As David Kaiser points out in his article Germany and the Origins of the First World War, some historians such as Fritz Fischer assign blame for the start of World War I squarely on Germany. According to this argument Germany had designed to start a war because it would quell the domestic social unrest that was going on back home. But as Kaiser points out this is a misconception because most of the German leadership (as disunified as they may have been in other issues) preferred to keep Germany out of War if they could because they knew that a war would only cause more internal social problems than it actually would solve. The conservatives in Germany especially realized this because they knew that the conclusion of a war tends to bring on domestic progressive changes, no matter if it results in victory or defeat. However that does not mean that such groups as the conservatives and even the central party did not see the need for Germany to try to expand its colonial reach, and build up its military, specifically the navy, all in the name of German prestige. But even then, those in command such as Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz( who is credit with the massive buildup of the German Imperial Navy) did not believe that Germany should go to war to achieve the prestige it so desired. As chancellor Bernhard von Bülow viewed it, Germany was well off as long as there was a perception that it was doing something to be a major world power. The problem with Bülow's view is that other world power such as Great Britain took this perception of Germany as increasing world power as a major threat to their interests. Germany's growing and increasingly more powerful Imperial Navy posed to the British the greatest threat of all to their superiority of the world's seas. This in turn would cause an arms race between the two navies which was also partially to blame for the start of the war.
This being said, I would like to add to Kaiser's argument that Germany did not start the war intentionally to quell internal social unrest because to propose such an argument ignores the fact that the First World war was culmination of different events that were not just concentrated in Germany or in western Europe. World War I had been ignited by Austria-Hungry's diverse empire crumbling apart, and Russia casting an eye towards the Balkan territories as the Ottoman empire slowly disintegrated just as much as it had been ignited by Germany's rise in militarism and world power. In other words to say Germany had caused World War I is to forget that the war was truly global and more than just a western Europe conflict.
I agree that the blame for the First World War was unjustifiably placed on the German nation. Though they may have had reasons for going to war, though an outdated political systems, social conflict and territorial expansion may have driven the ruling class into war more enthusiastically, the fault and the blame for the war itself lies in all european powers involved through entangling alliances. Britain may have gone to stop out a growing industrial and naval competitor, France to regain lost territory and honor lost in the Franco-Prussian war, Russia to assert its role as the Mother to all Slavic nations (ie Serbia), and Austria to expand into the Balkans and avenge the loss of their royalty. All the major players had reasons to go to war, to assign Germany the label of aggressor is simply bad history, or the record as it was decided by the victors.
ReplyDeleteThis myth that Germany “started World War I” is, as you both point out, is simplistic and erroneous. Worse still, little is done from elementary school onwards to dispel this notion; it was not until an earlier college course that I became aware of the fabulously tangled political situation that was Europe in the first decades of the 20th Century — it was a pub fight just waiting to happen. Serbia threw the first punch, Germany stood up for its mate Austria, and other nations fell in line. Germany did not stand up, declare war for the sake of war, and begin throwing beer bottles. I think Germany had a great desire to be taken seriously; in many respects he was the new kid on the block, and — as we have discussed before — somewhat awkwardly placed. If the other nations did not have this inferiority complex, in most other respects they went into the war with the same gusto as Germany. Bored young men of all nations, raised in a century of peace, were eager to take part in something bigger than themselves and believed sincerely that “dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.”
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that Germany has been assigned the blame for World War One irroneously, likely due to its position as the only one of losing nations to survive the war (Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire being dissolved). It was in the interest of the winners to place the blame on Germany, both for the immediate gain of financial reparations and the historical significance of being seen as the victim and accusing Germany of being the aggressor, which is why this myth is pervasive even today. France and Russia were just as quick to resort to military solutions as Germany and Austria, but they have been projected as the "good guys", which is what always happens after a war.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Germany is not chiefly responsible to the onset of the First World War. I believe that the blame that Germany had to assume as a provision of the Treaty of Versailles was rashly disproportional, nevertheless, as the primary force of the Central Powers the German Empire is chiefly to blame at the end of the war because of their position in conflict. The primary blame can placed on the major European nations that began forming alliances during peacetime and around the development of volatile conflicts that were occurring in smaller, less stable regions that were of significant interests to the aligning major European nations. All the nations involved at the onset were to blame because of their prewar alignments, but because of Germany's role during the conflict and the conflicts outcome there is not doubt that they deserved to assume blame for the conflict, although the sanctions were harsh.
ReplyDeleteAs the other commentators have pointed out, I think you are quite correct to note that WWI did not begin simply because German elites sought to manipulate domestic issues. Even if those in charge had truly viewed war as the best means of solving their internal problems, the other nations certainly bear a share of the blame for letting events escalate as quickly as they did (and arguably for allowing such a tense international scene to develop in the first place.)
ReplyDelete