Anglo-French Naval Agreement 1912

I have read a few scenario questions concerning how World War One might have occurred but not include Britain as a beligerant.

It seems obvious to me that in a Franco German war, Britain would join France because she would follow her strategy of not allowing one power to dominate the continent.

This strategic imperative seems to be just swept aside as though Britain needed the excuse of a German violation of Belgian neutrality to declare war.

Something that never gets mentioned is the Anglo-French Naval Agreement of 1912. If Germany attacked France Britain was bound to blockade Germany and to deal with their navy as per the agreement regardless of whether or not the Germans invaded Belgium.
 
This strategic imperative seems to be just swept aside as though Britain needed the excuse of a German violation of Belgian neutrality to declare war.

Needed? No. Preferred? Yes.

It's easier to sell a war back home as the 'Defence of an Innocent Neutral' rather than 'keeping the Germans in their place'.

Something that never gets mentioned is the Anglo-French Naval Agreement of 1912. If Germany attacked France Britain was bound to blockade Germany and to deal with their navy as per the agreement regardless of whether or not the Germans invaded Belgium.

I'm sure had Germany NOT invaded Belgium this old thing would have been dragged up by someone.

Germany by this point had already antagonised the British to breaking point as far as they were concerned. Britain was always going to go to war, it was merely a matter of when and what excuse was available.
 
Britain and WW1

I have read a few scenario questions concerning how World War One might have occurred but not include Britain as a beligerant.

It seems obvious to me that in a Franco German war, Britain would join France because she would follow her strategy of not allowing one power to dominate the continent.

This strategic imperative seems to be just swept aside as though Britain needed the excuse of a German violation of Belgian neutrality to declare war.

Something that never gets mentioned is the Anglo-French Naval Agreement of 1912. If Germany attacked France Britain was bound to blockade Germany and to deal with their navy as per the agreement regardless of whether or not the Germans invaded Belgium.
Important point and largely correct

The snag is Britain was not legally bound to fight with the Franco-Russian alliance and the naval agreement and similar military plans had been either concealed from the public or talked about, even in cabinet, as vague contingency plans rather than commitments. Nor was there unanimity regarding whether Britain should go to war, even given the strategic rationale.

Some British leaders thought Britain was morally bound to join France pretty much because of the naval understanding.. These included the Foreign Secretary, Grey, PM Asquith and Churchill. Possibly others. The Tories also agreed with such a policy, in line with their view of imperial strategy. However, the "war mongers" were in a minority in the cabinet until Germany invaded Belgium. The Liberal Party was also in power only due to support from Labour and Irish Nationalists, the first at least opposed the war IIRC. What would have happened if German strategic plans had been different is a very good question.

Possibly the Liberal Party would have split, as the Pacifists walked out of the cabinet. Asquith would have had to form an alliance with the Tories to get a DOW through. How long this would delay British entry is unclear but the importance is potentially very large. IMHO obviously.
:D
 
Needed? No. Preferred? Yes.

It's easier to sell a war back home as the 'Defence of an Innocent Neutral' rather than 'keeping the Germans in their place'.



I'm sure had Germany NOT invaded Belgium this old thing would have been dragged up by someone.

Germany by this point had already antagonised the British to breaking point as far as they were concerned. Britain was always going to go to war, it was merely a matter of when and what excuse was available.

Agreed - i was just querying threads that assume Britain would have stayed out had Belgium not been invaded.


Britain was always going to go to war, it was merely a matter of when and what excuse was available.

this is the point i was trying to make.
 
Britain & WW1

Agreed - i was just querying threads that assume Britain would have stayed out had Belgium not been invaded.
As you can tell I'm not so sure. Either way. The political balance in Britain wasn't that clear cut in favour of entering the war until the German invasion of Belgium became evident. For many it was just an excuse, for other though it was the reason they agreed to the DOW.

Still, lots of points on both sides and an exhaustive literature and historical analysis to hack into for both sides of the debate!
:D
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Britain will fight whether Germany invades Belgium or not and whether Germany attacks East or West first. Bonar Law and the Tories are quite clear on the matter and the only issue is whether Britain joins under a Liberal government (which she does because of Belgium) or under a coalition of Tories-Liberal Interventionists

Bonar Law and Lord Lansdowne's letter to the cabinet (before the invasion of Belgium)

'It would be fatal to the honour and security of the United Kingdom to hesitate in supporting France and Russia at this juncture and we offer our unconditional support tot the Government in any measures they may consider necessary for this object"

In other words- Britain must stand by France AND Russia- anything else would result in the isolation of Britain and the destruction of her Empire. They are right and there's strong enough sentiment in the liberal party to back it up
 
Britain and WW1

Britain will fight whether Germany invades Belgium or not and whether Germany attacks East or West first. Bonar Law and the Tories are quite clear on the matter and the only issue is whether Britain joins under a Liberal government (which she does because of Belgium) or under a coalition of Tories-Liberal Interventionists

Bonar Law and Lord Lansdowne's letter to the cabinet (before the invasion of Belgium)

'It would be fatal to the honour and security of the United Kingdom to hesitate in supporting France and Russia at this juncture and we offer our unconditional support tot the Government in any measures they may consider necessary for this object"

In other words- Britain must stand by France AND Russia- anything else would result in the isolation of Britain and the destruction of her Empire. They are right and there's strong enough sentiment in the liberal party to back it up
i agree that's what the Tories and Liberal Imperialist factions thought. I'm not convinced they were right. I don't fully agree with Niall Fergusson (Pity of War ) but he makes some good points regarding why joining WW1 need not have been in Britain's interests.

For that matter, the reasons Britain came to appease France and Russia and. thus back then against Germany aren't necessarily convincing, An Anglo-Gernan Alliance might actually have been in Britain's interest instead IMHO. Might.
;)
 

LordKalvert

Banned
i agree that's what the Tories and Liberal Imperialist factions thought. I'm not convinced they were right. I don't fully agree with Niall Fergusson (Pity of War ) but he makes some good points regarding why joining WW1 need not have been in Britain's interests.

For that matter, the reasons Britain came to appease France and Russia and. thus back then against Germany aren't necessarily convincing, An Anglo-Gernan Alliance might actually have been in Britain's interest instead IMHO. Might.
;)

To be honest, I think the British played a bad hand poorly. They were backed into a corner- if they didn't back France and Russia, the Entente was broken and the Russians and the French may well have reconciled to an Austrian advance on Serbia and joining the Germans against the British- the likeliest diplomatic solution

Just as bad for the British is a Russian victory- the only fallback is to form an alliance with France and Italy against the Russians. Its not much and would be hard to form

In any event, the British don't fight for Belgium- they fight for their lives
 
Top