…circa 1914.
The
Russian Origins of the First World War, by Sean McMeekin.
Prologue
In my
introductory post on this book, I offered the following regarding the complimentary
nature of McMeekin’s book to that of Frankopan’s Silk
Roads:
My one disagreement – or maybe
better stated, skepticism: McMeekin portrays the Russians as cunning diplomats
and the British diplomats as dupes. If I
believe Frankopan’s analysis, British diplomacy knew exactly what it wanted and
got it: Russia focused on Europe and not Asia; if I believe McMeekin, the
Russians fooled the British regarding ultimate Russian objectives.
I am about half-way through the
book, and so far I believe Frankopan. My
concern: is this so only because I read Frankopan first or is it so because Frankopan’s
arguments are more compelling? On this
question, I try to remain open-minded.
At the time, my concern was basic: Great Britain, a tiny
island, held an empire that spanned the globe.
Is it possible that this tiny land with no resources of its own was
virtually completely inept in the art of diplomacy, in reading tea leaves, in
understanding how to manipulate others?
I felt this not to discount Russian diplomats; I only felt
that British diplomats couldn’t be so wrong at almost every turn.
I am now much further along in the book, and am coming to
the conclusion that – as important and valuable as I find much of McMeekin’s
work – I think I lean toward Frankopan’s interpretation of events. What has swung me on this is McMeekin’s
description regarding the British attempts at Gallipoli; while this is a topic
for a future post, I will offer a brief summary here:
Russia, being quite clear on her objectives to possess
Constantinople and the Straits after the war, somehow got Great Britain to
sacrifice tens-of-thousands of her sons in a purely altruistic endeavor – capture
the Straits and access to it, then turn over to Russia this access to the
Mediterranean, gratis. Russia was able to trick Britain to attempt
this even while offering virtually no support at the Black Sea entrance to the Bosporus
at the time of the British landing.
It is difficult to believe.
Now, on to today’s
episode….
McMeekin lays out thoroughly Russia’s interests in
Constantinople and Austrian Galicia, while touching on Germany’s fears of her
neighbor to the east.
Regarding the latter point first, Russia had over three
times the population as did Germany; Russia’ army was triple the size of
Germany’s; Russia’s economy was growing at ten per cent per year. Of course, Russia had also recently had some
military setbacks – most notably against Japan a few years earlier.
The Romanov Empire had grown by fifty-five square miles a
day since 1683:
It was not hard to extrapolate
forward a geopolitical map on which Russian territory included half of China,
Afghanistan, northern Persia, Anatolia, Constantinople and the Straits,
Austrian Galicia, and Eastern Prussia.
And this, for me, is where McMeekin runs headlong into
Frankopan (and MacKinder): Britain intended to divert Russia from Asia by
getting Russia to focus on Europe.
In the meantime, Germany had grown to be the greatest
military power in Europe – defeating France in the Franco-Prussian War of
1870-1871. Germany’s literacy rate in
the military was nearly universal, whereas for Russia it was about 30%. Germany’s economy had also exploded in the
latter half of the nineteenth century – surpassing even Britain’s and second
only to the economy of the United States.
From pharmaceuticals to automotive to military hardware, Germany was a
world leader:
The words Krupp and Skoda alone
were enough to terrify infantrymen who might have to face Germans.
McMeekin discounts Britain’s and France’s interest in the
Middle East and the future of the Ottoman Empire; in Britain’s case especially,
they had already secured their desired prizes – Egypt and the Suez Canal. Either the desires of these two pre-eminent
European colonialists changed drastically within the first year or two of the
war’s start, or McMeekin is seeing something that was never there.
Meanwhile, Russia was making plans to take Constantinople:
The mood of the time was well
captured in a General Staff memorandum of October 1910 that outlined plans for
seizing Constantinople: first the rail and telegraph lines to Adrianople and
Ankara would be cut by “agents from the Christian population” (Macedonians and
Bulgarians in Europe, Greeks and Armenians in Anatolia), whereupon
Russia-friendly Christians in the city would “burn down all the wooden bridges
spanning the Golden Horn and set fire to Stambul”…
…a Muslim district blanketed with wooden houses.
Russian operational planning to seize Constantinople dates
as far back as 1895-1896, in response to the Turkish massacres of Armenians at
that time. Nearly all Russian naval and
army policy papers regarding an amphibious landing on Constantinople referred
to the “annihilation of Turkish dominion.”
I recall from Jack Beatty and his book, The
Lost History of 1914: How the Great War Was Not Inevitable, that in the
years prior to the war, Russia was
looking for external peace due to its very unstable domestic situation. McMeekin sees things a little differently,
but offers a clarification:
Stolypin’s famous 1909 remark that
Russia needed “twenty years of peace” to complete her economic modernization in
reality referred conditionally, like Sazanov’s professions of pacifist
intentions, to the prospects of a European
war on Russia’s vulnerable western borders.
But Russia’s skirmishes in the east and south would
continue. And this was precisely the opposite of what Britain was after; and,
it turns out, Russia focused on Europe once the war began. It leaves one to ask – which “ally” manipulated
the other into fighting the desired war?
Russia saw two weak and weakening empires to her south –
Austro-Hungary and Ottoman. She saw the
Ottomans lose in the first Balkan War, with Italy, Montenegro, Bulgaria, Serbia
and Greece all allied against the Turks; she saw Austro-Hungary stay out of the
war, as Germany did not offer support.
Meanwhile, Russia also saw Turkey invite Liman von Sanders
and more than forty German officers to command the Straits defenses; Russia’s
European enemy now defending Russia’s target in the south. Russia saw the British building naval ships
for Turkey; these ships would virtually eliminate any hope of Russia taking
major action in the Black Sea.
For Russia, the time for war was fast approaching.
This war was caused by Britain, as with so many of them.
ReplyDeletethere is no sole responsibility for the ww1
ReplyDeletewe can start with :
British Empire
The Bank of England Established in 1694
mercantilism-- as economic system and political belief
the system of political economy that sought to enrich the country by restraining imports and encouraging exports.
to achieve this nation need to have strongest military and to have colonies.
to accomplish this, play Divide and rule or divide and conquer.
French Revanchism for 1870/71 war.
russian imperialism and Quest for warm water ports
prussian/german imperialism
Italian empire - the desire for Roman imperial glory
"Sick man of Europe": Ottoman Empire and The Habsburg Empire
revival of Serbia's medieval glory.
revival of Bulgaria's medieval glory.
max
To complete your inquiry into this issue, please read "The Peace to End All Peace."
ReplyDeleteI have read it and written about it.
DeleteCheck the bibliography tab (above, or here):
http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/p/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none_30.html
You will find the links to my writing on the book.