РефератыИностранный языкToTo What Extent Is It Reasonable To

To What Extent Is It Reasonable To

Blame Germany For The Outbreak Of World War I Essay, Research Paper


To what extent


is it reasonable to blame Germany for the outbreak of World War I. ??????????? Germany?s


invasion of France via Belgium was the initial act of war that brought about


the commencement of war.? However, is it


fair to say that it was Germany and Germany alone who acted to bring about this


first step?? I would argue that a series


of events led to the German invasion of Belgium, but to what extent could


Germany be blamed for this series of events? ??????????? Germany was


a new power in Europe; the unification of Germany under Prussian leadership in


January 1871 was the result of the brilliant diplomacy of Otto von Bismarck who


by skilful use of war, and his excellent methods of convincing others of his


good intentions created the new empire.?


However, the emergence of the German empire had upset the balance of


Central Europe maintained for centuries by the Holy Roman Empire and


temporarily sustained by the German Confederation.? Many people believe that the invoking of hatred within France by


the creation of this new empire and the mistrust of the other surrounding


empires over Prussian expansionist tendencies led inevitably to a European


war.? The fact that war was averted for


nearly forty years was due to Bismarck?s brilliant diplomacy.? He managed to convince the other European


powers that Prussia?s only ambition was to consolidate its gains and not to


expand further.? He also made a series


of complex treaties with Russia, Austria and Italy.? The basic outcome of this web of agreements was that Germany had


a neutrality pact with Russia in the event of an Austro-Russian war, whilst


promising support to Austria and Italy in the event of a war with another


country.? These treaties succeeded in


isolating France a kept the peace for a considerable time, in this way what


Bismarck achieved was momentous.?


Whether, had Bismarck continued as German Chancellor after 1890 on the


accession of Wilhelm II, war may have been averted we will never know.? It is unlikely that Bismarck?s delay could


have been sustained indefinitely even had Bismarck remained as Chancellor.


However, war, if inevitable, would have come about in a different way under


Bismarck as he would have never allowed the alliance system of 1914 exist had


he been in power. ??????????? Caprivi?s


legacy was not perhaps as rosy as his predecessor had intended.? Despite France?s still being isolated and


treaties still existing between Germany and Russia, Italy and Austria, the


situation was more complex.? Problems


had existed between Austria and Russia for many years over an area known as the


Balkans.? The Ottoman Empire was in a


state of disintegration with both Austria and Russia vying for a greater


influence in the area.? Both powers held


a right to do so as Russia, predominantly a Slav country, felt that they should


have an influence with their fellow Slavs.?


However, Austria felt that if she did not have an influence in the area,


Russia?s policy would lead to a surge of Slav nationalist spirit with the


inevitable result that Austria?s Slavic peoples would rise up and overthrow


Habsburg rule.? Austria was a declining


power by this time and had regions of the empire begun to break away, it was


likely that a Slav nationalist uprising would result in the overthrow of the


system and an end to Habsburg rule.? For


these reasons, Russia and Austria clashed frequently over the issue of the


Balkans and indeed it was from this area that the spark for the First World War


would come. ??????????? The most


important of the Balkan crises came in 1878.?


In 1876-77, full-scale Bulgarian uprising led to a confrontation between


Turkey (The Ottoman empire) and Russia that led to a war from 1877-1878 over


the future of Bulgaria resulted in a defeat for the Turks.? The Russians then forced the Turks to sign


the Treaty of San Stefano.? This treaty


contained harsh terms that were felt by Britain and Austria-Hungary to give


Russia too much power in the Balkans area.?


Bismarck, unwilling to upset either Austria or Russia decided to play


the ?honest broker? in the conference of Berlin in 1878.? The result was that Russia was unhappy about


the settlement over Bulgaria, as it appeared to them that the Germans,


represented by Bismarck had sided with Austria.? Even Bismarck?s diplomacy had floundered over the difficult and


complex situation in the Balkans. The result was a distinct cooling of


relations between Russia and Germany, resulting in the effectual invalidation


of the Reinsurance Treaty between the two powers that insured the neutrality of


Russia in the event of a war with France.?


??????????? When the


Reinsurance Treaty was brought up in 1890, it could have been renewed through


clever diplomacy, had Germany sought reconciliation with Russia.? However, no such reconciliation was sought


and the Treaty that effectively stopped European war through ensuring that


France remained isolated was allowed to lapse.?


However, not only had this agreement been damaged by Bismarck?s handling


of the San Stefano treaty, but it had been further damaged by Wilhelm II who


seemed increasingly in favour of Germany forging closer links with Austria and


Italy and pursuing a more expansionist policy.?


The result was that Russia felt isolated and sought a treaty with


France.? It is perhaps surprising that


no treaty of this kind was forged previously. However, Russia and France had


had many differences in the past due to France?s revolutionary progressive


history; in contrast Russia still maintained its autocratic Tsarist


system.? However, bordered by


potentially hostile powers each needed an ally in the event of war.? France was showed immediate interest in this


agreement as it resulted in not only an ally, but also a means through which to


get even with Germany. France and Germany had become


enemies through a series of wars during the 19th century.? During the Napoleonic wars, Napoleon had not


only beaten Prussia on several occasions, but Prussia had been humiliated.? The result of this humiliation was that


Prussia sought to get even, and the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71 resulted in


not only a humiliating defeat for France, but also the unification of Germany.? France had been looking for revenge ever


since, and the prospect of an alliance against Germany appealed to the


nationalist feelings within France. The later Entente Cordiale


between Britain and France in 1904 and the Anglo-Russian Entente of 1907 effectively


ensured that Europe was split by two opposing alliances, the Triple Alliance


(Germany, Austria and Italy) and the Triple Entente (Britain, France and


Russia.) These alliances were the key that made European war possible, however,


even at this stage; war was far from inevitable and could have been avoided. ??????????? The trigger


factor was the successful assassination attempt by a Serbian terrorist


organisation, ?The Black Hand? on the life of the Austrian heir to the Habsburg


throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand.? This


event took place in Sarajevo on Sunday 18th June 1914. It was


originally a state visit by the Archduke to the capital whilst Austrian troops


carried out manovres close to the Serbia border through fear of a Slav attack


on newly taken Bosnia, due to the revised San Stefano Treaty.? It was the wedding anniversary of the


Archduke and his wife Sophie, and they celebrated by driving through the


streets of Sarajevo in an open top car enjoying the warm weather. The bungled


attempts by the ?Black Hand? gang, a group of amateur assassins were initially


unsuccessful as a hand grenade thrown at the car missed the intended target


injuring some twenty onlookers.? The


officials in charge of the visit decided to change the route, however, a wrong


turn was made by the first car and as the Archduke?s driver tried in vain to


reverse, a second assassin, Princip, fired several shots at point blank range


killing the Archduke and Sophie. ??????????? This event


seems to be relatively insignificant, except that the Austrians took the event


as a deep affront on their national pride.?


They felt that in an age where an insult could not be left unavenged


somebody must be to blame. It had been Archduke Franz Ferdinand who had time


and again prevented war as a cool headed general; it seems ironic that his


death caused the very thing he had been trying to avoid.?? The ?Black Hand?

were certainly a Serbian


terrorist organisation, whether the Serb government had any knowledge of their


actions is unsure, but what is for sure is that Austria blamed Serbia for the


attack.? However, if Austria was to


commence an attack on Serbia, it was almost inevitable that Russia would get


involved.? For this reason Austria


refused to act without the prior promise of support from Germany. On July 5th,


one week after the assassination, Austria sent an envoy to Germany requesting


permission for a response.? It was at


this point that war could have been avoided. Had the German Kaiser, Wilhelm II,


refused the Austrian request for support, it is probable that war would have


been avoided.? So why did the German


Kaiser give the Austrians a ?blank cheque? and promise unconditional support to


Austria?? It is in this action that


Germany?s responsibility lies, were they planning war, or did they not expect


Austria to actually go to war over the event? ??????????? Kaiser


Wilhelm II was brought up in a liberal family, but a withered arm and having


liberalism spoon fed into him from an early age caused him to blame his mother


for his withered arm and rebel against her liberal ideas.? The result is that we see Germany turning


away from liberal ideas during his reign.?


He became obsessed with the military and surrounded himself with


military advisors, indeed he only saw his Chancellor once weekly, though the


Chief of the Military cabinet met with the Kaiser three times weekly.? This led to policies such as naval


expansion, which invoked the ill will of Britain. In December 1912, the Germans


held a war council at Potsdam; the real question is were the Germans planning


European war even in 1912 or were they simply preparing for the possibility


that European war might occur? It seems to me that the conference did not set a


date for war, but simply discussed what Germany should do should the situation


arise.? However, the war conference


shows that Germany was not reluctant to enter into a war, and the Kaiser and


his advisors, yearning for expansion of the Empire saw the potential benefits


of such a war. ??????????? The ?Blank


Cheque? given by Germany to Austria led to war. Is it possible that Austria?s


intentions for war with Germany?s backing could have been mistaken?? However, this was an extremely difficult and


precarious position for the Germans.? If


they refused to support Austria, they would be accused of leaving Austria in


the lurch, and Austria might turn to the open arms of the Triple Entente,


however, if Austria were encouraged to pursue a course of action, Germany could


have been accused of pushing Europe towards war.? The result was the non-committal, but essentially vital ?Blank


Cheque.? The Austrians wanted revenge, and


German backing allowed them to commence a war with Serbia.? It was the ultimatum intentionally


containing completely unacceptable terms that Austria offered Serbia that


enabled war to commence. On 26th July 1914, Austria declared war on


Serbia despite Serbia?s acceptance of all bar one of the conditions on the


ultimatum. ??????????? Even at


this stage war could have been averted, but in fact mismanagement of the crisis


led to war.? It was predictable that


Russia, supported by France, would get involved; however, Russia initially did


not intend to engage Germany.? Russia


had two schemes for mobilisation, part mobilisation or full mobilisation, the


two were not interchangeable, once part mobilisation was ordered, because of


the rolling stock required etc. troops could end up stranded miles from the


front being rendered utterly useless, the result was that troops were fully


mobilise and placed along the entire front. ??????????? This again


was not an act of war towards Germany, but simply a threat of war, however, Russia?s


full mobilisation allowed Germany to blame the first move on Russia.? Despite the entreaties of Tsar Nicholas II,


Germany?s entire plan hinged upon a Blitzkrieg to wipe out France


followed by a concentration of forces on the Eastern Front.? For centuries, due to geographical position,


Germany had been petrified of a war on two fronts, Bismarck was obsessed by the


possibility and hence the Reinsurance treaty with Russia.? This had caused Germany to draw up a plan


known as the Schlieffen plan, which basically involved an attack on France


through Belgium, encircling Paris and thereby disabling France, causing her to


seek peace, hence allowing Germany to concentrate on Russia. The plan assumed


that it would take months for the Russian war machine to get moving, giving


Germany enough time to achieve victory against France. The result of this plan


was that as soon as Germany declared was on Russia, the trains went west,


through Belgium to attack France. ??????????? So, to what


extent was Germany responsible for the war of 1914? If one considers that the


Alliance system rendered war inevitable, then it can be said that Germany was


entirely to blame. It was Germany?s Triple Alliance with Austria and Italy that


began the system of Alliances under Bismarck. Germany can also be held


responsible for the lapse of the Reinsurance treaty with the result of a


Franco-Russian alliance followed closely by a Triple Entente between Russia,


Britain and France. Therefore, the defensive alliances, which were certainly


conducive to a hostile atmosphere, could certainly be blamed no Germany and


indeed these were vital in the eventual European war.? However, these alliances cannot be entirely blamed for the war. ??????????? The war


came about because of the mismanagement of a crisis.? In itself, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand should


not have led to war.? However, it was


the spark that lit the fuse in an atmosphere of hostility.? The communications breakdown between the two


?camps?, led in many ways to the commencement of war.? Again Germany played a role in the mismanagement of the Balkans


crisis, although in this case I think that a large part of the blame can be


laid on Austria.? If Austria had not


decided that the most appropriate form of revenge was war, then perhaps a full


scale European war could have been averted.?


It was the unacceptable ultimatum, and consequent declaration of war on


Serbia that led to the involvement of Russia and therefore a fight between the


alliances.? In this way we can blame the


fact that Austria was in the process of disintegration, and felt that it was


vital to her survival that a war was fought to prove her major power


status.? However, Germany cannot be


exemplified from blame, it was the promise of unconditional support that


allowed Austria to act.? It is difficult


to comprehend why Germany did this, but it is reasonable to assume that either


Germany wanted war or that she trusted Austria not to go to war.? Either way it is reasonable to say that as a


consequence of Germany?s non-committal ?Blank Cheque?, Austria was able to go


to war with the full support of its powerful ally. The lack of communication was


again seen in the almost accidental outbreak of war.? Russia?s full mobilisation caused Germany to feel threatened, and


as their plan relied upon surprise attack on France before turning east to


concentrate on Russia, war was brought about.?


However, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to mobilise fully right across the


front because of the practicalities of mobilising the huge Russian army, had


communication between Russia and Germany been better, perhaps the crisis could


have been controlled by an explanation of actions on Russians part, as both


Tsar Nicholas II and Kaiser Wilhelm II seemed intent on averting war. In conclusion, Germany can


certainly be blamed for causing the hostile atmosphere that had developed by


1914 due to the alliance system, and also for giving Austria unconditional


support in the Balkans crisis.? However,


to simply blame Germany for the outbreak of war would be not to consider all


the facts.? Austria?s loss of status,


and subsequent wish to restore itself as a great power through war led to a


spark igniting, and indeed the actual outbreak of war could be blamed on


Austria?s desire for war and revenge on Serbia. The unfortunate practicality of


fully mobilising Russia?s troops was also important in the outbreak of


war.? Germany can certainly be blamed


partially for contributing to the outbreak of war, but other factors and other


countries perhaps played a more pivotal role in Germany?s invasion of France in


1914.?

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: To What Extent Is It Reasonable To

Слов:3041
Символов:20152
Размер:39.36 Кб.