World War II (abbreviated WWII), or the Second World War, was a worldwide conflict which lasted from 1939 to 1945. World War II was the amalgamation of two conflicts, one starting in Asia as the Second Sino-Japanese War, later involving the United States with the Attack on Pearl Harbor, and the other beginning in Europe with the Invasion of Poland, followed by an all out attack also by Germany on the Soviet Union in June 1941, opening up the largest theater of war in human history.
This global conflict split a majority of the world's nations into two opposing camps: the Allies and the Axis. Spanning much of the globe, World War II resulted in the deaths of over 60 million people, making it the deadliest conflict in human history.[1]
World War II was the most widespread war ever experienced, mobilizing over 100 million soldiers from 61 nations, with hostilities covering over 20 million km². Total war erased the distinction between civil and military resources and saw the complete mobilization of a nation's economic, industrial, and scientific capabilities for the purposes of the war effort; nearly two-thirds of those killed in the war were civilians.
As a result of World War II, the United States and Soviet Union emerged as the world's two leading superpowers, dominating the world's stage for the next 40 years. The dominance of Europe faded due to the rise of Asian, Arabian, and eventually African decolonization/independence movements, which was roughly complete by the 1960s. Paradoxically, while World War II was probably the worst conflict in European history, it has led to a desire for unification in order to avoid future conflicts, which has transformed the difficult process of reconstruction into an unprecedented opportunity for prosperity.
The immediate Causes of World War II are generally held to be the German invasion of Poland, and the Japanese attacks on China, the United States, and the British and Dutch colonies. In each of these situations, the attacks were the result of a decision made by authoritarian ruling elites in Germany and Japan. World War II started after these aggressive actions were met with an official declaration of war or armed resistance.
The Nazi Party came to power in Germany by democratic means, although after acquiring power they eliminated most vestiges of Germany's democratic system. The reasons for their popularity included their renouncement of the Treaty of Versailles (particularly Article 231, known as the "Guilt Clause"), which had placed many restrictions on Germany since the end of World War I, staunch anti-communism, the Dolchstosslegende and promises of stability and economic reconstruction. They also appealed to a sense of Germanic identity, superiority and entitlement, which would play an important role in starting the war, as they demanded the integration of lands they considered to be rightfully belonging to Germany. Hitler was also portrayed by himself, his party, and his book Mein Kampf as an almost otherworldly savior for the German people.
Imperial Japan in the 1930s was largely ruled by a militarist clique of Army and Navy leaders, devoted to Japan becoming a world colonial power. Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931 and China in 1937 to bolster its meager stock of natural resources and extend its colonial control over a wider area. The United States and the United Kingdom reacted by making loans to Republic of China, providing covert military assistance, pilots and fighter aircraft to Kuomintang (KMT) China and instituting increasingly broad embargoes of raw materials and oil against Japan. These embargoes would potentially have eventually forced Japan to give up its newly conquered possessions in China or find new sources of oil and other materials to run their economy. Japan was faced with the choice of withdrawing from China, negotiating some compromise, developing new sources of supply, buying what they needed somewhere else, or going to war to conquer the territories that contained oil, bauxite and other resources in the Dutch East Indies, Malay and the Philippines. Believing the French, Dutch and British governments more than occupied with the war in Europe, the Soviets reeling from German attacks and that the United States could not be organized for war for years and would seek a compromise before waging full scale war, they chose the latter, and went ahead with plans for the Greater East Asia War in the Pacific.[1]
The direct cause of the United States' entry into the war with Japan was the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Germany declared war on the United States on December 12, 1941.
[edit] Ideological causes
[edit] Communism
Vladimir Lenin.Main articles: Communism and Anti-Communism
The Russian Revolution led many Germans to fear that a communist insurrection would occur in their own country. Shortly after World War I, the communists attempted to seize power in the country, leading to the establishment of the short-lived Bavarian Soviet Republic. The Freikorps helped to put down the rebellion and their forces were an early component of the Nazi Party. Neville Chamberlain and most of his fellow conservatives were vehemently anti-communist. Some saw in Fascism a force that would militarily oppose the Soviet Union as proxy for Western Capitalism, contributing to the decision to pursue appeasement. Lord Halifax acknowledged that the Nazis had destroyed Communism in Germany and felt that the Nazi State represented a bulwark for the West against Bolshevism.[1] Prior to the Munich Agreement, the Soviet Union had urged for cooperation in protecting Czechoslovakia, but the Western Allies were suspicious of Stalin's own expansionist ambitions. Although allowed to absorb the Sudentenland, Germany later invaded what had constituted the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. This had a tremendous effect on foreign opinion.
[edit] Expansionism
Main article: Lebensraum
Expansion of the Japanese Empire.Expansionism is the doctrine of expanding the territorial base (or economic influence) of a country, usually by means of military aggression.
In Europe, Italy’s Mussolini sought to create a New Roman Empire based around the Mediterranean and invaded Albania in early 1939, before the official start of the war, and later invaded Greece. Italy had also invaded Ethiopia as early as 1935. This provoked little response from the League of Nations and the former Allied powers, a reaction to empire-building that was common throughout the war weary and depressed economy of the 1930's. Germany came to Mussolini's aid on several occasions.
Italy’s expansionist desires can be tied to bitterness over minimal gains after helping the Allies achieve victory in World War I. At Versailles, Italy had been promised large chunks of Austrian territory, but received only South Tyrol, and promises believed to have been made about Albania and Asia Minor were ignored by the more powerful nations' leaders.
After World War I, the German State had lost land to Lithuania, France, Poland, and Denmark. Notable losses included the Polish Corridor, Danzig, the Memel Territory (to Lithuania), the Province of Posen and the most economically valuable eastern portion of Upper Silesia. The economically valuable regions of the Saarland and the Rhineland were placed under the authority (but not jurisdiction) of France.
The result of this loss of land was population relocation, bitterness among Germans, and also difficult relations with those in these neighboring countries, contributing to feelings of revanchism which inspired irredentism. Under the Nazi regime, Germany began its own program of expansion, seeking to restore the "rightful" boundaries of pre-World War I Germany, resulting in the reoccupation of the Rhineland and action in the Polish Corridor, leading to a perhaps inevitable war with Poland. However, due to Allied appeasement and prior inaction, Hitler estimated that he could invade Poland without provoking a general war or, at the worst, only spark weak Allied intervention after the results was already decided.
Also of importance was the idea of a Greater Germany, where supporters hoped to unite the German people under one nation. Germany's pre-World War II ambitions in both Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia mirror this goal. After the Treaty of Versailles, an Anschluss, or union, between Germany and a newly reformed Austria was prohibited by the Allies. Such a plan of unification, predating the creation of the German State of 1871, had been discarded due to the Austro-Hungarian Empire's multiethnic composition as well as competition between Prussia and Austria for hegemony. At the end of World War I, the majority of Austria's population supported such a union.
The Soviet Union had lost large parts of former Russian Empire territories to Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania in World War I and Russian Civil War and was interested in regaining lost territories.
Hungary, an ally of Germany had also been stripped of enormous territories after the partition of the Austria-Hungary empire and hoped to regain those lands by allying with Germany.
In Asia, Japan also harbored expansionist desires, fuelled at least partially by the minimal gains the Japanese saw after World War I. Despite having taken a German colony in China and a few other Pacific islands, as well as swaths of Siberia and the Russian port of Vladivostok, Japan was forced to give up all but the few islands it had gained during World War I.
In many of these cases, the roots of the expansionism leading to World War II can be found in perceived national slights resulting from previous involvement in World War I, nationalistic goals of re-unification of former territories or dreams of an expanded empire.
[edit] Fascism
Main article: Fascism
"Fascism" is a philosophy of government that is marked by stringent social and economic control, a strong, centralized government usually headed by a dictator, and often has a policy of belligerent nationalism that gained power in many countries across Europe in the years leading up to World War II. In general it believes that the government should control industry and people for the good of the country.
In many ways, fascism viewed the army as a model that a whole society should emulate. Fascist countries were highly militaristic, and the need for individual heroism was an important part of fascist ideology. In his book, The Doctrine of Fascism, Benito Mussolini declared that "fascism does not, generally speaking, believe in the possibility or utility of perpetual peace".[2] Fascists believed that war was generally a positive force for improvement, and were therefore eager at the prospect of a new European war. Facism ultimately proved to be one of beliefs that was universal with many invading Axis countries. While the Allies also ultimately developed this belief, Facism engulfed the culture of Europe during the War to be based around encouraging the political view of the leaders.
[edit] Isolationism
Main article: Isolationism
Isolationism was the dominant foreign policy of the United States following World War I. Although the U.S. remained active in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific, it withdrew from European political affairs but retained strong business connections.
Popular sentiment in Britain and France was also isolationist and very war weary after the slaughter of World War I. In reference to Czechoslovakia, Neville Chamberlain said, "How horrible, fantastic it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. I am myself a man of peace from the depths of my soul."
Within a few years of this statement, the world would be engulfed in total war.
[edit] Militarism
Main article : Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan
A highly militaristic and aggressive attitude prevailed among the leaders of Germany, Japan and Soviet Union. Compounding this fact was the traditional militant attitude of the first two, and the former Russian Empire had a similar track record that is often underestimated.
[edit] Nationalism
Nationalism is the belief that groups of people are bound together by territorial, cultural and ethnic links. Nationalism, was used by their leaders to generate public support for German, Italian and Japanese aggression. Fascism in these countries was built largely upon a theory of nationalism and the search for a cohesive "nation state". Hitler and his Nazi party used nationalism to great effect in Germany, already a nation where fervent nationalism was prevalent. In Italy, the idea of restoring the Roman Empire was attractive to many Italians. In Japan, nationalism, in the sense of duty and honor, especially to the emperor, had been widespread for centuries. Nationalism is known to fuel racism.
[edit] Racism
Main articles: Racial policy of Nazi Germany, Drang nach Osten, Polabian Slavs, and Japanocentrism
, Xenophobia in Showa Japan, Eugenics in Showa Japan
The events of the 20th century marked the culmination of a millennium-long process of intermingling between Germans and Slavs. Over the years, many Germans had settled to the east (e.g. the Volga Germans). At the same time, the Slavs had expanded westward (e.g. the Sorbs). Such migratory patterns created enclaves and blurred conceiveable ethnic frontiers. By the 19th and 20th century, these migrations now had considerable political implications. The rise of the nation-state had given way to the politics of identity and agendas such as Pan-Germanism and Pan-Slavism surfaced. Furthermore, Social Darwinist theories framed the coexistence as a "Teuton vs. Slav" struggle for domination, land and limited resources. Integrating these ideas into their own, the Nazis believed that the Germans, the "Aryan race", were the master race and the Slavs were inferior.
Japan, led by a democratic government, had an increasingly imperialistic and colonial program in the 1930s. Doctrines auch as the Hakko ichiu were based on the conviction that the Japanese race, led by Emperor Showa, the offspring of Amaterasu, was superior to others. Many Japanese were virulently racist, not only towards Europeans, but also against other Asian peoples such as Koreans, Ainu, and Chinese who were called kichiku (beast, devil). To these Japanese racists, anyone who was not Japanese was considered inferior and treated as such. Rapid industrialization and progress through the 19th and 20th centuries meant that Japan was economically and technologically ahead of most of its neighbours. Japan used that technological lead to invade its neighbors and pursue its own expansionist ambitions, again an example of eugenism.
[edit] Appeasement
Appeasement is a strategy where, hoping to avoid conflict, one party grants concessions to the other. The United Kingdom and France demonstrated this towards Germany in the late 1930's, culminating in the 1938 Munich Agreement. Simultaneously, Germany's capacity increased, assuring that victory would be not as easily obtained by the Western Allies if war did break out. With the status of Polish Corridor and the Free City of Danzig hanging in the balance, Germany eventually attacked Poland. The Allies, believing that the situation could be resolved diplomatically, did little to prepare for this event despite the fact that they had issued guarantees towards Poland. As tensions escalated in the final days before the invasion, France explicitly warned Poland against mobilizing, believing the Germans could still be bargained with diplomatically[citation needed].
[edit] Interrelations and economics
[edit] Treaty of Versailles
Main article: Treaty of Versailles
The Treaty of Versailles was neither lenient enough to appease Germany, nor harsh enough to prevent it from becoming the dominant continental power again.
The Treaty can be said by some to be the single most important, indirect cause of the war.[citation needed] It placed the blame, or "war guilt" on Germany and Austria-Hungary, and punished them from their alleged "responsibility" rather than working out an agreement that would assure peace in the long-term future. The Treaty resulted in harsh monetary reparations, territorial dismemberment, mass ethnic resettlements and indirectly hampered the German economy by causing rapid hyperinflation. The Weimar Republic printed trillions to help pay off its debts, and borrowed heavily from the United States (only to default later) to pay war reparations to Britain and France, who still carried war debt from World War I.
Another important aspect of the Treaty was that it created bitter resentment towards the victors of the World War I, who had promised the people of Germany that U.S. President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points would be a guideline for peace; many Germans felt that the German government had agreed to an armistice based on this understanding, while others felt that the German Revolution itself had been orchestrated by the "November criminals" who later assumed office in the new Weimar Republic. President Woodrow Wilson was never able to get the allies to agree to adopt them, indeed, he couldn't even get the U.S. Congress to join the League of Nations.
Contributing to this, the Allies did not occupy significant parts of Germany during the war, and the war in the East against Russia had already been won by Germany. These were the pillars that held together the Dolchstosslegende, and gave the Nazis another tool at their disposal.
An opposite view of the Treaty held by some is that it did not go far enough in permanently neutering the capability of Germany to be a great power by dividing Germany into smaller, less powerful states. In effect, this would have 'undone Bismarck's work' and would have accomplished what the French delegation at the Paris Peace Conference wanted. However, this could have had any number of unforeseeable consequences, especially amidst the rise of communism. Regardless, the Treaty of Versailles is generally agreed to have been a very poor treaty which sowed fertile ground for the rise of the Nazi party.
[edit] Competition for resources
Other than a few coal and iron deposits, Japan lacks true natural resources. Japan, the only Asian country with a burgeoning industrial economy at that time, feared that a lack of raw materials might hinder its ability to fight a total war against a reinvigorated Soviet Union. In the hopes of expanding its resources, Japan invaded Manchuria (1931) and set about to consolidate its resources and develop its economy. Insurgency by nationalists south of Manchuria compelled the Japanese leaders to argue for a brief, three month war to knock out Chinese power from the north. When it became clear that this time estimate was absurd, plans for obtaining more resources began. The Imperial Navy eventually began to feel that it did not have enough fuel reserves.
To remedy this deficiency and ensure a safe supply of oil and other critical resources Japan would have to challenge the European colonial powers over the control of oil rich areas such as the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). Such a move against the colonial powers was however expected to lead to open conflict also with the United States. On August 1941, the crisis came to a head as the United States, which at the time supplied 80% of Japanese oil imports, initiated a complete oil embargo. This threatened to cripple both the Japanese economy and military strength once the strategic reserves would run dry. Faced with the choice of either trying to appease the U.S., negotiate a compromise, find other sources of supply or go to war over resources, Japan chose the latter. Hoping to knock out the U.S. for long enough to be able to achieve and consolidate their war-aims, the Japanese Navy attacked the U.S. Navy at Pearl Harbor in December, 7, 1941. They mistakedly believed they would have about a two year window to consolidate their conquests before the United States could effectively respond and that the United States would compromise long before they could get near Japan.
Japan felt threatened by the U.S. and wanted to be the sole power in the Pacific region. Several laws were passed in America and Canada which were more or less prejudiced against the Japanese and other Asians.
[edit] League of Nations
Main article: League of Nations
The League of Nations was an international organization founded after World War I to prevent future wars. The League's methods included disarmament; preventing war through collective security; settling disputes between countries through negotiation diplomacy; and improving global welfare. The diplomatic philosophy behind the League represented a fundamental shift in thought from the preceding hundred years. The old philosophy, growing out of the Congress of Vienna (1815), saw Europe as a shifting map of alliances among nation-states, creating a balance of power maintained by strong armies and secret agreements. Under the new philosophy, the League was a government of governments, with the role of settling disputes between individual nations in an open and legalist forum. The impetus for the founding of the League came from U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, though the United States never joined the League of Nations. This also lessened the power of the League - the addition of a burgeoning industrial and military world power would have added more force behind the League's demands and requests.
The League lacked an armed force of its own and so depended on the members to enforce its resolutions, keep to economic sanctions which the League ordered, or provide an army, when needed, for the League to use. However, they were often very reluctant to do so.
After a number of notable successes and some early failures in the 1920's, the League ultimately proved incapable of preventing aggression by the Axis Powers in the 1930's. The absence of the USA, the reliance upon unanimous decisions, the lack of an armed force and the continued self-interest of its leading members meant that this failure was arguably inevitable.
[edit] European Civil War
Some academics examine World War II as the final portion of a wider European Civil War that began with the Franco-Prussian War in July 19, 1870. The proposed period would include many (but not all) of the major European regime changes to occur during the period, including those in Spain and Russia.
[edit] Specific events
[edit] Franco-Prussian War
Main article: Franco-Prussian War
The Franco-Prussian War was initiated by Napoleon III of France, who was alarmed at the rapid growth in population and unity among the German people. This period marked a relative decline in the strength of France, which would continue into the 20th century.
The war was an overwhelming Prussian victory, and Germany unified soon after. Alsace-Lorraine, a border territory, was transferred from France to Germany. The resulting disruption in the balance of power led France to seek alliances with Russia and the United Kingdom.
[edit] World War I
Main articles: World War I and Causes of World War I
Many people view World War II as a continuation of World War I. Firstly, some believe that the Versailles Treaty, drafted at the conclusion of the World War I, failed to set up the parameters which may have prevented the Second.
World War I lacked a dramatically decisive conclusion. Allied troops had not entered Germany and its people anticipated a treaty along the lines of the Fourteen Points. This meant the German people argued that had the 'traitors' not gone and surrendered to the Allies, Germany could have gone on to win the war, however unlikely the reality. This peace proposal was largely abandoned in favor of punishing Germany for its alleged "war responsibility", an ineffective compromise that left Germany smaller, weaker and embittered, but capable of rebounding and seeking revenge.
Large groups of nationalistic minorities still remained trapped in other nations. For example, Yugoslavia (originally the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes) had 5 major ethnic groups (the Serbs, Croats, Macedons, Montenegrins, and the Slovenes), and it was created after the war. Other examples abound in the former lands of Austria-Hungary which were divided up quite arbitrarily and unfairly after the war. For example, Hungary was held responsible for the war and stripped of two thirds of its territory while Austria, which had been an equal partner in the Austro-Hungarian government, had its territory expanded.
The Germans had a difficult time accepting defeat. At the end of the war, the navy was in a state of mutiny, and the army was retreating (but not routing) in the face of an enemy with more men and material. Despite this reality, some Germans, notably Hitler, advanced the idea that the army would somehow have triumphed if not for the German Revolution at home. This "Stab in the Back" theory was used to convince the people that a second world war would be winnable.
[edit] Weimar Republic
Main articles: Weimar Republic and Beer Hall Putsch
The Weimar Republic governed Germany from 1919 to 1933. The republic was named after the city of Weimar, where a national assembly convened to produce a new constitution after the German Empire was abolished following the nation's defeat in World War I. It was a liberal democracy in the style of France and the United States.
The Beer Hall Putsch was a failed Nazi coup d'état which occurred in the evening of Thursday, November 8 to the early afternoon of Friday, November 9, 1923. Adolf Hitler, using the popular World War I General Erich Ludendorff, unsuccessfully tried to overthrow the Weimar Republic. Following the Putsch, Hitler was imprisoned and wrote Mein Kampf.
[edit] Economic depression
The Great Depression resulted in 33% unemployment rate in Germany and a 25% unemployment rate in the U.S. This led many people to support dictatorships just for a steady job and adequate food.
The Great Depression hit Germany second only to the United States. Severe unemployment prompted the Nazi party, which had been losing favor, to experience a surge in membership. This more than anything contributed to the rise of Hitler in Germany, and therefore World War II in Europe. After the end of World War I many American industries and banks invested their money in rebuilding Europe. This happened in many European countries, but especially in Germany. After the 1929 crash many American investors fearing that they would lose their money, or having lost all their capital, stopped investing as heavily in Europe. Additionally, it has also been suggested that the economic downturn that struck Britain in 1939 influenced the decision to back Poland, knowing that this increased the danger of going to war.[citation needed] Interestingly, these conditions were a direct result of most of Central Europe, now part of Nazi Germany, dropping out of the international economy.
[edit] Nazi dictatorship
Main articles: Gleichschaltung, Nazi Germany, and National Socialist German Workers Party
Hitler was appointed chancellor on January 30, 1933. The arson of the parliament building on February 27 (which some have claimed the Nazis had instigated) was used as an excuse for the cancellation of civil and political liberties, enacted by the aged president Paul von Hindenburg and the rightist coalition cabinet led by Hitler.
After new elections, a Nazi-led majority abolished parliamentarism, the Weimar constitution, and practically the parliament itself through the Enabling Act on March 23, whereby the Nazis' planned Gleichschaltung (regimentation) of Germany was made formally legal. In the "Night of the Long Knives", Hitler's men murdered his remaining political rivals. After Hindenburg died on August 2, 1934, the authority of the presidency fell into the hands of Adolf Hitler. Without much resistance from the army leadership, the Soldiers' Oath was modified into an oath of obedience to Adolf Hitler personally.
In violation of the Treaty of Versailles and the spirit of the Locarno Pact, Germany remilitarized the Rhineland on Saturday, March 7, 1936. The occupation was done with very little military force, the troops entering on bicycles, and could easily have been stopped had it not been for the appeasement mentality. France could not act due to political instability at the time. In addition, since the remilitarization occurred on a weekend, the British Government could not find out or discuss actions to be taken until the following Monday. As a result of this, the governments were inclined to see the remilitarization as a fait accompli.
[edit] Italian Invasion of Ethiopia
Main article: Second Italo-Abyssinian War
Benito Mussolini attempted to expand the Italian Empire in Africa by invading Ethiopia, which had so far successfully resisted European colonization. With the pretext of the Walwal incident in September 1935, Italy invaded on October 3, 1935, without a formal declaration of war. The League of Nations declared Italy the aggressor but failed to impose effective sanctions.
The war progressed slowly for Italy despite its advantage in weaponry and the use of mustard gas. By March 31, 1936, the Italians won the last major battle of the war, the Battle of Maychew. Emperor Haile Selassie fled into exile on May 2, and Italy took the capital, Addis Ababa, on May 5. Italy annexed the country on May 7, merging Eritrea, Abyssinia and Somaliland into a single state known as Italian East Africa.
On June 30, 1936, Emperor Haile Selassie gave a stirring speech before the League of Nations denouncing Italy's actions and criticizing the world community for standing by. He warned that "It is us today. It will be you tomorrow". As a result of the League's condemnation of Italy, Mussolini declared the country's withdrawal from the organization.
[edit] Spanish Civil War
Picasso's Guernica, 1937.Main article: Spanish Civil War
Germany and Italy lent support to the Nationalist insurrection led by general Francisco Franco in Spain. The Soviet Union supported the existing government, the Spanish Republic which showed leftist tendencies. Both sides used this war as an opportunity to test improved weapons and tactics. The Bombing of Guernica was a horrific attack on civilians which foreshadowed events that would occur throughout Europe.
[edit] Sino-Japanese War
Main article: Second Sino-Japanese War
The Second Sino-Japanese War began in 1937 when Japan attacked deep into China from its foothold in Manchuria. The Japanese captured the Chinese capital city Nanking (now Nanjing), and committed brutal atrocities in the Rape of Nanking.
[edit] Anschluss
Main article: Anschluss
The Anschluss was the 1938 annexation of Austria into Germany. Such an action was expressly forbidden by the Treaty of Versailles. Historically, the idea of creating a Greater Germany through such a union had been popular in Austria as well as Germany, peaking just after World War I; in the years prior to the actual Anschluss, many Austrians had lost interest. As such, the Austrian National Socialist Party and Austria's German nationalist movement became dependent on their northern neighbor. Hitlerian Germany pressed for the Austrian Nazi Party's legality, played a critical role in the assassination of Austrian chancellor, Engelbert Dollfuss, and pressured for several Austrian Nazi Party members to be incorporated into offices within the administration.
Following a Hitler speech at the Reichstag, Dollfuss' successor, Kurt Schuschnigg, made it clear that he could be pushed "no further". Amidst mounting pressures from Germany, he elected to hold a plebiscite, hoping to retain autonomy. However, just days prior to the balloting, a successful Austrian Nazi Party coup transferred power within the country. The takeover allowed German troops to enter Austria as "enforcers of the Anschluss", since the Party quickly transferred power to Hitler. Consequently, no fighting occurred and Britain, France and Fascist Italy, who all vehemently opposed such a union, did nothing. Just as importantly, the quarrelling amongst these powers doomed any continuation of a Stresa Front and, with no choice but to accept the unfavorable Anschluss, Italy had little reason for continued opposition to Germany, and was actually drawn in closer to the Nazis. Austria ceased to exist as an independent state.
[edit] Munich Agreement
Main articles: Munich Agreement and Appeasement
The Sudetenland was a predominantly German region within recently formed Czechoslovakia. As a whole, Czechoslovakia had a large, modern army of 38 divisions, backed by a well-noted armament industry as well as a military alliance with France. The Sudetenland region formed about one third of Bohemia (western Czechoslovakia) in terms of territory, population, and economy. It contained most of the huge defensive system (larger than the Maginot line) that represented Czechoslovakia's only viable military defense, well protected by the mountainous terrain. In order to build these positions, some land had been expropriated (with compensation).[2]
Hitler pressed for the Sudetenland's incorporation into the Reich, supporting German separatist groups within the Sudeten region. Alleged "Czech brutality" and "persecution under Prague" helped to stir up nationalist tendencies with the help of the Nazi press. After the Anschluss all German parties (except German Social-Democratic party) merged with the Sudeten German Party (SdP). Paramilitary activity and extremist violence peaked during this period. The Czechoslovakian government declared martial law in parts of the Sudetenland to maintain order. Germany requested the immediate annexation of the Sudetenland.
Finally, in the Munich Agreement of September 30, 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and French leaders appeased Hitler. The conferring powers allowed Germany to move troops into the region and incorporate it into the Reich "for the sake of peace." In exchange for this, Hitler gave his word that Germany would make no further territorial claims in Europe.[3] Czechoslovakia, which at that time had already mobilized over one million troops and was prepared to fight to preserve its sovereignty, was not allowed to participate in the conference. When the French and British negotiators informed the Czechoslovak representatives about the agreement, and that if Czechoslovakia would not accept it, France and Britain would consider Czechoslovakia to be responsible for war, president Edvard Beneš capitulated. Germany took the Sudetenland.
In March, 1939, breaking the Munich agreement, German troops invaded Prague and the rest of what had been Czechoslovakia.
[edit] Soviet-Japanese Border War
Main article: Battle of Khalkhin Gol
In 1939, the Japanese attacked north from Manchuria into Siberia. They were decisively beaten by Soviet units under General Georgy Zhukov. Following this battle, the Soviet Union and Japan were at peace until 1945. Japan looked south to expand its empire, leading to conflict with the United States over the Philippines and control of shipping lanes to the Dutch East Indies. The Soviet Union focused on the west, leaving only minimal troops to guard the frontier with Japan.
[edit] Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact
Main article: Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact
Nominally, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a non-aggression treaty between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. It was signed in Moscow on August 23, 1939, by the Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov and the German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop.
In 1939, neither Germany nor the Soviet Union were ready to go to war with each other. The Soviet Union had lost territory to Poland in 1920 and would not tolerate German occupation of all of Poland.[citation needed] Although officially labeled a "non-aggression treaty", the Pact included a secret protocol, in which the independent countries of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania were divided into spheres of interest of the parties. The secret protocol explicitly assumed "territorial and political rearrangements" in the areas of these countries.
Subsequently all the mentioned countries were invaded, occupied or forced to cede part of their territory by either the Soviet Union, Germany, or both.
[edit] Invasion of Poland
Invasion of Poland.Main articles: Invasion of Poland (1939) and World War II
Tensions had existed between Poland and Germany for some time in regards to the Free City of Danzig and the Polish Corridor. Finally, after issuing a number of proposals, Germany declared that diplomatic measures had been exhausted and invaded Poland on September 1, 1939. Britain and France had previously warned that they would honor their alliances to Poland and issued an ultimatum to Germany: withdraw or war would be declared. Germany declined and World War II began. The Soviet Union invaded Poland from the east on September 17.
[edit] Invasion of the Soviet Union
Main article: Operation Barbarossa
Hitler Tearing the Nonaggression Pact, a 1941 poster by Kukryniksy artists.By attacking the Soviet Union in June, 1941, Hitler enlarged the scale of the war, committing what today is widely regarded as a strategic blunder. Leaving a determined United Kingdom at his rear, in effect, opened up a debilitating two front war. Hitler also believed that the Soviet Union could be defeated in a fast-paced and relentless assault that capitalized on the Soviet Union's ill-prepared state.
One theory states that if Germany had not attacked, Stalin would have done so within the next couple of months, unleashing the Red Army and all the force the Soviet Union could bear. This would have been a disaster for the Germans, as the Wehrmacht would lose the element of surprise and the ability to maneuver, which contributed to the military's ability to confront the Soviets so successfully early on. Furthermore, the terrain of Germany's east would not have been favorable for defensive warfare, as it is flat and relatively open. Still, the view promoted by Viktor Suvorov relies on a number of assumptions, including the underlying notion that a war between the two powers was, for various reasons, inevitable.
[edit] Attack on Pearl Harbor
Main article: Attack on Pearl Harbor
The Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, hoping to destroy the United States Pacific Fleet at anchor. Even though the Japanese knew that the U.S. had the potential to build more ships, they hoped that they would feed reinforcements in piecemeal and thus the Japanese Navy would be able to defeat them in detail. This nearly happened during the Battle of Wake Island shortly after.
Within days, Germany declared war on the United States, effectively ending isolationist sentiment in the U.S. which had so far prevented it from entering the war.
World War I, also known as the Great War and "The War To End All Wars," was a global military conflict which took place primarily in Europe between 1914 and 1918. More than nine million soldiers and civilians died. The conflict had a decisive impact on the history of the 20th century.
The Allied Powers, led by France, Russia, the United Kingdom, Italy, and, from 1917, the United States, defeated the Central Powers, led by Austria-Hungary, Germany, and the Ottoman Empire.
The fighting that took place along the Western Front occurred along a system of trenches and fortifications separated by an area known as no man's land. These series of fortifications ran from the North Sea to Switzerland. On the Eastern Front, the vast eastern plains and limited rail network prevented a trench warfare stalemate. But the scale of the conflict was just as large. The Middle East and the Italian Front saw heavy fighting as well. Hostilities also occurred at sea and, for the first time, in the air.
The war caused the disintegration of four empires: the Austro-Hungarian, German, Ottoman and Russian. Germany lost its overseas empire and states such as Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Yugoslavia gained independence.
World War I marked the end of the old world order, which had emerged after the Napoleonic Wars. The result of the conflict was an important factor in the outbreak of World War II.
included many factors, including the conflicts and antagonisms of the four decades leading up to the war. The immediate origins of the war lay in the decisions taken by statesmen and generals during the July crisis of 1914, the spark (or Casus Belli) for which was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary by Gavrilo Princip, a Serbian separatist.[1] The crisis did not however exist in a void; it came at the end of a long series of diplomatic clashes between the Great Powers in the decade prior to 1914 which had left tensions high almost to breaking point. In turn these diplomatic clashes can be traced to changes in the balance of power in Europe since 1870[2].On June 28, 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, the nephew of Emperor Franz Joseph and heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, and his wife, Sophie, duchess of Hohenburg, were assassinated in Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia, which had been annexed by Austria-Hungary in 1908. They were shot by Gavrilo Princip, a Bosnian Serb student. Gavrilo Princip was part of a group of fifteen assailants, who formed the Young Bosnia group, acting with support from the Black Hand, some members of which were part of the Serbian government.
After the assassination of June 28, Austria-Hungary waited for 3 weeks before deciding on a course of action, obtaining first a "blank cheque" from Germany that promised support for whatever it decided. The Austro-Hungarian government, once assured of support, moved to crush Serbia. On July 23, Austria-Hungary issued the July Ultimatum to Serbia, demanding among other things that Austrian agents be allowed to take part in the investigation of the assassination, and that Serbia should take responsibility for it.[3]
The Serbian government ordered mobilization of on July 25 and sent the Serbian reply, which accepted all the terms of the ultimatum with reservations except for those relating to the participation of Austrian agents in the inquiry, which Serbia asserted was a violation of its sovereignty. Russia entered a period preparatory to war and began some military preparations at the same time. Austria-Hungary, finding the reply unsatisfactory broke diplomatic relations with Serbia on July 25, Austro-Hungarian partial mobilization against Serbia only is ordered to begin on July 28. Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia on July 28 having not received a satisfactory reply since the expiration of the ultimatum. Belgrade was bombarded with artillery on July 29, on the same day Russian partial mobilization against Austria was ordered although Austria had not mobilized against Russia. On July 31, Austria-Hungary ordered general mobilization of its army in response to the Russian mobilization. Russia then ordered general mobilization.
Having pledged its support to Austria-Hungary, Germany issued Russia an ultimatum on July 31, demanding a halt to mobilisation within 12 hours. On August 1, with the ultimatum expired, the German ambassador to Russia formally declared war. Earlier the same day France mobilized against Germany in response to German general mobilization as per the terms of the Franco-Russian Alliance.
On August 2, Germany occupied Luxembourg as a preliminary step to the invasion of Belgium and implementation of the Schlieffen Plan (which was rapidly going awry because the Germans had not intended to be at war with a mobilized Russia so quickly).
Yet another ultimatum was delivered to Belgium on August 2, requesting free passage for the German army on the way to France. The Belgians refused. At the very last moment, Kaiser Wilhelm II asked Moltke, the German Chief of General Staff, to cancel the invasion of France in the hope this would keep Great Britain out of the war. Moltke refused on the grounds that it would be impossible to change the rail schedule—“once settled, it cannot be altered”.[4]
On August 3, Germany declared war on France and invaded Belgium on August 4. This act violated Belgian neutrality, the status to which Germany, France, and Britain were all committed by treaty. It was inconceivable that Great Britain would remain neutral if Germany declared war on France; German violation of Belgian neutrality provided the casus belli that the British government sought. German Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg told the Reichstag that the German invasions of Belgium and Luxemburg were in violation of international law, but he argued that Germany was "in a state of necessity, and necessity knows no law." Later that same day, in a conversation with the British ambassador Sir Edward Goschen, Bethmann Hollweg expressed astonishment that the British would go to war with Germany over the 1839 treaty guaranteeing the neutrality of Belgium, referring to the treaty dismissively as a "scrap of paper," a statement that outraged public opinion in Britain and the United States.[5] Britain's guarantee to Belgium prompted Britain, which had been neutral, to declare war on Germany on August 4. The British government expected a limited war, in which it would primarily use its great naval strength
Although World War I was triggered by this chain of events unleashed by the assassination, the war's origins go deeper, involving national politics, cultures, economics, and a complex web of alliances and counterbalances that developed between the various European powers over the course of the nineteenth century, following the final 1815 defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte and the ensuing Congress of Vienna.
The reasons for the outbreak of World War I are a complicated issue; there are many factors that intertwine. Some examples are[citation needed]:
Fervent and uncompromising nationalism
Unresolved previous disputes
Intricate system of alliances
Convoluted and fragmented governance
Delays and misunderstandings in diplomatic communications
Arms races of the previous decades
Rigidity in military planning
Colonial rivalry (imperialism)
Economic rivalry
The various categories of explanation for World War I correspond to different historians' overall methodologies. Most historians and popular commentators include causes from more than one category of explanation to provide a rounded account of the causal circumstances behind the war. The deepest distinction among these accounts is that between stories which find it to have been the inevitable and predictable outcome of certain factors, and those which describe it as an arbitrary and unfortunate mistake[citation needed].
In attributing causes for the war, historians and academics had to deal with an unprecedented flood of memoirs and official documents, released as each country involved tried to avoid blame for starting the war. Early releases of information by governments, particularly those released for use by the "Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War" were shown to be incomplete and biased. Even in later decades however, when much more information had been released, historians from the same culture have been shown to come to differing conclusions on the causes of the war[7].
[edit] Ideological causes
Some of the roots of the conflict arise out of specific ideologies which influenced the behavior of politicians and other figures during the years leading up to the war.
[edit] Social Darwinism
By the late 19th century, a new form of political and social thought emerged in the same context as nationalism, known as Social Darwinism. It emphasized the competition on a social scale between different national, ethnic, or racial groups. Inspired by what Charles Darwin considered a faulty understanding of his theory of evolution, expressed as 'survival of the fittest', this ideology was taken up by European political elites. The new ideology emphasized the violent struggle for existence between "races" or "nations" in which the weak would inevitably be destroyed by the stronger. These ideas were profoundly influential[8]. Much of the German and Austro-Hungarian leadership feared what they saw as an inevitable battle between "Slavs" and "Germanic civilization." Social Darwinism as a political ideology also influenced competition amongst nation states for colonies. Colonial expansion was rationalized by the elite as important for assuring a nation's economic and military strength in the face of rivals. The British policy of "strategic exclusion" of potential competitors was compatible with this adversarial perspective.
An aspect of late 19th century Social Darwinism was the sense of urgency it engendered. For a nation to be not growing compared to its neighbors and rivals was seen as very risky. The French looked in dismay at their birth rate, which was lower than Germany's.
[edit] German domestic politics
Left wing parties, especially the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SDP) made large gains in the 1912 German election. German government at the time was still dominated by the Prussian Junkers who feared the rise of these left wing parties. Some authors feel that they deliberately sought an external war to distract the population and whip up patriotic support for the government. Other authors feel that German conservatives were ambivalent about a war, worrying that losing a war would have disastrous consequences, and even a successful war might alienate the population if it were lengthy or difficult. Many Germans, feeling that they were not given an adequate amount of respect from all surrounding European countries, desired this war in order to obtain the respect and appreciation that they felt they deserved. This feeling, as Henry Kissinger points out in his book Diplomacy, was greatly encouraged by Kaiser Wilhelm II.
[edit] French domestic politics
The situation was quite the opposite in France, but with the same results. More than a century after the French Revolution, there was still a fierce struggle between the left wing French government and its right-wing opponents, including monarchists and "Bonapartists." A "good old war" was seen by both sides (with the exception of Jean Jaurès) as a way to solve this crisis[1] thanks to a nationalistic reflex. Everyone thought the war would be short and would lead to an easy victory. The left-wing government thought it would be an opportunity to implement social reforms (income tax was implemented in July 1914) and the right side politicians hoped that their connections with the army's leaders could give them the opportunity to regain power.
Some of the causes of the war lie in the structure of European society at the time, and the way it functioned.
[edit] Unifications of Germany and of Italy
This section cites very few or no references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
Any material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time. This article has been tagged since April 2007.
In the years that followed the Congress of Vienna, conflicts began springing up all over Europe between those who cried out for change and those who resisted it. By the mid-19th century, nationalism had become an evident force. A wave of unrest was seen across the continent in the Revolution of 1848. The unification of Italy and the unification of Germany in the 1860s and early 1870s changed the political environment of Europe. The two nations were formed on the basis of nationalism. German unification was brought about by Prussia's "Iron Chancellor", Otto von Bismarck, through a series of wars from 1864–1871. Italy was finally unified in 1866 after a long struggle under leaders Cavour and Garibaldi. The addition of two great powers in Europe fundamentally altered the balance of power.In 1867, the Austrian Empire fundamentally changed its governmental structure, becoming the Dual Monarchy of Austria-Hungary. For hundreds of years, the empire had been run in an essentially feudal manner with a German-speaking aristocracy at its head. However, with the threat represented by an emergence of nationalism within the empire's many component ethnicities, some elements, including Emperor Franz Joseph, decided that a compromise would have to be made in order to preserve the power of the German aristocracy. In 1867, the Ausgleich was agreed upon which made the Magyar elite in Hungary almost equal partners in the government of the empire.
"Distribution of Races in Austria–Hungary" from the Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd, 1911This arrangement fostered a tremendous degree of dissatisfaction amongst many in the traditional German ruling classes. Some of them considered the policy to have been a calamity for their empire because it often frustrated their intentions in the governance of the empire. For example, it was extremely difficult for the empire to form a coherent foreign policy that suited the interests of both the German and Magyar elite.
Throughout the fifty years from 1867 to 1914, it proved difficult to reach adequate compromises in the governance of the empire, leading many to search for non-diplomatic solutions. At the same time a form of social Darwinism became popular amongst many in the Austrian half of the government which emphasised the primacy of armed struggle between nations, and the need for nations to arm themselves for an ultimate struggle for survival.
As a result, at least two distinct strains of thought advocated war with Serbia, often unified in the same people.
In order to deal with political deadlock, some reasoned that more Slavs needed to be brought into the empire in order to dilute the power of the Magyar elite. With more Slavs, the South Slavs of the empire could force a new political compromise in which the Germans would be able to play the Magyars against the South Slavs. Other variations on this theme existed, but the essential idea was to cure internal stagnation through external conquest.
Another fear was that the South Slavs, primarily under the leadership of Serbia, were organizing for a war against Austria-Hungary, and even all of Germanic civilization. Some leaders, such as Conrad von Hötzendorf, argued that Serbia must be dealt with before it became too powerful to defeat militarily.
A powerful contingent within the Austro-Hungarian government was motivated by these thoughts and advocated war with Serbia long before the war began. Prominent members of this group included among them Leopold von Berchtold, Alexander Hoyos, and Janós Forgách Graf von Ghymes und Gács. Although many other members of the government, notably Franz Ferdinand, Franz Joseph, and many Hungarian politicians did not believe that a violent struggle with Serbia would necessarily solve any of the multinational empire's problems, the hawkish elements did exert a strong influence on government policy, holding key positions.
[edit] Imperialism
Historically, many of the economic causes of the war can be attributed to a growing material dependency of advancing European nations on imperialism. Nations such as Great Britain and France maintained thriving domestic economies in the late 19th century through their control of foreign resources, markets, territories, and people. As a late arrival on the world stage, the German Empire was geographically locked out of the most valuable colonial regions in Africa and the Far East. In addition, the rapid exhaustion of natural resources in many European nations began to slowly upset the trade balance and make nations more eager to seek new territories rich in natural resources. Intense rivalries developed between the emerging economic powers and the incumbent great powers.
[edit] Colonial expansion
Main article: New Imperialism
Map of the world with the participants in World War I.
The Allies are depicted in green, the Central Powers in orange and neutral countries in grey.Rivalry among the powers was exacerbated from the 1880s by the scramble for colonies which brought much of Africa and Asia under European rule in the following quarter-century. Otto von Bismarck resented an overseas empire but could not resist those forces, who succeeded the other way. This started Anglo-German tension since German acquisitions in Africa and the Pacific threatened to impinge upon British strategic and commercial interests. Bismarck knew that if the German state were to exist and thrive in spite of a clearly hostile France, it would be necessary to isolate France both diplomatically and militarily from the other European powers. Part of Bismarck's strategy was to allow France to pursue its own colonial interests without German fetters. It could even be argued that Bismarck supported French colonization in Africa because it diverted government attention away from continental Europe. In spite of all of Bismarck's deft diplomatic maneuvering, in 1890 he was forced to resign by the new Kaiser (Wilhelm II). His successor, Leo von Caprivi, was the last German Chancellor who tried successfully to calm down Anglo-German tensions. After his loss of office in 1894, it was not long till the new German colonial policy irritated the other European powers and Japan. Within a few short years, France gained diplomatic control in Europe, attaining alliances with both England and Russia.
Wilhelm's support for Moroccan independence from France—Britain's new strategic partner—provoked the Tangier Crisis of 1905. During the Second Moroccan or Agadir Crisis (1911), a German naval presence in Morocco tested the Anglo-French coalition once again. These two crises led to negotiations which Germany arguably lost. Germany failed to achieve its aims during the conferences and failed to gain support from the other European powers (except Austria-Hungary). Wilhelm, like Bismarck, threatened the use of German military power in an attempt to "strong-arm" the other European Powers into compliance. The difference between the two statesmen was that Bismarck had his enemies isolated, and his allies were fully supportive. Wilhelm II, by contrast, had neither and therefore Germany was not viewed as a political/military superpower worthy of due consideration but rather as a militaristic belligerent nation.
[edit] Web of alliances
A very tight web of alliances bound the European nations (many of them requiring participants to agree to collective defense if attacked):
Treaty of London, 1839, about the neutrality of Belgium,
German-Austrian treaty (1879) or Dual Alliance,
Italy joining Germany and Austria in 1882,
Franco-Russian Alliance (1894),
"Entente" (less formal) between Britain and France (1904) and Britain and Russia (1907) forming the Triple Entente,
Basic representation of the alliances centered on the Balkans.Russia proclaiming herself the "protector of the Southern Slavs" in the Balkans through several treaties[citation needed] .
This complex set of treaties binding various players in Europe together prior to the war is sometimes thought to have been misunderstood by contemporary political leaders. Mobilization by a relatively minor player would have a cascading effect that could rapidly run out of control, involving every country. Yet leaders discussed the crisis between Austria-Hungary and Serbia as if it were a localized issue. This is how Austria-Hungary's declaration of war against Serbia resulted in Britain declaring war on Germany:
June 28, 1914: Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria is assassinated by Serbian nationalist.
July 23: Austria-Hungary issues the July Ultimatum to Serbia.
July 25: Austro-Hungarian Ultimatum expires, Serbia does not fully accept
July 28: Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia.
July 30: Russia's treaties[citation needed] with Serbia commit it to mobilize against Austria-Hungary in Serbia's defense.
August 1: Germany declares war against Russia under the terms of the Dual Alliance with Austria-Hungary.
August 1: Germany, expecting that France will come in on the side of Russia, mobilizes against France.
August 1: France mobilizes against Germany under the terms of the Franco-Russian Alliance.
August 3: Germany declares war on France.
August 4: Germany invades Belgium. (The Schlieffen Plan for a war with Russia and France commits Germany to attacking France first, then turning against Russia when France is defeated. The roads of Belgium are needed for the German army to outflank the French.)
August 4: Britain declares war on Germany under the terms of the Treaty of London, 1839, which guarantees the neutrality of Belgium, and to support the Triple Entente.
With Britain's entry, the remainder of the British Imperial colonies and dominions are drawn in offering financial and military assistance. These were Australia, Canada, India, Newfoundland, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa.
August 23: Japan, honoring the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, declares war on Germany.
[edit] Arms Race
As David Stevenson has put it, "A self-reinforcing cycle of heightened military preparedness ... was an essential element in the conjuncture that led to disaster ... The armaments race ... was a necessary precondition for the outbreak of hostilities." David Herrmann goes further, arguing that the fear that "windows of opportunity for victorious wars" were closing, "the arms race did precipitate the First World War." If Archduke Franz Ferdinand had been assassinated in 1904 or even in 1911, Herrmann speculates, there might have been no war; it was "the armaments race ... and the speculation about imminent or preventive wars" which made his death in 1914 the trigger for war. (Ferguson 1999 p 82)
The naval strength of the powers in 1914
Country Personnel Large
Naval Vessels
Tonnage
Russia 54,000 4 328,000
France 68,000 10 731,000
Britain 209,000 29 2,205,000
TOTAL 331,000 43 3,264,000
Germany 79,000 17 1,019,000
Austria-Hungary 16,000 3 249,000
TOTAL 95,000 20 1,268,000
Source: Ferguson 1999 p 85
The German naval buildup is seen by some historians as the principal cause of deteriorating Anglo-German relations.
The overwhelming British response, however, proved to Germany that its efforts were unlikely to equal the Royal Navy. In 1900, the British had a 3.7:1 tonnage advantage over Germany; in 1910 the ratio was 2.3:1 and in 1914, 2.1:1. Ferguson (1999 p 83-85) argues that "so decisive was the British victory in the naval arms race that it is hard to regard it as in any meaningful sense a cause of the First World War." This ignores the self-evident fact Kaiserliche Marine had narrowed the gap by nearly half, and the Royal Navy had long felt (reasonably enough) a need to be stronger than any two potential opponents; the United States Navy was in a period of growth, making the German gains very ominous, indeed.
[edit] Over by Christmas
The belief that a war in Europe would be swift, decisive and "over by Christmas" is often considered a tragic underestimation; if it had been widely thought beforehand that the war would open such an abyss under European civilization, no one would have prosecuted it. This account is less plausible on a review of the available military theory at the time, especially the work of Ivan Bloch, an early candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize. Bloch's predictions of industrial warfare leading to bloody stalemate, attrition, and even revolution, were widely known in both military and pacifist circles. Some authors such as Niall Ferguson argue that the belief in a swift war has been greatly exaggerated since the war. He argues that the military planners, especially in Germany, were aware of the potential for a long war, as shown by the famous Willy-Nicky telegraphic correspondence between the emperors of Russia and Germany. He also argues that most informed people considered a swift war unlikely. Moreover, it was in the governments' interests to feature this message widely in their propaganda, since this encouraged men to join the offensive, made the war seem less serious and promoted general high spirits.
[edit] Primacy of the offensive and war by timetable
Military theorists of the time generally held that seizing the offensive was extremely important. This theory encouraged all belligerents to strike first in order to gain the advantage. The window for diplomacy was shortened by this attitude. Most planners wanted to begin mobilization as quickly as possible to avoid being caught on the defensive.
Some analysts have argued that mobilization schedules were so rigid that once it was begun, they could not be cancelled without massive disruption of the country and military disorganization. Thus, diplomatic overtures conducted after the mobilizations had begun were ignored.
Map of the Schlieffen Plan and planned French counter-offensives
[edit] Schlieffen Plan
Germany's strategic vulnerability, sandwiched between its allied rivals, led to the development of the audacious Schlieffen Plan. Its aim was to knock France instantly out of contention, before Russia had time to mobilize its gigantic human reserves. It aimed to accomplish this task within 6 weeks. Germany could then turn her full resources to meeting the Russian threat. Although Alfred Graf von Schlieffen initially conceived the plan prior to his retirement in 1906, Japan's defeat of Russia in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 exposed Russia's organizational weakness and added greatly to the plan's credibility.
The plan called for a rapid German mobilization, sweeping through the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Belgium, into France. Schlieffen called for overwhelming numbers on the far right flank, the northernmost spearhead of the force with only minimum troops making up the arm and axis of the formation as well as a minimum force stationed on the Russian eastern front.
Schlieffen was replaced by Helmuth von Moltke, and in 1907-08 Moltke adjusted the plan, reducing the proportional distribution of the forces, lessening the crucial right wing in favor of a slightly more defensive strategy. Also, judging Holland unlikely to grant permission to cross its borders, the plan was revised to make a direct move through Belgium and an artillery assault on the Belgian city of Liège. With the rail lines and the unprecedented firepower the German army brought, Moltke did not expect any significant defense of the fortress.
The significance of the Schlieffen Plan is that it forced German military planners to prepare for a pre-emptive strike at the first sign of war; otherwise Russia would have time to mobilize, and Germany would be crushed by Russia's massive army. At the last minute, Kaiser Wilhelm II attempted to cancel the plan and avoid a war, but he found that it was too late — to scrap the plan would require a re-organization of the German army that would leave Germany vulnerable for several months.
It appears that no war planners in any country had considered Germany's options, prepared for anything like the Schlieffen Plan, or advised politicians accordingly.
[edit] Specific events
[edit] Crimean War (1854-1856)
The Crimean War, in which Britain, France, and the Ottoman Empire defeated Russia, radically changed the diplomatic structure of Europe. Austria had been allied to Russia following mutual assistance during the Revolutions of 1848. Fearing Russian power at the mouth of the Danube and in Constantinople, however, Austria waffled and then sided with the Allies in the crisis leading up to the Crimean War. Following the war, Austria was diplomatically isolated, allowing it to be defeated in the Second Italian War of Independence and in the Austro-Prussian War, losing its influence in most German-speaking lands. Soon after, Austria allied with Germany, and Russia more aggressively supported pan-slavism in the Balkans, creating some of the conditions that would lead to World War I.
[edit] Franco–Prussian War (1870–1871)
Napoleon III and Bismarck after the 1870 Battle of Sedan, of the Franco-Prussian War.Many of the direct origins of World War I can be seen in the results and consequences of the Franco-Prussian War. This conflict brought the establishment of a powerful and dynamic German Empire, causing what was seen as a displacement or unbalancing of power: this new and prosperous nation had the industrial and military potential to threaten Europe, and particularly the already established European powers. Germany’s nationalism, its natural resources, its economic strengths and its ambitions sparked colonial and military rivalries with other nations, particularly the Anglo-German naval arms race.
A legacy of animosity grew between France and Germany following the German annexation of parts of the formerly French territory of Alsace-Lorraine. The annexation caused widespread resentment in France, giving rise to the desire for revenge, known as revanchism. French sentiments wanted to avenge military and territorial losses, and the displacement of France as the pre-eminent continental military power. French defeat in the war had sparked political instability, culminating in a revolution and the formation of the French Third Republic. Bismarck was wary of this during his later years and tried to placate the French by encouraging their overseas expansion. However, anti-German sentiment remained. A Franco–German colonial entente that was made in 1884 in protest of an Anglo–Portuguese agreement in West Africa proved short-lived after a pro-imperialist government under Jules Ferry in France fell in 1885.
[edit] War in Sight crisis
France quickly recovered from its defeat in the Franco-Prussian war. France paid its war remunerations and began to build its military strength again. Bismarck leaked that Germany was planning a preventative war against France so that this recovery could not be realized. However, the Dreikaiserbund sided with France rather than Germany, humiliatingly forcing Bismarck to back down.
[edit] Rise of Kaiser Wilhelm II
Under the political direction of its first Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, Germany secured its new position in Europe by an alliance with Austria-Hungary and a diplomatic understanding with Russia. Bismarck began pursuing alliances and peace treaties. He made peace with almost every nation in Europe except France. He feared greatly that a war might destroy the newborn nation he had created in the 1860s. By the time of Wilhelm I's death, a system of alliances kept a tight peace in Europe.
German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck.The ascension of Kaiser Wilhelm II in 1888 brought to the German throne a young ruler who, despite his rash diplomatic judgment, was determined to direct policy himself. After the 1890 elections, in which the centre and left parties made major gains (and partly because of his disaffection at inheriting the Chancellor who had guided his grandfather for most of his career), Wilhelm engineered Bismarck's resignation.
Kaiser Wilhelm II.Much of the fallen Chancellor's work was undone in the following decades. Wilhelm failed to renew the 1887 Reinsurance Treaty with Russia, presenting republican France with the opportunity to conclude a full alliance with the Russian Empire in 1891-94. Between 1898 and 1900, Wilhelm undertook the creation of a German navy capable of threatening Britain's century-old naval mastery, prompting the Anglo-French Entente Cordiale of 1904. In 1907, the alliances was expanded to include Russia, forming the Triple Entente.
[edit] Anglo–German naval race
Wilhelm II desired to construct a formidable German navy which could tie in with German ambitions in the colonial and commercial spheres, threatening British pre-eminence in these areas. The Kaiser entrusted the establishment of this German navy to his Naval Minister and close advisor, Grand Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz.
Motivated by Wilhelm's backing and his own enthusiasm for an expanded navy, Tirpitz championed four Fleet Acts from 1898 to 1912. The German program was enough to alarm the British and drive them into the alliances with France and Russia.
Under the direction of Admiral Jackie Fisher, the First Sea Lord from 1905 to 1910, the Royal Navy embarked on its own massive expansion to keep ahead of the Germans. The cornerstone of British naval rearmament was to be the revolutionary battleship Dreadnought, which was launched in 1906. From then on until 1914, the British and Germans vied with each other to construct superior numbers of battleships, submarines, and other naval vessels and weaponry.
[edit] Historiography
This article or section cites very few or no references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
Any material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time. This article has been tagged since April 2007.
Immediately after the war, much academic work that blamed Germany entirely for the war was produced in Allied countries. However, academic work in the later 1920s and 1930s blamed all participants more or less equally. Starting in the mid-1920s, several American historians opposed to the terms of the Treaty of Versailles such as Sidney Fay and Harry Elmer Barnes produced works that claimed that Germany was not responsible for war, and as such, Article 231 of the Versailles which had seemingly assigned all responsibility for the war to Germany and thus justified the Allied claim to reparations was invalid. The objective of Fay and Barnes was to put an end to reparations imposed on Germany by attempting to prove what they regarded as the moral invalidity of Article 231. Both Fay and Barnes were provided with generous use of the German archives by the German government.
In a different approach, Lenin in his pamphlet Imperialism - the Highest Stage of Capitalism portrayed the war as imperialist, caused by rivalries triggered by highly organised financial monopolies, that frenzied competition for markets and raw materials had inevitably brought about the war. Evidence of secret deals between the Tsar and British and French governments to split the spoils of war was released by the Russians. In the 1920s and 1930s, more socialist works built on this theme, a line of analysis which is still to be found today, although vigourously disputed on the grounds that wars occurred before the capitalist era.[9] Lenin argued that the private ownership of the means of production in the hands of a limited number of capitalist monopolies would inevitably lead to war. He identified railways as a 'summation' of the basic capitalist industries, coal, iron and steel, and that their uneven development summed up capitalist development on a world-wide scale[10].
In the inter-war period, various factors such as the network of secret alliances, emphasis on speed of offence, rigid military planning, Darwinian ideas, and the lack of resolution mechanisms were blamed by many historians. These ideas have maintained some currency in the decades since then. Famous proponents include Joachim Remak and Paul Kennedy. At the same time, many one sided works were produced by politicians and other participants often trying to clear their own names. In Germany these tended to deflect blame, while in Allied countries they tended to blame Germany or Austria-Hungary. The debate over "German war guilt" was quite emotional and topical in the interwar years, and some lingering resentment within Germany may well have contributed[citation needed] to the rise of the Nazi party, which denied German war guilt.
In 1961, German historian Fritz Fischer wrote Griff nach der Weltmacht, in which he blamed Germany for the war. Fischer believed that many members of the German government had overtly expansionist plans, formulated in the aftermath of Social Democratic gains in the election of 1912. He alleged that they hoped to use external expansion and aggression to check internal dissent and democratization. Some of his work is based on Bethmann Hollweg's "September Programme" which laid out Germany's war aims. Fischer's work created a whole school of analysis in a similar vein, emphasizing domestic German political factors. Some prominent scholars in this school include Imanuel Geiss, Hans-Ulrich Wehler,Wolfgang Mommsen, and V.R. Berghahn.
European military alliances in 1915. The Central Powers are depicted in puce, the Entente Powers in grey and neutral countries in yellow.The "Berlin War Party" thesis and variants of it, blaming domestic German political factors, became something of an orthodoxy in the years after publication. However, many authors have attacked it. At first, the idea prompted a strong response, especially from German conservative historians such as Gerhard Ritter who felt the thesis was dishonest and inaccurate. Writing in the 1960s, Ritter believed that Germany displayed all the same traits as other countries and could not be singled out as particularly responsible.
In the 1960s, two new rival theories emerged to explain the causes of World War I. The first, championed by the West German historian Andreas Hillgruber argued that in 1914, a “calculated risk” on the part of Berlin had gone awry. Hillgruber argued that what the Imperial German government had attempted to do in 1914 was to break the informal Triple Entente of Russia, France and Britain, by encouraging Austria-Hungary to invade Serbia and thus provoke a crisis in an area that would concern only St. Petersburg. Hillgruber argued that the Germans hoped that both Paris and London would decide the crisis in the Balkans did not concern them and that lack of Anglo-French support would lead the Russians to reach an understanding with Germany. In Hillgruber’s opinion, the German government had pursed a high-risk diplomatic strategy of provoking a war in the Balkans that had inadvertently caused a world war.
Another theory was A.J.P. Taylor's “Railway Thesis”. In Taylor’s opinion, none of the great powers wanted a war, but all of the great powers wished to increase their power relative to the others. Taylor argued that by engaging in an arms race and having the general staffs develop elaborate railway timetables for mobilization, the continental powers hoped to develop a deterrent that would lead the other powers to see the risk of war as being too dangerous. When the crisis began in the summer of 1914, Taylor argued, the need to mobilize faster than one's potential opponent made the leaders of 1914 prisoners of their own logistics. The railway timetables forced invasion (of Belgium from Germany) as an unavoidable physical and logistical consequence of German mobilization. In this way, Taylor argued, the mobilization that was meant to serve as a threat and deterrent to war instead relentlessly caused a world war by forcing invasion. Many have argued that Taylor, who was one of the leaders of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, developed his Railway Thesis to serve as a thinly veiled admonitory allegory for the nuclear arms race.
Other authors such as Arno Mayer, in 1967, agreed with some aspects of the "Berlin War Party" theory, but felt it isolated Germany from its historical context. Mayer believes that all states acted similar to Germany in the years before the war. Samuel R. Williamson lays most of the blame with the Austro-Hungarian elites rather than the German in his 1990 book, Austria-Hungary and the Coming of the First World War. Another recent work is Niall Ferguson's The Pity of War which completely rejects the Fischer thesis, laying most of the blame on diplomatic bumbling from the British. Recently, American historian David Fromkin has allocated blame for the outbreak of war entirely to Germany and Austria-Hungary in his 2004 book Europe's Last Summer. He theorised that the German military leadership, in the midst of a European arms race, believed that they would be unable to further expand the German army without extending the officer corps beyond the traditional Prussian aristocracy. Rather than allowing that to happen, they manipulated Austria-Hungary into starting a war with Serbia in the expectation that Russia would intervene, giving Germany a pretext to launch what was in essence a pre-emptive strike.