This war, like the next war, is a war to end war.
David Lloyd George, c.1916.
Learning Intention: We will be learning about the reasons for allied victory
Success Criteria:
I will be successful when I am able to outline the long-term factors in Germany's defeat
I will be successful when I am able to discuss the short-term factors that led to the collapse of Germany
I will be successful when I am able to explain the reasons for the allied victory
BRAINSTORM TASK: What were the reasons why the allies won World War 1? Write down some points and we'll brainstorm your ideas
Watch the videos above and write down the 3 main reasons for the Allied victory
Overlapping issues, but not necessarily the same thing. In order to explain the defeat of Germany in 1918, two questions need to be addressed:
What were the long term factors that led to the result of the war?
What were the short term factors that led to the result of the war?
There are various reasons for Germany's defeat in WWI, but it can be narrowed down to 4.
Failed strategy
Economics
North American Influence
Naval Power
Germany's great strategic fear was having to fight a war on two fronts (the Bismarckian nightmare).
The Schlieffen Plan had been designed to cope with this, however von Moltke introduced a series of modifications to the plan which reduced both the size and speed of Germany's advance through Belgium.
Germany's desperation in a war of attrition forced it to adopt unrestricted submarine warfare in February 1917 which ultimately forced the US into the war against Germany.
A war of attrition required a continuous flow of men and resources to sustain it. If a breakthrough was never going to occur, logically, it meant victory should come to the side with the superior resources.
The allied forces had obvious advantages:
The allies could call upon people from Britain, France, Russia, Italy (from 1915), Romania (from 1916), the US (from 1917.
The British Empire could call upon New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Canada and India.
The worlds two largest navies were lined up against Germany: the US and Britain.
Germany faced obvious disadvantages from this perspective:
It had its own power and it was burdened with three weaker allies: Austria, Bulgaria and Turkey.
The allied blockade denied the German economy essential for war-related imports.
The economic strains for Germany brought about by the war and more specifically the allied blockade, would eventually lead to the collapse of the Home Front in 1918.
The pre-war naval arms race between Britain and Germany was a key issue that cause tensions. However, naval warfare did not play a significant part in the war. It played its part in other ways.
From the start of the war, the allies placed a naval embargo on Germany which sought to prevent imports coming in and exports leaving. No blockade can ever be 100% effective but the allied blockade succeeded in placing enormous strains on the German Home Front.
The naval power of Britain, its empire partners and also Japan was a ey factor in the quick takeover of German colonies which further eroded the potential economic/population strength of Germany.
German submarines played havoc with allied shipping. So successful was it at one stage that Britain faced the possibility of being starved into submission. However, Germany's submarine warfare would bring the US into the war on the allied side with disastrous consequences for Germany.
The US did not enter the war until April 1917, and in military terms played no major role on the Western Front until mid-1918. Canada entered the war immediately as a loyal member of the empire. However, the influence of North America was to be crucial for the outcome of the war.
considering its small population, Canadian forces played a significant role on the Western Front, Canadian forces played a significant role on the Western Front. Canadian grain supplies played arguably an even more important role. The last soldier of the British Empire to be killed during the war was a Canadian.
Up to 1917, the steady flow of American munitions, ammunition and food were essential for the allied war effort.
Germany's Unrestricted Submarine Warfare policy forced the US to enter the war in April 1917. The US influence on the eventual outcome of the war was of fundamental important. In the short term, it led to a major boost in allied morale.
The US navy was able to have an immediate impact on the allied war effort. US convoy methods played a significant role in thwarting the damaging German submarine threat. US naval forces reinforced the allied blockade. Anglo-American control of the Atlantic ensured the steady transfer of men and food supplies across throughout 1918.
However, the US military presence would not be of any significance until the middle of 1918.
Despite the entry of the US in 1917, at the start of 1918, the war remained even. The promise of US military involvement augured well for the allies. However, the Russian war effort had collapsed. General Ludendorff was now able to transfer men and equipment to the Western Front and launch a major offensive on allied positions. This was to be Operation Michael, launched in March 1918. However, by May, Ludendorff's offensive was weakening. Within 6 months the German war effort had collapsed.
Short term factors that led to Germany's collapse were:
The Americans
Leadership
German Exhaustion
Technology
In mid-July, 275 000 US troops took part in the 2nd Battle of the Marne. It was this battle which finally bought the German offensive to a close.
US actions in the St Mihiel salient near Verdun resulted in the allied capture of 16 000 German prisoners and 400 guns. In late September, US forces were successful in the Meuse-Argonne campaign. By now the German were putting out 'feelers' for an armistice.
Much criticism had rightly been aimed at the allied military leadership throughout the war. However, by 1918, errores were being made less often and lessons had been learned.
General Monash:
New generals were now being given their opportunity. Notable amongst was the Australian general, John Monash.
Monash was a master of logistics as well as tactics. He understood how to coordinate infantry, artillery and air power.
Mention was made of his 93 minutes success at Hamel in July 1918.
General Ludendorff:
In terms of tactics, Ludendorff was thought to be brilliant. He was good at seizing opportunities, taking advantage of surprise and maximising the use of available resources.
However, Ludendorff, failed at a strategic level. Ludendorff lacked any overarching strategic plan.
General Foch described Ludendorff's tactics as 'buffalo tactics' in 1918. Like a wild buffalo, the German army charged, caused damage, sometimes broke through but there were no contingency plans about what to do next or what to do if specific plan did not work out and the buffalo would become exhausted.
Industry and science to the war effort of each side was very important. By 1918, each side had a greater array of technologically more efficient weapons on land, on sea and in the air.
Arguably, the crucial technological development which turned the tide in the allies favour in 1918 was the tank.
The tank was no longer the unwieldy, unreliable death trap that it had been 2 years earlier.
The leaders, like Monash and Foch, understood how the tank could be used effectively. Operated in mass numbers, tanks could break through the enemy lines.
The allies had put much into tank production and so were able to employ hundreds of them in 1918. The breakdown of the German economy meant that it was impossible for the Germans to match the allies in tank warfare. This was to be a crucial factor.
After the war, right-wing German politicians and leading military figures would argue that the German army had not been defeated in the field but that it had been 'stabbed in the back' by socialists, democratic politicians and Jews at home.
Nobody ever doubted the courage of tenacity of the German army. However, even the best trained army cannot survive when its Home Front cannot supply it with what it needs to fight, and while its enemy has the benefit of limitless supplies. By 1918, young boys and old men were being conscripted into the German army. The allies had millions of fresh Americans. Germany was exhausted.
By mid-1918, the German Home Front was in a state of collapse. Its industry was seriously lacking in essential raw materials; the allied blockade had done its job. There were major food shortages, far worse than anything in Britain. Starvation in some parts of Germany was real. The outbreak of Spanish influenza in 1918 only served to worsen the situation.
Political support had broken down. The Reichstag had already passed a Peace Resolution earlier in the war. By late 1918, Germany was facing the real prospect of revolution as Workers and Soldiers Councils appeared, seeking to take control. Desertion rates were increasing and there was a series of naval mutinies in north German ports. Bavaria would later become a Soviety republic.
Germany was exhausted and its Home Front had collapsed.
A.J Grant and H.W.V Temperley:
"...Breaking point had been reached because of the strain imposed by the navy at the time of the armistice negotiations..."
W Carr:
"...The Supreme Command had chosen to keep one and a half million men in the east controlling, directly or indirectly, vast territories from the Baltic to the Crimea..."
General Ludendorff:
"...Two factors above all are decisive for this development: Tanks. The enemy is using these in unexpectedly large numbers... We are not able to oppose the enemy with an equal number of German tanks... The enemy is in a position to make good his losses with American help... (the Americans provide) almost inexhaustible reserves..."
Extended Response Question:
To what extent was the defeat of Germany in World War I inevitable from the beginning?