Germany had to either get involved in the war and be on the front foot against France and Russia, or they could wait until they were attacked and be unprepared. They showed this fear in the German Imperial War Council of 1912. As well as this, they had pledged to defend Austro Hungary, and had a burden of responsibility after their show of support in November 1912. The Austro Hungarian Empire also had reasons for war, they had a large empire and wanted to protect their land from the rebelling Serbs. There was also the widely accepted claim that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the event that tipped the scales of war.
These four main, fundamental causes had impact on the start of World War One. But most of all, the one that had the greatest impact on the start of World War One is imperialism. Imperialism is the takeover of a territory by a stronger nation politically, socially, or economically. Many countries take over territories to gain more power. In order for a country
This ‘something’ could be anything from land, resources and people for slavery etc. This ‘something’ can also be power. If the country feels as if another country is gaining power, they will take it out before the other country is too powerful. For example, in the First World War, Britain and France felt that the unification of Germany caused them to rise up and gain power, therefore upsetting the ‘Balance of Power’ in place in Europe. Thus, to not disturb it they took Germany out before they became too powerful.
The outbreak of war in 1914 was according to many a key turning point as it could be argued that Russia was not well trained or equipped and it caused more harm than good. A key turning point here “denotes a significant change of direction as a result of a particular event or combination of events”. Optimistic historians would argue that World War I was a key turning point. The war was initially popular however not everyone agreed with the Tsar's decision to join the war. The minister of the Interior P.N.
There was also a significant number of Slave living inside the borders of Austria-Hungary who’s wish for a Great Serbia could not be ignored and so they needed to be shown their limits. The nationalistic Slavs were a serious threat to Austria-Hungary and it was clear that this nationalism would result in a war. The alliances on the other hand, should not be left unspoken of due to the fact that they delocalized the war and caused distrust between countries. The Triple Entente which included France, Russia and Britain on one side and the Triple Alliance Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy on the other made it impossible for Austria-Hungary’s conflict with Serbia to stay local. An especially important aspect of the Triple Alliance was that it only lasted from 1882 until 1914, because at the start of World
The outbreak of war in Europe in 1914 was due to an aggressive German foreign policy which had been waged since c.1900. How far do you agree with this opinion? It has been a matter of controversy within Germany on whether or not they went to war with aggressive or defensive intentions. Source V seems to be of the opinion that Germany went to war solely for defensive reasons due to the extensive array of alliances that encircled the country as well as diplomatic tension in Europe. Source W seems to take the opposite approach deeming how Germany’s aggressive actions since the turn of the century resulted in war.
Both Germany and Russia mobilized their armies in haste, because each one feared defeat by powerful enemies if they delayed. Germany and Russia also rashly committed themselves to support Balkan clients - Austria-Hungary and Serbia, respectively - because Berlin and St. Petersburg feared that failure to do so would cost them the trust of important allies and leave them isolated. This view treats Balkan matters largely as influences on policy
Nationalism is the policy or doctrine of asserting the interests of one's own nation, viewed as separate from the interests of other nations or the common interests of all nations. When the war was declared on Germany, people burst out on the street celebrating in France and Britain. If the population had not been primed to support the war, the government might not have started it. In this way, nationalism led directly to the War. But in a more general way, the nationalism of the various countries throughout Europe contributed not only to the beginning but the extension of the war in Europe.
According to political realism, war is inevitable in an international system where anarchy is the rule. As power-hungry individuals lead their states in pursuit of the national interest, fulfilment of the latter can sometimes only be achieved through conflict or the use of force. Thucydides discusses war and conflict at length in his History of the Peloponnesian War and comes to the conclusion that “What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta.” Here he has identified one of the main reasons for war: fear. As Thucydides sees fear as one of the universal human characteristics leading to an evil human nature and thus evil human behaviour, it can be seen that, for Thucydides, war is an inevitable feature of the international system. With the Balance of Power destabilising, which, according to Thucydides, is the only means to achieve peace, the growth of power in Athens caused the Spartans to feel more and more insecure and thus they started to prepare to defend themselves.
If the countries try to solve their problems peacefully through negotiation, it may result to mild tension but in contrast, if they want a war over a piece of land; people would be killed, cities would be damaged or destroyed. As a result the tension between the two countries would be huge and any future efforts of negotiation would be much more difficult. There are certain situations when violence may be justified. Let’s take World War II as an example. Hitler was advancing his plans to expand Germany in the late 1930s.