Militarism During the start of the First World War Britain was more powerful in terms of their economy, military power and industrial wise than the other countries. Similarly, another powerful country was the Germans under the leadership of their Chancellor Otto Von Bismarck (Strachan 12). Similarly, there were other powerful nations such as Russia, France, Italy and Austria. What was, however, common among this nation were that they were characterized by competition, rivalry, and suspicion among themselves. The impact of this was that there was structural conflict which brought about changes in individual behavior as more attention were being given on military. It was also different from institution to be formed between these countries because, by the end of the year 1914, the German military had doubled compared to the others. This made her have a greater influence on some of the public policies that even affected other nation. This plans and policies created fear and …show more content…
Imperialism Although there were institutions that were set to ensure that there were equitable allocation of colonies during the scramble and partition for Africa and Asia a keen look reveals that some countries might have conspired against the others so as to increase their wealth. Prior to the World War 1 due to the increased rates of industrialization, there was more demand for resources and labor for this industries and the main source of both was from Africa, this mean that despite any talk that were to be held among the colonizing countries, each wanted more territory so as to meet their own individualized demands (Etienne et al 16). As it is
When a nation gained more powerful arms, they were seen as a larger threat to the rest of the world, which was proven by post-war speeches from leaders of involved countries and statistics from the war. When Germany was blamed entirely for starting the war, German Versailles Treaty delegation leader Count Brockdorff-Rantzau argued that imperialism and the massive power put in the militaries across Europe had a larger impact on the war than Germany (Document 5). The mobilization of European armies and missed preventative steps to avoid war in almost every European country were both also cited by many historians for causing the Great War to occur (Document 6). The effects of military advancement and involvement in political discrepancies is clearly shown in statistics of money paid by each country involved in the war throughout time. When the war broke out, substantial increases in the investments made for weaponry are shown, especially by the main countries involved in the war, such as Great Britain, France, and Germany (Document 1). Military advancement overall had a large part in World War I’s breakout, due to its effects on the mindset of countries to create more weaponry for defense, and the power it gave to a nation’s
Germany and why it has gone through First World War has been subject of debate among scholars, academics and historians. Several documents have been analyzed in order to understand the subject and aims of Germany were when it went on war. Wide ranging literature is available on the subject, which concentrates on discussing the start of World War I. History is based on evaluation and examination of facts. The
Militarism was felt very strongly in 20th century Europe. Between 1890 and 1914, the countries involved in WW1’s armament growth was tremendous. Germany’s army and navy rose
Leah Griffin 3/6/15 HIST 121 Document Analysis Paper World War I played a key role in Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. After the devastating war, Germany was viewed as the main instigator and the European Allied Powers decided to impose strict treaty obligations upon Germany. This treaty, also known as the Treaty of Versailles, was signed by Germany and went into effect in June 1919 (“Treaty of Versailles, 1919” 1). The treaty forced Germany to give up the land it seized from multiple countries during the war and also forced Germany to recognize the independence of several others (“The Treaty of Versailles – 1919” 37-43). The treaty also forced Germany to agree to many other humiliating terms that did not rest easy with the German public
It is heavily debated that the display of German aggression inevitably contributed to the outbreak of general European tensions, and war in 1914. The use of strategies such as the Anglo-German Naval Race, as stated in Joll’s source, highlighted the aggression by Germany prior to war. Moreover, this type of tactic also demonstrated the desire and hunger Germany obtained for continental power, another factor towards European tensions. The sources in question both support and contest the set statement, to an extent. Sources 1 and 3 by Corrigan and Joll, respectively, argue how Germany’s use of tactics agitated European powers, thus causing war. However, Source 2 by Turner disagrees with the statement, arguing how other European powers were to
Many historians argue that the reason for Germany going to war was due to the aggressive behaviour of Germany in the build up to the war. Throughout this essay I will be addressing this issue looking at whether Germany was responsible for the outbreak of a general European war in August 1914. There are many factors which contribute to the outbreak of the war from a short-term trigger such as the assassination of Franz Ferdinand to the long-term annexation aims Germany implemented in the years building up to the war, the most important reason was Germany’s aggressive foreign policy, they had provided
Leading up to the First World War (WWI) was a series of crises -- Serbian unification efforts, the Ten-Point Ultimatum from Austria to Serbia, the Kruger Telegram, the Dreadnought Race, the Moroccan Crises of 1905 and of 1911, the Balkan Wars, and the Bosnian Crisis -- that generated significant conflict and division among the countries of Europe, all of which seemed to lay the foundation for the start of WWI. With concern for its own power and security in a rapidly changing Europe, Germany set out to undermine the power of as well as the alliances between other European countries. In his book The Sleepwalkers: How Europe went to War in 1914, Christopher Clark points out that, while ‘not one of the great powers has escaped the
In addition to the damaging consequences of the First World War with the requirements of the Treaty of Versailles, certain features of Germany caused the state to be susceptible to the influence of this dangerous ideology. Along with the damage to the national ego as a result of the First World War, Germany had co-existing and conflicting highly modern strands of development forced to integrate with powerful remnants of archaic values and social structures, and had a deeply fractured parliamentary political system, and the weaknesses of this system reflected the social and political differences within the population. This shame and failure after World War I was superimposed onto a modern country which once had an advanced economy, a sophisticated state
World War I saw the nations involved rallied into two major alliances in order to curb German’s increasing power. It is evident that German amassing too much power poses a threat to the security of its counterparts in an anarchic system. As a result, other countries were willing to use various means not only to mitigate the risks but also maintain their independence in the world’s political structure. The balance of power theory focuses on how countries can achieve a balance and international order. The causes of World War one can be attributed to the balance of power mechanisms used by the countries involved.
For the longest of time, Europe was led and controlled by the same powers, and to add another country into the already delicate mix, one with drive and determination to become a leading power, would inevitably upset powers, and escalate tension to a further extent. One must also take into account that in order to accomplish this goal of becoming a world power, industrialization was imperative. This brought forth wealth to the middle-class and jobs to the poor, increasing incentive to carry out Weltpolitik. Its significance, however, is highlighted through the increasing of tensions. Countries viewed Germany as an obvious threat, since before the Kaiser himself, and the installation of Welpolitik only heightened such worry.
The nations had spent millions of dollars on building their army and navy. Germany in 1890 had spent around 30 million in British pounds, then by 1910 they had spent around 60 million in British pounds. (Document C) All of these countries had spent so much money into their armaments, there was a lot of tension building up between the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente that either one was ready. The countries also had lots of colonies with territory by the other nations. No one wanted to get in each other’s way, but it became too close for comfort. (Document D) This proves how Militarism was a cause of
Allies bound by treaty, as well as compelled by defensive nature, began to acquire mass weaponry. Once these countries entered the war, they had to keep gaining power; i.e. spending money, and building on to military, thus putting financial burden on their countries for the benefit of their alliance. Britain and Germany especially, began an arms race, acquiring submarines as well as conventional weaponry. Powers were participating in naval warfare. This force of action solidified alliances. Countries chose sides and entered into alliances for personal benefit and gain. They pledged their allegiance to stronger countries in a “gang like” mentality which stressed an ideology of work with me, or be destroyed by me. This describes an effort to create a balance of power. However, the security dilemma was in full effect as everyone accumulated weaponry. It was hard for any nation, especially Germany, to keep tabs on the power that everyone had gained.
Bismarck was the man who did the most to unify Germany. It was clear that unification was one of his major objective which he announced in his famous ‘Blood and Iron speech’. I was fascinated by how he managed to unify the so many divided states. Thus, my historical investigation examines the question, to what extent was the Franco-Prussian war Bismarck’s final step to unify Germany? To assess whether the Franco-Prussian war was Bismarck’s final step for unifying the loose net of 39 German states or not, the investigation analyses the previous steps made by Bismarck to unify Germany. It investigates the events between 1962, when Bismarck became Minister president of Prussia and 1971, when Germany became officially unified. The events analyzed are the Danish war, The Prussian Austrian war and the Franco Prussian war.
Germany started out as a divided nation fighting for dominance in Europe. Otto Von Bismarck was able to take this struggling complexity and unify it. During this process Bismarck turned the small country of Prussia into a powerhouse, growing the population from 11 to 18 million. Bismarck sprung from a landlord class and moved his way up the political ladder as realpolitik, realistic Politician. He was a man of simple ideals; he stressed duty, service, order, and the fear of God. These ideals along with manipulative tactics are what lead Bismarck on his journey of the unification of Germany, proving that without Bismarck’s diplomatic efforts between 1871 and 1890 Europe would not be the stabilized continent it is today.
World War I was a war of unfathomable magnitude that devastated millions and still compels historians today to question its complex causes. At the heart of it all lay Germany which seemed to be at the height of its development. It was the economic and industrial leader of Europe as well as the unparalleled producer of great literature, music, and educational opportunities. Unfortunately, this rose-colored lens was not shared by German leadership who believed that the country was declining militarily. This growing insecurity is the key to understanding Germany 's actions and motives for entering WWI. This essay will discuss the overarching theme of insecurity through realism theory used to examine the international system during this Westphalian era, and how inept governmental policies supplemented by specific human decisions, societal factors, and public opinion contributed to Germany 's entry into WWI.