The Morocco Crisis started out when Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany declared support for the suitan of Morocco. However the Kaiser and the German government didn’t really care about Morocco, their main intention was to anger France in Britain in order to split them up. Not only were they nervous about having two of the most powerful nations in Europe together on one side, they were also angry about being excluded. The Entente Cordiale had been an agreement where Britain could pursue its interests in Egypt and France could expand westward from Algeria into Morocco. It was due to this that Germany felt excluded especially due to the fact that they weren’t involved in the decisions made about North Africa. The Kaiser expressed is thoughts on Morocco being allowed to have independence and eventually this led to the international convention guaranteed the independence of morocco in 1880. France and Britain threatened to override this which would then pose a challenge to Germanys own influence in Europe and the world. The Kaiser and Germany then planned to take aggressive action in Morocco in order to put a space in between France and Britain but this instead helped strengthen the bond between France and Britain. They now had a common enemy….Germany. This event changed the friendship of France and Britain into an informal alliance. The convention eventually gave France some power in Morocco. This being the first Moroccan Crisis.
The First Moroccan Crisis concerned the colonial status of Morocco and was really provoked by the signing of a friendship agreement between France and Britain known as the Triple Entente. Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany was perplexed over this agreement, so he decided to test the new-born friendship. He felt that a crisis, however contrived, would show the two countries would not support each other.
Morocco became the focal point of the Kaiser's worries because France was interested in taking it over as colony. In fact, France had already reached agreements with Britain and Spain granting their permission to France to take on Morocco as a protectorate.
Reacting against this permission with hostility, Kaiser Wilhelm II visited Tangier, Morocco, on March 31, 1905, and made a speech in favor of Moroccan independence. His visit represented such an upfront challenge to France that many in the French government began to rally for war. On January 3, 1906, France did begin moving troops toward the German border. A few days later, France called for a summit meeting in Algeciras, Spain, where delegates from thirteen nations convened, to resolve the dispute. The only nation to side with Germany was Austria-Hungary.
Diplomats took Germany's carefully planned performance as a signal. Germany was not attempting to keep France out of Morocco, nor even to reserve Morocco for itself. Germany wanted most of all to break up the Entente Cordiale between England and France.
The Germans looked forward to the Algeciras Conference with supreme confidence. But just as Germany seemed to be soaring toward the height of power, things began to go wrong. As diplomats were convening at Algeciras, it became clear that Germany, not France, was going to be the country in trouble.
Russia, France, Britain, Italy, Austria-Hungary, Germany, and even the United States sent representatives. Early in the convention, a test vote was taken on a minor issue. The test vote showed that all countries present, except for Germany and Austria-Hungary, sympathized with France.
An international agreement was eventually signed in Algeciras by which France retained control over Moroccan political and financial affairs, though it ceded control of the Moroccan police. As a result of the Algeciras Conference, France became the ruling power in Morocco.
Though the Algeciras Conference had solved the Moroccan problem, it strained the relationship between the Triple Entente and Triple Alliance, a prominent event leading up to World War I. It became clear after the Moroccan Crisis that if Germany decided to unleash a war against France, it would be opposed by almost every great power in Europe. At the Algeciras Conference, Germany was humble and gave in to the powers of Europe because of a huge lack of support. Thus, as a result of Germany's humbled stance, a possible European war had been averted.
Germany has made themselves the odd man out during the crisis it seems.They felt not only threatened by the mere thought that the two most powerful nations in the world would join together as one. Obviously Wilhelm had to act somehow.
Wilhelm, however, was threatening the peace Europe has been trying to maintain since Napoleon. On the flip side-Wilhelm himslef thought this was being threaten since Morocco was being divided by larger nations, rendering them-to him-unable to have control over their own nation. Thus, his visitation was aimed to encourage their own pursuit of freedom.
It is true however that Morocco was never a part of his intentions, rather to disrupt the Alliance France and Britain had created. What strikes me interesting is that both nations improved relations, and, at the Algecira COnference, conflict was settled. Ironically by Germany actually, who made the move to avoid major war, however in the long run they've only post-pone.
We see an attempt to keep the peace throughout Europe, however with tension would have to come with the new age of Imperialism. There is only so much land to go around, so much resources to use. While war could have been avoided (and in this case, was) tension could not. Unfortunately Germany has made themselves the subject of suspicion throughout Europe, they've made themselves the bad guy.
Probably not the most thrilling video you'll see in you life, but it gets right down to the point. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g4Aobq2HbQ
I thought it would be cool to check out the first Moroccan Crisis, so I did. After reading all of the post you guys put on here, it is safe to say that Germany was main bad guy behind this whole conflict. Kaiser Wilhelm and the Germans had tried to split the alliance between Britain and France by causing them to dispute over territory.It seems as though most of the conflicts that occured in Europe at the time were due to disputes over territory. In the conflict that I had to research, the First Balkan War, you had similar problems. the Balkan States came into conflict with the Ottoman Empire over certain territorial gains and territorial expansion. After the Treaty of London, not everyone was satisfied. In the first Moroccan crisis, the international agreement made at the Algeciras Conference had satisfied the thoughts of most nations, except for Germany and Russia. Now, this may not seem bad because only two out of the many nations that were present at the conference were dissatisfied. however, as we can see throughout history, Germany has an important role during the next two world wars. Especially in WWII, we can see all the tension and anger Germany has built up over the past centuries. Germany has always been the country that no one really wanted to side with because of some of the actions they had previously taken against other countries. I thought the Kaiser to be very strategic in trying to break the major alliance between France and Great Britain by trying to make them fight over territory. In a situation like this, this was Germany's only possible plan to gain any edge over the major European powers. There would have been no way for Germany to gain any influence in Europe with France and Great Britain in alliance with one another.
I did the second Moroccan crisis as my blog post. I found the first Moroccan crisis to be very interesting. While Otto Von Bismarck was in power in Germany, he used a policy referred to as realpolitik. This is the use of deception and military to out-do your opponents. I feel that this is the stance that Germany took at this time period. The kaiser of Germany would give a speech in Morocco. As Mike had said, he wanted to rally the natives of Morocco to gain independence. He was trying to split the relations between France and England. However, realpolitik was a strategy that I feel the Germans used in this period. It was also interesting that the man that replaced Bismarck decided to use different policies. This new person did not believe he would be able to create the same peace that Bismarck had created.
The first website gives a summary of the crisis in a more concise way. The second website is interesting because it shows various countries that were involved besides France and Germany. It shows the unfolding of both Moroccan crises. It shows various quotes which are interesting.
With this crisis that was about the country that controlled Morocco it shows us that there were two different causes to a conflict between Germany and France. Germany wanted to have Morocco become an independent country by rebelling against the French. All because Kaiser Wilhelm II wanted to break up the Triple Entente. In reaction to the actions taken by Kaiser Wilhelm II, France went and started to move troops over to the border of France and Germany, showing that he was ready to fight if they affected Morocco. To relieve the tensions they held a summit meeting where they wanted to settle the dispute that the two countries had and to show which countries were on which side of the argument, and it was favorable to the French side. So France was able to control the Moroccan political and financial affairs, but not the police. Giving control of all of the governing aspects but they were given that one restriction that allowed the prevention of unlawful arrests and laws pertaining to how the people act.
The First Moroccan Crisis certainly played a pivotal role in increasing the tension between the two emerging divisions of Europe. I thought that this ordeal was insightful in regards to German foreign policy. As Chris mentioned, it mirrored the realpolitik actions of Bismarck; Germany was out to strengthen its position on the international diplomatic stage and would do so by any means. However, I found certain elements to the crisis as being uncharacteristic of the unparalleled order and flawless efficacy of the German state. To begin, German policy seemed to be unnecessarily aggressive and clumsy. They ASSUMED that the Russians, who were being beaten up hardcore by the Japanese, could not assist France, and they HOPED that Britain would only give France partial support. If these things did actually happen, France’s ties with Russia and Great Britain would have been significantly weakened. However, they didn’t. Germany, who usually swiftly executes plans and demands for security, as well as order, really was overly optimistic. The Kaiser and his ministers made severe miscalculations that only served to come back and hurt them as France and Great Britain were drawn into a closer alliance due to the common national interest of limiting German power. Also, when they had already managed to pressure the French into compliance, they took it a step too far with outrageous demands. It is also important to mention that their military audacity and impatience struck feat, as well as suspicion into the other superpowers. They were put on the defensive and were mobilizing to suppress German aggression.
It’s safe to say they pretty much caused their own demise; the Algeciras Conference solved NOTHING. Maybe, it temporarily dealt with the immediate issue at hand… but that’s about it. I mean the increased tension between the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente would ultimately lead to WWI and France would be busy fighting, not worrying about Morocco. I also found in interesting that a pattern emerged when it came to Germany and its war activities. There seems to be a pattern where German aggression leads to tension and war with other nations, which is followed by a humiliating German defeat and a new determination to seek revenge and not back down again. This happened in the First and Second Moroccan Crisis, as well as in WWI-WWII.
I find it amusing that Germany initially wanted to break apart the Anglo-French alliance with the First Moroccan Crisis, but in the end it remained the same, if not strengthened. Germany went through a lot of trouble to weaken the Triple Entente, but it only angered the other European nations, making them, as Jose put it, the bad guys.
I also agree with Jose that World War was inevitable. Tensions only increase as time goes on, especially with the age of competition and imperialism. The escalation of these wars was avoided, but tensions increase, and eventually those tensions have to snap. Also, Germany’s actions caused other countries’ hostilities to grow, making them enemies. No matter how hard the European powers tried to avoid it, World War would happen sooner or later.
The Morocco Crisis started out when Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany declared support for the suitan of Morocco. However the Kaiser and the German government didn’t really care about Morocco, their main intention was to anger France in Britain in order to split them up. Not only were they nervous about having two of the most powerful nations in Europe together on one side, they were also angry about being excluded. The Entente Cordiale had been an agreement where Britain could pursue its interests in Egypt and France could expand westward from Algeria into Morocco. It was due to this that Germany felt excluded especially due to the fact that they weren’t involved in the decisions made about North Africa. The Kaiser expressed is thoughts on Morocco being allowed to have independence and eventually this led to the international convention guaranteed the independence of morocco in 1880. France and Britain threatened to override this which would then pose a challenge to Germanys own influence in Europe and the world. The Kaiser and Germany then planned to take aggressive action in Morocco in order to put a space in between France and Britain but this instead helped strengthen the bond between France and Britain. They now had a common enemy….Germany. This event changed the friendship of France and Britain into an informal alliance. The convention eventually gave France some power in Morocco. This being the first Moroccan Crisis.
ReplyDeleteA helpful site that I found was
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-first-moroccan-crisis
The First Moroccan Crisis concerned the colonial status of Morocco and was really provoked by the signing of a friendship agreement between France and Britain known as the Triple Entente. Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany was perplexed over this agreement, so he decided to test the new-born friendship. He felt that a crisis, however contrived, would show the two countries would not support each other.
ReplyDeleteMorocco became the focal point of the Kaiser's worries because France was interested in taking it over as colony. In fact, France had already reached agreements with Britain and Spain granting their permission to France to take on Morocco as a protectorate.
Reacting against this permission with hostility, Kaiser Wilhelm II visited Tangier, Morocco, on March 31, 1905, and made a speech in favor of Moroccan independence. His visit represented such an upfront challenge to France that many in the French government began to rally for war. On January 3, 1906, France did begin moving troops toward the German border. A few days later, France called for a summit meeting in Algeciras, Spain, where delegates from thirteen nations convened, to resolve the dispute. The only nation to side with Germany was Austria-Hungary.
Diplomats took Germany's carefully planned performance as a signal. Germany was not attempting to keep France out of Morocco, nor even to reserve Morocco for itself. Germany wanted most of all to break up the Entente Cordiale between England and France.
The Germans looked forward to the Algeciras Conference with supreme confidence. But just as Germany seemed to be soaring toward the height of power, things began to go wrong. As diplomats were convening at Algeciras, it became clear that Germany, not France, was going to be the country in trouble.
Russia, France, Britain, Italy, Austria-Hungary, Germany, and even the United States sent representatives. Early in the convention, a test vote was taken on a minor issue. The test vote showed that all countries present, except for Germany and Austria-Hungary, sympathized with France.
An international agreement was eventually signed in Algeciras by which France retained control over Moroccan political and financial affairs, though it ceded control of the Moroccan police. As a result of the Algeciras Conference, France became the ruling power in Morocco.
Though the Algeciras Conference had solved the Moroccan problem, it strained the relationship between the Triple Entente and Triple Alliance, a prominent event leading up to World War I. It became clear after the Moroccan Crisis that if Germany decided to unleash a war against France, it would be opposed by almost every great power in Europe. At the Algeciras Conference, Germany was humble and gave in to the powers of Europe because of a huge lack of support. Thus, as a result of Germany's humbled stance, a possible European war had been averted.
This is a good website that gives a clear and concise summary of the crisis.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.onwar.com/aced/data/mike/moroccan1904.htm
Germany has made themselves the odd man out during the crisis it seems.They felt not only threatened by the mere thought that the two most powerful nations in the world would join together as one. Obviously Wilhelm had to act somehow.
ReplyDeleteWilhelm, however, was threatening the peace Europe has been trying to maintain since Napoleon. On the flip side-Wilhelm himslef thought this was being threaten since Morocco was being divided by larger nations, rendering them-to him-unable to have control over their own nation. Thus, his visitation was aimed to encourage their own pursuit of freedom.
It is true however that Morocco was never a part of his intentions, rather to disrupt the Alliance France and Britain had created. What strikes me interesting is that both nations improved relations, and, at the Algecira COnference, conflict was settled. Ironically by Germany actually, who made the move to avoid major war, however in the long run they've only post-pone.
We see an attempt to keep the peace throughout Europe, however with tension would have to come with the new age of Imperialism. There is only so much land to go around, so much resources to use. While war could have been avoided (and in this case, was) tension could not. Unfortunately Germany has made themselves the subject of suspicion throughout Europe, they've made themselves the bad guy.
Probably not the most thrilling video you'll see in you life, but it gets right down to the point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g4Aobq2HbQ
I thought it would be cool to check out the first Moroccan Crisis, so I did. After reading all of the post you guys put on here, it is safe to say that Germany was main bad guy behind this whole conflict. Kaiser Wilhelm and the Germans had tried to split the alliance between Britain and France by causing them to dispute over territory.It seems as though most of the conflicts that occured in Europe at the time were due to disputes over territory. In the conflict that I had to research, the First Balkan War, you had similar problems. the Balkan States came into conflict with the Ottoman Empire over certain territorial gains and territorial expansion. After the Treaty of London, not everyone was satisfied. In the first Moroccan crisis, the international agreement made at the Algeciras Conference had satisfied the thoughts of most nations, except for Germany and Russia. Now, this may not seem bad because only two out of the many nations that were present at the conference were dissatisfied. however, as we can see throughout history, Germany has an important role during the next two world wars. Especially in WWII, we can see all the tension and anger Germany has built up over the past centuries. Germany has always been the country that no one really wanted to side with because of some of the actions they had previously taken against other countries. I thought the Kaiser to be very strategic in trying to break the major alliance between France and Great Britain by trying to make them fight over territory. In a situation like this, this was Germany's only possible plan to gain any edge over the major European powers. There would have been no way for Germany to gain any influence in Europe with France and Great Britain in alliance with one another.
ReplyDeleteI did the second Moroccan crisis as my blog post. I found the first Moroccan crisis to be very interesting. While Otto Von Bismarck was in power in Germany, he used a policy referred to as realpolitik. This is the use of deception and military to out-do your opponents. I feel that this is the stance that Germany took at this time period. The kaiser of Germany would give a speech in Morocco. As Mike had said, he wanted to rally the natives of Morocco to gain independence. He was trying to split the relations between France and England. However, realpolitik was a strategy that I feel the Germans used in this period. It was also interesting that the man that replaced Bismarck decided to use different policies. This new person did not believe he would be able to create the same peace that Bismarck had created.
ReplyDeleteI found these two good websites:
http://historyannex.com/20th-century-Europe/prewwi/first-moroccan.html
http://cnparm.home.texas.net/Wars/MorCrises.htm
The first website gives a summary of the crisis in a more concise way. The second website is interesting because it shows various countries that were involved besides France and Germany. It shows the unfolding of both Moroccan crises. It shows various quotes which are interesting.
With this crisis that was about the country that controlled Morocco it shows us that there were two different causes to a conflict between Germany and France. Germany wanted to have Morocco become an independent country by rebelling against the French. All because Kaiser Wilhelm II wanted to break up the Triple Entente. In reaction to the actions taken by Kaiser Wilhelm II, France went and started to move troops over to the border of France and Germany, showing that he was ready to fight if they affected Morocco. To relieve the tensions they held a summit meeting where they wanted to settle the dispute that the two countries had and to show which countries were on which side of the argument, and it was favorable to the French side. So France was able to control the Moroccan political and financial affairs, but not the police. Giving control of all of the governing aspects but they were given that one restriction that allowed the prevention of unlawful arrests and laws pertaining to how the people act.
ReplyDeleteThe First Moroccan Crisis certainly played a pivotal role in increasing the tension between the two emerging divisions of Europe. I thought that this ordeal was insightful in regards to German foreign policy. As Chris mentioned, it mirrored the realpolitik actions of Bismarck; Germany was out to strengthen its position on the international diplomatic stage and would do so by any means. However, I found certain elements to the crisis as being uncharacteristic of the unparalleled order and flawless efficacy of the German state.
ReplyDeleteTo begin, German policy seemed to be unnecessarily aggressive and clumsy. They ASSUMED that the Russians, who were being beaten up hardcore by the Japanese, could not assist France, and they HOPED that Britain would only give France partial support. If these things did actually happen, France’s ties with Russia and Great Britain would have been significantly weakened. However, they didn’t. Germany, who usually swiftly executes plans and demands for security, as well as order, really was overly optimistic. The Kaiser and his ministers made severe miscalculations that only served to come back and hurt them as France and Great Britain were drawn into a closer alliance due to the common national interest of limiting German power. Also, when they had already managed to pressure the French into compliance, they took it a step too far with outrageous demands. It is also important to mention that their military audacity and impatience struck feat, as well as suspicion into the other superpowers. They were put on the defensive and were mobilizing to suppress German aggression.
It’s safe to say they pretty much caused their own demise; the Algeciras Conference solved NOTHING. Maybe, it temporarily dealt with the immediate issue at hand… but that’s about it. I mean the increased tension between the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente would ultimately lead to WWI and France would be busy fighting, not worrying about Morocco.
ReplyDeleteI also found in interesting that a pattern emerged when it came to Germany and its war activities. There seems to be a pattern where German aggression leads to tension and war with other nations, which is followed by a humiliating German defeat and a new determination to seek revenge and not back down again. This happened in the First and Second Moroccan Crisis, as well as in WWI-WWII.
I find it amusing that Germany initially wanted to break apart the Anglo-French alliance with the First Moroccan Crisis, but in the end it remained the same, if not strengthened. Germany went through a lot of trouble to weaken the Triple Entente, but it only angered the other European nations, making them, as Jose put it, the bad guys.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Jose that World War was inevitable. Tensions only increase as time goes on, especially with the age of competition and imperialism. The escalation of these wars was avoided, but tensions increase, and eventually those tensions have to snap. Also, Germany’s actions caused other countries’ hostilities to grow, making them enemies. No matter how hard the European powers tried to avoid it, World War would happen sooner or later.