Its dependence in terms of foreign policy became all the more clear after the political unification of Germany in made it the dominant power in Central Europe. In domestic policy as well, dependence on the Hohenzollern empire made the German element predominant in the multi-ethnic state.
The German-speaking populations were split in their identification with Austria and Germany. This much-vaunted mythical community concealed the reality, which was characterised by mutual mistrust in view of the absence of military success and competing war aims. During the war the exhausted Habsburg Monarchy became heavily dependent both militarily and economically on the German Empire, which ultimately led to a loss of independence in military and foreign policy.
We employ strictly necessary and analysis cookies. Analysis cookies are used only with your consent and exclusively for statistical purposes. But it is equally true that absent a terrorist plot launched in Belgrade the Germans and Austrians would not have faced this terrible choice. Civilian leaders in both Berlin and Vienna tried to "localise" conflict in the Balkans. It was Russia's decision - after Petersburg received its own "blank cheque" from Paris - to Europeanise the Austro-Serbian showdown which produced first a European and then - following Britain's entry - world conflagration.
Russia, not Germany, mobilised first. Still, none of the powers can escape blame. All five Great Power belligerents, along with Serbia, unleashed Armageddon. The war was started by the leaders of Germany and Austria-Hungary. Vienna seized the opportunity presented by the assassination of the archduke to attempt to destroy its Balkan rival Serbia. This was done in the full knowledge that Serbia's protector Russia was unlikely to stand by and this might lead to a general European war.
Germany gave Austria unconditional support in its actions, again fully aware of the likely consequences. Germany sought to break up the French-Russian alliance and was fully prepared to take the risk that this would bring about a major war.
Some in the German elite welcomed the prospect of beginning an expansionist war of conquest. The response of Russia, France and later Britain were reactive and defensive. The best that can be said of German and Austrian leaders in the July crisis is that they took criminal risks with world peace. In my opinion, it is the political and diplomatic decision-makers in Germany and Austria-Hungary who must carry the burden of responsibility for expanding a localised Balkan conflict into a European and, eventually, global war.
Germany, suffering from something of a "younger child" complex in the family of European empires, saw an opportunity to reconfigure the balance of power in their favour via an aggressive war of conquest.
On 5 July it issued the "blank cheque" of unconditional support to the crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire trying to reassert its dominance over the rebellious Serbia , despite the likelihood of this sparking war with Russia, an ally of France and Great Britain. However, Austria-Hungary's actions should not be ignored. The ultimatum it issued to Serbia on 23 July was composed in such a way that its possibility of being accepted was near impossible. The largest share of responsibility lies with the German government.
Germany's rulers made possible a Balkan war by urging Austria-Hungary to invade Serbia, well understanding that such a conflict might escalate. Without German backing it is unlikely that Austria-Hungary would have acted so drastically. They also started wider European hostilities by sending ultimata to Russia and France, and by declaring war when those ultimata were rejected - indeed fabricating a pretext that French aircraft had bombed Nuremberg. Finally, they violated international treaties by invading Luxemburg and Belgium knowing that the latter violation was virtually certain to bring in Britain.
This is neither to deny that there were mitigating circumstances nor to contend that German responsibility was sole. Serbia subjected Austria-Hungary to extraordinary provocation and two sides were needed for armed conflict. Although the Central Powers took the initiative, the Russian government, with French encouragement, was willing to respond.
In contrast, while Britain might have helped avert hostilities by clarifying its position earlier, this responsibility - even disregarding the domestic political obstacles to an alternative course - was passive rather than active.
The World War One Centenary. Image source, Alamy. Here 10 leading historians give their opinion. Sir Max Hastings - military historian. Image source, Getty Images. Dickinson, who hoped desperately to avoid a final break Live TV. This Day In History. History Vault. Art, Literature, and Film History. Sign Up. American Revolution.
0コメント