You are on page 1of 3

GROUP 3: HISTORY

Finding an excuse for the

First World War


Paul Letters examines the alliances, ideologies
and misconceptions that led to the First World War

Exam context
This article is relevant to route 2, topic 1: causes, practices and
effects of war (examined in paper 2) in the subject guide and route 2,
option 5: aspects of the history of Europe and the Middle East
(examined in HL paper 3) in the subject guide. For paper 2, past
questions have compared the causes of the First World War with
those of the Second World War. For paper 3, a question about the
origins of the First World War is always to be expected.

Archduke Franz Ferdinand


and his wife, minutes
before their assassination
November 2014

hen Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the AustroHungarian throne, was killed by Serbian terrorists
on 28 June 1914, Europe had long been preparing for
war. Austria-Hungary now had the excuse it needed to bully its
neighbour, Serbia. Tsarist Russia had the excuse it needed to get
involved in the region known as the Balkans by readying Russian
troops to protect Serbia. When Russia mobilised troops, Germany
had the excuse it needed to assemble its own forces. Germany had
already told its closest ally, Austria-Hungary, to count on German
support, whatever happened.
France was Russias main ally, and the Germans expected the
French to intervene to help Russia in any war, so there was no
avoiding a reckoning with their western neighbour. The German
military, under Kaiser Wilhelm II and Chancellor Theobald von
Bethmann-Hollweg, knew that it could not win a war on two fronts
against France in the west and Russia in the east.

17

NORWAY
SWEDEN
Triple Alliance
Triple Entente
Russian allies
Agitation of
national minorities
Schlieffen Plan

DENMARK

BRITAIN
NETHERLANDS
GERMANY
BELGIUM
LUXEMBOURG

RUSSIA

Czechs

Poles

Slovaks

FRANCE

SWITZERLAND

Italians

AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN
EMPIRE

Slovenians
Croats

PORTUGAL
SPAIN

ITALY

Ukrainians

Romanians
Serbs

ROMANIA

BOSNIA
SERBIA
Sarajevo

Black Sea

BULGARIA

MONTENEGRO
ALBANIA
GREECE

TURKEY

Mediterranean Sea
MOROCCO

The alliance system in 1914

Russia, vast and relatively backward, would take more than


6 weeks to fully mobilise and was too big to defeat quickly. Germany
planned to quickly subdue France using the ambitious some
would say unrealistic Schlieffen Plan, which involved marching
into France through neutral Belgium. But Belgium neutrality was
enshrined in the nearly forgotten 1839 Treaty of London, which
the British empire had promised to uphold. However, German
Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg could not believe that Britain would
declare war on Germany because of a mere scrap of paper.
But Britain and its empire did get involved, and a war that could
have stayed confined to continental Europe became the first global
conflict. All these powerful nations appear to have been remarkably
keen to go to war. Why?

Wilhelm II looked at Britain, France and Russia with envy.


Germany had acquired colonies in Africa, picking up Britain and
Frances leftovers (which became German East Africa, German
South-West Africa and German West Africa). But the German
leadership was not satisfied. So in 1905, and again in 1911, Germany
encouraged the Moroccans in their struggle against Britain and
France. The result was that Britain supported Frances desire to keep
hold of Morocco.
In 1904 the British and French had settled arguments over
their colonial territories and signed the Entente Cordiale. Their
cooperation over Morocco confirmed what this agreement had
suggested: these two imperial rivals had become friends. Germany
was left out in the cold.

Alliances

Militarism

The major players in the First World War had already picked sides
long before 1914. The alliances that many had entered into and the
promises (treaties) that many of them had signed now committed
them to war. Many saw a promise made by a national government
as unbreakable, despite the consequences. This was the view that
the British government presented in regard to the 1839 Treaty of
London, although Bethmann-Hollweg seemed not to believe them.
Some observers suggested that Britains leaders muddled into war
(see Theory of knowledge box).

In competing to reach superpower status, Germany and France had


doubled the size of their armies since the 187071 Franco-Prussian
War. Britain had the largest navy, which it used to maintain the
largest empire.
The Royal Navy had been unchallenged for a century, but by
1898, under Admiral Tirpitz, Germany had initiated plans to catch
up. Germany soon became world leaders in the construction of
military submarines but struggled to catch up with the British
in terms of number of warships. In 1906 Britain launched the
revolutionary HMS Dreadnought, which boasted a new, powerful
steam turbine engine and guns that were both bigger and more
numerous than those of previous warships. However, within a few
years Germany was producing its own versions, and by 1914 had 24
dreadnoughts to Britains 38.

Imperialism
Britain was the worlds number one superpower in 1914. Its empire
stretched over six continents. France wasnt too far behind, and
Russia had absorbed many of its neighbours over the centuries.

18

IB Review

Theory of knowledge
1

We muddled into war, said David Lloyd George in 1934, 20


years after the event. Lloyd George became British prime minister
during the First World War, replacing Herbert Asquith. As Lloyd
George wasnt the prime minister when war broke out in 1914
but was when it finished, was he trying to blame his predecessor
for getting Britain involved unnecessarily?

Can participants in history, like Lloyd George or Winston


Churchill (who wrote a history of the Second World War) also
be historians? Can they be impartial (unbiased)? As sources, are
their views useful because they provide valuable insights? Or
are they useless because memoirs are never designed to show
the truth, but to justify the decisions that individuals made? Can
biased sources still contribute to our knowledge? Is it possible for
any historical sources to be impartial?

By 1914, Britains 150 pre-dreadnought warships (twice as many


as Germany) were obsolete. If they ran into a dreadnought-class
warship, they would be blown out of the water. It is no surprise that,
after the war began, many warship crews tried to avoid the enemy
rather than fight them.

Nationalism
The separate German-speaking areas of central Europe were
only able to form a unified Germany after defeating France in
the Franco-Prussian War. France had not been keen to see the
formation of a new and sizable neighbour. So Germany was formed
out of nationalism from a desire for German-speaking people to
merge into a larger, stronger nation. By 1914 France was keen both
for revenge and to win back the province of Alsace-Lorraine, which
it had lost in the war.
Like France, Britains empire was an expression of its nationalism,
particularly the idea that Britons were superior to Africans and
Asians. Britain felt that it deserved its grand empire and that it
deserved to keep it all out of German hands. In 1914 that meant
finding a way to stop Germany enlarging both its military and its
empire.
Austria-Hungary had a different problem with nationalism. The
ageing Austro-Hungarian emperor, Franz Joseph, ruled over many
different nationalities, including Serbs, Czechs, Poles and Croats.
These groups wanted to be free from Austro-Hungarian rule and to
establish separate nations. The Austro-Hungarian leaders felt the need
to assert their strength, so in 1908 Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia,
which had been abandoned by the weakening Ottoman empire.
Many Serbs lived in Bosnia and believed Bosnia should belong
to Serbia. Serbias confidence and territory had grown following
success in the 191213 Balkan Wars, and tensions ran high as Serbia
now threatened war with Austria-Hungary.

Conclusion
The First World War began out of a nationalistic desire for freedom
(particularly from Austro-Hungarian rule) and the nationalistic
arrogance of empire building by all of the major European powers.
Each side had built up its military hardware and military alliances
and therefore felt unduly confident: leaders on both sides believed
they could win in just a few months. All they needed was to find an
excuse to declare war
November 2014

In competing to
reach superpower
status, the empires
poured resources
into military
developments

Glossary
Alliance An agreement between two or more nations to work
together for specific purposes.
Chancellor The German equivalent of a prime minister or premier.
Colonialism When a nation takes over foreign countries or
territories and makes the people subject to its rule.
Entente Cordiale A friendly understanding (in this case it was to
solve colonial disputes), not an alliance promising to fight together in
war.
Mobilisation The process of readying troops in preparation for
possible war.
Nationalism An extreme form of patriotism marked by a feeling of
superiority over other nations.
Schlieffen Plan The plan for the German army to advance through
Belgium and encircle Paris to force a quick surrender. In reality,
German troops came within sight of the Eiffel Tower before they were
forced back. The plan assumed Russia would take at least 6 weeks
to mobilise, France would take less than 6 weeks to be defeated,
Belgium would offer no resistance and the UK would remain neutral.

References and resources


An overview of the causes:
www.historyonthenet.com/WW1/causes.htm
Each countrys short-term reasons for getting involved in the war:
www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm
Historiography of the Causes of World War One:
www.goo.gl/Qhglm3

BBC resources
Western front animated map: www.goo.gl/o60ZPE
Present-day historians views: www.goo.gl/3tGuLC

Paul Letters teaches IB Diploma history and theory of


knowledge in Hong Kong. He is also a writer for the South
China Morning Post.

19

You might also like