Was WWI inevitable?

War was not inevitable but its likelihood was determined by events and personalities.

If all things remained the same I think it could be averted even as late as July 1914. Somebody in Germany had to insist that the Austrians be told bluntly that Berlin agreed with London that the Serbian response to the Austrian demands were acceptable. Tear up the blank cheque and tell the Emperor that he had no choice but to go to the negotiating table but with the support of Germany, the UK and probably even France, for levering even greater concessions from Serbia. Even Willie thought that Franz Joseph should accept the terms offered so if there had been an influential person at court who could have given him some support and confidence, war could have been averted.

It should have been obvious to everyone that if Austria conditionally accepted the initial Serbian response and had the support of nearly all the European Great Powers for a further round of concessions, then Russia would not push its support for Serbia so far as it had threatened. Further, if Russia could be persuaded that Serbian elements that exposed extremism threatened Pan-Slavism rather than promoted it even Russia could have leant on Serbia to concede more.

Such a stand in Berlin would have emboldened Hungry even more and may possibly have led to them absolutely refusing to support Austrian moves towards war instead of opposing it politically but eventually caving in. Without the support of the other half of the Dual Monarchy, it is difficult to see the Empire being able to wage war when faced with such a large constitutional crisis.

which would result in crisis of 1914 to be seen as difused as crisis of 1905 was. But what about rest of tensions? Anglo-German and Franco-German?
 
Sooner or later one of these crises would end up in a war. They kept arising because new powers wouldn't accept the status quo imposed by the established powers who no longer held the whip hand.
 
Sooner or later one of these crises would end up in a war. They kept arising because new powers wouldn't accept the status quo imposed by the established powers who no longer held the whip hand.

True however if Germany continued the naval race for too much longer it would of faced economic ruin anyways (most analysts believe this would of occured before 1920) If 1914 crisis was actually settled through diplomacy and not warfare and if what the analysts say has any truth to it at all, this could rapidly lead to the deposing of Kaiser Wilhelm II. Without a naval-mad Kaiser threatning Britain's main defense, Anglo-German relations would defenitley improve, thus preventing WW1
 
Without a naval-mad Kaiser threatning Britain's main defense, Anglo-German relations would defenitley improve, thus preventing WW1

The naval race was just the obvious face of their rivalry. The main issue was that England had been the paramount power in Europe (and/or the world) because it had managed to keep any continental power from gaining dominance for a couple of centuries; the old balance of power thing. With Germany unified and rapidly industrializing, Britain's relative decline was inevitable unless Germany could be artificially cut down to size. Any old excuse would do. The German navy or the invasion of Belgium, what mattered was Germany's economic rise.
 
In my opinion, the best ( and maybe only sure way ) of avoiding WWI is with a different treaty of Frankfuhrt.

WWi was written in Frankfuhrt as much and more , than WWII was written at Versailles.
 
Top