Gavrilo Princip was a Serbian nationalist who, through his actions, provoked the escalation of the conflict between the major powers of the early twentieth century. He shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in Bosnia, triggering the outbreak of World War I on August 1, 1914. On the eve of 1914, the situation in the world was extremely tense. There was a geopolitical confrontation between the major powers – there were two hostile military and political camps: the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente. Although Gavrilo Princip has remained an important figure in history, if he had missed, a great war would have happened inevitably, just later.
Despite the existence of alliances, in reality, each state pursued its interests. France dreamed of regaining Alsace-Lorraine, which lost in the Franco-Prussian War 1870-1871 (Keiger, 2014). In turn, the rulers of the German Empire wanted to expand the number of territories under their control. Russia traditionally claimed the patronage of the Christian Balkan people, where its interests overlapped with the Ottoman Empire, which had comprised the Balkans since the 15th century (Keiger, 2014). As for Great Britain, it did not want to lose its economic position and status as a world economic leader. On the whole, a situation developed in which the territorial and economic interests of the countries were so different that conflicts were unavoidable (Keiger, 2014). All that was needed was a spark, which was the fatal shot that killed Franz Ferdinand.
After the First World War, the Versailles system was not the reliable guarantor of peace as its creators had planned. Based on the right of the strongest to gain and maintain unilateral advantages for some states at the expense of other countries, it was the cause of a new world war (Vasquez, 1996). Germany sought to seize a dominant position in world markets, while its rivals made every effort to maintain and consolidate their dominance. A conflict arose between Great Britain, France, the United States, the victorious countries of World War I, and Germany (Vasquez, 1996). The expansionist aspirations of Japanese capitalism toward Southeast Asia and the Pacific have encountered opposition from the United States, Britain, and other world nations. In addition, there were profound changes in the international arena associated with the emergence of the USSR. The new balance of power also opened up a new direction in politics – the struggle between the old capitalist world with the socialist society.
The Second World War, which lasted six long years, was one of the most crucial turning points in the last century’s history. The war shook the Eurasian continent with tremendous force, where all the most significant military events took place, and the most significant victories against the coalition of aggressors were achieved. The most important outcome was the defeat of fascism and militarism and the restoration of the sovereignty of countries seized by invaders. The successful resolution of the most important problems of the political order created real prerequisites for lasting peace. However, the people’s hopes for such a post-war development were not fulfilled.
There were contradictions in the views on the post-war world order between the Soviet Union and the Western Allies during the war. The coalition, which united states with different political goals, geopolitical aspirations, mentality, and traditions during the war, collapsed after victory was achieved (Garthoff, 1992). The beginning of the Fulton Speech was the precursor to the Cold War, and within a few years, it was fully formed. A clear ideological division was at the heart of the confrontation between the U.S. and the USSR (Garthoff, 1992). The two countries were enemies because they advocated fundamentally different ways of life and forms of society (Garthoff, 1992). The capitalist and socialist ideas of how the state and society should function are fundamentally different.
The Cold War was a period of phenomenal, unprecedented orderliness in international relations. It was built on the fear of mutual annihilation, a fear that defined a world structure that was extremely clear and stable. The resistance of the two superpowers fixed the limits of what was possible and what was impossible. Until the middle of the twentieth century, if there was a conflict, war was the way to resolve it, and that was the norm. Now local conflicts can occur, but clashes between major countries, which could unleash a world war in previous eras, are no longer possible. This is because the superpowers have nuclear weapons. A world war has a high chance of turning nuclear – and becoming the last.
After Gavrilo Princip killed Franz Ferdinand, many events occurred that he could not have foreseen. His act of terrorism was indeed the occasion for the outbreak of war, but World War I was an imminent event. Gavrilo Princip was born in Bosnia, whose population dreamed of reunification with their historic homeland, the Kingdom of Serbia. The military-police regime imposed by the Austrians only increased the radicalization of Serbian youth. Many of the members of the secret societies were not afraid to take the path of terrorism to achieve their goals. Gavrilo Princip joined one of these radical groups, called Mlada Bosna. He was not the only member of the terrorist movement and not the most radical, so any other person could have been in his place. His name has gone down in history due to a series of coincidences and the peculiarities of that time’s realities. For some, Gavrilo Princip is a terrorist and murderer; for others, he is a freedom fighter, a hero who rose to fight the all-powerful empire. In either case, however, it cannot be said that he is the most pivotal man who lived in the last century.
References
Garthoff, R. L. (1992). Why did the Cold War arise, and why did it end? Diplomatic History, 16(2), 287–293. Web.
Keiger, J. (2014). Thinking the causes of World War I. Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development, 1, 52–63. Web.
Vasquez, J. A. (1996). The causes of the Second World War in Europe: A new scientific explanation. International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale de Science Politique, 17(2), 161–178. Web.