[November 13, 2014] What does British criticism of the way World War I was being conducted early in the war and the decision of the United States to entire the conflict have in common? From the perspective of strategy, the entrance of the United States into the war was important. But more important for the U.S., were the self confidence of the nation and their view of themselves that they could field an effective fighting force. Ultimately, it was the influence of this criticism on U.S. President Woodrow Wilson that slowed the decision to enter the war.
On this date in 1916, British statesman Henry C.K. Petty-Fitzmaurice wrote a memorandum to the British cabinet questioning the direction of the Allied war effort. With the Allies locked in a bloody slugfest war with Germany on the Western Front, Fitzmaurice openly questioned the British war effort. “Its prolongation will spell ruin for the civilized world, and an infinite addition to the load of human suffering which already weights upon it.” He was heavily criticized for his comments.
Despite being lambasted by his British critics, U.S. President Wilson was said to be “impressed” with Fitzmaurice’s arguments. Note that Wilson was re-elected in 1916 in a narrow victory – he ran on the slogan, “He kept us out of the war.” A desire to negotiate for an early peace with Germany was foremost on the minds of many politicians, not to destroy Germany as a great power but to accommodate them. Eventually, the desire for accommodation by Wilson and Fitzmaurice came to nothing …Germany would never have accepted peace based on the status of states before the war (i.e., the status quo ante bellum). Germany and its allies wanted power and land; the point of the war from the start.
The following year in 1917, Wilson asked the U.S. Congress for a declaration of war in order to make the “world safe for democracy.”
[Don’t forget to “Like” the Leader Maker at our Facebook Page.]