User:Tyumentosu/sandbox

War is a consequence of a conflict that has outgrown out of the disagreement and lack of compromise by the fighting parties. Apparently, there is a better way to explain the events that lead to the escalation of a conflict to a point whereby the parties involved have to go to war to prove their supremacy (Lindemann and Erik, 85). In explaining the theory of war, it is imperative to refer to the case of World War I. The eruption of war and opposing forces in the world is a result of a failure to reach a consensus regarding private information, commitment as well as the issue of divisibility. In this discussion, the focus will be directed at the nature of the causes of World War I to offer an understanding of the theory of war. Primarily, World War I started in the European continent. In the European continent, different nations sought to form alliances and, thus, they became allies and would offer support to each other in times of need. The countries also had international allies such as United States of America and Japan. In this case, it is observed that political elites were aware that consolidating domestic and international support for nations is achievable through war. The belligerent use of foreign policies helps a nation to find another country which has the same policies, political and economic focus (Mearsheimer and Stephen, 430). At this point, the European countries had a struggle from within since private information, as well as problems arising from commitment, resulted in the creation of a fault line in the continent. The fault line caused the continent to rupture, and different countries formed alliances with nations that they had common policies. Commitment issues According to the theory of war, the aspect of commitment in connection to conflict is observable when relative power shift is experienced between states. The shift in power is noted when one nation rises and continues to become powerful. On the other hand, when another nation that had collaborated or had commitments of partnership with the rising power makes this observation, the government gets into the panic (Lindemann and Erik, 207). The panic is caused by the thought that the rising power might rewrite the rules of their cooperation. In most cases, the rising power will take the advantage of rewriting the rules of the game through the already existing greater bargaining leverage they have over the weaker state. In a preventive war, the weaker nation will resort to initiating war to prevent the rising power from becoming powerful enough to change the system in its favour. The fear of having a powerful nation over the other is a threat that has to be eliminated. Similarly, this aspect of the theory of war was observed in World War I. in fact; World War one was all about the shift of relative power whereby different countries that had formed alliances were threatened by some states growing strong and powerful. Primarily, on the European continent, Germany and Russia were powerful nations (Keegan). Therefore, they had alliances and collaborated with many nations on this continent. Therefore, the nations had other states within the European continent together with Asian countries that supported these two powers. In 1914, Germany was noted to be on the decline in comparison with Russia which also had allies and had formed alliances. In response to the threat that Russia posed to Germany, the political powers in the nation decided to fight back by seeking to expand their territory by being in control a big region and, thus amassing more resources to replenish its economy and military power. Evidently, Germany was facing problems of revenues. The nation was not in the position to raise enough revenue to cater for its military spending (Findley, Michael, 911). On the contrary, Russia was noted to be on the rise when it came to military spending and expansion. The budget for military replenishing and expansion was becoming big, and Russia faced no challenges meeting these demands. In response to the situation, the threatened Germany nation decided to fight back to prevent Russia from surpassing it from becoming powerful. The projection of the Germans on the state of military and economic growth of Russia was that The Russians would become powerful in the few years that followed (Keegan). In this way, the only way Germany would prevent Russia from becoming stronger than her regarding economy and military power was to initiate war. The initiation of war against Russia by Germany would, later on, trigger a sequence of countries going to war on the European continent. As noted in the theory of war, a threat to a nation also pushes the allied countries to the two opposing powers to offer support to their respective side (Lindemann and Erik, 227). Presumably, Russia had formed alliances with some allied nations in Europe and the attack from Germany prompted the allied nations to offer support especially military to Russia. Mutual Defense Alliances Mutual Defense Alliances were possibly one of the main causes of World War I. Mutual Defense Alliance is a form economic, political or military agreement between two or more nations. The country in a mutual alliance signs an agreement to support each other in times of political, economic and military crises. In the case of war, the allied countries were to support each other with military weapons, finances and also declare war on the side attacking their ally nation. In the 19th and 20th centuries, alliances were common aspect among the European nations and other continents. By 1914, The Great Nation of Europe had formed two opposing alliances that would all enter into a war in case of a conflict between any of the two opposing allies (Findley, 919). Europe as a common ground for territorial, ethical and political problems and Europe engaged in open warfare several times with France. In 14th and 19th century, Germans and French had troubled relations while France and Russia were also suffering their differences. Alliances in Europe provided protection for weaker states that could have been attacked by the stronger ones. World War I started in July 1914 and ended in November 1918 lasting for four years (Keegan). Over seventeen million people were killed and over hundred thousand American troops destroyed. World war one started as a result of conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia. Serbia had entered into a treaty with Russia, and so Russia joined to fight Serbia. Germany, an ally nation of Austria-Hungary, joined in and declared war on Russia. France was pulled into the war to fight Germans and Austria-Hungary. Germans strategized their war plans through the schifflen plan where they attacked France from Belgium hence pulling Britain to war. Japan, an ally country of Britain, joined in and later the United States and Italy joined their allies and World War I came into being. Militarism As the world entered the 20th century, most of the European Nations rushed in to acquire more military power (Keegan). Strong militarism in a nation provides security and also helps in solving the problems of other nations. Militarism is the source of pride to any nation and before the outbreak of World War I, all European Nations were in quest of military strength. By 1914, when the First World War was breaking up, Germans had the strongest military buildup. A naval race between German and Britain arose with two building up large navies before the war. Germans were involved in the construction of new submarines and battleships. The Britain were threatened by Germans establishment and decided to build up her navy to maintain her dominance of the sea. The Royal Navy set up by Britain was the strongest in 1900, and it was used to protect the Britain shipping and all of it vast location (Keegan). Britain fear the loss of dominance; they were in a rush to build up eight new battleships. The Russians also raced in to build up militia powers, and militarism started to affect public policies. The increase in militarism pushed the countries that were involved in joining the war. Apparently, the attack on Russia would result in the launch of an offensive against Germany from France. Therefore, Germany prepared as well to attack the Allied nations to destabilise the support Russia would get (Keegan). As leverage, Germany offered France a deal so that they would stop from launching attacks on Russia, but France declined, and thus war erupted between France and Germany as well as Russia and Germany. In the theory of war, if nation X supports Z and state X is at war with nation B, it would be presumed that nation B is a potential threat to nation Z (Mearsheimer and Stephen, 449). The France, Germany and Russia-Germany conflict were based on this principle. Germany was using France as leverage by offering them a deal and their decline to honour the demand would mean that France was a threat to Germany's were against Russia. Therefore, while Russia was taking time mobilising its military and ammunition, Germany decided to eliminate France from the equation by fighting against them almost immediately. Many factors usually define the economy of a country. One of the major factors is international relations. Treaties, trading partnerships, as well as investment opportunities, are some of the benefits that countries that have stable relationships around the world engage in. The economy of these individual nations greatly depends on these aspects. The theory of war is intertwined between the struggle to sustain the economy of the individual nations and the shift in power of powerful nations as noted in the First World War. When Germany declared war on Russia and attacked France, it was evident that the Britain would intervene because its economy was dependent on trading opportunities created by France. Therefore, the economy of the whole European continent was threatened when Germany declared war on Russia and France. When it came to the realization that Britain would be affected, it had to get involved. Primarily, this is the manner in which war broke up in the Europe affecting different countries worldwide such as the United States who came in to give support to their allied European nations. Works Cited Findley, Michael G. "Bargaining and the interdependent stages of civil war resolution." Journal of Conflict Resolution 57.5 (2013): 905-932. Keegan, John. The First World War. Random House, 2014. Lindemann, Thomas, and Erik Ringmar. International politics of recognition. Routledge, 2015. Print. Mearsheimer, John J., and Stephen M. Walt. "Leaving theory behind: Why simplistic hypothesis testing is bad for International Relations." European Journal of International Relations 19.3 (2013): 427-457.