Total War and the Process of Totalisation - Essay Example

Define and discuss total war and/or the process of totalisation. The expression ‘Total War’ has been viewed torefer to different things to various people, historically. The persons who made this concept popular are seen to have been driven by a particular objective but have conflicting agendas. According to Boemeke and others in their book, Clemenceau supported the idea of total war which was a sign of his government’s effort to ensure a civilian control over the conflict. On the other hand Ludendorff utilised the same expression to show his frustrations due to the interference by civilians in the third supreme command’s affairs and also the vision that he had about having a government without any civilian interference in any stage of war. (Boemeke, et al 1999 p 17) According to the BBC website, the process which leads to a situation of ‘total war’ is characterised by several features. It is the organisation of all societies for a war. The organisation is in the sense of economic, social and spiritual way. To this it is believed that the World War I was a good example of a ‘total war’. The website says that by the middle of this war it was viewed as a ‘total war’. The WWI was characterised by a process of the urge of people top show their national identity. Majority of population took part in the war by either fighting or supporting it in their ‘Home Front’ since they believed that a win for their own nation called for the indulgence. (BBE.co.uk, 2009) Briefly describe the war - countries participating and how this changed over time, i.e context of the analysis. The WWI involved two sides, the Allies and the Central powers. The Allies were made up of 27 states with the inclusion of Britain, France, Italy, Russia, the USA and Japan among other. The Allies were fighting against such powers like Turkey, Germany, Bulgaria and Austria Hungary. Due to lack of concentration by the Allies like France and Britain, poor equipment and poor coordination, the central powers came out victorious in some attacks as the war started. As the war continued, the entry of the US to the war in 1917 was seen as the major factor that turned the course of the war as the Central powers started to lose. It was finally a victory to the Allies in November 1918 as the Central powers got defeated. The reasons for the Allies’ victory are usually viewed from different perspectives. The Allies were made up of 27 states while the Central powers consisted of just 4 states and thus the Allies outdid them in terms of resources and manpower. Further more, the Allies were almost in total control of seas and thus they would blockade the coastline of Germany depriving the Central powers of raw materials and food. Moral support was on the side of the Allies since they claimed to be fighting for democracy and lastly the Germans had themselves to blame for making strategic mistakes. The war lasted for four and a quarter years having started in August 1914 and ending in November 1918. With it came seven new countries, wounded 30 million combatants and killed 10 million of combatants and cost around UK £35, 000 million. (Thecorner.org, 2007) Examine the military and economic aspects of totalisation - focus on those important aspects only. Justify and support your reasons for choosing these. The military technology developments had led to a continuous erosion of the link between military and civil issues. WWI efforts were perceived as pursuance of the war in totality, which involved all factors of production of nations and their capabilities. For example, the air power which was a new dimension of military increased the exposure of people. The general of Italy, Giulio, viewed that a permanent bombardment would make people more democratic. The WWI went beyond even the major European nations’ psychological conditions of their people. More specifically, the loss by Germany was blamed on the decrease in the national motivation towards the end of WWI and it led to the psychological perception of power in the views of economic and military fronts. (Hwang, 2008) At the onset of the World War I every European state was highly spontaneous due to the ‘nation culture’. This culture was portrayed in a power’s expressing itself in support of the conflict while defending its homeland. The powers initially obtained were hesitatingly deployed by the Europeans states. However, later in economic issues the states started to partner with their industries to ensure the necessary munitions were produced. States like Russia were faced by lack of ‘national mobilization,’ though. But as the war went on the need for the society’s and states’ total effort was seen as a viable idea. (Cawood and McKinnon-Bell, 2001 p 140) Provide evidence of which countries experienced total war and how this fits in with your definition and answers the question. Before 1914, Europe’s major powers avoided conflict with each other. The Western countries instead exported their wars during the age of expansion of imperialism. Alliances developed within Europe, though, so that they would ensure preservation of stability. Their set procedure was that each of the Alliances would enhance support for its members. There was a ‘Triple alliance’ formed by Austria- Hungary, Germany, as well as Italy while the other side was the ‘Triple Entente’ of Great Britain, Russia and France. An attack upon any member of the alliances would thus lead into a general European war. By the year 1914 it was now evident that the next European conflict would to severe and destructive than ever before. When 1914 set in the armies were so powerful and big. As a result towards the end of the year a war broke out. A whole hundred years of the industrial revolution meant that powers like France, Germany and the British were able to sustain million of armed men on the Western war front. The men had also the sense of patriotism as well as faith that urged them to stay on in the war. (bbc.co.uk, 2009) Compare one country, which you think experienced total war with one which you think did not The Netherlands did not play a big role in the affairs of Europe and rather embarked on liberalism at home. It remained neutral during the WWI. However, it did not go without a scratch since there were damages on its shipping industry by the Germans and Allies. Despite their aiding in destruction, this nation gained a great deal both financially and economically by indulging in trade with the two sides. After the WWI, like most European nations, the country concentrated on its innovative social projects that aimed at eradicating poverty, educational improvement and protection of the rights of children and women. It exploited the mines of Coal in South Limburg to make big reap economically. (Bedford, et al 2007 p 29) On the other hand, Germany went into total war during the WWI. It had previously been planning to invade every European nation since Bismarck’s time. One of the plans by Germany was the Schlieffen’s plan, which aimed at making quick and encircling movements to destroy an enemy. They tried it on France. Besides this plan, the German nation also worked hard to stop countries from taking part in the war where they would trigger revolutions in them. This approach worked in Russia. The World War I started in August 1914 when Germany made a declaration of war on France when Germany believed to be having a very brilliant army force. However, as the war continued, September in 1914 had the army of Germany being very hurt that it was so hard for them to reach Paris. Eventually, the German army lost the battle in 1918. (geocites.com, 2009) Conclusion While concluding, one can utilise the findings given to answer the question, “Does the cocept of ‘total war adequately describe the nature of first world war?” The most accurate, though, is the one given by the BBC website that says- According to the BBC website, the process which leads to a situation of ‘total war’ is characterised by several features. It is the organisation of all societies for a war. The organisation is in the sense of economic, social and spiritual way. To this it is believed that the World War I was a good example of a ‘total war’. The website says that by the middle of this war it was viewed as a ‘total war’. Therefore, WWI is a case that can be used to illustrate what ‘total war’ is. Reference List: Badsey, Stephen. (2009). The Western Front and the Birth of Total War. Retrieved April 30, 2009 http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwone/total_war_01.shtml Bedford, Neal. et al. (2007). The Netherlands. Lonely Planet, Edition: 3, illustrated. p 29. Boemeke, Manfred F. et al. (1999). Anticipating Total War: The German And American Experiences, 1871-1914. Cambridge University Press. p 17. Cawood, Ian and McKinnon-Bell, David. (2001). The First World War. Routledge, Edition: illustrated. p 140. Geocites.com. (2009). Germany during World War one. Retrieved April 30, 2009 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/6916/ww1.htm Hwang, Karl. (2008). New Thinking In Measuring National Power. Retrieved April 30, 2009 http://www.wiscnetwork.org/getpaper.php?id=137 Thecorner.org. (2007). Course Of The War 1914-1918. Retrieved April 30, 2009 http://www.thecorner.org/hist/wwi/course.htm Read More