“Uncomfortable Issues”: Kitchener's 1910 Report and Imperial German Assessment of Australian Defence Preparedness in the Context of Weltpolitik

The First World War marked the end point of a process of German globalization that began in the 1870s, well before Germany acquired a colonial empire or extensive overseas commercial interests. Structured around the figures of five influential economists who shaped the German political landscape, Learning Empire explores how their overseas experiences shaped public perceptions of the world and Germany's place in it. These men helped define a German liberal imperialism that came to influence the 'world policy' (Weltpolitik) of Kaiser Wilhelm, Chancellor Bülow, and Admiral Tirpitz. They devised naval propaganda, reshaped Reichstag politics, were involved in colonial and financial reforms, and helped define the debate over war aims in the First World War. Looking closely at German worldwide entanglements, Learning Empire recasts how we interpret German imperialism, the origins of the First World War, and the rise of Nazism, inviting reflection on the challenges of globalization in the current century.

Compared with the First World War, which ended quite quickly once the position of Germany became strategically hopeless, the Second World War proved exceedingly difficult to end even after the overwhelming economic advantage of the Allied powers had turned the strategic tide decisively against the Axis. Both German and Japanese forces continued to fight tenaciously long after any realistic chance of victory had disappeared. Part of the explanation lies in the extremely violent battlefield culture that developed in two key theatres of the war, which deterred soldiers from surrendering, even when they found themselves in hopeless situations. This culture had its origins on the Western Front during the First World War. But in the Second World War it became official policy on both sides, not only on the Eastern Front but in the Pacific theatre as well. Only when the Allied authorities adopted techniques of psychological warfare designed to encourage rather than discourage surrender did German and Japanese resistance end.

The article attempts to eliminate historical gaps in the organization of universal military training in Kazakh SSR in the days of the Great Patriotic War. The Soviet historiography covered this problem insufficiently. The modern historiography draws on materials, which became available to researchers in the last decade. The source studies method has been used. As the Great Patriotic War began, the Red Army military reserve training became of mass proportions. The command staff was trained in military schools, junior officers were trained in reserve military units; there were schools of junior aviation specialists. Military departments of higher educational institutions trained officers, sergeants, and privates, while public organizations (Osoaviakhim, physical education societies, Red Cross) trained privates of their profile. There were certain requirements (entrance exams, schooling, health, etc.) for training in the above-mentioned fields. For training of the private corps in the Vsevobuch (general training program) only age mattered. The age requirement was from 16 for youth and up to 50 for reservists. Within the frameworks for implementation of the State Defense Committee resolution “On General Compulsory Military Training for Soviet Citizens” of September 1941, the organization of Vsevobuch in the Kazakh SSR during the Great Patriotic War is assessed. In the headquarters of the Central Asian, Ural, and South Ural military districts, responsible for the territory of the republic, there were established Vsevobuch departments for training of citizens under military commissariats of the Kazakh SSR. Vsevobuch was based on military training stations. In the initial period of the Great Patriotic War, it faced acute problems due to lack of combat experienced personnel to fill the posts of instructors and due to poor equipment. The study has permitted to assess the results of the Vsevobuch in the Kazash SSR. The studied materials prompt conclusions on coordinated work of the leadership of the Kazakh SSR, Kazvoenkomt, and military districts in the organization of the Vsevobuch. In total, about two million Kazakhs were trained for the Red Army, which was a significant contribution of the republic to Soviet victory in the Great Patriotic War.

The Inculcative Power of Australian Cadet Corps Uniforms in the 1900s and 1910s

The great crisis of 1905–7 passed away, but it could no longer be contended that the Polish Question had ceased to exist. In fact, events were to give it a greater significance. The crisis in Bosnia-Herzegovina of 1908 left the Poles in no doubt that sooner or later the three great powers of Central and Eastern Europe would be involved in war and that in consequence one side or the other would be required to produce some solution to the problem of their existence. Poland did not exist as a country, because it was merely a frontier area on the periphery of three great empires. It was therefore clearly assigned to be a battlefield when the great conflict came. Since Poland did not herself possess an army to fight for her independence it followed that the Poles speculated upon which of the contending alliance groups they ought to place their hopes. No clearly defined solution could be found. The position of Germany was plain. The Germans had no place for the Poles in a Europe of their making. For practical purposes the choice lay between Austria–Hungary and Russia. The Polish inhabitants of Prussian Poland saw no future for themselves in a German state and were attracted to Russia. The landed proprietors of eastern Galicia, harassed by the Austro-Hungarian government's disposition to support the Ukrainians as a means of putting pressure upon the Poles, thought that they would fare better in a conservative Russian state.

The outcome of the London conference was already widely perceived in the summer of 1924 as a veritable caesura both in European and transatlantic relations. Yet the question as to precisely what kind of caesura it constituted has remained decidedly controversial. Previous accounts have uncovered countless nuances, conflicts and reversals marking the intense negotiations between the ‘anodyne’ opening speeches of 16 July and invocations of a new international spirit on 16 August 1924. Yet they have also drawn a markedly polarised picture of what shifts in the post-Versailles constellation the conference brought about. Most influentially, London has been interpreted as the first high-point of short-sighted Anglo-American appeasement after 1919 that, with the pursuit of narrow financial interests, eroded the Versailles system. Anglo-American policymakers and financiers allegedly forced a settlement on France that undermined not only French but all western possibilities to prevent a perilous resurgence of Germany. Accordingly, the agreement has been termed an unquestionable ‘victory’ for German revisionist policy – the stepping-stone for its attempts to alter not only the reparations clauses but also the wider status quo of Versailles. Yet the London conference has also been called critical for a continued ‘republican’ policy of peaceful revision under Stresemann. Can the outcome of London thus essentially be gauged in terms of Europe's balance of power – where Germany's position clearly improved? Or did it have a different, positive impact on Europe's stabilisation in the 1920s?

Georgian-German relations hold particular relevance today, especially considering Germany's position as a prominent member of the Big Seven and traditional Europe. While Germany's history includes aspirations for hegemony during the First and Second World Wars, Georgia maintained a largely positive attitude toward Germany, particularly during the period of our interest. We must contemplate what might have changed for our country if the German side had emerged victorious. Could it have spared us from the events of February 25, 1921? Was Germany a colonizer cloaked in charming European attire? An examination of these factors, we believe, is both intriguing and vital. The Georgian press meticulously monitored ongoing developments in Germany, as well as Germany's political stance toward our nation. It conveyed its sentiments and devoted considerable space to several relevant events. It's worth noting that the Georgian intelligentsia held a deep appreciation for German culture, diligently reporting to the German press, and closely tracking its global political involvement. In our study, we aim to address these pivotal questions. By employing thematic analysis of articles published in the government newspaper "Republic of Georgia" from 1918 to 1919 and reviewing the relevant literature on this topic, we seek to shed light on this important historical perspective.

The 50th anniversary of the Treaty between the People's Republic of Poland and the Federal Republic of Germany on the basis of the normalization of their mutual relations provides an opportunity to present a number of reflections, including remarks on the significance of this agreement for Bonn's foreign policy. The aim of the article is to reconstruct the relations and basic dependencies between Bonn's European policy (or, more broadly, the so-called Westbindung) and German eastern policy (Ostpolitik) and the Agreement as its element. The 1970 agreement has undoubtedly become one of the focal points in the process of changing, revising West German foreign policy at the turn of the 1960s and 1970s in its key dimensions. It has not only become a part of Germany's relations with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. It has also played a certain role and gained certain influence in the sphere of relations between the Bonn Republic and the countries of Western Europe and in the Euro-Atlantic context. Therefore, it seems that the presentation of a set of reflections devoted to this problem, especially in the light of the forthcoming anniversary of the PPR-FRG Agreement, is justified. The considerations below, in the light of the presented assumptions, include an indication of the central directions of West German foreign policy shaped after the end of the Second World War, a reconstruction of relations between Bonn's European policy and its Eastern policy, and an assessment of the Agreement itself and its significance from the perspective of Germany's position in European relations. The analyses were based mainly on (Polish and foreign) achievements of political, historical and legal sciences and relevant sources of law. At the same time, it should be noted that the presented considerations do not aspire to a comprehensive analysis of the signalized problem, but rather constitute a set of reflections devoted to its key mechanisms.

Teaching & Learning Guide for: Whose War Was It Anyway? Some Australian Historians and the Great War

This document was originally published as a broadsheet by the Central Committee of the Social- Democratic Party of Germany in mid-August 1911, on the occasion of the Second Moroccan conflict, also known as the Agadir crisis (1 July-4 November 1911). It should be read together with the next item in this anthology, a sharply critical response from Rosa Luxemburg. The paragraphs that provoked Rosa Luxemburg's condemnation were those suggesting that imperialism (or world policy, as Kautsky called it, following the old nomenclature) was not in the interest of most sections of the German bourgeoisie. Kautsky thought arms-expenditures were actually detrimental to large numbers of the possessing classes. Keywords:Germany; Social Democracy; World Politics; World War

Progress of migration scholarship over 60 years of <i>International Migration</i>

Germany has fascinated its own people as well as onlookers in the twentieth century because, unlike the history of other European states, its very being has been posed as a question. Why was there no unified German state until late in the nineteenth century? How did Germany become an industrial power? What responsibility does Germany bear for the two world wars? This accessible but authoritative study attempts to answer these and other fundamental questions by looking at the economic, social, political and cultural forces that have created modern Germany. The 1848 revolutions ushered in an age of Realism that saw rapid economic development and the creation of the Bismarckian empire. However, by the early twentieth century Germany's economic expansion and position as a world power began to fracture and growing internal, economic, social, and political contradictions led it, with disastrous results, into the First World War and the subsequent Weimar Republic. Hitler and the Nazi movement proposed a 'revolution' and the creation of a 'German style' and the Second World War/Holocaust is, arguably, the defining event of the twentieth century. The Americanization of the German economy and society, the 'economic miracle' and euphoria of reunification have in recent years rapidly given way to disillusionment as the major political parties have failed to master outstanding social and environmental problems. The 'German question' - Germany's place within the European Union - continues to be unanswered even within an EU where it is the dominant economic power.

Compulsory military service took on the most organized, long-term form it has ever had in Canada during the Second World War. But few historians look beyond the politics of conscription to study the creation, administration or impact of a training system that affected more than 150,000 people. Faced with the Mackenzie King government's policy of conscripting manpower only for home defence, and their own need for overseas volunteers, Army leaders used conscripts raised under the National Resources Mobilization Act to meet both purposes. This paper explores the Army's role in creating and administering the compulsory military training system during the war, the pressures put on conscripts to volunteer for overseas service, and the increased resistance to volunteering that resulted by 1944. The consequences of the Army's management of conscription came very much to shape the political events that took place in 1944, and cannot be fully understood outside that context.

Dr. John Pearce Way was headmaster of Rossall School, 1896–1908. The school was founded in 1844 by Rev. St Vincent Beechey, as a sister school to Marlborough College, for the sons of clergymen and others. It was listed in the top 30 public schools in the later 19th century. This chapter, taken from a collection published in the Edwardian era, observes the militaristic culture that was part of the public school ethos. Approximately 100 old boys served in the South African War, with 17 dying in active service. In the First World War, 297 old boys lost their lives. In the document, Way showed reasons why a militaristic culture was necessary – amongst which were to eliminate hooliganism, to instill self-discipline, promote a healthy body and protect the Empire. Way stressed the defensive nature of military training. Militaristic culture became a feature of both elite and non-elite schools of the period and was also a feature of the youth movements of the later Victorian and the Edwardian years. Way also notes that compulsory military training introduced in Germany had also improved industrial efficiency.

N the 20th century, capitalist countries experienced two major up~urges I of land reform : One in years immediately following World War I and the other in the period from the termination of World War 11 up to the present day. It occurred in East European countries in the former period, and in. the latter period, in Asian, Middle, and Near Eastern countries and in some parts of Europe. With respect to the problem of the development of less-developed countries, which has been taken up by both camps of East and West as a part of their world policies, the enforcement of land reform is regarded as one of the fundamental conditions for it. Consequently, in the family of free nations recognition of the importance of carrying out land reform has led to many researches and recommendations being made on this problem by the United Nations ~nd various institutes. For instance, in the United Nations report, Measures for the Economic Development of Underdeveloped Countries, prepared by five specialists, including Prof. T. W. Schultz, reference was made to the importance of land reform for underdeveloped countries, as follows. First, regarding the need for securing tenure, it states, Private enterprise will not yield its best results unless legal and social institutions are such that the private initiator secures the fruit of his own effort. Of the many spheres where this is lelevant, the most important sphere which is widely neglected in underdeveloped countries is the contract between the cultivator and his landlord. Tenancy legislation should protect the tenant against arbitrary disturbance, giving him secure tenure so long as he practises good husbandry. And it should protect his right to compensation, upon termination of the tenancy, for any unexhausted improvements which he has effected.I Regarding the necessity of land reform, or need for abolishing in Yarying degrees landholding in huge estates, it continues : In many underdeteloped countries, the cultivators of the soil are exploited mercilessly by a landlord class which performs no useful social function. This class