The following essay finds its niche in intending to shed light on the question as to why the United Kingdom entered the First World War.
Firstly, in the background analysis, the political causes that lead to the formal declaration of war of the UK against the middle powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy) will be analysed. Secondly, the first deployment of British troops will be looked at as a direct result of the declaration.
The subject will be approached from two sides, firstly from the Neoclassical perspective. Asking in how far political power struggles considerations resulted in the decision to join the war.
Especially, the Triple Entente alliance (UK, France, and Russia), and the ”Treaty of London of 1839” which played a crucial role in the British decision to join the war will be analysed. The UK found itself in a duty bound situation to "defense the Belgian neutrality." The two agreements will be used as part of the explanation as to why and how the UK joined the war, they will be examined through the sense of both school of thoughts.
Secondly, the Liberal school of thought will lend its self to the explanation. The ideas of Kant will be tested as to whether they can explain the British participation in the war. The concept of international cooperation, the duty to uphold contracts and the internal logic that democracy and free trade spreads are part of the train of thought of this paper.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Formal declaration of war by the UK
2.1 First deployment of troops
3. Neoclassical realism role of Belgium and the UK
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Themes
This essay aims to analyze the underlying causes of the United Kingdom's entry into the First World War by applying and comparing the theoretical frameworks of Neoclassical Realism and Liberalism to historical events and diplomatic decisions.
- Analysis of the Triple Entente and the Treaty of London of 1839 as catalysts for British intervention.
- Evaluation of Liberalist perspectives on international cooperation, democracy, and trade interests.
- Examination of Neoclassical Realist views on power struggles, state security, and the maintenance of the balance of power.
- Impact of German naval expansion and threats to British maritime and economic dominance.
- The role of the "Belgian question" as both a diplomatic duty and a strategic justification for war.
Excerpt from the Book
Neoclassical realism role of Belgium and the UK
On the other hand, the Neoclassical Realism position says that the humans lust for power and is as a theory not positive. Furthermore, in contrast to Liberalism, it represents a strong belief that IR in its very nature is conflictual. Bilateral and multilateral struggles and rivalry are bound to end in hostility. It focuses on state safety and the survival of the nation. There is a general disbelief in the possibility of positive development in the field of global politics. This theory views actors as mainly concerned with securing their advantage, their relative gains while competing in the international system. Morgenthau claims that humans in the international arena are competing for power, but it is unclear what the final goal is. However, the closest objective is power and "the modes of acquiring, maintaining, and demonstrating it determine the technique of political action”
This power struggle which is about securing international supremacy is being undertaken in a system without order; it is anarchic.
The realist approach towards explaining the UK political decision is plausible in several aspect. The UK wanted to secure the balance of power on the continent. As aforementioned it had no interest in France losing power. Joining the war secured the nations security, it can be regarded as a preemptive action. To take action before a rising power might attack the UK from a more powerful position as it possesses now. However, the balance of power theory, combines realist and liberalist elements. It aims to protect the British position as the dominant power in Europe. However, pursues this goal through cooperation with other powers, to keep the rising power in check. Nevertheless, an essential part of this theory is to go to war if the rising power becomes to mighty.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: This chapter introduces the research question regarding why the UK entered World War I and outlines the methodological approach using Neoclassical Realism and Liberalism.
Formal declaration of war by the UK: This section examines the diplomatic pressures, the commitment to the Triple Entente, and the significance of the 1839 Treaty of London in the British decision-making process.
First deployment of troops: This chapter covers the initial military mobilization of the British Expeditionary Force to France following the declaration of war.
Neoclassical realism role of Belgium and the UK: This chapter analyzes the conflict through the lens of power struggles, state security, and the preservation of British influence on the European continent.
Conclusion: This final chapter synthesizes the findings, concluding that while both theories provide valuable insights, the Neoclassical Realist perspective is particularly compelling in explaining the British desire to maintain continental hegemony.
Keywords
Neoclassical Realism, Liberalism, World War I, United Kingdom, Triple Entente, Treaty of London 1839, Belgian neutrality, International Relations, Balance of Power, British Expeditionary Force, Foreign Policy, Democratic Peace Theory, Capitalism, Naval Power, Diplomacy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental research question of this essay?
The essay explores how the theoretical frameworks of Neoclassical Realism and Liberalism can explain the motivations behind the United Kingdom's decision to enter World War I.
Which theoretical schools of thought are applied in this research?
The work utilizes Neoclassical Realism to analyze power struggles and state security, and Liberalism to examine the roles of international cooperation, trade, and democratic values.
What is the primary goal of the analysis?
The goal is to determine which theoretical approach provides a more persuasive explanation for the British intervention in the war, specifically regarding the violation of Belgian neutrality and the preservation of the balance of power.
What is the central methodological focus of the paper?
The methodology involves a background analysis of political causes, a review of diplomatic agreements, and an application of International Relations theories to historical military and political decisions.
What does the main body of the text address?
The main body investigates the diplomatic ties between Britain and Belgium, the influence of the Triple Entente, the deployment of British troops, and the strategic economic concerns of the UK.
Which keywords best describe the subject matter?
Key terms include Neoclassical Realism, Liberalism, World War I, British foreign policy, Belgian neutrality, and the balance of power.
How does the author characterize the role of the 1839 Treaty of London?
The author discusses it as a formal diplomatic obligation that was used as a justification for war, though historical debates exist regarding whether it was legally binding for Britain to defend neutrality by force of arms.
Why does the author consider the Realistic approach potentially more convincing?
The author suggests that the Realist perspective successfully shifts the focus from the moral argument of the "Belgian question" to the more strategic national interest of maintaining Britain's leading position among European powers.
- Citation du texte
- Otto Möller (Auteur), 2016, How can Neoclassical Realism and Liberalism explain that the UK entered World War I, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/373382
