- Position‹4 of 4
- Everyone shares responsibility
- Argument‹2 of 2
European expansionism led to the outbreak
Imperialistic and nationalistic feelings were widespread as nations scrambled to claim their pieces of unclaimed territories. Due to the scramble for colonies, tensions arose between the European powers, who viewed the amount of land as direct indicators of world power.
The argument
Before the onset of WW1, there was a great scramble for colonies in Africa, resulting in various diplomatic issues between European actors. With the age of imperialism in full swing, most European powers were greatly interested in spreading and imposing their culture and values onto Africa's inhabitants. A specific crisis, known as the First Moroccan Crisis, involving Morocco, France, and Germany, stands out. In this case, Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany declared support for Morocco to maintain their independence amidst France and Britain's attempts to colonize the territory. His declaration also served to dispute the balance of European powers at this time, which was dominated by the Entente Cordiale, France, and Britain. By declaring support for Moroccan independence, the Kaiser also advocated for equal trade opportunity for Germany in Morocco. Although unintended, this action strengthened the relationship between France and Britain, united by distaste in Germany. A second Moroccan crisis arose in 1911 when a German gunboat, the Panther, was dispatched to the territory. This led to a series of negotiations and dialogues between the powers to discuss both the Morocco crisis and compensation to Germany for events occurring in the Congo, another African colony. These conflicts, risen from the imperialistic foreign policy employed at the time by many major powers, resulted in increased tensions, formations of allyships, and ultimately caused World War 1.
Premises
Counter-arguments
Although many world powers of the time were involved in imperialist foreign policy, Germany was one of the aggressors in both imperialism and foreign policy with other European powers. All the other actors can not be held responsible. Germany contributed to the tension more and in different ways compared to the other European powers.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] Imperial rivalry in Africa describes the period rather than causing the war, and the connection is left implicit. The powers repeatedly settled colonial disputes without fighting each other — Fashoda in 1898 and the Anglo-Russian convention of 1907 among them — so competition for colonies plainly did not make a European war inevitable. [Rejecting P2] The Moroccan crises cut against the conclusion drawn from them. As the premise itself records, they were German initiatives whose effect was to push France and Britain together. If the result was to harden the Entente, that is evidence for differential rather than shared responsibility, which is the counter's point. [Rejecting P3] The chain from imperial policy through the alliances to the outbreak passes over the decisions that actually began the war: the assassination at Sarajevo, the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum, the Russian mobilisation, and the German plan that required an attack on France through Belgium. A crisis in the Balkans over the future of Austria-Hungary is not obviously the working-out of a scramble for Africa, and a verdict that everyone shares responsibility needs the specific choices of July 1914 weighed rather than bypassed.