According to a physics principle, “every action has a corresponding reaction and every cause has an equivalent effect” (Cause and Effect, 2016). In the field of history, the meaning of this principle is that in every historical event, there is an underlying cause. This cause is the root of all subsequent events that follow, considered as the effects or consequences. Some people say that this principle is valid because many events or consequences would not happen if there is no root cause just like attributing all misfortunes on earth to Adam and Eve. In essence, these people believe that all subsequent events are the effects or consequences of what the first couple did. However, many people disagree with this principle that makes it unpopular. The reason is that if it is true, then, there is no more hope for mankind considering that they are doomed from the beginning. In terms of war, the principle of cause and effect is also vague and confusing because its impact to the people pinpoints to a past incident that triggered the war. It fails to consider the real motives and differences of the warring nations that caused them to declare war. The aim of this paper is to explain to the readers how the cause and effect principle affects the war. Thesis: Is it correct to say that an event causes the declaration of war between nations? No, it is not right to state that a particular event causes the war between nations.
Documented arguments of those in favor of the thesis:
The pros argue that both the two events – Ferdinand’s assassination and Austria’s war declaration against Serbia, were minor issues or so-called variables (in physics) that triggered the war. His assassination contributed to the cause of the war, but it is not the main cause, and not even Austria’s declaration of war. Most historians reveal that the immediate causes of World War I were the rivalry among the large European empires, and the power blocs that they have established among themselves. Also included was the alliance between each bloc that made war inevitable before 1914. The big question is – if Ferdinand was not assassinated and Austria did not declare war against Serbia, would a major confrontation among the European powers still occur? Yes, the war was still inevitable at that time because of the existing European power blocs, complex mutual aid agreements, and unreliable non-aggression treaties. Accordingly, the causes that contributed to WWI were not the same causes that led to WWII (Cause and Effect, 2016). Although the cons to the thesis of this paper argue that the main cause of WWII was the Treaty of Versailles, it was not. That can be a major issue, but there were several causes of the war. The failure of the League of Nations to address the major international issues is another cause. Specifically in the 1930’s, the League showed its inability to control the powers in Abyssinia and Manchuria. It was clear then that the League could not do anything to enforce its power on those countries that violate the international law. Thus, Japan overwhelmed Manchuria and Italy dominated Abyssinia.
Documented arguments of those who are not in favor of the thesis:
The cons argue that if Franz Ferdinand, the Austrian Crown Prince, was not assassinated in Serbia by a Bosnian Serb, there was no cause for declaring a war. This event caused Austria to declare war against Serbia to retaliate against Ferdinand’s assassination in 1914. The cons believe that these major incidents led to the alliances among the big European nations and eventually started WWI. Another documented argument of the cons state that the root cause of World War II was the Treaty of Versailles. They claim that this Treaty was dictatorial in terms because Britain and France demanded that Germany should pay $33 billion as war reparations, surrender its colonies, cede its territories and limit the power of its army and navy. Because of anger and resentment about this Treaty in the face of economic turmoil, the Germans reacted by re-strengthening its arms and defying the restrictions in the Treaty. It invaded Poland without declaring war and stopped paying its war reparation dues to the victorious allies. These incidents gave rise to Adolf Hitler who planned to conquer the world (Trueman, 2016).
Effects of the war:
Germany and Japan suffered physical and economic casualties because of massive bombing. England also experienced German bombing in the 1940s, and depended on the US aid to move on. France did not suffer a big loss during WWI, but experienced an economic downfall during the Nazi occupation. At that time, only the US and Russia sustained their economy and became the world’s military power (Effects of World War II, 2016).
Conclusion: It is not true that a particular event is the root cause of the war between nations because if it is true, then, the causes of World War I should be the same causes in World War II. As pointed out on this paper, it is not the assassination of Prince Ferdinand and the declaration of war by Austria against Serbia that ignited WWI, but the differences among the major European nations and their motive to expand their territories. In WWII, the defiance of the Treaty of Versailles by Germany is not truly the pinpointed major cause of the war; it was only one of the causes. Some physicists and philosophers apply the cause-and-effect approach to their subject through negative logic. They claim that if A causes B, then B should not have happened if it were not for A. But in history, things do not work that way. For example, taking the negative logic argument as basis, if Prince Franz Ferdinand was not assassinated, WWI did not occur. But as mentioned above, there are several causes of this war that disprove the negative logic. Going farther to a common belief, the writer of this paper believes that “history does not repeat itself.” This writer cites the US-NATO alliance against the Soviet group in the Warsaw Pact as a proof where each country agreed for mutual aid principles and non-aggression treaties. In the end, these alliances that almost resulted to a war did not start a direct confrontation.
References:
Cause and Effect. (2016). Retrieved from: http://qcpages.qc.cuny.edu/writing/
history/considerations/cause.html
Effects of World War II. (2016). Retrieved from: http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/
effectww2.html
Trueman, CN. (June 2016). Causes of World War II. The History Learning Site. Retrieved from:
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-
1980/causes-of-world-war-two/
