Download Support Reading File

SUPPORT
READING
FOR MISSIONS
REFERENCE
AND
REVIEW
DIFFERENT SOURCES AND STYLES
USE THE ONE THAT WORKS BEST FOR YOU
DOES NOT have to be printed for Quarter Binder Check.
Print ONLY the pages you think you need that will help you.
This is posted on line to save trees!!
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Source A
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
WORLD WAR I (1914-1918)
In 1871, the balance of power changed in Europe. France had
been defeated in the Franco-Prussian War and Italy and Germany had
joined the competition among nations in Western Europe. The new era
of imperialism intensified the competition until global conflict finally
erupted in 1914.
Causes of World War I
The underlying causes of World War I revolved primarily around
the European rivalries.
MILITARISM
Key Concepts: Power
The economic rivalry
between Great Britain and
Germany poisoned
relations between the two
powers and ultimately led
to war.
The buildup of strong armies caused fear and suspi­
cion in Europe. Nations generally believed that war was a legitimate
way to handle a crisis if diplomacy failed. There was no worldwide
forum to help countries settle disputes.
NA VALISM England's status as the number one naval power was
being challenged by Germany. This contest, in addition to economic
competition, led to a hostile relationship between the two countries.
NA TlONALlSM Nationalistic feelings contributed to the out­
break of war in a number of ways.
o
Devotion to country led people to support the policies of their gov­
ernments, even if that meant war.
o
France, whose national pride had been hurt as a result of the Franco­
Prussian War. wanted revenge against Germany, which had taken
the French provinces of Alsace-Lorraine.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Western Europe
Ethnic minontles, such as the Slavic people of eastern Europe,
wanted unity and independence. Austria-Hungary attempted to stop
the spread of these nationalistic ideas since they threatened the exis­
tence of the. empire.
IMPERIALISM
Competition for trade and colonies resulted in
tense relationships between nations. In Europe, major powers, espe­
cially Russia and Austria-Hungary, became rivals for the Balkans, a
region of southeastern Europe. Intense foreign interest in the area,
combined with the desire of the Slavic people for their own unified and
independent country, transformed the Balkans into the "powderkeg of
Europe. "
149
MAKING CONNECTIONS
Key Concepts: Diversity
and Political Systems
The ferment of nationalism
among the diverse ethnic
groups of eastern Europe
weakened the political
system of Austria-Hungary
and became a major factor
leading to war.
SYSTEM OF ALLIANCES
In an effort to maintain a balance of
power in Europe, the major powers created opposing alliances. By
1907, Europe was divided into the Triple Entente (Great Britain,
France, Russia) and the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary,
Italy). The existence of these alliances, whose terms were kept secret.
turned a regional conflict into a world war.
Immediate Cause of the War
The spark that set off the "powderkeg" was the assassination of
Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in June of 1914. The assassin
was a member of the Black Hand, a Serbian nationalist group. Serbia
was a leader in the pan-Slavic movement to unite all Slavic people into
their own country.
Germany gave Austria-Hungary a "blank check" in whatever
action it wanted to take in revenge for the assassination. Backed by its
ally, Austria-Hungary decided on war, seeing it as an easy way to get
Balkan territory. Russia, the' 'big brother of the Slavs," was pledged
to support Serbia. The crisis became an international conflict when war
was declared and the system of alliances went into effect. The mem­
bers of the Triple Entente led the Allies, a group that grew to over 20
nations. Germany and Austria-Hungary became part of the Central
Powers. Italy declined to enter the war in 1914 since it viewed Ger­
many as the aggressor. In 1915, however, Italy joined the Allies with
the hope of gaining Austrian land.
The Course of the War
World War 1 was the first modem war. Countries made use of the
advances in military technology that resulted from the Industrial Revo­
lution. Weapons such as machine guns, grenades, poison gas, and
flame throwers killed millions and changed the nature of war forever.
TRENCH WARFARE Although World War I was a global con­
flict. involving countries and colonies all over the world, the main the­
aters of combat were in eastern Europe and along a western front in
France and Belgium. The failure of Germany to win a complete and
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Key Concepts: Power
The attempt to maintain a
balance of power by means
of opposing alliance
systems escalated limited
regional crises into major
international incidents.
150
Unit 2: Global History
MAKING CONNECTIONS
For more on the
Russian Revolution. see the
next section in this unit.
History
The
Germans' policy of using
their submarines to sink the
ships of neutral nations
suspected of carrying
supplies for the Allies
contributed to the entry of
the United States into the
war. U.S. intervention had a
profound effect on the
isolationist tradition in the
United States and set the
stage for future
interventionism in
European affairs.
History and Politics
Regents Tip List several
causes and results of World
War I. (Examples have been
listed.)
Causes: Economic rivalry
between Britain and
Germany
decisive victory produced a stalemate in the West. The method of
fighting became known as trench warfare. since opposing annies dug
in on either side of a "no man's land" over which they fought.
RUSSIAN WITHDRA WAL On the eastern front. Russia expe­
rienced heavy losses and by 1917 inadequately supplied soldiers began
deserting in large numbers. This situation helped lead to the Russian
Revolution, and the new Communist leadership subsequently pulled
Russia out of the war. Russian withdrawal allowed Germany to con­
centrate only on the western front. but American participation in the
war on the side of the Allies presented a new problem for Germany.
UNITED STA TES ENTRY The United States declared war on
Germany in April of 1917. Although it had tried to remain neutral, the
United States was pushed into the war by Germany's use of
unrestricted submarine warfare. President Woodrow Wilson felt
that freedom of the seas and the rights of neutrals were issues worth
fighting over. He also feared that a victory by the autocratic Germany
would pose a threat to democracy. America's entrance into the war
allowed the Allies to take the offensive until Germany agreed to an
annistice. The fighting ended on November 11, 1918.
The Treaty of Versailles (1919)
The victorious Allies gathered at Versailles in France to work out
the terms of peace. At the conference. the major decisions were made
by the" Big Four"-the leaders of Great Britain. France, Italy. and the
United States. Of the four Allied leaders. President Wilson of the
United States was alone in not wanting to punish Germany or gain
territory .
THE FOURTEEN POINTS Wilson presented his idealistic
plans for peace called the Fourteen Points. His ideas included anns
reduction. guaranteed freedom of the seas, and the right of self-deter­
mination for all nationalities. An essential part of his proposal was the
formation of a League of Nations to help settle disputes and prevent
future wars. Wilson was looked upon as a dreamer, and many of his
ideas were ignored in the creation of the actual treaty.
TERMS OF THE TREA TY OF VERSAILLES
The provi­
sions of the treaty applied to Germany alone:
Results: Breakup of
German and Austro­
Hungarian empires
• Loss of Territory Germany lost land. some of which was used to
help create the new country of Poland.
• Loss of colonies German colonies were taken by the League of
Nations and became "mandates" of the Allies. to be prepared for
independence.
• Disarmament Germany's anny and navy were drastically
reduced. In addition. no troops were allowed in the Rhineland, an
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Western Europe
151
Europe After World War I
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
I
100 200 300 Miles
I
I
I
1 I
300 Kilometers
ID
New nations
I
• Moscow
RUSSIA
industrial area along the French border. War industries were shut
down.
MAKING CONNECTIONS
• War Guilt Clause Germany was forced to accept full responsibil­
ity for the war and to pay for the damages. Having to accept blame
and pay reparations hurt national pride and caused much bitterness
among the Germans.
• League of Nations The Treaty approved the formation of an inter­
national peacekeeping organization. Ironically, the United States
Senate thought that participation in the League would involve the
United States in future European conflicts. and therefore it signed a
separate treaty with Germany. The United States never became a
member of the League. and this lack of support contributed to the
organization's weakness in enforcing the terms of the treaty.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Source B
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
F. World War I (1914-1918)
World War I was caused by a variety of factors:
competition for raw materials and markets
acquisition of colonies for national prestige
struggles for national independence in Eastern Europe
competition among powers to build military power (militarism)
As countries began to feel increasingly insecure, two
alliance systems were developed in an attempt to
WDrid '7 C'\;r'V\J;(.,""
achieve a balance of power. Gennany, under the leader­
Issues:.'
V, 0 ,
ship of Bismarck, took the lead in establishing the
7T7lr.Ti.
:f:N
\2""'" 'k4 '3
Triple Alliance, largely in fear of French retaliation
for the loss of the Franco-Prussian War. This alliance with Austria-Hungary
and Italy was augmented by a secret agreement with Russia, eliminating the
possibility of a two-front war.
__,,,,it~:;}
...
l_~-'~\V -'~<::--::~:f'
However, when Bismarck was forced out of office by Kaiser Wilhelm II,
the German alliance with Russia was allowed to lapse. The French were able
to take advantage of this, and began the establishment of the Triple
Entente alliance. Later, France and Russia were able to persuade the Brit­
ish to enter the Entente. Since the entente was not a finn commitment for
action, some uncertainty remained about the British position right up until
the outbreak of World War 1.
A series of crises also preceded the outbreak of war and worsened
relationships between the two alliance systems. There were two crises involv­
ing Morocco which pitted France against Gennany and two Balkan Wars in
Eastern Europe. The Balkan Peninsula was referred to as the "tinderbox" or
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Unit 6: Western Europe - Dynamics of Change
263
"powder-keg" because of the explosive mix of nationalities there. Austria­
Hungary wished to maintain the status quo in order to insure its existence.
The Russians were desirous of helping the Slavs to establish independent
states under Russian influence. They backed the ambitions of Serbia, the
leader of the Slavic movement. Two Balkan wars, fought by the small Balkan
countries against the Ottoman Empire with Russian encouragement, further
increased tension. The 1914 assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand
(heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary) by a Slav who belonged to a Serbian
nationalist organization, became the spark that set off the powder-keg.
Austria asked for German support. The Germans gave a "carte blanche"
pledge to back anything Austria did. The Germans actively encouraged the
Austrians to attack Serbia and were willing to aid Austria against Russia and
France if the war could not be localized. However, they were concerned about
the position of Britain, which did not make its stand clear until the war
began. Ultimately, as mobilization began in Russia, Austria declared war. A
chain reaction occurred as the alliances were activated. A regional crisis had
become World War 1.
Claiming that the alliance was defensive and their allies were the
aggressors, the Italians refused to honor their alliance with Germany and
Austria-Hungary. Later, Italy entered the war on the Entente side after
receiving promises of land.
The Russians fought valiantly, but their failure to modernize,
and their lack of equipment, resulted in heavy losses. The out­
break of revolution, the abdication of the Tsar, and the rapid
switch from the Provisional regime to the Bolshevik government
led to the Russian withdrawal from the war in 1917.
~\
Power
~
However, most of the action occurred on the Western Front where a
defensive war quickly emerged. The front lines hardly changed once they
stabilized at the beginning of the war. Thousands of men died for less than a
mile or two of land. During the course of the war, technological development
of new weapons such as poison gas, the tank, large artillery, the airplane,
and the submarine occurred. The real effect of these new weapons was not
felt until 1939. They made possible the high mobility of World War II.
Despite early attempts to remain neutral, the U.S. entered WW I in 1917.
Unrestricted submarine warfare by the Germans, loans made to the Allies,
and the idea of the democracies (Allies) fighting the autocratic powers
(Central Powers) drew America into the conflict.
During the course of World War I, President Wilson of the United States
drew up his Fourteen Points which were designed to settle the issues that
had caused the War and prevent wars in the future. He emphasized the
ideas of self-determination of nations, freedom of the seas, equal access to
trade, and the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France. The Allies accepted most
of Wilson's ideas as the basis for a peace settlement, but indicated that they
intended to obtain reparations or money payments for the war costs.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
264
Global Studies - A Review Text
©
N&N
Central
Powers
Allied
Powers
­
British
Naval
Blockade
D
Neutral
Nations
By the fall of 1918, it had become apparent to the German military that
they could not win the War. The Kaiser abdicated, and the government was
persuaded to sign an armistice based on the Fourteen Points. At the Paris
Peace Conference which followed, the Germans were not allowed to be
present, and the basic decisions were made by Wilson, Lloyd George of
Britain, Clemenceau of France, and Orlando of Italy. The resulting Treaty of
Versailles required the Germans to accept responsibility for the war (war
guilt clause), pay reparations, reduce its military, surrender all its colonies,
return Alsace-Lorraine to France,and accept the loss of various territories in
Europe.
Under protest and the threat of resumption of the war, the Germans
signed the Treaty of Versailles. The resentment caused by the treaty's harsh
terms was to be a major factor leading to World War II. The loss of lives
caused by the war upset the demographic patterns in Europe leaving a large
surplus of females over males and allowing younger people to emerge as na­
tionalleaders.
~
Change
~
Outside of Europe, the war resulted in an increase in a
nationalist spirit in colonized nations hoping to achieve indepen­
dence or a measure of self-government through the Paris Peace
Conference. Although European domination began to weaken after
World War I, it was World War II that dealt the fatal blow to Euro­
pean colonial empires.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Unit 6:
We~tern
Europe - Dynamics of Change
Europe
After
World War I
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
265
Source C
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
World War I
Causes of World War I
Why do nations go to war? This is a question that is not easily answered.
Indeed, there may be many answers. Historians themselves may disagree on the
answers and often disagree on the chief reason that led to a particular war. Per­
haps each war should be examined separately, as the reasons for one conflict may
indeed be very different from the reasons for another. This section will examine
the reasons for the conflict that became known as World War I (1914-1918).
Mter learning about these reasons, you may wish to think about whether or not
this war was inevitable (bound to happen). Viewed against the background of the
preceding years, however, its outbreak in 1914 seemed surprising. There had not
been a major European war involving so many nations in almost 100 years. With
the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815, the Congress of Vienna laid the founda­
tion for a near-century of peace. This "Pax Europa" was broken only by a few brief
and local wars (the Austro-Prussian, Franco-Prussian, Russo-Turkish, and Crimean
wars). Beginning in the 1870s, however, a series of forces and events combined to
move Europe toward a major war. These included a growing spirit of nationalism,
increasingly dangerous colonial conflicts, a complex system of entangling
alliances, and a rising tide of militarism.
The war that was to sweep across Europe, and even draw in the United States
would last for four years. It was far more destructive of lives and property than any
previous conflict and was the first so-called total war. Civilian populations became
military objectives and targets along with soldiers. TerrifYing weapons were used
for the first time. It is no wonder that this terrible conflict was originally called the
Great War. Mter it was over, President Woodrow Wilson of the United States
hoped that the world would see it as "the war to end all wars."
It is time now for us to see why this war occurred. In doing so, we will look at
both underlying and immediate causes. Many factors contributed to the start of
World War I. All of the major powers shared some blame, although historians dis­
agree on whether one nation was more at fault than the others.
World War I
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
527
Underlying Causes
Causes that build up over a long period of time, leading to an argument or dis­
pute, can be called underlying. They can also be described as basic or fundamen­
tal causes.
Imperialism The desire to control overseas regions (i.e., imperialism) led to sharp competition
and rivalry among the nations of Europe. Examples included the following:
1. Britain and Germany in East Mrica, where their colonies bordered on each
other.
2. Britain and Germany in the Middle East. Germany wished to construct a
Berlin-to-Baghdad railroad. For the British, this would pose a threat to their
"lifeline to India" through the Suez Canal.
3. France and Germany in Morocco, where Germany had contested France's
establishment of a protectorate.
4. Austria-Hungary and Russia in the Balkans (southeast Europe), where Rus­
sia's support of Serbia was seen as a threat to the unity of the Austro-Hun­
garian Empire.
Nationalism Strong ties to a nation and/or ethnic group (i.e., nationalism) stirred deep emo­
tions. Many groups of people wanted to be free of control by other nations. For
....., Chapter 30 Chronology
1-----------­
.
Paris Peace Conference
Balkan Wars
[1912-1913]
Franco­
Prussian
War
[1870-1871]
Alliance formed
between Germany
and Austria-Hungary
I ~I
1870
I
.
.
United States
enters the war
Treaty of
Brest-Utovsk
1880
I
Russian
revolutions
Entente Cordiale
formed between
France and Britain
Dual Alliance
formed between
France and Russia
Signing of Treaty
of Versailles
~
Triple Alliance formed
with Germany, Austria-Hungary,
and Italy as members
I
I
I
1890
1900
1910
I
~I
Fashoda
affair
~
Other
peace
treaties
•
I
1920
I
Entente formed between
Britain and Russia
.
Triple Entente formed with Britain,
France, and Russia as members
Battle of
Verdun
U.S. refuses to join
the league of Nations
Armistice ~greement
End of World War I
Assassination of Austrian Archduke
Francis Ferdinand an~ his wife in Sarajevo
Start of World War I
528
•
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
example, Bosnia and Herzogovina, which consisted of Slavic people, as did Serbia,
wanted to be free from Austria-Hungary so they could be unified with Serbia and
thus be with others of their own kind. As Russia was a Slavic nation, it backed the
nationalist wishes of Bosnia, Herzogovina, and Serbia. Obviously, this angered
Austria-Hungary. Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Turks ruled over many differ­
ent nationalities, who wanted to break free and form their own nations. Some of
these subject nationalities, besides the ones mentioned above, were Czechs, Slo­
vaks, Poles, and Arabs.
Nationalism was also a source of anger and antagonism (opposition to someone
or something) between France and Germany. Ever since France's defeat in the
Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871), France had resented Germany. French pride
was especially hurt by the loss of Alsace-Lorraine to Germany at the end of the
war. France's passionate desire to regain this territory was reflected in the often­
heard cry for revanche (revenge). This wish was ingrained in students your age and
younger in schools throughout France in the late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries.
Alliances Otto von Bismarck, chancellor of Germany, was well aware of France's antagonism
toward Germany. Accordingly, to assist Germany in case of a French attack, and
also to isolate France, he formed an alliance with Austria-Hungary in 1879. In
1882, Italy allied herself with these two nations because she was upset with France's
seizure of Tunisia in North Africa. Thus was born the Triple Alliance of Germany,
Austria-Hungary, and Italy. Known as the Central powers, these nations stated that
their alliance was purely defensive and that they would not start a war. The parties
to a defensive alliance, however, usually promise to help each other if anyone of
them is attacked by someone else. Formation of the Triple Alliance shows how a
nation's self-interest influences its dealings with other nations. Anti-French feeling
brought Italy and Germany together; then, as Germany was already allied with Aus­
tria-Hungary, Italy found herself an ally of that nation. This was ironic, however, as
Italy had long feared Austria-Hungary and had wanted to get Austrian land that
was inhabited by Italians. Italy may have felt that it was more in her interest to ally
herself with the two German-speaking nations than to stay isolated.
The French and British were aware of the linkages put together in the Triple
Alliance and became disturbed. France's wish to regain Alsace-Lorraine, along
with her fear of being alone in a possible showdown with Germany and that
nation's allies, prompted France to seek allies of her own. An opportunity arose
when the tsar of Russia faced economic troubles. France lent him money for both
industrial and military projects, and the two nations also signed a treaty, forming
the Dual Alliance in 1894. For reasons of self-interest, each felt good about this
alliance: it gave France, lying to Germany's west, an ally on the eastern side of Ger­
many, and it gave Russia an ally against Austria-Hungary, a competitor with Russia
for influence in the Balkans.
Although Britain had a long history of warfare with France, Britain was now
growing much more alarmed about Germany. German naval power was seen as a
threat on the seas, while German industries were challenging British products on
the world market. Also, as we have seen, the two countries had clashing imperialis­
tic ambitions in both East Mrica and the Middle East. For these reasons, and
because of British fear of being alone in case of conflict with the Triple Alliance, it
entered into an entente (understanding) with France in 1904. This Entente Cor­
diale, although not a strictly military alliance, nevertheless brought these two his­
toric enemies closer together. It was also another instance of how self-interest
World War I
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
529
affects a nation's foreign policy. Only six years earlier, in 1898, Britain and France
had almost gone to war over the Fashoda affair in Africa, but now both nations
were more afraid of Germany than of each other. Also, the Anglo-French Entente
of that year settled another colonial issue in Africa. It provided that Britain would
recognize French control in Morocco in return for French recognition of British
control in Egypt.
In 1907 Britain and Russia entered into an "understanding." Russia, weakened
and shocked by her defeat in the Russo:Japanese War (1904-1905), was willing to
smooth over with Britain the conflicting imperialistic claims of both nations in
Central Asia (i.e., Afghanistan and Persia). Britain saw in Russia another counter­
weight to Germany, geographically. Indeed, the agreement with Russia in 1907,
and that with France in 1904, reflected a traditional British foreign policy goal in
dealings with other European nations-to maintain a balance of power. As a
country lying apart from the European continent, Britain would traditionally stay
out of the disputes among continental countries. She would act differently, howev­
er, when events might, in her opinion, appear threatening to her interests. Thus,
in the Napoleonic Wars, Britain sided with Prussia to stop General Napoleon. Less
than 100 years later, however, Britain found that her self-interest lay in aligning
herself with France and Russia against Germany, the nation united by Prussia!
This 1907 agreement between Britain and Russia, along with the Dual Alliance
of 1894 and the Entente Cordiale of 1904, now aligned Britain, France, and Russia
as the Triple Entente. The result was that, fewer than ten years into the twentieth
century, Europe had become an armed camp. Two powerful alliances, represent­
ing six nations, had emerged. Although these alliances were supposedly formed to
keep peace, we have to wonder whether their creation provided a balance of
power or a balance of terror. We can also ask, in general, whether alliances tend to
promote peace or war. In the early 1900s, the danger existed that the slightest dis­
pute between any two nations in opposing alliances could expand into a con­
frontation among all six nations. This is what happened in 1914.
Militarism As the alliance system divided Europe into opposing groups, each member nation
began to increase its military strength. Indeed, one German officer had said, "In
time of peace, prepare for war." The growth of armies and navies, as well as the
development of advanced weaponry, added to the belligerent (warlike, get-tough)
mood. Belligerent and hostile nations have a tendency to settle arguments by
fighting. As governments sought to build up their military arsenals, arms manufac­
turers such as Krupp in Germany and Schneider in France increased production.
Lack of Any World Prior to World War I, no strong global organization existed to foster peace or to
Peacekeeping Machinery settle disputes between nations. There was no United Nations. Some historians
have described the tense period from the 1870s to 1914 as one of international
anarchy. (The term anarchy refers to the absence of any overriding political orga­
nization, able to set and enforce rules.)
Immediate Cause
The immediate cause of World War I was the assassination of Francis (Franz)
Ferdinand, archduke of Austria, on June 28, 1914. He was killed in Sarajevo, the
capital city of Bosnia and Herzogovina, by Gavrilo Princip. Bosnia and Herzogov­
ina were Balkan parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and had Slavic people
530
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Austrian Archduke Francis
Ferdinand.
who wished to be free. Princip was from nearby Serbia, an independent Slavic
nation, which wanted unification with Bosnia and Herzogovina and was opposed
to rule by Austria-Hungary. Although Princip was not a Serbian government offi­
cial, and acted as a member of the Black Hand, a secret society of Serbian nation­
alists, Austria-Hungary nevertheless blamed Serbia for the killing. Although Serbia
claimed it was not responsible, its government had known of the assassination plot
beforehand.
The shots fired by Princip not only killed the archduke and his wife, but also
would indirectly cause the deaths of almost ten million other people during the
next four years. The event ofJune 28 has been likened to a "spark setting off the
Balkan powder keg." The term powder keg referred to the crisis that had been smol­
dering in the Balkans for several years prior to 1914. Tension had existed since the
1870s, when Serbian nationalists with Russian backing strove to create a Slavic
state from parts of Austria-Hungary and the declining Ottoman Turkish Empire.
Subject nationalities under Austria-Hungary protested the treatment they
received. Austro-Hungarian opposition to these movements was intense. In
1912-1913, two Balkan wars were fought over land claims in the area. These wars
would prove to be mere preludes to what would take place all over Europe from
1914 to 1918.
Events Following the Archduke's Assassination
In the six weeks between the assassination on June 28 and the outbreak of war
on August 4,1914, events deVeloped in a way that showed how jealousies, rivalries,
bitterness, and underlying causes discussed previously would destroy the Pax
Europa. The key events that saw the firing of a revolver in June lead to the blast­
ing of guns in August were as follows:
1. Between June 28 and July 23, Austria-Hungary decided to take action against
Serbia. However, knowing that Russia might aid Serbia, Austria-Hungary
wanted to be sure that Germany would stand behind her. Germany indicated
her willingness to do so. The German agreement to support any policy to be
pursued by Austria-Hungary has been interpreted as Germany giving her ally
a "blank check to be filled in for any amount."
2. On July 23, Austria-Hungary sent Serbia an ultimatum (a set of demands
that must be accepted). This required Serbia to
put down all writing, teaching, demonstrating,
and so on that was against Austria-Hungary. The
ultimatum also demanded that Serbia fire any
officials opposed to Austria-Hungary, and that
Austria-Hungary be allowed to send her own
judges to Serbia to conduct a trial of those
involved with the archduke's shooting. If the
ultimatum was not answered positively within 48
hours, war would be declared on Serbia.
3. On July 25, France assured Russia of support in
the crisis.
4. On July 26, Serbia, having received some assur­
ance of support from Russia, responded affirma­
Five minutes after this photograph oJ the archduke and his wife,
tively to all parts of the ultimatum except the
Sophie, was taken on June 28, 1914, thl!)l were assassinated by
last
part.
Gavrilo Princip.
World War I 531
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
PROFILES IN HISTORY
Gavrilo Princip
If you had happened to pass the young man on the street, you most likely would
have paid little attention to him. He was short and very thin, with a high forehead.
The only noticeable aspect was his strikingly blue eyes. If you had come closer, you
might say that they had an almost hypnotic quality. Perhaps they shone with the
idealism of youth-the passionate desire to drive the Austrians from his beloved
Serbia and to create an independent nation. Gavrilo Princip opposed Church
domination, custom, and tradition, hated the Austrian regime, and sought the
creation of a south Slav state. Like many other zealots, he did not smoke, drink, or
seek the company of women.
Princip decided that the best way to accomplish his goal was through the assassi­
nation of Francis Ferdinand, the archduke of Austria. Francis Joseph, who had
been Emperor of Austria, was reaching the end of his days and Francis Ferdinand
would be the successor. A band of three men, with Princip as their leader, planned
to kill the archduke when the time was right. They formed a secret society, the
Black Hand, and took an oath. We would find it difficult today to take this serious­
ly, but it was not foolish to them. They swore that "...from this day until the
moment of my death, I shall remain faithful to every law of this organization; I
shall be ready to sacrifice for it, to die for it, and to take its secrets to the grave.»
Mter the oath was completed, each of the three conspirators was given a little box
containing a cyanide capsule that he was to take if captured.
The newspapers reported that the archduke and his wife were to visit Sarajevo on
June 28. The Austrians could not have picked a worse time.June 28 was a day held
sacred by all Serb nationalists. It was St. Vitas Day, named for a Serbian hero who
had stabbed a sultan that was leading a Turkish army. To have the successor to the
throne of the Austrian oppressors visit on that day was a slap in the face of all Ser­
bian nationalists.
Princip and his followers prepared themselves for the visit by practicing their
markmanship. Princip became a skilled man with a gun.
532
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
The three arrived in Sarajevo on June 4, 1914, and stayed pretty much to them­
selves. They studied the route that the newspapers said would be taken by the
archduke. Princip gave each man a position along the route so that the three
would have a number of opportunities to kill Francis Ferdinand as he passed.
While waiting at the post he had assigned to himself, Princip heard a bomb go off.
Each of the conspirators had a pistol and a bomb. Elated, he ran to see what had
happened. Finding that one of his followers had been arrested, Princip was going
to shoot both his partner and himself so as to avoid capture. The crowds were so
great, however, that he could not get a shot off. He then heard that the attempt
had failed and the archduke had driven off safely.
What happened then is one of the strange twists of fate that sometimes occur in
history. Believing that it was all over, that they had lost their opportunity to strike a
blow for Serbian nationalism, Princip looked up and saw the archduke in a car
five feet away_ The archduke had insisted on going to see an aide who had been
wounded by the bomb blast. Another aide, believing that, if another attempt was
made, it would come from a certain side, now stood on the running board of the
car on that side-opposite from Princip. The driver of the automobile drove
down the wrong street to get to the hospital and had to stop to turn around. He
chose to do this directly in front of where Princip was standing. It was too close to
use the bomb, so Princip took out his pistol and shot twice, killing both the arch­
duke and his wife.
Princip then attempted to shoot himself, but the gun was ripped from his hand by
the crowd. He tried to bite down on the cyanide capsule, but a blow to his head
knocked it out of his mouth. The conspirators were all arrested and sentenced to
death-except for Princip. Too young for the death penalty, he was sentenced to
20 years at hard labor. Four years later, on April 28, 1918, he died in prison as a
result of harsh treatment and tuberculosis. Princip did not live to see the end of
the war he did so much to bring about.
World War I 533
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
5. On July 26, Britain called for an international conference.
6. On July 27, Germany rejected the invitation to attend.
7. On July 28, Austria declared war on Serbia and bombed the city of Belgrade,
having begun mobilization (getting ready for war) during the summer.
8. On July 29, Russia began to mobilize. Germany tried to soften and moderate
Austria-Hungary's reactions to the ultimatum's response.
9. On August 1, France announced that she would do what her interests dictated.
10. On August 2, Germany declared war on Russia.
11. On August 3, Germany declared war on France and invaded Belgium in
order to attack France. Britain, not legally bound by her entente with France
to assist that nation, pondered a decision to go to war.
12. On August 4, Britain declared war on Germany. What finally swayed Britain's
declaration was the invasion of Belgium. In a treaty signed in 1839, Britain,
the German state of Prussia, and other European powers had agreed to
respect and guarantee the neutrality of Belgium. Germany's actions in 1914
were seen as a violation of this treaty. The fact that Germany was indifferent
about Belgium's status and Britain's reaction was evident in the sarcastic
statement made by Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg of Germany. He dis­
missed Britain's action by stating that Britain had gone to war simply for "a
scrap of paper." This remark, printed by presses all over the world, was a
major reason for the charge of war guilt made against Germany after the war.
13. On August 6, Austria-Hungary declared war on Russia.
By the first week of August, all members of the two alliances had gone to war
except Italy. That nation did not consider itself bound by the Triple Alliance
agreement, and had always been uneasy about aligning itself with Austria-Hun­
gary. In May 1915, Italy joined the Allies (Britain, France, Japan, Russia, and Ser­
bia), having signed a secret agreement with them for a promise of land. Japan
joined the Allied side in 1914, while the United States would join in 1917. By the
time the war was over, other nations, as well as colonies of nations, had become
involved as belligerents (participants in a fight).
In Origins oJthe World War, a book about World War I written in 1928, the Amer­
ican historian Sidney Fay states, "None of the Powers wanted a European War.
Their governing rulers and ministers, with few exceptions, all foresaw that it must
be a frightful struggle in which the political results were not absolutely certain,
but in which the loss of life, suffering, and economic consequences were bound to
be terrible." Since then, some other historians have supported Fay's thinking.
Others have laid the blame on one or more of the major belligerents. All of them,
however, have agreed on how shocking and unprecedented were the human and
economic consequences. In the next section we will see why these tragedies
occurred as we survey the conduct of the war.
Conduct of World War I
The terrible loss of life and property during World War I can explain why this
conflict was originally called the Great War. New weapons and technology were
used that made warfare more deadly than it had ever been before. With almost 30
nations and colonies involved, World War I had more participants, both military
and civilian, than any prior war on our planet. The actual conduct of the war will
concern us in this section.
534
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
New Weapons
The warfare from 1914 to 1918 produced unprece­
dented numbers of casualties as innovative (new)
weaponry was employed on land and in sea and air.
Ground forces were equipped with machine guns able
to fire many bullets in quick succession over a wide
area. The use of machine guns eliminated the tradi­
tional stand-up-and-charge tactics. Tanks were
armored vehicles containing lethal guns, and maneu­
vered by soldiers seated inside. These fierce-looking
vehicles could easily break through enemy lines and
move over different kinds of terrain (land). Explod­
New weapons and technology caused more human losses than
ing canisters released poison gas that caused injuries
any prior war in what was termed the Great Wm: Here British
never experienced in prior conflicts between nations.
soldiers fight from the trenches.
The threat of gas warfare required infantry units to
carry gas masks and to learn how to use them within
seconds of an attack.
Naval warfare expanded with the construction of
faster and more powerful battleships. Besides engag­
ing in combat and troop transport, these ships were
effective in maintaining blockades of water routes. An
innovation was the submarine, first used by Germany.
Also called U-boats, from the German word unterwass­
er (underwater), submarines inflicted enormous dam­
age throughout the war.
Warfare in the air was introduced as belligerents
on both sides sought to use the newly invented air­
plane. Aircraft were initially utilized to observe troop
Women played a valuable role on the home front during the war. movements. Pilots also engaged in bombings and
Skilled workers are shown in a French munitions factory.
"dogfights," but on a very limited scale. Aerial combat
here was in its infancy and had little impact upon the
course of the Great War.
The management and care of these new weapons called for extensive training.
The training had to be given not just to professional soldiers, but also to the thou­
sands of civilians who were drafted to fight for their countries. The drafting of
civilians for combat had been relatively rare in previous wars. Most fighting had
been done by individuals who had voluntarily chosen military careers and were
thus professional soldiers. World War I, with so many civilians in uniform and so
many others at work in factories and at home in the war effort, became known as
the first total war.
Military Aspects
The war was fought almost entirely in Europe and surrounding waters,
although there was some action in the Middle East. From 1914 to 1916 the fight­
ing resulted in a stalemate, with neither side gaining much ground. In 1917, even
though Russia dropped out of the war, the entry of the United States helped the
remaining Triple Entente nations to secure victory in 1918. In Europe, the war
was fought on two fronts, the western and the eastern, described in relation to the
World War I 535
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
"War posters from the United
States and Germany were used
to build up morale and
patn"otism.
536
geographical position of the Central powers. The major battles resulting from mil­
itary strategic planning are listed below in chronological order, as are other key
events of the war.
1. Marne River (1914): Lying to the southeast of Paris, the Marne River was the
site of a strong defense effort by French forces against the Germans. Mter
overrunning Belgium, Germany had hoped to score a quick victory against
France by taking Paris. At the Marne River, both sides dug trenches in the
ground, trying but unable to advance against each other. This kind of trench
warfare was common along the western front.
2. Tannenberg (1914): This battle, fought on the eastern front, in Germany,
proved to be a crushing defeat for the Russian army.
3. Gallipoli (1915): In 1914, the Ottoman Turks, fearing Russia,joined with the
Triple Alliance powers. Turkey was in a geographical position to prevent
Russian ships from reaching the Mediterranean Sea. Britain and France
landed troops on Turkey's Gallipoli peninsula in an attempt to capture the
capital of Constantinople and connect with Russia. Mter eight months of
combat, the Allies withdrew. They could not break through the Turkish
lines, commanded by Turkish and German officers.
4. Jutland (1916): This was the largest naval battle of the war, occurring off the
coast of Denmark in the North Sea, between Britain and Germany. Although
neither belligerent could claim complete victory, the German attempt to
break the British blockade remained unsuccessful.
5. Verdun (1916): Scene of the bloodiest battle of the war, this area in north­
eastern France locked France and Germany into an indecisive struggle. A
famous example of dangerous, dirty, and at times boring trench warfare, the
six-month-long encounter at Verdun saw almost 600,000 men killed.
6. Russian Revolution of March (1917): Russian forces had suffered disastrous
losses in the war. The resulting discontent, along with other factors, led to
the overthrow of Czar Nicholas II. However, the new provisional govern­
ment, led by Aleksandr Kerensky, wanted Russia to stay in the war.
7. United States Entry into the War (April 1917): Although the United States had
declared itself neutral at the outbreak of the war in 1914, and wished to fol­
Iowa policy of isolationism, it changed its mind during the next three years.
For a number of reasons dealing with economics, politics, geography, cultur­
al ties, and propaganda, Congress sided with the British and French and
declared war on the Central powers. This was done at the request of Presi­
dent Woodrow Wilson.
8. Capture ofJerusalem by British Forces (1917): This victory in Palestine by British
General Edward Allenby helped protect British interests in the Middle East
and was a severe blow against Ottoman Turkish rule in the region. It laid the
basis for the British Mandate in Palestine, to begin after the war. (See Chap­
ter 28, "Imperialism in Asia.")
9. Russian Revolution of November (1917): In the second Russian Revolution of
1917, the provisional government was ousted by Vladimir Ilyich (Nikolai)
Lenin and the Communists. Lenin had stated that he wanted to take Russia
out of the war. This was accomplished with the signing of peace treaties with
the Central powers at Brest-Litovsk in 1918.
10. Chateau-Thierry and the Argonne Forest (1918): One result of the Brest-Litovsk
treaties was that Germany was now free to take troops from the eastern front
to the western front. She did this, mounting a large offensive push in
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
France. However, she was stopped at the battles of Chateau-Thierry and the
Argonne Forest and was pushed back all the way to her own borders. These
battles saw American forces under General John Pershing fighting with the
French troops of General Ferdinand Foch.
End of the War
The skies were darkening for the Central powers in the fall of 1918. In Septem­
ber, the Turks requested peace. Austria-Hungary was coming apart, as some sub­
ject nationalities had declared their independence from the Empire. On
November 9, Kaiser William II of Germany abdicated (quit his office) and fled to
Holland. A new German government was established and agreed to stop fighting
the war. Accordingly, an armistice was signed in a railroad car in France on
November 11, 1918, between Germany and the Allied forces. The armistice stated
that all combat would cease at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the
eleventh month of 1918. There was rejoicing then in many parts of the world. In
the United States, November 11 has since been a national holiday, referred to also
as Veteran's Day or Armistice Day.
With peace now on the horizon, the world could breathe easier. In November
1918, nobody had yet called this war World War 1. That title came later in the cen­
tury, for reasons we will discuss in Chapter 32 ("World War II"). The key problems
for consideration in the winter of 1918-1919 were how to arrange a suitable
peace, what to do with the defeated countries, and how to prevent another "Great
War" from occurring. These problems were on the agenda at the peace confer­
ence that took place in Paris in January 1919. The resolution of these problems, as
well as the general results of the war, will be the next topic for us to examine.
Results of World War I
What is the purpose of a peace conference? This is an important question to
ask as we prepare to study the peace conference that took place after World War 1.
Delegates to this kind of conference may agree on its purpose, but may disagree
on how to achieve that purpose. They may not even agree on the purposes. Some
other questions to consider are those raised at the end of the last section: How
can a suitable and just peace be arranged? How should the defeated countries be
treated? How can another war be prevented?
In this section you will see how each of these questions was answered by dele­
gates at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, and will also learn the general results
of World War 1.
The Delegates and Their Goals
The Peace Conference opened in Paris in January 1919, with delegates from
almost all the victorious Allied powers. Russia was not present, as she was involved
in a civil war. (See Chapter 31, "The Rise of Totalitarianism in Russia, Italy, and
Germany.") Other absentees were the defeated nations. (It had been decided to
call in Germany and her allies only after treaty terms had been drawn up.) The
major participants in Paris were the four most powerful Allied victors, known as
World War I
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
537
the Big Four: France, Great Britain, Italy, and the United States. They were repre­
sented by their respective leaders: Premier Georges Clemenceau of France, Prime
Minister David Lloyd George of Great Britain, Premier Vittorio Orlando of Italy,
and President Woodrow Wilson of the United States.
Each of these men came to the conference with specific goals and objectives. So
did delegates from other nations, such as Belgium. Every delegate's goals repre­
sented the foreign policy desires of his nation. As we said previously, the foreign
policy of a nation is influenced by its own self-interests. Foreign policy is also influ­
enced by geography and a nation's past relations with other nations. These factors
must be kept in mind to order to understand why there were disagreements
among the Big Four at the 1919 Peace Conference.
France Premier Clemenceau spoke for a nation that had been seriously hurt by Germany
in this most recent war, as well as in the Franco-Prussian War some 47 years earlier.
France wanted revanche for the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, and security against possi­
ble German aggression in the future. France hoped to severely weaken Germany
by making that nation limit her military, give up land in Europe and overseas, and
pay for damages during the war.
Great Britain Although Britain was further away from Germany than was France, and although
British soil had not been trod upon by German troops, Britain nevertheless want­
ed to see a weakened Germany. For Lloyd George, this would mean a reduced
German navy, loss of colonies, and German reparations (payments) for the war.
These goals would benefit British self-interests. Prime Minister George would be
less harsh on Germany than would France. He may have remembered a slogan
about Germany from a fellow countryman: "Hang the Kaiser, but preserve a bal­
ance of power."
Italy Italy hoped to add to her territory in Europe, particularly with acquisitions from
Austria-Hungary. She also wanted land overseas and claimed that many areas had
been promised to her in secret treaties. Premier Orlando argued with Lloyd
George about some of these claims, and left the conference in anger. The Big
Four then became the Big Three.
The United States President Wilson arrived in Paris with goals that were entirely different from those
of his fellow delegates. Much more idealistic than they, and coming from a nation
whose soil was untouched by the war and was furthest from the Central powers, he
did not seek punishment. His overall goal was a "peace without victory." His spe­
cific goals were outlined in a speech he gave to Congress in January 1918 that con­
tained the famous Fourteen Points. While eight of these concerned specific
regions and nations, the remaining six dealt with broad issues and spelled out
objectives that Wilson hoped to see adopted at the peace conference:
1. Freedom of the seas;
2. Self-determination for all people;
3. Open diplomacy and the end of secret treaties;
4. End of tariffs and other economic barriers;
5. Limitations on weapons; and
6. Establishment of a League of Nations to settle international disputes peace­
fully.
538
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
It would almost seem that Wilson viewed war as a
disease. And with a disease, doctors hope to cure it
and ultimately find the reasons for it. If the reasons
are known, then perhaps sufficient methods can be
created to prevent its recurrence. Did the other "doc­
tors" at the Paris Peace Conference agree with Wil­
son? Let us turn now to the provisions of the peace
treaty that was put together and eventually signed at
the Palace of Versailles inJune 1919.
Provisions of the Versailles
Peace Treaty
Mter much arguing and many compromises
among the delegates, the Treaty of Versailles was
drawn up in May 1919. At this point, representatives
from the new German repUblic were summoned to
appear and told to sign the treaty. Viewing the docu­
ment as too harsh, the Germans at first refused to sign
it. But when the Allies threatened to renew the war,
the representatives had no choice. They signed the
treaty on June 8, 1919, precisely five years after the
assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand in Sara­
jevo!
Another event from the past was called to mind
The signing of the Treaty of Versailles at the Hall of Jvlinm"S on
at
the
signing ceremony. In the Hall of Mirrors, site of
June 28, 1919, exactly five years after the assassination of
the
ceremony,
almost 50 years earlier after the PrussArchduke Ferdinand.
ian victory in the Franco-Prussian War, the Prussian
leader Bismarck had proclaimed the birth of the Ger­
man Empire.
Although the treaty was a long document, its chief provisions can be summa­
rized as follows:
1. Creation of a League of Nations.
2. Loss of German territory in Europe. Alsace-Lorraine would be returned to
France. The resource-rich Saar Valley would be under League of Nations
authority for 15 years. During that period, France could have all the coal
mined in the region as part paymen t for German war damages. The recreat­
ed nation of Poland received much German territory, including a strip of
land that would give Poland a seaport on the Baltic Sea. This strip of land,
known as "the Polish corridor," separated German East Prussia from the rest
of Germany. Danzing, formerly a German city, would be a free city adminis­
tered by the League of Nations for Polish use.
3. Loss of German territory overseas. All German colonies would be held as
mandates by the League of Nations.
4. Military restrictions on Germany. Germany was restricted to an army of
100,000 volunteers and prohibited from practicing conscription (drafting
people into the armed forces). The Rhineland was to be demilitarized, and
the navy limited to a few ships. Germany could not build submarines, mili­
tary aircraft, or other instruments of war.
World War I 539
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
5. War guilt and reparations. Germany was forced to admit guilt for the war, and
therefore required to make huge monetary payments called reparations.
Other Peace Treaties and Territorial Changes
Separate treaties were signed with the other Central powers.
1. With Austria in 1919, the Treaty of St. Germain; with Hungary in 1920, the
Treaty of Trianon. In the last year of the war, the Austro-Hungarian Empire
under Habsburg rule had ceased to exist. In its place were the independent
nations of Austria and Hungary and the new nations of Czechoslovakia and
Yugoslavia. Both consisted of subject nationalities that had long clamored
for independent nationhood, free of Habsburg domination. The new
YUgoslavia contained both Serbia and Sarajevo. Limitations were placed on
the armies of both Austria and Hungary. They also had to pay reparations,
though not as severe as those imposed on Germany. Also, Austria was forbid­
den from any future union (anschluss) with Germany.
2. With Turkey in 1923, the Treaty of Sevres. This treaty officially reduced the
once powerful Ottoman Empire to the sole nation of Turkey. Non-Turkish
areas in the Middle East were taken away and became mandates; two exam­
ples were Palestine and Syria. Turkey did not have to pay reparations, nor
was her army restricted.
Other territorial arrangements saw Poland re-established as a nation. It had
undergone several partitions since 1795. The three Baltic regions of Lithuania,
Latvia, and Estonia became free. They had been taken by Germany from Russia in
the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which was canceled after the war.
A summary of major territorial changes after World War I is given below. Also,
see the contrasting maps of Europe to locate these changes.
MAJOR TERRITORIAL CHANGES AFTER WORLD WAR I
Change
Nation(s) from which land was taken
Poland was recreated, with a "corridor" to the sea.
Germany and German-conquered areas
of Russia
Romania was enlarged.
Austria-Hungary
Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were created as
new nations.
Austria-Hungary
Austria and Hungary became separate nations.
Austria-Hungary
Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were created.
Russia
Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France.
Germany
Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine become mandates under
the League of Nations.
Turkey
General Results of World War I
As we have seen, World War I was labeled the Great War for many reasons. An
additional reason lies in the fact that the war changed the course of world history.
It brought short-range results as well as long-range outcomes that affected future
540
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Europe in 1914
Europe in 1919
~
~
D
Allied powers
§ Central powers •
~ Neutral countries
l
'
~
New countries
D
Countries with "
border changes
-11'
SOVIET
UNION
events and generations. The economic chaos and radical social changes in its
wake were accompanied by historic political developments. Some of the most pow­
erful European nations lost their influence and began to decline. Many monarchs
lost their thrones. Some empires came to an end, while others expanded. A Com­
munist government came to power in Russia. The general results, seen from eco­
nomic, social, and political perspectives, are discussed below.
Economic The war was very costly to the participants. Costs were estimated at close to $400
billion. In all belligerent nations, taxes had to be raised while living standards fell.
The losers became debtor nations, some of them finding it difficult to make repa­
ration payments while rebuilding their economies. Many of the economic prob­
lems arising from the war were partly responsible for the worldwide Great
Depression that began in 1929.
Social Casualties were heavy. Estimates are that ten million soldiers were killed and
another 31 million wounded. Civilian population losses were also in the millions,
caused to a large degree by the deadly weapons used for the first time in warfare.
Most Europeans failed to understand the destructive power of these weapons until
they had been used, and to realize how horrible modern warfare had become.
Displacement of people as refugees and changes in boundaries brought resent­
ment. This was true, for example, in western Poland and Czechoslovakia, where
large numbers of Germans now found themselves living. Ethnic tensions also
existed, for a variety of reasons, between Turks and Greeks and between Turks and
World War I
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
541
Armenians. Between 1915 and 1922 almost two million Armenians were killed by
the Ottoman Turks in a campaign of genocide.
Political New nations arose, and boundaries changed, as shown in the preceding table.
Ownership of some colonies changed. The long-standing Ottoman and Austro­
Hungarian Empires were no more. The League of Nations was formed in an effort
to secure world peace and to watch over specified areas as mandates. Three tradi­
tional royal dynasties saw their centuries-long rule ended: the Hohenzollerns in
Germany, the Habsburgs in Austria-Hungary, and the Romanovs in Russia. The
world's first Communist government came to power in Russia as a result of a revo­
lution. Germany was about to embark on her first experience as a democracy. The
United States was not viewed as a major world power.
Summary
Europe would never be the same after WoTld War I. The results left the woTld
uncertain about the future. As coming events would suggest, it may have been
easier to achieve a victory on a battlefield than to gain a lasting peace at a con­
ference table. The League of Nations was the first large international forum to
design a peace plan for Europe since the 1815 Congress of Vienna. As we will
see, however, the league lacked powers of enforcement and did not have the Unit­
ed States as a member. (In 1920, the US. Senate refused to let the United States
join the league.)
The Treaty of Versailles stirred controversy. Critics claimed that it was too
harsh on Germany and thereby planted the seeds of World War II. The Germans
certainly were bitter about it, claiming that its provisions amounted to a diktat
(dictated peace). AdolfHitler and the Nazi party were able to use this issue as an
effective argument in their rise to power in 1933. Treaty critics in Germany and
elsewhere believed that all of Wilson 5 Fourteen Points should have been incorpo­
rated into the treaty. In their view, the failure to do so created a peace with
vengeance rather than with justice.
Whether or not we accept these opinions, we should pause to consider a situa­
tion that, although simplistic, nevertheless raises a fundamental issue of human
nature. Assume that two longtime enemies, A and B, have a fistfight. A wins
decisively. To make sure that B will never again bother A, how should A act
toward B? Should A continue to beat up B, inflicting additional punishment?
Or should A treat B kindly, helping him up and shaking hands? Critics of the
Versailles treaty would probably choose the second course of action, and propo­
nents of the treaty the first.
Those who favored the treaty felt that Germany deserved what she received. For
them, Germany was seen to have been a hostile, militaristic nation for decades
that needed to be taught a lesson now that it was defeated in war. German land
in Europe was taken mainly on the basis of nationality; lands taken overseas
were to be administered as mandates under the League of Nations with the
promise of eventual independence. The treaty by itself cannot be blamed for the
rise of Hitler and the Nazis. And if all the treaty provisions had been fully
542
War and Upheaval in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
ENRICHMENT
READING
WITH PRIMARY
SOURCE
DOCUMENTS
MAKES FOR BETTER DISCUSSION AND DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF MATERIAL –
WILL ALSO HELP WITH AP PLACEMENT FOR GRADE 11 ANDS 12
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
The Assassination of
Archduke Franz Ferdinand
By 1914 Europe had become accustomed to weathering inter­
national crises and averting wars by last minute negotiations.
The assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne in the Bos­
nian town of Sarajevo at first seemed no more than a regional
affair. The Austrians, however, knew that the Bosnian assassins
were part of a Serbian terrorist society, and they had reason to
suspect that high-ranking Serbs had been aware of the plot.
Austria, long aggravated by the threat that Serbian nationalism
posed to the Empire, which contained many discontented na­
tional groups, was now determined to put an end to Serbian
pretentions.
The conciliatory attitude of the Serbs toward the harsh
Austrian demands did not alter Austria's plans to make war. The
Germans had offered to support their Austrian allies in what
they considered a local incident. Austria declared war on July 28.
The Russians, who regarded themselves as the champions and
protectors of all Slavic peoples, began to mobilize to help Serbia.
At this point, the two great alliance systems of Europe came into
play, and within a short time the major powers were at war.
An account of the assassination of the Archduke and his
wife by GaVIilo Princip is given by Borijove Jevtic, one of the
leaders in the band of terrorists. Jevtic was imprisoned after the
assassination, but was released when no evidence could be un­
covered to implicate him.
A tiny clipping from a newspaper, mailed without comment
from a secret band of terrorists in Zagreb . . . to their comrades in
Belgrade, was the torch which set the world afire with war in 1914.
That bit of paper wrecked old, proud empires. It gave birth to new, free
nations.
I was one of the members of the terrorist band in Belgrade which
received it, and in those days I and my companions were regarded as
desperate criminals. A price was on our heads. . . .
The little clipping . . . reached our meeting place . . . one night
the latter part of April 1914. . . .
As everyone knows, the old Austrian-Hungarian Empire was built
by conquest and intrigues, by sales and treacheries which held in sub­
jugation many peoples who were either Austrian nor Hungarian. It
taxed them heavily; it diverted the products of their toil to serve the
wealth of the master state. It interfered in their old freedom by a multi­
plicity of laws administered with arrogance. . . .
Several years before the war, a little group of us, thirty-five in all,
living in several Bosnian and Herzogovinian cities and villages, formed
the Narodna Odbrana, the Secret Society, the aim of which was to work
for freedom from Austria and a union with Serbia. . . .
We were not the only organization which plotted against Austrian
rule. But we were the only one which went to the length of direct ac­
tion - political crimes and demonstrations to inflame the hearts of the
people. The others merely distributed nationalistic and revolutionary
literature and by argument sought to prepare the ground for revolu­
tion. We were the extremists. All the organizations had a loose con­
nection with each other, but none of them knew our plans or when
we would strike. . . .
Coming up to the World War period, the men who were terror­
ists in 1914 in Bosnia embraced all classes. Most of them were students:
youth is the time for the philosophy of action. There were also teachers,
tradesmen, and peasants; artisans and even men of the upper classes
were ardent patriots. They were dissimilar [in] everything except hatred
of the oppressor.
Such were the men into whose hands the tiny bit of newsprint was
sent by friends in Bosnia that April night in Belgrade. At a small table
in a very humble cafe, beneath a flickering gas jet, we sat and read it.
There was no advice nor admonition sent with it. Only four letters and
two numerals were sufficient to make us unanimous, without discussion,
as to what we should do about it. They were contained in the fateful
date, June 28. *
* June 28: a day all patriotic Serbs observe. On that day in 1389 the Serbian
kingdom was conquered by the Turks, and in the second Balbn War Serbian armies
defeated the Turks in battle on June 28.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
How dar~d Franz Ferdinand, not only the representative of the op­
pressor but in his own person an arrogant tyrant, enter Sarajevo on that
day? Such an entry was a studied insult. ...
As we read that clipping in Belgrade we knew what we would do
to Franz Ferdinand. We would kill him to show Austria there yet lived
within its bOiJers defiance of its rule. We would kill him to bring once
more to the boiling point the fighting spirit of the revolutionaries and
pave the way for revolt. We would kill him for his insult to our coun­
try. . . .
Then came the matter of arranging it. To make his death certain,
twenty-two members of the organization were selected to carry out the
sentence. At first we thought we would choose the men by lot. But here
Gavrilo Princip intervened. Princip is destined to go down in Serbian
history as one of her greatest heroes. From the moment Ferdinand's
death was decided upon, he took an active leadership in its planning.
Upon his advice we left the deed to members of our band who were in
and around Sarajevo, under his direction and that of Gabrinovic, a lino­
type operator on a Serbian newspaper. Both were regarded as capable of
anything in the cause. . . .
The fateful morning dawned. Two hours before Franz Ferdinand
arrived in Sarajevo, all the twenty-two conspirators were in their allotted
positions, armed and ready. They were distributed five hundred yards
apart over the whole route along which the Archduke must travel from
the railroad station to the Town Hall.
When Franz Ferdinand and his retinue drove from the station
they were allowed to pass the first two conspirators. The motor cars
were driving too fast to make an attempt feasible and in the crowd were
Serbians; throwing a grenade would have killed many innocent people.
When the car passed Gabrinovic, the compositor, he threw his
grenade. It hit the side of the car, but Franz Ferdinand with presence
of mind threw himself back and was uninjured. Several officers riding in
his attendance were injured.
The cars sped to the Town Hall and the rest of the conspirators did
not interfere with them. After the reception in the Town Hall, General
Potiorek, the Austrian commander, pleaded with Franz Ferdinand to
leave the city, as it was seething with rebellion. The Archduke was per­
suaded to drive the shortest way out of the city and to go quickly. . . .
The road to the maneuvers was shaped like the letter V, making a
sharp turn at the bridge over the river Nilgacka. Franz Ferdinand's car
could go fast enough until it reached this spot, but here it was forced to
slow down for the turn. Here Princip had taken his stand.
As the car came abreast he stepped forward from the curb, drew
his automatic pistol from his coat, and fired two shots. The first struck
the wife of the Archduke, the Archduchess Sofia, in the abdomen.
She died instantly.
The second bullet struck the Archduke close to the heart.
He uttered only one word, "Sofia" - a call to his stricken wife.
Then his head fell back and he collapsed. He died almost instantly.
The officers seized Princip. They beat him over the head with the
flat of their swords. They knocked him down, they kicked him, scraped
the skin from his neck with the edges of their swords, tortured him, all
but killed him.
Then he was taken to the Sarajevo jail. The next day he was trans­
ferred to the military prison and the roundup of his fellow conspirators
proceeded, although he denied that he had worked with anyone. . . .
His only sign of regret was the statement that he was sorry he had
killed the wife of the Archduke. He had aimed only at her husband and
would have preferred that any other bullet should have struck General
Potiorek. ... [Princip, because he was a minor (nineteen) and could
not be executed, was sentenced to twenty years of hard labor. He died in
prison in 1918.]
Source: The New York World, June 29, 1924. Reprinted by permission of The
World and the North American Newspaper Alliance, Inc.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
The Allies Impose Terms
Upon the Germans
On November 11, 1918, at eleven o'clock in the morning, all
fighting ceased on the Western Front. The war had not been
going well for Germany for some time. Weary and tasting de­
feat, the German people revolted against Kaiser Wilhelm II,
who tIed to the Netherlands. It was the Chancellor of the newly
created German Republic who met with Marshal Foch and his
Allied associates to sign the armistice agreement.
The staggering losses in life and property suffered by the
Allies and the hatred whipped up during the war against the
enemy made an idealistic peace settlement unlikely, in spite of
Woodrow Wilson's pronouncements. The Treaty of Versailles,
drawn up without consulting the Germans, was presented to
them as an ultimatum. In the Hall of Mirrors, where the Ger­
man Empire had been proclaimed in 1871, the German delegates
reluctantly put their signatures to the Treaty.
Excerpts from the Treaty and the reaction of the German
delegates to its contents are given in the following selections.
The Treaty
Article 42. Germany is forbidden to maintain or construct any
fortifications either on the left bank of the Rhine or on the right bank
to the west of a line drawn 50 kilometers to the east of the Rhine.
Article 43. In the area defined above, the maintenance and the as­
sembly of armed forces, either permanently or temporarily, and military
maneuvers of any kind, as well as the upkeep of all permanent works
for mobilization, are in the same way forbidden.
"rticle 44. In case Germany violates in any manner whatever the
provisions of Articles 42 and 43, she shall be regarded as committing a
hostile act against the Powers signatory of the present Treaty and as
calculated to disturb the peace of the world. . . .
THE TREATY. Source: Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols, and
Agreements Between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1910-1923,
Vol. III, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1923, pp. 3351 passim.
Article 80. Germany acknowledges and will respect strictly the in:
dependence of Austria, within the frontiers which may be fixed in a
Treaty between that State and the principal Allied and Associated
Powers. . . .
Article 81. Germany, in conformity with the action already taken
by the Allied and Associated Powers, recognizes the complete inde­
pendence of the Czecho-Slovak State. . . .
Article 87. Germany, in conformity with the action already taken
by the Allied and Associated Powers, recognizes the complete inde­
pendence of Poland. . . .
Article 119. Germany renounces in favor ·of the principal Allied
and Associated Powers all her rights and titles over her oversea posses­
sions. . . .
Article 160. By a date which must not be later than March 31, 1920,
the German army must not comprise more than seven divisions of in­
fantry and three divisions of cavalry. . . .
Article 198. The armed forces of Germany must not include any
military or naval air forces . . . .
Article 231. The Allied and Associated Governments affirm and
Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for caus­
ing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Gov­
ernments and their nationals have been subjected as a consequence of
the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her
allies. . . .
Article 245. Within six months after the coming into force of the
present Treaty, the German government must restore to the French
government the trophies, archives, historical souvenirs, or works of art
carried away from France by the German authorities in the course of the
war of 1870-1871 and during this last war, in accordance with a list
which will be communicated to it by the French government. ...
Article 428. As a guarantee for the execution of the present Treaty
by Germany, the German territory situated to the west of the Rhine, to­
gether with the bridgeheads, will be occupied by Allied and Associated
troops for a period of fifteen years from the coming into force of the
present Treaty. . . .
Article 431. If before the expiration of the period of fifteen years
Germany complies with all the undertakings resulting from the present
Treaty, the occupying forces will be withdrawn immediately.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
The German Reaction
On April 14, 1919, when it seemed as though a settlement were
in sight, the German delegates were summoned to Versailles to receive
the Treaty. . . .
The Treaty of Versailles was formally presented to the German
representatives on May 7, 1919, by coincidence the fourth anniversary of
the sinking of the Lusitania.
The scene was the Trianon Palace at Versailles. The day was one
of surpassing loveliness, and brilliant spring sunlight flooded the
room. . . .
The crowd was small, for the room was small - merely the dele­
gates of both sides, with their assistants, and a few carefully selected
press representatives. The grim-visaged Clemenceau sat at the center of
the main table, Wilson at his right, Lloyd George at his left. . . .
When all were seated, the door~ swung open. At the cry "Messieurs
les pll!nipotentiaires allemands!" ["The German representatives"J, the
whole assembly rose and stood in silence while the German dele­
gates filed in before their conquerors and sat at a table facing Clemen­
ceau.
The Tiger [Cl.emenceauJ rose to his feet and, his voice vibrant with
. the venom of 1871, almost spat out his speech with staccato precision:
"It is neither the time nor the place for superfluous words. . . . The
time has come when we must settle our accounts. You have asked for
peace. We are ready to give you peace."
Already a secretary had quietly walked over to the table at which
the Germans sat, and laid before them the thick, two hundred-odd page
treaty - "The Book."
With Clemenceau still standing, the pale, black-clad Count Brock­
dorff-Rantzau, head of the German delegation, began reading his reply
- seated.
An almost perceptible gasp swept the room, for the failure of the
German to rise was taken as a studied discourtesy. Some felt that he was
too nervous and shaken to stand. Others felt that he wanted to snub
his "conquerors." The truth is that he planned to sit, not wishing to
stand like a culprit before a judge to receive sentence. . . .
If Brockdorff-Rantzau's posture was unfortunate, his words and the
intonation of his words were doubly so.
Speaking with great deliberation and without the usual courteous
salutation to the presiding officer, he began by saying that the Germans
were under "no illusions" as to the extent of their defeat and the degree
of their "powerlessness." This was not true, for both he and his people
were under great illusions.
Then he referred defiantly but inaccurately to the demand that the
Germans acknowledge that "we alone are guilty of having caused the
war. Such a confession in my mouth would be a lie." And the word
"lie" fairly hissed from between his teeth. . . .
When the echo of Brockdorff-Rantzau's last tactless word had died
away, Clemenceau spoke. His face had gone red during the harangue,
but he had held himself in check with remarkable self-restraint. Harshly
and peremptorily he steamrolled the proceedings to an end: "Has any­
body any more observations to offer? Does no one wish to speak? If
not, the meeting is closed."
The German delegates marched out, facing a battery of clicking
moving picture cameras. Brockdorff-Rantzau lighted a cigarette with
trembling fingers.
Lloyd George, who had snapped an ivory paper knife in his hands,
remarked angrily, "It is hard to have won the war and to have to listen
to that."
Thus, within a half hour was compressed one of the greatest dramas
of all time.
[Though no discussion of the terms was permitted, the Germans had
fifteen days in which to make a written reply. Their reply resulted in
a few minor revisions. The Germans were then given a five-day ultima­
tum. Having no alternative, they signed the Treaty on June 28, 1919.J
THE GERMAN REACTION. Source: Thomas A. Bailey, Woodrow Wilson and the
Lost Peace, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1944, pp. 286, 289-90. Reprinted
by permission of the publishers.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
On the Eve of the
Russian Revolution
There was no lack of patriotic fervor in Russia when war broke
out in 1914; even some radical elements uffered to back the
national effort. The war soon turned into an utter disaster tor
Russia. Enormous military casualties, shortages at equipment at
the lront and food at home, and widespread profiteering com­
bined to rouse popular discontent. The Czar did his soldiers no
favor when he assumed personal command at the army. The
government was left in the hands of his inept wite. She, in turn,
had fallen under the influence of Rasputin, a monk who was
believed to be endowed with supernatural powers. Russia was
collapsing. The Czar, given ample warning at the approaching
crisis, did little to avert it. Eventually even the best friends
of the monarchy advised his abdication.
The state at Russia during the war and in the years before
the Revolution is described by Alexander Kerensky, who later
became Minister of Justice, Minister of War, and then Prime
Minister in the shortlived Provisional Government of 1917.
.
The direct consequence of the war was a disastrous rupture of
commercial relations between town and village.
The revolutionary annihilation of the internal exchange [of goods]
had upset the whole economic routine of the country. Therein lay the
root of all the miseries ... which were to descend upon Russia. . . .
By the autumn of 1916, the towns were experiencing a food shortage,
which increased with ever-greater rapidity.
During the winter of 1916 the food shortage extended to the army,
where it was due not only to the lack of commodities in the market, but
also to the ever-increasing transport difficulties.
And then there was the fuel crisis. . . .
This extreme economic exhaustion in the rear had its counterpart
in the extreme exhaustion of the army at the front. As early as January
1915, a colonel of the general staff, Engelhardt, a conservative member
of the Duma, told the Budget Committee that "we can oppose the
technical perfection of Germany only by flesh and bones; that is why
we have to fill the trenches to the brim with the corpses of our soldiers."
" All we know," said Field Marshal von Hindenburg in his memoirs
concerning the fighting on the Russian front, "is that from time to time
we had to destroy mountains of enemy corpses which accumulated in
front of our trenches in order to be able to direct our fire against new
groups of attackers. It must be left to the imagination to compute the
losses. . . ." The Russian army lost two and a half million men ... or
forty per cent of the total on the Allied side. In the spring of 1915, dur­
ing the tragic retreat from Galicia, the Russian guns did not reply to
Mackensen's barrage of fire - we had no shells. The Russian soldiers
went out to die without rifles, sometimes armed with sticks, always
awaiting their turn for rifles - to be taken out of the hands of the dead
or wounded. . . . Both the officers and the men of the trained peace­
time regular army, especially the infantry, were slaughtered during the
very first year of the war. . . .
In December 1916 the army had a million men listed as desert­
ers . . . . Military operations sometimes had to be abandoned because
the soldiers refused to leave their trenches and attack the enemy. . . .
To be sur,,:, no one could be held responsible for those terrible so­
cial and economic upheavals which were the direct consequence of the
war as such. But it is the rulers who must be held fully responsible for
the internal policy of the state during a war so incredibly difficult, of
such exceptional historical importance, and conducted under such un­
endurable economic conditions.
The first question that arises is whether the position of Russia in
the WorId War was hopeless and helpless from the start. I say without
hesitation that it was not. Wherever there was no interference from
above, the Russian military and civil authorities managed to solve the
most difficult war problems, and not at all badly. Local self-government
bodies . . . coped splendidly with the work they had undertaken, be­
ginning with the munition factories, down to the care of the wounded.
After all was said and done, Russia had mobilized, alone, fifteen million
men; she had a front which began on the Baltic and stretched across the
Black Sea to Erzerum and Persia; she supported fourteen armies to hold
this line. . . . During the first years of the war she bore the brunt of
it; she suffered enormous losses in men, territory, fortifications, and in­
dustrial cities. And yet the technical equipment of the army, the train­
ing of its officers, and the commissariat organization in the rear were
better early in 1917 than in the years 1914-15. The military strength of
the country was ruined by the will of man and not by the force of cir­
cumstances. A sound organization at the front and in the country be­
hind it was rendered impossible by the fault of the rulers and not of the
ruled. The war for the very existence of Russia had to be waged simul­
Source: Alexander Kerensky, The Crucifixion of Liberty, New York: The John
Day Company, Inc., 1934, pp. 203-07. Copyright 1934 by Alexander Kerensky. Re­
printed by permission of the publishers.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
taneously at the front and in the rear. Such was the curse of Russia­
both under the Czar during Rasputin's reign, and after the fall of the
monarchy, when Lenin and his adherents took over.
The March Revolution
Informed of the rioting in Petrograd, the Czar commanded his
soldiers to fire on the mob and ordered the dissolution of the
Duma (parliament). Neither the soldiers nor the Duma obeyed.
By the time he yielded to the demand for a responsible ministry,
it was already too late; his supporters had melted away. On
March 15, 1917, the last of the Romanov czars, Nicholas II, was
forced to abdicate his throne.
•
State power was in the hands of a Provisional Government
until a national assembly could be elected. Composed mainly of
moderates, the Provisional Government refused to cor:lply with
the desperate demands of the people for peace, food, and land.
It forbade the seizure of land by the peasants, and it felt honor
bound to its a11ies to continue the war. Its increasing unpopu­
larity played into the hands of the extremists, who magnified its
deficiencies. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew the Provisional
Government in November.
The fol1owing description of the March Revolution (Feb­
ruary in the Russian calendar), which led to the establishment
of the Provisional Government, was written by Leon Trotsky,
who pieced the story together from a number of accounts.
The twenty-third of February was International Woman's Day.
The social-democratic circles had intended to mark this day in a gen­
eral manner: by meetings, speeches, leaflets. It had not occurred to any­
one that it might become the first day of the Revolution. Not a single
organization called for strikes on that day. What is more, even a Bol­
shevik organization, and a most militant one - the Vyborg borough­
committee, all workers - was opposing strikes. The temper of the
masses, according to Kayurov, one of the leaders in the workers' district,
was very tense; any strike would threaten to turn into an open fight. But
since the committee thought the tir:J.F; unripe for militant action - the
Party not strong enough and the workers having too few contacts with
the soldiers - they decided not to call for strikes but to prepare for rev­
olutionary action at some indefinite time in the future. Such was the
course followed by the committee on the eve of the twenty-third of
February, and everyone seemed to accept it. On the following morning,
however, in spite of all directives, the women textile workers in several
factories went on strike, and sent delegates to the metal workers with an
appeal for support. "With reluctance," writes Kayurov, "the Bolsheviks
agreed to this, ane they were followed by the workers - Mensheviks and
Social Revolutionar>s. But once there is a mass strike, one must call
everybody into the streets and take the lead."
It was taken for granted that in case of a demonstration the soldiers
would be brought out into the streets against the workers. What would
that lead to? This was wartime; the authorities were in no mood for
joking. C'n the other hand, a "reserve" soldier in wartime is nothing like
an old soldier of the regular army. Is he really so formidable? In revolu­
tionary circles they had discussed this much, but rather abstractly. For
no one, positively no one - we can assert this categorically upon the
basis of all the data - then thought that February 23 was to mark the
beginning of a decisive drive against absolutism. . . .
Thus the fact is that the February Revolution was begun from be­
low, overcoming the resistance of its own revolutionary organizations,
the initiative being taken of their own accord by the most oppressed
and downtrodden part of the proletariat - the women textile workers,
among them no doubt many soldiers' wives. The overgrown bread lines
had provided the last stimulus. . . .
On the following day the movement not only fails to diminish but
doubles. About one half of the industrial workers of Petrograd are on
strike on the twenty-fourth of February. The workers come to the fac­
tories in the morning; instead of going to work they hold meetings;
then begin processions toward the center. New districts and new groups
of the population are drawn into the movement. The slogan "Bread!" is
crowded out or obscured by louder slogans: "Down with autocracy!"
"Down with the war!" ... There was no fear in the crowd. "The Cos­
sacks promise not to shoot," passed from mouth to mouth. Apparently
some of the workers had talks with individual Cossacks. Later, how­
ever, cursing, half-drunken dragoons appeared on the scene. They
plunged into the crowd, began to strike at heads with their lances. The
demonstrators summoned all their strength and stood fast: "They won't
shoot." And in fact they didn't. ...
Throughout the entire day crowds of people poured from one part
of the city to another. They were persistently dispelled by the police,
stopped and crowded back by cavalry detachments, and occasionally by
infantry. Along with shouts of "Down with the police!" was heard
oftener and oftener a "Hurrah!" addressed to the Cossacks. That was
significant. Toward the police the crowd shouted ferocious hatred. They
routed the mounted police with whistles, stones, and pieces of ice. In a
totally different way the workers approached the soldiers. Around the
barracks, sentinels, patrols, and lines of soldiers stood groups of work­
ingmen and women exchanging friendly words with the army men.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
- -
-
-
-.
­
On the twenty-fifth, the strike spread wider. According to the gov­
ernment's figures, 240,000 workers participated that day. The most back­
ward layers are following up the vanguard. . . . Orators address the
crowds around the Alexander III monument. The mounted police open
fire. A speaker falls wounded. Shots from the crowd kill a police in­
spector, wound the chief of police and several other policemen. Bottles,
petards, * and hand grenades are thrown at the gendarmes. The war has
taught this art. The soldiers show indifference, at times hostility, to the
police. It spreads excitedly through the crowd that when the police
opened fire by the Alexander III monument, the Cossacks let go a vol­
ley at the horse "pharaohs" (such was the nickname of the police) and
the latter had to gallop off. This apparently was not a legend circulated
for self-encouragement, since the incident, although in. different ver­
sions, is confirmed from several sources. . . .
The twenty-sixth of February fell on a Sunday; the factories were
closed, .and this prevented measuring the strength of the mass pressure
in terms of the extent of the strike. Moreover, the workers could not as­
semble in the factories as they had done on the preceding days, and that
hindered the demonstrations. . . .
But this calmness does not last long. The workers gradually Concen­
trate and move from all suburbs to the center. They are stopped at the
bridges. They flock across the ice: it is only February and the Neva is
one solid. bridge of ice. The firing at their crowds on the ice is not
* petards: cases containing explosives.
enough to stop them. They find the city transformed. Posses, cordons,
horse patrols everywhere. . . .
Police reports for that day testify that the fire hose was inadequate:
"In the course of the disorders it was observed as a general phenomenon
that the rioting mobs showed extreme defiance toward the military pa­
trols, at whom, when asked to disperse, they threw stones and lumps of
ice dug up from the street. When preliminary shots were fired into the
air, the crowd not only did not disperse, but answered these volleys with
laughter. ..." The masses will no longer retreat, they resist with opti­
mistic brilliance, they stay on the street even after murderous volleys;
they cling, not to their lives, but to the pavement, to stones, to pieces
of ice. The crowd is not only bitter, but audacious. This is because, in
spite of the shooting, it keeps its faith in the army. It counts on victory
and intends to have it at any cost.
The pressure of the workers upon the army is increasing, counter­
ing the pressure from the side of the authorities. The Petrograd garri­
son comes into the focus of events. The expectant period, which has
lasted almost three days, during which it was possible for the main mass
of the garrison to keep up friendly neutrality toward the insurrection,
has come to an end. "Shoot the enemy!" the monarchy commands.
"Don't shoot your brothers and sisters!" cry the workers. And not only
that: "Come with us!" Thus in the streets and squares, by the bridges,
at the barrack gates, is waged a ceaseless struggle - now dramatic, now
unnoticeable - but always a desperate struggle, for the heart of the sol­
dier. In this struggle, in these sharp contacts between workingmen and
women and the soldiers, under the steady cracking of rifles and ma­
chine guns, the fate of the government, of the war, of the country, is
being decided. [Late on the twenty-sixth and throughout the twenty­
seventh the soldiers mutiny and join the revolution.]
In the early hours of the twenty-seventh, the workers thought the
solution of the problem of the insurrection infinitely more distant than
it really was. . . .
Chugurin was among the first to appear at the Bolshevik head­
quarters, a rifle in his hands, a cartridge belt over his shoulder, "all spat­
tered up, but beaming and triumphant." Why shouldn't he beam? Sol­
diers with rifles in their hands are coming over to us! ...
One after another came the joyful reports of victories. Our own
armored cars have appeared! With red flags flying, they are spreading
te.rror through the districts to all who have not yet submitted. Now it
will no longe~ be. necess~ry to crawl under the belly of a Cossack's horse.
The RevolutIon IS standmg up to its full height.
During the twenty-seventh of February the crowd liberated without
bloodshed from the ~a~y jails of the capital all political prisoners,
an:ong the.m the patnotIc group of the Military and Industrial Com­
mittee, which had been arrested on the twenty-sixth of January, and the
members of the Petrograd Committee of the Bolsheviks.
DeMatteo HSW Global 10
Lenin Rules in the Kremlin
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin's life was dedicated to a single purpose ­
revolution. A devoted follower of Marx's philosophy, he never­
theless realized that revolutions were not brought about by arm­
chair theorists. With a will of iron and amazing energy, he set
about building a trained, disciplined, and militant party of rev­
olutionaries. For moderates or compromisers he had only con­
tempt. He became the leader of the extremist Bolshevik wing
of the Marxists in 1903. After years of exile, disappointment, and
despair, his opportunity came in 1917. Against great odds Lenin
won the revolution for the Bolsheviks.
Brought back to Russia in April 1917 by the Germans, who
believed that he would add to the chaos, Lenin galvanized his
followers against the Provisional Government. In simple and
powerful slogans he offered the people what they wanted -land
and peace. Departing from Marxist theory, he called for the
union of worker and peasant as the means of bringing about a
revolution in backward Russia. With customary disdain for
democratic institutions, and with typical ruthlessness, he dis­
persed the freely elected Constituent Assembly in which the
Bolsheviks had won only a quarter of the votes.
A description of Lenin as ruler of Russia is given below by
David Shub. Shub was in close contact with Russian revolu­
tionary leaders for several decades. After being exiled to Siberia
for taking part in the Revolution of 1905-06, he escaped and
came to the United States in 1908.
On the first of May Lenin stood on the Kremlin wall where
Napoleon once had watched Moscow burning and gazed down at the
May Day demonstration in Red Square.
"The most important thing is not to lose constant contact with
the masses," he told his companion. "One must be in touch with the
life of the masses." And he asked what the crowd was saying, what their
mood was, was their demonstration spontaneous or artificial? . . .
Not having industrial and consumer goods in sufficient quantity to
exchange with the peasants for grain, the Soviet Government on May
10, 1918, issued an order for the requisitioning of grain from "rich"
peasants. A month later, on June 11, the so-called "Committees of the
Poor" were created to enforce the decree in every village. An ugly at­
mosphere of suspicion, espionage, and betrayal was created among the
peasants. Neighbor spied upon neighbor. Peasants slaughtered their cat­
tle and refused to sow their land rather than turn over their food sup­
plies to the government. And the countryside seethed with local upris­
ings, which were crushed by punitive expeditions of Cheka troops
rsecret police].
The complete suppression of civil liberty, the dissolution of the
Constituent Assembly, the Cheka terror, and the ... peace of Brest­
Litovsk - which deprived Russia of its richest regions - brought in­
creasing revolt from every stratum of the Russian people.
The Petrograd regiments which had overthrown Kerensky [the Pro­
visional Government] were on the verge of a new revolt and had to be
disarmed, as were other military and naval units. The Lettish [Latvian]
sharpshooters became the only regular armed force on which Lenin
could rely with complete certainty. . . .
In 1918 Lenin embarked on a policy of "incomplete Communism."
In March the nationalization of trade was decreed. To the Seventh
Party Congress he explained that the industrial workers an~ landless
peasants had to help build Communism on the fundamental principle
"From each according to his capacities, to each according to his needs."
Communism had to be predicated [based] on the elimination of the
middleman. The system of private trading was to be abolished. Produc­
tion would be guided by social needs, he promised.
There were special needs for nationalizing trade. The peasants. un­
willing to sell their grain for worthless paper currency, were demanding
manufactured goods. In order to secure food for the urban population,
~ the government had to organize a barter system between village and
city. Committees were formed in every town with a population of ten
thousand to fix local prices of articles. The existing stocks of merchan­
dise were registered. Trading in manufactured goods was placed under
state control. But that was not enough. On October 8, 1918, the regime
nationalized all domestic trade. All shops, great and small, were closed
and their inventory used for barter with the peasants.
According to Trotsky, Lenin asserted in 1918, "You will see that
within six months we shall establish Socialism in Russia."
Lenin also prepared the draft of a decree outlining how he pro­
posed to force all able-bodied men and women to serve the interests of
the state.
"Every toiler having worked eight hours during the day is obliged
to devote three hours to military or administrative duties.
"Everyone belonging to the nobility or the well-to-do (an income
of not less than five hundred rubles a month or ... capital of not less
than fifteen hundred rubles) is obliged to obtain a workbook wherein
shall be recorded whether or not he has performed his share in military
or administrative service. The recording is to be done by the trade union,
the Soviet, or the staff of the local Red Guard. The well-to-do can ob­
tain this book on the payment of fifty rubles.
"Nonworkers who do not belong to the wealthy classes are also re­
quired to have such a workbook, which they can obtain for five rubles.
For failure to secure such a book or for false entries in it, punishment is
to be meted out according to military law. . . ."
When the decree for the full nationalization of all industrial and
commercial enterprises was promulgated, the Soviet state really con­
DeMatteo HSW Global 10sisted largely of a few offices in Moscow and Petrograd, whose managers
had little practical experience. The "plan" existed mainly in the brain
of Mikhail (Yuri) Larin.
Larin was [a Communist] who had lived for many years in Ger­
\Vhen [~e].returned to Russia, ... Lenin made [him] the
mam architect of Socialist construction. He was the author of the decree
for nationalization of all industries, large and small. He created, mainl
on paper, a system of central institutions for every branch of
and commerce. All private stores were closed and the merchandise con­
ma~y .....
indust~
fiscated. With Russia's economy already undermined by war and civil
conflict, Larin in effect destroyed the remnants.
When the non-Communist specialist Lieberman reported to Lenin
on the sad state of the lumber industry as a result of Larin's decrees,
Lenin interrupted him with these words:
"Of course we make mistakes, but there are no revolutions without
mistakes. We learn from our mistakes, but we are glad we can correct
them."
As for the latest Larin decrees Lenin remarked:
"We are engaged in making revolution. Our power may not last
long, but these decrees will become part of history, and future revolu­
tionaries will learn from them. They may learn something from Larin's
decrees which you consider senseless. . . ."
The population was forbidden to produce or trade, and at the
same time the state was unable not only to build new industries but to
manage the existing ones. Opening a small factory or shop was prohib­
ited under pain of being shot as a "counterrevolutionist" or speculator.
But there was no trace of state-organized commerce. Economic catastro­
phe followed. Raw materials disappeared together with COnsumer goods
and industrial products. The little that remained in private hands van­
ished from the markets. But although state factories could obtain noth­
ing, there was an active black market where enormous speculation flour­
ished. The result was disastrous inflation. And when the cities were
unable to supply the villages with products, the peasants refused to
bring their bread and meat to the cities. A great part of the city workers
who had come from the villages deserted the hungry cities. The cities
were emptied not only of workers, but of all who could find food in the
villages. Because of the scarcity of labor and materials, hundreds of fac­
tories closed down.
To feed at least the essential workers and the administrators, the
regime had to send troops to the villages to collect bread and grain by
force. But the peasants resisted and" armed revolts broke out. The peas­
ants in 1918-19 were mostly ex-soldiers who had returned from the
front with their rifles, machine guns, and grenades. Thus a war for
bread flared in the villages. The city came to take grain but the peasant
didn't want to surrender it, because the paper currency had no value.
These forced requisitions drove hundreds of thousands of peasants into
the arms of the counterrevolution.
The ravaged villages often joined the anti-Bolshevik forces. In the
Ukraine one heard that the peasants favored the "Bolsheviks" (who
took the land from nobles) but were opposed to the "Communists,"
who sent requisitioning squads. The peasants also replied with sabotage,
refusing to produce. Crops dropped to the point where only enough was
planted and harvested for local village consumption but nothing for the
cities.
At one of the sessions of the Council for Labor and Defense, the
above-mentioned Lieberman proposed that several tons of bread and
oats be designated for the peasants who were to deliver firewood to the
cities and railways. One of the commissars opposed the plan, explaining
that this would entail reducing the already meager bread rations of the
city workers.
Alexei Rykov then took the floor.
"We are able to get our workers and peasants accustomed to work­
ing even without bread. But unfortunately we could not get our horses
accustomed to it. You may declare the horses counterrevolutionary, but
you cannot ignore the fact and you must give them oats."
Tuming to Dzerzhinsky, Rykov said, "Even Felix Edmundovitch
can do little about it. Let him try to shoot a few dozen horses."
Lenin closed the discussion and dictated an order to issue bread
and oats for the peasants.
[In March 1921 Lenin inaugurated the New Economic Policy
(NEP), which attempted to cope with the economic disorganization by
a temporary retreat from the socialization of industry, agriculture, and
commerce.]
DeMatteo HSW Global 10