The smaller countries did not want to be taken over, and so, they did their best in fighting back.The conflict between the nations trying to over-ride one another with their nations and the conflict aroused between countries wanting to escape from a nation's ruling led up to the outburst in war. Alliances are promises or agreements to help and defend another country. During this time, the two evident alliances were the Triple Alliance consisting of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy; and the Triple Entente bringing together France, Russia and Britain. Alliances play a part in the outbreak of the war because it one country from each alliance were at conflict, the remaining countries in their alliance would be quick to join them, thus, making it a bigger conflict and war. If there were no alliances at this time, world war 1 would not have been as big as it was.
The French army are then put on war-footing so they are ready for when Germany attack. Once Britain hears that Germany has declared war on Belgium and France it orders Germany to withdraw its army from Belgium. Germany doesn’t listen to Britain’s command so Britain declares war on Germany. Then Austria finally declares war on Russia. Long-term causes of WW1: Imperialism is a big cause of WW1 because many countries were building up their empires; there were disagreements over who would control which areas of the World and countries were becoming jealous of other countries, this caused arguments between the countries.
Underlying Causes Of WWI World War I, also known as “The Great War” was an extremely bloody war that immersed Europe with huge losses of life and little ground lost or won. There may have seemed like there was a chain of events that led to the fighting, but the underlying causes of WW1 were Nationalism, Alliances, Militarism, imperialism and the assignation of Arch Duke Ferdinand. America tried there hardest to remain neutral and stay out of the war, but they were dragged in by force. Several incidents built up tension between nations before the outbreak of the First World War. Nationalism was one of the underlying causes of WW1.
‘The outbreak of the war in Europe 1914 was due to an aggressive German Foreign Policy which had been waged since c.1900’ How far do you agree with this opinion? Discussions over the causes of the outbreak of war in Europe in 1914 have caused much controversy due to the breadth of events in multiple countries which took place over a short period of time, concluding in war. The evidence within source V, W and X refer to some of these events, thus hold different countries and individuals to blame to different extents. Whilst source V suggests that aggressive German Foreign policy did hold a considerable proportion of the blame, it places the Germans in a sympathetic position due to their encirclement leaving them no other option. Source W is very similar due to the fact that it blames Germany’s strengthening of the military and navy to a large extent, however proclaims their ‘peaceful intentions’; whereas source X dwarfs Germany’s contributions as a state, placing more responsibility for the outbreak of war on Austria-Hungary.
Source 2, even though it agrees with the statement also disagrees to an extent as well and supports source 3, blaming the immobilisation of Russia for the outbreak of war, linking to source 3 as Russia would have carefully thought out the plan to immobilise and rearm. Source 1 also slightly blames the Austrians for the start of the war due to the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia in relation to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand which is an important reason that should not be overlooked. Another reason for the outbreak of war is also the triple entente between Britain, France and Russia which caused Germany to feel encircled due to these countries geographical location, this could disprove source 2 about the schlieffen plan, arguing it was done in order to knock France out before war began officially and put ends to a 2 front war. Source 1 agrees with the statement that war broke out as a result of decisions made by the German military. ‘German military which ultimately secured by a combination of persuasion and defiance, the mobilisation orders, the ultimata and declarations of war which unleashed the conflict’ This shows the German military were the ones who ordered the mobilisation and rearmament of Germany and the use of the word ‘defiance’ means source 1
There were two dominant alliances in Europe and they were the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente. The Triple Alliance involved 3 countries, “Italy, Germany and Austria-Hungary.”The Triple Entente was also made up of 3 countries, “Britain Russia and France.” In my opinion, the Triple Entente had more of an advantage position geographically. This was because the countries, “Britain, Russia and France” were surrounding “Italy, Germany and Austria-Hungary” and if there was a war, the Triple Entente could attack quicker and more efficiently as they were surrounding their rivals. Alliances were also a very fundamental reason towards the break out of the war. This was because if one
Weltpolitik could be argued to be a factor relating to the breakout of the First World War in August 1914. Although, it could be said that the war was avoidable and not inevitable, supported by Geiss in source 2 and Mombauer in source 3. On the other hand there are a two other main views which the sources suggest could be accountable for the outbreak of the war, with Deist source 1 mainly pushing for the political decision makers in the Kaiser and his military cabinet, such as Molkte and Tiripitz. The final factor that all three sources partially suggest is the impact of the tensions in the Balkans, mainly between the Austro-Hungarians and the Russians. Altogether, the idea that Weltpolitik made the First World War inevitable by August 1914 is short sighted as this is not entirely accountable for the war but was a contribution.
This is implying of course that the decision by Nicholas II to go to war against Germany and it’s allies in 1914 was wrong, but this is not the case. Russia actually had many reasons to risk war again; the war was weighed heavily in the allies favour as the combined forces of Great Britain, France and Russia were far stronger than that of Germany, Austria and Hungary. Russia was aware of it’s major failing though, it’s slow modernisation had left it trailing behind that of the other countries, and Russia would have to be prepared for the rapid social and economic change that a war brings. This was Russia’s best chance to modernise and not be left behind. Russia’s early hopes were soon dashed however.
Russia also feared the growing German threat and sought to ally itself with Great Britain, France, and even Germany itself for protection. The British, for their part, tried hard to remain out of the conflict, but found that having the world's most powerful navy made that impossible. Rebellious provinces within the Austro-Hungarian Empire made central Europe extremely unstable, and the leaders of the Ottoman Empire in the Near East sought to expand their power. Historians have generally noted that the European powers had managed to avoid war for so long, that when it did
Why did the opposition grow between August 1914 and December 1916? “The events that took place on the Eastern Front...would have a profound impact upon world history for the remainder of the century.” This reference shows that the facts and historic value of the tsars ruling had a profound effect on history that century. In August 1914 Russia was facing hardship. June 28th Franz Ferdinand was assassinated which later started a war between Germany and Russia. The opposition against the Tsar grew due to the loss of war and other factors such as; the Tsar controlling the army, the refusal to co-operate with the Dumas and Rasputin being an advisor.