Essay: The Triple Alliance was not powerful enough to defeat the Triple Entente

In the early twentieth century, Europe was home to a tangled network of alliances that pitted nation against nation. By 1914, Europe was divided into two hostile camps and it would take only a little spark for the situation to explode into war.  On one side, there was Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy that formed the Triple Alliance. Germany and Austria-Hungary were already allying by 1879 when worried about a threat from Russia, and formed the Dual Alliance, and Italy joined the group in 1882. Opposing the Triple Alliance, there was the Triple Entente; made up of France, Great Britain and Russia. The war reached its end when Germany signed an armistice as the Triple Alliance was damaged and they were no longer able to win the war. There were many reasons for the destruction of the Triple Alliance, but in the end, it was the strength of their opponents, especially the involvement of the United States, that overpowered the Alliance’s weaknesses, which resulted in their ultimate defeat.  The impact of USA’s participation was particularly significant as it came at a critical time period, one in which it seemed like the Alliance was going to appear victorious at the end of the war.
Italy aimed to remain neutral during the war, however after pressure from the Triple Entente to enter the conflict, Italy then declared war on Austria-Hungary – essentially resulting in the expiry of the Triple Alliance. This created the problem of a two-front war since Russia and France were staunch allies, so Germany executed the Schlieffen Plan which was the idea of invading France through Belgium.  This plan failed partly because the number of trained German troops was not enough to achieve the encirclement of Paris and drive the remaining French troops southward. Any casualties that the German army suffered from, could not be counteracted by the reserve and replacement troops as they were not able to implement the plan due to lesser training and resources. Furthermore, by going through Belgium to France and violating Belgium’s neutrality, Britain was forced to enter the war as it had guaranteed the sanctity of Belgium’s borders. This was a key turning point as Germany and Austria-Hungary had entered the war heavily reliant on Britain not participating.  Many historians argue that the failure of the Schlieffen Plan was largely based on a lack of preparation for the worst, and in 2015, Holger Herwig stated that “the generals who did know about it counted on it giving a quick victory within weeks – if that did not happen, there was no Plan B”.  Overall, it is evident that the execution of the Schlieffen Plan exhausted Germany’s resources and left them with even less power to use against their enemies, especially since the war grew larger and the Central Powers grew more powerful. This caused great problems for them when the Triple Entente strengthened due to new allies that had fresh troops and armoury which Germany could no longer compete with after years of fighting.
Leading on from this, the Entente was superior in troops and arms regardless of the failure of the Schlieffen Plan. This was as a result of the entrance of the United States into the war, who bought with them around 1.6 million soldiers by the end of the war to assist the Triple Entente.  By 1918, most combatants reached their highest point in terms of arms production, however the Entente was superior in terms of quantity and quality. The British Expeditionary Force had 440 heavy artillery batteries at their disposal by November 1918, in comparison to a mere 6 in 1914. The US also helped limit the Germans and destroyed the ‘4-year deadlock’ of almost equal forces of the Entente and the Alliance. The exhausted troops of the Alliance could no longer compete with the fresh American forces that first contributed in July 1918, to the French counteroffensive on the Marne. Subsequently, the leaders of the German army told the German government that they must stop fighting.  It was only months after the US entered the war, that Germany signed the armistice and the war officially ended. Not to mention the large volume of soldiers combined with the UK’s combat tactics and weaponry which played a key role in the defeat of the Alliance. British historian Jeremy Black claims that the higher number of UK and French tanks than Germany’s had a ‘psychological impact, rather than a military or a strategic one’.  The German leadership saw this as a disadvantage, even though the tanks were essentially useless on the ground (they did not get very far). Since these tanks were useless in winning the war, French marshal Ferdinand Foch took command of Entente troops and coordinated a joint attack of the forces. By mid-October, their advances managed to cause the fall of the ‘Hindenburg Line’.  This collapse was the final straw for the German High Command and they eventually signed the armistice just over a month later, ending the war and marking the end of the Hundred Days Offensive.   This shows how effective the entrance of US troops was in building enough power to help weaken the Triple Alliance and ensure the Entente won the war.
Adding to the loss of power for the Alliance was the lack of allies and loyalty amongst them. What started off as a Triple Alliance, resulted in mainly Germany fighting the Entente and attempting to win the war. After defeating Russia in 1917, it seemed possible that Berlin would find victory over the Western Great Powers with assistance from a separate peace treaty signed with Soviet Russia at Brest Litovsk on March 3rd, 1918. This peace treaty, known as the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, ended Russia’s participation in World War I.  Historian Spencer Tucker considers the treaty the “ultimate betrayal” towards the Alliance as it freed up around a million German soldiers for the Western Front and meant that German domination of Eastern Europe was becoming more realistic.  However, this victory wasn’t enough to help Germany win the war, seeing as by October 1918, most of her allies had collapsed. In particular Austria-Hungary, an original member of the Triple Alliance, had surrendered in the final months of the war. Throughout the war, these allies seemed inefficient in contributing to the war effort and their surrender cut off more of Germany’s resources, which were already scarce. The armistice between the Entente and Austria-Hungary ensured they evacuate all occupied territory and all German forces were to be expelled from Austria-Hungary and the Entente were given use of internal communications and took possession of their warships.  USA played an undeniably pivotal role in the dissolution of Austria-Hungary despite initially appearing hesitant to declare war on them.  The reason they chose to declare war on Austria-Hungary was largely due to pressure from Italy as they were in need of some help from their allies in their war with the Austro-Hungarian empire.  President Woodrow Wilson of the United States, took a calculated risk of declaring war on the “pawn of Germany” in order to achieve their principal goal of defeating the Germans. As a result of this, the German forces were weakened even further and were now easier to beat, and the Triple Alliance were moving closer to their complete surrender and acceptance of defeat.
Another key turning point in World War I was the untimely mistake of sinking the American passenger ship ‘Lusitania’ by the Germans which helped seal their fate in the war.  Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill directly attributes the German defeat in World War I to the sinking of Lusitania.  Initially, the USA was against Britain’s decision to impose a naval blockade as it affected their international market, however they subsequently changed their allegiance and had a big impact on the state of the war at the time. They helped shift the power over to the Triple Entente and bolstered their forces with troops to replenish their resources and secure victory. This again highlights the significance of the USA’s role in the Great War as the tables were turned once they chose a side and fought against the Triple Alliance. This incident was also significant because when USA finally decided to enter the war, they were initially only declaring war on Germany in April 2017; and eventually the Austro-Hungarian Empire too by the end of 1917. This can further explain why the USA was a key player in the defeat of the Triple Alliance as they declared war on the only two remaining members of the Triple Alliance without involving themselves in the military campaigns of the Alliance’s other allies such as the Ottoman Empire.
In conclusion, based on the events of World War I, in particular between the years 1917-1918, it is evident that the Triple Alliance was simply not powerful enough to defeat the Triple Entente and its allies to achieve victory. A combination of limited resources, lack of loyalty to one another, and inadequate combatants amongst other reasons led to multiple surrenders kicking off with Italy and ending with the final surrender of Germany. Voltaire writes “It is said that God is always on the side of the big battalions” and in the Entente’s case, they acquired great strength from the involvement of the United States that brought with them a large body of troops. It’s quite ironic to find that many historians believe that Germany were were falsely accused of starting the war. German historian, Gerhard Ritter claims that Germany ‘didn’t have a plan for domination and that it was only trying to support its ally Austria-Hungary’.  However, some historians such as Sir Max Hastings believe that Germany had the power to prevent disaster by not interfering with Austria-Hungary’s war on Serbia, which subsequently involved Russia.  Regardless of who started the war, the Triple Alliance was initially a defensive pact, and as Austria-Hungary and Germany had taken the offensive, Italy was bound to not join them.  Ultimately, the war ushered in a new diplomatic period, with new alignments and both the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente receded into history.