How can we begin to explain the causes of the First World War?

Why an obsession?

  1. Amount of evidence is enormous e.g., Governments opened up the archives after 1919. Variety of approaches endless.
  2. It was the Great War, a turning point, the end of the age of progress. ‘An event of such magnitude, which left so deep an impression, cries out for explanation’.
  3. The problem of ‘guilt’, who started it, has remained and remains politically alive. Germany was blamed.

Interpretations

‘The sheer richness of the material made the task difficult and rewarding though the results seemed to confirm the old adage that important historical questions are never finally answered.’

Zara Steiner – Britain and the Origins of the First World War (1977)

Causes as a set of events, incidents, facts are conveniently divided as we have seen into background or long-term causes and short-term causes.

Long-term Causes

These start at different points dependent on the thesis

  1. German-French rivalry as central cause will start in 1871
  2. Balkans as central cause 1878 Treaty of Berlin
  3. Alliance system 1892/4 Franco-Russian
  4. Imperialism 1890s in general

Two descriptive themes:

Whatever the account the alliance system will be important to the description and two key dates will be central:

1879 – Dual Alliance (G-AH)

1904 – Anglo-French Entente (Difference between entente and alliance? – entente was simply a commitment to diplomatic support and consultation)

All long term surveys will describe the series of crises in the years leading up to 1914

1905-6 – First Moroccan crisis = Franco-German confrontation strengthened the entente.

1908-9 – Balkan crisis begins with Austrian annexation of the Bosnia-Herzegovina – Russia decides not to support Serbia

1911 – 2nd Moroccan crisis another F-G confrontation

1912-13 – two series of wars in Balkans. Serbia emerges strengthened at the expense of Turkey and now turns attention to Austria.

Three major consequences

  1. ‘Never again’ mentality in Russia and Austria
  2. Rise in Balkan nationalism directly threatened Austria
  3. Moroccan crises led the French to expect British support

And yet… in all four crises a diplomatic way out was found without a war.

Short Term Causes

Six weeks from the assassination of 28 June 1914 and early days of August. Have any other six weeks of human history ever been subjected to such intense analysis? Luigi Albertini (Italian Historian) has dedicated two massive volumes to the study of these days. And there is plenty of evidence to go on (Opening up of the archives) but to presume an answer can be found is an interesting assumption.

What stands out?

A certain inevitability about the whole narrative that seems to take on a life of its own. Described by contemporaries through a metaphor of a river, approaching rapids and eventually a waterfall. It was a series of perfectly rational decisions in the narrow context of the decision making process itself; an apparent collective failure to predict the nature of the warfare to come. If they had only known… but this leads to a cardinal historical sin of not judging the characters on their own terms.

The story…

Austria holds Serbia responsible for the death of the Archduke and sends a wholly unrealistic ultimatum.

Russia supports Serbia and unlike in 1908-9 is prepared to mobilise and fight.

Germany offers unconditional support to Austria – The Blank Cheque

At this point the alliance system and the military plans come into play – Schlieffen Plan meant whatever happened in the east, a widespread European war was likely. The invasion through Belgium proved to be the decisive factor for the British Cabinet.

The rest came down to railway timetables and the lessons of the Franco-Prussian war… ‘The lesson of 1870 was burnt into the mind of every staff-officer in Europe: the nation which loses the mobilization race is likely to lose the war’.

M Howard ‘Reflections on the First World War’ Studies in War and Peace (1970)