10 interpretations of who started WW1

[Malthus]

They only agreed because they felt they had no other option (Russia wasn't declaring to stand for them yet). Seems to me that it was unlikely Serbia would actually fully comply with all but that one point.

Russia really did not want to fight the war.  If Austria-Hungary had accepted the offer I doubt they would have done so anyway.  How could Serbia have gotten away with it?  What trump card were they going to play?

Just buying time really. After all, given those demands it wouldn't be impossible to be really slow about them and/or eventually fail to live up to all of them.

Serbia was unlikely to find time on their side. If more and more info came out about their involvement, and Serbian foot-dragging became obvious, it likely that Russian support would be less forthcomming.

Note that many of the demands had nothing to do with the assassination, and everything to do with Sebian 'dissing' of A-H to fellow-Serbs inside A-H - notably 1, 3 and 9.

[Kleves]

Do you really think that Russian support of Serbia was in any way based on the righteousness of Serbia's case?

[garbon]

Just buying time really. After all, given those demands it wouldn't be impossible to be really slow about them and/or eventually fail to live up to all of them.

If that is the case why not just accept all of them?

Because there are some things that you likely never sell to anyone? Having AH essentially garrison Serbia seems like a no go.

[Malthus]

They only agreed because they felt they had no other option (Russia wasn't declaring to stand for them yet). Seems to me that it was unlikely Serbia would actually fully comply with all but that one point.

Which is just another reason not to give them a list like that--if their word means nothing, they can just say whatever is to their advantage (up to the point of follow through of course).

Oh I agree the list if foolish. Just countering the Malthus/Valmy contention about how Serbia was already agreeing - as if Serbia's word was money in the bank.

Serbia was clearly *seen* to be acting more reasonably than A-H *at the time*. Which is the significant fact, in analyzing whether Russia was wrong to defend them. It isn't necessary, for that analysis, to assume Serbia would whole-heartedly implement its agrement.

But Valmy's point is a good one - if Serbia was just agreeing only to renege later, why didn't Serbia simply accept all of the demands?

[garbon]

Serbia was unlikely to find time on their side. If more and more info came out about their involvement, and Serbian foot-dragging became obvious, it likely that Russian support would be less forthcomming

Depends. Not clear that the connections (which you note are still somewhat murky) would have been unearthed. Besdies, Pasic had to recognize that actually moving forwards with agreement to those demands would likely be a major political gamble. I seem to recall that he had even stated some of those things weren't legal per the Serbian constitution.

Note that many of the demands had nothing to do with the assassination, and everything to do with Sebian 'dissing' of A-H to fellow-Serbs inside A-H - notably 1, 3 and 9.

Sure. The sort of stoking that helped have people in Serbia so inflamed against Austria.

[garbon]

They only agreed because they felt they had no other option (Russia wasn't declaring to stand for them yet). Seems to me that it was unlikely Serbia would actually fully comply with all but that one point.

Which is just another reason not to give them a list like that--if their word means nothing, they can just say whatever is to their advantage (up to the point of follow through of course).

Oh I agree the list if foolish. Just countering the Malthus/Valmy contention about how Serbia was already agreeing - as if Serbia's word was money in the bank.

Serbia was clearly *seen* to be acting more reasonably than A-H *at the time*. Which is the significant fact, in analyzing whether Russia was wrong to defend them. It isn't necessary, for that analysis, to assume Serbia would whole-heartedly implement its agrement.

By whom, the powers that had already lined up against them - Russia and France?

[Valmy]

Oh I agree the list if foolish. Just countering the Malthus/Valmy contention about how Serbia was already agreeing - as if Serbia's word was money in the bank.

That is not my contention.  I am talking about making Serbia lose face and check their nationalism and expansion.  Instead Austria-Hungary made Serbia look courageous and put their Empire's entire existence on the line.  As I said even if Russia had not aided Serbia this would have cost Austria-Hungary tens of thousands of lives and led to an incredibly dangerous and expensive indefinite occupation. 

Thanks to the assassination and ultimatum Serbia was about to look weak in the face of Austro-Hungarian pressure, and anti-Serb feeling in the Empire was rising.  You say what is to stop Serbia from dragging its heels?  Well what is to stop Austria-Hungary from turning up the heat once Russia stepped down?

[Malthus]

Do you really think that Russian support of Serbia was in any way based on the righteousness of Serbia's case?

If Serbia was clearly initiating hostilities, it would have been much more difficult for Russia to spring to its support. Russia was of course not a democracy of any sort, but there were key authority figures in the government most reluctant to initiate hostility over Serbia. For one, Russia was in no way ready for war (the rearmament program already mentioned would not have been completed until 1916-17). Russia put pressure on Serbia to accept the ultimatum.

As it was, the issue was not tested, because A-H made no attempt to "sell" its version of events to the Russians with any plausability, denying several reasonable Russian requests (extebd deadline, show them the evidence, etc.)

[Malthus]

By whom, the powers that had already lined up against them - Russia and France?

The important actor was Russia.

An unreasonable Serbia may well have tipped the actually fairly delicate balance inside Russia itself against supporting the Serbs. No Russian support = no Great War.

[Valmy]

Do you really think that Russian support of Serbia was in any way based on the righteousness of Serbia's case?

It was based on the prestige of the Russian monarchy.  The Austrio-Hungarians had already humiliated them by annexing Bosnia.  To fail to stand up to Austria-Hungary twice was a little too much to ask.  However if Austria-Hungary had provided Russia some cover to back down with honor they would have taken it...probably...but we will never know.  Austria-Hungary did not give Russia any cover at all, it was either stand by and look pathetic and weak or mobilize.

[alfred russel]

Why is it so important for some people to defend Serbia's actions? Why do they think it was OK for Serbia to send death squads to assassinate VIPs in a different country...

Do you blame monkeys at the zoo for throwing poo at the visitors?

[Malthus]

Why is it so important for some people to defend Serbia's actions? Why do they think it was OK for Serbia to send death squads to assassinate VIPs in a different country...

Do you blame monkeys at the zoo for throwing poo at the visitors?

That just makes him amorous. 

[Valmy]

Why is it so important for some people to defend Serbia's actions? Why do they think it was OK for Serbia to send death squads to assassinate VIPs in a different country, but A-H being less than perfection in the way it responded is worse than Hitler? I'm guessing childhood trauma and/or deficient skull shape.

I don't think Austria-Hungary was evil so much as incompetent and divorced from reality.

[The Brain]

Why is it so important for some people to defend Serbia's actions? Why do they think it was OK for Serbia to send death squads to assassinate VIPs in a different country...

Do you blame monkeys at the zoo for throwing poo at the visitors?

Other visitors?

[Razgovory]

Do you really think that Russian support of Serbia was in any way based on the righteousness of Serbia's case?

If Serbia was clearly initiating hostilities, it would have been much more difficult for Russia to spring to its support. Russia was of course not a democracy of any sort, but there were key authority figures in the government most reluctant to initiate hostility over Serbia. For one, Russia was in no way ready for war (the rearmament program already mentioned would not have been completed until 1916-17). Russia put pressure on Serbia to accept the ultimatum.

As it was, the issue was not tested, because A-H made no attempt to "sell" its version of events to the Russians with any plausability, denying several reasonable Russian requests (extebd deadline, show them the evidence, etc.)

Russia was pretty upset about the influence they had lost in the Balkans.  Serbia was pretty much all they had left at that point, and they weren't going to abandon it.  The truth is that pretty much any country would have destroyed Serbia for the assassination.  Just as the US invaded Afghanistan for 9/11.