Causes of Ww1 & Ww2

By 1914, Europe was divided into two groupsÐ'--the Triple Entente, or Allied Powers, made up of Britain, Russia, and France, and the alliance between Germany and Austria (Italy was a part of this group, known as the Triple Alliance, but only so on paper as they did not fully actively participate in World War I). Given each side's past rivalries resulting from wars fought in the late 19th century, it is not surprising that both sides engaged in expansive colonization as well as a competitive arms race and military expansion to prove their own superior technological and militaristic ability in the event of a war.

Moreover, as a result of the Balkan wars fought in 1912 and 1913 against the Ottomans, a group of newly independent sates including Bulgaria, Greece, and Serbia emerged. Serbia would eventually play an instrumental role in the conflict that would soon engulf the world in a matter of years; but for the time being, the opposing sides managed to stay out of it. However, as a result of the Balkan wars, the multi-ethnic groups within the Austro-Hungarian Empire began to strongly resent their second-class positions in the German and Hungarian parts of the empire, notably, they despised the empire's dual monarchy, which was established in 1876 and did not grant them positions in the empire's government. Particularly resentful were the Bosnians who had been under Austrian occupation since 1878 when the Austro-Hungarian Empire annexed it, and its Serbian citizens desired to join the newly independent Serbia.

Austria's refusal to allow this, combined with Serbia's guerilla tactics against the empire, threatened to bring the previous regional Balkan conflict to the international stageÐ'--and it did, beginning with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914. It is interesting to note that the Archduke had been willing to undertake more measures to appease the Bosnians, even going as far as to propose a tri-partite monarchy in which each part would have their own Parliament and chancellor, thus Bosnia would be less likely to break away to join Serbia. Consequently, the Serbians viewed Franz Ferdinand as an enemy set to undermine their nationalistic ambitions. With the assassination, the Austrian military branch, which had sought to crush the Serbians for quite a while, now had a direct incentive. Viewing the assassination as a direct attack by the Serbian government, Austria then demanded the right to punish those who were involved in the assassination, to prohibit militant nationalistic propaganda, and other unreasonable demands so as to provoke the Serbs into conflict.

Their tactics eventually worked, but initially, despite both the Serbian and Austrian mobilizations, there was still a chance to avoid war; yet, Austria's determination to fightÐ'--driven by their desire to reassert their authority on the international stage and also the Russians, who also wanted to regain international prestige and unite all Slavs made that impossible. The Germans were consequently drawn into the war because of the Austro-German alliance as well as because their fears were recognized of a dual threatÐ'--an alliance between France and Russia. Germany's mobilization set off a chain reaction throughout Europe. Not soon after, France mobilized, and then the British declared war after Germany invaded neutral Belgium to invade Paris. The British did so for two main reasons: first was a secret pact that required them to help France as well as a public one to protect Belgium's neutrality; second was to maintain the balance of power that was threatened by the rise of the German navy.

In summary, it can be argued that many factors led to the occurrence of World War I. Among them included Austria's mismanagement of the crisis combined with their emotional reaction to the assassination, Russia's inability to intervene without mobilization, and poor timing, as many political officials were on vacation and left many military generals using poor diplomatic strategies to plan out the war. But above all, one could argue that the spread of nationalism contributed strongly to the hostilities that led to the outbreak of a war such that individuals on opposing sides could not look at another man, woman, or child as a fellow European, lest a human being deserving of life: "This was, for one thing, the first war in which the distinction between soldier and civilian broke down, a development that was partly due to the expansion of warfare made possible byÐ'...technological innovations" (Craig, Sherman 57). Given the rise of such weapons including the machine gun, warfare became more brutal and less civilized as the opposing sides main goal was slaughtering their opponents in the most efficient way possible, and this attitude even moved beyond the battlefield: "The civilianÐ'...could not look the enemy in the face and recognize him as another man; he knew only that it was "the enemy", an impersonal generalized concept that was depriving him of the pleasures of peace" (Craig, Sherman 57).

Yet, despite the massive casualties

and utter destruction