Musings on the First World War (Part Two of Five)

(From Part One)

One of the other ideas of I have been working on is a better understanding of certain patterns in history – namely the problems of sketchy alliances and the issue of a resurgence in Anarchism as a “revenge effect” of the conflicts which may arise due to geopolitical obligations.

Going through some of my academic submissions, I find it fitting to share some of my thought processes on the First World War as I gradually get around to the anarchist movement of the 1920s. Some posts, like this one, are comparatively abbreviated… which may or may not please the reader. Context is appropriate, however, and that is my overall goal with everything I write…

What sort of difficulties did Austria-Hungary and Russia, in particular, face in 1914?

Austria-Hungary and Russia both experienced significant challenges in 1914. For Austria-Hungary, the multitude of nationalities and the resulting ethnic bonds became the foundation of the internal and external efforts and competition of regional control and further brought the question of effective self-governance of these contested areas.[1] The extended support offered by Russia to the Serbs posed the difficult challenge of Austria maintaining internal control of its Slavic population and such considerations guided and restricted Austria-Hungary in how best to handle any actions to prevent outright provocation of Russia.[2] Likewise, national prestige weighed heavily and it was clear to key leaders like chief of the general staff, Franz Conrad von Hötzendorff understood the futility of a war with Serbia.[3]

How did cultural values motivate Germany against the allies? How did they view themselves differently?

Germany’s motivation and identity in the beginning of the 20^th century could be best described as aggressive and assertive. Competitiveness with established European powers like France and Britain was offset by the poor diplomatic efforts of Germany to generate friction between the two nations in Morocco.[4] In relation to their ability to maintain their own borders, Germans viewed their situation as potentially untenable, as they were encircled by possible adversarial nations;[5] they fatalistically viewed war as inevitable, and in the words of Helmuth von Moltke, it was “unavoidable, and the sooner, the better.”[6]

How would the war affect long-term changes in Asia & Africa?

Colonized by European nations, Asia and Africa’s internal power structures and struggles were reflected by the progress of the war. Germany’s defeat released their administration of the Cameroons, Togoland, German East Africa Tsingtao and Samoa, and opened these former colonies to acquisition and exploitation by European nations allied with Britain.[7] The influx of Europeans in post-war Africa was both a blessing and a curse. In some areas, the creation of economies and basic infrastructure provided the residents with possibilities they had previously not imagined; in others, the departure of authorities created a power vacuum of anarchy and many in these areas reverted to their previous ways of life.[8] The Anglo-Japanese alliance of 1902 provided justification for Japan to begin creating a modern and formidable land and naval forces to stem potential German attacks on British assets and shipping in the Pacific. This created the means for future Japanese expansion into China and caused Australian concerns about potential Japanese aggression extending to their shores.[9]

What were the ramifications of Galipoli?

Gallipoli was initially to serve as a secondary British front against the Ottoman Empire and the intent was to either force the Turks to appeal to their German allies for reinforcements, which would divert some of the forces engaged on the Western Front, or create enough instability within Constantinople to allow the government to be overthrown. The Entente also sought to form an alliance with Greece and Romania to open an Eastern Front against the Central powers as well as open maritime resupply efforts to Russia.^[10] Thought Gallipoli proved to be an overall failure for the Entente forces, the conflict boosted the reputation of Australian and New Zealand’s soldiers as well as that of Turkey’s Mustafa Kemal.[11]

How unified was the Muslim response in WWI?

Muslims were divided according to their colonial affiliation. The Ottoman Empire declared a jihad against Britain, France, Russia, Serbia, and Montenegro, though the Muslims residing in territories not directly controlled by Germany and the Ottoman Empire were allied in opposition to the Ottoman Empire, creating a chaotic situation in the colonies within the Middle East.[12]

Part Three to follow…

Bibliography

Strachan, Hew. The First World War. New York: Penguin Books, 2005. Accessed December 23, 2016. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost.

[1] Hew Strachan, The First World War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2005), accessed December 23, 2016. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost,18.

[2] Ibid., 19-20.

[3] Ibid., 22.

[4] Ibid., 42.

[5] Ibid., 44.

[6] Ibid., 47.

[7] Ibid., 71.

[8] Ibid., 92.

[9] Ibid., 72.