Ian's World of History

Before 1905 there were foundations of hatred and alliance between many nations. There was general hatred between Britain and Germany through refusal of cooperation years before. There was alliance between France and Russia too. However, the friction did not really threaten fully until 1905.

In 1905 Russia’s defeat to Japan had left them crushed and with massive internal problems. Russia was humiliated and had lost it’s power of threat. Germany saw fit to capitalise on this by threatening France over Morocco, this was the first Moroccan crisis. Germany had strong claim but France was backed by Britain and Russia who subsequently discussed military cooperation. War was a possibility but the treat was too big for Germany and they decided to let things settle down, typical of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s unpredictable nature. It is hard to tell whether war was ever intended here due to this nature.

1907 saw the birth of the Anglo-Russian entente and the Triple entente between France, Britain and Russia. Now it seemed Germany was encircled and if Russia gained a Mediterranean port it would be completely surrounded. Germany had to do something. It responded by boosting naval production. This posed a threat to Britain, war seemed a possibility but Germany dared not attack while it was encircled. In my view war was not likely here due to this factor but the threat carried on as the naval race became a long term factor.

In 1908-9 the Ottoman Empire became a new factor. It had been slowly losing power and territory and there were several claimants including Russia who saw Constantinople as a perfect warm water port, there was also a religious impetus here as Constantinople was a Holy city to both Christianity and Islam. This tension in the Balkans and the fear of rebellion by the Slavs of Serbia made war incredibly likely and I see this as the one other time when war was most likely. However, Britain and France’s unwilling to go to war and Germany’s backing of Austria-Hungary made Russia Humiliated once more. War did not start here but it fueled the fire for later by increasing tension between Bosnia and the Hapsburg Family.

The Second Moroccan crisis of 1911 saw another unpredictable attack on French superiority in Africa. French troops arrived in Fez after a German gunboat was seen off the coast. They feared that the French were going against the Algeciras agreement of 1906 to block German trade. In compensation Germany demanded control of the French Congo. France agreed but did not hand it all over. Britain threatened to support France if Germany threatened them, the fleet was even put on hold but, ironically, there was no intention of war from either side and both sides looked rather foolish in their respective call to arms. Again this was a false alarm but it added to the sour relationships between the countries. The possibility of war was interpreted here as another misunderstanding but the looming threat kept everyone in their respective countries on edge. The propaganda flying about would have placed a lot of pressure on governments to go to war.

In 1912 the Naval race declined; another indication that Germany was not ready for war but instead of laying down Britain continued to make sure they were superior at sea and reviewed all military agreements.

The long term issue was also the Balkans, in 1913 a second war broke out and this time, the Ottoman Empire was almost wiped out in Europe and Serbia had grown substantially. This provoked Austria-Hungary into a new fear of Slav nationalism and the creation of Albania to protect Serbia from a costal invasion also provoked an idea of war. Now things were getting really tense but there was still no real impetus for a major war to break out.

The Following year saw the determining factor in the equation for war.

In 1914 there was a controversial decision to send the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Heir to the Hapsburg throne to tour the Balkans. Controversial as there is evidence to say that Austria sent him on purpose to get him assassinated and find an excuse for war. Indeed it is feasible to assume that this was the case. In Sarajevo he was finally assassinated after the driver of his open top car took a wrong turn. This was the spark that set off the whole fragile situation.

The long term factors in all of this are the naval race, the alliance system and the Balkans. Neither of these looked like major cause for a war on their own but they contributed to years of tension which eventually resulted in war. I feel that war was never possible in 1905 as Russia was weakened after defeat to Japan and Germany was no match for Britain at sea. Until they had regained strength there was no realistic possibility of war.

I feel that in the years 1907-1910 the encirclement of Germany was a strong factor in preventing war and a very smart move on the part of the Entente to prevent it so. Again, this was a measure to buy time while strength was built up militarily and politically.

Though war was never inevitable it was always a looming threat and had to be prepared for. Austria-Hungary, being landlocked had to make sure there was no threat from below as it would also mean encirclement.

The short term factors were highly important as they provided the main spontaneous threat. The Moroccan crises served to sour relations between nations and the main factor being the assassination eventually upset the situation.

In conclusion, I feel that until 1914 there was no real impetus for a war and that the pacifist approach prevailed as it was the most beneficial approach at the time. The factors all built up the tension but it all needed a point at which to erupt and, when it arrived, war broke out.

Overall I am saying that war was not realistically possible between 1905 and 1913.

In part this statement is very true but it is certainly not the only reason for the outbreak of war in 1914. I will look at Germany’s attempts to break free and also the other factors leading to war to conclude how far this statement contains the truth.

    To begin with it is clear that Germany resented being encircled as a result of the triple entente between France, Britain and Russia and Germany felt threatened and victimised by this. There is evidence on several occasions of Germany trying to relieve this pressure by breaking out of it’s suppression.

   The first instance in attempting to boost Germany’s resources with which to break out as well as sending a warning to Britain is the naval race which reached the point of worrying Britain in 1908. It became apparent that Germany was building a serious fleet after the launch of the dreadnaught in 1906 but it began in 1898 when naval laws were passed to allow increased ship production to challenge Britain at sea. The evidence of fear is that Britain wanted to cut production but ended up doubling it in 1909 because Germany was ahead. This is a long term attempt for Germany to break out of the encirclement but there were many more in the meantime.

   The first Moroccan crisis of 1905-6 was seen by many as an attempt to break up the Anglo-French entente and, to many, it’s primary aim was to create a crisis for France which planned to take control of Morocco. Kaiser Wilhelm II declared after landing in Tangier that he planned to uphold Moroccan independence and said his primary aim was to demand “fare shares” and to be consulted about Morocco’s fate but he certainly had the alternative objective of destroying the Anglo-French entente by showing up Britain as an unworthy or a liability of an ally. The idea was to cause such a rift that France would be humiliated and would have to side with Germany and effectively digging itself out of encirclement. At the resulting conference in 1906 however Britain stood by France and only Austria-Hungary supported Germany, now we see the sides for the war taking place which is a possible reason, early on, that Germany attempting to break free contributed to if not caused the war at this point. Ironically the pressure increased for Germany as it served to strengthen the entente! Talks even took place between France and Britain as to how to defend each other if Germany attacked which contributes to the argument that Germany in attempting to release itself worsened relationships and began talk of violence.

    To make things worse, in 1907 Germany was further encircled by France as an agreement of neutrality was agreed between France and Italy which meant Germany only had Austria-Hungary for support which further increased the tension.

Also the Triple entente had now been formed between France, Britain and Russia which created 2 fronts for Germany to be encircled on. There were other factors in the mean time but for now I will stick with Germany.

   The next major attempt by Germany comes in 1911 with the Agadir crisis in which French troops occupied Fez. Germany said this would break the 1906 Algeciras agreement if they attempted armed takeover of Morocco. The Germans sent the gunboat Panther to “protect German property” but in actual fact to persuade France to give Germany compensation of land in return for recognition of French protectorate. Germany wanted prestige as well as French goodwill. The feeling was mutual and France would pay a huge amount to settle it. Germany however demanded the whole French Congo which France would not give up easily. Germany ended up disastrously worsening relations with Britain as she was ignored in the matter by Germany. Lloyd-George saw it as attempted Blackmail by Germany and Britain put the navy on alert for an attack. This is another event to say that it was Germany’s attempt to break out of encirclement that caused the war. The crisis ended with a settlement granting Germany territory in the Congo. This did not cause the war but is evidence to say that Germany worsened relations by trying to break out which did not help the matter.

   The infamous “final attempt” came in 1914 in the form of the Schlieffen plan devised in the 1870’s when talks of weltpolitik began. The reason this is seen as responsible for the war is because it was a disaster and failed miserably. While it was designed to take over France in 6 weeks and then the rest of Europe in the same again they forgot one thing and that was that this plan was over 30 years old and Europe had changed, alliances had been made and borders adjusted and wars had begun elsewhere. Inevitably upon hearing this France, Britain and Russia mobilised while unexpected resistance was met in Belgium. Russia’s early mobilisation meant Germany had to divide it’s forces causing a disaster. Britain kept it’s promise to help France in case of attack and the western front was underway. This is a clear argument that Fischer’s statement is true but I feel that it would have been more accurate if he had said “responsible for the war on the western front” rather than for the whole of the war because, as I will explain, I believe the war truly began in Sarajevo on the 28^th of June 1914.

    Now I will look at other factors which argue that it wasn’t just Germany attempting to break free that caused the war.  

While all of the political tension was building in the west there was genuine violent tension in the east as the Eastern question began in 1908 with the Bosnian crisis. This area shows that responsibility lies with Austria-Hungary and Russia. The crisis unfortunately came at a poor time as there was relative harmony in the previous 10 years. The crisis came when there was a lot of tension in Europe and Austria-Hungary had it’s own attentions as well as those of Germany and it was here in the Balkans that A-H’s aspirations lay. The problem was with Serbian politicians who were hoping to unite Serbians into a “greater Serbia” and as Serbs made up more of the population of the Habsburg empire than they did Serbia’s this could only cost Austria-Hungary. Something had to be done so Austria decided to increase political pressure on Serbia which worsened relations. Russia played a part in the way that it had lost to Japan in war three years earlier and wanted redemption. It also wanted a warm water port in the Mediterranean sea which could be easily achieved by ceasing the moment while the Ottoman empire was in decline, inevitably causing tension. Foreign ministers from A-H and Russia met to discuss the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina due to Turkey attempting to claim it for itself. Russia’s minister accepted in return for the straits however, Russia itself didn’t and denied all knowledge of a sending a minister. Russia turned to supporting Serbia claiming betrayal by A-H. Request of a conference was ignored and Tension reached boiling point with talk of war. In the end there was no choice but to accept annexation and Russia left embarrassed and angry. There was more tension created here in such a short space of time spawning from a long term rivalry than in the west which suggests responsibility lies mainly here.

    The east was a powder keg waiting to go off and the eastern question returned in 1911 when violence actually broke out in the Balkans in a series of conflicts called the “Balkan Wars”. Italian success at war with a diminishing Turkey made other Balkan states realize they could take advantage. The Balkan states Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia and Romania declared war on Turkey and all but Constantinople was driven from Europe, the armistice being signed in 1912. Bulgaria claimed that it was promised land which it didn’t get, instead it got a declaration of war from the other states which crushed it and it lost all gains made in 1908. Serbia had now doubled in size sparking concern from Austria-Hungary.

   The final factor came in 1914 when the Habsburg family sent Archduke Franz Ferdinand to tour Serbia as a “goodwill ambassador”. Ultimately while in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo he was assassinated by Serbian terrorists. It can be argued as to whether A-H knew that it was going to happen as the circumstances were controversial. A-H hated Serbia and so attempts at peace seemed unlikely so it can be claimed that A-H organised the assassination. There were no guards, an open top car and a wrong turn made by the driver allowing time for the shot at point blank range.

That may have been the most disastrous shot in history as it caused the declaration of war by A-H on Serbia and consequently the outbreak of World War One. Germany ceased the moment of crisis and began the ill fated Schlieffen plan and the whole situation erupted into a full blown European war.
    From the evidence it is hard to tell exactly who was responsible for the war but it is certain that every factor is as important as the next. The comment in the title comes from Fritz Fischer who was renowned for his criticism and blame of Germany for the outbreak of war. Ritter, another German historian and critic of Fischer claims that “Germany stumbled into war by supporting Austria-Hungary” and I feel that, from the above evidence, that this is more accurate than Fischer’s claim but as with any thesis it can be debated depending on your perspective. It is also claimed by Ritter that Germany wanted to localize the war but it was out of her hands and Germany would end up in conflict one way or the other so it decided to act independently.

    In conclusion I feel that Fischer’s claim holds some truth in the opinion that it provided the spark for violence in the west but I believe that the war was not entirely Germany’s responsibility but the result of a series of unfortunate events involving several countries in Europe.

.