Britains Participation in The Great War - Coursework Example

Britain and World War I Remembering History World War I, also known as the Great War, refers to the period from 1914 to 1918 where major European nations, Russia, the United States and even the Middle East were up in arms. There were two poles of power, the so called Central Powers and the contending Allies. The former was an alliance between Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey while the latter was composed of Great Britain, France, Russia, Japan, United States, Australia and other nations. Historians consider the assassination of Austrian Archduke Francis Ferdinand at Sarajevo by a Serbian nationalist as the spark that ignited a chain of events that included threats, ultimatums and finally, declarations of war. The Great War finally ended with Allied power proving to be the superior of the two. (French, 1986) Britain’s Participation The Great War is considered by many to be one of the most destructive wars ever fought. Germany and Austria-Hungary entered into an economic-military pact that bound them to offer military assistance to each other in times of war. France and Russia was also in such an arrangement with its allies particularly in the Balkans. Britain, on the other hand, did not enter into such agreements with its allies except for Belgium when they assured the fledgling nation of assistance in the Treaty of London. This treaty was entered into by the United Kingdom in 1839, almost a century before the start of World War I. The prevailing foreign affairs view then was that the 1839 treaty did not bind the country to go to war ‘in any circumstances and at whatever risk’. Following the logic of statesman Lloyd George, the Germans would use “the furthest southern corner” of Belgium to go to war with France which did not endanger its neutrality nor cause any unpaid damages from Germany. In other words, many decision makers were of the notion that there was virtually no particular arrangement that bound Britain to go to war for the sake of other nations. (Gooch, 1974) Despite having made no commitments, Britain did go to war on the night of August 4, 1914 and it is the determination of the underlying causes which brought these state of affairs that forms the central core of this paper. Research for possible explanations and analysis of the data gathered indicate that the decision to go to war was due to a combination of many factors encompassing political, military and social fields. The Treaty of London, 1839 Perhaps the most often cited reason why Britain went to war was the treaty it entered into with Belgium. While it was mentioned earlier that this was no strong reason for Britain’s involvement, it was the reason primarily used by politicians in persuading their colleagues to declare war on Germany. In the declaration of war, it was stated that the decision was arrived at after the German government failed to satisfactorily reply with the British ultimatum of keeping Belgium neutral. Even with the knowledge that Belgium was guaranteed protection by the British, the Germans were confirmed to have entered Belgium through Dolhain, Francorchamps, and Stavelot. Belgian resistance was overpowered in Fort Fleron, Liège, and Visé. Further incursions were made in Verviers and other Belgian territory. According to the Schlieffen Plan, Belgium was to be the gateway to France. Knowing of the decision, the Foreign Office immediately issued a statement declaring that a state of war exists between Germany and Britain starting at 11 pm on August 4. The rest is history. This was the official reason but many would argue that there are other subtle factors that made Britain go to war with Germany. Germany a Threat to British Interests Naval supremacy was one of the reasons why Great Britain managed to establish an empire spanning from Africa, Asia and the American continents. After having defeated the Spanish Armada, British ships dominated the high seas which enabled it to pursue maritime trade and conquest of new lands. Besides from this, there is another important reason why naval supremacy was important to the Empire. The British Isles was separated from Continental Europe by the English Channel and the main battle force of invading armies needed to travel and land by ships to wage war against the country. It was therefore crucial to prevent the enemy from setting foot to its beaches and the navy did this role. By 1897, the British Armada had five key ports serving as staging area for the plans of Queen Victoria. They were Dover, the Cape, Gibraltar, Singapore and Egypt. They had the most number of warships as compared to other nations. In 1893, they had 38 battleships while the rest of the world had a combined number of 40 battleships. By 1897, the ratio slightly tilted but the British still had 62 battleships ready to engage a total of 96 battleships of the world. While the British still outnumbered any nation with the number of battleships and other warships, it no longer enjoyed the dominance of the sea and ultimately, the world. By 1900, it had lost naval control of the USA, Brazil and Argentina because of the rise of the mentioned countries’ national navies. Russia, France, Italy were also building up their naval warfare capability while Japan’s navy was emerging as Far East Asia’s supreme naval force. Suffice it to say, the period from 1897 until the Great War saw a shift in the balance of power with the British losing dominance and forced to rethink its foreign policy. It even saw the forming of alliance with the French navy so that the British can still protect its interest in the Mediterranean where it once reigned supreme. The reason behind the lost of capacity to guard the Mediterranean was due to the recall of many British ships stationed in the ‘Outer Ocean’ to join the North Sea force. Where does Germany fit in the picture? Britain was more concerned regarding the rise of Russian and French navy in the early 1900’s but became anxious of Germany when Kaiser Wilhelm II rose to power. The German leader was very adamant in building the armed forces to counter any threat presented by its neighbors, France and Russia. These two countries became fearful of Germany’s war development efforts and initiated their own military improvement program. Other neighbor countries soon followed suit. An arms race among the major European powers ensued and Europe saw larger and better-equipped armies and a larger number of war ships docked on ports. Nevertheless, Britain did not saw Germany as a threat and they were actually good friends. This was until 1907. By 1907, Germany had such a strong economy, powerful armed forces and large population where they can draw reserves that Britain finally acknowledged that Germany was indeed the greatest potential threat to the United Kingdom. Dominance of Europe was being wrestled away from Britain by Germany as the ‘Weltpolitik’, Germany’s naval force, was increasingly becoming at par with the Royal Navy. If Britain had not joined the Great War, it would have left the French navy in the mercy of the Weltpolitik and compromised its interest in the Mediterranean which was being protected by the French navy for the British. Expansionist Germany would have acquired more territory and more resources if it won against Russia and France – a situation which further threatens Britain’s position as the foremost power in Europe. French ports would have been made available to German mercantile and war shipping. In other words, the Great War was an opportunity for the British to maintain or secure its naval and imperial supremacy by ‘downgrading’ or inflicting major losses and preventing acquisition of ports for the staging and servicing of the German fleet. (Mayer, 1967; Gooch, 1974) Nonetheless, attributing Britain’s involvement with the Great War solely with the desire to maintain naval supremacy is quite incomplete or completely unacceptable to other historians and politicians. The most common argument is that German naval capabilities were still far behind the experience and sheer number of warships. A German victory would not come without huge economic consequences and financial losses. Britain would still be supreme even without going to war. There must be another motivation for Britain’s involvement. Did Britain go to war against Germany hoping it would strengthen its imperialist goals? Winning over expansionist Germany would re-establish the imperial glory of Britain to a certain degree and perhaps transfer German colonies to British hands no matter how few they have. However, if we are to note the events in the period from 1880 to 1900, major European nations were able to expand and prosper and still maintain peace. Indoctrinated for War Nationalism and patriotism were very high in Britain precisely because they were able to build an Empire that directly or indirectly controlled many regions of the world. They were very proud of their achievements both in the economy and the battlefield. Suffice it to say, every Briton was ready and were actually very eager to fight for their glorious motherland. The eagerness to support the war effort was not only unique to Britain as Joll would explain. While many people would prefer that the country go to war, patriotism, inculcated at many levels in society, almost always prevailed in that time period. As Joll would point out, the youth was already being directly or indirectly indoctrinated for war while the rest of society was conditioned to always think that war could happen. In effect, governments were able to wage war because their people already accepted the necessity for it. Some people were also under the impression that war would not only solved external problems but internal problems as well. In other words, Britain joined the war because the prevailing attitude then was to fight and win for the glorious motherland. It was a matter of attitude as Joll (1984) would claim. There is a degree of truth in Joll’s claims if we consider the Steiner (1979) factual account that there was a hearty cheering and clapping of the crowd gathered before the balcony of Buckingham Palace and in the streets of London with the national anthem playing in the backdrop. This shows the eagerness and the acceptance of war by the Britons. Conclusion It appears that Britain went to war to war due to many reasons, all of which are valid. Honoring the Treaty of London was the foremost reason forwarded by politicians but the foregoing analysis would indicate that Britain was also considering its imperial interests and its eagerness to prove their mettle in combat. The combination of these factors ultimately led to the British intervention. References: French, David (1986). British Strategy and War Aims, 1914-16. London: Blackridge. Gooch, John (1974). The Plans of war: The General Staff and British Military Strategy, c.1900-1916. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Joll, James (1984). The Origins of the First World War. London: Longman. Mayer, Arno (1967). Domestic Causes of the First World War, The Responsibility of Power. London: McGraw-Hill Steiner, Zara (1979). Britain and the Origins of the First World War 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Read More