The Front was static for so long due to the introduction of trench warfare. It was very difficult to attack successfully from trenches because the defensive weapons were better than the offensive weapons at the time. Machine guns and artillery were great defensive weapons in the early stages of the war. It was much harder to attack a trench than to defend it. Each side was not strong enough to overwhelm the other. Even if gaps were opened it soon would be filled by opposing troops. Marshal Foch said in 1903, “Any improvement in firearms is bound to strengthen the offensive.” This was not true until 1918 in the war, with many advances in firearms strengthening the defensive such as more accurate and powerful artillery. Artillery was inaccurate at first but may have worked if the number of shells was immense, however due to the shortage of shells it was not immense enough to win the war. This caused the war to be static for a long time, as did cavalry. Horses were used less for offensive purposes because they were useless against machine guns and artillery. Haig said in 1911, “Cavalry will have a larger sphere of action in future wars.” Haig was wrong, as horses could not travel at speed across No-Mans Land, and used for transporting goods instead.
The tactics of the generals caused the stalemate to last longer. They concentrated on attacking, believing they should attack the enemy not waiting. They used old tactics thinking the war would be fought like past wars. They tried no imaginative ways to overcome problems and thinking their troops only capable of simple tasks when many were more intelligent. The Allies did not co-operate, each wanting to make the breakthrough themselves. Better results may have been achieved if co-operation came earlier than in 1918.
From the beginning of the stalemate to the end there were many changes to warfare to try and break the stalemate. However some tactics used were never changed and never worked. There was always trench warfare throughout the war causing it to be static. In April 1915 the Germans used poisonous chlorine gas for the first time. Poisonous gas was effective as it opened a 9km gap in the Allied lines, but was unreliable because gas could change direction depending on the wind direction and many soldiers had gas masks to avoid suffocation. This was a change of warfare but not decisive enough to win the war and so it was still stalemate. As the war was a stalemate on the Western Front, the Allies attacked at Gallipoli to find a resolution to the stalemate. However this was not successful.
The ‘War of Attrition’ began in 1916 with the Battles of Verdun and the Somme. Attrition was a new idea of winning the war by wearing out the enemy until they had no resources left and would have to end the war. At Verdun, Germany attacked where the French were defending at all costs, and men were poured into the ‘mincing machine’ with both sides suffering huge losses. At Verdun the French had a new way of defending, led by Pétain by rotating troops regularly making the Germans run out of resources first. Attrition and this defending was a change in warfare but also kept the war static. The Somme failed and was much the same to Verdun but was the British attacking the Germans. Attrition was slow and did not work in the short term so generals went back to old tactics of sending troops ‘over the top’ at the Third Ypres or Passchendaele similar to war in 1914. The Germans withdrew to the new Hindenburg Line, the best defences they had, and making it hard for the Allies to attack successfully thus the war was static.
In 1917 there was still no breakthrough but another change in warfare was at Messines Ridge; the British used mines successfully to take out German positions. Use of tanks at Cambrai successfully was another change and broke through German lines, however this was too successful and there was no infantry support as they could not keep up thus the Germans regained land.
In 1918, Germany was under pressure from the British blockade of supplies and more Americans arriving. However, the Russian surrender meant that Germany could move its troops to the west, to give the ‘knock-out blow’ they needed to end the stalemate.
In March 1918, the Lundendorff Spring Offensive launched, breaking the stalemate. They advanced 1,200 square miles because of new tactics. Less preliminary bombardment, using the element of surprise with a creeping barrage in front of infantry broke through Allied lines. The Allies had no experience of open warfare and so the Germans were able to drive the Allies back. Attack several points at once so enemy don’t know where to send reinforcements, moving elsewhere when resistance was met, attack at points the Allies joined causing communication problems, using specially trained shock troops to initiate faster attacks, use of fog and gas as cover and high morale meant the Germans advanced further in 1918 than in 1914.
However, Lundendorff sent in too many men too fast, with the army exhausted and no reserves. The Germans rapid advance had made a salient rather than breaking the line. The Allies finally had co-operation, with Commander Foch in charge leading an efficient counter-attack on 8th August 1918, Lundendorff calling it “The Black Day”. The British used tanks successfully as they were more reliable and led infantry through barbed wire, advancing 8 miles in 1 day driving the Germans back. By September the whole line was moving, because of new tactics similar to the Germans. They attacked with rapid blows, not a big punch. German morale was low after they didn’t get what the generals had promised them and they saw British had better supplies when they were starved. On 11th November, Germans signed an armistice ending the war.
1918 was more like 1939-1940 than 1914. The changes, resulting from new tactics and new technology in weaponry, in 1918 broke the stalemate and finally ended the war. 1918 was a different kind of warfare because of new tactics used by both sides to overwhelm the enemy, with the Allies gaining the advantage in the end. In 1926, General Foch was right in saying, “The military mind always imagines that the next war will be on the same lines as the last. That has never been the case, and never will be.”
