We are not oranges! It is recommended to check the materials in this paragraph using a home test, the questions of which cover all parts of the paragraph and concern others. Artillery - God of War
1. The First World War: a) did not affect the development of countries outside Europe and the USA; b) led to the collapse of the colonial system; c) largely influenced the development of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
2. Find the incorrect statement: a) the peoples of Asia and Africa took part in hostilities; b) the peoples of Latin America took an active part in the hostilities; c) residents of dependent countries provided for the needs of the armies of their metropolises.
3. During the First World War, colonial regimes: a) remained unchanged; b) sharply intensified; c) temporarily weakened.
4. The mandate system created at the Paris Conference actually proclaimed: a) the destruction of colonial oppression; b) equal rights of former colonies in resolving issues of world politics; c) maintaining the dependence of Asian and African countries on developed countries.
5. In the 20-30s. the struggle for the independence of the countries of Asia and Africa was carried out: a) by armed means; b) peacefully; c) in both forms.
6. The influential force helping the countries of Asia and Africa in the struggle for independence was: a) the USA (the goal is to increase influence in the world); b) League of Nations (the goal is the struggle for lasting peace); c) Soviet Russia (the goal is to unleash a “world revolution”).
7. Crisis of 1929-1933 and the Great Depression: a) intensified the struggle for independence in Asian and African countries; b) made the countries of Asia and Africa more submissive to their metropolises; c) contributed to the establishment of a political union between the colonies and the metropolises.
9. The slogan “Asia for Asians,” put forward by Japan, in fact meant: a) the creation of a military alliance of all Asian countries; b) termination of all economic and diplomatic contacts with European countries; c) the development of Asian peoples under Japanese control.
10. In the 30s. Japan's foreign policy was aimed at: a) territorial conquests and increasing influence in the world; b) to develop diplomatic relations with leading European powers and the United States; c) to strict self-isolation from the outside world.
11. By the end of the 30s. Japan planned a struggle for dominance in the area: a) the Balkan Peninsula; b) the Pacific Ocean; c) Africa.
12. The Communist Party of China was created: a) in 1921; b) in 1925; c) in 1929
13. The leader of the Communist Party of China became: a) Sun Yat-sen; b) Mao Zedong; c) Chiang Kai-shek.
14. In domestic policy, Chiang Kai-shek’s government pursued: a) strict government regulation; b) Europeanization of culture and life; c) broad development of democracy.
15. In the 20-30s. India: a) became an independent state; b) became a colony of the United States; c) remained a colony of Great Britain.
16. The basis of the teachings of Gandhism in India was: a) the inclusion of India into Great Britain on the basis of equality; b) achieving Indian independence through non-violent resistance to the colonial British administration; c) achieving Indian independence through an armed uprising against the British administration.
17. The main force of the national liberation struggle in India was: a) The Communist Union of India; b) Social Democratic Party; c) Indian National Congress.
18. The policy of nonviolent protest did not include: a) boycott of British goods; b) tax evasion; c) emigration to Europe.
19. A new constitution was adopted in Turkey: a) in 1920; b) in 1924; c) in 1928
20. In the 20-30s. in Turkey there was: a) the formation of a secular state; b) development of religious authority; c) strengthening the monarchy.
21. The main ideological principles of Kemal do not include: a) nationalism and nationality; b) religious fanaticism and traditionalism; c) republicanism and revolutionism.
22. One of the unresolved issues of domestic politics in Turkey remained: a) the question of the form of power; b) environmental issue; c) the national question.
23. Features of the political development of Latin American countries in the 20-30s. were: a) the development of authoritarian and military regimes; b) development of democratic regimes; c) development of all types of regimes.
24. The population of African countries in the 20-30s: a) continued to remain dependent and powerless; b) won for itself basic democratic rights; c) won the right to create trade unions.
First World War
On August 1, 1914, Russia entered the First World War on the side of the Entente. Without touching on all the events during the war, let us dwell on the impact it had on the overall development of the situation. In the traditional interpretation of Soviet historiography, the war was seen as a “mighty accelerator” of the revolution. Today, due to the fact that many authors tend to view both the revolution and the cataclysms it caused as a tragedy and catastrophe, there is a tendency to “whitewash” this war, to present it in an ennobled romantic-tragic aura. If earlier they wrote about the world imperialist carnage, now more often - about the just nature of the war on Russia’s part, about the vile role of the Bolshevik defeatists, about wonderful people who clearly showed themselves on the battlefields, etc. Such authors are right about one thing: for Soviet historians The First World War was “alien,” “imperialist,” and because of this, its objective history was not written. Speaking about the significance of the war for the fate of Russia, it is necessary first of all to recognize several immutable facts. The war was not going well for our country. The year 1915 was especially difficult, when the Russian army was forced to leave Poland and Lithuania and was forced out of Austrian Galicia. Military defeats had a depressing effect on public opinion, strengthened the critical attitude towards the ruling regime, and contributed to the decline of its authority. The war required enormous strain on Russia's material and human resources. Three-quarters of industrial enterprises by 1917 worked for the needs of the war; 16 million people, mostly peasants, were mobilized into the army during the war years and were cut off from their main occupations. The war significantly worsened the lives of various segments of the population, especially the middle and lower classes, due to a reduction in production in civilian sectors and the militarization of the economy. The war for Russia was associated with great casualties and human losses: about 2 million killed, millions of wounded, maimed, and prisoners. For many families, this meant the loss of a breadwinner, worsening poverty and disaster. The huge number of people put under arms could not but lead to an increase in the role of the army in the life of society, and much depended on its position in the turn of political passions. No matter what they say today about this war, in many ways its goals and objectives remained unclear and did not reach the heart of every soldier, which Bolshevik propaganda skillfully exploited. Why, they say, does the peasant need Constantinople, the Bosporus and Dardanelles, which were promised to Russia in case of victory. A long stay in the trenches, blood, dirt, deprivation caused embitterment and brutality, a decline in morality, moral principles, traumatized people and left a deep mark on society. The value of an individual human life was rapidly falling. Social instability constantly increased, social confrontation intensified. Many people were torn out of their usual nests and were, as it were, in limbo due to continuous mobilizations, movements, evacuations, etc. The number of lumpen elements increased. The population became increasingly susceptible to the influence of various rumors, panic, and impulsive unpredictable actions. In the First World War 1914 - 1918. 38 states participated. The war brought untold disasters to the peoples of the world: 10 million people were killed, 20 million were wounded. The economies of many countries were undermined. The war showed the inability of the ruling elite to cope with the misfortunes that befell the country. We can list other phenomena related to the influence of the war on the situation in the country. But from what has already been said, it is obvious that the war exposed and aggravated the contradictions inherent in Russia to the limit, and its state mechanism could not stand it.
It is unlikely that there is another war in the documented history of mankind that has changed the consciousness of people as much as the Great First World War. But the point is not only the severe moral trauma inflicted on the entire Western civilization by four years of mass senseless suicide. The First World War irrevocably changed the war itself. Some of the cardinal innovations from 1914–1918, after which the war never became the same, are in our selection.
Positional deadlock
The First World War was a “trench” war. Europe was dug up in several rows with trenches from top to bottom, bloody battles were sometimes fought over sections of positions hundreds and even tens of meters deep. The maneuver warfare gave way to exhausting frontal attacks and multi-day artillery shelling of positions.
The death of tens of thousands of people on barbed wire and under machine-gun fire sometimes resulted in a shift of the front line by a couple of hundred meters in one direction or another.
A strategic breakthrough of the front was impossible - the preparation and development of the offensive was too slow, and they managed to stop it with reserves transferred from other sectors. It was a deadlock that they tried to solve, either by starving Germany out or by organizing massacres as part of the “strategy of crushing.” From 1914 to 1918, the Western Front, glorified by Remarque, stagnate, until the states that created it collapsed during the revolutions in Austria and Germany.
Mass mobilization
The First World War affected many. Men went to the front, women stood at the machines in the rear.
This mass, having experienced conditions previously unprecedented, became significantly politicized.
The result was revolutions in Europe and severe political crises in many states, the emergence of totalitarian regimes and military-fascist dictatorships. The Second World War was born in this cradle, already poisoned by mass propaganda.
Artillery - God of War
In both world wars, up to 80% of all casualties among personnel were caused by artillery shelling.
In World War I, days of exhausting bombardment of positions preceded every major offensive.
This rarely yielded results, because in a few days the attacked man managed to drag reserves to the site and stop the future offensive. But people were grinding properly.
Machine gun - a symbol of the First World War
This weapon, which appeared at the very end of the 19th century, was called either “barbaric” or too expensive a toy (they say, you can go broke on just ammunition thrown into the air). The First World War quickly put everything in its place: the machine gun became almost the key weapon of the infantry, its advantages could not be overestimated.
Rising to the attack “against the wind” of working machine guns was not an activity for the faint of heart.
Toxic substances
Or simply “gases,” as they said in those days. In 1915, when the front became solid, and the first attempts to break through it with frontal attacks led to terrible losses, the Germans used a cloud of chlorine near the Belgian city of Ypres, released from cylinders downwind towards the enemy trenches. Subsequently, the production of artillery shells with toxic substances began; this, in particular, turned out to be a fairly effective means of suppressing enemy artillery. However, “gases” were not only an inhumane weapon (Europe’s fear of them prevented the massive use of accumulated combat chemicals in World War II), but also did not allow solving the problems of developing a front breakthrough, that is, lifting the curse of the “positional impasse.”
The vile weapon could do everything except what it was created for.
Tanks
Breaking through equipped positions became increasingly difficult. To accompany the infantry in 1917, the British used a technical innovation - tanks. Huge armored hulls on caterpillar tracks (to overcome the destroyed breakthrough zone and trenches), equipped first with machine guns and then with cannons, were initially considered as a means to overcome the “positional impasse.” After the war, the concept of mobile tank formations appeared, entering into a gap in the front and disrupting communications in enemy rear areas faster than the enemy could bring in reserves - something that we could then observe en masse on the battlefield of the Second World War, in the German, and then in the Soviet performance.
Mobile mechanized formations made it possible to at least partially escape the dull hopelessness of sitting in trenches and frontal attacks on barbed wire without any result other than piles of corpses.
However, World War II provided humanity with new horrors.
And in general the mechanization of the army
The first use of vehicles in the “Great War” happened as an improvisation - Parisian taxis were used in 1914 to quickly transport French infantry to the battlefield on the Marne. All the armies of the world emerged from the war with a clear conviction of the need to create powerful and numerous vehicle fleets.
Combat aviation
Strictly speaking, the first combat use of aviation happened, although not long ago, even before the First World War.
However, it was during the “Great War” that combat aviation developed rapidly and gradually took a vital place on the battlefield.
It got to the point that in the interwar period the possibility of a “non-contact” war from the air through massive strategic bombing of enemy industrial centers and cities was seriously discussed - the so-called “Douay Doctrine”. These ideas were partially used in World War II; their results were the destruction of a number of cities - Rotterdam, Coventry, Dresden, Tokyo, as well as Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
“All over Europe the lights are going out,
our generation will not see
how they will light up again"
Edward Gray, Foreign Secretary
British Affairs (1905-1916)
The First World War, in its consequences, had a colossal impact on the development of Europe and the whole world. Events of 1914-1918 not only left an indelible mark on the hearts and minds of their contemporaries, but also changed man’s idea of war and peace, life and death, enemy and ally. The collapse of four empires (Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman), the formation of nine new states in Europe, a huge number of killed and wounded soldiers, officers, civilians and an even greater number of maimed and shell-shocked under continuous shelling - this is an incomplete list of what The suicidal massacre of the early twentieth century was left to future generations.
The war had the most painful impact on the people directly involved in the battles. During the long period of sitting in the trenches under incessant enemy shelling, during those minutes spent in deadly attacks and counterattacks, Europe lost an entire generation of its young people, which received the name “lost” in literature. Such a diagnosis could have been made throughout Europe at that time. People who returned from the war were unable to adapt to a new peaceful life. This is due not only to fear of what they managed to see and experience at the front, but also to the socio-economic and political upheavals that took place in European countries by the end of 1918 and the beginning of 1919. German soldiers, for example, went to war as subjects of the German Empire, and returned to a country gripped by revolutionary sentiments, mired in mass unemployment and inflation.
Fire kills people. War destroys entire empires
The First World War claimed the lives of more than 10 million soldiers and officers, about 12 million civilians, about 55 million were wounded, destroyed four empires (Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman), and redrew the political map of Europe beyond recognition. It brought the world new types of weapons (tanks, gas), a new nature of war (trench, positional), new battles, striking in their cruelty (Verdun, Ypres, Galicia). The First World War took away a huge number of young people from Europe, and brought back a crippled and embittered “lost generation”.
The First World War had a special character of warfare that distinguished it from other wars. First and foremost, it was trench warfare. The soldiers, along with their equipment, burrowed into the ground as much as possible, showing that they prioritize defense over attack. Secondly, the tanks first used by the British in the Battle of the Somme River in 1916 also had a defensive nature. Thirdly, the monotonous method of conducting combat operations. The classic attack of the First World War looked like this: a preliminary 2-hour artillery preparation, after which an infantry attack began, accompanied by large numbers of dead and wounded soldiers, faced with fierce enemy defenses. Then the attack was followed by a counterattack. It often happened that during a months-long offensive, the attacking side managed, by straining a huge amount of strength, to break through the enemy’s defenses and move forward only a few tens of kilometers. Fourthly, the use of prohibited types of weapons, primarily the chemical warfare gas chlorine, used by the German army near the town of Ypres in 1915, will forever remain one of the most shameful pages in the history of mankind.
During the First World War, the world witnessed bloody and brutal battles the likes of which it had never seen before. Verdun “meat grinder”, Brusilovsky breakthrough, battle on the river. The Somme, in which hundreds of thousands of soldiers and officers died, showed everyone the very essence of a suicidal war.
The collapse of four empires, the formation of new states, the international isolation of Russia, the humiliation of Germany, which was given full responsibility for starting the war, became the foundations of a new world order, formed on the basis of what was signed at Versailles on June 28, 1919. The new system of international relations had the following characteristics:
1. The scale of the international system has increased. If previously it was limited mainly to Europe, now, with the entry of new non-European actors (USA, Japan) into the international arena, it has acquired a global character.
2. The principle of collective security was to replace the principle of “balance of power”.
3. The formed League of Nations was to become an instrument for maintaining peace, order and stability.
4. The new system of international relations could not provide a solution to the problems assigned to it, due to the presence of contradictions in it, expressed in the reluctance of the USA, France and Great Britain to give Russia and Germany a worthy place in the new world order. Instead, the former found itself in international isolation, and the latter humiliated and crushed under the pressure of reparations.
“Indecent world”: how the Great War was forgotten
The Great October Revolution and the coming to power of the Bolsheviks radically changed Russia's foreign policy, subordinating it to communist ideology. Having given the First World War the status of an imperialist war, they threw all their efforts into finding a speedy exit from hostilities.
Taking into account the fatigue of the army and society from the war, cases of desertion and fraternization at the front, as well as simply the reluctance of soldiers to go on the attack, the Bolshevik government decided to conclude a separate peace treaty with Germany and withdraw the country from the war.
The agreement concluded in March 1918 in Brest, depriving Russia of a territory of a total of 780 thousand square meters. km, with a population of 56 million people, V.I. himself. Lenin described it as “obscene.” He wrote: “The peace is obscene, but if war breaks out, our government will be swept away and peace will be made by another government.” Of course, the separate agreement had a tactical significance for the Bolsheviks; they needed to preserve their forces for the decisive blow. But, nevertheless, the “obscene peace” had a colossal impact on the former Entente allies, who considered it a betrayal. Because of this, instead of Constantinople and victory, Russia received defeat, civil war and international isolation. Churchill wrote: “Fate has never been as cruel to any country as to Russia... Holding victory already in its hands, it fell to the ground, alive, like Herod of old, devoured by worms.”
Thanks to the Soviet government, the very memory of the First World War, of its soldiers who fearlessly fought for their homeland, was erased, all military graves of Russian soldiers and officers were destroyed. The Great War remained “forgotten” for a long time, but the worst thing is that the memory of the participants in this war and their exploits was destroyed. This decision to “forget” was one of the most shameful pages of our history.
Europe's difficult years
After the end of the First World War and the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, many politicians and journalists believed that peace on the planet was now established for eternity. This was a misconception. The Versailles-Washington system of international relations, initially unfair, turned out to be unable to save humanity from the horrors of war. After a suicidal massacre that lasted 4 years, Europe's suffering was not over.
In 1918-1919 The Spanish flu epidemic, or “Spanish flu,” hit the entire world, killing 90 million people. Those who could not be killed by the fire of a brutal war were killed by a deadly disease, which can rightfully be called the plague of the twentieth century.
Crushed and humiliated Germany, which, by the decision of the United States, Great Britain and France, lost its place in the rank of great powers and turned out to be the only country that bore moral responsibility for starting the war, will still make itself felt. The national feelings of the Germans were so hurt that sooner or later forces would have been found that would have touched the sore points of German society and given the country a policy aimed at revising the “fetters of Versailles.”
Isolated Russia, now acting under the name of the USSR, long considered an outsider in Europe, over which hung the “ghost” of communism, lost vast territory under the Brest-Litovsk Treaty and also considered its place in the new world order to be unfair. Moreover, Western politicians saw the Soviet regime as a danger in the form of a “red flood” that could flood the Old World. As it will become clear later, in London and Paris they will make a monstrous mistake, deciding that fascism and Nazism are less dangerous for Europe than communism.
In Italy, which did not receive the areas of Istria, Dalmatia and the city of Rijeka that were promised to it as a result of the Treaty of Versailles, this country gave rise to the myth of a “curtailed victory,” which was painfully perceived in Italian society. This was also perceived as a national humiliation and prepared the way for the rise to power of fascist forces led by B. Mussolini in 1922.
Problems also affected the socio-political atmosphere in Germany. The growth of instability, unemployment, and crime in a country engulfed in revolution aggravated the formation of social inequality in this country. Thus, a fertile environment was created for the formation of radical parties, which, playing on the feelings of the Germans, rushed to power.
The climax came in 1929 with the onset of the economic crisis and the onset of the Great Depression. This led to massive unemployment, rising inflation and a decline in economic growth. In the wake of these events, forces led by A. Hitler came to power in Germany, openly calling for a revision of the articles of the Treaty of Versailles and seeking to pursue a policy based on the notorious theory of racial superiority. Skillfully playing on the national feelings of the German people and intimidating France and Great Britain with the “Red threat”, from which only Germany can protect Europe, Hitler managed in a short time, unilaterally, to throw off the “fetters of Versailles”, recreate the army and air force and begin to carry out territorial conquests . All this will plunge the Old World and the whole world into a new, even more destructive and cruel, World War II.
Lost Generation
What happened to the people who experienced all the hardships and torments of the First World War? How did sitting in the trenches and going on attacks for four years change their view of life and death? What did the soldiers face at the front? How did the war affect their psyche and what influence did it have on the formation of their post-war worldview?
After the First World War, much of Europe and the world were diagnosed as a “lost generation”, or, as they said in Britain, a generation of “angry young men”. It is believed that the term itself was introduced by the American writer Gertrude Stein in the post-war period. But it is most fully developed and presented in the works of E.M. Remarque and E. Hemingway.
Young men and women at the age of 18 went straight from school to the front, not knowing what awaited them there. Initially, it seemed that the war would not last long, and they, as victors, covered in glory, would return to their hometowns, villages, and families. Going to military registration and enlistment offices as volunteers and then going to war were accepted in European countries as a short and exciting adventure. No one knew then that most of them would take part in the bloodiest and cruelest battles in history, which the world had never seen, some would experience terrible torment from gas attacks, some would die under shelling in the trenches, and some would forever remain disabled. Many will understand that everything they were taught at school, telling stories about great battles, about valiant heroes, about love for their homeland, is in no way reflected in reality. The idea of war as a knightly tournament in the brightest colors of the Middle Ages, after the first battle, will be replaced by a dirty soldier's overcoat and the eternal fear that every day could be the last. In the novel by E.M. In the remark “All Quiet on the Western Front,” one of the characters, recalling his school days, notes quite interestingly: “... no one taught us at school how to light a cigarette in the rain and wind or how to light a fire from damp wood, no one explained, that it is best to strike with a bayonet in the stomach, and not in the ribs, because the bayonet does not get stuck in the stomach.” This phrase perfectly shows how war changes people, how it takes away their sense of beauty, forcing them to pay attention only to what is immediately necessary for them in order to survive, forgetting everything unnecessary that could interfere with this. Maybe those who came to war did not understand what family and love were, but they clearly knew that “a blow with a bayonet should be aimed at the stomach, and not at the heart.”
In novels dedicated to the First World War, special attention is paid to how ordinary soldiers themselves reflect on the causes of military conflicts. Moreover, the search for an answer to this question is accompanied by a lack of understanding of how one people, experiencing incredible suffering from pain and fear, from the loss of friends and relatives, pushes another people onto the same path. This is clearly traced in another of Remarque’s novels, “The Return,” where one can find the following: “Perhaps it is only because wars arise again and again that one can never fully feel how the other suffers.”
Another explanation for the emergence of wars can be found in the novel by the famous writer, Nobel Prize winner in literature, E. Hemingway, “A Farewell to Arms!”, one of the characters of which says: “The country is ruled by a class that is stupid and does not understand anything and will never understand. That's why we fight." This shows the desire to place responsibility for the war on the ruling classes, who profess their selfish interests and for their sake drag people into a suicidal massacre. In this case, the lack of hatred towards the soldiers of enemy armies is very significant. Understanding full well that the French and Russians, just like the Germans, were fighting for their homeland, the participants in the First World War saw each other not as irreconcilable enemies, but as equally war-weary people.
At the same time, reading the literature of writers of the lost generation, you come across pages that describe all the hardships and torments experienced by the soldiers. Fear for one's life sometimes exceeds fear for the death of one's Fatherland. Sometimes no one even understood why the war was going on. For some straits or territories in the Middle East. In battle, soldiers, first of all, thought about how not to die themselves and how to help their comrades avoid this fate. The war was no longer about glorious conquests, but about one’s own survival.
The fear of war did not leave the soldiers even after they returned home. Those who managed to survive the deadly fire and recover from their wounds could not forget the feelings they had to endure. Many did not feel alive even after the war, knowing full well that even a peaceful life, to which it was so difficult for them to adapt, would not be able to return them to normal. E. Hemingway in the novel “A Farewell to Arms!” wrote: “What a joy it is not to be wounded if at the same time you die of fear.”
There was also pronounced war fatigue in Russian society. This was especially clearly observed in the military environment. Russian soldiers, frankly speaking, are tired of sitting in the trenches and endless attacks in which they risked their lives. Many were maimed, killed and wounded - this is what the war left to a society that, like in the West, had to endure the syndrome of a lost generation. The soldiers' songs reflect despair and resentment at their fate. For example, lines from the song “Galician Fields”:
The Russian brigade took
Galician fields,
And I got it as a reward
Two maple crutches.
Let us not forget the role of women during the First World War. Of course, the main burdens were borne by men in military uniform. It was they who came under gas attacks, they were torn to pieces under artillery fire, they went on attacks on the river. Somme and near Verdun. But women also paid a high price in this war. Many lost husbands, brothers, fathers, sons on the battlefields. A large number of women worked in hospitals, where sometimes complex operations on wounded soldiers had to be performed under heavy fire. But the most important thing is the contribution that women made while working on the home front. First of all, in chemical industry factories, putting their lives and health at risk, sometimes forgetting about sleep and rest. Many of the women suffered permanent burns to their hands and faces from manufacturing chemicals, and most lost the opportunity to have children forever.
As we see, the Great War affected everyone. A heavy burden fell on the shoulders of both men and women. Most were never able to adapt to peaceful life. Many were left crippled. Some committed suicide or went crazy. There were even cases when a person returning from war fell into hysterics at the mere sight of a military uniform. The First World War, unfortunately, turned out to be stronger than people. As E.M., who has already been mentioned more than once, wrote. Remarque: “Thousands and thousands of those who returned will still regret that they did not lie down with the dead.”
Sergey Ignatiev, master's student at the Faculty of World Economy and International Politics, National Research University Higher School of Economics
The First World War, which in Europe is called the Great War, determined the fate of humanity for more than a century. In his new book, based on numerous testimonies of participants in those dramatic events and only recently made public archival documents, L. Mlechin in a fascinating and exciting manner describes not only the reasons that gave rise to the bloody war, but also, most importantly, its consequences.
If it were not for the First World War, the Russian Empire would not have collapsed, there would have been no revolution. In Germany, Hitler would not have come to power and would not have unleashed the Second World War. The First World War pushed the old European countries to the periphery. Bolshevik Russia, which considered the entire world around it to be hostile, and the United States, which became a world superpower, came to the forefront. France and England, fearing a new war, preferred a policy of neutrality. The Balkans are still torn apart by the hatred of fraternal peoples. The conventionally drawn borders in the Middle East still give rise to endless conflicts. The consequences of the First World War largely determined the fate of even Asian and African states far from Europe...
Leonid Mlechin
The Great War is not over. Results of the First World War
Different memory
Instead of a preface
After the death of the last participants in the First World War, it finally passed from human memory into history. But it didn’t sink into oblivion. Its consequences are not only scars on the political map of the world. The war did not resolve any of the contradictions that tore Europe apart at that time; worse, it only aggravated them, and even sowed the seeds of new conflicts that rage to this day.
Europe was no longer able to return to the prosperous state in which it was at the beginning of the century. When the First World War broke out, the continent began to slide from the heights of political, military, economic and cultural leadership. The lowest, truly tragic point was the rise to power of the Nazis.
Thirty countries participated in the First World War, which lasted from the summer of 1914 to the autumn of 1918. 65 million people donned military uniforms. Every sixth died. Millions returned home injured or disabled. And millions died in the rear from hunger and disease.
The First World War was a bloodbath, although half a century earlier in China, during the Taiping Rebellion, between 20 and 30 million people were killed! But China is far away. Western Europeans suffered the greatest losses in their entire history in the First World War, and that is why this particular war is called the “great”. Twice as many British, three times as many Belgians and four times as many French died in the First World War than in the Second World War.
“When I see the list of losses,” said then British Prime Minister David Lloyd George sadly, “I think: why did we need to win all these victories?
It is characteristic that even today Europe does not have a single memory of the great war.
France has not forgotten the victims. Memories of the First World War are a vital element of modern national identity. Then eight million people were called to arms. Almost one and a half million died. These are heroes revered in the country.
For the French, victory in the First World War is as glorious a page as the great revolution of 1789. For politicians, every anniversary of the war is a welcome opportunity to call on their compatriots to national unity, courage and willingness to make sacrifices in the name of their homeland. France is afraid of falling behind in the competitive struggle going on in a globalized economy, and is looking for internal support in the memory of the great war. The image of a heroic soldier helps France, which is experiencing a crisis of national identity. This memory unites left and right, pacifists and hawks, European idealists and nationalists.
Unlike the USA, Canada, Britain and France, where the last veterans of the First World War were lavishly buried, they were not noticed in Germany. The First World War faded from German collective memory, supplanted by the Second World War and the Holocaust.
As for our country... More than two million soldiers of the Russian army died on the battlefield, died from wounds and went missing. But the Bolsheviks once called the war “imperialist” and erased it from history.
Generally speaking, throughout Europe, most families had someone involved in the First World War. They wrote letters from the front - now an invaluable historical source. To some extent, this was the most “literary” war. After the First World War, serious changes took place in cultural life, philosophy, sociology, starting with the understanding of the psychology of war.
But the Russian educated class died or left the country. Russian philosophy, literature and art did not even have time to comprehend this war, as happened in Western Europe and North America.
Henri Barbusse's anti-war novel "Fire" was published at the height of hostilities. Ernest Hemingway, who served as a driver on the Italian front and was wounded, John Dos Passos, Scott Fitzgerald, Thomas Eliot are those whom Gertrude Stein called the “lost generation.” They were victims of the First World War - regardless of whether they themselves participated in it. They also captured her unique spiritual experience. Joseph Roth wrote the novel "Radetzky's March" in Austria. Jaroslav Hasek in Czechoslovakia - "The Adventures of the Good Soldier Schweik." This literature will then become a discovery for the Russian reader. There was almost no one of our own: the First World War was supplanted by the revolution and the Civil War. For us, the First World War seemed to never exist.
For a hundred years, historians have not come to a common conclusion as to who is guilty of starting the war. Some denounce the Kaiser's Germany. Others talk about a fatal system of rivalry, alliances and unions, when some empires were declining, like Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, while others were rapidly gaining strength - Russia and Germany, which in itself led to confrontation. In 1914, the rulers overestimated the importance of military strength and incredibly underestimated economic power.
The war lasted four and a half years. It spread throughout Europe, captured the Middle East, Asia and even Africa. And it fundamentally changed the modern world. She overthrew kaisers, kings, tsars and sultans, destroyed entire empires. Chemical weapons, tanks and military aircraft appeared.
Central European states, formed on the ruins of empires that did not survive the war, gained independence. New countries have emerged in the Middle East - with borders not recognized by their neighbors.
The Great War was a disaster for Russia. If it had not been for the First World War, the revolution and the Civil War had not happened, our country would have developed evolutionarily and millions of people would not have died in the name of building communism. In general, human history would have taken a different path.
Of course, Friedrich Nietzsche predicted that the 20th century would be a century of great wars, fought in the name of philosophical doctrines. But without the First World War, total ideologies would not have played such a role, dictatorships would not have arisen.
The First World War was an unnecessary and senseless massacre. This was the self-destruction of Europe, which led to the death of a large part of European youth. The war ended Europe's self-reliance. The First World War gave rise to mass disillusionment that determined the mood of Western society for decades. The Great War destroyed the very idea of progress.
According to some historians, the consequences of the First World War were so catastrophic because Germany was defeated. If not the Entente, but Kaiser Wilhelm II had won the war, Adolf Hitler would not have become chancellor, World War II would not have begun... And what would have happened to France and England if they had lost? They would lose their colonies. Not such a big deal.
The war determined the fate of humanity for more than a century. The old European powers faded into the background. Two countries emerged: Bolshevik Russia, which considered the entire world around it hostile, and the United States, which became a world superpower. France and England, fearing a new war, adopted a policy of appeasing the aggressors: let them do what they want, as long as they don’t bother us. The Balkans are still torn apart by the hatred of fraternal peoples. The conventionally drawn borders in the Middle East still give rise to endless conflicts.
The demons that gave birth to the First World War have not disappeared.
