Download THE PRELUDE: MOVING TOWARD WAR (1901

THE PRELUDE:
MOVING
TOWARD WAR
(1901-1917)
Chapter 24—Part I
America’s entry onto
the world stage can be
divided into three
phases:
• 1898-1917 from the Spanish-American War
to American participation in World War I
• 1917-1918 during which the U.S. fought in
the war itself
• 1919, the year that the U.S. took part in
settlement crafted at Versailles
United States from the
Spanish American War
to 1917
“The foreign
policy they
[Roosevelt, Taft,
and Wilson]
pursued from
1901 to 1920
was aggressive
and
nationalistic.”
TR’s Foreign Policy
Steps Taken by Roosevelt
to Make America
A World Leader in the
20th Century
• Modernized the U.S. army
• Established the Army War College
• Imposed stiff tests from promotion of
officers
• Created a General Staff to oversee military
planning and mobilization
• Doubled the strength of the U.S. Navy
An Anglo-Saxon supremacist, T.R.
flexed the United States' muscles
abroad as no other President. His
diplomacy was known as "big stick
diplomacy." He prepared America to
become a world power.
Great White Fleet
T.R. had America's 16
battleships go on a world tour
as a show of American might
Japan
21-3
The Japanese were able to escape imperialism and decided
the only way to keep from being a colony was to become like
the industrial nations. TR dealt directly with the Japanese, a
newly emerging power in Asia:
•
Taft-Katsura Agreement of 1905
– Recognized Japanese dominance in Korea—a
violation of the Open Door Policy
– In return the U.S. received assurance that
Japan would not invade the Philippines
• Treaty of Portsmouth 21D-3
Treaty of Portsmouth
21D-3**
•
TR mediated the Russo-Japanese War of 1905
that totally destroyed the Russian navy.
• All treaty parties agreed to:
– Maintain the status quo in the Pacific
– Uphold the Open Door
– Support Chinese independence
TR won the
Noble Peace
Prize for his
involvement.
Japan received
Manchuria and
Port Arthur.
While publicly,
Roosevelt
received acclaim,
he found
negotiations with
these two nations
to be distasteful
and difficult.
Root Takahira
Agreement
•
Japan wanted to create a Japanese Monroe
Doctrine for Asia
• TR's Secretary of State, Elihu Root, worked out
an agreement with Japan that
– Preserved the Open Door
– Preserved trade
– Protected American interests (the Philippines)
in the region
The Agreement checked Japanese imperialism in
Asia
Europe (19051906)
Germany and France both had interests in Morocco and
were willing to fight for them. TR successfully defused the
First Moroccan Crisis of 1906 when he told the Kaiser to
back down.
Latin America
•
•
Roosevelt
Corollary
21D-2**
The Panama
Canal—
completed in
1914 21D-1
This new U. S. policy claimed
the U.S. had right to exercise
“international police power”
over Latin American nations
when they failed to take care of
their own affairs
The Corollary in
Action**
•
•
•
•
•
In 1902, Venezuela defaulted on its debts
England, Germany, and Italy blockaded Venezuelan
ports and sent an ultimatum demanding repayment
In 1904, the Dominican Republic defaulted on its debts
In 1905, TR book charge of Dominican finances with
U.S. officials collecting customs and overseeing the
repayment of Dominican debt
In 1912, the “Lodge Corollary” warned foreign
corporations not to purchase harbors and strategically
significant sites in Latin America
These collective policies remained in effect until the 1930s
when FDR’s “Good Neighbor Policy” became standard U.S.
practice
The Panama Canal—
Major Benefits to U.
S. of Canal Across
Isthmus of Panama**
• Shortened the journey from New York to
San Francisco
• Reduced shipping costs
• Avoided expenses of keeping separate
navies in Atlantic and Pacific oceans
How President
Roosevelt Gained
Right to Build
Canal Through
Panama
He negotiated a treaty with Britain giving the U. S. sole right
to build a canal across Panama or Nicaragua. When
Colombia rejected TR’s offer to buy land in Panama for the
canal, he encouraged the revolt that later occurred there
against the Colombians. The newly formed Panamanian
government cooperated with the U. S.**
Problems Facing
Those Who
Constructed the
Canal
• Dense vegetation
• Mud in rainy
season
• Jungle creatures
• Malaria and
Yellow Fever
William C. Gorgas
Medical officer from
Alabama who realized
that the malaria and
fever bearing
mosquitoes must be
conquered before any
canal could be
successfully built.
By defeating the enemy the mosquito first, American efforts
proved successful where the earlier French attempt to build a
canal had succumbed to tropical diseases.
Steps Along the
Way
•
•
•
Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850—treaty between U. S.
and Britain agreeing to joint control over any future
canal in Panama or Nicaragua
The Hay-Pauncefort Treaty of 1901—this AngloAmerican agreement permitted U.S. to construct and
control an isthmian canal that would be freely open to
ships of all nations
Hay Herrản Convention of 1903—this gave U.S. a 99year lease with option to renew on a 9-mile wide canal
zone; the U.S. was to pay the Columbian government a
one-time fee of $10 million and annual rent of
$25,000.The Columbian Senate rejected the treaty.
Hay-BunauVarilla Treaty of
1903
The newly formed revolutionary
Panamanian government granted U.S.
control of a 10-mile wide canal zone; the
U.S. guaranteed Panamanian
independence and promised to pay the
same fees offered to Columbia.**
TR used Frenchman Philippe
Bunau-Varilla to negotiate
with Panamanian rebels.
TR & The
Canal
In 1911, TR responded to criticism of his
action declaring, “If I had followed traditional
conservative methods, I would have submitted
a dignified state paper of 200 pages to
Congress and the debate on it would have been
going on yet; but I took the Canal Zone and let
Congress debate; and while the debate goes on
the Canal does also.” Like other milestones in
the extension of American influence and
territorial control—e.g., Thomas Jefferson’s
Louisiana Purchase—acquisition of the Canal
was affected unilaterally by presidential
decision.
TR’s Foreign
Policy
Ironically, TR’s image as one
that subdued the dogs of war
(right) was accurate during
his presidency. . . but not at
all the case as international
events deteriorated during
the second decade of the 20th
century. Roosevelt
belligerently pushed for
American involvement in
World War I and assailed
Woodrow Wilson for not
doing so.
Taft’s “Dollar
Diplomacy”** 21E
GOALS OF
DOLLAR
DIPLOMACY
President Taft’s policy of substituting dollars for bullets
(i.e., TR’s “Big Stick” policy). He argued that American
investment abroad would help stabilize troubled regions
while simultaneously turning a profit. As such, Taft
encouraged business ventures abroad when they advanced
U.S. interests.
• bring stability to troubled regions
• increase American power and profit without
the use of force
While Taft’s
domestic
conservative
policies led to an
estrangement with
TR, his foreign
policy, like his
predecessor’s, was
interventionist.
As the cartoon above
suggests, Nicaragua was
the site of “exploding
foreign policy volcanoes.”
In 1911, Taft helped
Nicaragua obtain a large sum
in the form of a loan. In
exchange, the U.S. received
control of Nicaragua’s
National Bank. When
Nicaraguans revolted against
the agreement, Taft
dispatched a detachment of
Marines to stabilize the
situation. Those soldiers
remained in Nicaragua, off
and on, into the 1930s.
Moreover, From 1906-1909,
the United States U.S.
intervened in Cuba regularly
Wilson’s “Moral
Diplomacy”** 21F
•
•
•
•
Make the U. S. conscience of the world
Condemn colonialism
Spread democracy
Promote Peace
Wilson sought these goals
with a missionary zeal
Wilson was not experienced in
foreign affairs and knew little
about foreign policy. He was “a
supremely self-confident man”
who “conducted his own
diplomacy. . . . The idealistic
Wilson believed in a principled,
ethical world in which militarism,
colonialism, and war were
brought under control. He
stressed moral purpose over
material interests. . . . [Rejecting]
dollar diplomacy, Wilson initially
chose a course of moral
diplomacy, designed to bring right
to the world, preserve peace, and
stand to other peoples the
blessings of democracy.”
Countries Where
Wilson and Bryan used
Moral Diplomacy
•
•
•
•
Nicaragua
Haiti
Dominican Republic
Mexico
Bryan, right, was an amateur in foreign
relations. He trusted the common man and
was skeptical of the experts at the State
Department. He embraced pacifism
fervently, and considered it America’s duty
to help less favored nations.
As was the case in his domestic
policy, Wilson eventually reverted
to the ideas and programs of his
predecessors. Wilson intervened in
Latin America more than both
Roosevelt and Taft.
Bryan developed the idea of “cooling off treaties”—a
nation that sought to prevent international conflict by
giving the belligerents, through the passage of time, an
opportunity to use sense and human reason in a less
emotional or passion filled environment. Bryan’s treaties
were predictably naïve and failed to work.
Wilson’s Foreign
Policy in Mexico**
The liberal reformer, Francisco I. Madero
(below right) replaced Diaz. By 1913,
Madero—overwhelmed by a coalition of
powerful opponents including wealthy
landowners, the army, and the Catholic
Church—was arrested and later murdered.
The liberal reformer,
Francisco I. Madero (right)
replaced Diaz. By 1913,
Madero—overwhelmed by a
coalition of powerful
Mexican president,
opponents including wealthy
Porfirio Diaz
landowners, the army, and
(above) fell from
the Catholic Church—was
power when
overthrown in 1911. arrested and later murdered.
Victoriano Huerta
Mexican general who overthrew
the government and seized power;
he favored the wealthy landowners
in Mexico and received support
from foreign oil interests He
resigned in 1914.
Venustiano Carranza
Leader of a group in opposition to
Huerta’s newly established Mexican
government; the conflict led to a
bloody civil war. Upon Huerta’s
departure, Wilson recognized the
Carranza government.
Francisco “Pancho” Villa
A Mexican revolutionary who
led a revolt against Carranza
(Villa’s former leader), as well
as a series of anti-American
border raids against the U. S.
in 1916. He was responsible
for over 30 American
deaths.**
John Pershing
Wilson dispatched American
brigadier general John J.
“Black Jack” Pershing to lead
U. S. 6,000 troops on a punitive
expedition in pursuit of Villa.
Pershing never caught his prey.
Actions Taken by
Wilson During
Mexico’s Civil War**
•
•
•
Adopted policy of “watchful waiting”
Wilson objected to Huerta’s government
based on arbitrary, irregular force rather
than just rule of law
Offered to negotiate between Huerta and
Carranza
“Wilson’s [Mexico] policy had laudable
goals; he wanted to help the Mexicans
achieve political and agrarian reform. But
his motives and methods were
condescending. . . . He interfered in the
affairs of another country, and in doing so he
revealed the themes—moralism, combined
with pragmatic self-interest and a desire for
peace—that also shaped his policies in
Europe.”
Ordered Capture of
Vera Cruz
The stage was set for a
drastic change in
American foreign policy.
The U.S. stood on the
verge of abandoning its
time-honored practice of
avoiding foreign
entanglements and
plunging headlong into
vigorous participation in
world affairs.
THE CAUSES
AND THE
COMING OF
WORLD WAR I
Chapter 24—Part II
Even after 1900,
Americans had little
apparent interest in
foreign affairs.
Celebrated political
pundit, Walter
Lippman, observed, “I
cannot remember
taking any interest
whatever in foreign
affairs until after the
outbreak of the First
World War.”
Statistics about
World War I
• war which was supposed to last 4 months lasted 4 years
(just like the U. S. Civil War)
• The "Great War" involved 30 nations
• Close to 10 million soldiers were killed and twice that
many were wounded
• The advent of "total war," or war involving everyone
• The war's initial purpose—to determine the fate of little
Serbia—took on far greater aims
• The war cost an estimated $350 billion
($3,730,890,000,000—TRILLION in 2003 dollar value)
• The Old World "blew itself up"
General
Alignment
Allied and Associated
Powers (49 million
mobilized men) Britain,
France, and Russia (Triple
Entente) + the "Associated
Powers"
Austria, Germany,
Turkey, and Bulgaria
(Central Powers)—the
Central Powers (25
million mobilized men)
Dissolution of the
“Old World”
• Class structure was shattered
• Belief in progress was shattered
• The war precipitated a revolution in central
and eastern Europe which swept away any
remnants of autocratic monarchism
• Monarchical government was abolished in
favor of democracy
What led
to such a
drastic
change?
Root, Underlying or LongTerm Causes — Larry
"Long Fuse" Lafore**
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nationalism
Territorial Disputes
Economic Competition
Secret Diplomacy/Alliances
Militarism
Festering Hostility Because of the Franco-Prussian
War of 1870
• Absence of any Effective International Agency to
Preserve Peace
Nationalism
• Eastern European
Nationalities: AlsaceLorainne, BosniaHerzegovina, Poland, or
Serbs, Croats, etc. within
the Austro-Hungarian
Empire
• Herbert Spencer and
Social Darwinism—belief
that some better than
others
Territorial
Disputes
Imperialist Rivalries
• Imperialism was an expression of nationalism and/or
racism
• It fulfilled territorial desires
• It fulfilled economic needs (e.g., acquisition of new markets
and sources of raw materials)
• Areas of Contention in the World
– Africa
– Asia (the Far East)
– Near (or Middle) East
Imperialist
Rivalries
Continued
The "New Imperialism" of the Late-19th
Century
• the New Imperialism differed from that preceding it in that
its motives now operated with far greater intensity
• a scramble for overseas possessions, colonies,
protectorates, and spheres of influence
• moreover, in the past, imperial expansion had a limited
appeal chiefly among the upper classes; in the late-19th
century, it suddenly became of vital concern to almost
every strata of society
• the New Imperialism Embodied the Key Trends of the
Period
Key Trends of the
Period
•
•
•
•
Aggressive nationalism
Ruthless economic competition
Restless struggle for success
Opportunity for men of daring and
initiative to suffer hardship in foreign,
distant lands to:
The Balkans — The
Only Remaining
"Zone of
Accommodation"
The Coming of the Age
of Nations — Germany
and Italy
The Balkans was an area in
which several of the Great
Powers had conflicting
interests. With the coming of
the Age of Nations, 1860-1871,
and the unification of
Germany and Italy, it became
the only region in Europe
where boundary lines
remained fluid.
Germany—desired control
there for the Berlin to
Baghdad Railway
At the Congress of Berlin ore
than 30 years before, German
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck
(left) had noted “Europe today
is a powder keg and the leaders
are like men smoking in an
arsenal…A single spark will set
off an explosion that will
consume us all…I cannot tell
you when that explosion will
occur, but I can tell you
where…Some damned foolish
thing in the Balkans will set it
off.”
The Balkans
The Balkans was an area in which several of the Great
Powers had conflicting interests. With the coming of the Age
of Nations, 1860-1871, and the unification of Germany and
Italy, it became the only region in Europe where boundary
lines remained fluid.
• Serbia—desired to build a southern Slavic (Yugoslav) state
• Russia
– desired as an outlet from the Black Sea
– viewed itself as champion of the Slavic nationalities
within the Austro-Hungarian Empire
• Nationalities problem within the Austro-Hungarian
Empire
Economic
Competition
• The Depression of the 1870s
• England challenged as the sole
industrial nation of the world
• Nations embraced protectionism
and erected protective tariffs, trade
barriers
Secret
Diplomacy/Alliances
The grand irony of it all was that the powers
formed these alliances out of fear of war
• Triple Entente—
France, Britain, and
Russia
• Triple Alliance—
Germany, AustriaHungary, and Italy
(Turkey)
Militarism
• Universal
Military Service
• The Great Arms
Race to Keep the
Nation Strong
AngloGerman Naval
Rivalry/Buildup
•
Anglo-German Naval
Rivalry/Buildup
• The Dreadnought
• First Lord of the
Admiralty, Jacky
Fisher
• Admiral Alfred
Von Tirpitz
Germany's shift to
weltpolitic
• Germany used risiko-Gedanke or the "Risk
Theory" which posited that the German
fleet would become so powerful that it
would be too big a risk for Britain to fight
Germany
• Brinkmanship — Bluster, Bullying of
Britain to Extort Concessions
Festering Hostility
Because of the FrancoPrussian War of 1870
The harsh peace
imposed by Germany
on France sewed seeds
of discontent that
ultimately
germinated, in large
part, into the French
war effort of 19141918.
The victorious leadership of Prussia proclaims the German
Empire in the French Palace of Versailles (above)
Immediate or
Short-Term
Causes**
•
•
•
•
Stupidities and Timidities of Statesmen
Involved
Pressures of Public Opinion
Vagaries of Coincidence—the “wrong
turn” taken by Franz Ferdinand’s driver
Assassination of Archduke Fraz
Ferdinand and Wife, June 28, 1914 at
Sarajevo
#1—Immediate or
Short-Term Causes
Stupidities and Timidities of Statesmen Involved
Wilhelm II of
Germany
Wilhelm II
dismissed
Bismarck in
1890 as
“Dropping the
Pilot” (right)
illustrates.
German Chancellor
Theobald von BethmannHollweg
Nicholas II of
Russia
Tsar Nicholas II
(left) was out of
touch with his
subjects.
Moreover,
his wife the
Tsarina was
under the
sinister
influence of
the
charismatic
but
diabolical
and
malevolent
monk
Rasputin
British Statesmanship
What Prime Minister H. H.
Asquith (left) had in
political experience in
longevity, he lacked in
dynamic leadership. He
proved to be an uninspiring
and mediocre wartime
leader.
The latter was
also the case
with his Foreign
Secretary Sir
Edward Grey
(right). Grey
did, however,
have the insight
to understand
the gravity of
the impending
conflict.
On the eve of the war, from his office, Grey watched
the gas lights on the streets of London being
extinguished. He reflectively observed, “The lamps
are going out all over Europe; we shall not see them
lit again in our lifetime.”
#2—Pressures of
Public Opinion
• The fin-de-siècle outburst
of literacy and the
simultaneous explosion of
"Yellow Journalism" was
a major contributor in
whipping up popular
sentiment which
contributed to war fever
• Lord Northcliffe and
"Yellow Journalism"
The Education Act of 1870
established compulsory education
in England. By the turn of the 20th
century, there existed a vastly
expanded citizenry with literacy
skills. Publishers like Alfred
Harmsworth, a.k.a., Lord
Northcliffe, took advantage of this
“market,” luring thousands of with
his flamboyant style, bold and
screaming headlines, and
sensationalized accounts of events.
His is the British counterpart to
America’s Joseph Pulitzer and
William Randolph Hearst.
Vagaries of Coincidence—
the “wrong turn” taken by
Franz Ferdinand’s driver
Assassination of
Archduke Fraz Ferdinand
and Wife, June 28, 1914 at
Sarajevo
Assassin—Gavrilo Princip, a Serb nationalist. Why Franz
Ferdinand?
• He favored moderation and
reconciliation of the south
Slav element in the Dual
Monarchy
• This policy interfered with
Serb nationalism
• It would have blocked the
ultimate union of all
southern Slavs under
Serbian rule
•
•
•
•
The Coming of War -- A
foreordained domino
effect
Austro-Hungary
declares war on Serbia
Germany declares war
on Russia (who
supported Serbia) and
France
Germany invades
neutral Belgium to
strike at France
England declares war
on Germany
French orders to mobilize and enthusiastic French troops
headed to the Western Front (above). Soldiers on both sides
expected to be home within months. They were blissfully
unaware of the lengthy horror that awaited them. This
insensitivity to the awfulness of war was in large part the
product of the 99 years that Europe had enjoyed without a
general war (after Napoleon fell in 1815).
Alfred Graf von
Schlieffen
He proposed a quick and powerful western
blow to take France out of the war early,
leaving the German divisions to turn on the
slowly mobilizing Russian Army to the east.
This “Von Schlieffen Plan” called for following
the easiest route, traversing neutral Belgium.
Long before
the Great War
actually took
place, German
strategist
Alfred Graf
von Schlieffen
(who died the
year before the
war began)
designed the
basic attack
plan used by
the German
Army in 1914.
The invasion of Belgium invited British
intervention since England had guaranteed Belgian
neutrality from the time that Belgium became an
independent nation in 1831. For the British, this
German action was a God-send.** They were in
the awkward position of being committed to a
course of war by virtue of secret alliance treaties
with France and Russia. Violation of Belgian
neutrality enabled the English to enter the war
without openly divulging the degree to which
Britain was already obligated. If the “sins” of the
other Great Powers were ones of “commission”-aggressive acts of war--the sin of England was one
of “omission.”
German Chancellor BethmannHollweg (below) dismissed the
British decision going to war
against a kindred nation over
nothing more than a mere
“scrap of paper.” His flippant
attitude regarding Belgian
sovereignty fueled war sentiment
in the British Isles.
Thus the Western
World hurtled pellmell into war. Few
at the time realized
what
revolutionary
change this
unprecedented
conflict would
work.
Chapter 24 Essay
Assignment
• Why did the U.S. abandon George
Washington’s venerated advice & become a
participant in World War I
• Was this a wise / good thing to do?
• Compare & contrast the “Realist” &
“Idealist” schools of thought
• Evaluate the merits of the Revisionist
interpretation of why America went to war
in 1917