Jump to content

Causes, practices and effects of wars: First World War (1914‑8)


Julie

Recommended Posts

Yeaaah :))

And after that annexeation of Bosnia by Austria-Hungary,Serbia remained bitterly hostile to Austria, and it was this quarrel which sparked off the outbreak of the war, wasn't it??

And at the same time Russia was humiliated by her allies because when Serbia resorted to Russia for help, the Russian allies let her down and Russia herself could not support the Serbia because she had to recover from her defeat in the Russo-Japansese War (1904-5) yess? :D

But wait ! Hm... why Russia wanted to help Serbia?? Were they allies, or what?

Russia wanted to help Serbia, as I've said before because Russia considered itself the mother of the slavic race, and felt that it's duty was to help its fellow slavs.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

ok smile.gif) thanks but there were laso countries that emerged from the Austro_hungarain Empire.. what were they??

ok i got it ;d

these were:

Czechoslovaka, Yugoslavia and Romania smile.gif

Talking about the states that emerged....You should talk about WHY they emerged.

Reason1:

CONTAIN RUSSIA. Grab a map of Versailles WW1 and one will notice there's an entire line of countries created that completely block Russia.

Reason2

Stop Austria from joining up with Germany again. (but Hitler said screw that and went Anschluss)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is dedicated to the First World War (1914‑8).

Major themes

Different types and nature of 20th century warfare

• Civil

• Guerrilla

• Limited war, total war

Origins and causes of wars

• Long-term, short-term and immediate causes

• Economic, ideological, political, religious causes Nature of 20th century wars

• Technological developments, tactics and strategies, air, land and sea

• Home front: economic and social impact (including changes in the role and status of women)

• Resistance and revolutionary movements

Effects and results of wars

• Peace settlements and wars ending without treaties

• Attempts at collective security pre- and post-Second World War

• Political repercussions and territorial changes

• Post-war economic problems


Hey, my semester exams are coming up and our teacher is currently reviewing WWI: causes and interpretation. he has given us a billion different ways to organize the causes of WWI.

We looked at organizing it thematically, chronologically, long-term/mid-term/immediate-term causes, long-term/short-term causes, etc...

I want to study the most, shall I say, sophisticated way in which to organize the causes (the one that will display my knowledge in the most effective, "elite" way). Any suggestions?

Out of all the history books I've read so far, "Diplomacy" by H. Kissinger and "Europe's Last Summer" are two of the most sophisticated ones on causes of World War I. What I would do is that you divided up the essay into two halves, and tell right from the beginning that there is the "simple story" and the "complicated story", ONLY DO THIS IF YOU ARE GOING FOR 19-20

- Simple story: everyone should know this by heart now. This would include imperialism (Africa and Balkans), rise of nationalism in the balkans, unification of germany in 1871 after franco-prussian war, Schlieffen Plan, shift in German foreign policy (Bismarck's cautious foreign policy to Wilhelm's Weltpolitik), assassination of Franz Ferdinand. So basically this is a mix of themes and events.

- Complex story: This is where it gets really complicated, depends how much you want

+ There were several attempts to form an Anglo-German entente agreement but the Germans were so blind they could not see the value of a promise of British neutrality, Kaiser really wanted to go for a Anglo-German firm military alliance. In order to push G.B into the alliance, the Germans tried to demonstrate their strengths (Morrocan crises 1905/1911) and therefore UNINTENTIONALLY pushed the formation of Triple Entente

+ The assassination itself was somewhat irrelevant, it was how the leaders manage the crisis that happened afterwards which is important. On the one hand, we have the blank cheque being signed, "Germany backing up A-H to the hilt" but then also there was a series of Willy-Nicky telegram between Wilhelm II and Nicholas II, trying to diffuse the "bomb". At the same time, A-H was really just using the assassination as a pretext to destroy Serbia, it pushed Germany into the war (Fritz Fischer believed Germany tailored all the plans for an aggressive war). David Fromkin said that the A-H acted too late otherwise, Europe could have accepted the A-H-Serbian war as a "fait accompli" and therefore NO WORLD WAR.

+ The military planners pushed mobilisation and the casus belli in 1914 was no longer the first shot fired but the first mobilisation. Everyone wanted an upper hand in mobilising (which takes many weeks) and therefore there's a security dilemma (one mobilises for defensive purposes the other sees as aggressive, in the end they go to war). Therefore mobilisation meant war and once the military planners have called mobilisation, no diplomatic effort could stop.

Some suggestions if you are really going for the top grade ;) If anyone has doubts about cause of WWI/II or anything then feel free to give me a PM.

Good luck :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeaaah smile.gif)

And after that annexeation of Bosnia by Austria-Hungary,Serbia remained bitterly hostile to Austria, and it was this quarrel which sparked off the outbreak of the war, wasn't it??

And at the same time Russia was humiliated by her allies because when Serbia resorted to Russia for help, the Russian allies let her down and Russia herself could not support the Serbia because she had to recover from her defeat in the Russo-Japansese War (1904-5) yess? biggrin.gif

But wait ! Hm... why Russia wanted to help Serbia?? Were they allies, or what?

Russia wanted to help Serbia, as I've said before because Russia considered itself the mother of the slavic race, and felt that it's duty was to help its fellow slavs.

They signed a military alliance in 1903 and also, Russia had its prestige on the line after defeat against Japan. It had to maintain its status as a Great Power and it was deeply interested in power balance in the balkans as well. Not so altruistic "pan-slavism" as it may seem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...