Matu syllabus reference - La 1re guerre mondiale : discuter des diverses causes de la première guerre et des questions relatives à la responsabilité de la guerre. Présenter les grandes étapes et les caractéristiques de la guerre ; mesurer les conséquences de la guerre, les buts et les limites des traités de paix et présenter la SDN comme espoir de sécurité collective. Matu syllabus
Lesson 1 - Introduction - The long-term causes of WW1: Which were the six Great Powers of Europe before WWI?
|
Having studied nationalism and imperialism in the 19th century, you already have a solid grasp of the international situation in 1900. The video opposite is from a classic 1960s BBC production, the first major attempt to produce a television documentary about the war. This episode provides a country by country overview of 1914 that is worth watching. The people participating in the series were as close to the war of 1914, as we are to the 1960s film. Although very dated the series has the advantage of having interviews with participants when they were still relatively young. In the last six years or so there have been many fantastic resources produced to commemorate 100 years since the war. Why not watch some of them? |
|
It is important to think about what we mean when we say 'cause'. What we refer to as background causes are, in the strict sense, not causes—they did not make the First World War inevitable. Instead, in history, we must talk in terms of probabilities. What follows is a set of developments that made war more likely. These developments increased the suspicion, fear and tension between the European powers and therefore made war 'more likely'. Further, they made a big war more likely. The trend towards larger militaries, industrial capacity and empires made the chances that a short, limited, regional war involving two, maybe three, countries would stay contained slim at best. In 1914 the six most powerful countries in Europe were divided into two opposing sets of alliances. The Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy) formed in 1882 and the Triple Entente (Britain, France and Russia) formed in 1907.
|
The Triple Entente
Great Britain
Great Britain
|
As we saw in our study of the Industrial Revolution, Britain under Queen Victoria (1837-1901) had become the richest and most powerful state on earth. For most of the 19th century, she had the richest industries, the most trade, the largest number of colonies and the biggest navy.
Britain was a constitutional monarchy. The king could not make his own laws and as we saw earlier, the franchise had been extended on a number of occasions after 1832 to give all men the right to vote at the start of the 20th century. The British monarch was not only the head of state of Great Britain, but also the Emperor of India and ruler of many other lands overseas. These colonies formed the British Empire, the largest empire in the world, nearly a quarter of the world's land surface. One quarter of the world's population lived in the British Empire. |
|
There were problems. Unemployment was rising. Workers in powerful trade unions were organising strikes. Riots and demonstrations were becoming common. Women suffragettes were demanding the right to vote The biggest problem facing Britain was what to do with Ireland. Ireland was part of Great Britain and was governed from London. But most Irish people wanted to change this. They wanted to break away from Britain and have Home Rule. Protestants living in the North, however, wanted to stay British. By 1914, both Protestants and Home Rulers were armed and ready to fight. It looked as if there would be a civil war in Ireland
Since the Napoleonic Wars and throughout the 19th Century Britain had tried not to get involved in mainland European politics. Its attitude became known as ‘splendid isolation’ as it concentrated on its huge overseas empire. For most of the nineteenth century, Britain had regarded France and Russia as its two most dangerous rivals. However, by the early 1900s the picture had begun to change. France and Britain had reached a number of agreements about colonies in North Africa. As we saw last week, in 1904 Russia was defeated in a war against Japan. This weakened Russia so that Britain less concerned about it.
Above all, Britain was very worried about Germany. The German Kaiser had made it clear he wanted Germany to have an empire and a strong navy, which Britain saw as a threat to its own empire and navy. Britain began to co-operate more with France and signed an agreement with it in 1903 (Entente Cordiale) and signed another agreement with Russia in 1907.
France
|
France was twice the size of Britain and about the same size as Germany. The land was fertile, she had an excellent transport system and she owned many colonies. But in spite of these advantages France was weaker than Britain and Germany. Her farms and factories produced less, the industrial revolution had been slower and her population was not only smaller than theirs but was actually shrinking. The defeat in the Franco-Prussian War obsessed French politics. After this defeat, the Germans took away two valuable provinces from France - Alsace and Lorraine. The loss of these provinces made many French people hate the Germans bitterly. Like many European countries traditional French politics was struggling to come to terms with the rise of the working class. Trades Unions were growing in power and the socialist party was becoming influential and threatening revolutionary change (again, 1789, 1830, 1848, 1871).
|
(Above – A French cartoon shows a boy looking down on the ‘lost provinces’)
|
At the start of the century France was most famous for its artistic life and for its fashion. Many of the world's most famous painters, designers, writers, scientists and musicians lived and worked in France. Paris was not only the capital of France, but the cultural capital of the world. Unlike the other great powers of Europe, France was a republic - that is, a country ruled by an elected president. France had the second largest empire in the world. France was worried about the growing power of Germany, so the French had also built up their industries and armies. France had also developed a strong and close friendship with Russia including an alliance in 1894. Most of her colonies were in Africa and her other main colonies were in the Far East, in Indo-China. The French army in Indo-China was often at war with groups of rebels who wanted independence, and the cost of fighting was a drain on France's men and money.
Russia
|
Russia is the largest country in the world but, in 1900, she was also one of the poorest. She was very rich in minerals - oil, coal, iron ore, gold, etc - but these had not been exploited. The country was almost entirely agricultural, although loans from France had helped Russia to develop some industries. She had a huge population but most people lived in the western half of the country. Russia had great amounts of land but much of it was too cold for farming. She had a long coastline but most of it was frozen for half the year, making sea transport impossible. And Russia was an empire of many peoples, each speaking a different language, from the Finns in the north to the Caucasians in the south and the Poles in the west. All these things made Russia hard to govern as the threat of nationalist independence groups was very real.
|
|
Russia was politically archaic. Feudalism had only finally been ended with the freeing of the serfs in 1861. An autocrat like Louis XVI, Russia's ruler Tsar Nicholas II was a weak man. He was a bad judge of people and was easily influenced by poor advisers. In 1905, partly as a result of the defeat in war to Japan, Russia suffered a revolution which nearly brought down the Tsar. There were many revolutionary groups on the extreme left, anarchists and socialists, (Lenin's Bolsheviks will be important later) who were plotting to seize power. The industrial revolution had begun in Russia and capitalism was expanding quickly. Just as in the early stages of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, most Russians lived and worked in dreadful conditions. Workers in the towns laboured for up to fourteen hours a day for very low wages. Their homes were crowded and unhealthy. Workers like these had little reason to support the Tsar. Many were ready to rebel against him and join the anarchists and socialists.
|
Nearly eight out of ten Russians were peasants who scraped a living by farming small plots of land. At the best of times, life was hard and short for the peasants. In bad times, when the harvest was poor, many died while others lived desperately close to starvation. Like the workers in the towns, the peasants were ready to rebel against the rule of the Tsar.
In the 19th century, Russia had sought to gain influence in the Balkans. Just as in the Far East, access to the Mediterranean via the Black Sea was important to a country whose northern ports were frozen for months of the year. The Crimean War 1853-56 had seen Russia go to war against the Ottoman Empire for influence in the region (this remains a contemporary issue). The intervention of Britain and France were critical to Russian defeat. This was also a reason for the long history of rivalry with Austria-Hungary and why Russia was so friendly with Serbia. Another reason was that both Russians and Serbs were Slavs. Many other Slavs lived in Austria-Hungary’s empire. Russia felt it should have influence over them. Russia shared France’s worries about the growing power of Germany. The Russians began to build up a large army in case of emergencies in the future. |
|
The Triple Alliance
Germany
In 1914 Germany was less than fifty years old. As we saw, Chancellor Bismarck of Prussia united the German states into a new country - the German Empire. In 1870 the Prussian statesman Bismarck won a war against France, after which he united the many German states into a new and powerful German empire. Germany was the most powerful country on the European continent and had 1870 begun to over take Britain economically. Germany too had her problems. As in all the European countries, many workers were unhappy because their wages were low, food was expensive and working conditions were bad. More and more workers were joining trade unions and organising strikes, hoping that this would force the government to improve their conditions. Many were also joining the Socialist Party which wanted Kaiser Wilhelm to share his power with Germany's parliament. Some Socialists wanted to overthrow him in a revolution. In 1914 the German Socialist Party was the most important in Europe.
In 1914 Germany was less than fifty years old. As we saw, Chancellor Bismarck of Prussia united the German states into a new country - the German Empire. In 1870 the Prussian statesman Bismarck won a war against France, after which he united the many German states into a new and powerful German empire. Germany was the most powerful country on the European continent and had 1870 begun to over take Britain economically. Germany too had her problems. As in all the European countries, many workers were unhappy because their wages were low, food was expensive and working conditions were bad. More and more workers were joining trade unions and organising strikes, hoping that this would force the government to improve their conditions. Many were also joining the Socialist Party which wanted Kaiser Wilhelm to share his power with Germany's parliament. Some Socialists wanted to overthrow him in a revolution. In 1914 the German Socialist Party was the most important in Europe.
|
In 1871, Germany had taken from France the important industrial area of Alsace-Lorraine and, to guard against a revenge attack from the French, formed an alliance with Austria-Hungary and Italy. Bismarck went on to established a complex set of alliances and through careful diplomacy tried to keep her potential enemy France isolated. The key to this was the Three Emperors League between Germany, Russia, and Austria-Hungary, which William I signed in October 1873 and which was renewed twice in 1881 and 1884. Bismarck even encouraged French imperialism in order to bring France into potential conflict with Britain. Germany's imperial ambitions were deliberately restrained in order to restrict possible causes of conflict. Then when the new German Emperor, Kaiser Wilhelm II came to power in 1888, and when he sacked Bismarck in 1890 everything changed. (See cartoon right)
The German Kaiser felt that Germany should be a world power and should have overseas colonies and an empire like France and Britain had. The Germans had established two colonies in Africa, but they wanted more. In the 1890s the Kaiser ordered the building of a large navy, which soon became the world’s second most powerful fleet. Britain’s was the largest and most powerful. German leaders were very worried by what they called ‘encirclement’. Friendship between Russia to the east and France to the west was seen as an attempt to ‘surround’ and threaten Germany. Germany was also concerned by the huge build-up of arms, especially in Russia, and was itself building up a vast army. The new Germany was especially successful in industry. By 1914 German industry had overtaken Britain’s and was second in the world only to that of the USA. |
|
Austria-Hungary
Austria-Hungary had become a union of two separate countries. The union was established by the Austro-Hungarian Compromise on 30 March 1867 after the defeat of Austria in the Austro-Prussian War. It was ruled by the House of Habsburg and following the 1867 reforms, the Austrian and Hungarian states were co-equal in power. Foreign and military affairs came under joint oversight, but all other governmental faculties were divided between respective states. Inside each country lived many different peoples, or nationalities, each with its own language, its own customs and its own way of life. Like Russia, this made the country very hard to govern, especially as many of the peoples wanted to be independent of Austria-Hungary so that they could rule themselves in their own ways. The 'patchwork' of peoples was falling apart. Like Russia, Austria-Hungary had no colonies overseas. Nor did Franz Joseph aim to get any. He already ruled an empire of eleven different nationalities, many of them wanting their freedom.
Austria-Hungary had become a union of two separate countries. The union was established by the Austro-Hungarian Compromise on 30 March 1867 after the defeat of Austria in the Austro-Prussian War. It was ruled by the House of Habsburg and following the 1867 reforms, the Austrian and Hungarian states were co-equal in power. Foreign and military affairs came under joint oversight, but all other governmental faculties were divided between respective states. Inside each country lived many different peoples, or nationalities, each with its own language, its own customs and its own way of life. Like Russia, this made the country very hard to govern, especially as many of the peoples wanted to be independent of Austria-Hungary so that they could rule themselves in their own ways. The 'patchwork' of peoples was falling apart. Like Russia, Austria-Hungary had no colonies overseas. Nor did Franz Joseph aim to get any. He already ruled an empire of eleven different nationalities, many of them wanting their freedom.
|
Austria-Hungary was a sprawling empire in central Europe. It was made up of people of different ethnic groups: Germans, Czechs, Slovaks, Serbs and many others. Each group had its own customs and language. Many of these groups wanted independence from Austria-Hungary. In the north the Czech people wanted to rule themselves. The Slav people in the south-west (especially the Croats) wanted their own state. The Serbs living in the south wanted to be joined to the neighbouring state of Serbia. By 1914 the main concern of the Emperor of Austria-Hungary was how to keep this fragmented empire together. Austria-Hungary also faced problems from neighbouring states: Its newly independent (1878) neighbour Serbia was becoming a powerful force in the Balkans. Austria was very anxious that it should not become any stronger. Another neighbour, Russia, supported the Serbs, and had a very strong army.
|
|
Italy
Italy was the sixth of the Great Powers, but only 'great' in ambition and potential. As we have seen previously this year, Italy was created in the 1850s and 60s largely as a result of international events that were not totally under her control. Like Germany, Italy was formed from a collection of smaller states but was deeply divided between north an south each with it's own set of problems. In the south of Italy, poor peasants made up the bulk of the population and as in Russia many were attracted to the politics of anarchism which promised land redistribution and decentralised control. In north, around industrial centres in Milan and Turin, working class trades union and socialist movements like in France, Germany and Britain promised egalitarianism and workers' control. Italy had only extended the franchise to all adult men in 1912 and up to this point governments were formed by factions that assembled around leading liberal politicians who did deals to rule amongst themselves. This process was called ‘trasformismo’ and was designed to keep mass parties, especially the socialists, out of power. The lack of social cohesion in Italy wasn’t helped by the fact that the Pope still refused to recognise the legitimacy of the Italian state which had seized the Papal lands in 1870.
Italy was the sixth of the Great Powers, but only 'great' in ambition and potential. As we have seen previously this year, Italy was created in the 1850s and 60s largely as a result of international events that were not totally under her control. Like Germany, Italy was formed from a collection of smaller states but was deeply divided between north an south each with it's own set of problems. In the south of Italy, poor peasants made up the bulk of the population and as in Russia many were attracted to the politics of anarchism which promised land redistribution and decentralised control. In north, around industrial centres in Milan and Turin, working class trades union and socialist movements like in France, Germany and Britain promised egalitarianism and workers' control. Italy had only extended the franchise to all adult men in 1912 and up to this point governments were formed by factions that assembled around leading liberal politicians who did deals to rule amongst themselves. This process was called ‘trasformismo’ and was designed to keep mass parties, especially the socialists, out of power. The lack of social cohesion in Italy wasn’t helped by the fact that the Pope still refused to recognise the legitimacy of the Italian state which had seized the Papal lands in 1870.
|
For many Italian nationalists concerns revolved around the incomplete status of the unification project; the ‘terra irredenta’, the lands that had been inhabited by Italian speakers in the former Austro-Hungarian empire. (see map above) These nationalists and the ruling elite as in other European powers, also wanted to set up colonies and build up an overseas empire, but this had been largely disappointing. In 1879 Italy tried to move into Ottoman controlled Tunisia but lost out to France. As a result of this disappointment, Italy joined Germany and Austria in the Triple Alliance. In the 1880s, with the secret support of Britain it moved into the horn of Africa with the ultimate ambition of subjugating Abyssinia (Ethiopia) one of the rare still independent African states. First Italo-Ethiopian War broke out in 1895 but Italy was defeated by Ethiopian forces at the Battle of Adawa in 1896. Italy also faced humiliation at the hand of China who refused to grant the same rights to Italy as had been awarded to other European powers. Only after the Boxer Rebellion did Italy get a foothold in Tientsin in 1901.
|
|
The relative strengths of the Great Powers in 1914
Activities
- Which countries were i) the weakest and ii) the strongest before the First World War. Explain the weakness of the weaker and the strengths of the strongest.
- What common problems did most of the European powers face before 1914?
- Using the descriptions of each country on the website, download and fill out the chart opposite to show causes of tension between them. You may not be able to fill out all the boxes. Decide which relationship is the greatest source of tension. For each box, use a scale of 1 to 5 – a rating of 1 means that there are no major sources of tension between the states, but a rating of 5 means things are very serious. Put a number in each box of the diagram.
Lesson 2 - Introduction - The long-term causes of WW1: Imperialism, Nationalism and Militarism.
|
Imperialism
As you will remember, until 1850, the European exploration and subsequent exploitation of Africa had largely been limited to the coastal areas. By the 1870s, however, entrepreneurial explorers such as Henry Stanley had begun to awaken to the economic potential of the African interior, touching off a race by European states to claim their own colonies in Africa. The potential of this "scramble" to bring far-flung powers into conflict should be obvious. It certainly was to Bismarck. Despite his disdain for overseas colonies, Bismarck hosted a conference in Berlin in 1885 to hammer out the rules for claiming and exploiting Africa in hopes that these rules would stave off disagreements over ownership. Just as he had no interest in Germany acquiring her own colonies, he did not want disputes between other powers in some distant African land to jeopardise his new Germany by dragging her into a European war |
|
But in order to feed their massive industrial and military machines, the powers needed access to resources. This need had been momentarily satisfied by the 'scramble for Africa', but by 1900 the demand had returned. The European powers had claimed all of Africa, with a few small exceptions. Sources of raw materials, not to mention markets, had either to be wrung from existing holdings or wrestled, forcibly or diplomatically, from another power.
Despite Bismarck’s efforts, and in some ways because of his efforts, the European powers would come dangerously close to war over African questions after Bismarck's 'retirement' in 1890. Young Wilhelm demanded that Germany get her "place in the sun" and developed a brash, provocative and ultimately dangerous Weltpolitik (world policy) to achieve it.
Nationalism
As we saw earlier this year, nationalism was powerful by-product of the process of industrialisation in all modernising states. National railway networks, education systems and media began to create a powerful sense of imagined identities that allowed the people of a state to distinguish themselves from neighbouring states. This was particularly important in groups of national people who were subject to the rule of an empire that denied them the right to express that identity. The role that nationalism played in the growing international tensions at the turn of the century is best demonstrated in the Balkans. This region was populated by a number of ethnic groups broadly referred to as Slavs and centred in the small independent nation-state of Serbia. Political domination in the region had traditionally been split between two rival empires, the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman. By the end of the 19th century, the crumbling influence and power of the Ottoman Empire, coupled with Austria-Hungary's desire expand her influence in the region, made this a very unstable part of the European political system. As we have seen, Russia also had an interest. Growing numbers of radical pan-Slavic nationalists living under the Hapsburgs were convinced that their future lay not in a federated Austria-Hungary, but rather in a Greater Serbia or Yugoslavia. With Serbia's ambition to become the Piedmont of a pan-Slavic state added to this frightening situation, the region was becoming dangerously volatile.
Militarism
Broadly speaking, we can talk about militarism as an overall societal emphasis on the military. The trend towards massive armies and navies at the end of the 19th century can be highlighted in two ways. On the one hand there are the precise, technical aspects that appeal to many military historians—warship tonnage, troop concentration, military expenditure. On the other hand, we should consider those aspects that appeal to the social historian—the relation of the military to the wider society. The size of an army or a navy became a source of enormous national pride. It is certainly true that at the turn of the last century, the militaries of the major European powers were the largest in history. (see table above) Paradoxically, most statesmen, if not generals, believed that this could help avoid a war. This early idea of deterrence held that the larger a country's military, the less likely other countries would be to attack. This might have been true if the size of militaries had remained static. The big problem was that they were growing. If a country was worried that a rival state's army was growing faster than its own, the temptation was to attack the rival pre-emptively before the differential was too great. In short, use your army before you lost it. This was to have ominous ramifications in July 1914.
Despite Bismarck’s efforts, and in some ways because of his efforts, the European powers would come dangerously close to war over African questions after Bismarck's 'retirement' in 1890. Young Wilhelm demanded that Germany get her "place in the sun" and developed a brash, provocative and ultimately dangerous Weltpolitik (world policy) to achieve it.
Nationalism
As we saw earlier this year, nationalism was powerful by-product of the process of industrialisation in all modernising states. National railway networks, education systems and media began to create a powerful sense of imagined identities that allowed the people of a state to distinguish themselves from neighbouring states. This was particularly important in groups of national people who were subject to the rule of an empire that denied them the right to express that identity. The role that nationalism played in the growing international tensions at the turn of the century is best demonstrated in the Balkans. This region was populated by a number of ethnic groups broadly referred to as Slavs and centred in the small independent nation-state of Serbia. Political domination in the region had traditionally been split between two rival empires, the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman. By the end of the 19th century, the crumbling influence and power of the Ottoman Empire, coupled with Austria-Hungary's desire expand her influence in the region, made this a very unstable part of the European political system. As we have seen, Russia also had an interest. Growing numbers of radical pan-Slavic nationalists living under the Hapsburgs were convinced that their future lay not in a federated Austria-Hungary, but rather in a Greater Serbia or Yugoslavia. With Serbia's ambition to become the Piedmont of a pan-Slavic state added to this frightening situation, the region was becoming dangerously volatile.
Militarism
Broadly speaking, we can talk about militarism as an overall societal emphasis on the military. The trend towards massive armies and navies at the end of the 19th century can be highlighted in two ways. On the one hand there are the precise, technical aspects that appeal to many military historians—warship tonnage, troop concentration, military expenditure. On the other hand, we should consider those aspects that appeal to the social historian—the relation of the military to the wider society. The size of an army or a navy became a source of enormous national pride. It is certainly true that at the turn of the last century, the militaries of the major European powers were the largest in history. (see table above) Paradoxically, most statesmen, if not generals, believed that this could help avoid a war. This early idea of deterrence held that the larger a country's military, the less likely other countries would be to attack. This might have been true if the size of militaries had remained static. The big problem was that they were growing. If a country was worried that a rival state's army was growing faster than its own, the temptation was to attack the rival pre-emptively before the differential was too great. In short, use your army before you lost it. This was to have ominous ramifications in July 1914.
The above is an edited extract from IB Course Companion: 20th Century World History,
Cannon, Jones-Nerzic, Keys, Mamaux, Miller, Pope, Smith and Williams.
Cannon, Jones-Nerzic, Keys, Mamaux, Miller, Pope, Smith and Williams.
Activity
Download a copy of the sheet, 'Imperialism, Nationalism and Militarism'. In each of the boxes explain what is meant by the key term and provide examples from lesson 1 of how in the period before 1900 European powers exhibited examples of imperialism, nationalism and militarism.
Download a copy of the sheet, 'Imperialism, Nationalism and Militarism'. In each of the boxes explain what is meant by the key term and provide examples from lesson 1 of how in the period before 1900 European powers exhibited examples of imperialism, nationalism and militarism.
Lesson 3 - The short-term causes of WW1: Imperialism, Nationalism and Militarism.
But first a word of warning...
The main problem with 'big events' in history is that they seem to need big explanations. Surely, something as catastrophic as the First World War can not have happened easily? And yet in 1914 and despite the best efforts of Europe's statesmen, war seemed almost inevitable and certainly impossible to stop. This apparent powerlessness in 1914, helps to explain why historians have sought to explain the war by looking beyond human 'agency' (the actions of individuals) to look at those 'vast impersonal forces' (TS Eliot) such as imperialism, militarism and nationalism which seemed to drive an unwitting humanity over the edge. The one major advantage of this historical approach is that it suggests no-one was to blame for the First World War and the 10m+ deaths that resulted. We'll return to this question of human agency and blame later.
The main problem with 'big events' in history is that they seem to need big explanations. Surely, something as catastrophic as the First World War can not have happened easily? And yet in 1914 and despite the best efforts of Europe's statesmen, war seemed almost inevitable and certainly impossible to stop. This apparent powerlessness in 1914, helps to explain why historians have sought to explain the war by looking beyond human 'agency' (the actions of individuals) to look at those 'vast impersonal forces' (TS Eliot) such as imperialism, militarism and nationalism which seemed to drive an unwitting humanity over the edge. The one major advantage of this historical approach is that it suggests no-one was to blame for the First World War and the 10m+ deaths that resulted. We'll return to this question of human agency and blame later.
Imperialism, nationalism and militarism in the short(er)-term
As we move closer to 1914 we study a series of events each of which helped contribute to the hostile climate that made war more likely in 1914. But the danger is that when we look closely at singular events we lose sight of the bigger picture. In this activity I am going to describe - chronologically - the unfolding of events that led to 1914. Your job will be to extract them from their chronological moment in time and fit them in as further examples of imperialism, nationalism and militarism.
As we move closer to 1914 we study a series of events each of which helped contribute to the hostile climate that made war more likely in 1914. But the danger is that when we look closely at singular events we lose sight of the bigger picture. In this activity I am going to describe - chronologically - the unfolding of events that led to 1914. Your job will be to extract them from their chronological moment in time and fit them in as further examples of imperialism, nationalism and militarism.
|
1900-1914
One of the most significant causes of tension in Europe was the naval rivalry which developed after 1900. As we saw last year, since the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805, Britain had ruled the seas without any challenge. Its navy was the most powerful in the world. This situation began to change in 1898 when the new Kaiser, Wilhelm, announced his intention to build a powerful German navy. Britain felt very threatened by this. Germany’s navy was much smaller than Britain’s but the British navy was spread all over the world, protecting the British Empire. The Kaiser and his admirals felt that Germany needed a navy to protect its growing trade. In 1906 Britain raised the stakes in the naval race by launching HMS Dreadnought (right), the first of a new class of warships. Germany responded by building its own ‘Dreadnoughts’. Both Britain and Germany spent millions on their new ships. |
|
Partly as a result of this rivalry Britain concluded agreements with its two major colonial rivals: the Entente Cordiale with France in 1904 and the Anglo-Russian Entente of 1907. The First Moroccan Crisis (also known as the Tangier Crisis) was an international dispute between March 1905 and May 1906 over the status of Morocco. In 1905 the Kaiser visited Morocco. As we have seen, Germany was building up its own African empire and had colonies in central and southern Africa . The Kaiser was now keen to show that Germany was an important power in North Africa as well. The French had plans to take control of Morocco so the Kaiser made a speech saying he supported independence for Morocco. The French were furious at his interfering in their affairs. An international conference was held in Algeciras in 1906. But the conference did not cool things down. At the conference the Kaiser was humiliated. He had wanted to be seen as a major power in Africa. Instead his views were rejected. This made him bitter. The crisis worsened German relations with both France and the United Kingdom, and helped ensure the success of the new Anglo-French Entente Cordiale. Kaiser Wilhelm II was angry at being humiliated and was determined not to back down again, which led to the German involvement in the Second Moroccan Crisis in 1911.
|
As tensions worsened, all countries looked to their military capability and began to plan for future conflict. The size of armies, the length of military service and level of investment all increased. Public support for militarism was encouraged by newspapers and popular nationalism reached new levels of enthusiasm. In Germany, in particular, war and militarism were glorified. The Kaiser surrounded himself with military advisers. He staged military rallies and processions. He loved to be photographed in military uniforms.
|
|
The arms race in which all the major powers were involved contributed to the sense that war was bound to come, and soon. Financing it caused serious financial difficulties for all the governments involved in the race; and yet they were convinced there was no way of stopping it.
Although publicly the arms race was justified to prevent war, no government had in fact been deterred from arming by the programmes of their rivals, but rather increased the pace of their own armament production.
James Joll, Origins of the First World War, 1992.
|
Many countries felt so sure that war was ‘bound to come’ sooner or later that they began to make very detailed plans for what to do if and when it did. Within the general staff of each country, complex plans for future war were developed that tried to learn the lessons from the Franco-Prussian war. Countries adapted to the Prussian model and the importance mobilising troops as quickly as possible.
The problem facing the German commanders was that if a war broke out they would probably have to fight against Russia and France at the same time. In 1905, the Germans came up with the Schlieffen Plan. Under this plan they would quickly attack and defeat France, then turn their forces on Russia which were expected to be slow to get its troops ready for war. Austria-Hungary knew it needed the help of Germany to hold back Russia. It too relied on the success of the Schlieffen Plan so that Germany could help it to defeat Russia. The Russian army was badly equipped, but it was huge. The Russian plan was to overwhelm Germany’s and Austria’s armies by sheer weight of numbers. France had a large and well-equipped army. Its main plan of attack was known as Plan 17. French troops would charge across the frontier and attack deep into Germany, forcing surrender. Britain’s military planners had been closely but secretly involved in collaboration with French commanders. It also meant that Britain had a more of a moral obligation to support France if she was attacked. |
|
One thing that unites all of these plans was the assumption that a war, if and when it came, would be quick. These military plans were designed to achieve a quick victory. No one planned for what to do if the war dragged on.
|
The next crisis came in the Balkans in 1908. As we have seen previously the area had been ruled by Turkey, but Turkish power had been in decline throughout the 19th century. She was known as the 'sick man of Europe'. The new governments which had been set up in place of Turkish rule were regularly in dispute with each other. Two great powers, Russia and Austria, bordered the countries in this region.
|
However, there were some serious consequences. Austria now felt confident that Germany would back it in future disputes. Some historians think that this made Austria too confident, and encouraged it to make trouble with Serbia and Russia. Russia resented being forced to back down in 1909. It quickened its arms build-up. It was determined not to let it happen again.
In 1911, imperial rivalries pushed France, Germany and Britain to compete for control of Morocco, leading to a short-lived war scare. The Agadir Crisis resulted from the deployment of a substantial force of French troops into the interior of Morocco in April 1911. Germany reacted by sending the gunboat SMS Panther to the Moroccan port of Agadir on 1 July 1911. The main result was deeper suspicion between London and Berlin, and even closer military ties between London and Paris. A secret naval agreement by which the Royal Navy would protect the northern coast of France from German attack, while France concentrated her fleet in the western Mediterranean and agreed to protect British interests there. The British cabinet was not informed of this agreement until August 1914 when they were asked to defend France from Germany.
From 1912 to 1913 there was a series of local wars again in the Balkans. Serbia emerged from these as the most powerful country in the Balkans. This was very serious for Austria. Serbia had a strong army and it was a close ally of Russia. Austria decided that Serbia would have to be dealt with. By this time, Russia had mostly recovered from its defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, and the calculations of Germany and Austria were driven by a fear that Russia would eventually become too strong to be challenged. Their conclusion was that any war with Russia had to occur within the next few years in order to have any chance of success. In 1914 Austria was looking for a good excuse to crush Serbia. Austria’s opportunity came with the murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie in Sarajevo .
Activity 1
Read through the narrative above 1900-1914. As you do, highlight examples of causes as imperial, militarist and nationalist. Download and complete this worksheet.
Read through the narrative above 1900-1914. As you do, highlight examples of causes as imperial, militarist and nationalist. Download and complete this worksheet.
The precipitant cause of WWI - The assassination of Franz Ferdinand, June 28th 1914
Sunday 28 June 1914 was a bright and sunny day in Sarajevo. Sarajevo in Bosnia was preparing for a royal visitfrom Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria [see Source 2], Crowds lined the streets and waited for the procession of cars to appear. Hidden among the crowds, however, were six teenage [Bosnian Serb] terrorists sworn to kill the Archduke. They hated him and they hated Austria. They were stationed at intervals along the riverside route which the cars would follow on their way to the Town Hall. They all had bombs andpistols in their pockets, andphials ofpoison which they had promised to swallow if they were caught, so that they would not give the others away. It seemed as if the plan could not fail.
Finally, the cavalcade of four large cars came into sight. The Archduke was in a green open-topped car. He looked every inch a duke, wearing a pale blue uniform, a row of glittering medals and a military hat decorated with green ostrich feathers. Beside him sat his wife Sophie, looking beautiful in a white dress and a broad hat and waving politely to the crowd.
At 10.15 the cars passed Mehmedbasic, the first in line of the waiting killers. He took fright, did nothing, and then escaped. The next assassin, Cabriolvic, also lost his nerve and did nothing. But then as the cars passed the Cumurja Bridge, Cabrinovic threw his bomb, swallowed his poison, and jumped into the river. The Archduke saw the bomb coming and threw it off his car, but it exploded under the car behind, injuring several people. Now there was total confusion as the procession accelerated away, fearing more bombs. Meanwhile the police dragged Cabrinovic out of the river. His cyanide was old and had not worked.
The Archduke was driven to the Town Hall, where he demanded to be taken to visit the bomb victims in hospital. Fearing more terrorists, the officials decided to take a new route to avoid the crowds, but this was not properly explained to the driver of the Archduke’s car. Moreover, no police guard went with the procession.
Meanwhile the other assassins, on hearing the bomb explode, assumed the Archduke was dead and left - all except Princip, who soon discovered the truth. Miserably he wandered across the street towards Schiller’s delicatessen and café.
Princip was standing outside the café when, at 10.45, the Archduke’s car suddenly appeared beside him and turned into Franz Josef Street. This was a mistake, for according to the new plan the procession should have continued straight along the Appel Quay. As the driver realised he had taken a wrong turn he stopped and started to reverse. Princip could hardly believe his luck. Pulling an automatic pistol from the right-handpocket of his coat, he fired two shots at a range of just 3 or 4 metres. He could not miss. One bullet pierced the Archduke’s neck and the other ricocheted off the car into Sophie’s stomach. Fifteen minutes later she died and the Archduke followed soon after.
Princip was immediately seized. He managed to swallow his poison, but it did not work and he was taken off to prison. All the plotters except Mehmedbasic were eventually caught, but only the organiser, Ilic, was hanged, for the others were too young for the death penalty. Princip died in an Austrian jail, however, in April 1918, aged twenty-three.
Adapted from Britain at War by Craig Mair, 1982.
Although there was no hard evidence that Princip was acting under orders from the Serbian government, Austria blamed Serbia. Frantic diplomatic effort gave Austria a guarantee of German backing. With this support Austria now felt secure enough to deal with the Serbian problem once and for all. It gave Serbia a ten- point ultimatum that would effectively have made Serbia part of the Austrian Empire. The Serbs could not possibly accept it. When the Serbs asked for time to consider, Austria refused and declared war on 28 July 1914. The slide to all-out war had begun.
Activity 2
|
Read the account of the assassination above, then watch the film opposite. The password is 1914.
1. There were many moments during 28 June 1914 when events could have turned out differently. List three moments at which a different decision might have saved the lives of the Archduke and his wife. 2. Do you think that if the Archduke had not been shot, the war would not have started? Give your reasons. |
|
The July Crisis - War by railway timetable?
On 23 July: Having secured the support of Germany (the blank cheque) Austria blamed Serbia for the death of Franz Ferdinand and sent it an ultimatum that was impossible to fulfil.
On 28 July: Austria declared war on Serbia and shelled its capital, Belgrade.
On 29 July: The Russian army mobilised (got ready) to help Serbia defend itself against the Austrian attack. Germany warned Russia not to help the Serbs. Russian war plans assumed mobilisation against Germany.
On 1 August: Germany declared war on Russia, but the Schlieffen Plan meant that its army moved towards France and Belgium.
On 2 August: The French army was put on a war footing ready to fight any German invasion.
On 3 August: Germany declared war on France and invaded Belgium. Britain ordered Germany to withdraw from Belgium.
On 4 August: With the Germans still in Belgium, Britain declared war on Germany.
On 6 August: Austria declared war on Russia.
On 23 July: Having secured the support of Germany (the blank cheque) Austria blamed Serbia for the death of Franz Ferdinand and sent it an ultimatum that was impossible to fulfil.
On 28 July: Austria declared war on Serbia and shelled its capital, Belgrade.
On 29 July: The Russian army mobilised (got ready) to help Serbia defend itself against the Austrian attack. Germany warned Russia not to help the Serbs. Russian war plans assumed mobilisation against Germany.
On 1 August: Germany declared war on Russia, but the Schlieffen Plan meant that its army moved towards France and Belgium.
On 2 August: The French army was put on a war footing ready to fight any German invasion.
On 3 August: Germany declared war on France and invaded Belgium. Britain ordered Germany to withdraw from Belgium.
On 4 August: With the Germans still in Belgium, Britain declared war on Germany.
On 6 August: Austria declared war on Russia.
|
Activity 3
Watch this video from the 1970s. A.J.P Taylor was probably the most famous historian in the world at the time, so famous that the BBC made television programmes that were no more than a single camera recording him talking in a single take. He had no notes or teleprompter. He was not reading. This is an extract from a series he did called 'How Wars Begin'. It is quite short so try to watch it all in one go. Make a few notes as he talks, it is a lecture, it's what his students would be expected to do. At the end, explain in no more than 150 words what he thinks caused the First World War. |
|
Revision activities
|
Download and complete this revision diagram. First add the correct dates to the events on the left and the a brief description as in the two boxes already completed.
Next move them into the correct place on the diagram. You have to decide chronologically (long-term or short-term) and thematically (militarism, imperialism and nationalism). Finally, you need to draw lines making connections between events if you can find any. |
If you are feeling ambitious and want to see what modern university lecturers sound like watch sleepwalkers (opposite). As a revision and general overview watch John Green's take on events. All three videos make jokes, you may be surprised to know.
|
|
|
|
Lesson 4 - The nature of the First World War - Expectations
One of the reasons for the ease to which Europe went to war in 1914 was because large sections of the public supported it. The militarism and nationalism which had been such powerful cultural forces before 1914 played a critical role encouraging people to view war in a positive light.
|
Begin by watching the extract from the film 'All Quiet of the Western Front', (based on the classic book) which captures the enthusiasm with which the war was greeted.
|
|
Lesson 5 - The nature of the First World War - Reality
Friday 5th June 2020
Friday 5th June 2020
The war plans fail
The Schlieffen plan was put into operation. The German army invaded Belgium on 4 August. After a successful initial advance they were slowed at the Battle of Mons by Belgian resistance aided by the British Expeditionary Force.
French war plans faired no better. On 20 August the German forces defended the frontier from a attack which cost the French 200,000 men in 12 days. The French abandoned Plan 17, and regrouped their forces to defend Paris from the advancing Germans. But the German Supreme Commander Moltke had to pull 100,000 troops out of the army advancing on Paris because the Russians had mobilised far more quickly than expected and had already invaded Germany. The German army also faced another problem. Their advance had been so fast that their supplies of food and ammunition could not keep up. At the Battle of the Marne the combined British and French forces were able to stop the German advance and then counterattacked and pushed the Germans back to the River Aisne. Neither side could make any progress and by 8 September troops on both sides were digging trenches to protect themselves from snipers and shell fire. Soon after, they added machine guns and barbed wire.
|
The Battle of the Marne was a turning point. In a desperate move to try and prevent this on12 October the German army began a series on manouvres to try and outflank the French and British. It became known as ‘the race to the sea’. The key battle was the first Battle of Ypres from 12 October to 11 November 1914. The BEF lost around 50,000 men and the Germans probably 100,000, but they kept control of the English Channel ports, which meant they could be supplied with equipment and reinforcements. In December the French army tried to break through the German lines in Artois and Champagne in December, but they were beaten back with heavy losses. As 1914 ended, the fighting had reached a stalemate which was to last until 1918. Millions of troops were dug into a line of trenches that stretched from the sea in the west to the Alps in the east. It became known as the ‘Western Front’.
|
|
|
|
Failing to make the breakthrough
From 1915 to 1918 the Western Front was marked by a a series of failures to make a breakthrough. It can be easily be explained. The techniques and the weapons were better suited to defence than to attack. It was much easier to defend a position than to attack one.
Enable Flash to view the following animations
• Barbed wire, trenches and mud made cavalry charges ineffective.
• Machine guns could mow down charging infantry.
• The colossal new guns of the artillery could kill the enemy in their trenches, could wear down the troops and sap their morale and could disrupt enemy supplies, but they couldn’t make a breakthrough.
• Artillery could also destroy enemy guns but the supply of weapons to both sides quickly became inexhaustible. Factories back home in each country were soon geared up to produce all the extra munitions needed.
• Machine guns could mow down charging infantry.
• The colossal new guns of the artillery could kill the enemy in their trenches, could wear down the troops and sap their morale and could disrupt enemy supplies, but they couldn’t make a breakthrough.
• Artillery could also destroy enemy guns but the supply of weapons to both sides quickly became inexhaustible. Factories back home in each country were soon geared up to produce all the extra munitions needed.
|
Early in 1915 the French lost many thousands in an unsuccessful offensive in Champagne (see map left). The British gained some ground at Neuve Chapelle in March but at a heavy cost. The Germans were driven back from Ypres in April with heavy losses and the British suffered a setback at Loos in September. In February 1916 the Germans began a determined battle to capture strategic French forts surrounding Verdun. Attacks were followed by counter-attacks and by July 1916 some 700,000 men had fallen. The French, led by General Pétain, held out, but by the summer of 1916 they were close to breaking. To relieve the pressure, the British led by Field Marshal Douglas Haig launched their long- planned offensive at the Somme. After a week-long artillery bombardment of German trenches, British troops advanced. On the first day there were 57,000 British casualties. The fighting continued until November 1916 with the loss of 1.25 million men.
|
The war on other fronts
Gallipoli - 1915
In 1915 casualties were mounting on the Western Front and government ministers in London could see no prospect of breaking the stalemate. They began to look for another way to gain a breakthrough in the war. The war planners were attracted to the idea of a knock-out blow against Turkey, whom they considered to be one of Germany’s more vulnerable allies.
In 1915 casualties were mounting on the Western Front and government ministers in London could see no prospect of breaking the stalemate. They began to look for another way to gain a breakthrough in the war. The war planners were attracted to the idea of a knock-out blow against Turkey, whom they considered to be one of Germany’s more vulnerable allies.
|
Winston Churchill, who was head of the navy, and Lord Kitchener, who was in effect overall commander of the war effort, persuaded the government to attempt an attack on the Dardanelles strait, a narrow stretch of water linking the Aegean Sea and the Sea of Marmara. It was intended as a naval attack but too many ships were damaged and sunk so a land invasion was attempted instead. British, French and ANZAC (Australian and New Zealand) troops attacked but the commanders had severely underestimated the power of the defending army. Very quickly Gallipoli became another trench war made worse by the more extreme weather and the lack of reinforcements. After eight months of fighting and 500,000 casualties on both sides, the allied were forced to withdraw. |
The Balkans and Middle East
The Allied force at Salonika in Greece did not fare much better than that at Gallipoli. The aim was to land at Salonika, help Serbia to defeat Austria and Bulgaria and then march through what was described as the ‘soft underbelly of Europe’ to create a new front against Germany. Greece was neutral and wanted to stay out of the war. Russia was not particularly happy either about the Allies working with Greece. Greece and Russia were bitter rivals in the Balkans. The Allied landing took place in October 1915 with a mixed force of British, French, Serb, Italian and Russian troops. They were immediately bogged down by Bulgarian resistance. Here again, as on the Western Front, a stalemate developed. The main hazard facing the troops was not enemy action but disease - particularly malaria and dysentery. At any one time so many troops were ill that attempts to plan attacks were thwarted.
The Allied force at Salonika in Greece did not fare much better than that at Gallipoli. The aim was to land at Salonika, help Serbia to defeat Austria and Bulgaria and then march through what was described as the ‘soft underbelly of Europe’ to create a new front against Germany. Greece was neutral and wanted to stay out of the war. Russia was not particularly happy either about the Allies working with Greece. Greece and Russia were bitter rivals in the Balkans. The Allied landing took place in October 1915 with a mixed force of British, French, Serb, Italian and Russian troops. They were immediately bogged down by Bulgarian resistance. Here again, as on the Western Front, a stalemate developed. The main hazard facing the troops was not enemy action but disease - particularly malaria and dysentery. At any one time so many troops were ill that attempts to plan attacks were thwarted.
|
When Turkey had entered the war it threatened Britain’s oil supplies in Persia (now Iran) and its territory in Egypt. Turkish soldiers fought well and were ably led and supported by German officers and technical experts. They had such success in Mesopotamia that the Allies had to send 600,000 troops there. They sent a further half a million to Palestine. Between 1916 and 1918 British, Australian, New Zealand and Indian troops gradually drove the kirks back through Palestine towards Turkey itself. The Turks, as well as facing superior forces, were harassed by guerrilla warfare from the many Arab tribes who wanted independence from Turkish rule and led by TE Lawrence of Arabia (see the David Lean film opposite).
|
|
The Eastern Front
It is important to note when you are asked to provide a summary of the main developments in the First World War you include events in eastern Europe. As in the west, there were some trenches, but warfare did not get bogged down in the same way.
|
At the start of the war, Russia surprised everyone. It quickly mobilised two huge armies and invaded East Prussia in August 1914. As we saw above, the Germans had to take an extra 100,000 troops away from the Western Front to fight them. The Russian armies enjoyed some early successes but at the Battle of Tannenberg they suffered a significant defeat by German forces. The Russian soldiers were badly led, poorly equipped and underfed.
The Russians were more successful against the Austrian forces. In 1915 they invaded the Austrian province of Galicia. Although the Russians were defeated at Gorlice in May 1915, it took four more months for the Austrians to drive them out of Galicia altogether, and to do so the Austrians needed substantial reinforcements from the Germans. However, this defeat put a terrible strain on Russia - there were 2 million dead or wounded in 1915 alone. Russia's war was helped when the focus of the German and Austrian war effort shifted to Italy, Turkey and the Balkans. |
In the summer of 1916, General Brusilov (Brusilov Offensive) a stunning offensive against the Austrians. Three Russian armies broke through the Austrian lines and captured the city of Lutsk on 8 June. But by August, the Russian advance was running out of steam. Another 500,000 Russians were dead or wounded, adding to the half million dead or wounded already in 1916. Such losses intensified Russia’s domestic problems. (see Russian Revolutions)
Activities
|
This lesson refers to a number of battles (in red) in a number of places at a number of times between 1914 and 1917. It is not easy to keep track and remember all these events.
1. Make a timeline of the battles of 1915-16. It is important that you keep the events in chronological order irrespective of the location of the battle. 2. Explain why the expected war of movement became a war of attrition with no significant breakthrough during those two years. 3. Watch the documentary People's Century 1914. It contains many references to the experiences of ordinary soldiers who fought the war. With reference to the film, describe the main experience of trench warfare for those who fought it. |
|
Lesson 6 - Total War and the Defeat of Germany
|
The First World War was unlike any previous wars because of the scale and extent of the fighting. Millions of men were mobilised to fight around the world. But the war was not restricted to the battlefield. Civilians were involved in helping to fight the war from the 'home front' in the munitions industry for example and they were also subject to significant control and mobilisation by their governments. Government took direct control over the economy to make sure essential supplies were produced and distributed. Food supplies were strictly controlled and even newspapers were restricting in their reporting of events. In brief this was a 'total war'.
Activity 1. Using the worksheet to the right, produce a mind-map/spider diagram to explain the full extent of the nature of WW1 as a 'total war'. Your textbook has a well illustrated section on the home front, on propaganda, the role of women, rationing etc. pages 66-77. |
|
|
Why was Germany defeated?
Understanding the reasons for Germany's defeat in World War I is relatively straightforward as the film from France 24 makes clear. Germany took a calculated risk of following a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare which was designed to force Britain and France to capitulate but made it likely that the USA would intervene. After the withdrawal of Russia in early 1918, Germany threw all her remaining resources into one last push in an attempt to win before the USA involvement could be decisive. The gamble almost succeeded but ultimately failed. From the summer of 1918 it was just a matter of time before Germany was defeated. The end of the fighting was agreed at an armistice signed on November 11, 1918. The frontline of the fighting was still outside German territory. |
|
|
|
|
Activity 2
Read your textbook pages 31-32. Complete the questions on the worksheet why was Germany defeated?
Read your textbook pages 31-32. Complete the questions on the worksheet why was Germany defeated?
- On the diagram, mark the reasons for the defeat of Germany as Political (P), Economic (E) or Military (M). It is possible to use more than one letter for each reason.
- Write three (PEE) paragraphs explaining the defeat of Germany politically, economically and militarily. Use your textbook pages 31-32 and 44-45 to help you find facts to support your answer.
- Why according to Ian Cawood and David McKinnon-Bell are democracies more likely to win a ‘total war’?
Lesson 7
Peace in Paris 1919
For the peace treaties that ended the Great War, we are going to conduct a role-play reconstruction on Monday 2nd November, a week before the official peace commemorations. This is the website for the Paris 1919 role-play activity.
Peace in Paris 1919
For the peace treaties that ended the Great War, we are going to conduct a role-play reconstruction on Monday 2nd November, a week before the official peace commemorations. This is the website for the Paris 1919 role-play activity.
|
|
Lesson 8
The Paris Peace Treaties - Versailles
The Paris Peace Treaties - Versailles
|
|
Activity 1
1. Write a summary of the five main terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Make sure your account is factual.
2. Read over the aims (pages 82-85) of the 'Big Three' - Clemenceau, Lloyd George and Woodrow Wilson - to what extent do you think they would be happy with the terms of the Treaty? It is important that you identify both aspects they would be happy with and other aspects that would have disappointed them.
1. Write a summary of the five main terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Make sure your account is factual.
2. Read over the aims (pages 82-85) of the 'Big Three' - Clemenceau, Lloyd George and Woodrow Wilson - to what extent do you think they would be happy with the terms of the Treaty? It is important that you identify both aspects they would be happy with and other aspects that would have disappointed them.
The other treaties - SaiNTS
|
|
Activity 2
1. Write another summary this time of the four other treaties. Restrict yourself to absolutely essential information but again make sure your account is factual.
2. In conclusion, explain the main reasons why these five peace settlements failed in their objectives to maintain peace in Europe.
1. Write another summary this time of the four other treaties. Restrict yourself to absolutely essential information but again make sure your account is factual.
2. In conclusion, explain the main reasons why these five peace settlements failed in their objectives to maintain peace in Europe.