“Making friends and uniting communities one trench at a time.”

Good day gamers,

Lots of ground to cover as usual…

• OctaCon with the Bethpage Library, which will be both online and in person. October 23 & 24. More details coming on this website this week. The schedule and more info.
• Played two games of Silver Bayonet and half a game of Apollo the other day. Both very interesting games.
• Ginger has been very busy with her wedding business. If you need anyone that needs an officiant, please check out here website.
• Been listening to Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History podcast for my Empire State College World War I class. I highly suggest all of Dan Carlin’s stuff. It looks like the World War I series called “Blueprint for Armageddon” is not free anymore, but it’s great. @dancarlin @hardcorehistory

My first World War I paper.

As stated before, I’m attending Empire State College to finish up my degree. The course I’m taking right now is on World War I. The very first paper I needed to write had to be about five double-spaced pages and be from our readings. The purpose of the paper was to rank the Great Powers of Europe and rank their responsibility for starting the war. I’ve included the paper below. I hope you enjoy.

Send me feedback at Dave@GameMasterGames.com

Thanks so much and enjoy! I hope you learn something.

• Game Master Dave

Here it is…

The Great Powers’ Responsibility for World War I

            This assignment is to rank the Great Powers’ responsibility for the start of World War I and to support our decisions with our readings.  A five-page essay cannot give justice to this analysis.

If a random survey was sent to the average American today, they would almost certainly say that Germany was completely responsible for World War I after the assassination of a Duke somewhere in Europe.  This could be an extrapolation from their general understanding that Germany started World War II, and therefore Germany started World War I as well.  I am confident that most Americans do not know very much about how World War I started.  I plan to show that Germany is partially to blame, but it certainly should not hold all the responsibility.  In addition, I would like to advance the idea that some of the reasons for the war were not any one nation’s fault, but the fault of the militarism, industrialism and technology, and the failure of the  alliance system.  I will assign points, ‘War Points’ to each explanation, and we will come to a score at the end of this essay.

Austria-Hungary

The Austrian-Hungarian nation was considered declining in power and prestige in relation to other European great powers. There were political and ethnic tensions among several ethnic groups within the nation as well as mutual mistrust with its neighbor Serbia. Each feared the others expanding influence and territorial ambitions in the Balkans. On June 28, 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary was assassinated in Sarajevo by suspected Serbian supported rebels. Austria-Hungary was eager for revenge.  After receiving tacit support from Germany for a planned attack on Serbia, Austria-Hungary sent an ultimatum to Serbia demanding a response within a short 48-hour time frame.  Austria-Hungary was sure that Serbia could not agree to all the terms of the ultimatum, and Serbia did not.  This led to mobilization by both nation’s armies and Austria-Hungary’s declaration of war on Serbia.  Austria-Hungary knew that an attack on Serbia meant that Russia was most likely going to support Serbia in the war.  Russia’s involvement would then widen the conflict by pulling in France, since France had an alliance with Russia.  Austria-Hungary was willing to risk that by declaring war on Serbia, Russia might be called into the conflict by Serbia, Germany might then be called into the war by Austria-Hungary, and France might be called into the war by Russia.  Austria-Hungary knew that an attack on Serbia might start a continent-wide conflict.  Austria-Hungary bears some responsibility for the start of World War I, because they issued an impossible ultimatum to Serbia despite the knowledge that this could create a greater conflict.  I assign Austria Hungary one War Point.

Russia

After losing a war to the Japanese in 1905, Russia concentrated its political and military attention on Europe instead of on the East.  The Russian military had fallen behind in technological advancements.  The reorganization and reequipment of the Russian military were sorely needed, and programs were started in 1908 to address military requirements.  Other European nations were aware of the Russian military weakness and did not expect Russia to mobilize effectively to defend the Dardanelles Straight or get involved in another Balkan war.  However, Russia needed to keep its prestige with the Balkan States and needed to give the impression that it was still strong.  When Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, Russia decided to start the mobilization of troops to potentially assist Serbia. 

Mobilizing huge armies required an immense amount of logistical support especially around communication and transportation.  Military theory at this time was that victory went to the nation that could arrive on the battlefield first and with the greatest numbers.  Therefore, mobilization of a nation’s military forces was considered an act of war.  An unintended consequence of Russian mobilization was to give Germany an excuse to declare war on Russia.  I assign Russia one War Point for this first non-Balkan mobilization which led to general war.

Germany

Germany could be assigned many ‘War Points’ for factors including the diplomatic processes that were started with Otto von Bismarck after 1871, the annexation of the Alsace-Lorraine territory after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the adherence to the Schlieffen Plan that forced Germany to stick to an extremely strict timeline, and the German perception that they were surrounded.  I have decided to assign Germany two War Points.

First, when Austria-Hungary was asked for a guarantee of assistance if they declared war on Serbia, Germany issued a ‘blank check’ to Austria-Hungary. This meant that whatever Austria-Hungary decided to do with Serbia, Germany would support the decision. The only German condition was that Austria-Hungary act quickly. Germany’s support should have had additional conditions.  This ‘blank check’ gave Austria-Hungary too much of a sense of security for its future actions.  If there had been no ‘blank check’, Austria-Hungary may have acted less aggressively, and general war may have been avoided. 

Second, Germany provoked a wider conflict by invading Belgium, a neutral country.  The concept behind the Schlieffen Plan was to fight a two-front war, but only one front at a time.  Germany’s main opponents on a continental war were France to the West and Russia to the East.  Using analytical detail, including an exact time schedule for mobilization and transportation of troops and material, the plan assumed that a quick knock-out blow to France, just like in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, could be performed very quickly. Then Germany could quickly shift troops to the East to defend against and eventually defeat the Russians.  Germany did not know if Britain would support France in the conflict, so the German plan was to eliminate France so quickly that it would not matter what the English did.  Germany believed that to secure a future as a Great Power on the continent, they had to strike first and hard.  It was important to defeat France before the Russians could completely mobilize their armies.  The French had built fortifications along the border with Germany.  Germany felt that defeating these defenses would be too time consuming, so Germany decided to go around the French forts by going through neutral Belgium and this is exactly what they did.  Germany’s violation of a neutral nation enraged the world, and German prestige dropped considerably.  The invasion of Belgium added to the resolve of Britain to help France and led to negative propaganda against Germany.  I assign Germany two War Points:  one for the ‘blank check’ to Austria-Hungary and one for the violation of neutrality of Belgium.

France

France was still upset by its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 and the loss of the Alsace-Lorraine territory.  France understood that Germany’s military was more technologically advanced, but France in 1914 could still field an impressive number of troops once mobilization was complete.  France also assumed that a defensive war was not good for morale or prestige and developed plans for offensive operations in case of war.  France built massive forts along its border with Germany and maintained very limited diplomatic relations with the Germans.  However, France formed an alliance with Russia, and they both guaranteed each other’s independence in case of war.  Does France bear any responsibility for World War I?  The alliance with Russia showed an offensive spirit, but more than anything, France’s terrible defeat to the Prussians in 1870 gave the Germans much confidence that France could be easily defeated again.  If France had been more assertive toward Germany, France could have helped avoid a greater war. 

Why did France not support Serbia?  Why did France not threaten to invade Austria-Hungary using its fleet in the Mediterranean?  Could this have helped to avoid a greater war?  These questions would take further research.  I give France one half of a War Point for not using the diplomatic resources available to avoid a greater conflict. 

Britain

Britain’s responsibility for the war rests on two counts.  First, their naval arms race with Germany increased tensions.  Britain was a global colonial, financial, diplomatic, and naval power in 1914, as it had been for a hundred years or more.  Germany had great colonial aspirations, but Britain and France controlled most of the world’s markets. Germany needed imports of food, and Britain’s navy threatened this important resource.  By having such a large naval presence with more warships and dreadnaughts than Germany, Britain could blockade Germany. The possibility of blockade fed into the German feeling of being surrounded.  Britain’s policy at the time was to make sure they had 60% more warships than any other nation in the world.  This policy triggered a naval arms race with Germany, with Germany committing almost 50% of their war budget to building ships to compete with Britain.  Britain could have realized that Germany was in a tough position and would be willing to negotiate.  Britain could have offered a naval treaty to release the tension. 

Second, as tensions rose on the continent, Britain stayed non-committal.  There was much debate in the British parliament about how to approach the continental tensions that had been rising the years before World War I.  France and Russia asked Britain for an alliance while Germany and Austria-Hungary looked for Britain to stay out of the continental alliances.  Britain did not commit to a solid response to any of these nations, though Britain gave the impression of potential British support for France and Russia.

I assign Britain two War Points: one for not engaging with Germany for a diplomatic solution to the naval arms race, and second because they refused to commit earlier to an alliance.  If Britain had signed a treaty with France or Russia in 1914 or before, Britain may have helped to keep the balance of power, and Germany and Austria-Hungary may have reconsidered starting a war. 

Other European Factors

            I assign one War Point to the prevalence of militarism in Europe at the time.  All nations spent enormous budgets on their militaries.  This was a holdover from previous experiences with diplomacy and conflicts.  For a thousand years, Europe experienced small wars between states or provinces for the gain of territory, a population or financial center, good land for growing crops, or revenge for insults between monarchs.  Militarism was ingrained in the culture of each nation.  To have a bigger and better military than your neighbors was always deemed important for creating a favorable outcome for national goals.  Nations frequently used their small, professional, well-trained, state-supported armies to achieve their goals. Militarism led leaders to overvalue war as a diplomatic tool.

            The next War Point is for industrialization and technological advancement.  Due to industrialization, armies became larger, better-equipped, and logistically supported through mass manufacturing and transportation.  Weapons technology advanced rapidly.  There were no major Great Power conflicts for a generation before World War I, so no one understood how accurate and deadly the weapon systems were. If leaders understood the destructive power they were about to unleash, perhaps they would have chosen to avoid war.

            I assign one War Point to the failure of the alliance system to prevent World War I.  The goal of the alliance system was to keep the balance of power in Europe and avoid major conflicts.  The alliance system did successfully keep the major powers out of larger conflicts even after two Balkan Wars before 1914, but the same system created a domino effect in pulling the Great Powers into World War I.  The alliance system failed to prevent The Great War.

Assigned War Points

• 3 War Points – shared among all the Great Powers – Militarism, Industrialization and Technology, and the Alliance System.
• 2 War Points – Britain
• 2 War Points – Germany
• 1 War Point – Austria-Hungary
• 1 War Point – Russia
• .5 War Points – France

            In conclusion, there were many factors leading to the start of World War I, including some mentioned only briefly in this assignment.  It is my opinion that the responsibility is shared by all the Great Power of Europe.  European leaders believed that the benefits of victory would outweigh the costs of war.  They hoped the conflict would be fast.  They hoped it would be short.  They all felt that they had a better than equal chance of success in gaining prestige, land, and power.  As we will continue to study, the war did not turn out the way anyone thought it would.

Bibliography

Carlin, Dan. “Countdown to Armageddon, Episode 50”. Hardcore History. Podcast Audio.

October 29, 2013.  https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-55-blueprint-for-armageddon-series/

Friedman, Normal.  Fighting the Great War at Sea: Strategy, Tactics and Technology.

            S Yorkshire: Seaforth Publishing, 2014.

Herwig, Holger H. The Outbreak of World War I. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company,

1997.

Keegan, John. The First World War.  New York, NY: Vintage Books, 1998.