The first of a two volume study, which will analyse the complex relationship between Britain and France in the twentieth century: a relationship which has been crucial to European politics and to both World Wars.This volume (fully self-contained) runs from the period of intense imperial rivalry at the turn of the century to the Fall of France. Philip Bell discusses diplomatic, economic and military policy, combining absorbing narrative with revealing commentary about the two countries.
Germany's invasion of France in August 1914 represented a threat to the great power status of both Britain and France. The countries had no history of co-operation, yet the entente they had created in 1904 proceeded by trial and error, via recriminations, to win a war of unprecedented scale and ferocity. Elizabeth Greenhalgh examines the huge problem of finding a suitable command relationship in the field and in the two capitals. She details the civil-military relations on each side, the political and military relations between the two powers, the maritime and industrial collaboration that were indispensable to an industrialised war effort and the Allied prosecution of war on the western front. Although it was not until 1918 that many of the war-winning expedients were adopted, Dr Greenhalgh shows that victory was ultimately achieved because of, rather than in spite of, coalition.
Histories of the First World War are often written from a British perspective, ignoring the coalition element of the conflict and the French point of view. In Strategy and Command, Roy Prete offers a major new interpretation supported by in-depth research in French archival sources. In the first of three projected volumes, Prete crafts a behind-the-scenes look at Anglo-French command relations during World War I, from the start of the conflict until 1915, when trench warfare drastically altered the situation. Drawing on extensive archival research, Prete argues that the British government's primary interest lay in the defence of the empire; the small expeditionary force sent to France was progressively enlarged because the French, especially Commander-in-Chief Joseph Joffre, dragged their British ally into a progressively greater involvement. Several crises in Anglo-French command relations derived from these competing strategic objectives. New information gleaned from French public and private archives - including private diaries - enlarge our understanding of key players in the allied relationship. Prete shows that suspicion and distrust on the part of both sides of the alliance continued to inform relations well after the circumstances creating them had changed. Strategy and Command clearly establishes the fundamental strategic differences between the allies at the start of the war, setting the stage for the next two volumes.
This book, first published in 1983, examines in depth the nature and sources of class radicalism in France and Britain and takes issue with some of the major theories of class consciousness and class action. Drawing on data both from detailed case studies and from wider national surveys, it shows that the conflict of class interests within capitalist societies can lead to sharply diverging attitudes to class inequality. It argues that the explanation of such differences cannot be found in some 'general' law of the evolution of social conflict in capitalist society. It must be sought in the profound institutional differences that exist between the two societies. In particular the study argues for a reassessment of the importance of the experience of war and of the way in which the business and political elite handled the social crises generated by war, in accounting for the long-term structural divergence of capitalist societies.
With the creation of the Franco-Russian Alliance and the failure of the Reinsurance Treaty in the late nineteenth century, Germany needed a strategy for fighting a two-front war. In response, Field Marshal Count Alfred von Schlieffen produced a study that represented the apex of modern military planning. His Memorandum for a War against France, which incorporated a mechanized cavalry as well as new technologies in weaponry, advocated that Germany concentrate its field army to the west and annihilate the French army within a few weeks. For generations, historians have considered Schlieffen's writings to be the foundation of Germany's military strategy in World War I and have hotly debated the reasons why the plan, as executed, failed. In this important volume, international scholars reassess Schlieffen's work for the first time in decades, offering new insights into the renowned general's impact not only on World War I but also on nearly a century of military historiography. The contributors draw on newly available source materials from European and Russian archives to demonstrate both the significance of the Schlieffen Plan and its deficiencies. They examine the operational planning of relevant European states and provide a broad, comparative historical context that other studies lack. Featuring fold-out maps and abstracts of the original German deployment plans as they evolved from 1893 to 1914, this rigorous reassessment vividly illustrates how failures in statecraft as well as military planning led to the tragedy of the First World War.
Why is France so often relegated to the background in studies of international relations? This book seeks to redress this balance, exploring the relationship between the United States, United Kingdom and France, and its wider impact on the theory and practice of international relations.