The factors that set off World War I, imperialist rivalries and blocs of alliances, are solidifying today in a fashion with frightening parallels to 1914, argues Chris Bambery 

What happens when empires collide? We are in the process of finding out. I have said before that the world faces the danger of a ‘Sarajevo moment.’ The reference is to the 28 June 1914 assassination in that city of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne and his wife: the act which would unleash World War I. 

Why do I make this analogy? The world then was so different from ours. Or was it? 1914 saw the end of the first period of globalisation. Many then argued that the growth of international trade would undermine any danger of war. In 1914, Germany and Britain were each the other’s biggest trading partner. That didn’t stop them going to war. That’s because they existed within an imperialist system. The world still does, even though it’s changed in appearance, but not in basics. 

1914 was the age of empires: Britain, France, Russia, Germany, Austria-Hungary and the USA. These were both formal and informal. Britain and the USA had extensive informal ones where they used economic and financial power, backed up by naval might, to exert control. 

Imperialism was never simply about colonies. It was, primarily, a hierarchy of economic, financial and military power, as it remains today. Britain had, by 1900, been overtaken industrially by the USA and Germany, but it increasingly used its financial and naval power to maintain itself as the number-one power, just like the USA today regarding China. 

For much of the nineteenth century, Britain had pursued a policy of ‘splendid isolation’, eschewing alliances with other powers. However, at the dawn of the twentieth century, it faced new challenges. In regard to the USA, it essentially followed a policy of appeasement: recognising US dominance in the Americas and western Pacific. It never entered a naval arms race with America, as it would with Germany, and by 1914 it had already come to something of an informal alliance with Washington. 

That would deepen in the Second World War and, as British power diminished, its elite would cling desperately to US coat tails, claiming a ‘special alliance’. 

Britain’s prime concern was the defence of the Indian Raj, ‘the jewel in the crown’ of Empire, from Russia, which had expanded to the borders of Afghanistan and Tibet. Russia’s growing presence in China with its expansion into Manchuria, and France’s challenge to British control of Egypt and the vital Suez Canal added to the sense of danger. 

Britain reacted to this by dropping ‘splendid isolation’, first making an alliance with Japan, which would take on the defence of Britain’s formal and informal imperial posts in the far east; then in 1903 with France whereby Paris recognised British control of Egypt and London French control of Morocco; finally, in 1908 with Russia, whereby they resolved various imperial difficulties. 

But the ‘ententes’ with Russia and France drew Britain into inter-imperialist conflicts in Europe where both powers regarded Germany as their enemy. Germany itself was tied into an alliance with the decaying Austro-Hungarian Empire. 

How the First World War began 

I shall not go through the various crises from 1903 to 1914 which broke down any ‘concert of powers’ where the major states could sit down and resolve their conflicts. This became particularly toxic in the Balkans, where the First World War would begin. 

Three empires faced off there: Austria-Hungary, which contained a large Slav population; Russia which portrayed itself as the champion of all Slavs and wanted access to the Mediterranean; and the dying Ottoman Empire. This had once ruled all the Balkans, but in the course of the nineteenth century, nationalist revolts and defeat by Russia had seen the creation of independent states: Serbia, Montenegro, Romania, Bulgaria and Greece. 

The vultures gathered around the old Ottoman empire. In 1908, Austria-Hungary formally annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina, enraging both Russia and Serbia. In 1912, Russia encouraged the various states to form a Balkan league and they fell on Turkey, nearly forcing it out of Europe. The next year, the victors fell out over the spoils and Serbia, Romania and Greece defeated Bulgaria. It broke with Russia and joined Turkey in allying with Germany. 

The Balkans then in many ways mirror today’s Middle East. It was a mix of different nationalities and religions where attempts to create ethnic nation states always led to ethnic cleansing. 

Serbia was the strongest of the Balkan states. It wanted to create a Southern Slav state under its control, including Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, all Austro-Hungarian possessions. It was an economically backward, peasant country, like its neighbours, but with French and Russian loans, it could buy the most modern artillery and rifles. 

As with the USA today, Russia quickly found it difficult to control its regional allies. Austria-Hungary saw its end as a great power if it lost its Balkan possessions. Twice in recent years it had used military threats to force Russia to stand down and forced Serbia to withdraw from Albania. It believed it could do so again. 

On 28 July 1914, young Bosnian Serb terrorists, armed and trained by the Serbian secret service, assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian imperial throne and his wife in Sarajevo. No one believed this act would lead to a European and global war, but it did. 

Austria-Hungary wanted to neuter Serbia and remove it as Russia’s ally in the region. The Hapsburg Empire was Germany’s only significant ally. Fearing it would lose that ally, Germany backed it up with the famous blank cheque from Berlin to Vienna. 

In truth, Germany believed that at worst, there would be a regional war. However, Russia could not see Serbia humiliated. It received a blank cheque of support from France, who was afraid, if it did anything less, it would lose its ally. 

Austria-Hungary delivered an ultimatum to Serbia and then bombarded Belgrade. Russia mobilised its armed forces and in alarm Germany responded, with France following suit. Austria-Hungary and Russia went to war, Germany with Russia, and France with Germany. 

It was Britain’s decision to join the fray that ensured it became a world war. Why did Britain choose war? It wasn’t because of ‘poor little Belgium’. The imperialist minority within the Liberal cabinet used German violation of that neutrality to dragoon the majority into backing war. Britain feared if it did not stand by Russia and France and they won, they would turn on her (both played on this) threatening India, Egypt and its control of the Mediterranean Sea routes. If Germany defeated France and Russia, it would control continental Europe and turn on an isolated Britain. 

Today’s configuration 

No comparison is exact, but there is today an alliance system emerging not unlike that in Europe in 1914. China faces a US-led coalition of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Australia and Britain, pledged to defend Taiwan (historically Chinese territory) and having the ability to close off Chinese access to the Pacific and Indian Ocean. 

In the South China Sea, rival warplanes ‘buzz’ each other, warships come close to collision and distrust grows. A Sarajevo moment threatens. 

China is part of an entente with Russia and Iran but does not fully control either. The USA chooses not to control Israel but arms and funds it. Israel can act like it does because no other state in the region is prepared to challenge it. However, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are regional players with ambition. Formally a Nato member, Turkey is acting out of control in Syria and Kurdistan. China and Russia do not fully control Iran and it doesn’t control the Houthis, despite what Trump says. 

We have also seen awful wars fought, like that between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020 and 2023. Azerbaijan won and then ethnically cleansed the region as the world looked on. 

This is no longer a unipolar world where the US dominates. The US sees China as its key rival but neither are fully in control of events. There is to no ‘concert of powers’ where states can sit down and negotiate. Distrust of Washington has grown in Beijing, Moscow and Tehran. Trump’s tariff wars are a heady addition to this cocktail. 

So, this isn’t an exact parallel with 1914 and nothing is inevitable in history. Yet the dynamics at play are chillingly similar.