A conflict is either historically contingent, objective, or both (Magagna, 6/7/2017). An objective conflict is caused by the quick changes among the different powers (rising and declining powers); this can cause an incentive to strike first in order to avoid decline, inciting a preemptive war, or an attempt to repel or defeat a perceived imminent offensive or invasion, or to gain a strategic advantage in an impending war shortly before that attack materializes (Wikipedia). A contingent conflict is where the “existence of the conflict is dependent upon readily rearranged circumstances, but is not recognized by conflicting parties” (Universal Business School). The final type of conflict is the hegemonic conflict with which there is the greatest probability of causing war because potential hegemons threatens all states (Magagna, 6/7/2017). All of these conflicts were present in the July Crisis of 1914. The July Crisis was composed of a list of ultimatums sent by Austria-Hungary to Serbia upon the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand. These ultimatums include “the banning of Serbian publications responsible for anti-Austrian propaganda, the removal of anti-Austrian individuals from Serbian military, government, and civil service, the removal of Serbian teachers and curriculum that had promoted or incited anti-Austrian feeling, the outlawing and disbanding the Serbian nationalist group Narodna Odbrana, a crackdown on cross-border arms trading and the removal or corrupt
Serbia was upset of Bosnia being placed under Austrian rule because of their devotion to Slavic nationalism, and Austria was aware of their disappointment and unhappiness. Austria suggested eliminating Pan-Slavism because they were worried about the idea of Serbian terrorists in their country because of Serbia's aggression towards them. Austria was aware that Bosnia favored Slavic nationalism just like Serbia. Austria-Hungary could have avoided intervening in the social and political ideas of getting rid of Slavic nationalism and being oppressive to the Serbian people. By sending an Austrian political figure to Serbia during the turmoil was an unintelligent action for Austria to make because it was a fact that the Archduke's life would be put in danger and that he would most likely be killed. The Austrian government even expressed how the atmosphere created by the malicious agitation in Serbia sprang up a series of murderous attacks on high functionaries of the Monarchy, which ended in the execrable crime against the exalted person of the heir to the throne, the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which had been carefully prepared in Serbia(The Austro-Hungarian Red Book). Austria knew that Serbia
World War I, also known as the first World War, or the Great War, was a global war originating in Europe the began on the 28th of July 1914 and lasted until the 11th of November 1918. World War I was a war that was fought between two sides with a few of the World’s greatest Nations of that time. The two sides were Triple Entente which included Britain, France, and Russia, and the Triple Alliance which was consisted of the countries Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy. World War I left a mark on history as we know it, what could have possibly led to that war?, What were the underlying causes of World War I?. The major causes of “The Great War” or WWI consist of four long-term causes and one short-term cause. The common acronym that’s used for the four long-term causes to help students remember the causes of WWI is M.A.I.N; the acronym stands for Militarism, Alliances, Imperialism, and Nationalism,and the short-term cause The Assassination of the ArchDuke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo on the 28th of June 1914. To put all of this in a simpler way the five major causes of WWI was Militarism, Alliances, Imperialism, Nationalism, and the assassination of the ArchDuke Franz Ferdinand. Each of topics played a significant role in the reasons why WWI would begin.
Conflict, according to Wilmot & Hocker (2011), is defined as an expressed struggle between at least two interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals, scarce resources, and interference from others in achieving their goals.
In this essay I will be outlining the key points in why the First World War broke out in 19 14. Many people tend to say "Because Archduke Ferdinand got shot." Still others have blamed it on the increased independence and Imperialism in Hungary to Russia’s growing military. If I had to answer the question myself, the answer would be all of the above, and more. The events from June of 1914 through August of 1914 can be described as one thing leading to another.
Great War, also known as The First World War, lasted for four year (1914 to 1918). It brought a huge development of war technics and weapons. More number of countries had been involved in the Great War than any previous war. It involved the mobilization of the whole nations, not just an enormous army that turned the war into a “total war”. (Clare 6) However, historians are still arguing about the major cause of the World War I. The major cause will be one of the four long-term causes of WWI, which are Militarism, Alliance, Imperialism, and Nationalism. In my opinion, the two major causes would be Alliance and Nationalism. Alliance is an association between two or more countries for mutual benefits that formed with different treaties, while
The Austro-Hungarian Ultimatum to Serbia was one of the examples of imperialism during WW1. On July 23 1914, Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip assassinated archduke Franz Ferdinand, who was to be the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. Austro-Hungary, realizing they were stronger than Serbia, issued an ultimatum with ridiculous demands, along with statements such as “The Royal Serbian Government [is]… to suppress any publication which incites to hatred and contempt of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and the general tendency of which is directed against its territorial
Promptly after the First World War had ended there were many debates about who or what caused the war. Historians such as Fritz Fischer argued that Germany was the to blame for the entirety of the war but there have been many more ideas of what was the cause of the war and therefore causing peace to fail. The main ideas amongst historians for the underlying causes of the war are the different balance in power due the formation of alliances, imperialism, militarism and also the July Crisis of 1914. This essay will argue that the alliances were the main cause of peace failing as with the constant conflict of interests and increasing tension it made it almost impossible to create peace in Europe in 1914.
The 1910’s were stressful for everyone - especially for soldiers. Warfare and weaponry was changing drastically right before their eyes on the smoke-infested battlefields of World War I. Little did they know, these advances would alter the way wars were fought for eternity. Fighting a never ending battle would be no more; countless lives lost for a never ending battle would be no more; old techniques used repetitively would be no more. As written in “Le Feu” by Henri Barbusse, a French soldier, "Two armies that fight each other is like one large army that commits suicide" (Immortal). This is saying that, instead of progress being made and minimal deaths, everyone just fights each other so they can all die with no one left alive - which is not helped with advances in weaponry and war tactics. Weapons used at the time were rapidly evolving to become machines which held death on a leash. Machine guns with rapid fire and a longer range, gas becoming poisonous, and tanks invented and improved hold some of the most significant impacts from weaponry in the First World War.
War and Risk in 1914 The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife on the 28th June 1914 began what has since been termed the July Crisis, a month or so of intense diplomatic wrangling and military preparation. The crisis ended in early August 1914 with all five major European powers at war, a European war that ultimately escalated into World War I. During the war itself, aggressive premeditation by each power was seen as its primary cause but these arguments were replaced within two years of its end by ones of inadvertence, the ‘slide’ theory.[1] The statement contained in the title of this essay lies somewhere in between these two accusations. Discussion of this statement requires
It corresponds with Stevenson’s view - “many Austro-Hungarian leaders agreed… that only violence could solve the Serbian problems” and highlights the influence of German support in providing the Austro-Hungarians the confidence they needed to declare war. What’s more is that in the overall sense of the July crisis it displays that the beginning of WW1 on the 28th of July, 1914 was avoidable and it was the stubbornness of nations during the crisis, like Austria-Hungary, to prove their strength and pride that led to a war where so many died for power and control. The document clearly demonstrates that there were alternative measures to war, and that these were suggested to the leaders who tossed them aside in order to prepare for the bloodshed that was the Great
The assassination gave Austria-Hungary a good reason to form a plan against Serbia, but Austria-Hungary first got Germany’s promise to support them in any action they took against Serbia. Then Austria-Hungary sent Serbia a list of demands on July 23. Serbia accepted most of the demands and offered to have the rest settled by an international conference. Austria-Hungary rejected the offer and declared war on Serbia on July 28 1914("World War I History." ).
Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1896. He was a threat to the Black Hand Terrorist group, a group of radical Serbian nationalists. They pledged “to destabilize the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire in order to incorporate their Serb population into a greater Serbia” (CITE) However the Archduke’s goals were “strengthening the Austro-Hungarian Empire” (CITE) which was contrary to the Serbs' desires. They feared that if he came into power, he would continue to persecute the Serbs, henceforth the decision to assassinate him.
Jose Garcia Professor Wheatland History 310 Diplomatic Relationships in Europe in the 20th CE September 26, 2016 Italy during the July Crisis of 1914 It is July 23rd, 1914 and the world is on verge of declaring war within one another. War was technically not declared in World War I until five days later on July 28th, 1914 when the Austria-Hungary people declare war on Serbia. Those two countries are the ones we can say help kick off what at the time was called the war to end all wars, but later became known as World War I. The country I have done my researched that helped play a role in all of it was Italy. I looked intensively into what, where Italy’s intentions during the July Crisis of 1914. Italy had an alliance with Austria-Hungary and Germany. Although their alliance with both countries they formed to stay neutral after war was declared, just days after the July Crisis of 1914. Italy had long-term hope and fears as well as short-term hopes and fears. They hoped to achieve different things during the July Crisis as well as things they saw coming before the crisis and after the crisis. Italy had long-term goals of getting new territory. It was something that the Italians wanted very badly since they had seen other countries like England get new territory. The Italians had long-term goals that friends/alliance of the Austrians-Hungary people will help them give them territory in the Balkans. They were specifically looking at the areas of (Trieste, Fiume, and
The war that broke out in 1914 was one of the worst, if not the worst, wars in human history. It had left millions dead and a scar burned into European history forever. However, if we do not identify why war broke out in 1914, stopping others wars will be impossible. Clearly, we may never know the answer to this, but many sources give many interpretations. In this essay, I will try to recognise the key factors that led the outbreak of the Great War in 1914 and try to identify the most significant of these causes.
1. International conflict among countries is more likely of what we may think. Today there are many different ongoing conflicts. International conflict is a stage of opposition, disagreement or incompatibility between two or more states (Malek). The term "international conflict" referred to conflicts between different nations and conflicts between people and organizations in different nations (Mr. Turetzky lec 11). It also applies to inter-group conflicts within one country when one group is fighting for independence or increased social, political, or economic power. International conflicts can be divided into two branches: private international conflict and public international conflict. A private international conflict is a disagreement