The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand on 28 June 1914, otherwise known as “the shot heard round the world,” is widely recognized as the immediate cause of the First World War. However, while Ferdinand's assassination may have been the trigger for the war, without long-standing underlying factors such as nationalism and the alliance system, it would not have sparked one of the largest wars in history. According to historical sociologist Anthony Smith, nationalism, in simple terms, is the ideology or movement aimed at promoting the interests, self-determination, and unified national identity of a particular state. The alliance system of 1914 refers to the two main alliances of Europe before the Great War: the Triple Entente, formed between Great Britain, France and Russia, and the Triple Alliance, formed between Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy. With reference to historians who predominantly adhere to the interpretive theories of Realism and Power Transition, and without moving away from the last 25-30 years preceding the war, this article will discuss the relative importance of nationalism, the alliance system and assassination of Ferdinand as general causes of the First World War. The spread of nationalist sentiment and rivalry of alliances, both of which created strong tensions between the European powers, paved the way for the outbreak of war after the archduke's assassination more than any other cause. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Across Europe, the spread of nationalism through popular culture and politics generated not only intense war fever across nations, but also fierce arms racing among powers for ultimate militaristic dominance. Filled with nationalist sentiment, the media and politicians began to exaggerate stories to the public, portraying their countries as righteous and just and antagonizing their enemies as defenders of evil. Leaders acquired an excessive sense of confidence in their ability to win the war, as well as an excessive sense of pride and reluctance to lose national prestige. In the words of Baroness Ruth Henig, "Countries went to war because they believed they could achieve more through war than through diplomatic negotiations and that if they stood aside their status as great powers would be seriously compromised... ". More significant, however, is the effect that nationalist sentiment had on militarism and imperialism, especially in the case of young Germany. Hoping to assert Germany's supremacy among other powers, a young and equally ambitious Kaiser Wilhelm II enthusiastically promoted programs of imperial, military, and economic conquests, thus strengthening his ideal of Pan-Germanism and fueling German-German hostilities. the other powers. In his biography of Wilhelm II, John C. Fredriksen writes: “Wilhelm's Weltpolitik thus remained determined to secure Germany's imperial place under the sun, regardless of the circumstances. Such reckless behavior pushed France, Russia and England to form a great military alliance against Germany: the Triple Entente." To the dismay of competing Entente powers, by 1914 Germany had in its possession several valuable regions in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific. German naval expansion and support for the Boers in the Boer War of 1899-1902 were met with disgust especially by the British, fueling both the start of an incessant arms race and the German urgency to rid itself of internal dissent and abroad through war. Apart from the alienation of GranBritain on the part of Germany, the Kaiser also harbored feelings of contempt towards France and Russia. Referring to the effects of nationalism on German relations, the American historian Sidney Bradshaw Fay states: “In the chronic form of Pan-Germanism, Pan-Slavism and revanche, nationalism fueled hatred between Germany and its two neighbors to the East and East-West.” The hatred described by Fay manifested itself in none other than Germany's Schlieffen Plan, a meticulously planned plan for a two-front war against France and Russia Created in 1905, the Schlieffen Plan was risky and depended on belief in presumptive action can say with certainty that, in the interval of time when they were still militarily stronger than their European counterparts, the Germans were ready to strike. However, the inter-European hostilities that erupted in the short period before the war caused a rapid strengthening of military power and economic throughout Europe, and countries, especially Wilhelm II's Germany, were ready to take an offensive or defensive position in war. As for the alliance system of 1914, although the ties between the participating powers were not strongly pierced, they were established in an attempt to increase security and maintain the balance of power. If the threat of imperialism or militarism began to tip the balance in favor of one alliance, the other alliance would act to restore peace. In this way, alliances also had an impact on the advancement of the arms race and the formation of war plans. The net result of the disagreements between the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente was the renewed appeal of war. The most important of these disagreements was the question of the future of the Balkans, which, on the basis of imperialism, Austria-Hungary sought to control, and on the basis of pan-Slavism, Russia sought to protect. As mentioned above, there were mutual feelings of contempt between Germany and the Entente powers. From The Origins of the First World War by Gordon Martel, “The First World War was…fought over control of the collapsed Ottoman territories; it was believed that whoever won this struggle would be able to dominate all of Europe. Germany and its ally attempted control; Russia and its allies have decided to stop them”. Alliances also provided links through which disputes in smaller colonial regions could spread and influence the involvement of major powers. Historical author Stephen J. Lee expands on this concept: “Normally dangers were seen and connections were cut; the Moroccan crises of 1906 and 1911 were therefore allowed to play out. But, as the sequence of events after Sarajevo demonstrated all too clearly, the means existed to turn a local conflict into a continental war.” Lee's mention of Sarajevo is a direct reference to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The following paragraph will delve deeper into why the archduke's assassination, unlike the Moroccan crisis, was capable of provoking a real war between the great powers. On June 28, 1914, Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip fired the shots that would change the entire course of history. European history. Just a month later, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. From Fay: "the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was the factor that consolidated the elements of hostility and began the rapid and complicated succession of events that culminated in the world war, and for this factor Serbian nationalism was mainly responsible." While relations between Austria-Hungary and Serbia had first soured in the 1600s, it was the Bosnian crisis of 1908.