AP European History

## Learning Outcomes

- Explain how **nationalism**, **alliances**, and **imperialism** increased tension in Europe before **1914**
- Distinguish between long-term causes of World War I and the immediate trigger in **Sarajevo**
- Identify key events including the **Bosnian Crisis (1908)**, **Moroccan Crises (1905, 1911)**, and the **July Crisis (1914)**
- Understand how the alliance system widened a Balkan conflict into a continental war
- Analyse why nationalism in the Balkans was especially dangerous for **Austria-Hungary**
- Use specific evidence, dates, and examples in AP-style short answers and essays

## AP European History Syllabus

For the AP European History, you are expected to understand the causes of World War I, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

- Know that **nationalism**, **alliances**, **imperialism**, and militarism created the long-term tensions behind the war
- Identify the rival blocs of the **Triple Alliance** and the **Triple Entente**, and explain why they mattered
- Explain how **Balkan nationalism** threatened the survival of **Austria-Hungary**
- Understand the importance of the **Bosnian Crisis of 1908** and the **Balkan Wars of 1912-1913** as background to 1914
- Know the significance of the **assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand** on **June 28, 1914**
- Explain the **July Crisis**, including Germany’s **blank check**, Austria-Hungary’s ultimatum to Serbia, Russian mobilization, and German declarations of war
- Understand how **imperial rivalry** in Africa and Morocco deepened mistrust among the great powers
- Explain why alliances made war more likely without making it fully automatic

## Test Your Knowledge

_Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, look more closely at that area during your revision._

1. Why was the Balkans called the “powder keg of Europe”?
2. How did the alliance system help turn a regional crisis into a European war?
3. What was Germany’s **blank check**, and why did it matter?
4. How did imperial disputes such as the Moroccan Crises increase hostility before 1914?
5. Why should you avoid saying that the assassination of Franz Ferdinand alone caused World War I?

## Introduction

World War I belongs to **AP European History Unit 8: 20th-Century Global Conflict**, but its roots stretch back into the late nineteenth century. Europe did not stumble into war because of one murder alone. By **1914**, the continent had already been made unstable by competing national loyalties, rival alliance blocs, colonial rivalry, and aggressive state decision-making.

For the exam, one of the most useful habits is to separate **long-term causes** from the **immediate trigger**. Nationalism, alliances, and imperialism created a tense and dangerous system. The assassination of **Archduke Franz Ferdinand** in **Sarajevo** on **June 28, 1914** supplied the spark. The war happened because both conditions existed at once: a combustible structure and leaders willing to take risks inside it.

> **Key Term: July Crisis**
> The chain of diplomatic ultimatums, mobilizations, and war declarations in July and early August 1914 that turned a Balkan dispute into World War I.

### Nationalism made Europe unstable, especially in the Balkans

Nationalism had been one of the most powerful forces in Europe since the nineteenth century. It helped unify **Italy** and **Germany**, but by the early twentieth century it was no longer simply a liberal call for self-government. It had also become a force of rivalry, exclusion, and territorial ambition.

In western and central Europe, nationalism encouraged competition between states. Newly unified **Germany**, created in **1871**, upset the older balance of power. Its leaders and many of its citizens believed Germany deserved greater status, military strength, and overseas influence. French nationalism also remained intense after the loss of **Alsace-Lorraine** in **1871**. That meant nationalist feeling was not only pride in one’s own nation; it was often anger against another.

The most explosive form of nationalism appeared in the **Balkans**. This region mattered because the declining **Ottoman Empire** had left a vacuum. Different peoples and states competed to fill it. **Serbia** wanted to expand and unite South Slavs. That aim threatened **Austria-Hungary**, which ruled over many Slavic peoples inside its multinational empire. If Serbian nationalism succeeded outside Austria-Hungary, it might inspire Croats, Serbs, and other Slavs inside the empire to demand independence too.

> **Key Term: Pan-Slavism**
> The belief that Slavic peoples shared a common identity and should support or unite with one another, often with Russian backing.

Russia supported Slavic causes partly out of genuine cultural and religious sympathy, but also because it wanted more influence in the Balkans. That turned local nationalist disputes into great-power disputes. A Serbian success could strengthen Russian influence; an Austrian success could weaken it.

The **Bosnian Crisis of 1908** shows this clearly. Austria-Hungary formally annexed **Bosnia-Herzegovina**, angering Serbia because many Slavs lived there. Austria did not annex Bosnia because it wanted more Slavs in its empire. In fact, that was part of the problem. It annexed Bosnia to stop Serbia from absorbing it first. This is a key distinction: Austrian policy was defensive in one sense, but aggressive in method.

The **Balkan Wars of 1912-1913** then made matters worse. Serbia emerged stronger, and Austria-Hungary became even more fearful. By **1914**, many Austrian leaders believed that if Serbia was not checked, the Habsburg Empire might eventually disintegrate.

The assassination at Sarajevo came directly out of this nationalist climate. **Gavrilo Princip**, a Bosnian Serb nationalist linked to **Young Bosnia** and connected to Serbian nationalist circles, murdered Franz Ferdinand because he opposed Austrian rule in Bosnia and supported South Slav nationalist aims. That is why the Balkans were called the **powder keg of Europe**: local nationalist conflict threatened to ignite all Europe.

> **Key Term: Balkan nationalism**
> Nationalist movements in southeastern Europe that sought independence or expansion, especially among Slavic peoples, and destabilized both the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires.
>
> **Test Tip:** In SAQs and LEQs, do not define nationalism only as “love of country.” For high-scoring answers, explain how nationalism could both unify states and break apart multinational empires.

### Alliances turned a local crisis into a continental war

Alliances were meant to provide security. In practice, they increased the danger that one crisis would pull in many states. This is why historians often use the acronym **MAIN** for World War I causes: militarism, alliances, imperialism, nationalism. For this subtopic, alliances matter because they linked the powers into rival camps.

> **Key Term: alliance system**
> A network of formal agreements between states that promised support or cooperation, helping divide Europe into rival blocs before 1914.

The main blocs were:

- **Triple Alliance**: Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy
- **Triple Entente**: France, Russia, and Great Britain

These blocs did not make war automatic. That point matters. States still made decisions. But alliances made leaders think in wider strategic terms. Austria-Hungary could not consider Serbia without thinking about Russia. Germany could not consider Russia without thinking about France. Britain could not ignore a continental war if Belgian neutrality or the balance of power were threatened.

The origins of this alliance structure go back to **Bismarck**, who tried to keep France isolated while avoiding a two-front war. After **Kaiser Wilhelm II** forced Bismarck from office in **1890**, Germany failed to renew the **Reinsurance Treaty** with Russia. That helped push Russia toward France. Britain, once more detached, grew closer to France in the **Entente Cordiale (1904)** and then to Russia in **1907**.

By **1914**, Europe was not split into two perfectly rigid machines, but it was divided enough that states feared being left isolated if they hesitated. This fear made caution harder.

The **July Crisis** shows the process step by step:

- **June 28, 1914**: Franz Ferdinand is assassinated at Sarajevo.
- **July 5-6**: Germany gives Austria-Hungary a **blank check**, promising support.
- **July 23**: Austria-Hungary issues a harsh ultimatum to Serbia.
- **July 25**: Serbia accepts most terms, but rejects or modifies those that violated its sovereignty.
- **July 28**: Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia.
- **July 30**: Russia orders general mobilization to support Serbia.
- **August 1**: Germany declares war on Russia.
- **August 3**: Germany declares war on France.
- Germany invades Belgium under the **Schlieffen Plan**.
- **August 4**: Britain declares war on Germany.

Germany’s **blank check** mattered because Germany was the one ally strong enough to restrain Austria-Hungary. Instead, it encouraged Austrian firmness. Yet even here, leaders retained agency. Germany chose support. Austria chose war. Russia chose mobilization. These were not robotic moves.

> **Key Term: blank check**
> Germany’s promise in July 1914 to back Austria-Hungary against Serbia, even at the risk of a wider war.

Mobilization was especially dangerous because war plans depended on speed. Russian mobilization was slow, so Russian leaders feared delay. German strategy assumed that if Russia mobilized, Germany had to strike fast before being trapped in a two-front war.

> **Key Term: general mobilization**
> The large-scale calling up and movement of armed forces for war, which in 1914 was difficult to reverse and therefore escalated crises quickly.

The **Schlieffen Plan** widened the war further. Germany planned to defeat France quickly by moving through **Belgium**, then turn east against Russia. This mattered because Britain was not pulled into war by alliance language alone. The immediate reason for British entry was Germany’s violation of **Belgian neutrality**.

> **Test Tip:** A strong AP answer says alliances made expansion of war more likely, not inevitable. That distinction shows analysis rather than memorized summary.

### Imperialism increased mistrust and sharpened rivalry

Imperialism did not directly cause the assassination at Sarajevo, but it made relations among the great powers more hostile. By the late nineteenth century, European states competed for colonies, trade routes, raw materials, and prestige. Colonial disputes often happened outside Europe, but they changed relations inside Europe.

> **Key Term: imperialism**
> The policy of extending a state’s power through colonies, economic domination, or political influence over other territories.

Britain wanted to protect routes to **India**, especially after establishing control over **Egypt** and the **Suez Canal** in **1882**. France expanded in Africa and Asia. Germany, especially under **Wilhelm II**, pushed a more assertive world policy, often called **Weltpolitik**. German leaders believed Germany deserved an empire equal to its industrial and military strength.

The problem was not just colonies themselves. It was what colonial rivalry did to diplomacy. Crises overseas tested alliances, increased suspicion, and made compromise harder.

The **Fashoda Crisis (1898)** nearly brought Britain and France to war in Sudan. In the long run, though, it helped convince France that Britain was a better potential partner than Germany. That helps explain why later British-French cooperation became possible.

The **First Moroccan Crisis (1905-1906)** and **Second Moroccan Crisis (1911)** are even more important for AP Euro. Germany challenged French influence in Morocco, hoping to split Britain and France. Instead, Britain backed France. Germany came away more isolated and more resentful. The **Agadir Crisis** in **1911**, when Germany sent the gunboat _Panther_ to Morocco, alarmed Britain and strengthened anti-German feeling.

Imperial competition also linked directly to military tension. Germany’s effort to build a global role included naval expansion. Britain saw its navy as the shield of the empire. So German naval building, especially after Britain launched the **Dreadnought** in **1906**, fed a naval arms race. Even if fleets were not the main battlefield factor in 1914, the rivalry poisoned relations.

A useful cause-and-effect chain is this:

- Imperial competition increased distrust
- Crises in Africa and Morocco deepened bloc politics
- Germany appeared more aggressive
- Britain moved closer to France and Russia
- By 1914, the great powers interpreted each crisis through a lens of rivalry and fear

Imperialism therefore mattered less as the immediate cause and more as the background condition that made compromise weaker and suspicion stronger.

### How to structure an AP Euro argument on war causation

On AP European History essays, the strongest responses do more than list **MAIN**. They explain relationships among causes and rank them.

A good thesis might argue that nationalism, alliances, and imperialism all contributed to war, but that **Balkan nationalism** created the immediate flashpoint, while the **alliance system and July Crisis decisions** turned that flashpoint into a continental war.

To build that argument:

- Start with broader context: nationalism after **1848**, German unification in **1871**, imperial rivalry in Africa and Morocco
- Then move to the Balkans: Serbian nationalism, Austrian fear, Bosnian annexation in **1908**, Balkan Wars
- Then explain the escalation of **1914** step by step
- Finish by qualifying: war was not automatic; leaders made choices within an unstable system

This structure helps with **causation**, which is one of the key AP historical thinking skills. It also avoids the weak response that says “many things caused WWI” without showing which mattered most and why.

## Key Point Checklist

_This article has covered the following key knowledge points:_

- World War I resulted from long-term tensions and short-term decisions
- Nationalism increased rivalry between states and destabilized multinational empires
- Serbian nationalism and **Pan-Slavism** made the Balkans the most dangerous region in Europe
- **Austria-Hungary** feared that Serbian success would inspire Slavs within its own empire
- The **Bosnian Crisis of 1908** and the **Balkan Wars of 1912-1913** increased tension before 1914
- The alliance system divided Europe into the **Triple Alliance** and **Triple Entente**
- Alliances made escalation more likely but did not make war fully automatic
- Germany’s **blank check** encouraged Austria-Hungary to act harshly against Serbia
- The **July Crisis** turned the Sarajevo assassination into a general European war
- Imperial rivalries such as **Fashoda** and the **Moroccan Crises** deepened mistrust
- Germany’s **Schlieffen Plan** widened the conflict by bringing in France and Britain
- Britain entered the war immediately after Germany violated **Belgian neutrality**

## Key Terms and Concepts

- July Crisis
- Pan-Slavism
- Balkan nationalism
- alliance system
- blank check
- general mobilization
- imperialism


World War I - Nationalism alliances and imperialism caused war