What do you think?
Rate this book
The Greater War
حروب الإمبراطوريات
حرب اندلعت بهدف توسع الإمبراطوريات وإذكاء مطامع الدول...خطط باءت بالفشل وصراعات دامية على مستوى إمبراطوريات جبّارة أدت إلى قلب الموازين وانهيارها...
جانب آخر للحرب العالمية الأولى تكشف عنه مجموعة كبيرة من المؤرخين والمحررين، منهم روبرت غيروارث وايريز مانيلا في "حروب الإمبراطوريات". وهو كتاب فريد من نوعه يتناول هذه القضية من منظور مختلف، شاملًا بلدان العالم كافة من دون التركيز على قارة معينة أو تفضيل إمبراطورية على حساب أخرى. فيعرض للمرة الأولى في التاريخ الصراع العالمي بين الإمبراطوريات العظمى في إطار زمني موسّع يتعدى سنوات الحرب العالمية الأولى الأربع التي تركز عليها دراسات الحروب وتُتلى حكاياتها على مسمعنا، بدءًا من الهجوم الإيطالي على الأراضي العثمانية في شمال إفريقيا في العام 1911، أي من نقطة انطلاق الصراع الإمبريالي، وصولًا إلى انهيار الإمبراطوريات جميعها في العام 1923 وتوقيع معاهدة لوزان.
يبدأ الكتاب بعرض القضية العثمانية من وجهة نظر مؤرخ الشرق الأوسط الحديث مصطفى أكساكال متحدثًا عن مختلف الشعوب التي تعايشت في إطار الإمبريالية وعن ترحيل القادة العرب وعمليات الشنق العلني التي بدأت في العام 1915 في سوريا وجبل لبنان، بالإضافة إلى العوامل التي ساهمت في تضعيف شرعية الإمبراطورية العثمانية مخصصًا جزءًا كبيرًا للبلدان العربية. وكذلك يسلط الضوء على أحداث عديدة، منها: استبدال الإمبراطورية البلشفية في روسيا بالإمبراطورية العائلية وضرب ألمانيا الباحثة عن مستعمرات أسوةً بالدول الأخرى وصراع اليابان والصين من جهة وتفاهم فرنسا وبريطانيا على اقتسام المغانم والتراضي من جهة أخرى، وأخيرًا تحوّل المفهوم الإمبراطوري في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية.
كتاب نادرٌ يغوص في تفاصيل حروب الإمبراطوريات التي أدت إلى انهيار النظام الإمبريالي العالمي ناقلًا إلينا أحلام الدول وأوهامها في الهيمنة المتكئة على إرث تاريخي واعتداد وطني يبلغ حد العنجهية.
جانب آخر للحرب العالمية الأولى تكشف عنه مجموعة كبيرة من المؤرخين والمحررين، منهم روبرت غيروارث وايريز مانيلا في "حروب الإمبراطوريات". وهو كتاب فريد من نوعه يتناول هذه القضية من منظور مختلف، شاملًا بلدان العالم كافة من دون التركيز على قارة معينة أو تفضيل إمبراطورية على حساب أخرى. فيعرض للمرة الأولى في التاريخ الصراع العالمي بين الإمبراطوريات العظمى في إطار زمني موسّع يتعدى سنوات الحرب العالمية الأولى الأربع التي تركز عليها دراسات الحروب وتُتلى حكاياتها على مسمعنا، بدءًا من الهجوم الإيطالي على الأراضي العثمانية في شمال إفريقيا في العام 1911، أي من نقطة انطلاق الصراع الإمبريالي، وصولًا إلى انهيار الإمبراطوريات جميعها في العام 1923 وتوقيع معاهدة لوزان.
يبدأ الكتاب بعرض القضية العثمانية من وجهة نظر مؤرخ الشرق الأوسط الحديث مصطفى أكساكال متحدثًا عن مختلف الشعوب التي تعايشت في إطار الإمبريالية وعن ترحيل القادة العرب وعمليات الشنق العلني التي بدأت في العام 1915 في سوريا وجبل لبنان، بالإضافة إلى العوامل التي ساهمت في تضعيف شرعية الإمبراطورية العثمانية مخصصًا جزءًا كبيرًا للبلدان العربية. وكذلك يسلط الضوء على أحداث عديدة، منها: استبدال الإمبراطورية البلشفية في روسيا بالإمبراطورية العائلية وضرب ألمانيا الباحثة عن مستعمرات أسوةً بالدول الأخرى وصراع اليابان والصين من جهة وتفاهم فرنسا وبريطانيا على اقتسام المغانم والتراضي من جهة أخرى، وأخيرًا تحوّل المفهوم الإمبراطوري في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية.
كتاب نادرٌ يغوص في تفاصيل حروب الإمبراطوريات التي أدت إلى انهيار النظام الإمبريالي العالمي ناقلًا إلينا أحلام الدول وأوهامها في الهيمنة المتكئة على إرث تاريخي واعتداد وطني يبلغ حد العنجهية.
492 pages, Paperback
First published June 19, 2014
11 people are currently reading
389 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
May 5, 2018
Εξαιρετικό βιβλίο που εξετάζει με πρωτότυπο τρόπο, εν είδει «μακρού Α΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου» αλά Φερνάν Μπρωντέλ (σύμφωνα με έναν από τους συγγραφείς) και αντι-ευρωκεντρικά, τα πολύπλοκα γεγονότα της περιόδου 1911-1923.
Ο Charles Maier ορίζει τις αυτοκρατορίες ως υπερεθνικές οντότητες τις οποίες χαρακτηρίζουν «το μέγεθος, η εθνοτική ιεράρχηση και ένα καθεστώς που συγκεντροποιεί την εξουσία, αλλά περιλαμβάνει ποικίλες κοινωνικές και/ή εθνοτικές ελίτ στη διαχείρισή του». Υπό το πρίσμα αυτού του φαινομενικά απλού και συνάμα περιεκτικού ορισμού, οι συγγραφείς κάνουν σε δεκατρία αυτοτελή κεφάλαια μια συστηματική ανάλυση για για τον βαθμό επιρροής που άσκησαν σε πραγματικό ή φαντασιακό επίπεδο οι επικράτειες της αυτοκρατορικής περιφέρειας (αποικίες, προτεκτοράτα, υπερπόντια εδάφη και κατεχόμενες χώρες), στον τρόπο με τον οποίο ενεπλάκησαν οι μεγάλες, μεσαίες και κατά λάθος αυτοκρατορικές δυνάμεις στο πρωτοφανές σφαγείο του Μεγάλου Πολέμου του 1914-1918.
Δυνάμεις, οι οποίες με τον ένα ή άλλο τρόπο πληρούσαν τις προϋποθέσεις για να χαρακτηριστούν αυτοκρατορικές, α) είτε αυτές ήταν παραδοσιακές πολυεθνικές εδαφικές αυτοκρατορίες τύπου Αυστροουγγαρίας, Οθωμανικής Τουρκίας ή Ρωσίας με την πεπαλαιωμένη πολιτειακή τους δομή, β) είτε μοντέρνα έθνη-κράτη με υπερπόντιες αποικίες, προσανατολισμένα στον ιμπεριαλισμό και το διεθνές εμπόριο όπως το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, η ρεπουμπλικανική Γαλλία ή η φτωχή και παρηκμασμένη Πορτογαλία, γ) είτε sui generis περιπτώσεις όπως οι αναδυόμενη υπερδύναμη των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών, η δυναμική Ιαπωνία της μετα-Μεϊτζί εποχής και η φανφαρονική Ιταλία.
Στην τελευταία κατηγορία (sui generis), αξίζει να γίνει ιδιαίτερη αναφορά στην Καϊζερική Γερμανία, το κράτος που βγήκε αργά (για την κούρσα του αποικιακού ανταγωνισμού) και αλαζονικά στο προσκήνιο, μέσα από τον θρίαμβο του Γαλλοπρωσικού Πολέμου του 1870-71 και σε μιάμιση γενιά αξίωσε για τον εαυτό του δάφνες παγκόσμιας κυριαρχίας. Αυτή η αξίωση μεταμόρφωσε τη Γερμανική Αυτοκρατορία σε κράτος με εν μέρει αλληλεπικαλυπτόμενα αυτοκρατορικά συστατικά που αντιστοιχούν και στις δύο πιο παραδοσιακές κατηγορίες αυτοκρατορίας. Σε πρώτο επίπεδο, ο όρος «Γερμανική Αυτοκρατορία» βρήκε εφαρμογή σε αυτό που θα μπορούσαμε να αποκαλέσουμε εσωτερική αυτοκρατορία, δηλαδή στα εδάφη του Ράιχ πριν από το 1914, σύμφωνα με την ανακήρυξη του Kaiserreich το 1871. Σε δεύτερο επίπεδο ο όρος χρησιμοποιήθηκε για να διατυπώσει το όραμα της Γερμανίας στη διάρκεια του πολέμου για μια ευρωπαϊκή αυτοκρατορία που θα εξουσίαζε προσαρτημένα εδάφη και κράτη-δορυφόρους, τα οποία θα περιέρχονταν στη γερμανική σφαίρα ελέγχου ως αποτέλεσμα της σύγκρουσης. Σε τρίτο επίπεδο ο όρος αναφερόταν στη Γερμανία ως παγκόσμια αυτοκρατορία εννοώντας την προπολεμική αυτοκρατορία την οποία είχε οικοδομήσει η Γερμανία στην Αφρική και την Άπω Ανατολή με στόχο να βρει πατήματα για εμπορική επέκταση της υπερπλεονάζουσας βιομηχανικής της παραγωγής.
Ο Charles Maier ορίζει τις αυτοκρατορίες ως υπερεθνικές οντότητες τις οποίες χαρακτηρίζουν «το μέγεθος, η εθνοτική ιεράρχηση και ένα καθεστώς που συγκεντροποιεί την εξουσία, αλλά περιλαμβάνει ποικίλες κοινωνικές και/ή εθνοτικές ελίτ στη διαχείρισή του». Υπό το πρίσμα αυτού του φαινομενικά απλού και συνάμα περιεκτικού ορισμού, οι συγγραφείς κάνουν σε δεκατρία αυτοτελή κεφάλαια μια συστηματική ανάλυση για για τον βαθμό επιρροής που άσκησαν σε πραγματικό ή φαντασιακό επίπεδο οι επικράτειες της αυτοκρατορικής περιφέρειας (αποικίες, προτεκτοράτα, υπερπόντια εδάφη και κατεχόμενες χώρες), στον τρόπο με τον οποίο ενεπλάκησαν οι μεγάλες, μεσαίες και κατά λάθος αυτοκρατορικές δυνάμεις στο πρωτοφανές σφαγείο του Μεγάλου Πολέμου του 1914-1918.
Δυνάμεις, οι οποίες με τον ένα ή άλλο τρόπο πληρούσαν τις προϋποθέσεις για να χαρακτηριστούν αυτοκρατορικές, α) είτε αυτές ήταν παραδοσιακές πολυεθνικές εδαφικές αυτοκρατορίες τύπου Αυστροουγγαρίας, Οθωμανικής Τουρκίας ή Ρωσίας με την πεπαλαιωμένη πολιτειακή τους δομή, β) είτε μοντέρνα έθνη-κράτη με υπερπόντιες αποικίες, προσανατολισμένα στον ιμπεριαλισμό και το διεθνές εμπόριο όπως το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, η ρεπουμπλικανική Γαλλία ή η φτωχή και παρηκμασμένη Πορτογαλία, γ) είτε sui generis περιπτώσεις όπως οι αναδυόμενη υπερδύναμη των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών, η δυναμική Ιαπωνία της μετα-Μεϊτζί εποχής και η φανφαρονική Ιταλία.
Στην τελευταία κατηγορία (sui generis), αξίζει να γίνει ιδιαίτερη αναφορά στην Καϊζερική Γερμανία, το κράτος που βγήκε αργά (για την κούρσα του αποικιακού ανταγωνισμού) και αλαζονικά στο προσκήνιο, μέσα από τον θρίαμβο του Γαλλοπρωσικού Πολέμου του 1870-71 και σε μιάμιση γενιά αξίωσε για τον εαυτό του δάφνες παγκόσμιας κυριαρχίας. Αυτή η αξίωση μεταμόρφωσε τη Γερμανική Αυτοκρατορία σε κράτος με εν μέρει αλληλεπικαλυπτόμενα αυτοκρατορικά συστατικά που αντιστοιχούν και στις δύο πιο παραδοσιακές κατηγορίες αυτοκρατορίας. Σε πρώτο επίπεδο, ο όρος «Γερμανική Αυτοκρατορία» βρήκε εφαρμογή σε αυτό που θα μπορούσαμε να αποκαλέσουμε εσωτερική αυτοκρατορία, δηλαδή στα εδάφη του Ράιχ πριν από το 1914, σύμφωνα με την ανακήρυξη του Kaiserreich το 1871. Σε δεύτερο επίπεδο ο όρος χρησιμοποιήθηκε για να διατυπώσει το όραμα της Γερμανίας στη διάρκεια του πολέμου για μια ευρωπαϊκή αυτοκρατορία που θα εξουσίαζε προσαρτημένα εδάφη και κράτη-δορυφόρους, τα οποία θα περιέρχονταν στη γερμανική σφαίρα ελέγχου ως αποτέλεσμα της σύγκρουσης. Σε τρίτο επίπεδο ο όρος αναφερόταν στη Γερμανία ως παγκόσμια αυτοκρατορία εννοώντας την προπολεμική αυτοκρατορία την οποία είχε οικοδομήσει η Γερμανία στην Αφρική και την Άπω Ανατολή με στόχο να βρει πατήματα για εμπορική επέκταση της υπερπλεονάζουσας βιομηχανικής της παραγωγής.
April 21, 2020
كتاب مهم
وأرجو له الإنتشار في بلداننا العربية بكثرة في قادم السنين، فهو يثور، وربما دون أن يدري، على الصورة النمطية في أذهاننا نحن العرب تجاه الحرب العالمية الأولى، الحرب التي لم يكن أبطالها الحقيقيين هم ممثلي هوليود ذو الشعور الصفراء والعيون الخضراء، ولكنهم أبناء المستعمرات، من الشعوب المستعبدة في كل مكان في العالم، وما كابدته تلك المستعمرات صاغرة من أجل أن تخدم إمبراطوريات لا شرف لها ولا بقاء، إنه كتاب يحدثك عن هؤلاء الذين اقتيدوا إلى حرب لا ناقة لهم فيها ولا جمل، ويحدثك عن تاريخ ثلاثة عشر إمبراطورية من نهايات القرن التاسع عشر وحتى انهيارها النهائي في أعقاب الحرب العالمية الأولى أو الثانية، وجاء الفصل الأخير مكملاً ومتمماً لهذا الكتاب الرائع، يعرض ويفسر مبادئ ويلسون الأربعة عشر ويحلل ميثاق عصبة الأمم الزائف، أو أنه يفضح السياسات الإمبريالية التي لم ولن تتغير، ولكنها تتخذ وجوهاً عديدة لتلائم متطلبات العصر
وأرجو له الإنتشار في بلداننا العربية بكثرة في قادم السنين، فهو يثور، وربما دون أن يدري، على الصورة النمطية في أذهاننا نحن العرب تجاه الحرب العالمية الأولى، الحرب التي لم يكن أبطالها الحقيقيين هم ممثلي هوليود ذو الشعور الصفراء والعيون الخضراء، ولكنهم أبناء المستعمرات، من الشعوب المستعبدة في كل مكان في العالم، وما كابدته تلك المستعمرات صاغرة من أجل أن تخدم إمبراطوريات لا شرف لها ولا بقاء، إنه كتاب يحدثك عن هؤلاء الذين اقتيدوا إلى حرب لا ناقة لهم فيها ولا جمل، ويحدثك عن تاريخ ثلاثة عشر إمبراطورية من نهايات القرن التاسع عشر وحتى انهيارها النهائي في أعقاب الحرب العالمية الأولى أو الثانية، وجاء الفصل الأخير مكملاً ومتمماً لهذا الكتاب الرائع، يعرض ويفسر مبادئ ويلسون الأربعة عشر ويحلل ميثاق عصبة الأمم الزائف، أو أنه يفضح السياسات الإمبريالية التي لم ولن تتغير، ولكنها تتخذ وجوهاً عديدة لتلائم متطلبات العصر
January 6, 2016
"Empires at Wasr" consists of a series of short essays written by experts in the field. Each empire involved in the First World War gets an informed section to itself. The authors explain the situation prior to the opening of conflict, their experiences during the war itself and the aftereffects, and in so doing expand our understanding of the Great War beyond the Western Front and boundaries of Europe, but also beyond the timeframe so often attached to those hostilities. Being a coming together of such vast range of topics, this could have been a very dry read indeed but the degree of information provided and occasional sprinkling of bits of detail, such as the vignette of General Botha metamorphosing from Colonial rebel to loyalist warrior, from horseback to airplane, provide the sort of interest that whets the appetite for more.
I was always taught that WW1 was driven by the railway timetables of Europe and the interlocking of diplomatic agreements but this is not true - the war in Europe was merely a station on the railway line of Nationalism; the ambitions of new nations confronting declining powers. The Italians, for example, saw an opportunity to acquire an empire in the lands of the declining Ottoman Empire. The invasion of Libya was only the beginning of a series of wars that gradually pushed the Ottomans out of Europe and which can be seen as a prelude to, if not actually part of, WW1. The Austro-Hungarian Empire looked to expanding into the newly-"vacated" Balkans whilst the youthful would-be "empire" of Serbia, one of the chief players in the wars against the Ottomans and in the grab for power of the Balkan Wars, was also eyeing possibilities; conflict was inevitable. It was also inevitable that Russia, which saw itself as defender of the Orthodox Slavs, would become involved. In this context it is important to view WW1 as the Fourth Balkan War which happened to run out of control.
The Russian Empire caved-in on itself because it went onto a war footing in occupied territories where its own troops were both occupiers and defenders at the same time. Inadequate military governors replaced experienced civilian ones who were well-versed in the political complexities of governing what was to become the main battleground of the Eastern Front. In the vacuum of the post-war years new states arising from the breakup of the old empires in the east, themselves a militarised society (their citizens having served in the War) newly given an independent voice and attempting to create nation states, experienced disruption as they came into conflict with minority ethnic groups and religions that had fallen into their spheres and, in turn, clashed with the ambitions of their equally new-born neighbours.
The roots of a future war were laid in the German "subconscious" by their experiences during this conflict. The German Empire, locked out of the prospects of an overseas empire began to see its future as a continental one and began to eye the eastern lands occupied by new and vulnerable states. The Germans had also looked down on the British and French use of colonial native troops in the European conflict, seeing this act as exposing European weaknesses to primitive societies. In time this stimulated the idea of other European races as being inferior.
The situation in Africa, as might be expected, was quite complex. Initially, both German and British colonies hoped they might remain out of the conflict in a state of neutrality, but this was not to be. Fighting only really broke out because of the British need to secure the sea lanes by destroying German radio stations and supply bases. It has to be remembered that the first shots fired in the Great War by a soldier in British service were fired in Togoland by Alhaji Grunshi, part of an advance patrol of the Gold Coast Regiment, when they encountered a German-led police force on 7 August 1914, at a factory in Nuatja, near Lomé.
The War placed great economic pressures on the French Empire placed a great burden on her colonies and this, coupled with enforced conscription due to a need for manpower at the front, an exposure to the French way of life, and racist attitudes in France towards native troops, sowed the seeds of discontent, both in Africa and Asia, that came to a head after WW2.
The British, unlike the French, kept their African troops fighting only in Africa. the loyalty of these forces was unreliable, however, for they would shift sides depending on the scale of the renumeration for their services. A chapter on the dealings of Britain with her Dominions and India, and a juxtaposed one looking at the almost-chaos of the war in Portuguese Africa, actually highlights the broader aspects of Empire that are quite complicated and demonstrate how the seeds of independence became sown. In the post-War era one saw an interesting "balance", in both Canada and Australia, between a decline of faith in the Empire and, at the same time, a demand for recognition of the service and sacrifice in war of the men of those Dominions which often lead to conflict at home.
The war catapulted Japan's position into the leading ranks amongst the empires of the world. The actual origins of this, once again, lay in actions that dated back further than 1905 and the defeat of Russia. It is the diversion of Western attention to the European theatre that created a vacuum which was filled by Japan and which spelt the end of European expansion in East Asia. Once again, a Eurocentric view of the War leads us to forget the continuation of hostilities in Siberia into the 1920s. Japan played a significant role here.
A fascinating chapter on China explains how the nation was at a crucial turning-point during this period. Humiliated by Japan in 1895, she looked to Western ideals as a way forward. The fiasco that initially accompanied her attempt to enter the War in 1917 was a sign of things to come. China entered the War full of commitment and hope only to find herself betrayed by the Allies at Paris. At this stage she looked for a "third way" forward and began to show interest in Bolshevism. How the seeds of our times are sown!
One tends not to think of the USA as having an empire so the chapter dealing with it is, initially, a revelation. It's not long, however, before one is to be seen slapping one's forehead and saying "Of course!". The US developed very specific ways of politically and economically managing areas that it felt fell into its sphere of self-interest and it is fascinating to see how these are still being employed to this day. American racist attitudes, coupled with its self-deluded view that it was an exemplar of what a multi-ethnic, multi-religious society could achieve, had a powerful influence on the Paris Peace talks and, in many ways, contributed to the failure of the process. Yet it was the concept of self-determinism, introduced by the Americans, that also played a significant part in controlling the greed of France and Britain, and laid the foundations of the unrest we see today, especially in the Middle East.
This is an excellent introduction to a real understanding of the complexities of Modern history and their origins in the lead up to the Great War, that watershed in our history.
I was always taught that WW1 was driven by the railway timetables of Europe and the interlocking of diplomatic agreements but this is not true - the war in Europe was merely a station on the railway line of Nationalism; the ambitions of new nations confronting declining powers. The Italians, for example, saw an opportunity to acquire an empire in the lands of the declining Ottoman Empire. The invasion of Libya was only the beginning of a series of wars that gradually pushed the Ottomans out of Europe and which can be seen as a prelude to, if not actually part of, WW1. The Austro-Hungarian Empire looked to expanding into the newly-"vacated" Balkans whilst the youthful would-be "empire" of Serbia, one of the chief players in the wars against the Ottomans and in the grab for power of the Balkan Wars, was also eyeing possibilities; conflict was inevitable. It was also inevitable that Russia, which saw itself as defender of the Orthodox Slavs, would become involved. In this context it is important to view WW1 as the Fourth Balkan War which happened to run out of control.
The Russian Empire caved-in on itself because it went onto a war footing in occupied territories where its own troops were both occupiers and defenders at the same time. Inadequate military governors replaced experienced civilian ones who were well-versed in the political complexities of governing what was to become the main battleground of the Eastern Front. In the vacuum of the post-war years new states arising from the breakup of the old empires in the east, themselves a militarised society (their citizens having served in the War) newly given an independent voice and attempting to create nation states, experienced disruption as they came into conflict with minority ethnic groups and religions that had fallen into their spheres and, in turn, clashed with the ambitions of their equally new-born neighbours.
The roots of a future war were laid in the German "subconscious" by their experiences during this conflict. The German Empire, locked out of the prospects of an overseas empire began to see its future as a continental one and began to eye the eastern lands occupied by new and vulnerable states. The Germans had also looked down on the British and French use of colonial native troops in the European conflict, seeing this act as exposing European weaknesses to primitive societies. In time this stimulated the idea of other European races as being inferior.
The situation in Africa, as might be expected, was quite complex. Initially, both German and British colonies hoped they might remain out of the conflict in a state of neutrality, but this was not to be. Fighting only really broke out because of the British need to secure the sea lanes by destroying German radio stations and supply bases. It has to be remembered that the first shots fired in the Great War by a soldier in British service were fired in Togoland by Alhaji Grunshi, part of an advance patrol of the Gold Coast Regiment, when they encountered a German-led police force on 7 August 1914, at a factory in Nuatja, near Lomé.
The War placed great economic pressures on the French Empire placed a great burden on her colonies and this, coupled with enforced conscription due to a need for manpower at the front, an exposure to the French way of life, and racist attitudes in France towards native troops, sowed the seeds of discontent, both in Africa and Asia, that came to a head after WW2.
The British, unlike the French, kept their African troops fighting only in Africa. the loyalty of these forces was unreliable, however, for they would shift sides depending on the scale of the renumeration for their services. A chapter on the dealings of Britain with her Dominions and India, and a juxtaposed one looking at the almost-chaos of the war in Portuguese Africa, actually highlights the broader aspects of Empire that are quite complicated and demonstrate how the seeds of independence became sown. In the post-War era one saw an interesting "balance", in both Canada and Australia, between a decline of faith in the Empire and, at the same time, a demand for recognition of the service and sacrifice in war of the men of those Dominions which often lead to conflict at home.
The war catapulted Japan's position into the leading ranks amongst the empires of the world. The actual origins of this, once again, lay in actions that dated back further than 1905 and the defeat of Russia. It is the diversion of Western attention to the European theatre that created a vacuum which was filled by Japan and which spelt the end of European expansion in East Asia. Once again, a Eurocentric view of the War leads us to forget the continuation of hostilities in Siberia into the 1920s. Japan played a significant role here.
A fascinating chapter on China explains how the nation was at a crucial turning-point during this period. Humiliated by Japan in 1895, she looked to Western ideals as a way forward. The fiasco that initially accompanied her attempt to enter the War in 1917 was a sign of things to come. China entered the War full of commitment and hope only to find herself betrayed by the Allies at Paris. At this stage she looked for a "third way" forward and began to show interest in Bolshevism. How the seeds of our times are sown!
One tends not to think of the USA as having an empire so the chapter dealing with it is, initially, a revelation. It's not long, however, before one is to be seen slapping one's forehead and saying "Of course!". The US developed very specific ways of politically and economically managing areas that it felt fell into its sphere of self-interest and it is fascinating to see how these are still being employed to this day. American racist attitudes, coupled with its self-deluded view that it was an exemplar of what a multi-ethnic, multi-religious society could achieve, had a powerful influence on the Paris Peace talks and, in many ways, contributed to the failure of the process. Yet it was the concept of self-determinism, introduced by the Americans, that also played a significant part in controlling the greed of France and Britain, and laid the foundations of the unrest we see today, especially in the Middle East.
This is an excellent introduction to a real understanding of the complexities of Modern history and their origins in the lead up to the Great War, that watershed in our history.
May 7, 2017
One of the most interesting books I've ever read. If you've ever wondered about just how valid it is to describe WWI as a "world war" and/or what the various countries and nationalities made of it all, this is for you. It is not however an introductory text. If you're interested in the concept but new to it, try Hew Strachan's "The First World War" and/or Robert Gerwarth's "Why WWI failed to end".
If you're suitably prepared though, this is excellent with almost every sentence holding meaning. Truly one of the few books I've ever considered giving five stars to.
If you're suitably prepared though, this is excellent with almost every sentence holding meaning. Truly one of the few books I've ever considered giving five stars to.
March 18, 2023
Most studies of World War One focus on the Western Front, and understandably so. The Western Front was a real bummer of a place, where the most dramatic battles of the war occured, and where, for the first time in history, more soldiers died in battle than from disease. Nevertheless, the First World War was, obviously, a world war, fought on nearly every continent, caused by and fought for imperialism. This collection is essential for anyone who wants to have a complete understanding of the global ramifications of the war.
September 21, 2023
Me está resultando muy interesante la manera de abordar la primera guerra mundial.
March 25, 2024
sometimes interesting,
varying quality
wasn't super high value, or particularly interesting
I was perplexed when they bleeped out the word "d---d"
uhh why? I have wondered what swear word this could have been... died? dyed? dood?
totally obscured the point of the quotation
not impressive, but if you want some more stuff on WWI this could be interesting for the right reader. Too surface and superficial for academics, not terribly detailed.
varying quality
wasn't super high value, or particularly interesting
I was perplexed when they bleeped out the word "d---d"
uhh why? I have wondered what swear word this could have been... died? dyed? dood?
totally obscured the point of the quotation
not impressive, but if you want some more stuff on WWI this could be interesting for the right reader. Too surface and superficial for academics, not terribly detailed.
December 9, 2024
Uni read. Great for understanding the dynamics between the major actors in East Asia
September 1, 2016
This book was a good book. The writers were well informed about their topic. I liked this historical period. It was fascinating to read about all those empires that crashed after the end of the First World War and changed so many lives. The economy, the ideology, and the organisation of societies is scrutinised both in the Metropolis as well as in the colonies.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.