Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 05:34 AM Jun 2014

World War One: First war was impossible, then inevitable

Why does the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand — the event that lit the fuse of World War One 100 years ago Saturday — still resonate so powerfully? Virtually nobody believes World War Three will be triggered by recent the military conflicts in Ukraine, Iraq or the China seas, yet many factors today mirror those that led to the catastrophe in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914.

The pace of globalization was almost as dramatic and confusing in 1914 as it is today. Fear of random terrorism was also widespread — the black-hatted anarchist clutching a fizzing bomb was a cartoon cliché then just as the Islamic jihadist is today. Yet the crucial parallel may be the complacent certainty that economic interdependence and prosperity had made war inconceivable — at least in Europe.

>

The truth, as the world discovered in 1914 and is re-discovering today in Ukraine, the Middle East and the China seas, is that economic interests are swept aside once the genie of nationalist or religious militarism is released. As I pointed out in this column, Russia has in past conflicts withstood economic losses unimaginable to politicians and diplomats in the Western world — and the same is true of Iran and China. Thus the U.S. strategy of “escalating economic costs” cannot be expected to achieve major geopolitical objectives, such as preserving Ukraine’s borders or Japan’s uninhabited islands. Either territory must be open to renegotiation or the West must be prepared to fight to protect the “sanctity” of borders, which shows the really unsettling parallels with the world of 1914.

Though historians continue to debate World War One’s proximate causes, two key destabilizing features of early 20th-century geopolitics created the necessary conditions for the sudden spiral into all-consuming conflict: the rise and fall of great powers, and the over-zealous observance of mutual-defense treaties. These features are now returning to destabilize geopolitics a century later.

http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/06/27/world-war-one-first-war-was-impossible-then-inevitable/

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
World War One: First war was impossible, then inevitable (Original Post) dipsydoodle Jun 2014 OP
Hiram Maxim, the inventor of the machine gun, said his invention would make war impossible. Archae Jun 2014 #1
This is Glenn Beck style nonsense SnakeEyes Jun 2014 #2
To be honest, I do think the prevalence of the "impossibility" belief is often greatly overstated. AverageJoe90 Jun 2014 #3

Archae

(46,311 posts)
1. Hiram Maxim, the inventor of the machine gun, said his invention would make war impossible.
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 01:38 PM
Jun 2014

Instead it just turned war into a meat grinder.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
3. To be honest, I do think the prevalence of the "impossibility" belief is often greatly overstated.
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 10:53 PM
Jun 2014

Some people, including those at the top, no doubt believed such, but it wasn't exactly universal; even a half decade before the Archduke's death, many realized that tensions were getting quite intense.....so, I'm afraid Mr. Kaletsky is wrong here; it wasn't a sudden spiral. It was a long chain of one event after another that ultimately just happened to spark the explosion of war when Gavrilo Princip made his decision that fateful day.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»World War One: First war ...