The Success Of The Doomsday Machine

Lenin, knowing Russia’s economic status quo and having to get ready for an upcoming civil war, had to stop the war against Germany no matter the cost. Thus having persuaded Trotsky and Kamanev, supporters of the war, in 1918, the treaty of Brest-Litovsk was accepted. However this came with high sacrificial value. Due to the treaty, Russia lost Riga, Lithuania, Estonia and parts of White Russia. This was a heavy blow to the already weakened economy as these areas were of major importance since they were some of the most fertile farming lands in Russia, while additionally losing 75% of their iron ore and coal deposit. Thus one could see the Brest-Litovsk treaty as an unsuccessful move by Lenin as the loss of economical important lands was a major downfall. However it has to be taken into account that the people of Russia wanted an end to the war and despite the loss, it did help Lenin in winning the civil war in Russia. Thus, Lenin was successful to a large extent in stopping the war but yet again, this was not the only war he would be fighting.

World War I was caused by several issues between European powers, the first being militarism, or the huge emphasis placed on having large and strong armies and navies. Germany is an example of militarism in WWI because Germany began competing with the British for having the largest navy in the world, as well as developing new weapons like poison gas and submarines, the latter being a great tool in surprise attacks. Militarism was also associated with the Romanticism of war; Europeans wished to fight so that they could become heros. The constant military build ups in several European countries left countries looking for alliances with other strong countries, in the event that war was to break out. Germany, Italy, and Austria created the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente was comprised of Great Britain, France, and

Bismarck’s alliance system brought peace between the European countries. (Stewart, Fitzgerald, Pickard 12) His alliance system starts with a treaty with Austria-Hungary who was one of the 5 powers in Europe. In 1879, Germany and Austria-Hungary signed the Dual Alliance, which was planned as a merely defensive arrangement or military alliance. Both governments promised that they should help or remain neutral when other powerful countries such as Russia or France attack. (Stewart, Fitzgerald, Pickard 13) The second allied country was with Italy. In 1882, Bismarck turns Dual Alliance into Triple Alliance by making Italy to join in his alliance system. Since Italy had close friendship with Great Britain, although Italy was not a strong military nation, it was an influential part of the Alliance. And at the same time, Great Britain and Germany had conflict in North Africa on colonial aspiration. Therefore, it was the perfect time to be an ally with her to isolate France. (Stewart, Fitzgerald, Pickard 14) Making Great Britain as a close friend was a benefit for Germany. Bismarck’s next target to isolate France was Russia. In 1881, the Dreikaiserbund was made a treaty, which was the agreement between Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia promising not to help the fourth power, France. However in 1884, this treaty had renewed and Russia refused to renew her membership in Dreikaiserbund. Then Bismarck discussed the Reinsurance Treaty with

There were two main causes of tension between Russia and the West from 1941 and 1945. One cause, according to historians was the disagreements over a Second Front being opened. Tensions arose due to the West’s perceived delay in opening a front, the front being used as a political tool by Stalin and the perceived lack of supplies and materials being sent to the soviets as aid. A more significant cause of tension, however, is believed by some to be Stalin’s attempts to create a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe and his actions in Poland.

Although the world seemed at peace in the early 1900’s but world’s powerful forces were pushing Europe towards war. These forces included militarism, alliances, imperialism and nationalism.

The first cause of war was alliances; though not the strongest motive, it provoked a large amount of tension leading up to the war. There were two “sides” to warfare- the Triple Entente, and the Triple Alliance- commonly known as the Allied and Central powers. As seen in Document 3, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and temporarily Italy, made up the Central powers while the Allied powers were

A system of alliances was originally created for protection and guarantee that they would be of aid to one another if attacked. However, they were more harmful than beneficial because they caused countries not involved in the argument to fight against one another. The Triple Alliance which was made up of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy was on one side of the war. The Triple Entente which was made of Britain, France, and Russia was the other side (Document A). The opposing countries began to declare war against one another, and soon the entire continent of Europe was at war with itself. The start of the war spread like wildfire throughout the world, and in one newspaper were shown to be blaming each other based on their alliances for who killed the peace in Europe. The blame game between the childish nations only created more tension, as they had to support the countries they made alliances with (Document B). All in all had it not been for these complex alliances, a more local conflict being the assassination would only have brought about a war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, instead of turning into a continental war. It forced nations not involved in the initial argument to participate in the “Crime of the Ages,” even if they did not want

At the Versailles Peace conference, German delegate, Count Brockdorff-Rantzau, pointed out that “the imperialism of all European states has chronically poisoned international relations” (Doc 5), making hostility between countries more apparent and war more likely. Along with that, he mentioned that they fought the war defensively in response to the military advances made by their enemies. The author’s background being German should also be taken into account, as a German delegate is likely to favor their own country and be biased toward them. Thus, every country in Europe holds some responsibility for the causing of World War

At the turn of the twentieth century Europe seemed to enjoy a period of peace and progress. Yet below the surface, several forces were at work that would lead Europe into the “Great War”. Some of the causes of WW1 were Nationalism, Militarism, Imperial Rivalries, Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, and Alliance.

On June, 28 1919, the Treaty of Versailles was signed. This treaty coupled with other factors, such as the Nazis rise to power in Germany, Europe’s policy of appeasement, and Germany’s invasion of Poland would lead to - and be direct causes of - World War II. In fact, when French military commander Marshal Foch heard of the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, her observed with extreme accuracy - “This is not Peace. It is an Armistice for 20 years.” (Churchill, 7)

Mearsheimer states that war is more likely in multipolarity that bipolarity for 3 reasons. Potential conflict dyads in a system, the imbalance of power which eventually favours the great powers which makes deterrence more difficult and war more likely and the potential for miscalculation is also high in this system. Mearsheimer defined unbalanced multipolarity as a situation that involved three or more super powers in which the power between them is unbalanced. This is the worst case scenario as it usually leads to war. A good example for unbalanced multipolarity could be the Second World War. Following Mearshiemer’s explanation war broke out in this case because of potential conflict dyads and mainly imbalance of power between

The tensions begin to mount after Germany and Berlin were divided among the victorious countries of the Allies and three major power blocs formed. The countries that had been newly formed in the

German historian Fritz Fischer argues that Germany 's desire for world power was the reason that for the outbreak of WWI. Germany had plans for a war before the crisis that occurred during 1914 and used the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand as an excuse to put the plans into effect. Germany also encouraged Austria and its war plans to provoke a crisis in which it can solve the problem that Germany would face if they went to war. This problem is called "encirclement" and Germany would face this problem if it went to war with France and Russia. By having Austria doing so it would allow Germany to dominate and expand its territories. France and Russia signed a full military defensive alliance in 1892-1895 which allowed the possibility of a two-front war. With Germany 's geographical position being between these two great powers, it would cause Germany to lose the war at an instant. In addition to this, France felt bitterness towards the defeat of 1870-1871 and the taking

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.

In order to fully understand how Britain’s decision to go to war against Germany is best explained one must engage into the debate revolving around the question of the extent to which Britain and other countries were responsible for causing war. This helps explain the intention Britain had for war which is vital in understanding their decision making process to cause war in the first place. Some schools of thought have come to the conclusion that it was everybody or nobody- the continent “slithered over the brink into the boiling cauldron of war without any trace of apprehension or dismay.”1 That analysis will be considered in this essay as will the widespread thesis that it was Germany’s aggression which not only created the preconditions for war, but also triggered Britain into war with the political imbalance of power being created from the growing naval and colonial expansion of Germany. Other factors that help explain why Britain went to war against Germany