World War (WW) 1 remains to be one of the initial events that ever manifested in modern history. It had a global scope. It defined a magnificent turning point in the world’s history. Europe was subdivided into a series of sovereign countries or states. However, it still formed a uniform cultural community about some aspects. For instance, Christianity predominantly defined Europeans with shared ideology on the supernatural being, their morality, and underlying destiny. Most states in Europe had varied sorts of administration and governance. It is only France and the neighbor Portugal that were republics. Most of the nations were monarchies. A wide range had constitutional monarchies like the Great Britain. Russia and some others had autocratic governments. Besides, culture was unilateral across Europe. People co-existed freely, and movement from one country to other was allowed without a necessarily show of passports.
In 1914, significant changes of events occurred. The Europe’s industrial nations had dominated substantial parts of the world. The centers of power, which included the Britain, Germany, as well as France governments, had direct and indirect control of approximately 80 percent of the globe’s inhabitable surface (Walter, 2006). They possessed considerably nearly half of the globe’s industrial gist. Their merchants dominated half of the globe’s international trade (Walter, 2006). Nevertheless, the European countries fronted a devastating war virtually on each other. Their perennial rivalry for the globe’s influence, as well as their economic power, resulted in significant differences, divisions, or unprecedented suspicions among the states (Richard, 2004). Some national groups, which owned no specific states or those not included in the existing territories desired, expressed their nationalism. Most of these groups were largely found in Eastern Europe. They included the Poles, Ukrainians, the Croatians, Serbs, as well as Czechs. Tensions grew significantly among sovereign states culminating in war (Richard, 2004).
Europe had ominous arms that were up for grabs. Germany had already become a unified and solidified country in 1871; it presented a new power to reckon with. Its rapid growth and expansion as an economic hub and military command raised an alarm, particularly, for France and the sister Britain (Richard, 2004). Shifts and possible adjustments in power balancing ended. Europe finally was drawn into two unified alliance blocks: Germany and Austria-Hungary constituting one block while Britain, France, and the sister Russia forming another block (Richard, 2004). The death of Archduke Francis Ferdinand-an Austria-Hungary heir precipitated the war (Richard, 2004).
Nationalism as a Cause of WW 1
Different political leaders agitated for independent countries or states. The leaders believed in defending and constantly pursuing the possible interests of their sovereign states. The profound desire of Slavic individuals to gain freedom from the predominant reign of Austro-Hungarian Empire fueled or propelled the World War 1 (Walter, 2006). Serbian citizens were militant. They demanded a unification and formation of the smaller Kingdom of the Serbia. In the Middle East, there was an uprising of the Arabic-speaking nationalists, seeking independence from the prime Ottoman Turkish Rule (Walter, 2006). Other nationalists from Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, as well as Poland, demanded a break from the leading Russian Empire (Walter, 2006). Furthermore, Russia also resolved to support Pan-Slavism, especially among the Balkans. This promoted yellow Slavic-affiliations quest to have the Austria-Hungary's Empire overthrown. The peace treaties experienced after war leading to the formation of new states; for instance, Poland, Yugoslavia, and Turkey were merely symbolic. They were dominantly ruled by ethnic nationalist affiliations (Walter, 2006). This fundamentally demonstrates that nationalism was imperatively the main causative factor of the World War 1.
Imperialism as a Cause of WW 1
Aggressive nationalism similarly manifested in the economic rivalry and competition. There were colonial conflicts. These propelled dangerous divisions among focal European powers. The highly industrialized countries in Europe competed negatively for the foreign markets and further engaged in constant tariff wars (Richard, 2004). The most felt and unsettled economic rivalry entailed the Great Britain and Germany. It was apparent by the twentieth century that Germany's rapid economic growth and expansion had threatened British's predominance in the economy. For that reason, British was extremely reluctant to acknowledge the comparative decline in its industry base in comparison to that of Germany (Richard, 2004). This strained their relations. The persistent search for fresh colonies resulted in fomented colonial rivalry. The imperial rules stumbled on one another. Notwithstanding, all major rulers engaged in a perennial scramble for new empires. Scramble for Colonies culminated into war (Richard, 2004).
Militarism as a Cause of WW 1
After 1907, there was an upsurge in military command on policy-making (Richard, 2004). This was particularly shown in Germany and Russia. The Germans and their rival Britons reached a consensus that naval power was the ideal as well as imperative in securing new trade routes. It was also better for the protection of merchant shipping. Additionally, military commanders and politicians resolved to have navies as a measure of commanding the seas during the war. The dreadnoughts and battleships were constructed from both warring ends. This expensive venture of the naval race resulted in strained relations and hostilities among nations (Richard, 2004).
The Events that Drew the United States into World War 1
In 1917, the U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson presented a sensational appeal to the joint session of the U.S. Congress, seeking for a declaration of war on its arch-rival Germany (Nancy, 2008). The President cited serious Germany’s violation of its pledge to defer unrestricted submarine military operations and warfare especially in the vast North Atlantic and the entire Mediterranean waters (Nancy, 2008). Besides, the president mentioned the attempts by Germany to lure Mexico in forming an alliance aimed at fronting war with United States (Nancy, 2008). Therefore, Germany’s persistent submarine attacks, especially on passenger and merchant ships, drew the U.S into the war.
The Sussex Pledge, which prohibited sinking of unarmed boats and military incursions in water, was breached by Germany. The German military leadership had a conviction that the resumption of the unrestricted submarine operations and war fronts would assist in defeating the Great Britain (Sue, 2010). Germany also believed that U.S. was no longer a neutral party. It had supplied ammunitions and financial provisions to its allies. Additionally, Germany believed that the U.S. had already jeopardized its neutrality by acquiescing and rallying behind the Allied blockade mostly of Germany (Sue, 2010).
U.S. had good relations with Germany until 1917 when the latter breached the pledge. President Wilson was further reluctant to declare war on Germany due to doubt of achieving full support of the American nationals on his quest (Sue, 2010). Nonetheless, the perennial submarine attacks, especially on the U.S. merchant and their passenger ships, made it join the war. The ‘Zimmerman Telegram,’ which demonstrated the possible threat of attack on the U.S. by Germany made the citizens of America, support the war. Additionally, the law on international diplomacy and relations stipulated that U.S. naval soldiers were to operate in civilian ships to be protected from the constant attacks by German submarines. This was an act of war on Germany (Sue, 2010). Germans had demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that it did not intend to seek any peaceful termination of the conflict (Sue, 2010).
America had an enormous industrial ability. The country had been partially supplying its allies with financial help, weapons, as well as other goods since the inception of the war in 1914. It had powerful and well-established blue-water naval personnel. America ensured a win of WW 1 by bringing experienced soldiers and new tactics to the battle field.
Events that Led to the Defeat of the Treaty of Versailles
The underlying factors that led to the defeat of this treaty were the concerted strength of the opposing fronts. The opposition to the formation of the League of Nations, and the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Board’s displeasure of not being brought on board during the negotiations of the terms or conditions of the Treaty (John, Richard & Donald, 2001). Besides, political ignorance, incapacitation, and plain inflexibility of President Woodrow resulted in the final defeat of the noble Treaty of Versailles (John, Richard & Donald, 2001).
There were serious political, social, or economic ramifications and far-reaching effects in case the Treaty was ratified by the United States. There were possible economic embargoes or strained to sever diplomatic and international relations. Critics are further perceived the Treaty as a supranational government (John, Richard & Donald, 2001). It was believed that it would control the power of the United States government from possibly determining and managing its affairs. The U.S. failed in ratifying the treaty because of the grudge and personal enmity between the president and the Republican leader-Lodge Henry Cabot (Vishwa, 2004). Their pride could not allow for the sober deliberations and adoption of the treaty. Additionally, ethnic groupings in U.S. also played a significant role in its defeat (Vishwa, 2004).
In conclusion, World War 1 changed the landscapes, perceptions of people, and states towards each other. Despite, the defeat and the end of war, it is unfortunate that peace and harmonious co-existence was equally lost. It was coupled with disillusionment, especially for those who believed in ideals of economic and political progress. Large places in Europe were ruined, economies were on near collapse, and every young generation was near extinct. The Paris Peace Conference (PPC) held in the year 1919 helped in the ratification and streamlining of states.
References
John, P., Richard, P., & Donald, R. (2001). The Oxford Guide to the United States Government. Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford Univ. Press.
Nancy, G. (2008). The Great War and America: Civil-Military Relations during World War I. Westport, Conn.: Praeger Security International.
Richard, H. (2004). The Origins of World War I. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Richard, H. (2004). The Origins of World War I. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Sue, V. (2010). The United States enters World War I. Edina, Minn.: ABDO Pub.
Vishwa, N. (2004). International Relations. New Delhi: Vikas Pub. House.
Walter, H. (2006). Everyday Life: World War I. Tucson, Ariz.: Good Year Books.
