The realisation of the advantage of defence resulted in the enhanced rate of advancing technology. This was one of the core reasons for stalemate upon the Western Front because technology was advancing at such a rapid rate and new inventions were being introduced in a hasty manner. Many of the new inventions were not sufficiently tested and many of the ideas were not thoroughly thought through which resulted in unnecessary delays. It was not until 1918 that either side managed to get all the new weapons together and use them to their advantage. Bombardments were used to destroy the enemy’s defences before an infantry attack. But this warned the enemy that an attack was imminent and the space in time between the bombardment and attack was so great that it allowed the defenders to return to their positions and to send for reinforcements. Bombardments also were not sufficient enough to destroy deep trench systems and concrete machine-gun posts.
Barbed wire was massed produced on an industrial scale by both sides as barbed wire entanglements were unbreakable for troops, stopped cavalry in their tracks, and slowed troops down completely. Attempts were made to destroy barbed wire with shellfire but the barbed wire is just lifted and often ends up in a bigger mess than before. Chlorine gas was introduced in April 1915 by the German Army against the French army at Ypres. Chlorine gas destroyed your respiratory organs and you had a long slow death. But poisonous gas was an extremely unreliable method of attack as the direction of the wind may change at any time and return the poison in the direction of the attacker killing your own troops. Also, as with many other weapons that were developed it can only be used once to an advantage, as their element of surprise is lost. Gas masks were quickly distributed to both sides and gas was not such a great fear as it was first thought.
Tanks were invented to be the technical solution to the major problem of both barbed wire and machine guns. They had an armour plate to protect troops whilst attacking and caterpillar traction to allow them to cross-hilly and muddy ground. But the first Mark I tank was a week and variable weapon. It was used at the Somme in 1916 but neither their performance nor numbers could help win the battle. It was not until Cambrai in 1917 that tanks were used on a large scale. They crunched their way over the barbed wire and German trenches creating a huge hole in the German defences. But by the evening most of the 378 tanks that had set out had broken down leaving troops stranded in German land and the were no reserves to back them up. The British infantry were eventually pushed back.
Aircraft at the start of the war was used primarily for reconnaissance work, spotting enemy trenches and movements before a possible attack. But this alerted the enemies attention and gave them time to prepare resulting in the attackers job being more costly and difficult to undertake. A General on horseback commanded armies up until 1914 but in 1914 10 million telephones were working. Battles could be safely won from behind a desk away from the terror of the front line. But though this development in communications may seem a great success, telephones in reality were useless in attack, as they couldn’t be taken over the top. Troops often had to pull back because of lack of communications.
In 1914 neither the French nor the British armies were trained for trench warfare. They had to adapt which took them several years and accounted for several of their failures and delays. Many of the generals thought they could win the war by attrition for example Falkenhayn at Verdun in 1916 believed that if enough ammunition and men were used the enemy would collapse completely and the war would be won. The Germans however only used this method once, but the Allies constantly attacked ‘over the top’. French generals such as Nivelle and Joffre and also General Haig felt infantry charges were a necessity to win the war despite the huge advances in technology.
Eventually in 1917 the French army refused to attack any more, only to defend because of the horrific numbers of casualties lost for only a few miles gained. The Somme in 1916 is a good example for a shocking case of incompetent leadership; Britain lost around 419,654 men and France around 204,253 for only a strip of land about 25 km long and 6km wide. Haig believed it would save Verdun, which it did but at huge losses to his own army due his own lack of planning. The men were untrained and advanced towards the enemy walking and carrying heavy packs on their backs. These ‘big pushes’ were mere execution of side’s troops as they were walking straight into machine gun fire.
The first World War was the first war between two vastly industrialised economies and factories on both side’s mass-produced inconceivable amounts of artillery and ammunition. Industry was under an incredible amount of strain and it was not until 1917 that the munitions industry was able to produce adequate quantities of ammunitions. Canning had also recently been invented which enabled the troops to continue to fight throughout the winter where as in previous years they had, had to retreat to winter quarters. Railways played a major part in the transportation of troops form one area of the western front to the next along with food and other supplies. Both sides were also both able to keep going because of the huge numbers of men enlisting from all countries.
At the outbreak of war on the Western Front, the Allies and the Germans were relatively equal in their strengths and weaknesses. Bad leadership held up many of the British and French attacks resulting in unnecessary numbers of casualties. But the Allies soon learn from their mistakes and by 1918 they had much-improved tactics for example the creeping barrage, which protected advancing infantry. Where as the Germans did not learn as quickly from their mistakes and the generals stuck strictly to their plans believing that it would bring them a rapid victory. Germany spread its men out over many of the fronts for example the eastern front, not only the Western Front. One argument is that if perhaps they had concentrated on only one front they may have had an enhanced chance of success as they would of being focussing a huge number of men over a much smaller area.
The deadlock ended in 1918 when it was broken by eventual collapse of the central powers. It was ultimately attrition that proved the crucial decider but it was a series of events and inventions that had had not happened before which gave way to the end result. The Submarine campaign was important as it brought America into the War who brought with them fresh troops and much needed resources and resulted in a huge blow to the German morale. It was not until 1917 that all the new technology was brought together and used to it’s full potential. Many people believe that if world War One had been either 20 years earlier or 20 years later the would never have been a deadlock, or if that had been not to the extreme that World War One encountered. If it had been 20 years earlier technology would not have advanced at the rate it did. Or if it had been twenty years later tactics would have been sufficiently modernised.
I believe that there was no one true reason for deadlock on the western front, but that it was due to several problems. Technology advanced too rapidly, generals were not adequately trained for trench warfare, the war was able to be kept going due to the fact they were both vastly industrialised economies and neither side was able to eliminate the other.
