...The main idea of this speech is that Otto von Bismarck wanted Germany to actually make a difference for their country by taking action. He wanted to enforce power, military, something that Prussia had not done. Here he was responding to the Landtags of Prussia and how they refused military support. He says that, “not through speeches and majority decisions,” the problems and conflicts of this German state will no longer be solved by just talking and waiting for public and the parliament's approval. The government always took too long to come into an agreement yet, their governing was not successful. Basically, the main idea was that an army was needed fast to help gain more control no matter if his solution becomes violent and bloody; war. Bismarck want to make sure that he was taking over so Germany, in the future, would not have to deal with another revolution. He wanted to make things right, right in that moment....
Words: 930 - Pages: 4
...Coercive Diplomacy: Otto von Bismarck and the Unification of Germany by Lieutenant Colonel Kenneth R. Kassner United States Marine Corps United States Army War College Class of 2012 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT: A Approved for Public Release Distribution is Unlimited This manuscript is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Master of Strategic Studies Degree. The views expressed in this student academic research paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Army War College is accredited by the Commission on Higher Education of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, 3624 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, (215) 662-5606. The Commission on Higher Education is an institutional accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information...
Words: 7938 - Pages: 32
...united by “iron and blood” refers to the speech given by Prussian statesman Otto Von Bismarck, referring to the ‘Bismarck wars’; the battles heavily acclaimed to be the binding force behind German unification into one, powerful state. However, it is also possible to agree with Kenyes , who challenged Bismarck’s speech and opinions on unification by believing in an economically led charge towards unification; hence the use of the term “iron and steel” To agree on Bismarck’s “blood and iron” beliefs, You have to start with the ‘Bismarck wars’, wars created to help unite Germany against common enemies. The Danish War of 1864, which was fought over the two duchies ‘Schleswig’ and ‘Holstein’. Denmark, who occupied the Duchess at the time, had taken the land from the Prussians in the 1400s (Bismarck was of course Prussian by nature). Denmark was also the main threat from the North of Germany, consequently explaining why the Duchies were such crucial regions for Germany to control/have influence over. Two years later, in 1866 there was the Austro-Prussian war. Austria had always been a strong, united and independent nation; which situated geographically right next to the German states would clearly be enviable of pro-unification German ministers. Bismarck wanted the Austro-Prussian war to show that his Prussia was the more dominant and significant state than Franz Joseph’s Austria. Previously too Bismarck had met with Napoleon III In Biarritz to discuss possible French intervention...
Words: 772 - Pages: 4
...spanning from July 1870 until May 1871, the Franco-Prussian War was fought between the French and the Germans, resulting in a comprehensive German victory. The primary cause of the war was Otto von Bismarck, Prussian Chancellor, and his desire to create a unified Germany. Unification of Germany - officially occurring on the 18th January 1871, this unification was a direct result of the Franco-Prussian War, although many believed this organisation of German-speaking populations into one nation was inevitable. Nevertheless, this rose tensions for political, religious and cultural reasons, meaning true unification wasn't complete for years. Austria-Hungary - in the Balkans, the growth of Slavic nationalist groups threatened the stability of the already-fragile Austro-Hungarian empire. These groups sought to gain independence from the political domination of this empire. Unification of Italy - this involved the consolidation of states of the Italian peninsula into one state, spanning a large proportion of the 19th century. Many see the completion of this process as 1871, when Rome was made the capital city of this unified state. This was due to a growing national identity and the sight of nearby countries also unifying. The Dual Alliance, 1879 - created on 7th October 1879 as part of Otto von Bismarck's plan to prevent or limit war. This alliance existed between Germany and Austria-Hungary, focusing on protecting one another in the event of Russian or French invasion. ...
Words: 425 - Pages: 2
...↑ Bismarck hat laut der Darstellung Volker Ullrichs (Otto von Bismarck. 4. Auflage, Rowohlt, Reinbek 1998) den Titel eines Herzogs zu Lauenburg konsequent abgelehnt und auch Post zurückgesandt, die so adressiert war. ↑ Christopher Clark: Preußen. Aufstieg und Niedergang 1600–1947. Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Stuttgart 2007, ISBN 3-421-05392-8, S. 592 f.; Lothar Gall: Bismarck. Der weiße Revolutionär. 2. Auflage, Ullstein, Berlin 2002, ISBN 3-548-26515-4, S. 27–30; Volker Ullrich: Otto von Bismarck. Rowohlt, Reinbek bei Hamburg 1998, ISBN 3-499-50602-5, S. 14 f. ↑ Ullrich: Bismarck, S. 17; Gall: Bismarck, S. 29. ↑ Ullrich: Bismarck, S. 16–20. ↑ Brautwerbebrief an Heinrich von Puttkamer. In: Fürst Bismarcks Briefe an seine Braut und Gattin. Herausgegeben vom Fürsten Herbert von Bismarck. Cotta, Stuttgart 1900 ↑ Brief Bismarcks an seinen Bruder Bernhard vom 16. Oktober 1836. In: Otto Becker: Bismarcks Ringen um Deutschlands Gestaltung. Hrsg. und ergänzt von Alexander Scharff. Quelle & Meyer, Heidelberg 1958 ↑ Ludwig Reiners: Bismarcks Aufstieg 1815–64. C.H. Beck, München 1956. ↑ Bismarck, Gedanken und Erinnerungen I, S. 1 ff. ↑ Ullrich: Bismarck, S. 23; Gall: Bismarck, S. 33–36. ↑ Paul Kuetgens (Hrsg.): Carl Borromäus Cünzer Folie des Dames. Illustr. Bert Heller, Aachen 1932, S. 11. ↑ Zit. nach Ullrich: Bismarck, S. 26. ↑ Ullrich: Bismarck, S. 27. ↑ Ernst Engelberg: Bismarck – Urpreuße und Reichsgründer, Siedler Berlin 1985...
Words: 2217 - Pages: 9
...Bismarck: A Brief Summary Of Accomplishments Otto Von Bismarck was the first chancellor of the German empire (1871-1890) and is well known for the unification of Germany. Germany had existed as a collection of numerous separate principalities and Free Cities since the formation of the Holy Roman Empire. As a large result of Bismarck's efforts, the various German territories were united into a single country. He was appointed chancellor during the reign of Wilhelm I and was also chancellor to his son, Wilhelm II, for a time. Bismarck can best be described as secretive, manipulative, controlling, and willing to use trickery to achieve his goals. Not exactly honorable, but you have to admire his ambition to do whatever it took to achieve his goals. I think he was a clever and masterful strategist; he studied leaders, treaties and laws that attracted him and learned from their mistakes. Bismarck would take his time and plan things out. (Bismarck, Archive p. 307) In the process of unifying Germany, three wars were fought. The first was against Denmark in 1864 which didn’t do much for the rivalry between Austria and Prussia. Bismarck knew he would have to go to war with Austria sooner or later if he wanted to unify Germany. War broke out again in 1866 with Austria. It seems that Austria was predicted to win the war, but Germanys well organized army defeated Austria in six weeks. France was not pleased with this victory; Napoleon III feared that Germany would become too powerful...
Words: 741 - Pages: 3
...War Name Course Date War is defined as an organized and prolonged conflict carried out by countries or individuals within or outside a country. War is generally characterized by brutal or extreme violence, displacements of populations and both social and economic disruption or destruction. War is an actual, widespread and intentional armed conflict between countries. War is regarded as a form of political violence because countries are political creations or entities. When war is absent piece prevails. There are several types of war, namely; civil war, asymmetrical, conventional, chemical, unconventional, nuclear warfare among others. In civil war the warring sides are from the same country or political entity and what is at stake is either the control of the nation and instruments of power or one side is trying to break away or secede. In asymmetrical war, the combatants or feuding sides are not evenly marched in terms of military capability and therefore the weaker side engages in guerilla tactics in order to counter the huge disadvantage it is faced with. Conventional war is defined as a war whose main aim is to reduce or minimize the enemy’s capability mostly through battles. It is a war mostly fought by states and their allies. Unconventional war on the other side refers to a war whose main purpose is to attain military victory through use of clandestine activities such as supporting secretly one side in a...
Words: 1897 - Pages: 8
...include its birthplace Great Britain, Spain, most of Scandinavia and New Zealand. Hong Kong still has its own Beveridge-style health care, because the populace simply refused to give it up when the Chinese took over that former British colony in 1997. Cuba represents the extreme application of the Beveridge approach; it is probably the world's purest example of total government control. ------------------------------------------------- THE BISMARCK MODEL Named for the Prussian Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, who invented the welfare state as part of the unification of Germany in the 19th century. Despite its European heritage, this system of providing health care would look fairly familiar to Americans. It uses an insurance system -- the insurers are called "sickness funds" -- usually financed jointly by employers and employees through payroll deduction. Unlike the U.S. insurance industry, though, Bismarck-type health insurance plans have to cover everybody, and they don't make a profit. Doctors and hospitals tend to be private in Bismarck countries; Japan has more private hospitals than the U.S. Although this is a...
Words: 805 - Pages: 4
...How far does the role of individuals explain the outbreak of the German Wars of Unification? The German Wars of Unification can be blamed on a myriad of reasons however the pragmatism of Otto Von Bismarck often allowed him to take advantage and shape the course of German history. Conversely it would be remiss to state that Bismarck was solely responsible for the German Wars of Unification, nationalist elements as well as growing calls for liberalism all spurred the way for the beginning of a German state. Compounding this was the economic prosperity of Prussia, as Prussia grew economically stronger it diminished Austria’s sphere of influence in the region. This would also spur calls for greater German unity whilst isolating Austria. Prussian ambition can be first seen to rival Austria with the creation of the Zollverein. Prussia in 1818 created a law to integrate Prussian customs systems onto neighbouring small states, over the next fifteen years through a complex mixture of threats and concessions the Prussians managed to create a concrete policy that would lay the foundations for the Zollverein. In 1833 the Zollverein was created and most importantly Austria was firmly excluded. The importance of this is summed up in Metternich’s quote “a smaller rival confederation..which all too quickly will become accustomed to following its own objectives with its own means”. Metternich’s fears would eventually become a reality, this is reiterated by the historian Treitschke...
Words: 1111 - Pages: 5
...Nearly the ends of concert of Europe, there have been changes to some European countries, by some high-ranking political leaders. Leaders such as the Prime minister of Prussia Otto Von Bismarck, Mamio Benso Count of Cavour the Prime minister of the kingdom of Piedmont and lastly the Tsar of Russia Alexander II. Russia when to major changes after their defeat in the Crimean war, in which Alexander II made drastic choices for his kingdom. Cavour and Bismarck both prime ministers had in their mind how to change their land in way of politics. Although they were al great leaders they all used various political similarities and different methods to achieve their goals. First, Cavour and Bismarck where both Prime minister of their perspective country in which both wanted to better their homeland for the best. Both leaders wanted to unify their country for economic growth and to give more power to the states. In order to accomplish their goal of unifying the North and the South of Germany and Italy, they used real politik to succeed, which is: policies which to gain on consideration of power. They used Nationalism to get the people of their country on their side for the war. Cavour asked the help from the Emperor of Europe, Napolean III, to get the Austrians to out of the northern lands of Italy. Bismarck on the other hand provoked Russia into commencing wars. They both used method of wars to get what they wanted, both leaders involved the country of France to gain their dream, also...
Words: 403 - Pages: 2
...IB1 History HL Einar Iliyev Paper 3 Questions 1. How far is it true to say that Austria lost control of Germany rather than Prussia gained it? The steady decline of Austrian political ascendancy over the German Confederation (since the failure of Prussian Erfurt Plan in 1850 to the Austro-Prussian War in 1866) was a result of Austria’s imperial (rather than German nationalist) and inefficient foreign policies towards its European neighbors (namely, France, Britain, Russia, Italy and Prussia). Austria’s shifty foreign policy in the Crimean War (1854-1856), as well as its imperialist interests in Italy, Moldavia and Wallachia, established its international reputation as a purely imperial (and not German) Empire. In this respect, it was Austria that lost political control of increasingly nationalist Germany, rather than Prussia gained it. After the Prussian Erfurt Union plan, aimed at the creation of Prussian-dominated Kleindeutsch (Little German) unified state under the presidency of Prussian King Friedrich Wilhelm, failed following the revolt at Hesse-Cassel and Olmutz Capitulation; Austria had an excellent opportunity to ensure its lasting dominance in the German Confederation and lead the cause of German national Unification. Although the spirit of liberal 1848 revolutions has seriously undermined German nationalism, the idea of a unified German state became popular again in 1860’s. This was due to the rapid industrialization in Prussia and non-Prussian Germany, when...
Words: 1387 - Pages: 6
...Germany became the European strongest power until the fall of Germany in 1914. The unification of Germany brought about changes to the European diplomatic scene, with the appointment of Otto von Bismarck as the German chancellor in 1871 by Kaiser Williams 1, he reorganized the German military and increased industrialization in Germany. Through Bismarck’s political strategies Germany was able to become European’s instrument for peace and balance of power. According to some research we realize that during the reign of Napoleon Bonarphte coalition were also formed against the French aggression, therefore we can say the alliance systems had been occurring in Europe before the coming of Bismarck, but for the purpose of our study the system of alliance that was going to change the political order of Europe, both in the east and west was formed between 1871-1907. This system of alliance was not aggressive but gradually it generated into the outbreak of the First World War which occurred as a result to the Balkan crisis and various territorial dispute in Africa and Europe.The alliance system was started by Bismarck, the German chancellor from 1871-1890. After the franco-prussian war, Bismarck held that Germany was a “satiated state” which should give up the ideas of expansion or further conquest. Thus Bismarck organized system of alliances designed to maintain Germany’s hegemony on the European continent. France was determined to challenge the...
Words: 2226 - Pages: 9
...Wyatt Rodriguez 9/30/15 1st period World War One Causes Various events took place in Europe, assassination, betrayal, alliances, and territorial disputes. Each of these events taking shape towards a war that would unite the world in a single fight. With the traits of nationalism, imperialism, militarism, and alliances being the motivators in the world wide war. Throughout time there have always been alliances, with different races forming together for single causes. Hence Rudyard Kipling’s quote in 1905 “Oh East is East, and West is West… But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth, when two strong men stand face to face, tho’ they come from the ends of earth!” There was no exception in World War one, when Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, Russia went to defend against the Austrians’ with Serbia. With Russia in the fight, Germany declared war upon Russia, eventually leading France into the war against Germany and Austria-Hungary. With Germanys’ attack on Belgium, it provoked the British and included them as well into the nationwide war. Japan later joined as well on the Allies side, and with the sinking of the Lusitania the United States, Britain, and Italy went into the war fully. Imperialism was already enforced before the war, with most of Europe looking to take certain points within Asia and Africa. These points proved advantages and disadvantages to some of the warring countries. When the war was ready to commence the controlled countries...
Words: 704 - Pages: 3
...V DOS revolucionarios: Napoleón III y Bismarck EL DESPLOME del sistema de Metternich como secuela de la guerra de Crimea produjo casi dos decenios de conflictos: la guerra del Piamonte y Francia contra Austria en 1859, la guerra por el Schleswig-Holstein de 1864, la guerra austro-prusiana de 1866 y la franco-prusiana de 1870. De este vórtice surgiría en Europa un nuevo equilibrio del poder. Francia, que había participado en tres de las contiendas y alentado las demás, perdió su posición de predominio ante Alemania. Y, de importancia mayor aún, desaparecieron los frenos morales del sistema de Metternich. Este tumulto quedó simbolizado con el uso de un nuevo termino para una política irrestricta de equilibrio del poder: el termino alemán Realpolitik remplazó al termino francés raison d'état, sin modificar, empero, su significado. 98 Material reproducido para fines académicos, prohibida su reproducción sin la autorización de los titulares de los derechos DOS REVOLUCIONARIOS: NAPOLEÓN III Y BISMARCK 99 El nuevo orden europeo fue obra de dos colaboradores bastante insólitos, que luego llegarian a ser archienemigos: el emperador Napoleon III y Otto von Bismarck. Estos dos hombres pasaron por alto los antiguos lemas de Metternich: que en interés de la estabilidad habia que conservar las cabezas coronadas legitimas de los Estados de Europa; que habia que suprimir los movimientos nacionales y liberales, y, ante todo, que las relaciones entre los Estados habian de...
Words: 16089 - Pages: 65
...How Accurate is it to Summarise the Period Before 1848 as: ‘The Time when Nothing Happened’? Bismarck described the era before 1848 as ‘the time when nothing happened’ and to a certain degree it is true, however, a number of key events did occur that had long lasting effects on Germany that would come to hinder, advance and affect the pace and direction of unification. Friedrich I established Prussia as a kingdom, independent of its previous association as a Polish fief, Prussia expanded its borders massively into neighbouring states. Under Friedrich I Prussia emerged as one of the strongest military and economic powers in Europe proper. The strong economy and growing military reputation lay foundations for a strong, proud and militaristic culture. As a relatively new state it could learn from the mistakes of others and as a large state it could bully and manipulate its neighbours, but it was still a subordinate of Austria in the Holy Roman Empire and nowhere near powerful enough to contend Austria’s seat of dominance. The influence that Prussia gained allowed for a stronger Prussia later, the knowledge that Prussia was vastly superior to its neighbours aided in giving Prussians a sense of self-confidence that allowed them to make the exertive steps towards unifying Germany after 1815. From the 9th century until 1806, the Holy Roman Empire dominated the German states, a common language and a notably similar culture had developed and bound the member states together as the...
Words: 2318 - Pages: 10
