2015 Ross Horning Lecture "Was World War One Inevitable?"

Last year, the history department decided to invite Professor Margaret MacMillan for the Ordnung lecture to commemorate the centenary of the Great War. Professor MacMillan, a Toronto native and professor of international history at Oxford, is highly esteemed for her research on the British Empire and 20th-century international relations. Her accolades include the Order of Canada and multiple honorary degrees. Her notable works include 'Nixon in China,' 'Paris 1919,' and 'The War That Ended Peace.' She will discuss the question of whether World War I was inevitable.

Before 1914, Europe experienced unprecedented peace and prosperity. The century from 1815 to 1914 was marked by short, decisive wars and significant progress in industrialization and trade. Europeans believed war was a thing of the past and that continued progress would ensure a peaceful future. This period of optimism and prosperity, however, was shattered by the outbreak of World War I, leading to questions about how such a devastating conflict could arise from such advantageous circumstances.

World War I brought profound changes to Europe and the world, leading to the fall of empires like Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Russia, and the rise of new states and nationalist movements. The war also weakened European powers, accelerating the decline of their empires and the rise of new global powers like the United States and Japan. The aftermath of the war redrew political boundaries and reshaped international relations, creating a new world order and sowing the seeds for future conflicts.

The origins of World War I have been extensively debated, with various theories attributing blame to different causes such as alliance systems, militarism, nationalism, and economic rivalries. The debate has significant political implications, particularly regarding the assignment of war guilt and reparations. The vast body of literature on the topic reflects the complexity and multifaceted nature of the causes of the war, with no single explanation being universally accepted.

The outbreak of World War I can be likened to a perfect storm, where multiple factors and accidents converged. European leaders, influenced by militarism and a desire for a decisive resolution to their problems, saw war as a viable solution. Despite signs pointing to the potential for conflict, the war was not inevitable, and different choices could have led to a peaceful resolution. The role of accidents, such as the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, played a significant part in the rapid escalation.

Before World War I, militarism and nationalism were pervasive in Europe. Militarism promoted the idea that military values and readiness were paramount, while nationalism fostered a sense of ethnic superiority and competition. These ideologies, combined with fears of societal degeneration and the belief in a short, decisive war, created a dangerous environment ripe for conflict. The belief in the necessity of war to prove national strength contributed to the eventual outbreak of hostilities.

Despite the prevailing militarism, there were significant peace movements and international efforts aimed at preventing war. Disarmament conferences, arbitration agreements, and the activities of organizations like the Red Cross and the Second International demonstrated a strong commitment to peace. These efforts showed that many Europeans believed in and actively worked towards a peaceful resolution of conflicts, highlighting an alternative path that Europe could have taken.

The peace movements faced significant challenges from militaristic and nationalistic ideologies. The belief in the inevitability of war, combined with dangerous assumptions about national strength and the preparedness for conflict, undermined efforts for peace. This period saw the rise of eugenics and fears of societal degeneration, further complicating the political landscape. The belief in a short, decisive war and the failure to appreciate the complexities of modern warfare contributed to the eventual collapse of peace efforts.

The military plans and nationalist sentiments of the time played crucial roles in the outbreak of World War I. In Germany, the Schlieffen Plan exemplified the military's dominance over political considerations, while in other countries, ethnic nationalism and historical grievances fueled tensions. The belief in the necessity of war to resolve conflicts and assert national superiority was pervasive, and the failure to account for the realities of modern warfare led to catastrophic consequences.

The rapid escalation to World War I was marked by a series of misjudgments and the influence of key personalities. The complacency and miscalculations of European leaders, coupled with a lack of direct communication and understanding of the consequences, led to a swift and catastrophic descent into war. The crisis following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand revealed the dangers of unchecked militarism and the failure to appreciate the complexities of the international situation.

In a Q&A session, Professor MacMillan discusses the failures of anti-war movements and socialist parties in preventing World War I. Despite the international rhetoric of socialism, nationalist sentiments proved stronger, leading to widespread support for the war among the working classes. The initial support for the war, framed as a defensive struggle, eventually gave way to growing opposition as the war dragged on and its true costs became apparent.

Professor MacMillan highlights the significant impact of leaders' personalities and nationalist sentiments on the decisions leading to World War I. The power held by leaders like Kaiser Wilhelm II and Tsar Nicholas II, combined with their personalities and misjudgments, played crucial roles in the escalation. The influence of nationalist rhetoric and the framing of the war as a defensive struggle further complicated the political landscape, demonstrating the importance of understanding the motivations and actions of key figures.

The migration of Europeans before World War I had significant effects on domestic politics in countries like the United States, Canada, and Australia. Immigrant groups brought diverse perspectives and influenced public opinion on the war. The presence of these groups created political challenges and tensions, as governments navigated the complexities of loyalty and support within their diverse populations. The impact of migration highlights the interconnectedness of global events and their influence on national policies.

The discussion concludes with lessons from World War I for modern politics. Key takeaways include the importance of civilian control over the military, the need for effective communication and understanding among nations, and the dangers of complacency in the face of crises. The significance of leaders' personalities and the impact of nationalist sentiments are underscored, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of political decisions and their potential consequences in maintaining peace and stability.

The role of the Black Hand in the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and the potential for other events to trigger World War I are explored. While the assassination provided a convenient excuse for Austria-Hungary to act against Serbia, the broader context of nationalist movements and geopolitical tensions suggests that other incidents could have similarly escalated into a major conflict. The discussion highlights the complexities of historical causation and the interplay of multiple factors in shaping significant events.

The impact of the Treaty of Versailles on Germany and its role in the lead-up to World War II is debated. While the treaty is often cited as a crucial factor, Professor MacMillan argues that other events, particularly the Great Depression, played more significant roles in destabilizing Europe and enabling the rise of fascism and militarism. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the broader economic and political context in analyzing the causes of subsequent conflicts.