Accurately titled The Long Fuse, this memoir, by Laurence Lafore, describes the lengthy chain of events that led to the First World War. He begins his work by thrusting the reader in the midst of 1870 Europe and her hopeful situation. Nations were developing nationalism at every turn and were vying for a better world. The Second Industrial Revolution was in full swing and was changing how the world, and war, operated. Education and literacy were taking root in average lives and, in turn, the idea of Liberty took off. Thus the foundation for greatness was set. If Europe was destined for greatness, then how did it end up in total war? Lafore makes his detailed explanation in seven lengthy chapters. He goes on to describe the European obsession with nation states and the problems it caused such as: territorial disputes, namely with Alsace-Lorraine; ethnic nationalism, especially with the Serbs (known as pan-Serbism), and twisted alliances to maintain the balance of power between said nation states. Such alliances are the very things that laid the foundation for the conflict of World War I because every country had multiple reasons for joining their respective alliance, mainly for revenge, distrust, or …show more content…
This essentially left Britain as the only power that had not picked a side and therefore the deciding point for the balance of conflict. If they choose the Franco-Russian alliance, then the delicate balance of power that had so long existed would remain. Lafore explains the reasons in which Britain may have wanted to join either alliance and finally gives the reason for joining the Franco-Russian alliance by saying that the effects of the Boer war and other events had led Britain into an uncertain alliance with the two countries (140). Thus Britain, France, and Russia formed the Triple
All causes of the Great War calling and bickering to be the main cause yet it was the combination of the main causes that made the war even possible; the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand with it’s nationalistic origins, then the alliances that created a larger web of support, and lastly imperialism that had created the passion of revenge, militarism, and nationalism. Though looking back many may not believe that the four years of trench warfare was not the most brilliant war in history, but they do have to agree that the causes are the most important aspects of the war in its entirety. For if people see why terrible events happen then they can prevent the future from new world wars that could’ve been solved without the need of war.
details the causes of the first World war and describes the first month of the war. The book clearly illustrates how a local war became an entire European struggle by a call to war against Russia. Soon after the war became a world issue.
The first and possibly most important cause of World War I may have been the allying of the countries involved in the war and the posturing for action which they participated in. Although many treaties were signed and many alliances made previously, the start of the time line of WWI may be traced to the Dual Alliance signed by Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1879, to which Italy joined in 1882 forming the Triple Alliance. It was an agreement that was one of military protection, stating that if a...
Another way that these alliance systems made themselves known was in the war plans of the different countries. Though the alliances were not initially meant for war, they fostered military cooperation between the signatories. This was evident in the Dual Alliance, as the two militaries “exchanged letters and visits which served to build up an expectation that they would consult and act together to support each other in moments of crisis.” The two even had “shared planning and strategies.” Opposing this bloc, the Triple Entente was also cooperating. Even though it was primarily aimed at defense, “within two years of signing the agreement of April 1904, plans were being made for common military action against Germany.” As a result of this cooperation and strengthening of ties, the two alliances were beginning to be viewed by the other as a cohesive group. Therefore, expectations began to grow about how the system would work: it was believed that confrontations would bring in alliance partners. Due to this sentiment, the Dual Alliance began to make promises about the course ...
The stronger country would attack weaker countries and in the end the weaker would usually lose. This caused a lot of tension just like militarism. The last of the ideas, was the idea of jingoes. These were people who lived for war. All they wanted was to go to war. Jingoes where very aggresive talkers and they caused a lot of friction between many countries. These ideas where some of the main reasons Europe was pushed to the brink of war.
Professor Geoff Hayes, “4 August 1914: Slithering Over the Brink, The Origins of the Great War,” Lecture delivered 31 October, 2011, HIST 191, University of Waterloo
The rise of European nationalism in the 19th Century brought with it an overabundance amount of change that would definitively modify the course of history. The rise of nationalism in one country would rouse greater nationalism in another, which would in turn, motivate even greater nationalism in the first, progressively intensifying the cycle that eventually concluded in a World War. Nationalism as an ideology produced international competition which inspired absolute allegiance to an individual’s nation state. The ideology was fueled by industrial commerce and imperialistic developments which led to nation-states pursuits of outcompeting rival nations.
The alliances were a huge part of World War One. For one reason, there was quite an excessive amount of them and all because of paranoia. I think that making so many alliances with so many different countries only made suspicion worse and tension high, especially because no one knew exactly why they were making them. For example, the Triple Alliance had no real reason to become an alliance. Even in the negotiation documents they said, “In case a Great Power non-signatory to the present Treaty should threaten the security of the states of one of the High Contradicting Parties…” (Article 4, firstworldwar.com). Notice how they say “in case” not “when”, which states the fact that they’re only making this alliance in case of emergency. Little did they know, the alliances that all of the involved countries were making with each other were actually hurting them instead of helping. Which concludes stupid political decision number one.
Nationalism is a devotion and loyalty to one’s own nation, with primary emphasis on furthering its interests as opposed to those of other countries. This feeling widely spread throughout Europe during the 19th and 10th centuries and caused many problems. The Slavic people of Bosnia and Herzegovina wanted to break away from Austria-Hungary and unify with other Slavic nations. Russia as a Slavic nation backed up the two countries in this matter, therefore causing tensions between Austria-Hungary and itself. Nationalism was also a source of anger between France and Germany as France resented its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871).
It was the middle of the 19th century and Europe had been experiencing a long period of peace. Industrialization was at its peak; new horizons were being explored; countries were being rebuilt, and everything seemed to be falling into place. However, this peace would be forever lost after Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary got assassinated by Serbian, Gavrilo Princip. Tension between these two European countries were rising by the day, and soon enough every country would be dragged into four gruesome years of fatality and utter destruction. Even with Europe holding a long lasting peace, the catastrophe was inevitable. An imbalance caused by an unstable alliance system, nationalism, and imperialism would throw Europe into the
Alliances played a hefty role in the inevitability of World War One. Countries were constantly at each other’s necks and needed power in order to protect themselves from each other. This is where alliances came in; countries could seek shelter from others by developing truces with close friends. Having a truce was beneficial in most ways because it provided the illusion of being a bigger power, and offered one extra support in case of a crippling event. Then again they did also create tensions between the countries that could only escalate further. For example, in the year 1879 there was a dual alliance created between Germany and Austria-Hungry. This alliance was created to protect them from Russia, who ...
Although the alliance system was a main cause of the First World War, it arose because of several other factors, and did not cause the war single handedly. Nationalism, the love and support of one's country, has always existed. In this era, however, it was to take part in the creation of one of the most famous wars in history. Since so much pride was devoted to countries, it made the possibilities of peace between past rivals less probable. It also meant that most nations, especially the great powers, would rather fight a war than back down from a rival's diplomatic provocation.
When countries formed alliances with each other it gave them protection, if a country was threatened or under attack then the alliance would come to that country’s aid. Countries made an alliance when they both needed protection from a stronger country. When Austria-Hungary had heard about the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, they went to war with Serbia.... ... middle of paper ...
During the late 19th century many countries sought an alliance with other countries to guarantee their own safety, preserve peace and sometimes to help their economic position. this is highlighted by alliances and treaties such as the "Dual Alliance" of 1879, the "Dreikaiserbund" of 1881 and the "Reinsurance Treaty" This was also the case for both France and Russia, with them agreeing the "Franco-Russian Military Convention" on August 18th 1892 and later agreeing the "Franco-Russian Alliance" in 1893. France and Russia were animated by a common desire to preserve peace. The only reason it was possible for France and Russia to form this alliance is because Germany allowed the Reinsurance treaty to become invalid. Both countries wanted different things from the alliance but there was one common reason between them, and that was to oppose Germany - although both countries had different incentives for this. France, Russia and Germany all contributed to the alliance being formed, either through their aims or what they did.
The importance of the alliance system that developed in Europe in the decades before World War I as a cause for it is still an important topic of debate and argument between modern historians. Some argue that the alliance system was a direct cause of the outbreak of war between all major countries in Europe while other historians prefer to state that the alliance configuration we observe before the war started was simply a symptom of the conflicts and disagreements, fears and envies that had been accumulating since the Bismarck system of alliances collapsed, and even before then. This last opinion is becoming more accepted as the one that describes the true importance of the actual alliance system as a cause of the war. In order to determine the importance of the alliance system as a cause for the war we must first explore the origins of these alliances. We will take high-point of the Bismarck system in 1878 as our starting point as the Franco-Prussian war is a key factor for the development of this system.