home

= Welcome to IB History- Class of 2012 WWI Projects

= **__ The Three Images of War __** War as the result of Human Nature: States that war is the outcome of the very nature of human beings.
 * Supported by Confucius to present day behavioral scientists.

Implication: to prevent war one must change human nature! Things that could be done to Change Human Nature: Criticisms: War As the Result of the Internal Structure of States: Argues that wars are caused by ‘bad states’ / i.e.: an unpopular government engages in a war against another state in an attempt to promote internal unity. What is a ‘bad state’? In recent past bad = autocratic. More difficult to define what constitutes a ‘good state’ Therefore, this theory has not much practical value when attempting to eliminate war. War as the result of the Structure of the State System: Argues that war is the result of the nature of relations between states, i.e.: Gov. of a state will represent its own interests and in the event of a serious clash in interests there will be war. Implications: Criticisms: The Origins of the First World War 1. German Responsibility: Fischer’s View: (German Historian) Criticism of Fischer: More Correct View: 2. The Responsibility of Other Powers: Austro-Hungary: Russia: France: (not a crucial role) Britain: (not a crucial role) The system of alliances helps explain why so many powers became involved in the war of 1914. The importance of the alliance systems was not its existence but rather that their defensive nature had been altered. Yet the system of alliances had been successful before at preventing conflicts and maintaining an aspect of a balance of power. Why did war break out in 1914? One answer is that Germany was intent on war in 1914 (and thus rejected most proposals for mediation in 1914). Germany could not tolerate a diplomatic defeat for her ally. The Arms Race can be both a cause and an effect of international tension. Capitalism: Arguments For: Arguments Against: Imperialism: Yet, agreements were being made on colonial issues prior to the war. Conclusion: Four central factors: Four subsidiary factors: --- The Causes of the First World War The Profound Causes --- Events Leading to World War I  ‘No war is inevitable until it breaks out’ à The 2 wars inflame national sentiment in the Balkans / Alarm A-H and convince her to act against Balkan nationalism and in particular Serbia which would almost certainly bring her into conflict with Russia. --- The Outbreak Of War June 28th 1914: Heir to A-H throne assassinated in Sarajevo, Bosnia by a young Bosnian student (supplied in weapons and training by the Black Hand — a secret Serbian society) à leads A-H to assume Serbian guilt. July 5th: German Emperor and Chancellor give A-H a ‘blank cheque’. July 23rd: Ultimatum sent to Serbia (delayed to avoid Serbians receiving it while French President in visit to Russia) July 24-28th: British Foreign secretary contacts on 4 occasions the Germans to propose some form of arbitration. (Germany refused offers and delayed transmitting offers to A-H) July 27th: Kaiser returns and proposes the Halt in Belgrad by which A-H would seize the capital Belgrade until Serbia fulfilled the terms of the ultimatum (but not seize the whole country) July 28th: A-H declaration of War on Serbia: Kaiser’s proposal has come too late (his own ministers had been encouraging declaration of war and concealing info. from him.) July 29/30th: German Chancellor contacts Britain to propose British neutrality / Britain refuses July 30th: Czar Nicholas II orders Russian mobilization to begin. July 31st: Full German mobilization is ordered. August 1st: British propose to ensure French neutrality à Kaiser orders the halt of any Western advance à German army commander protests b/c of the Schlieffen Plan à Germany asks Russia to halt mobilization / Russia refuses à Germany declares war on Russia à France orders mobilization / Germany asks France to halt her mobilization and guarantee neutrality. August 3rd: Germany declares war on France who refused demands. August 4th: Britain declares war on Germany when German troops invade Belgium (part of Schlieffen Plan)
 * Optimists: human nature can be modified to make war less likely
 * Pessimists: Human nature cannot be changed and war is inevitable.
 * Offer alternatives to war i.e.: demanding physical activities.
 * Education: humans to be educated with a love of peace and hatred of war (there are human societies where war is unknown)
 * Cultural exchanges (better understanding btw peoples)
 * Screen Potential leaders: ensure that they are not predisposed towards violence.
 * Human nature is infinitely variable.
 * Far too general for any practical use.
 * If war is caused by human nature then so is peace.
 * 1) Marxists define it in economic terms. Good state is one in which there is a fair distribution of wealth.
 * 2) USA and allies define it in political terms based on multi-party democracy, sovereignty of people, …
 * 3) Fundamentalists Islam defines it in terms of a states which bases itself upon the word of God.
 * Groupings of states in an attempt to promote the wellbeing of all / establishment of an alliance which would deter attack on an individual state / disarmament programs (i.e.: NATO, Non-Proliferation treaty)
 * Transfer of authority from national Gov. to regional or global organizations (i.e.: EC, UN)
 * World Government!
 * Alliances in the past arguably have been as much responsible for the outbreak of war as they have been useful in preventing it.
 * It does not address the most common form of warfare since 1945: civil war.
 * Germany responsible for war b/c of its aggressive pursuit of its weltpolitik.
 * Germany willed the war in order to realize expansionist ambitions and to resole an acute domestic crisis.
 * Fear of ‘encirclement’ after the Triple Entente and Russian army reforms meant that ‘a moment so favorable froma military point of view might never occur again’.
 * Germany put pressure on A-H to retaliate against Serbia (even if it meant General war) ß ‘blank cheque’
 * German policy before 1914 seems contradictory and lacking in clear aims.
 * No evidence that German leader help expansionist aims before the ‘September Programme’ (which Fischer uses to explain the German desire for war)
 * Places too much importance on the domestic crisis in the decision to launch a war in 1914 Bulow and Hollweg dismissed war as a solution to the socialist problem.
 * Distinguish btw Germany’s contribution to the growth in international tensions from 1900-13 w/ her role during the July crisis itselft.
 * All Gov. responsible for tension until 1914 but not equally responsible for the fatal turn of events — for which Germany was culpable.
 * Contributed to conflict in Balkans by lengthy delays in responding to Sarajevo. (i.e.: the ultimatum to Serbia was not delivered until almost a month after Sarajevo.)
 * Decleration of war on Serbia came only 5 days after ultimatum
 * Refused to halt military operations (as Kaiser suggested) even though talks with Russia were scheduled for July 30.
 * Clear that Russia was the expansionist force in the Blakans.
 * Unable (unwilling?) to restrain/control Slaw nationalism even though it was a force endangering peace/stability in Europe.
 * Balkan Wars might have been a ‘war by proxy’ for Russia.
 * Promise of support to Serbia (influenced decision to reject the ultimatum)
 * Promised French support to Russia (but this was more the work of French ambassador in Russia rather then official policy from Paris)
 * Hopes of recovering Alsace-Lorraine was worth fighting for but not sufficient for wanting war.
 * Underestimated gravity of crisis in late July.
 * Maybe a clearer statement of British intent to support France would have restrained Berlin.
 * Naval talks with Russia convinced the German Chancellor that the ‘ring of encirclement’ was complete.
 * 1) The Balkans
 * Tension between Russia and A-H. (A-H’s prestige depended on its influence in the Balkans)
 * Pan-slavism / nationalism
 * Do NOT in themselves explain how an Austro-Serb dispute excalated into a general European war.
 * 1) Alliances, International Anarchy, and Armaments:
 * After her isolation at the Algeciras conference, Germany realised that A-H was virtually her only ally and the alliance w/ A-H took on a new importance. (blank-cheque of 1914 transformed a defensive alliance into an offensive one)
 * Similarly France gave a ‘blank cheque’ (1912) to Russia turning a defensive alliance into an offensive one.
 * Alliance system reduced flexibility of responses in the event of a crisis (i.e.: German response to Franco-Russian alliance was the Schlieffen Plan, therefore the answer to a Russian threat was to invade France!)
 * However in some respects the alliance system was in some disarray in early 1914 (i.e.: Britain disanchanted w/ agreement w/ Russia over Persia // Britain still did not support France by July 1914)
 * Determination of Germany to become a naval power threatened Britain.
 * Russian army reforms (due to be completed by 1917) led to a point of view of the German high command that a preventive war against Russia in 1914 made sense.
 * Maybe the arms race contributed to the feeling that war could not be postponed indefinitely.
 * Gov. in the leading states had warlike attitudes (i.e.: in Germany the General Staff had enormous influence.)
 * However there was a current of anti-militarism in both France and Germany (i.e.: in the socialist movements)
 * 1) Capitalism, Imperialism and Nationalism
 * 1) Simple belief that industrialists had an interest in provoking war
 * 2) Capitalist economic pressures were the driving force behind imperialist rivalries.
 * 3) Anglo German Trade Rivalry
 * Armaments manufacturers had markets overseas which might be lost in wartime.
 * Financiers needed stability.
 * Anglo-German commercial links were growing closed from 1904-1914.
 * Lenin said that the war was an ‘imperialist war’ b/c it sought a re-division of colonial territories.
 * Germany had a prime interest in acquiring the colonies of other states.
 * German Weltpolitik was a challenge to British/French Empires.
 * Psychological consequences of a generation of imperialism: Exacerbating mutual suspicion and hostility (contributed to the mood of 1914)
 * Contributed to ‘nationalist revival’
 * Legacy of Weltpolitik: failed by 1914 / harmed Germany’s relations with other powers / meagre achievements contrasted with its high expectations / increased German feeling of insecurity.
 * Growth of Russian power: economic expansion, pop. growth, army reforms, and strategic railways (close to German borders) alarmed Germany.
 * Disruptive effect of nationalism: threatened A-H in terms of her ability to act as a great power & disintegration.
 * Inadequacy of Germany policy during the July crisis: failure to devise diplomatic alternatives in case the Triple Entente held and France and Britain supported Russia.
 * The decline of the ‘Concert of Europe’: statesmen unwilling to behave with restraint for the sake of ‘Europe’ as a whole.
 * The Arms Race: increased expectations of war / led Germany to believe she had a better chance of winning in 1914 rather then later.
 * The legacy of imperial rivalries: increased animosities among the great powers (affecting public opinion, press, and Gov.)
 * The influence of domestic tensions: encouraged ruling circles to consider war as a relief from such tensions.
 * 1) War was not seen as morally wrong
 * 2) Nationalism was high in the 19th century
 * Nations which had not obtained independence by 1900 were determined to do so.
 * Resulted in fierce price (i.e.: Deutschland uber alles)
 * 1) Imperial rivalries: clashes often produced a ‘war fever’ but there is little correlation between imperial rivals and WWI rivals. These rivalries did contribute to the build-up of tension.
 * 2) Economic rivalry: search for new markets by giant corporations led to intense rivalry.
 * 3) System of Alliances: international relations became rigid w/ the development of alliances à deterioration of international relations.
 * 4) Secret Diplomacy:
 * Encouraged the making of aggressive agreements.
 * Generated a climate of suspicion.
 * 1) Arms Race:
 * Fueled national sentiment.
 * Huge sums devoted to weaponry could only be justified if these weapons were to be used.
 * May have increase the influence of the Armament industries upon Gov. policy.
 * 1) Vigorous Foreign policy of Germany: after resignation of Bismarck.
 * 2) Franco-Prussian War: loss of Alsace-Lorraine for France, poisoned relations btw the two states.
 * 3) The Eastern Question: series of crises kept the are on the boil.
 * 1) March 1890: Bismarck resigned, the new Kaiser seeks a more active Weltpolitik à the blunders of both the new Kaiser and the Chancellors alienated other powers and increasingly gave influence to army leaders in Germany
 * 2) March 1980: German refusal to renew the Reinsurance Treaty w/ Russia à made Russia suspicious of German intentions (led to closed relations btw France and Russia à ‘war on two fronts’)
 * 3) December 1893: France and Russia sign a military convention pledging to helped each other in the event of a German attack.
 * 4) December 1895: failure of Jameson raid and German intervention congratulating the Boer on dealing with the attack ‘without appealing to the help of friendly powers.’ ß infuriated British whilst gaining nothing for Germany.
 * 5) November 1897: Germany seized control of Kiao-Chow (Chinese port), Britain and Russia do likewise à imperial rivalries in region inflamed à eventually lead to the Boxer Rebellion (1902)
 * 6) March 1898: Germany introduces the navy Code — plan to increase the size of the nave — seen by British as threatening. Seen as an immediate threat with the launching of the dreadnoughts in 1906.
 * 7) 1898: Fashoda Incident: Increased tension in both countries.
 * 8) 1899-1902: Boer War: British losses (and disillusionment at easy victory) meant Britain began to seek allies to help protect her widespread empire.
 * 9) January 1902: British-Japanese alliance
 * 10) February 1904: Russo-Japanese war (Germany tried to obtain an alliance with Russia since Britain was allied to Japan but Russians refused as they saw it would not help them against Japan and would instead anger France)
 * 11) April 1904: Anglo-French Entente (Entente Cordiale) settled colonial disputes à seen in Germany as a clear British alignment with France (and therefore Russia) against the Triple Alliance of Germany, A-H, and Italy (1882)
 * 12) March 1905: Germany assures Moroccan Sultan of his independence (attempt to challenge the Anglo-French agreement concerning the region)
 * 13) January 1906: Algeciras Conference: called by Kaiser / Anglo-French agreement over North Africa recognized à German humiliation à Germany would be less likely to seek compromise through fear of being seen as weak.
 * 14) August 1907: Russia and Britain settle their differences over Persia and Afghanistan (seen as a Triple Entente by Germany) à fear of encirclement begin to motivate German policy.
 * 15) 1908: Revolt in the Ottoman Empire: A-H annexes Bosnia-Herzegovina / obtains Russian agreement by promising to support the ending of travel restrictions on Russian warships between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean / A-H ignores the agreement / Germany mobilizes forces in support of A-H / Russian protest end. à increased tension in the Balkans
 * 16) April 1911: Italy seized control of Tripoli (Libya)
 * 17) April 1911: Moroccan Sultan calls for French help against rebellion / French intervene / Germany protests and sends a warship to Agadir à convinces British that Germany wanted a naval base in west Africe / brings to power in France the anti-Germany premier Poincaré (1912) / intensifies naval arms race.
 * 18) 1912: First Balkan War: Balkan states drive the Turks out of the Balkans.
 * 19) 1913: Second Balkan War: Balkan states quarrel amongst themselves.
 * 1) June 1914 (28th): Archduke Francis-Ferdinand assassinated.
 * Presented A-H with an opportunity to crush Serbia.
 * Note: Kaiser leaves for a cruise in Baltic until 27th.
 * Demanded full investigation into the assassination.
 * Terms criticized by France, Britain, and Russia.

The Nature of Warfare 1914-1918 (The Practice of War) WWI changed popular conceptions of warfare. Before 1914 war had been regarded as an acceptable tool of diplomacy. à at first war was greeted with scenes of great enthusiasm in all countries concerned. Main Characteristics: a. Weapons could be manufactured on a vast scale. b. The destructive power of weaponry increased greatly. c. The concentration of population in urban centers meant easy mobilization à field armies of a scale never seen before. a. The entire population became involved, conscription was introduced. b. Industry was geared to war production / Women were used. c. The new weapons had the range and destructive power to inflict casualties on the civilian population. a. Maintain enthusiasm for the war. b. Pressure those who did not support the war. c. Convince world opinion of the justness of one’s cause. d. Weaken enemy morale. B/c of the escalation of the war, both sides could justify nothing less then total victory and the war was portrayed as a struggle btw democracy and autocracy. (Allies made use of this after the collapse of Russia in 1917)
 * 1) The Industrial Revolution meant that:
 * 1) The influence of nationalism: war was seen as between peoples à difficult to think in terms of a negotiated end, instead sought total defeat of the enemy.
 * 2) Elements of Total War:
 * 1) Economic Warfare: destroying the enemies’ capacity to supply the huge armies (i.e.: through blockading of ports, unrestricted submarine warfare by Germany)
 * 2) Use of Propaganda: resulted from the development of mass media and its roles were:
 * 1) Loss of individual freedom: i.e.: through conscription, rationing of food, gearing of industries, censorship of the press (Germany)
 * 2) Casualties were appallingly high: i.e.: casualties for Verdun in 1916 were greater then entire losses of Britain and Commonwealth in the whole of WWII.
 * 3) Fighting tended to be static (i.e.: trench warfare)
 * 4) Conditions were appalling.
 * 5) War took a major step towards total war.

The Effects of the First World War Domestic Effects: International Effects:
 * 1) Changes in population structure:
 * 2) Most of those killed were of ages 18-38.
 * 3) Fall in the birth rate 1914-1918.
 * 4) The ‘baby boom’ that followed the war meant huge demand for school places.
 * 5) Manpower shortage during 1930s.
 * 6) Changes in society:
 * 7) Social barriers undermined b/c of the emphasis on national unity during the war years.
 * 8) Status of women enhanced.
 * 9) Increased role of Governments:
 * 10) Increased intervention in areas of health and education.
 * 11) Gov. had taken over areas of the private sector during the war à some of these remained under Gov. control.
 * 12) Belief in the need for economic self-sufficiency:
 * 13) Normal trade was disrupted.
 * 14) Countries had tried during the war to develop alternative home supplies.
 * 15) Promoted the idea of autarky
 * 16) Major changes in the internal economies of states: European powers entered the war as creditor nations but ended the war as debtor nations.
 * 1) Nationalism reached its highest point (i.e.: through treaties that took into account the ‘right of self determination’ of Woodrow Wilson. (yet there were many exceptions)
 * 2) Spreading of democratic ideals: new states that emerged from war initially dedicated to democracy (in practice not always the case)
 * 3) Creation of the world’s first communist state (single most important consequence?)
 * 4) Economic life and world trade dislocated: prewar trading patterns had changed during the war and were never restored.
 * 5) Major post war programmes began with ‘re’: reconstruction, reparations, repayment, recovery, restoration…indication of the desire to turn back the clock rather then rebuild with new thinking and initiative.
 * 6) Left a tangle of war debts and reparation payments: all the victorious Allies (except US)heavily in debt à countries like France did not take active measures and waited for reparation to start flowing.
 * 7) Shift away from Europe as the center of the world (this trend was evident by the end of WWII)
 * 8) Development in the area of international organizations: to prevent the horrors of war (i.e.: League of Nations, ILO)