StarDestroyer.Net BBS

As I was reading the Gavrilo Princip thread I was thinking of the question: Were there any political figures or commentators prewar who successfully predicted that the system of alliances would spiral out of control as it did?

As far as I know there were plenty of people who thought that war was coming, but no one predicted it woudl arise because of what Princip did, or that it would be as devastating (see the whole "you'll be home before the leaves have fallen from the trees" line from the Kaiser).

Ironically, Bismarck did predict that the balkans would become a huge disaster area, which is why he did everything possible to keep Germany out of it (his famous outburst "the whole of the balkans are not worth the bones of a single Pommerian grenadier"). Firing him was probably the worst decision Wilhelm II ever did (aside from cancelling the alliance with Russia and pissing off the British with the fleet).

Looking into this somewhat, Ivan Bloch and Pyotr Durnovo are two that apparently predicted elements of the great war.

Ivan Bloch, a banker from Warsaw, was more geared towards military issues and thus was correct about the length of said war and that fact that it would likely stalemate. As he was writing in 1899 he was mostly wrong about the political issues and completely failed to predict the system of alliances, though he did predict the social unrest that would ultimately occur for the Russians and Germans. . He was also wrong in that he believed that the level of destruction would make war less likely.

Pyotor Durnovo, a minister to the Tzar, writing in February 1914 was more accurate, predicting the two alliances that would spring up, that Italy would remain neutral and Turkey would join Germany and Austria. He also predicted that the likely result would be rather negative for both Russia and Germany leading to massive social upheaval. His original reason for writing it an attempt to convicen the Tzar to stay out of the war, a goal at which he obviously failed.

At the risk of derailing my own thread, sadly it appears none of the leadership of Europe in 1914 were as accurate as Dick Cheney, speaking in 1994. Perhaps there were merely fortunate to not exist in an era when it was all too easy to be recorded actively contradicting yourself:

Maybe not quite the sense of "predict" that you mean, when Kitchener was made Secretary of State for War at the very start of the war, he was one of the few prominent people to predict that the war would be long and bloody. At the time, most people predicted a very quick war. Kitchener, however, was very vocal about how the war would be longer and bloodier than anyone imagined and the Army wasn't anywhere near prepared to handle modern warfare. Kitchener famously said something to the effect of "This war will drain us to the last million".

Part of that with Kitchener was that he had quite a bit of experience in waging war, notably in the Sudan and the Boer War. He knew what he was getting into.

There was Admiral Jackie Fischer of the RN who predicted there would be a big war following the completion of some canal or another? He was wrong about the year but only because the canal was delayed or something. Half-remembered wiki, take that for what it's worth. lol.

edit:
Here We go.

In 1908, he predicted that war between Britain and Germany would occur in October 1914, which later proved accurate, basing his statement on the projected completion date of the Kiel Canal, which Germany needed to move its warships safely from the Baltic to the North Sea.

Crazedwraith wrote:There was Admiral Jackie Fischer of the RN who predicted there would be a big war following the completion of some canal or another? He was wrong about the year but only because the canal was delayed or something. Half-remembered wiki, take that for what it's worth. lol.

edit:
Here We go.

In 1908, he predicted that war between Britain and Germany would occur in October 1914, which later proved accurate, basing his statement on the projected completion date of the Kiel Canal, which Germany needed to move its warships safely from the Baltic to the North Sea.

Would not this fall more under the realm of 'coincidence' than any actual planning or serious predicting upon anybody's part, though?

Elheru Aran wrote: Would not this fall more under the realm of 'coincidence' than any actual planning or serious predicting upon anybody's part, though?

I may be remembering my pre-World War I British politics wrong, but IIRC Fisher, as a major proponent of naval spending, had a bit of a history of trying to rattle sabers to get the government to give him carte blanche to pursue his various attempts to modernize and improve the Royal Navy (e.g. converting it to burning oil for fuel, among other things). I wouldn't be surprised if he had previously made several similar "predictions" about a looming war.

Ziggy Stardust wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote: Would not this fall more under the realm of 'coincidence' than any actual planning or serious predicting upon anybody's part, though?

I may be remembering my pre-World War I British politics wrong, but IIRC Fisher, as a major proponent of naval spending, had a bit of a history of trying to rattle sabers to get the government to give him carte blanche to pursue his various attempts to modernize and improve the Royal Navy (e.g. converting it to burning oil for fuel, among other things). I wouldn't be surprised if he had previously made several similar "predictions" about a looming war.

To be fair, if you were a high-level career military officer in that era, you probably could see the writing on the wall easily enough. It was the politicians who kept thinking there was nothing going wrong because surely all the treaties would mean nobody would be stupid enough to pick a fight, right? Right?

Not really, some military officers (mainly the British and German naval establishments) showed a remarkable lack of concern and were in some cases even drumming up the jingoism to get funding. (e.g.: Naval Scare).