had sent a clear signal that it was going to war by mobilizing their vast army. However, "The Schlieffen Plan (Germany planned to defeat France as soon as possible and then mount a major offensive on the Russian eastern front) dictated where the war would start and helped fix the locus of the war. But perhaps its important flaw was that it caused German planners to discount political solutions. It 29

brought Britain into the war, and the Russians had mobilized their forces much faster than the Germans had anticipated". 63

The Schlieffen Plan was devised almost a decade prior to the war, convincing German officials that a war would become an assured victory. 64

In simple words Fritz Fischer, a renowned German historian, assessed the reasons for the outbreak of World War I and the responsibilities of the German Government in its initiation. First, the German leaders were always aggressive and willing to go to war at the slightest provocation. The will to go to war among the German think tank personnel prompted the German army to initiate the war with confident backing. The Germans were fearful about the foreign policies of other key European countries. They were trying to conquer new territories but

63

Dewey A. Browder, "Schlieffen Plan: World War I," World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society, ABCCLIO, 2013, 24 Mar. 2013.

64

Terence Zuber, "The Schlieffen Plan--Fantasy or Catastrophe?,", image, History Today 52, no. 9 (September 2002): 40. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed April 21, 2013).

30

most of the earth and its key resources, were already controlled by various imperialist rulers. Thus Germany, strongly believed that by winning the war that they would surely gain a huge number of colonies and that the resultant trade and commerce for Germany would grow immensely. Germany always wanted to do something nationalistic, which would give its citizens a sense of national unity because at the end of the 19th century, the unification process of Germany had just been completed. The Germans were certain that a war would surely give them a very necessary economic boost. Apart from this reason, there were many other factors, mostly regarding the colonial issues of Africa and some parts of Asia, which is why the German government played a catalytic role to mix the events into a fully-fledged war. They believed that they could orchestrate it in such a way that they could win the war with a huge margin of victory with minimum effort; how wrong they were. Also they had an expansion plan, which was coincidentally very similar to that of the subsequent Nazi expansion plans. There is some historical evidence that suggests that both Austria-Hungary and Russia longed for a war as a diabolical solution to their internal troubles, which is a prime example right out of Clausewitz theories. Russia was in a critical phase of development and a war could have turned the focus to internal revolution with the people joining together to fight for their rights in their own country. In summarizing the modern thinking about the reasons that led to World War I, Ruth Henig stated: What really marked out the decade before 1914 was a failure of statesmanship and hope. By 1912, most European governments had come to believe that a general European

31

war was inevitable...The balance sheet in 1918 proved how wrong they had been. 65 Thus, most of the powers in Europe can be held responsible for World War I, however, through defeat the country that can be held totally responsible for the war is Germany. History is no stranger to the spoils of war, therefore, the modern 20th century is no exception.

65

Robert John Unstead, A Century of Change, (London: Black, 1966), 184.

32

Bibliography Allied and Associated Governments. Treaty of Versailles, June 28, 1919. Fordham University: Internet Modern History Sourcebook, 1997. http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/mod/1919versailles.asp (accessed March 16, 2013). Browder, Dewey A. "Schlieffen Plan: World War I." World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2013. 24 Mar. 2013. Councillor von Schoen. The First Moroccan Crisis, March 31, 1905. Letter. Brigham Young University: World War I Document Archive, 2009. http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_First_Moroccan_Crisis (accessed March 16, 2013). Dill, Marshall. Germany: a modern history. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1970. Duffy, Michael. Ems Telegram, 1870. Firstworldwar.com. http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/emstelegram.htm (accessed March 16, 2013). Duffy, Michael. The Causes of World War One. Firstworldwar.com. http://www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm (accessed March 16, 2013). Ferraro, Vincent. Statistics on the Extent of Colonialism,. Mount Holyoke College: International Politics, 2010. https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/feros-pg.htm (accessed March 16, 2013).

33

Fromkin, David. Europe's Last Summer: Who Started The Great War in 1914? Auckland: Knopf, 2004. F.X. Pizon. The Turkish Straits Vessel Traffic Service (TSVTS).. Image. Association Francaise Des Capitaines De Navires. http://www.afcan.org/dossiers_techniques/tsvts_gb.html (accessed April 20, 2013). Gillette, Aaron. "Why Did They Fight the Great War? A Multi-Level Class Analysis of the Causes of the First World War." History Teacher vol. 40 no. 1, (November 2006): pp 4558. Henig, Ruth. The Origins of the First World War. London and New York: Routledge, 2002. Hollweg, Bethmann. The Blank Check, July 6, 1914. Letter. Brigham Young University: World War I Document Archive, 2013. http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_%27Blank_Check%27 (accessed March 16, 2013). Joll, James. The origins of the First World War. New York: Longman, 1992. Levinson, Martin H. "Mapping the Causes of World War I to Avoid Armageddon Today." et Cetera 62.2, (Apr 2005), 157-164. Mayer, Arno. The Persistence of the Old Regime: Europe to the Great War. Boston: Croom Helm, 1981. McMeekin, Sean. The Russian Origins of the First World War. New York: Harvard University Press, 2011. 34

Mombauer, Annika. "The First World War: Inevitable, Avoidable, Improbable Or Desirable? Recent Interpretations On War Guilt and the War's Origins." German History vol. 25, no. 1, (January 2007): pp 7895. Seipp, Adam R. "Beyond the 'Seminal Catastrophe': Re-imagining the First World War." Journal of Contemporary History vol. 41, no. 4, (October 2006): pp. 757766. Showalter, Dennis. "The Great War and Its Historiography." Historian Vol. 68, no. 4, (Winter 2006): pp. 713721. Smith, Leonard V. "The 'Culture De Guerre' and French Historiography of the Great War of 1914-1918." History Compass vol. 5 no. 6, (2007): pp. 19671979. Steiner, Zara. Britain and the Origins of the First World War. LA: Macmillan Press, 1977. Tuchman, Barbara. The Guns of August. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962. Turner, Frank. Origins of the First World War. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1970. Unstead, Robert John. A Century of Change. London: Black, 1966. War Atlas. Image. WorldWar1.com. http://www.worldwar1.com/atbalk.htm (accessed April 20, 2013). Wehler, Hans-Ulrich. The German Empire, 1871-1918. Berlin: Berg Publishers, 1985.

35

Wertheimer, Mildred. Program of the Pan-German League, 1890-1898,. Fordham University: Internet Modern History Sourcebook, 1998. http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/mod/1890pangerman.asp (accessed March 16, 2013). Williamson, Samuel R. Austria-Hungary and the Origins of the First World War. Auckland: St. Martin's Press, 1999. Williamson, Samuel R. and Ernest R. May. "An Identity of Opinion: Historians and July 1914." Journal of Modern History vol. 79, no. 2, (June 2007): pp. 335387. Willmott, Hedley P. "World War I: Russia (Opponent Overview)." World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2013. Willmott, Hedley P. "World War I: Russia (Overview)." World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2013. Zuber, Terence. "The Schlieffen Plan--Fantasy or Catastrophe?." Image. History Today 52, no. 9 (September 2002): 40. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed April 21, 2013).

36