Cause of World War 1. Causes and objectives of the First World War
Ticket 1
Causes, nature and beginning of the First World War.
Prerequisites
1. Germany from a backward, fragmented state becomes a strong power.
2. Two blocks of countries have formed:
1) England, France and Russia;
2) Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy (new capitalist countries; General signs: high economy. rates of development, almost complete absence of colonies.).
3. 80s: treaties between Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary (first economic, then political, and then military)
"Triple Alliance" - 1st military alliance.
4. "Triple Alliance" - colonies are needed (for trade and extraction of raw materials), i.e. they are for the redistribution of the already "divided" world.
5. 90s: Entente - 2nd military bloc (England, France, Russia)
Tot. signs: low rates of economy. development; had colonies. they wanted to keep.
main reason- The desire of the leading powers to redistribute the world. The First World War was caused by the aggravation of contradictions between the leading powers of the world in the struggle for the redistribution of spheres of influence and the investment of capital.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Anglo-German, Franco-German, Russian-German, Russian-Austrian aggravated. relationship.
1. Anglo-German. relations: England is trying to weaken Germany by directing it to Russia.
2. Franco-German. relations: France wants revenge, Germany wants to stay in 1st place.
3. Russian-German, Russian-Austrian: due to Russian influence in the Balkans, Aust-Hungarian. demands an end to aid to the Balkans.
Reason for war. The reason for the war was the assassination in Sarajevo by a Serbian student of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke Ferdinand. The assassination took place on June 28, 1914, on July 10, Austria-Hungary presented Serbia with a deliberately impossible ultimatum, and on July 28 declared war. Within a matter of days, all the major European powers entered the war.
Start of World War I
Nicholas II announces the start of the war with Germany from the balcony of the Winter Palace.
August 1 Germany declared war on Russia, on the same day the Germans invaded Luxembourg without any declaration of war.
August 2 German troops finally occupied Luxembourg, and an ultimatum was put forward to Belgium on the passage of German armies to the border with France. Only 12 hours were given for reflection.
August 3rd Germany declared war on France, accusing her of "organized attacks and aerial bombardments of Germany" and "violation of Belgian neutrality".
August 3rd Belgium responded with a refusal to Germany's ultimatum. Germany declares war on Belgium.
August 4 German troops invaded Belgium. King Albert of Belgium turned to the guarantor countries of Belgian neutrality for help. London sent an ultimatum to Berlin: stop the invasion of Belgium, or England will declare war on Germany. After the expiration of the ultimatum, Great Britain declared war on Germany and sent troops to help France.
The nature of war
For everyone it is predatory, for Serbia it is fair, because. the conflict with it (presenting an ultimatum on July 23, 1914) by Austria-Hungary was only a pretext for the outbreak of hostilities.
Over time, 38 countries of the world join the war. In total, 74 million people will be put under arms.
Détente in the 1970s and the role of the 1975 Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Discharge- A period in international relations (70s of the twentieth century), which is characterized by the weakening of the confrontation between the superpowers and the normalization of relations between them, mutual concessions and compromises. During this period, measures are being taken to limit the arms race and develop cooperation in various fields.
Prerequisites:
Military-strategic parity of the USSR and the USA in the arms race.
Awareness of the catastrophe in the event of the use of nuclear weapons.
Détente milestones
| Year | Foreign policy action |
| The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is open for signing. Entered into force in 1970 | |
| Quadripartite agreement between the USA, the USSR, England and France on West Berlin. | |
| - Message (February 1972) from US President R. Nixon to Congress, which stated that the USSR had achieved military-strategic parity with the United States. - R. Nixon's visit to the USSR and the signing of the ABM treaty (on limiting missile defense systems) and SALT-1 (on limiting strategic offensive weapons for a period of 5 years). | |
| - Leonid Brezhnev's visit to the United States, the signing of an agreement on the prevention of nuclear war. - Leonid Brezhnev's meeting in Vladivostok with US President George Ford. Conclusion of a preliminary agreement on cooperation in the field of arms control. | |
| Treaty between the USSR and the USA on the limitation of underground nuclear tests. | |
| Joint flight of the Soviet and American spacecraft "Soyuz" and "Apollo". | |
| August 1975 | Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in Helsinki. Signing of the Helsinki Final Act. |
| Treaty between the USSR and the USA SALT-2 (was not ratified by the US Senate). |
The key event of détente in Europe was the conference on security and cooperation on the continent, which took place in the capital of Finland, Helsinki. August 1, 1975 the leaders of 33 European states, as well as the United States and Canada, signed the Final Act of the meeting. Its core is the Declaration of Principles that will guide the participating States in their mutual relations.
The Declaration includes the following principles:
3. Background and the beginning of the Great Patriotic War. Occupation of the Ukrainian SSR.
Prerequisites: The Second World War was generated by the entire previous course of the economic and political development of the capitalist world. On the eve of the war, there was a further increase in the uneven development of the capitalist countries, which led to a new balance of forces between the main capitalist powers, i.e., the main cause of the war was the contradictions that arose between the states. And Germany played a particularly aggressive role in international relations and the aggravation of the situation in the world. And after Hitler came to power, the situation in the world became much more complicated. Germany and Japan rushed to the markets, strove for supremacy, and the leading countries (USA, England, France) tried to keep their profits. Japan and Germany fought against US global financial hegemony. This is the main reason for the Second World War. The second reason was the natural fear of the leaders of the developed countries (Churchill, Chamberlain, and others) of the spread of the ideas and practices of socialism-communism. Thus, in the 1930s, two main centers of war were formed: in the East - led by Japan, in the West - with Germany.
Germany's goals in the war were:
1. Liquidation of the USSR and socialism as a state, system and ideology. colonization of the country. Destruction of 140 million "superfluous people and peoples."
2. Liquidation of the democratic states of Western Europe, deprivation of their national independence and subjugation of Germany.
3. The conquest of world domination. The pretext for aggression is the imminent threat of attack from the USSR.
The goals of the USSR were determined during the war. This:
1. Defense of the freedom and independence of the country and socialist ideas.
2. The liberation of the peoples of Europe enslaved by fascism.
3. Creation of democratic or socialist governments in neighboring countries.
4. Liquidation of German fascism, Prussian and Japanese militarism.
At dawn June 22, 1941 Germany and its allies (Italy, Hungary, Romania, Finland) attacked the Soviet Union with an unprecedented force: 190 divisions, about 3 thousand tanks, more than 43 thousand guns and mortars, about 5 thousand aircraft, up to 200 ships. The Great Patriotic War began Soviet people against the Nazi aggressors.
The main military-political event of the summer campaign was the defense of Kiev, which lasted from July 7 to September 26, 1941. and diverted significant enemy forces. However, the German armies managed to surround a large group of defenders of Kiev: more than 665 thousand soldiers and officers were captured, the command of the Southwestern Front was destroyed. September 19, 1941 Kiev was captured by the Germans. The cause of the tragedy was the miscalculations of the high military command, in particular, the fact that Stalin did not agree to the withdrawal of troops from Kiev.
Major defensive battles on the territory of the Ukrainian SSR:
Defense of Odessa (August 5 - October 16, 1941) 73 days. Only after fresh German units approached did the Soviet troops leave the city.
Results: For 73 days, the defense of Odessa delayed the advance of the right wing of the troops of the Army Group "South", diverted and pinned down up to 18 divisions of the German-Romanian troops with a total number of over 300 thousand military personnel. The total losses of the German-Romanian troops in the Odessa region amounted to over 160 thousand military personnel, about 200 aircraft and up to 100 tanks
At the beginning of July 1942 The Crimean front collapsed. The Germans captured the Kerch Peninsula, including Kerch.
Ticket 2
1. Military campaigns and major battles 1914–1918.
By the beginning of the war, Germany had 8 armies (about 1.8 million people), France - 5 armies (about 1.3 million people), Russia - 6 armies (more than 1 million people), Austria-Hungary - 5 armies and 2 army groups (more than 1 million people). Military operations covered the territory of Europe, Asia and Africa. The main land fronts were the Western (French) and Eastern (Russian), the main maritime theaters of military operations were the North, Mediterranean, Baltic and Black Seas.
Eastern front
On the part of Russia World War I 1914–1918 It was carried out in order to counter the expansionist policy of Germany and Austria-Hungary, to protect the Serbian and other Slavic peoples, to strengthen Russia's position in the Balkans and the Caucasus. Russia's allies in the war were England, France and other countries of the Entente, the main allies of Germany and Austria-Hungary were Turkey and Bulgaria. During the war, the Russian command deployed 5 fronts and 16 armies. In 1914, Russian troops failed in the East Prussian operation against the German troops.
Battle of Galicia (1914)- a strategic offensive operation of the troops of the Southwestern Front under the command of General Nikolai Ivanov was carried out against the Austro-Hungarian troops August 5 - September 8, 1914. The offensive zone of the Russian troops was 320–400 km. As a result of the operation, Russian troops occupied Galicia and the Austrian part of Poland, creating the threat of an invasion of Hungary and Silesia. This forced the German command to transfer part of the troops from the Western to the Eastern theater of operations.
Battle of Tannenberg (August 26-30, 1914)- a major battle between Russian and German troops during the East Prussian operation. The defeat of the Russian army.
Brusilovsky breakthrough (1916)
Front offensive operation of the Southwestern Front of the Russian Army under the command of General A. A. Brusilov during the First World War, carried out on May 22 - July 31 (old style), 1916, during which the armies of Austria-Hungary and Germany were severely defeated and occupied Bukovina and Eastern Galicia.
In March 1918, Russia withdrew from the war.
Western Front
Battle of the Marne(Battle of the Marne River) - one of the first major battles of the First World War. Happened September 5-12, 1914. on the Marne River in northern France. The Anglo-French troops, having launched a counteroffensive against the German troops advancing on Paris, stopped their advance and forced them to withdraw. 5 German and 6 Allied armies took part in the battle, the fighting was carried out on a front with a length of 180 km. The Battle of Marne marked a turning point in the 1914 campaign on Western front. As a result of the battle, the strategic plan of the German command, aimed at the rapid defeat of France and its withdrawal from the war, was thwarted.
Battle of Verdun- one of the largest and most bloody battles of the First World War. Happened February 21 - December 21, 1916 in a narrow area near the Verdun fortified region (north-east of France). After stubborn fighting with heavy losses on both sides, the Germans managed to advance 6-8 km and take the forts of Duamont and Vaud, but their advance was stopped. As a result of the counter-offensive of the French army, which began on October 24, the Germans were pushed back to their original positions. The parties lost about a million people (600 thousand Germans, 358 thousand French). In this battle, for the first time, light machine guns, rifle grenade launchers, flamethrowers were widely used, and the principles of aircraft combat operations were also worked out. Because of the huge victims, it went down in history as the "Verdun meat grinder".
Naval battles
Battle of Jutland- the largest naval battle of the First World War. Happened May 31 - June 1, 1916 between the German and British fleets in the North Sea off the Jutland Peninsula. Germany's goal was to destroy part of the British fleet, which had blocked the exit from the North Sea since the beginning of the war, which interrupted the supply of raw materials and food to Germany. The British command received intelligence about the German plans and was able to take countermeasures. The British forces significantly outnumbered the enemy forces: 148 ships against 99. As a result of the battle, both sides announced their victory: Great Britain - due to the inability of the German fleet to break through the blockade, and Germany - due to the heavy losses of the British fleet (Great Britain lost 14 ships in the battle and 6.8 thousand people, Germany - 11 ships and 3.1 thousand people). After the battle, Germany ceased to actively use the surface fleet, and the continuation of the naval blockade led to the undermining of German industrial potential and an acute shortage of food. The battle also demonstrated the increased role of military intelligence.
Compiègne truce of 1918- an agreement on the cessation of hostilities in World War I, concluded on November 11, 1918 between the Entente and Germany in the French region of Picardy near the city of Compiègne. The Treaty of Versailles summed up the final results of the war.
2. The Marshall Plan and its role in the reconstruction of post-war Europe.
Marshall Plan(official name "Programme for the Reconstruction of Europe") - a program of assistance to Europe after the Second World War. Nominated in 1947 by US Secretary of State George C. Marshall and effective April 1948. 17 European countries, including West Germany, participated in the implementation of the plan.
The Marshall Plan began with April 4, 1948, when the US Congress passed the Economic Cooperation Act, which provided for a 4-year program of economic assistance to Europe. The total amount of appropriations under the Marshall Plan (from April 4, 1948 to December 1951) amounted to about 13 billion dollars, with the main share falling on England (2.8 billion), France (2.5 billion), Italy (1.3 billion), West Germany (1.3 billion), Holland (1 billion).
The provision of economic "assistance" was carried out on the basis of bilateral agreements subject to rather stringent conditions. Among them:
Rejection of the nationalization of industry,
Providing freedom of private enterprise,
Unilateral reduction of customs tariffs on imports of American goods,
The withdrawal of the communists from the government,
Restriction of trade with countries of "pro-socialist orientation".
I.V. Stalin viewed the Marshall Plan as interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. The countries of the socialist camp refused to help.
The high effectiveness of the Marshall Plan, combined with the implementation of their own economic programs for the post-war revival in European countries, was manifested in the growth of output in basic industries in 1947–1950. more than half, and even higher for certain types of products - potash fertilizers - by 65%, steel - by 70%, cement - by 75%, vehicles - by 150%, oil products - by 200%.
Results:
· Industries that, as it seemed before, hopelessly outdated and lost efficiency, were restructured in a short time and without changing the national economic policies of the countries. As a result, European economies recovered from the effects of the war faster than expected.
· European countries were able to pay off their external debts.
· The influence of the communists and the USSR was weakened.
· The European middle class was restored and strengthened - the guarantor of political stability and sustainable development.
At the same time, against the background of the aggravation of the international situation after the 2nd World War, already in 1951 the Marshall Plan began to turn into a military assistance program, contributed to the post-war split of Europe, the formation of a military-political bloc of Western states, and the strengthening of the Cold War. dependence of Western European states on the United States. The plan was curtailed, but in 1951 the United States and European countries signed a law on mutual security. On the basis of bilateral agreements, he promoted foreign policy through grants and the supply of American goods and materials. However, the recipient countries, for their part, were forced to provide their territory for American military bases and stop trading in so-called strategic goods with the socialist countries.
3. The establishment of the Nazi "new order" in the Ukrainian SSR. Genocide. Holocaust.
1. Dismemberment of the territory of Ukraine. Having captured Ukraine, the Nazis, first of all, destroyed its integrity. The territory of Ukraine was divided by the Nazis into four parts, subordinated to different states and administrative bodies.
Chernivtsi and Izmail regions were included in the ally of Germany - Romania. The Odessa region, the southern regions of Vinnitsa, the western regions of the Nikolaev region, the left-bank regions of Moldova, the Nazis united into a governorate "Transnistria" and also included in Romania.
Western lands - Drohobych, Lviv, Ternopil, Stanislav regions - as a separate district (district) by name "Galicia" became part of a separate governorate, which also included Polish lands with a center in the city of Krakow.
Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv regions and Donbass as frontline zones were directly subordinated to German military command.
Other Ukrainian lands were part of the Reichskommissariat "Ukraine" with the center in the city of Rivne. It was divided into six districts. Erich Koch was appointed Reichskommissar for Ukraine.
Transcarpathian Ukraine has been occupied since 1939 Hungary.
2. The establishment of the Nazi "new order". The Nazis set up a brutal occupation regime. They turned Ukraine into a German colony, which was part of the "German living space" and became a source of raw materials, food, labor for the "Third Reich". 85% of all products exported to Germany during the war with the USSR were from Ukraine. Economic robbery took place with German thoroughness and pedantry. The Nazis created a whole system of predatory procurement bodies. The largest among them was the "Central Society of the East", which had 30 commercial departments with 200 branches in the cities.
Hitler's plan "Ost" provided for the transformation of Ukraine into an agrarian and raw material appendage of the Reich, a living space for the colonization of representatives of the "superior race". Within 30 years, it was planned to deport 65% of the population of Ukraine to "liberated lands", resettle the Germans, and gradually "Germanize" those local residents who remain alive.
The occupation regime was carried out by the Gestapo, the SS troops, the Security Service (SB). There was also an auxiliary administration from local residents (burgomasters, elders, police). The need to manage the occupied territories of Ukraine required a large and extensive administrative apparatus, which was difficult to create without the participation of the local population. And the Nazis had assistants - collaborators (local residents who collaborated with the occupation authorities. Most of them were those who fell victim to the Stalinist repressive system, who wanted to take revenge on the Soviet regime. They went to the occupation authorities, the police, and punitive units. It was the traitors who contributed to the arrests and destruction of the anti-Hitler underground in Kiev, Odessa and other cities, they helped to find communists, Soviet activists, Jews, dooming them to destruction, sometimes collaborators directly participated in "actions of destruction".
The Nazis in their ideological work used as negative examples of the activities of the Bolsheviks against the people of Ukraine. The occupiers promised to carry out agrarian reform, develop Ukrainian culture, return soldiers home, but these were ways moral and psychological pressure, against the backdrop of which the inhabitants of Ukraine were declared citizens of the "third class", their life was strictly regulated by rules and orders, the violation of which led to a concentration camp or execution.
A great tragedy for Ukraine was removal of people especially youth, to work v Germany. In 1941-1944, 2.8 million people were taken out of the USSR into Nazi slavery, and 2.4 million of them were from Ukraine. Tens of thousands of them died in a foreign land from exhaustion, illness and injury. Part Ostarbeiters (as those who were taken to Germany were called), fearing reprisals from the Soviet authorities, did not return to their homeland after the end of the war. In addition, forced labor of the population was organized in the occupied territories in order to strengthen the economic power of the "Third Reich".
Mankind will never forget or forgive the Nazis for mass extermination of the population. The Nazis used mass terror against the Ukrainian people with particular cruelty. SS units destroyed entire villages. V October 1941 Ukraine and all of Europe "saw their first Khatyn": the village of Obukhivka, Poltava region, was completely burned, and the entire population was shot. During the occupation, such barbaric actions were committed by the Nazis in 250 settlements of Ukraine. Dozens of "death camps" operated in Ukraine, there were 50 ghettos.
The Nazis organized the mass destruction of prisoners of war. Hundreds of thousands of people were tortured to death in Lvov, Slavutsky, Kamyanets-Podilsky and other concentration camps. Of the 5.8 million Soviet prisoners of war who fell into the hands of the Nazis, about 3.3 million died; of which almost 1.3 million are Ukrainians.
Holocaust. An integral part of the Nazi plans for world domination, an essential element of ideology, policy and practice Nazi Germany 1933-1945 was anti-Semitism - one of the forms of national intolerance, expressed in a hostile attitude towards Jews. In practice, it resulted in the desire for the total physical extermination of Jews throughout the world. This tragic event in human history is called Holocaust.
Holocaust - the death of a significant part of the Jewish population of Europe as a result of the Nazi policy of systematic and organized physical destruction ( genocide ) Jews in Germany and in the territories occupied by it in 1933-1945.
In Ukraine, the anti-Jewish genocide had especially cruel form. This was explained by the fact that, in the understanding of the Nazis, not just Jews lived here, but “Bolshevik” Jews, allegedly forming the basis of Soviet power, who were the driving force of the world revolution, in order to prevent which it was necessary to get rid of its carriers by any means.
On the eve of the war, in terms of the number of Jews living on its territory - 2.7 million people - Ukraine (within modern borders) ranked first in Europe and second in the world.
The killing of Jews by the invaders began in Ukraine on June 22, 1941 and continued for more than three years. The first "Jewish actions" were directed mainly against the Jewish intelligentsia as a potential organizer of resistance to the invaders. Jews - party workers and civil servants - were also subject to priority destruction. Further, the occupiers proceeded to the wholesale extermination of all Jews. The main role in these operations was given to the forces of the police and the SD. Before the extermination of the Jews in Eastern Galicia, in Volhynia, in Podolia, Transcarpathian Ukraine, in Left-Bank Ukraine, they were forcibly gathered in ghetto.
The ghettos created by the Nazis during the Second World War were designed as intermediate places of residence on the way of Jews to the "death camps". In the rest of Ukraine, ghettos were not created, since the remaining Jews were exterminated nearly straightaway after the occupation, a maximum of a few months.
The execution of over 150 thousand people, most of whom were Jews, became a symbol of the Holocaust in Ukraine. Babi Yar(Kiev). Mass killings of the Jewish population also took place in Lvov, Berdichev, Kharkov, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk and other cities of Ukraine. In addition, a significant part of the Jewish population of the Ukrainian SSR was taken out and destroyed on the territory of Poland - in the "death camps" Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka and others.
The total number of dead Ukrainian Jews can be estimated in 1.8 million people In general, Ukraine has lost about 70% of the pre-war Jewish population.
It should be especially noted that many Ukrainians, risking their lives, they hid Jews in their homes, saving children, women and men from inevitable death. In modern Israel, they, like representatives of other nationalities, are called the "Righteous of the World" and pay tribute to the courage and humanism of these people.
Ticket 3
1. The Paris Peace Conference of 1919, its main decisions.
Paris Peace Conference(January 18, 1919 - January 21, 1920) - an international conference convened by the victorious powers to develop and sign peace treaties with the states defeated in the First World War. It took place intermittently from January 18, 1919 to January 21, 1920. It was attended by 27 states and five dominions of Great Britain. Germany and Russia were not invited to the conference.
Tasks of the peace conference:
1. Legalize the end of the First World War, for which it was supposed to develop and sign peace treaties with Germany and its allies.
2. During the war years, the Russian, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman and German empires collapsed and new independent states emerged on their territory. Among them: Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Finland, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and the Kingdom of Serbo-Croat-Slovenes. Each of the new countries sought to self-determine in the maximum territorial extent. And this could lead to new wars. Therefore, the task of the peace conference was to firmly establish the boundaries of the new states and prevent wars between them.
3. During the war years, the idea that that war should be the last in the history of mankind was widely circulated, so it was supposed at the conference to create a comprehensive international organization that would stand up for world peace. The first such idea was proposed by Smets, the Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa. Then this idea was supported in many states.
Solutions:
The victorious powers should have concluded a series of peace treaties: with Germany, Bulgaria, Turkey, as well as with those states into which Austria-Hungary broke up. The main issue The Paris Conference was a peace treaty with Germany. The conclusion of this treaty was complicated by disagreements between the victorious powers and the position of Germany itself. The fact is that at the Paris Conference it was already necessary to deal with the new Germany - the revolution that had taken place destroyed the empire, while republican Germany refused to recognize itself as the culprit of the war. Based on the position expressed by Wilson, "we cannot trust Germany", the Entente had to present an ultimatum, only after which Count Brockdorff-Ransau, representing Germany, was forced to sign an agreement - June 28, 1919 Treaty of Versailles, signed at the Palace of Versailles in France, officially ending the First World War of 1914-1918. After the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles with Germany, similar agreements were concluded with Germany's allies:
Poland
In Poland, small partisan detachments first entered the struggle against the Nazi invaders, then the Craiova Army formed by the Polish émigré government and the Guards of Ludow, created at the initiative of the Polish Workers' Party, which in 1943 reached 10 thousand people, joined. In 1944, all democratic forces united in the People's Army. With the beginning of the liberation of Poland, the People's Army and the formations of the 1st Polish Army, formed on the territory of the USSR, merged into the regular Polish Army, which made a significant contribution to the liberation of their homeland.
Western Europe
A powerful resistance movement unfolded in the countries of Western Europe. In France, for example, since 1943, the National Council of Resistance has been operating, and since 1941, the French Internal Armed Forces. In France, the resistance movement was led by General Charles de Gaulle. France - in 1943 the movement intensified, the Paris uprising on June 6, 1944, which brought victory, became the top.
In Belgium, the Independence Front and the Belgian Partisan Army were active; in Italy - shock brigades named after Garibaldi. In Germany itself and in a number of other countries of the fascist bloc, groups of anti-fascists known under the names "Red Chapel", "International Anti-Fascist Committee" operated under the conditions of cruel terror and repression.
Thanks to the resistance movement, the defeat of Nazi Germany and its allies was significantly accelerated. The movement also became a shining example of the struggle against imperialist reaction; destruction of civilians and other war crimes; for world peace.
3. Historical meaning The Battle of Stalingrad and the defeat of the German troops on the Oryol-Kursk Bulge.
The battle of Stalingrad, its consequences and significance. The battle for Stalingrad began on July 17, 1942. This city on the Volga became a symbol of resilience, courage and unheard-of heroism of Soviet soldiers. The capture of the city by the enemy would mean not only the loss of one of the industrial centers, but would also interrupt important transport arteries connecting the center of the country with the southern regions. Moreover, new victory would strengthen the authority of fascist Germany and push its allies to more active actions against the USSR. The Sixth German Army under the command of General F. Paulus, a well-known military leader, one of the developers of the Barbarossa plan, was advancing on Stalingrad. The period from July to November 1942 is called defensive in Soviet historical literature. The city was defended by the 62nd (commander V.I. Chuikov) and 64th (commander M.S. Shumilov) armies. During this period, the German troops carried out more than 700 attacks on the positions of the Soviet troops. For almost two months, a small detachment under the command of Sergeant Ya. V. Pavlov defended the house along Penza Street, the Nazis could not take it. The steadfastness of the Soviet soldiers, despite the huge losses suffered, did not allow the Nazis to take control of the entire city. For 4 months of fighting, the qualifying Nazi troops lost up to 700 thousand soldiers and officers near Stalingrad, over 1000 tanks, 2000 guns and mortars, 1400 aircraft. In mid-November 1942, the enemy troops were forced to stop the offensive.
The battles in Stalingrad ended the defensive period of the Great Patriotic War. The steadfastness and courage of the defenders of Stalingrad allowed the Soviet command until mid-November to achieve a general superiority of forces over the Nazi troops and proceed to defeat the enemy.
According to the Uranus plan developed by G.K. Zhukov, it was supposed to encircle and destroy the German troops between Volga and Don. During the operation "Uranus", which began on November 19, 1942, there was an encircled grouping of enemy troops numbering 330 thousand people.
All attempts by the Nazis to release the encircled armies were repelled by units of the Second Guards Army under the command of R. Ya. Malinovsky. On February 2, 1943, the remnants of the encircled group (90 thousand soldiers and officers), led by Field Marshal F. Paulus, surrendered to the Soviet troops. During the Battle of Stalingrad, the Germans lost about the same amount of equipment as in all previous battles on the Soviet-German front. Germany has declared four days of mourning. The victory at Stalingrad marked the beginning of a radical turning point in the Great Patriotic War. She demonstrated to the whole world the power of the Red Army, the skill of Soviet military leaders, the increased strength of the rear, provided the front with a sufficient amount of weapons, military equipment and equipment. The international prestige of the Soviet Union grew immeasurably, and the positions of fascist Germany were seriously shaken. Having seized the strategic initiative, the Soviet troops launched a general offensive. They freed North Caucasus, broke through the blockade of Leningrad and defeated the German grouping in the central sector of the front. The Wehrmacht was able to respond with only one, albeit a very tangible counterattack near Kharkov.
The defeat of German troops on the Oryol-Kursk Bulge In the summer of 1943, the Nazis tried to seize the strategic initiative. Having carried out a total mobilization (which was subject to all men from 16 to 65 years old and women from 17 to 45 years old), Hitler was able to replenish the huge human losses and dramatically (by 70% per year) increase the output military equipment, including new samples. The plan of operation "Citadel", developed by the Nazi command, provided for the encirclement and destruction of Soviet troops in the area of the Kursk ledge and thereby open the road to Moscow. The Hitlerite command sent its best formations and the latest armored vehicles to the central sector of the front - the Tiger and Panther tanks, the Ferdinand assault guns. Soviet intelligence managed to establish the exact date for the start of the German offensive - July 5, 1943. Headquarters representatives G.K. Zhukov and A.M. Vasilevsky decided to wear out the advancing enemy units with deliberate defensive actions, and then go on the counteroffensive.
For seven days of stubborn
1 military world conflict. scale 28.07.1914 – 11.11.18 participation 38 state, battle over 74 million, more than 10 million died, 20 million were injured. The main opponents were from the side of the Entente: England, France, Russia, Serbia, Japan, later Italy, Romania and the USA; from the Triple Alliance: Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Bulgaria. Entente victory. Main causes: contradictions between the countries of the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente (Entente) in the economic, naval and colonial spheres. 1) chapters. between England and Germany - economy, naval, colonial; 2) between France and Germany - because of Alsace and Lorraine, taken from France after the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71; because of the French. colonies in Africa claimed by Germany; 3) contradictions between European. powers in the Balkans and the Far East - the problem of spheres of influence, political positions in the Balkans, questions about the straits. Occasion: 06/28/14 . in Sarajevo, a Serbian student, a member of the Terror. op. G. Princip shot the heir to the Austrian throne. Results: 4 empires collapsed - Ottoman, Russian, German and Austro-Hungarian (British survived); had a huge impact on the economy, politics, ideology, the MO system; formation of a new geopolitical situation in the world. End: Compiègne truce - agreement on the cessation of hostilities11.11.18. K.P. was concluded for 36 days, extended until the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. On July 28, 1919, the Treaty of Versailles was signed, officially ending the 1st MV. Russia, which concluded a separate peace with Germany (Brest-Lit. Peaceful) in March 1918, did not participate in the development of the Versailles system.
Reference:
Causes of the First World War:
1) the result of the aggravation of contradictions between the major powers in the early twentieth century. The rapid growth of Germany's economic power prompted her to seek to redistribute the world and expand her colonial possessions.
2) Anglo-German contradictions: the rapid build-up of German naval power, the desire of Germany to win positions in the traditional sphere of British interests in the Middle East.
2) The confrontation between Germany and France due to the capture of Alsace and Lorraine added + colonies: F. captured Morocco, which was claimed by Germany.
3) The interests of Russia and Germany came into conflict because of the Balkan issue, G. supported Russia's rival - Austria-Hungary. + at the end of the 19th century. a customs war unfolded, Russia's interests prompted her to support France in order to prevent Germany's hegemony in Europe.
The course of the First World War is divided by historians into five separate military campaigns.
1914- hostilities unfolded on the Western (France) and Eastern (Prussia, Russia) fronts, the Balkans and colonies (Oceania, Africa and China). Germany quickly captured Belgium and Luxembourg, and launched an offensive against France. Russia led a successful offensive in Prussia. In general, in 1914, none of the countries managed to fully realize their plans.
1915- Fierce fighting was going on on the Western Front, where France and Germany desperately sought to turn the tide in their favor. On the Eastern Front for the Russian troops, the situation has changed for the worse. Due to supply problems, the army began to retreat, losing Galicia and Poland.
1916- during this period, the most bloody battle took place on the Western Front - Verdun, during which more than a million people died. Russia, seeking to help the allies and pull the forces of the German army towards itself, made a successful attempt at a counteroffensive - the Brusilovsky breakthrough.
1917- the success of the Entente troops. The USA joins them. As a result of revolutionary events, Russia is actually withdrawing from the war.
1918- the conclusion by Russia on extremely unfavorable and difficult conditions of peace with Germany. The rest of Germany's allies conclude peace with the Entente countries. Germany remains alone and in November 1918 agrees to surrender.
How did the age of world wars begin? What are the causes, perpetrators and true motives of the warring powers?
Causesfirst world war
The July crisis of 1914, which provoked the outbreak of the First World War, is one of those rare historical events that are surprisingly very carefully and completely documented in the annals of history.At the same time, the main characters in the events of that European drama found it difficult to name its causes.
In August 1914, shortly after Germany's entry into the war, a memorable conversation took place between the former German Chancellor Bernhard von Bülow and his successor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg. Bulow then asked: “How did this happen?” And he received a discouraging answer: “Oh, if only I knew!”
Today, both historians and ordinary people who are not indifferent to history retain a certain feeling of the deepest misunderstanding and absurdity of all the events that plunged Europe into a four-year nightmare of a war of extermination.
None of the countries that unleashed the conflict, in principle, had any reasonable reason to go to war. US President Woodrow Wilson summed up the bewilderment of his contemporaries in the following words: “Everyone is looking for and does not find the reason why the war began. Their attempts are in vain, they will not find the reason. The war did not start for one reason, the war started for all reasons at once.
But even this formulation is hardly correct. This idea was better expressed by the Russian philosopher L.P. Karsavin, who said that the very formulation of the problem of the causality of the First World War, as, indeed, of any other historical event, is essentially unscientific (Philosophy of History, 1923). Historical research should not be aimed at finding the true or imaginary roots of the phenomenon, which anyway can never be studied in its entirety, but at studying the flow of events in their totality.
Economic reasons for the start of the First World War
Despite almost a century of efforts, historians have not been able to identify the objective economic or political causes of the Second World War.The economic rivalry between England and Germany (and, to a lesser extent, other major European powers) was striking long before August 1914. According to the generally accepted opinion, which was based on the doctrine of the inevitability of military conflicts under capitalism, well developed by the followers of Marx, imperialist competition was to blame for everything . There was not a newspaper that did not publish at least one detailed article on its pages, where it was clearly proved that England would never allow an increase in German economic power and a navy. The reader was inspired that sooner or later the economic contradictions between the leading imperialist countries were bound to blow up the world.
Meanwhile, neither England nor Germany ever set themselves the goal of undermining the economic well-being of a competitor with the help of war. France and Russia were considered military enemies of Germany: but with the first, the Germans had a territorial dispute (Alsace-Lorraine), and with the second they were quarreled by geopolitical contradictions.
Further, if one takes the "economic" point of view about the origin of the First World War, then England and Germany were supposed not to fight among themselves, but as soon as possible to act together against the United States of America, whose growing industry challenged both the British and German economies. However, no one in Europe saw the US as a likely enemy. Therefore, economic competitors are by no means doomed to war with each other, even if we are talking about world leadership.
In the same way, the most acute contradictions in the sphere of the colonial division of the world in England arose not with Germany, but with France, which created the second most extensive colonial empire, and with Russia, which had a conflict with British interests along almost its entire southern border. Despite this, England, France and Russia found themselves in the same military camp.
The role of warmongers has traditionally been attributed to arms companies and their associated banking interests. But over the past hundred years, researchers have not been able to find those magnates and industrial and financial corporations who would be vitally interested in unleashing a world war, that is, who would associate their business interests exclusively with wartime profits and, more importantly, would have such political weight to be able to dictate their will to governments. Moreover, some of the major representatives of the military-industrial complex had to give up their monopoly positions in the arms market with the outbreak of war. Here is a characteristic story told by Louis Renault, one of the most enterprising and successful French industrialists, the father of a famous automobile brand. At the very beginning of the war, on August 8 or 9, he was summoned by the Minister of War. When Renault opened the door of his office, he paced from corner to corner looking extremely upset, endlessly repeating: "We need to have shells, we need to have shells." Asked by one of the generals present if he could produce shells, Renault replied that he did not know, as he had never seen them. However, he soon organized and launched the production of shells, after which the state arsenals and the weapons concern Schneider-Creusot lost their monopoly.
In a word, if in the course of the war entrepreneurs were found who began to extract superprofits from military orders, this by no means means that they are responsible for its occurrence—there is absolutely no evidence in favor of this.
Political causes of the war
The search for the political causes of the First World War also does not give objective results. Most historians agree that it is impossible to single out a country or a group of countries that set themselves the goal of asserting their supremacy through war and planned to carry out territorial seizures. In fact, all military plans did not have a pre-formed strategic vector; rather, the situation developed rapidly. The territorial claims of the European states to each other were insignificant in comparison with the material damage from the total war; colonial disputes were settled through gentlemen's agreements. Of course, in every major European country there were groups of adherents of world or regional domination. But their claims were mostly expressed at the level of moods and politically unformed ideas. As one German writer lamented in 1912, “the main reason why our position sometimes gives the impression of being dubious, even unpleasant, when viewed from outside Germany, lies in the difficulty of presenting any intelligible real goal for the policy necessary for the implementation of the German idea” .A future military clash could be considered inevitable and even desirable in government circles; however, no one wanted to look like the aggressor. They prepared for the war and at the same time tried with all their might to delay it or avoid it altogether. The main opposing military alliances and coalitions in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. were concluded not in order to pursue an aggressive policy, but in the hope that they would serve as a deterrent for the opposing side. Individuals from the entourage of the Austrian emperor and the German Kaiser took a direct course for war - and only a few weeks before it began.
As Wilhelm II well noted, during the pre-war decades the European world resembled a sick heart: “he can live and live for himself, even for a very long time. And it can die with the same probability at any moment - suddenly and unexpectedly.
European chauvinism as the reason for the start of the war. National Factor
The First World War was brought about not by this or that reason or by their totality, but by a long chain of events and actions held together by no means by an unconditional connection. And all we can do is to touch them like a rosary with grains strung on it. different size and dignity.The foundation of a lasting European world politicians saw in this or that combination of four great powers - Germany, England, France and Russia. Obviously, the most effective means of maintaining the balance would be an Anglo-German alliance or an alliance of three continental states. However, an impenetrable wall stood in the way of these agreements, nationalism, already flavored with a fair amount of the latest scientific delusion - racism.
England, the only European country that nurtured a racist ideology on the basis of its own political culture, suffered most from national swagger. Too many orders and acts of the British colonial administration had all the signs of racial segregation and genocide.
The idea of national superiority over other peoples was presented in English educational institutions as an immutable law of being. The largest racial theorist of the late XIX - early XX century. Houston Stewart Chamberlain, son of the admiral and nephew of Field Marshal Sir Neville Chamberlain, recalled: "I absorbed this sense of pride from early childhood ... I was taught ... to consider the French as a lower grade of people and not to mention them on a par with the British." Other nations should envy Indians and Irishmen who have the good fortune of being subjects of the British crown. "God himself could not beat out of an Englishman a sense of his own superiority" 3 .
After moving to Germany, where he became Wagner's son-in-law, Chamberlain published his book The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century (1899). The history of mankind was considered by him from racial positions. He is not was here a pioneer, long before him, many of his compatriots worked on this issue. Their search, however, did not enjoy authority across the English Channel. The scientific charm of Chamberlain's book was such that the racial doctrine was henceforth unconditionally accepted by the German professors (Chamberlain's admirers in England were Winston Churchill and Bernard Shaw, who called his work "a masterpiece of truly scientific history").
The sown dragon's teeth gave abundant shoots. After the publication of Chamberlain's work, racist literature in Germany and Austria passed into the category of popular reading (The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century itself went through 10 reprints in 12 years; up to 1914, 100,000 copies were sold).
Chamberlain claimed that the Germans saved Europe from the "eternal darkness" into which it had plunged after the collapse of the Roman Empire. This is the chosen master race: "The entry of the German ... into world history is still far from complete: the German has yet to take possession of the whole world." He considered the Romance and other peoples of the Mediterranean to be half-breeds and "a parody of people." The Slavyan hated everyone en masse, although the Russians more than the rest, seeing in them "a new incarnation of the eternal empire of Tamerlane." Russian literature aroused in him a feeling of disgust.
Chamberlain formulated the immediate historical goal for the "Teutonic spirit" - the fight against "Yankized Anglo-Saxonism and Tatarized Slavdom."
In Germany, Chamberlain's ideas fell on fertile ground. The Germans were filled with pride in their brilliant victories in 1866 and 1870, and the stunning successes of German science, industry and commerce gave rise to sweet dreams of a cultural right to rule the rest of the world.
On the way to world hegemony, of course, stood " natural enemies» Germany. The fight against them was perceived within the framework of the theory of the struggle of races. The French, however, no longer caused concern - they were simply despised. It was believed that "the Latin peoples have passed the zenith of their development, they can no longer introduce new fertilizing elements into the development of the world as a whole" (Moltke). So far, hostility towards England was expressed in emphasizing the hypocrisy of British policy, its commitment to exclusively mercantile interests. A common place in German historical and journalistic literature was the comparison of England with decrepit Carthage, and Germany with rising Rome.
But the attitude towards Russia was panicky: they looked at us with hatred and fear. The notion of cultural and even intellectual backwardness, savagery and despotism of the Russian people is deeply rooted in European minds. At the same time, German historians in every possible way extolled the role of the German element in Russian history - from the notorious Varangians to the Baltic Germans, who flooded Russian offices, ministries, military headquarters and universities. The most odious exponent of such views was the pan-Germanist W. Hehn, who argued in his book Demoribus Ruthenorum (1892) that the Russians “have no traditions, roots, culture on which they could rely”, “everything they have is imported from abroad"; they themselves are not able to put two and two together, their souls were “impregnated with age-old despotism”, therefore “without any loss for humanity they can be excluded from the list of civilized peoples.” These monstrous stupidities found connoisseurs in all sectors of German society, and even the leader of the Social Democratic faction of the Reichstag, August Bebel, repeatedly said that, if necessary, he would take a gun on his shoulder and go to war in order to protect his homeland from Russian despotism.
The British, French and Russians paid the Germans in the same coin.
Inhabitants of the British Isles since the end of the XIX century. was tormented by an irrational fear of a German invasion, fueled by the press and science fiction writers such as William Le Kieu, who devoted two of his novels to this topic - The Great War in England in 1897. (1894) and The Invasion of 1910: With a Complete Account of the Siege of London (1906). The German "danger" was even more visible in the market, where it manifested itself in the dominance of German goods, threatening to undermine British industry, trade, and maritime transport.
The French could not forgive the Germans for the defeat at Sedan and the annexation of Alsace and Lorraine. Traumatized by this unheard-of humiliation, they preferred to "never talk about it, but constantly think about it." The catastrophe of 1870 was seen as an accidental concession of the "Gallo-Roman barrier" to the barbaric onslaught of Germanism. In the future, according to Victor Hugo, “France will strive only for one thing - to restore its strength, stock up on energy, cherish its sacred anger, educate the younger generation so as to create an army of the whole people, work continuously, study the methods and techniques of our enemies in order to to become great France again 1792, the France of the idea with the sword. Then one day she will be invincible. Then she will return Alsace-Lorraine." The annexation of the lost provinces was associated with the return of France to its rightful place among the great powers.
In French mass literature, the image of the enemy, the German, was implanted. Popular novels were populated by numerous German spies (French writers even seriously claimed that, of all the peoples of Europe, the Germans were most prone to espionage). Stereotypical images of national characters were used: Latin cheerfulness and love of freedom were opposed by the barbaric squalor of fat German "pigs", obsessed with beer and order, and, in addition, smelling bad.
In Russian society, in relation to the “German”, an unaccountable hostility traditionally dominated, so fully expressed in the famous exclamation: “The scoundrels are the Germans!”. But individual Russian thinkers, writers, journalists were already beginning to be disturbed by the brutal militancy of the German character. Saltykov-Shchedrin, in his book Abroad, shared his impressions of his trip to Germany (1881): German “shyness was replaced by self-conceit, political evasiveness — by an unjustified claim to universal dominance, modesty — by an unsuccessful desire to bribe foreigners with the philistine luxury of new quarters ... ". He expressed his disgust at German militarism in the following words: "Berlin is not needed for anything else but for homicide"; “The whole essence of modern Berlin, all its world significance is concentrated at the present moment in a building that rises in view of the Royal Square and bears the name: Main Headquarters...".
Meanwhile, Dostoevsky was already mourning the “European cemetery”: Germany is “a people that has outlived its strength, a dead people and without a future...”, “France is an extinct nation and has said its all”, and in England “the same thing as everywhere in Europe - a passionate thirst for life and the loss of the highest meaning of life.
According to the writer, an insurmountable abyss of alienation has opened up between Russia and Europe. “Lord, what prejudices we have about Europe!” he exclaimed in one of his letters abroad. The Germans, "let them be scientists, but they are terrible fools! .. All the local people are literate, but incredibly uneducated, stupid, stupid, with the basest interests." Dostoevsky felt with all his skin “that constant, universal, based on some kind of strong direct and disgusting feeling, Europe's hostility towards us; her aversion from us as from something repugnant, partly even some superstitious fear of her before us...”. "Europe hates us"; “Europe despises us, considers ourselves inferior, as people, as a breed, and sometimes we disgust them, we disgust them at all, especially when we throw ourselves on their necks with brotherly kisses”; “We are not Europeans for them, we interfere with them, we smell bad.” The Europeans “cannot in any way recognize us as their own. Turks, Semites are closer to them in spirit than we Aryans. There is one extraordinary reason for all this: we bring an idea that is not at all the same as they are to humanity - that is the reason! All Slavs in general "Europe is ready to brew with boiling water, like bedbug nests in old women's wooden beds"; “Europe decided long ago to put an end to Russia. We cannot hide from their gnashing, and someday they will rush at us and eat us.” And in order not to be eaten, we must eat Europe ourselves. Such is the Russian Christian "all-service to mankind."
After the Congress of Berlin in 1879, bitter attacks on Germany and the Germans became commonplace in the Slavophile and liberal press. Bismarck in 1888 wrote about "a ten-year falsification of public opinion by the Russian press, which in the reading part of the population created and nourished an artificial hatred for everything German ...". German Ambassador in St. Petersburg, Lothar Schweinitz deplored the inability of the Russian government to deal with the anti-German campaigns of its own press.
Under the influence of these speeches, the antipathy of Russians towards Germany took on more pronounced forms. In 1887, Alexander III shared with the ministers his observations about the anti-German sentiments of his subjects: “I used to think that it was only Katkov, but now I am convinced that it is all of Russia.”
The paranoid fears that gripped the minds of the Europeans, to a large extent, contributed to the fact that the military-political alliances of European countries adopted illogical configurations.
Schlieffen Plan or Closing Door Plan
The Schlieffen Plan and its political consequences
In 1905, the General Staff of Germany, in order to counter the Russian-French "encirclement", developed a rather serious strategic decision, which was called the Schlieffen Plan (Closing Door Plan).The author of this very important project for the course of hostilities was General Count Alfred von Schlieffen, a hereditary military man, from 1891 to 1906 headed the German General Staff.
 |
Deeply studying military history, from a young age he was fascinated by the Battle of Cannae (216 BC), which until the end of his life he considered the highest example of military art. He was fascinated by the beauty of Hannibal's plan - the double flank coverage of the huge Roman square, which led to the almost complete extermination of the encircled legions. A detailed study of the famous battle led Schlieffen to the conviction that "flank attack is the essence of the whole history of wars." Until the moment when Schlieffen became head of the General Staff, German military thought lived on the precepts of Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke Sr., or the great Moltke, the father of the brilliant victories of the Prussian army in the wars with Austria-Hungary (1866) and France (1870-1871). The military doctrine he formulated proceeded from the fact that in a future war Germany would no longer have to deal with one, but with two opponents - France and Russia. Moltke Sr. considered a war on two fronts to be disastrous for Germany, therefore, under him, the General Staff concentrated its efforts on developing a strategy for defeating the allies in turn. |
The most important thing here was not to miscalculate the direction of the main attack. Since France, living in fear of a new German attack, turned its eastern border into a continuous chain of impregnable fortresses, Moltke senior came to the conclusion that Germany should limit itself to defense in the west, and concentrate the main forces of the German army against Russian Empire. Then it was still believed that "the boundless expanses of Russia are not of vital interest to Germany." Therefore, it was planned to defeat the Russian army in the border areas and end the war with the capture of the Russian part of Poland. After that, having transferred troops to the west, it was possible to start offensive operations against France.
Schlieffen abandoned the doctrine of his legendary predecessor, retaining only the Napoleonic idea of the "Vernichtungs-Strategie" - the "destruction strategy" of the enemy. Unlike Moltke, who predicted that a future war could last for years and even decades, he believed that Germany's limited financial resources and the German economy's heavy dependence on raw material exports would not allow it to wage a protracted war. "The strategy of starvation," he wrote, "is unthinkable when the maintenance of millions of armed people requires billions of dollars." The time factor became decisive in his strategic calculations. By the beginning of the XX century. Germany had a well-developed network of modern railways, thanks to which it could mobilize and concentrate troops both in the east and in the west in just a few days. Importance railway tracks The message was also realized by France, which, being engaged in reinforced railway construction, managed to equalize the terms of mobilization of its army with the German one. But in Russia, the density of the railway network in the western and central regions was much lower than in Germany and even in Austria-Hungary. In addition, due to the vast extent of the Russian Empire, the Russian General Staff was forced to plan the transfer of troops to a distance several times greater than that which the German military units had to overcome according to the mobilization order. According to the calculations of the German General Staff, the full mobilization of the Russian army was to take from 40 to 50 days. Consequently, at the first stage of the war, it was possible not to be diverted to the Russian front, but to throw all the strike forces against France.
Schlieffen considered a frontal breakthrough through first-class French fortresses a waste of time and effort. Repetition of the Sedan at the beginning of the 20th century. was no longer possible. Meanwhile, the French army had to be destroyed with one mighty blow. And here Schlieffen suggested using the experience of Cannes. “A battle of annihilation,” he wrote, “can be given even now according to the plan of Hannibal, drawn up in time immemorial. The enemy front is not the object of the main attack. What is essential is not the concentration of the main forces and reserves against the enemy front, but the pressure on the flanks. A flank attack must be directed not only at one extreme point of the front, but must capture the entire depth of the enemy's disposition. Destruction is complete only after the attack of the enemy's rear.
The plan he conceived was not a blind copy of the scheme of the Battle of Cannae. Schlieffen wanted to encircle the French, but not by double envelopment, but by a powerful breakthrough of one right flank of the German army. To do this, he maximally weakened the line of troops on the left flank, stretching along the German-French border, for the protection of which only 8 divisions were allocated, and concentrated a shock fist of 53 divisions against Belgium and Luxembourg. In the rear of these countries there was no insurmountable chain of French fortresses. The only fortress on the way of the right flank of the German army was the "eternal" neutrality of Belgium, guaranteed in 1839 by England, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany itself (then still Prussia). Schlieffen looked at the matter from a purely military point of view, without taking political considerations into account. The neutral status of Belgium had no effect in his eyes. According to his plan, with the outbreak of war, the main forces of the German army were to immediately invade Luxembourg and Belgium, pass through them, then, having carried out a maneuver in a wide arc, envelop Paris from the southwest and press the French troops to the left flank of the German army.
If, during the victorious march of the German intrusion wing, the French army rushed with all their might to the weakened left flank of the Germans, then the effect of a revolving door would turn out: the harder you push such a door forward, the more painfully it hits you on the back and the back of the head. The German right flank, passing through the rear of the enemy, would destroy the French army in the fields of Alsace and Lorraine.
The whole operation against France is the grandiose "Cannes of the 20th century." - was calculated with purely German punctuality, literally by the hour. Exactly six weeks were allotted for the encirclement and defeat of the French army. After that, it was necessary to transfer the German corps to the east.
Schlieffen deliberately sacrificed East Prussia at the initial stage of the war. The 10 German divisions stationed there could not withstand the pressure of the Russian "steam roller", which, as expected, would have set in motion four to five weeks after the start of mobilization.
It is important to note here that the German Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg even forbade the planting of long-lived elms in his Brandenburg estate of the Hohenfins: it’s not worth the trouble, the Russians will get the estate anyway.
The brunt of the confrontation of the Russian army would have to be borne by 30 Austrian divisions deployed in Galicia and the southern regions of Russian Poland. But a week after the victory over France, half a million German soldiers who had arrived from the western front were to crush Russian power and end the war on the continent - eight to ten weeks after it began.
The effectiveness of the "Schlieffen Plan" depended entirely on the precise implementation by each division, each regiment and battalion of the deployment and concentration schedule developed for them. Any delay threatened to lose the whole case. And Schlieffen, with maniacal passion, indulged in the detailing of his plan, trying to foresee any circumstances. At times he gave the impression of a madman. Once, during an inspection tour of headquarters in East Prussia, Schlieffen's adjutant drew the attention of his boss to a picturesque view of the Pregel River seen in the distance. The general, with a brief glance in the direction the officer was pointing, muttered, "A minor obstruction." It was said that before his death, which followed in 1912, he was terribly worried about the fate of his offspring. His last words on his deathbed were: "Do not weaken the right flank."
Subsequently, it turned out that the "Schlieffen plan" was not free from major shortcomings. These included neglecting the neutrality of Belgium, which pushed England into the camp of Germany's opponents, and underestimating the scale of England's participation in the land war. Nevertheless, the military doctrine of Schlieffen, which became the shrine of the General Staff, had a powerful psychological impact on a whole generation of German politicians and military men. She brought them liberation from the fear of "encirclement" and war on two fronts. Wilhelm and his entourage firmly learned: ten weeks of vigorous effort - and all enemies will be defeated.
Agadir crisis in Morocco, the Balkan bloc and the arms race
Agadir Crisis in Morocco
The death of King Edward VII in May 1910 a short time brought together all the monarchical courts of Europe. Some solace was brought to the tense relations between the great powers.The complacent mood that prevailed in Europe in 1910 prompted the authors of the eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica to notify their readers that "soon national differences will remain only in the field of education and economics."
As if in mockery of these words, one of the most acute crises in relations between Germany and the Entente erupted the following year.
In the spring of 1911, an uprising broke out in Morocco. The French government, under the pretext of protecting its citizens, sent troops to the capital of the Sultanate, the city of Fez. In fact, this meant that France acquired a new colony. The German presence in Morocco was limited to two firms operating in Agadir and Mogador (on the west coast). Inflate the conflict, in general, it was not because of what. But the German Secretary of State for foreign affairs Alfred von Kiderlen-Wächter, against the wishes of his direct superior Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg, persuaded the Kaiser to retaliate. His goal was to prevent the transition of Morocco under the rule of France, or, at worst, to receive compensation - the French Congo or at least one port city on the Atlantic coast.
The German gunboat Panther entered Agadir harbor. Soon the arrival of reinforcements was expected - the cruiser "Berlin", also heading for Moroccan waters.
The "Panther's Leap" provoked a serious resonance all over the world, becoming also an important precursor and cause of the First World War. France was taken by surprise, the German newspapers choked with delight. The general tension increased every day. And suddenly England intervened, standing shoulder to shoulder with France. The British government recognized the strengthening of Germany on the Atlantic coast as affecting the interests of England. On behalf of the Cabinet, Chancellor of the Exchequer David Lloyd George publicly let the German government know that "if Germany wants to fight, she will find Great Britain on the opposite side." The British fleet was put on alert.
For the Kaiser, England's sharp demarche came as a complete surprise. So far, neither he nor anyone else among European politicians has considered the Entente as a military bloc. The British did not support France in the Moroccan crisis of 1905, and during the Bosnian crisis of 1909, together with the French, they left Russia alone against Austria-Hungary and Germany. The direct threat of war with England frightened Wilhelm, especially since Austria was not ready to support her ally. He didn't dare cross the line.
On August 17, the Kaiser held a meeting with his entourage. It was decided to give in. “At a moment of real danger,” Bülow scoffed, “His Majesty was each time imbued with the unpleasant consciousness of the fact that he had never commanded armies in real battles - despite the marshal's baton, which he so loved to brandish, despite the medals and orders with which he he loved to adorn himself so much, despite the pseudo-victories that he was invariably awarded during maneuvers. He was well aware that he was nothing more than an ordinary neurasthenic, devoid of any military talents, and as for maritime affairs, for all his enthusiasm for them, he is not able to command not only a squadron, but even a single ship.
in negotiations With Germany unconditionally recognized the protectorate of France over Morocco by the French and was content with worthless compensation in the form of a marshy area of the French Congo, inhabited mainly by tsetse flies.
By that time, nationalist sentiments in all countries involved in Agadir crisis have reached their climax. The deputies of the Reichstag met the message of Bethmann-Hollweg about the treaty with France with deathly silence, but the chief of the General Staff, Moltke Jr., raged: “If we are once again forced to get out with our tail between our legs, if we again cannot decide to openly declare that we are ready to use the sword , then I will lose faith in the future of Germany and retire ... ". German newspapers poured out torrents of hatred against the Entente. The press of the Entente countries, in turn, mockingly savored the diplomatic humiliation of Germany.
The following year, a dress rehearsal for the future war took place.
Balkan Crisis and Partition of Turkey
This time Italy and the Balkan states, united by the efforts of Russian diplomacy in " Balkan blo To". As early as November 5, 1911, the Italian government officially proclaimed the annexation of the North African possessions of the Ottoman Empire - Tripolitania and Cyrenaica. Italy played a win-win game. She knew that there would be no protest from the Great Powers—and there was none. The Entente wanted to see Italy in its ranks, Germany and Austria were afraid of her withdrawal from the Triple Alliance. In the Italo-Turkish war that followed, the Italian squadron bombarded Beirut, the Dardanelles fortifications, and captured a dozen Turkish islands in the Aegean.The Italian victories demonstrated the complete impotence of the Turkish army. The Balkan states did not want to miss such an opportunity and hastily set about dividing the Turkish inheritance. In autumn 1912 Montenegro, Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece declared war on Turkey. Military operations resembled the triumphal march of the allied armies. A month later, the Turks lost all their possessions on the European coast, and the Bulgarian army stood 40 km from Constantinople. The Turkish government turned to the great powers with a request for mediation.
Russia before the First World War
Reasons for Russia's involvement in World War I
The division of Turkey by the Balkan states against the interests of Russia caused the strongest indignation of the domestic Ministry of Foreign Affairs, headed by D.S. Sazonov.When the naval flotilla of England and other great powers entered the Turkish ports, Russia lost the opportunity to capture and hold the Black Sea straits. In addition, the prospect of a war against Austria-Hungary and Germany had to be reckoned with. Finally, even the temporary closure by the Turks of the Dardanelles, the sea gate through which 60% of Russian grain exports passed, threatened the Russian economy with multimillion-dollar losses. Therefore, Russia acted in an unusual role as a defender of the territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire. At her urging, the other great powers agreed to decide at an international conference.
It was already impossible to fix anything in the current situation: the division of the Ottoman Empire became a fait accompli.
The military successes of the Serbs and Montenegrins terribly worried Austria, which sought to prevent Serbia from reaching the Adriatic Sea and the excessive strengthening of Montenegro. In November, Austria-Hungary carried out a partial mobilization and concentrated large forces on the Serbian border.
Russia, of course, did not stand aside. The reform of the Russian army, begun after the unsuccessful Russo-Japanese War, proceeded at an accelerated pace, and many members of the Council of Ministers were determined to "stubbornly defend our vital interests and not be afraid of the specter of war." It was said that it was time for Russia to stop "groveling before the Germans", that the Russian people "understand better than we do the need to free ourselves from foreign influence." Minister of War Vladimir Alexandrovich Sukhomlinov with great success developed his thoughts to the sovereign that “all the same, we cannot escape the war, and it is more profitable for us to start it earlier,” since “only one good thing will come out of the war for us.” He did his best to convince Nicholas II to agree to the mobilization of two military districts bordering Austria. At the same time, Sukhomlinov showed amazing frivolity: well aware that the decree on mobilization could provoke a war, he at the same time applied for leave for a pleasure trip to the Riviera. In response to the bewilderment of other members of the Cabinet, he said without a shadow of embarrassment: “What a disaster, the Minister of War does not personally mobilize, and while all orders are being carried out, I would always have time to return on time. I didn't expect to be away for more than 2-3 weeks."
All this happened against the backdrop of noisy demonstrations in favor of the Balkan Slavs, in which tens of thousands of people participated.
The French government was also ready to pull the trigger, assuring St. Petersburg that if Germany intervened in the war, France would fully fulfill its allied obligations.
Chairman of the Council of Ministers Vladimir Nikolayevich Kokovtsov, a staunch supporter of a peaceful course, had to work hard to cool down the militant ardor of his colleagues. On his advice, he was detained under the banners for six months for the entire last term of service - this measure made it possible to increase the composition of the army by a quarter, without resorting to mobilization, to which Austria would inevitably respond with war.
Unequivocal signals were sent to France and Serbia about Russia's unwillingness to get involved in a war with Austria-Hungary. The Russian military attache in Paris, Count Aleksey Alekseevich Ignatiev, in a conversation with French Minister of War Alexander Millerand, stated that although “the Slavic question remains close to our hearts, history has taught us, of course, to think first of all about our own state interests, without sacrificing them in favor of abstract ideas." To a direct question from the French Foreign Ministry: "What actions will Russia take in the event of an Austrian attack on Serbia?", the Russian answer was: "Russia will not fight." The Serbian government received a note from the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sazonov, which read: "We categorically warn Serbia so that it does not expect to drag us along with it ...". Under the influence of Russian diplomacy, Serbia withdrew its territorial claims and refused access to the Adriatic Sea.
The position of Germany in the Balkan crisis of 1912 was again influenced by the firm determination of England.
Austria was initially promised full support, as in 1909, "regardless of the consequences", in the words of the Kaiser. But last year's events sowed indecision in him. Wilhelm tried to figure out which side Britain would take. The answer was disappointing. At the beginning of December, reports were received through various channels: the British would not remain indifferent observers of the Austrian invasion of Serbia and would not allow the defeat of France.
At the council of war on December 8, with the participation of the top leadership of the army and navy, Wilhelm could not contain his rage: “Due to the fact that England ... is so envious of us and hates us so much, because of this, it turns out, not a single other power has has no right to take up a sword to protect their interests, and they themselves ... are going to oppose us! Oh, this nation of shopkeepers! And they call this the policy of peace! Balance of power! In the decisive battle between the Germans and the Slavs, the Anglo-Saxons are on the side of the Slavs and Gauls! The Kaiser was determined, but wanted to know what chances Germany had in the war with the Entente.
Moltke's opinion looked like a direct quote from Sukhomlinov's speech: "I consider war inevitable, and the sooner it starts, the better ...". But Grand Admiral Tirpitz spoke out against hasty decisions. According to him, the fleet was not yet ready to measure strength with the English dreadnoughts, it took at least eighteen months to complete the work on expanding the Kiel Canal and building a submarine base on the island of Heligoland. Moltke grimaced skeptically - there is no need to wait a year and a half, “the fleet will not be ready then, and the army will be in a less advantageous position by that time; the enemy is arming more intensively than we are, we do not have enough money.” Tirpitz nevertheless insisted on his own. The German sword was not drawn from its scabbard. Bethmann-Hollweg was instructed to “enlighten the people through the press about the great national interests that Germany will set if the Austro-Serbian conflict escalates into war. In the event of war, the people should not ask what Germany is fighting for.”
In general, it was in 1912 that the Kaiser's thinking took on a catastrophic character. Moreover, he saw the coming European apocalypse in the light of the theory of the struggle of races. So, on the margins of one diplomatic report, Wilhelm wrote: “The second chapter of the Great Migration of Nations is over. Chapter three begins, in which the Germanic peoples will fight against the Russians and the Gauls. No future conference can weaken the significance of this fact, for this is not a matter of high politics, but a matter of the survival of the race." The Austrian general Count Stürkg later heard the following words from the Kaiser: “I hate the Slavs. I know it's wrong. No one should be hated, but I can't help it: I hate them."
Contemporaries associated the Kaiser's racist remarks with the influence of Professor Shiman, who was considered an expert on Russia. Wilhelm showed this Eastsee German, obsessed with hatred of the Slavs, invariable favor. Even earlier, the Kaiser had familiarized himself with Chamberlain's "Basic Myth of the 19th Century" with great interest; The author was awarded the Iron Cross.
Apart from Wilhelm, no other political leader at that time considered the confrontation between the Entente and the Central Powers in a racial aspect. A psychological turning point was also observed in the behavior of Nicholas II. The king seemed to be seized by some kind of fatigue, a fatalistic desire to let events take their course. Kokovtsov recalled one of his last reports to the sovereign. This was already in November 1913, after Kokovtsov's return from a trip to Berlin. The tsar received him at the Livadia Palace in the Crimea. Kokovtsov spoke about the belligerent mood at Wilhelm's court and his anxious conviction that war was imminent and inevitable. Nikolai listened attentively: “He never interrupted me during the entire time of my presentation and stubbornly looked straight into my eyes, as if he wanted to believe in the sincerity of my words. Then, turning to the window where we were sitting, he peered for a long time at the boundless sea distance spread out in front of him and, as if waking up from oblivion, again stubbornly looked at me and said: "All the Will of God!"
Apparently, Nicholas II was still under the impression of the magnificent celebration of the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty. The celebrations began in February and continued throughout the year. The sovereign and his family made a long journey through Russian cities. Tens of thousands of people who stood along the route of the royal train, an endless series of ceremonial dinners, religious processions, prayers, folk festivals were to testify to the inextricable unity of the king with the people. Rasputin could also influence the mystical mood of the sovereign, it was then that he finally affirmed his exclusive position in the royal family. The tsar, like his German cousin, was rapidly losing an adequate perception of reality.
The crisis of 1912 finally clarified the alignment of forces before the decisive battle.
The exchange of threats continued at the beginning of 1913. In the margins of Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg's report on the situation in the Balkans, Wilhelm made an inscription: finally, a provocation is needed in order to be able to strike, "if there is more or less clever diplomacy and a cleverly directed press such ( provocation) can be constructed ... and it must be constantly at hand.
However, it was already clear that there would be no war again. In the last days of January 1913, Lenin, in a letter to Gorky, dropped with regret: “A war between Austria and Russia would be very useful for the revolution (in all of Eastern Europe), but there is little likelihood that Franz Joseph and Nikolasha would give us this pleasure.”
Peace in the Balkans came in May. Turkey admitted its defeat and lost almost all European possessions, which went to the countries of the "Balkan bloc".
On May 24, the wedding of the only daughter of the Kaiser, Princess Victoria Louise, and the Duke of Brunswick took place. Wilhelm invited both of his cousins to the celebration - Georgie (George V) and Nike (Nicholas II). Both arrived in person. Later, George V complained that it was extremely difficult for him to talk heart to heart with the Russian sovereign: Wilhelm followed them everywhere, fearing that Georgie and Nicky would conspire against him. When they still managed to be alone, George did not leave the feeling that "Wilhelm is standing with his ear pressed against the keyhole."
That was the last meeting of the three royal cousins.
The lull in the Balkans lasted only a month. The former allies could not divide the territories seized from Turkey, and at the end of June the Second Balkan War began. Now Greece, Serbia and Montenegro opposed Bulgaria. Soon Romania and Turkey joined the anti-Bulgarian coalition. The Great Powers behaved this time much more restrained. A month later, the war ended with the defeat of Bulgaria and a new redrawing of the borders between the Balkan states.
After that, Russian-German relations escalated again. The Kaiser tried to increase German influence in Turkey. On July 30, 1913, Otto Liman von Sanders, one of the best German generals, arrived in Istanbul at the invitation of the Turkish government. A little later, forty officers-instructors joined him. Sanders was tasked with overseeing the reorganization of the Turkish army. In addition, he was appointed commander of an army corps stationed in Istanbul and a member of the Turkish Military Council.
Petersburg took this news extremely painfully. The work of the German military mission was clearly intended to prepare the Turkish army for war with Russia. It was also feared that the economic development of southern Russia would fall under German control. Kokovtsov's negotiations on this issue with Bethmann-Hollweg and Wilhelm II were fruitless. The conflict around the Sanders mission was somewhat defused only in January 1914, when the general, under a plausible pretext, was removed from the direct leadership of the Istanbul garrison - he was promoted to marshal of the Turkish army and appointed military inspector of all Turkish troops.
From the very beginning of the Balkan crisis of 1912-1913. the great powers began to increase their armaments. With continued economic growth, governments were able to afford previously unthinkable military spending.
Germany began to form two new army corps. The naval program, adopted by the Reichstag in May 1912, intended to increase the size of the German fleet to 41 battleship and 20 armored cruisers, not including light cruisers and destroyers.
In response, Churchill promised the Commons that the world would soon see the largest construction in the history of the British Navy: "One torpedo boat a week ... One light cruiser every thirty days ... one superdreadnought every forty-five days." In 1914, the British government acquired a controlling stake in the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company in order to be able to fuel ships with liquid fuel instead of coal.
The French government by law of August 7, 1913 increased the length of service from two to three years and lowered the draft age from 21 to 20 years. This allowed France to form the largest peacetime army in Europe - 882,907 people, including colonial troops (the pre-war strength of the German army was increased to 808,280 people).
In the Russian budget, defense already accounted for about a third of all government spending. At the end of 1913, the "Great Program to Strengthen the Army" was approved, which provided for an increase in the number of ground forces by almost 40%; much attention was paid to field artillery and naval construction. Three years later, the Russian government planned to have the most first-class army on the continent.
A significant increase in military spending was also approved by the Austrian and Italian parliaments. All records were broken by tiny Belgium, which planned to more than triple its peacetime army by 1918.
The celebration in 1913 of the centenary of the liberation of Germany from Napoleon's dominion resulted in a large-scale anti-French demonstration. The press reminded the Germans that the hour was not far off when they would again have to fight with the same "historical" enemy of the German nation.
Militarization in Germany has reached such a scale that it obtrusively climbed into the eyes even on the street. The Russian publicist Alexander Valentinovich Amfiteatrov recalled how Germany struck him in the spring of 1913: “It seemed to me as if renewed and powerfully grown. Amazed and horrified. A huge, ingenious culture - as if in an annex to a model military camp. Everything that is strong, strong, healthy is in a military uniform: well-fed, rosy-cheeked, automatically herd, ideally trained for human extermination, armed people ... And how armed! Love and tremble! And the civilian population is rather weak, frail, pale and short-sighted: for ten people there are six with glasses. It was clear that the state is forcing the country to live in the military, and the military feeds the country, of course, not for parades and maneuvers.
“I don’t know,” Amfiteatrov sums up his impressions, “who then in Germany wanted war, and whether the Germans even wanted war. But the air was filled with war - and, moreover, war, obviously victorious" ("Fight against the German hero").
The same feelings were experienced by Protopresbyter of the Russian army and navy Georgy Shavelsky, who attended the celebration of the centennial anniversary of the Battle of the Nations at Leipzig in 1913: “Here it is, Germany! Slender, close-knit, disciplined, patriotic. When it's a national holiday, everyone is like soldiers; everyone has one idea, one thought, one goal, and everywhere harmony and order. And here everyone is talking about the fight against it ... It is difficult for us, scattered, propagandized, to compete with it.
However, the so-called common sense refused to dramatize the situation. Maxim Gorky, for example, found that Amfiteatrov exaggerated German power. The German military, according to the writer, was "not as strong as ... it seems that the German socialists will not allow the country to go to war, and if such a thing happened, then the fiery German onslaught will meet a harsh rebuff in Russia, on which they will break their horns" .
By the end of 1913 political passions subsided. Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg reminded supporters of a pre-emptive strike: “Until now, no country has encroached on the honor or dignity of the Germans. Anyone who speaks about war under these conditions must convincingly formulate its goal and prove that it is impossible to achieve this goal in any other way ... If at the present time it is meant to start a war in the absence of reasonable and understandable motives, then this will cast doubt on the future not only the Hohenzollern dynasty, but Germany as a whole. Of course, we must be bold in our foreign policy, but simply brandishing the sword on every occasion when neither the honor, nor the security, nor the future of Germany is affected, is not only frivolous, but also criminal.
US Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, observing the situation from the outside, concluded: "The conditions promising world peace have never been so favorable as they are now."
At the very end of 1913, a special meeting was held with the participation of the ministers of foreign affairs, the military, naval and chief of the General Staff. They discussed the mission of General Sanders and the possibility of a joint Russian-English-French attack on Turkey. The chairman of the meeting, Kokovtsov, directly put the question to the ministers: "Is war with Germany desirable and can Russia go to it?"
State Secretary Kokovtsev, considering the war the greatest disaster for Russia at the present time, adhered to the extreme undesirability of Russia's involvement in the European clash.
Foreign Minister Sazonov also held a fundamentally negative opinion regarding the war with Germany.
He explained this position by the fact that Russia, even together with France (from which assurances of unconditional support had already been received), is unlikely to have unequivocal chances of winning the war with Germany. The Minister pointed out that it was not at all clear how vigorously England would be ready to act. Namely, the participation of British troops could really guarantee victory over Germany.
At the same time, Minister of War Sukhomlinov and Chief of the General Staff General Yakov Grigoryevich Zhilinsky "categorically declared Russia's complete readiness for single combat with Germany, not to mention a one-on-one clash with Austria."
As a result of the meeting, the following provisions were adopted:
1) It is necessary to continue to convince Germany of the inadmissibility, from the point of view of Russia's interests, commanding a German general of a military unit in Constantinople, and even more so providing him with an inspection in the sense of commanding one or another district, but at the same time recognizing it is permissible to grant powers to the Head of the German military mission for a general inspection of the Turkish army.
2) Negotiations in Berlin should be continued until their complete failure is clarified.
3) After that, with the consent of France and England, it is necessary to proceed to the planned measures of influence outside Berlin.
4) In the absence of active support from France and England, further pressure that could lead to war with Germany is unacceptable.
Such were the events that preceded Russia's entry into the First World War.
World War I
1914 - 1918 years
The reason for the First World War was the assassination on June 15 (28), 1914 in Sarajevo (Bosnia) by Serbian nationalists of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Germany decided to use the favorable moment to start a war. Under pressure from Germany, Austria-Hungary issued an ultimatum to Serbia on July 10 (23) and, despite the agreement of the Serbian government to fulfill almost all of its demands, broke off diplomatic relations with it on July 12 (25), and declared war on it on July 15 (28). Serbian capital Belgrade came under artillery fire. On July 16 (29) Russia began mobilization in the military districts bordering Austria-Hungary, and on July 17 (30) announced general mobilization. Germany on July 18 (31) demanded that Russia stop mobilization and, having received no answer, on July 19 (August 1) declared war on her. July 21 (August 3) Germany declared war on France and Belgium; On July 22 (August 4), Great Britain declared war on Germany, with which its dominions entered the war - Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa and the largest colony of India. On August 10 (23) Japan declared war on Germany. Italy, while formally remaining part of the Triple Alliance, declared its neutrality on July 20 (August 2), 1914.
Was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand the cause or cause of the First World War?
On June 28, 1914, Gavrilo Princip assassinated the Austrian heir apparent Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo and his wife. It is believed that this incident was the reason for the outbreak of the First World War.
Historians' opinions.
Konstantin Zalessky, historian
The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is not the cause of the First World War, but only an excuse. And the reason is not very good. To unleash the war, they used the case that appeared at that moment. Moreover, the assassination of Frans Ferdinand was not the work of a Serbian organization, but an organization that secretly operated on the territory of Austria-Hungary. Although certain circles in Serbia could be involved in the murder, however, not the ruling circles. The Serbs quite decently responded to the ultimatum of Austria-Hungary. And after the response of Serbia, in principle, it followed that there was no reason for starting a war. As for whether Gavrilo Princip acted on his own initiative or was a puppet in the hands of others, I think that he acted solely for reasons of patriotism. That is, Princip shot at Franz Ferdinand and then at his wife, solely believing that this terrorist act would help the liberation of the southern Slavs from the power of Austria-Hungary. Another thing is that the entire organization was under the influence of certain terrorist and ultra-radical circles of the Serbian leadership. But I emphasize that not the ruling circles in Serbia, but those who sought to unleash the conflict. For his part, Princip acted honestly, he had an exclusively patriotic idea. Although, a terrorist is a terrorist, even if he acts with good intentions. And he, in principle, was not a puppet in the hands of others. This whole group, which organized the assassination attempt on Frans Ferdinand, acted absolutely consciously.
Andrey Zubov, historian
The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand certainly triggered World War I. If this were the cause, then the problem could be solved quite easily. And, in general, the incident could be exhausted. Historians are well aware that Austria consulted with Germany, and Germany believed that the war might start now or never start. That is why military programs, including the program of Russia, went forward. And the plan to quickly defeat the French army on the Western Front, followed by the transfer of troops to the Eastern Front and the defeat of Russia, failed for a number of technical reasons. Consequently, Germany and Austria were extremely interested in starting the war as soon as possible. As for how Gavrilo Princip acted, he acted on behalf of Serbian nationalists. That is, he represented those people who believed that all Slavic lands should be united. Indeed, the movement was quite powerful then, so it is possible that the Principle acted completely sincerely, and was not a double agent.
