To what extent can the First World War be considered a ‘Total War’?

To what extent can the First World War be considered a ‘Total War’?

The First World War is considered by many, a ‘total war’ because when evaluated, it is shown to have a great amount of factors within the criteria of a ‘total’ war, but the question is, to what extent? When defining a total war, one must examine the following factors: the mobilization of fully available resources and population, the relentless intensity of warfare, the innovative techniques and their extreme effects, and all in all, the militaristic, economic, and social changes/events that occur in order to obtain a complete victory. From a militaristic, economic, and social standpoint, the First World War unquestionably falls under these characteristics, which show not to be separate factors affecting the total war question, but connected, as one factor affects another.

The military tactics, outcomes and innovations, as well as the relentless intensity during the First World War, clearly define the characteristics one would illustrate a ‘total war’ of having, as the escalated situation was a representation of countries engaging in a conflict that had aims of more than just winning; they wanted to win aggressively. The Battle of the Somme in 1916 is a prime representation of how the battles were extremely catastrophic in terms of casualties, as well as the fact that war had a continuous disintegration effect, as opposing powers tried to wear each other down. The use of artillery bombardments also shows the expansion of means of warfare, as it was an escalation in terms of being weapon of ‘mass destruction’: a weapon, which showed, if used effectively, to cause many casualties. Before the battle, the British bombarded the German lines, with 1.6 million shells being fired in a week’s time. The copious amount of resources (bombardment) used emphasizes the engagement of the countries in battle, and the following events resulted in a battle like never before in terms of high casualty rates. The German trenches were heavily fortified, so many of the British shells had failed to explode. When the attack commenced, the machine gun fire of the Germans resulted in a massacre: 60,000 British casualties on the first day: “The first day of the Somme is remembered so much because it’s the bloodiest day ever in British military history.”- Peter Simkins. The fact that the war had had such a groundbreaking event further exemplifies the committed involvement of nations in the way that countries were prepared to lose many men. The battle itself had proven that it was a war of attrition, as opposing countries would rigorously try to wear each other down. Further advancements by the British and the French resulted in many casualties, but unable to make significant advancements, the battle turned into stalemate for both sides. The allies had only advanced 8 km by the end of the battle (which lasted 4 months), but between the three nations involved there were over 1.2 million casualties. Therefore, despite not gaining significant ground, countries relentlessly engaged in long-lasting battle, testing each other to the brim in order to come one step closer to victory. During the war, innovative means of warfare were being implemented, as mentioned before (artillery bombardments). The introduction of poison gas at the Second Battle of Ypres (1905) was another innovative weapon, and it further shows how the war can be considered as a total war due to its effects: poison gas was a torture for soldiers to endure, as breathing in the chlorine gas destroyed the victim’s respiratory organs, bringing on choke attacks. The war was no longer about defeating the opponent; it was about making them suffer in the process; countries used all of the weapons at their disposal (including chlorine gas) in order to do this. When Germany declared ‘unrestricted submarine warfare’ on January 9th, 1917, it meant that a vessel could without warning attack any vessel of its rivals or rivals’ allies- this innovation exemplifies again the ruthless commitment to not only defeating a rival, but to cutting off a rival’s economic resources.

From an economic standpoint, the First World War meets the total war criteria because it was completely engaged in the belligerent effort that countries gave in order to try and win the war. Combatants were committed to such an extent that their militaristic aims and actions would purposely result in economic disadvantages for opposing countries, with the civilians feeling full effect of the war. The naval blockade of the Allies to Germany is a prime example, as they suffered from massive food shortages and other resources such as weapons and clothing. During the winter of 1916 especially, Germans were forced to turn to a variety of ersatz (substituting) products, including ‘war bread’ and powdered milk due to their shortages in the food areas. This was a turning point, as the criteria of total war met the economy: “It meant starting and ending the day with substitutes for nearly everything”- Moyer. By November 1918 the government could no longer control the streets of Berlin, among other cities, as food riots spread not only in Germany, but the Hapsburg cities of Vienna and Budapest, where the effects of the blockade were also felt. The public was therefore a subject of the war, as the war spanned further than only militaristic aspects- they were economically deprived. The war also involved the complete mobilization of resources to prepare for war. The industry expanded and created opportunity for those who were not at war- especially women. In Russia for example, this allowed a 2,000 percent increase in the production of artillery shells, and by November 15th, over 1,500,000 artillery shells were being produced per month. The war therefore caused the ‘civilian’ economy of nations to be reconstructed to war economies, which is also why rationing was introduced (controlling the distribution of scarce resources, goods, or services). In February 1918, rationing was introduced in Britain and DORA (Defense Of the Realm Act) aimed to prevent food shortages for the people due to the war- primarily the German blockade, but the soldiers also needed to be supplied by their countries’ supplies- it was a vicious circle, a total circle of war where countries’ economies suffered while trying to provide for not only the soldiers, but the civilians as well. The economy was changed to revolve around the war, and because of this the resources produced and used of countries counted towards the belligerent effort to try and win the war- therefore a total war.

The First World War can be defined as a total war for the reason that social changes occurred as a result of economic and militaristic factors; a total war contains

...