THE FIRST WORLD WAR
·
Why was Britain
Europe’s strongest power throughout most of the nineteenth century?
In the four years of bloodshed that began in 1914, over thirteen million Europeans died. During the First World War the continent lost almost an entire generation of its young men. In addition, four empires—the German, the Austro-Hungarian, the Russian, and the Ottoman—disappeared. In Russia, communism gained power largely due to the impact of the war. This catastrophe was brought about by a combination of tragic forces: nationalism, militarism, imperialism, and rival alliances that had built up over the course of the preceding century, only to finally explode during the summer of 1914.
The last major military conflict that had engaged all of the major countries of Europe had been the Napoleonic Wars (1798-1815), which finally ended with the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. With the defeat of Napoleon I, Britain became the undisputed power in Europe. For the next 75 years, British foreign policy was dedicated to preventing the emergence of any other power that could become a significant rival. Britain’s power rested upon her overseas colonial wealth (primarily India), industrial might, and the unchallenged supremacy of the British navy. During the nineteenth century, Britain engaged in a number of shifting alliances with the powers of Europe, all of which were designed to maintain the balance of power and prevent the emergence of a serious rival. This policy as successful until the emergence of a strong, united Germany in the 1870s.
·
Define
“nationalism.”
·
What factors led
to the growth of European nationalism prior to 1815?
No force had a greater effect on the causes of the First World War than that of nationalism. Nationalism is the belief that people of a common cultural heritage or nation (usually indicated by a common language) should be united in an independent government (state) of their own. Prior to the eighteenth century, poor communication and transportation linkages made it virtually impossible to develop any great sense of national identity in most European countries. Loyalties were usually to regions and local princes. A single king might rule many areas, but this was viewed more as an empire of different provinces rather than a single unified state.
The great turning point in the history of European nationalism was the French Revolution (1789-97). National patriotism in France until then had centered upon the king. As a result of the revolution, loyalty to the king was replaced by loyalty to the nation itself. Thus “La Marseillaise,” the anthem of the French Revolution that later became the national anthem, begins with the words Allons enfants de la patrie (March on, children of the fatherland). With the creation of the National Assembly in 1789, France achieved a truly representative system of government. Regional divisions, with their separate traditions and rights, were abolished, and France became a uniform and united nation-states, with common laws (the Napoleonic Code) and institutions. Over the next twenty years French armies, raised through universal male conscription (required military service), spread the new spirit of nationalism to other lands.
The rise of nationalism coincided generally with the spread of the Industrial Revolution, which promoted national economic development, the growth of a middle class, and popular demands for representative government. National literatures emerged to express common traditions and the common spirit of each people. New emphasis was given to nationalist symbols of all kinds; for example, new holidays were introduced to commemorate various events in national history. National patriotism was further inculcated through wide-spread universal public education.
·
What were the
two main actions of the Congress of Vienna?
·
Who were the
five major powers in continental Europe after the Congress of Vienna?
·
What major
European countries of today did not exist in 1815?
·
What two groups
were the most disappointed by the actions of the Congress of Vienna?
In the wake of the turmoil brought about by the French Revolution and Napoleon’s conquests, Europe was restructured at the Congress of Vienna in 1815. Conservative forces, led by Austria’s Prince Metternich, controlled the conference and Europe was restored to the rule of autocratic (one-person control) monarchs.
The map of Europe was also redrawn at the Congress of Vienna. In the center of Europe stood the huge Austrian Empire. Ruled by the German-speaking Habsburg family, Austria included the modern countries of Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, as well as parts of Italy, Poland, Serbia, Romania, and the Ukraine. Although ruled by Germans, 75% of its population was non-German. Other national groups in Austria included Magyars (Hungarians), Czechs, Ukrainians, Poles, Serbs, Croats, Rumanians, Slovenes, Slovaks, and Italians. Southeast of Austria stood the Ottoman Empire of the Turks. This area included all of the Middle East as well as southeastern Europe (called the Balkans, which included modern-day Serbia, Bulgaria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania, Greece, Romania, and European Turkey). North of Austria was the German-speaking country of Prussia that extended all the way to the Baltic Sea. Ruled by the Hohenzöllern family, Prussia had a strong military tradition and was ruled by conservative landowners known as Junkers. To the east of Prussia and Austria was Russia (Poland did not exist as an independent country). Although the largest country in Europe in terms of population, Russia was extremely backward, manufacturing less than one tenth the production of either Britain or France. South of Austria was the Italian Peninsula that was divided into eight major countries, including the Papal States ruled by the Catholic Church. France, required to surrender all of the land it had conquered under Napoleon, was restored to its pre-Napoleonic borders and was exhausted from fighting the rest of Europe during the Napoleonic Wars. Between France and Prussia stood over thirty small states. The largest of these were the Kingdom of the Netherlands (which included French and Flemish-speaking Belgium), Denmark, Hanover, Saxony, and Bavaria. The latter three of these states were the largest of many small German speaking kingdoms and principalities between France, Austria, and Prussia.
The Congress of Vienna largely ignored the principle of nationalism. Germans and Italians had been divided into numerous small states while many other national groups were subject to rule by Austria, Russia, or the Turks. Nor were liberals happy with the results. Their hopes for the formation of constitutional monarchies, in which elected parliaments would share power with hereditary monarchs, were also ignored.
·
What two
failings of the Congress of Vienna eventually led to the revolutions of 1848?
·
In what country
did the revolutions of 1848 begin? What
was the effect of this revolution?
·
What were the
two main goals of the revolution in German states? Why were the goals of the revolution not accomplished?
·
What
achievements did the revolution attain in Austria? Why did it eventually fail?
·
What was the goal
of the revolution in the Italian states?
What were the two main reasons why this goal was not attained?
It took three decades for the disappointment in the decisions of the Congress of Vienna to overflow into full-scale rebellion. In 1848, beginning in France, revolutions swept across Europe. Although many of the causes of these rebellions were local in nature, there were two main common factors: the desire for representative governments and the abolition of the total power of monarchs, as well as the desire of many people to build nation-states in which the peoples of an entire nation would be unified into one state.
In France, King Louis Philippe was forced to flee into exile in February and was replaced by the Second French Republic. The example of revolution quickly crossed the Rhine River and spread to Central Europe. At public assemblies throughout Germany, liberals demanded representative government and German unification. Rapid changes came with minimal casualties, thanks largely to the humane response of the Prussian king, Frederick Wilhelm IV, who decided to make concessions to the protesters rather than unleash violence and bloodshed. He ordered army troops out of Berlin and tried to make peace with his “dear Berliners” by promising a parliament, a constitution, and a united Germany. Upon learning of this development, many rulers of the other German states agreed to establish constitutional governments and guarantee basic civil rights.
The Frankfurt Assembly opened its first session on May 18. Over 500 delegates attended, coming from the various German states including the two largest, Austria and Prussia. Popular enthusiasm reached a peak when the assembly’s president announced: “We are to create a constitution for Germany, for the whole Empire.” Unfortunately, as also later occurred in France, the radical and moderate reformers were not able to agree on what path the reform efforts should take. Another issue of disagreement was whether the Austrian Habsburg rulers in Vienna or the Prussian Hohenzöllerns in Berlin should lead a new, united Germany. Gradually, the conservatives recovered from the shock of the spring revolts and began to rally around their monarchs, urging them to undo the reformers’ work. Frederick Wilhelm soon turned against the reformers. When the Assembly offered the leadership of the new German Reich (nation) to the Prussian king, he refused to accept it, later declaring that he could not “pick up a crown from the gutter.” After his dramatic refusal, the Assembly disbanded. Outbreaks against conservative domination continued, but the Prussian army effectively put them down. Thousands of prominent middle-class German liberals fled, many emigrating to the United States.
The events of 1848 took a more tragic toll in Austria. When the news of the February uprising in France reached Vienna, Prague, and Budapest, reformers immediately called for change. In Budapest, the Hungarian liberal nationalist Lajos Kossuth demanded parliamentary government for the whole of the empire. In Vienna, Kossuth’s demands inspired some Austrian students and workers to demonstrate in the streets. The movement soon gained the force of a rebellion and the frightened Austrian emperor forced his conservative chief minister Prince Metternich, the main force behind the Congress of Vienna, to resign. The Hungarians wrote a new constitution, calling for a guarantee of civil rights, an end to serfdom, and the destruction of special privileges for the nobility. In theory, the political benefits guaranteed in the constitution were to extend to all citizens of Hungary, including non-Magyar minorities. The emperor accepted these reforms and promised, in addition, a constitution for Austria. He also promised the Czechs in Bohemia the same reforms granted the Hungarians.
By summer the mood in Austria suddenly shifted. German, Hungarian, Slav, Rumanian, and Czech nationalists began to quarrel. Divisions among the liberal and nationalistic forces gave the conservatives in Vienna time to regroup and suggested to them the obvious tactic to follow to regain their former dominance: divide and conquer the various nationalities. By the end of the year the weak and incapable emperor Ferdinand I abdicated (gave up the throne) in favor of his young nephew, Franz Josef (who would rule until his death in 1916). The Austrians began to repeal (take back) their concessions to the Hungarians, arguing that their new emperor was not bound by the acts of his predecessor. The Magyars, outraged by this maneuver, declared complete independence for their country. The Austrians, aided by 100,000 Russian troops sent by Tsar Nicholas I, defeated the Hungarians in a bloody and one-sided struggle. By the summer of 1849, Kossuth had fled the country and the Hungarian revolution was crushed.
The news of the revolutions in Paris, Berlin, and Vienna also triggered a rash of uprisings on the Italian peninsula. In Sicily, Venice, and Milan, revolutionaries demanded an end to foreign domination and autocratic rule. In response, King Charles Albert of Sardinia voluntarily granted a new liberal constitution. Other states such as Tuscany also issued constitutions. As in the rest of Europe, the liberal and nationalist reforms were quickly swept away by the reactionary (favoring a return to the old ways) tide. The Austrians regained their mastery in the north of Italy in July when they defeated Charles Albert at the decisive Battle of Custozza. Another defeat a year later forced him to abdicate in favor of his oldest son, Victor Emmanuel II. Austria helped restore the old rulers and systems of government in Italy to their pre-1848 conditions.
The final blow to the Italian liberals came in November 1848 when the pope refused to join in the struggle against Catholic Austria for a united Italy. His subjects forced him to flee from Rome, and the papal lands were declared a republic. The pope’s flight prompted a hostile reaction from conservative Europe, and the French sent in an army to crush the republic in July 1849. When the pope returned to Rome, he remained bitterly hostile to all liberal causes and ideas until his death in 1878.
The Revolutions of 1848 all failed to establish the liberal, parliamentary democracies that their leaders advocated. In France, the Second Republic lasted just three years after which the nephew of Napoleon I, Napoleon III, declared himself emperor and took total control of the government. The revolutions, however, stirred strong nationalist feelings especially in Germany, Italy, and the various nationalities of Austria. Within the next three decades, the dreams of Italian and German unification would be realized.
·
Who led the
drive for Italian unification?
·
How was Italian
unification achieved?
·
What problems
remained in Italy after unification?
Despite the failure of Sardinia to unite the peoples of the Italian peninsula in 1848, the Sardinians did not give up in their quest. In 1852, Count Camillo Cavour became the Sardinian Prime Minister. In 1855, Cavour led his country into the Crimean War against Russia on the side of Great Britain and France. Although the Sardinians had no interest in the issues of the war, Cavour skillfully maneuvered into an alliance with the sure winners of the war in order to build up the prestige of his small country and to gain British and French support. In 1859, Cavour joined with France to make war on Austria. As a result of this victory, both France and Sardinia gained Austrian territory. Elsewhere the drive for a united Italy accelerated. In 1860, several other northern Italian states voted for union with Sardinia. Southern Italians, led by Giuseppe Garibaldi, with Cavour’s secret support, took control of Sicily and then conquered most of Southern Italy. In the process, Sardinia absorbed the bulk of the Papal States, leaving the pope only with Rome and its immediate environs. Cavour then persuaded Garibaldi to unite Southern Italy with Sardinia in the north.
On March 17, 1861, the kingdom of Italy was proclaimed, with the former Sardinian King Victor Emmanuel II as King and Cavour as Prime Minister. Italy, however, was not complete as Rome and Venice remained outside the kingdom. In 1866, Italy became the ally of Prussia in the Seven Weeks’ War against Austria and at its end acquired Venice. In 1870, French reverses in the Franco-Prussian War forced Napoleon III to withdraw his troops from Rome and the Italians were finally able to enter the city. In July 1871, Rome became the capital of a united Italy.
Through the brilliant leadership of men such as Cavour and Garibaldi, skillful foreign alliances, and a series of short wars, Italy became a unified country although some problems remained. Liberals resented the power of King Victor Emmanuel and, though his power was limited by an elected parliament, fewer than one in thirty Italians had the right to vote. Southerners resented the power of the Sardinians, and while the North began to industrialize, the South remained largely in rural poverty. Finally, some northern Italian areas had not been incorporated into Italy and remained in Austrian hands.
·
What factors
stood in the way of German unification?
·
What were the
significant differences between the two largest German countries in Europe?
·
What did
Bismarck mean in his “blood and iron” speech?
·
How did Bismarck
remove Russia and Austria from opposing German unification?
German unification faced many obstacles. The two strongest German-speaking countries, Prussia and Austria, were bitter rivals divided by three significant factors. Prussia was predominately Protestant, while Austria was Catholic. Prussia was made up of almost exclusively German-speaking people, while Austria had many differing nationalities, of whom 75% were non-Germans. Prussia had industrialized rapidly in the first half of the nineteenth century but Austria had remained agricultural. The other European powers, primarily France and Russia, had no desire to see a strong unified Germany take the place of the weaker divided German states. Finally, many of the smaller German states did not want to lose their independence, either to Austria or Prussia.
When King Frederick Wilhelm attempted to form a union of all non-Austrian Germans in 1850, the Austrians and Russians stopped him. A conference of the three powers meeting at Olmutz in 1850 forced the Prussians to withdraw their plan. The angry Prussians returned to Berlin, pledging revenge for the “humiliation of Olmutz.” Despite this diplomatic setback, Prussia gained success in other areas. The Junker-dominated government was modern and efficient, and the Prussians extended public education to more of their citizenry than in any other European state. Prussian industry had developed to the point where it out-produced all of the other European countries except for Britain and France.
In the early 1860s a new ruler, Wilhelm I, came to power. In 1862, a stalemate occurred when the king wanted to strengthen his army, but the parliament would not vote the necessary funds. The liberals in parliament asserted the constitutional right to approve taxes, while the king adamantly expressed his right to build up his forces. As the king struggled with this crisis, he called Otto von Bismarck home from his post as Prussian ambassador to France and made him Prime Minister. Bismarck advised the king to ignore the legislature and collect the needed taxes without the Chamber’s approval. To justify the increase of the army, he warned, “the great questions of the day will not be settled by speeches and majority decisions … but by blood and iron.” With the appointment of Bismarck, the Prussians gained the necessary leadership for unification. Bismarck realized that he faced three main obstacles to German unification under Prussian leadership: Austria, Russia and France. He was a master of the art of realpolitik. He had the intelligence to accurately assess conditions, the insight to gauge the character and goals of his opponents, and the talent to move skillfully and quickly to outwit them.
Bismarck’s first action was to neutralize Russia. In 1863, he promised to support Russian claims in any dispute with Austria over Polish territory. As a result, he was able to form an alliance with Russia without giving up anything of value to Prussia. His next step was to deal with Austria. In 1864, Bismarck invited Austria to join Prussia and wage war on Denmark. The cause of the war was the disputed status of two small duchies bordering on Prussia and Denmark. Both the Prussians and the Danes claimed these two duchies, Schleswig and Holstein. The two Germanic powers easily overwhelmed the modest Danish forces and split the duchies: Austria took Holstein, and Schleswig went to Prussia.
Before Bismarck used disputes concerning the governance of these two provinces to provoke a war with Austria, he used skillful diplomacy to ensure (guarantee) that Austria would have no allies in such a war. Italy was already hostile to the Austrians and remained so when Bismarck promised it the area surrounding Austrian-controlled Venice in return for its assistance in any future war. He also encouraged the French to remain neutral by hinting that Prussia might support France should it seek to widen its borders. Finally in 1866, he provoked Austria to war by alleging that they had violated their earlier agreements in regard to Schleswig and Holstein and by sending Prussian troops into the province. Austria took the bait, declared war on Prussia, and was devastated by the Prussians in what became known as the Seven Weeks War.[1] Rejecting the calls of other Prussian leaders to occupy the Austrian capital of Vienna, Bismarck negotiated a generous peace with the Austrians, commenting: “We had to avoid leaving behind in her any desire for revenge.” As a result of the war, 21 northern German states joined with Prussia to form the North German Confederation. By 1767 only the southern German states, most notably Bavaria, remained outside of Prussian control.
·
Describe how
Bismarck maneuvered France into war.
·
Why did Prussia
win the Franco-Prussian War? What were
the results of the war?
After 1867, Bismarck turned his attention westward to France and Napoleon III. The French leader had allowed himself to be talked into neutrality in 1866 because he anticipated a long war between his German neighbors that would weaken both of them. and because he hoped to expand into the neutral state of Belgium. In August 1866, Napoleon III insisted that Prussia approve France’s annexation of Luxembourg and Belgium. In a crafty move, Bismarck asked the French ambassador in Berlin to put these demands into writing but still avoided giving a definite response. Later Bismarck sent the document to the British, who favored Belgian independence, in order to gain their sympathy for the upcoming war with the French. Bismarck then set about to deny France any potential allies. After France’s participation against them in the Crimean War, there was no chance that Russia would come to Napoleon’s aid. Bismarck let the Austrians know about France’s cooperation with the Prussians during the 1866 war, and Italy was already allied with Prussia. Thus, by 1870 France was isolated. It was simply a question now of Bismarck maneuvering the French into war.
The immediate excuse for war centered on the succession to the Spanish throne left vacant after a revolution had overthrown the queen. The Spaniards asked Leopold, a Hohenzöllern prince, to become the constitutional monarch of their country. France saw this as an unacceptable extension of Prussian influence, and Leopold was forced to withdraw his candidacy. But this was not enough for Paris. The French sent their ambassador to Ems, where the Prussian king was vacationing, to gain from him a pledge that he would never permit Leopold to seek the Spanish throne. Wilhelm I refused this request and directed that a message be sent to Bismarck, describing the incident. Bismarck altered this “Ems Telegram” to give the impression that the French ambassador had insulted the Prussian king and that the king had returned the insult. The rumor was leaked to the press, and people in both Prussia and France called for war.
France declared war on July 15, 1870. The two countries’ forces appeared to be evenly matched, but the Prussians had a better-trained and more experienced army. In two months, the Prussians overwhelmed the French, delivering the decisive blow at the Battle of Sedan, where the French emperor and his army were surrounded and forced to capitulate (surrender). Prussian forces besieged Paris for four months before the final French surrender. As a result of the Franco-Prussian War, France lost two wealthy eastern provinces, Alsace and Lorraine, and was required to pay a large indemnity (financial penalty). The south German states joined Prussia, and German unification was finally complete. On January 18, 1871, in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles outside Paris, the Second German Reich was proclaimed, and Wilhelm I of Prussia was crowned German Kaiser (emperor). Bismarck’s diplomatic skill and his use of limited wars to obtain a specific goal had, at long last, produced German unification.[2]
·
Why was the new German
Empire so powerful?
·
Describe how
Wilhelm II ruled Germany.
·
How did German
unification affect the rest of Europe?
Within six short years the weak, divided German states had been unified into a mighty German empire of 41 million people under Prussian leadership. Bismarck provided the initial genius to bring about unification, but the source of German strength was found in its rapid economic growth, skilled military, and efficient political structure. Between 1840 and 1870, Prussian coal production had increased from 4 to 33 million tons per year and their railroads had expanded from 500 to 19,500 kilometers. Although Germany did not yet out-produce Britain, long-term projections showed that the island nation’s growth had leveled out and that in the next generation the Reich would surpass it. The Germans dominated the world market in the chemical and electrical industries and were making strides in other areas as well. They possessed more efficient industries, a higher literacy rate for their workers, better vocational training, and a more aggressive corps of businessmen. Students from all over the world flocked to German universities to receive the best technical and scientific education. German workers were covered by accident, health, and old-age insurance decades before workers in any other major country.[3] German pride was exemplified by the title of the new German national anthem Deutschland Uber Alles (“Germany Above All”).
In 1888 Wilhelm II, the grandson of the emperor Wilhelm I, came to power.[4] The new Kaiser was a person who advocated a policy of “blood and iron,” but without Bismarck’s skill at diplomacy. Where Bismarck knew the limits and uses of force and appreciated the value of restraint, Wilhelm II was a militarist and a bully. Serving in a modern age, the new emperor still believed in the divine right of kings and constantly reminded his countrymen that “he and God” worked together for the good of Germany. With such a contrast in styles, it is not surprising that Wilhelm II saw Bismarck not as a guide but as a threat. In March of 1890 the 31-year-old emperor forced Bismarck to resign the position of chief minister, which he had held for 28 years.
In the first two decades of his rule Wilhelm II nearly doubled the size of the German army. He then announced that he would build a navy larger than Britain’s and demanded that Germany receive its share of colonies in Africa and Asia. German steel production grew from two metric tons per year in 1890 to thirteen in 1910. While the Germans took an almost unrestrained pride in their achievements, the rest of Europe stood terrified. Wilhelm’s rhetoric did little to ease the concerns of Germany’s neighbors. In dispatching troops to China during the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, he exhorted: “Give no quarter (mercy). Take no prisoners. As a thousand years ago when the Huns under King Attila made such a name for themselves as still resounds in terror, so may the name of Germany resound.”
The German army had already humiliated France and Austria. With Russia and the Ottoman Turks a century behind German technology and industry, Britain had its first true rival since the defeat of Napoleon. The forces of nationalism had created a huge giant in the center of Europe that had forever altered the existing balance of power in Europe.
·
Explain why
nationalism was such a threat to the Austrian Empire.
·
Why was the Dual
Monarchy created?
While the concept of nationalism had united Italy and Germany and supplied enormous pride to their people, nationalism was an enormous threat to the Austrian Empire. By 1910, Austria contained 12 million Germans, 10 million Hungarians, 7 million Southern Slavs, over 6 million Czechs, 5 million Poles and 4 million Romanians, along with numerous other nationalities. Each of these groups chafed at being under the rule of the Austrian Germans. Granting the nationalist desires of these various peoples would, however, cause the Austrian Empire to explode into a number of small insignificant pieces.
After the Austrians’ disastrous defeat by Prussia in 1866, the Austrian emperor, Franz Josef, was forced to offer the largest of the non-German nationalities, the Hungarian Magyars, an equal partnership with the Austrians in ruling the empire. The offer was accepted, and in 1867 the constitution known as the Ausgleich (compromise) was enacted. Under this document, the Dual Monarchy of Austria-Hungary came into existence. The Habsburg ruler, Franz Josef, was both king of Hungary and emperor of Austria—that is, all of the empire that was not a part of Hungary. Each area had its own constitution, language, flag, and parliament while finance, defense, and foreign affairs still rested mainly in the hands of the Austrians.
Although the Austrian Germans had recognized the equality of the Hungarians, the rest of the nationalities continued to live under their rule. In some cases, such as in the prospering, sophisticated, industrialized area inhabited by Czechs, the people wanted an independent state or, at the very least, more rights within the Habsburg realm similar to those granted the Hungarians. Others, such as many Slavs (Poles, Serbs, Romanians), sought the goal of joining their countrymen living in adjacent national states. The creation of the Slavic country of Serbia on Austria-Hungary’s southeastern border in 1878 became a constant irritation as many of the Dual Monarchy’s Slavs sought unification with the Serbs. The divisions of the Dual Monarchy were best symbolized by the official bank notes that were printed in eight languages on one side and in Hungarian on the other.
Although bitterly divided at home, the Dual Monarchy occupied a strategic geographical location and had enough military strength to be influential in European diplomacy. In addition, the area had great economic potential with Hungarian wheat, Croatian and Slovenian livestock, Czech banking and industry, and commerce centered in Vienna. Even united, however, Austria-Hungary’s economic and political strength could not compare with that of Germany or even that of France.
·
What problems
did the Ottoman Empire have?
·
How did the
Crimean War and the Congress of Berlin affect the Balkans?
·
What was
Pan-Slavism?
The forces of nationalism also threatened Europe’s weakest power, the Ottoman Turks. After the Congress of Vienna, the Ottoman Empire had included all of modern day Turkey, the Balkan Peninsula of southeastern Europe, and the entire Middle East. Among the nationalities of this far-flung empire were Turks, Greeks, Rumanians, Bulgarians, Albanians, Serbs, Croats, Syrians, Egyptians, and Palestinians, as well as various other European Slavs and Middle Eastern Arabs. The Turks did not, however, possess the power or organizational ability to rule this huge empire effectively. By the nineteenth century Ottoman power had substantially declined in the Balkans just at a time when the various peoples began to experience the waves of nationalism. After failing to put down several rebellions, the Turks had been forced to give a limited amount of autonomy (self-rule) to the Montenegrins and the Serbs. With support from Britain and Russia, the Greeks won their independence in 1827, and parts of the Rumanian portion of the Ottoman Empire became under the influence of Russia.
As the Ottoman Empire grew weaker, Britain, Russia, and Austria competed for dominance in the Balkans. In the Crimean War (1853-1856) Britain and her allies defeated the Russians. The war momentarily stopped the Russian advance into the Balkans, but the problems posed by the weakness of the Ottoman Empire, referred to by the Russian Tsar as the “sick man of Europe,” remained. Further, the various Balkan nations became even more inflamed with the desire for self-rule. In the two decades following the Crimean War, national groups in Montenegro, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania worked to sabotage Turkish rule. The Russians, under the banner of unity with her fellow Slavs (known as Pan-Slavism), encouraged these revolts. The crisis came to a head in 1875 when peasants revolted in the district of Bosnia, a Turkish-governed province populated by a religiously diverse group of Slavs. Following this insurrection, Serbia and Montenegro declared war on the Turks. In the summer of 1876 the Bulgarians revolted, but Ottoman forces forcefully put down the rebellion. When highly emotional accounts of the Turkish massacres were published, the incident became known as the “Bulgarian horrors” and Russia declared war on the Turks in 1877. After a hard-fought campaign, the Russians broke through early in 1878 and were close to achieving their final goal of taking the Ottoman capital of Constantinople when the Turks asked for peace. The resulting Treaty of San Stefano in March 1878 recognized the complete independence of Serbia and Romania from the Ottomans and reaffirmed Montenegro’s independence. In addition, a large Bulgarian state was set up, dominated by Russia.
Britain and Austria, however, objected to the increasing Russian influence in the Balkans and the two of them forced a reconsideration of the San Stefano Treaty at the Congress of Berlin in the summer of 1878. Held under the supervision of the German Chancellor, Bismarck, the Congress forced Russia to agree to weaken its hold on Bulgaria. Britain was awarded the island of Cyprus, and Austria got the right to “occupy and administer” the provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. After the Congress of Berlin, the Balkans remained an arena of local nationalistic conflicts with the major powers of Europe, principally neighboring Russia and Austria, competing for influence.
·
How did imperialism
increase tensions in Europe?
As the twentieth century dawned, all of the major western European countries were undergoing rapid industrial expansion. Competition over natural resources and markets was best seen in the scramble for colonies in Africa and Asia. Britain’s vast empire, backed up by the world’s strongest navy, gave her a huge industrial advantage. Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, and Portugal had seized most of Africa and Asia before the newer countries of Germany and Italy were in a position to compete for colonies. Determined to obtain Germany’s “Place in the Sun,” Kaiser Wilhelm II launched an effort to obtain colonies in the late nineteenth century that yielded Cameroon, East Africa, South-West Africa, and numerous small islands in the southeast Pacific; however, there was a strong sense among Germans that they had been stuck with the leftovers after Britain and France had captured all the prizes. Italy had even less success, seizing Libya and Eritrea, but suffering the humiliation of being the only European power to be driven out of an African country when they were defeated by the Ethiopians in the Battle of Adawa (1896). Imperialistic rivalries greatly contributed to the tension that gripped Europe by 1914. Twice, in 1906 and 1911, German and French competition over Morocco threatened to trigger war and was narrowly averted by international peace conferences that gave France a free hand in Morocco and compensated Germany with a small area in central Africa.
·
Why did the
Three Emperor’s League fail?
·
What countries
made up the Triple Alliance?
·
Why was the
French-Russian alliance a threat to Germany?
·
Why did Britain
ally itself with France and Russia?
From 1870 to 1890, Bismarck dominated European diplomacy. He built a foreign policy devoted to the diplomatic isolation of France by depriving it of potential allies. He reasoned that the French would try to take revenge on Germany and regain Alsace and Lorraine, but he knew they could do little without aid from the Austrians or Russians.
In 1873, Bismarck made an alliance, known as the Three Emperors’ League (Dreikaiserbund), with Russia and Austria-Hungary. The weakness of this alliance was that both Austria and Russia had their eyes on the territory of the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans. At the Congress of Berlin, Bismarck was forced to choose between the conflicting claims of the Austrians and Russians. He chose to support Austria-Hungary for a number of reasons, including a fear of alienating (angering) Great Britain if he backed the Russians. In addition, he felt that he could probably dominate Austria more easily than Russia. In 1879, Bismarck negotiated the Dual Alliance with the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. As the Three Emperor’s League fell apart, Bismarck negotiated a separate agreement with Russia called the Reinsurance Treaty, in which both sides pledged neutrality—except if Germany attacked France or Russia attacked Austria. In 1882, Italy joined the Austro-German Alliance, which now became the Triple Alliance.
For twenty years Bismarck’s Germany made every effort to avoid challenging Britain’s interests and to continue to isolate France. As a result, enemies did not surround Germany. In the 1890s, however, the rash actions of Wilhelm II destroyed Germany’s favorable position. He dismissed Bismarck, took foreign policy in his own hands, and ruined the diplomatic advantages the former chancellor had built up. When the Kaiser allowed the Reinsurance Treaty to lapse shortly after dismissing Bismarck in 1890, the Russians sought new allies. By 1894, France finally achieved what it had wanted for twenty years—a strong ally. The Dual Alliance of Russia and France now confronted the Triple Alliance of Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary. Thus, Germany’s worst fears had come to pass as it now had enemies on both its eastern and western borders.
Since the defeat of Napoleon, Britain had avoided strong alliances with the other major European powers, preferring to have them fight among themselves so that no power could grow strong enough to challenge British supremacy. By the end of the nineteenth century, Britain found itself involved in bitter rivalries with Russia in the Balkans and France in Africa. Most threatening for London, however, was Germany’s plan to build a fleet that would compete with Britain’s. The British knew that the German naval program was aimed directly at them. For the island nation, the supremacy of the Royal Navy was a life-or-death matter. Since food and raw materials had to come by sea, it was crucial that their navy be able to protect British shipping.
Challenged by Germany and increasingly isolated, Britain began to look for allies. In 1904 officials from London and Paris began to settle their outstanding differences and proclaimed the Entente Cordiale (“friendly understanding”), setting aside a tradition of hostility going back to the fourteenth century. The Entente ended Britain’s policy of diplomatic isolation and brought it into the combination pitted against Germany’s Triple Alliance. In 1907, London also settled its problems with Russia, thereby establishing the Triple Entente.
Europe was now divided into two major alliances, the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy; and the Triple Entente of France, Russia, and Britain. This new system of alliances created the very real danger that a small dispute could quickly escalate (expand) into a major European war.
·
What was
militarism?
·
How did
militarism contribute to European tensions?
·
How was Germany
able to build a potential army of almost six million men?
Throughout the nineteenth century European countries had used military force to achieve their political goals. Germany and Italy had been unified through war. All of the major countries saw military strength as the key element to maintaining their power and influence. This belief in militarism led countries to create enormous armies. Germany’s huge and technologically advanced army was a grave threat to her neighbors, causing both France and Russia to expand their forces in order to keep up. By the end of the 1870s, five of the six major powers had introduced compulsory military training. Although the British had not done so, they were in the process of rapidly expanding their fleet. By the first decade of the twentieth century, the great powers had nearly four and a half million men in the military and spent annually more than $2 billion on arms.
The German military system involved all healthy men from the age of 17 to 45 and served as a model for the other powers. At 17, men registered for military training that lasted 2 or 3 years. This was followed by active service that ended at 27. Then the soldier joined the reserves (the Landwehr) where he would engage in periodic training and could be called back into active service in the event of war. At 39, men left the Landwehr and joined the Landstrum where they could be called for wartime administrative duties. Only at 45 was a man’s military obligation fulfilled. Concerns about military spending limited the full implementation of the German military system, as prior to 1914 only 54% of Germany’s potential manpower was actually called into service. France, with 25 million fewer people, required military training out of all its non-disabled young men and maintained the capability to mobilize almost as many men as Germany.[5] As a result of universal conscription, the nations of Europe became literal armed camps with the potential to mobilize (put into service) millions of men in a matter of days.
Militarism not only meant the maintenance of huge armies, it also described a belief in the benefits of war. As a German general had remarked in 1880: “War is an element of the world order established by God. It fosters the noblest virtues of man, courage, self-denial, obedience to duty, and the spirit of sacrifice…. Without war, the world would stagnate and sink into materialism.” In the wake of the short, successful wars that had enabled Germany and Italy to unify, it was not unreasonable for European statesmen to view war as a relatively painless, means of pursuing their political goals.
·
What factors led
to tensions in the Balkans between Austria-Hungary, Serbia, and Russia?
The two rival alliances soon came to blows over the Balkans where the interests of Austria-Hungary and Russia directly collided. In this complex area that became known as the “powder keg of Europe,” the forces of local nationalism drew the great powers into a military showdown. Austria and Russia had long opposed each other’s policies in southeastern Europe. During the nineteenth century, each country had attempted to benefit from the gradual collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and neither side could afford for the other to gain too great an advantage in the area.
The main issue that increased hostility in the Balkans was Austria-Hungary’s annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908. The Dual-Monarchy had administered the two areas since the 1878 Congress of Berlin, so the annexation actually changed very little. But the Slavs perceived the annexation as humiliating to them. Serbia was outraged by the incorporation of more Slavs into the Habsburg Empire and expected its Slavic protector, Russia, to do something about it. The Russians had been badly bruised in their war with Japan and the Revolution of 1905. Humiliatingly, aside from making threatening noises, they could do little, especially in the face of Germany’s support for Austria-Hungary. The Germans dreamed of a Berlin-based political and economic zone stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Persian Gulf and also could not afford to abandon their only dependable ally, Austria.
Austro-Hungarian interest in the Balkans was primarily concerned with keeping Serbia under control. A strong Serbia served as an attractive alternative to Austrian rule to the Slavs of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the rest of Austria-Hungary. Serbia dreamed of acquiring the Dual Monarchy’s Slavic minorities, while Russia found itself backed into a corner. The Russians in the future would be forced to act strongly and encourage aggressive policies on the part of their Balkan allies or lose forever their position of leadership of Pan-Slavism. The Serbian government had even begun to assist anti-Austrian terrorists, known as the Black Hand, in Bosnia.
In 1912, Serbia and its neighbors Greece and Bulgaria formed an alliance with the objective of expelling Turkey completely from the European continent. The First Balkan War began later in the year and came to a quick end with the defeat of the Turks. Serbia, Romania, and Bulgaria soon quarreled over the territory acquired in the war, and in 1913 Bulgaria attacked its former allies, starting the Second Balkan War. The Romanians and Turks in turn joined with the Serbs. The Bulgarians were no match for the combined strengths of its enemies and were forced to sign a peace agreement that turned over most of the territory that they had earlier gained in the first war. The Serbs were the major beneficiaries of these two wars, while the Turks were the clear losers. By 1913, the Turks retained only a precarious toehold in Europe, the small pocket from Adrianople to Constantinople.
By the end of 1913, no permanent solution had been found to the Balkan problems. Austria was more fearful than ever of Serbia’s expansionist desires and its threat to the Dual Monarchy’s Slavic minorities. Russia feared losing its status as a great power as its influence in the Balkans continued to decline. Serbian ambitions had grown even larger since its territory had doubled as a result of the two recent wars. The Serbian Prime Minister declared: “The first round is won: now we must prepare the second against Austria.”[6]
Jeffrey
T. Stroebel, The Sycamore School, 1995.
Revised 2000.
[1] Prussian technology produced immense Austrian casualties. In the decisive battle of Sadowa, 45,000 Austrians died, most victims of Prussia’s quick-firing needle gun.
[2] Most of the information relating to European nationalism is derived from Wallbank, Taylor, Bailkey, Jewsbury, Lewis, and Hackett, Civilizations Past and Present, Chapter 24: Reaction, And Reform; Chapter 25: Society, Politics, And Culture, 1871-1914; and Chapter 26: The Foundations Of European Global Dominance.
[3] Health insurance, paid for by 50% contributions from workers and employers, was introduced in 1883, workers’ accident insurance a year later, and old age and disability insurance (similar to Social Security) in 1889.
[4] Wilhelm II’s father, Friedrich, ruled for only 99 days after the death of Wilhelm I before dying of throat cancer. Friedrich, deeply influenced by his wife Vicky who was the eldest daughter of England’s Queen Victoria, favored developing Germany into a liberal, constitutional monarchy. It was at the wedding of Friedrich and Vicky in 1588 that Felix Mendelssohn’s famous Wedding March was played for the first time.
[5] While Germany was forced to enlist only 54% of its men in the eligible age range, France was forced to call up 82%.
[6]Parts of this section have been adapted from Civilizations Past and Present, Chapter 30: Tragic War And Futile Peace: World War I.