• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How valid is the claim that in 1914 states went to war due to fear rather than motives of gain?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How valid is the claim that in 1914 states went to war due to fear rather than motives of gain? In this essay, I will analyse the reasons why World War I broke out due to fear and motives of gain, and I will evaluate which reason was more of a cause for this global outbreak. Fear was a feeling experienced by all countries in both the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente. Fear ultimately causes war between countries due to tension as each states question what will happen in the near future and try to avoid this outcome. On the other hand, motives of gain also create tension as one nations gain may conflict with another's gain. An example being Germany and France as both of these countries had an interest in Morocco. The reason of tension was that only one country could colonise Morocco and these two countries had a violent history. An example such as this shows how fear brought two rival nations together and created further hatred towards them. Historians often believe that the Alliance system was a result of fear. After France's defeat in the Franco-Prussian war in 1871, France feared the constantly increasing power of Germany, as did Britain. ...read more.

Middle

Tension was also created due to motives of gain through nationalism. Austria-Hungary's aim was to gain land and Russia's aim was to encourage Pan-Slavism. Both of these aims conflicted over the region of the Ottoman Empire. But this reason alone would cause a small war and not a total 'World' War. Russia supported the Slavic's and this created the rising power of Serbia. Russia created a new and more powerful Serbia, hoping that they would eventually become Russia's allies. Austria-Hungary saw Serbia as a great threat. They feared Serbia and knew that they couldn't wait for them to get any stronger. This proves that fear brings risk into play. Austria-Hungary could not take any chances with Serbia so they were looking for any reason to launch an attack on the increasing power of Serbia. Austria-Hungary's fear of Serbia was in fact the trigger that sparked the devastating battle of WWI. Fear was a far greater cause as Austria-Hungary knew that they not only had to defeat Serbia, but destroy it. Serbia was quickly gaining power and Austria-Hungary had to put a stop to this before it was too late. Historians often consider Militarism to be one of the main origins of fear in a country. ...read more.

Conclusion

When comparing these two causes, I believe fear was a more supported answer as compared to motives for gain. As stated before, the fear a country had over another country's rise in military power can cause great amounts of tension. A country with greater power threatens the existence of other countries such as the rapid power gained by Germany posed a great threat to three other countries, Russia, Britain and France, who were all one of the great powers of Europe at the time. In the case of a country like Belgium, they had no fear or motives for gain. They were basically a neutral party that was involved because it was invaded by Germany. Belgium's neutrality was supported by the alliance treaty with Britain. In conclusion, the feeling of fear brings great distress and anxiety in a nation. Gain may cause a minor feud between two nations, but unlike gain, fear can cause terror and anxiety in a country and the only way to remove a feeling of fear, is to get rid of it. No one can take a chance on fear as it could threaten the country's very own existence. This point proves the brutal consequences of fear. Although motives for gain can cause war, it cannot cause a war with a high caliber such as the World War. ?? ?? ?? ?? Sheheryar 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. How valid is to claim that "Europe stumbled into a war in 1914"?

    This granted Austria "permission" to follow an aggressive behaviour that would knowingly create a conflict with Russia, the protector of the Serbs. What is more, in the verge of war, Germany made no diplomatic attempts to negotiate with the other countries , and gave ultimatums demanding Russia to stop mobilization and France to remain neutral.

  2. Causes of WW1. How valid is the claim that in 1914, states went ...

    Austria-Hungary invaded and took over the former Turkish province of Bosnia. This caused tension in Serbia as they felt Bosnia should belong to them. Austria-Hungary viewed Serbia as a threat. This was largely due to Serbia's desire to unite the Slavic people, including those living in the southern parts of the empire.

  1. How valid is the claim that in 1914 states went to war due to ...

    They anticipated campaigns as sharp and decisive as those of the Balkans Wars, or of the wars of 1859, 1866 or 1870. The anticipated no great strain upon society, and would have been horrified to think that four years of trench warfare, technological revolution and economic attrition were about to tear apart the fabric of European society.

  2. To what extent do you agree with the claim that Germany launched an aggressive ...

    Furthermore, it is also crucial to clarify what an aggressive war of expansion is. It is generally recognized that such a war should be the one that is undertaken by a state on another state with an objective of taking some land or territory for expansionist ambitions.

  1. IB Extended Essay - How where the Conquistadors able to defeat the Incan and ...

    This marked the beginning of the destructive conquest of the Spanish. Hernan Cortes was a triumphant Spanish conquistador of the early 16th century, and is credited with the conquest of the great Aztec empire. Nearly 30 years after Columbus first landed in the New World in 1492 C.E Hernan Cortes began his conquest of the Aztec empire in 1519 C.E.

  2. IB History HL, Extended Notes: Russia, the Tsars, the Provisional Govenment and the Revolution.

    Kronstadt communities? dislike and lack of trust in Kerensky grew and it became a major force in the October revolution. Kornilov Affair May 1917 1. Seen by the right and liberals as the man who was going to save Russia from the Bolsheviks who had been blamed for the July Days and introduce a strong unified government.

  1. Notes on the History and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

    and the Arabs faced significant disadvantage in terms of living standards, education, health and employment opportunities Impact on neighbouring Arab States: - Israel now held all of the Negev Desert in the south. In the north Nazareth, Acre and the land to the Lebanese border had been gained while much

  2. To what extent did women gain social equality during the 1920s?

    Women were able to receive higher paying jobs due to the absence of able men at war. Not only were grown women benefiting during the 1920?s, but children were as well. Physical education for every girl &?athletics for all? were strongly endorsed throughout this era.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work