World War I

[Lorenzo_Cavalli]

Do you think Nicholas II. did everything possible to prevent the outbreak of World War I?

[LisaDavidson]

I think it would be grossly unfair to assign blame or credit to Nicholas II for the outbreak of WWI. The "Guns of August" does a brilliant job of showing how misundertandings of the actions and motives of others led to the outbreak of war. Nicholas II was just one piece of the puzzle.

[James1941]

If you are really interested in the events of the two months between June 28 (assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand) and the German declaration of war on Russia, the latest book on it is "Europe's Last Summer--Who Started the Great War in 1914" by David Fromkin.
It is a very readable book and it puts the blame for the war on several people. It is once of the best explantions of how it all went wrong that I have yet read.

[Richard_Cullen]

Hi,

Hew Strachan's First World War (Volume 1, all 1200 pages of it) Is an excellent book that deals with the descent of Europe into World War I.  I think Nicholas' view has to be considered in the light of the two Balkan Wars.  Strachan outlines how unready Russia was for war and provides compelling evidence that modernisation of the Russian armed services would not be complete until 1917 - although they had made considerable progress between 1909 and the outbreak of World War I.

Whilst the killing of the Archduke might have been 'the straw that broke the camel's back' a Europe wide war was inevitable given the imperial aspirations of the Kaiser.

Whilst the alliance of Great Britain and Russia was not a natural relationship given the years of playing the 'Great Game' on the Indian sub-continent it was necessary to hold the Triple Alliance in check.  Thus through Russia's alliance with France and the Entente between France and Britain Europe managed to kill a few million people - maybe if the war hadn't happened we would never have seen the Russian revolution and the millions of deaths that were instigated by Lenin, but especially Stalin.  A sobering thought?

Russia had an alliance with Serbia - I suppose Nicholas could have placed more pressure on them to accede to Austria/Hungary's demands - but I think it is something that is open to debate.

Richard

[Elisabeth]

I think most contemporary accounts underscore Nicholas' great unhappiness and reluctance in going to war against Germany in 1914. I agree with Richard Cullen's assessment that the war was inevitable because of the overweening ambition of the Kaiser and his generals.

I would only add to that statement, that after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, and the Kaiser's consequent threats of retaliation against Serbia, the war was also in a sense inevitable on Russia's side. Russia's urban classes, from the highest to the lowest, were overwhelmingly in support of going to war against Germany and Austria-Hungary in the summer of 1914. Educated Russians in particular were extremely nationalistic in this period and believed it was Russia's duty to come to the aid of its Slavic brother Serbia. If Nicholas had not gone to war, chances are he would have been overthrown by a popular revolution in 1914 instead of 1917, and the government that succeeded the autocracy would have taken Russia to war in his place.

Sadly, I don't believe either World War I or the Russian Revolution could have been avoided.  

[HerrKaiser]

Everyone knows the winners get to write history, but it is interesting to me that after 100 years and the trendy attitude to be critical of establishment ideas, that pre WWI Germany is still vilified for that catastrophe. If the "imperial aspirations of the Kaiser" caused the war, what were they? Germany had a few colonies in Africa and the Pacific and had capitalist joint ventures in several places, but the country paled in comparison to the empire of the British and French. One of the most indelible images in grade school was the world map; Britain and its empire was in pink--75% of the world! Imperialistic aspirations?
Wilhelm was creating a great navy, but he was far behind the British and French in the global land grab and well behind the Brits on naval ships by treaty.
During the summer of 1914, after the assassinations, W was the only prominent leader to get Serbia to yield to the Austrian demands. Russia did not. England did not. France did not. William accomplished this goal ALONE, and hence avoided the supposed spark to ingnite war.
Upons closer inspection, Germany was quite satisfied with the Serbian response. It seems Russia and France, each of whom did not at all expect Serbia to fold (and hence bring war) were much surprised and likely disappointed that the trigger had been defused. Rather than back off, they each mobilized in spite of the Serbian accomodations.
Moreover, Germany's and the Kaiser's "imperialist" activities during the Wilhelmine era are ever so misleading. They took great advantage of the industrial revolution and the benefits therein, as did the U.S. and Britain. Germany paralleled the other great powers in industrial and commercial growth in all areas of culture and society. This was not "imperialist" unless every other nation is also guilty of that bad term. And, the Kaiser, who had led Germany through 35 years of peace during which he took the moral high road on issues like the Boer War, had little to gain by any war. He and Germany were in great shape and poised for even larger greatness. The leading commercial giants, such as Albert Ballin, and the leading diplomats, such as Prince ? in England, begged for peace and the Kaiser was on their side.

[HerrKaiser]

....and the point relative to the topic  ...

Nickolas could have avoided the conflict. However, governments of poor nations or nations with loads of miserable people have historically seen war as a short term solution. U.S. did it to get out of the depression and Nickolas saw a war as a means to get the masses of oppressed back on a nationalistic track. So, he actually seems to have invited the opportunity for war and it backfired.
Germany had no such motive. Their population was growing by leaps and bounds, affluence in the middle class was historical. Germans were happy and content and very pleased with the status quo.
What could have happend, but obviously did not, was what is happening today. Had Nickolas not desired a war to divert homeland attention, German businesses would have very likely set their sites on the vast opportunities in Russia. Already, Germany had built the Baghdad/Berlin and Tehran/Berlin railways and Russia was prime for development. Industrial development would have not only jump started a vastly improved life for Russias millions, but would have avoided WWI and set the stage for a very different and less tragic 20th century. The monarchies would have fallen sooner of later, but likely with less misery and bloodshed.

[Silja]

Excellent analysis HerrKaiser!

Germany's imperialistic aspirations posed a threat to Britain's supremacy, so naturally, those aspirations must be criminal  

And France wanted revenge for 1871, for a war they had themselves started, and lost.

By the way, G.B. Shaw had written some very intelligent stuff about Britain and its hypocrisy regarding WWI.  

[Richard_Cullen]

Just remember guys tomorrow we will remember all those whoo dies in the two World Wars (Patriotic War), at the 11th hour, of the 11th day, of the 11th month.  Spare a thought for all those of whatever nationality who have died in the service of their country and those who have been the victims of man's inhumanity to man;

"Do not stand at my grave and weep
I am not there, I do not sleep.
I am the thousand winds that blow,
I am the diamond glints that glow,
I am the sunlight on ripened grain,
I am the gentle Autumn rain,
When you awaken in the morning's hush
I am that swift uplifting rush of quiet birds in circled flight,
I am the soft stars that shine at night.
Do not stand at my grave and cry,
I am not there I did not die"

Anon

Lest we forget

Richard

[rskkiya]

Richard
Thank you for the timely announcement

I always like to read Wilfred Owen and Sigfried Sassoon at this time of year -- for my grandfather's sake.
Pax

rskkiya

[Sergio]

 

                                      WORLD WAR I

11th November 1918 - 11th November 2004

[HerrKaiser]

Thank you all for noting this important and sad day or memory. I too bow my head in silence for lost family in the European (and Pacific) wars. How tragic the lack of public awareness of the significance of today! If more were known and taken to heart, perhaps the continuation of the wars (and in large part the current global crises are WWI act three) would/could have been averted long ago. Hmmmm. Must be the so-called human nature.

[rskkiya]

HerrK!

Well put!

rskkiya

[The_Ferret]

In a word.... No.

He greatly overestimated Russias ability to fight a modern war.

Like Nicolas I who thought he was the elect of God, he relied on fatalism and was not enough of a realist.

Like Nicolas I he ended up getting his country in a war they could not win.

[AGRBear]

Nicholas II or Michael I or whomever would have followed after Nicholas II's abdication as Tsar/Emp.,  could have won the war with the Allies help.

Germany had supported Lenin in hopes to gain a treaty so they could free their already too thin troops from their eastern front and focus on their western front.

It was because of Lenin and Trotsky having pulled out of the war and making their treaty with Germany that WWI lasted longer than it needed.

AGRBear