The Sleepwalkers

In his non-fiction book, The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 (2012), Australian historian Christopher Clark traces the sources of World War I. Clark explores the complicated geopolitical situation of the early twentieth century, which allowed a global conflict to erupt from the assassination of an archduke few outside of Austria knew or cared about at the time.

While the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is frequently cited as the spark that began World War I, Clark begins his narrative eleven years before that killing, describing a different terrorist act that would reshape global politics forever. In 1903, Serbian militants stormed the royal home in Belgrade and brutally murdered King Alexander and Queen Draga, shooting them, stabbing them, and mutilating their faces. This attack, though horrendous, was wildly "successful," at least by the terrorists' standards. The leader of the plot, Dragutin Dimitrijević, was rewarded by being named the head of the Serbian military. From this position, he helped stir dissent among Serbians and other Slavic races against the non-Slavic leaders of Austria-Hungary. Later, these same Serbians would be responsible for the murder of Archduke Ferdinand.

Another fuse was lit in 1908, Clark asserts, when Austria annexed Bosnia. Serbian nationalists were infuriated by the annexation because they felt Slavic states like Bosnia should be independent. This sense of nationalism had deep roots, stemming from wars fought in the 1300s in which Slavic people lost huge amounts of land to predominantly Muslim countries like Turkey. These nationalists felt betrayed by European powers from the United Kingdom to Russia who allowed this to happen. Then in 1912, Serbia invaded Albania, slaughtering hundreds of Muslims until finally, they were forced out under pressure by pretty much the entire rest of Europe.



When the Archduke and his wife made their fateful trip to Sarajevo in 1914, it happened to be on the 525th anniversary of a major historic loss for the Serbs in the Battle of Kosovo against the Turks. Despite this, the Archduke was hopeful. He had planned to create a kind of "United States of Europe" to avoid a conflict he truly believed was not inevitable.

From there, the author details the various chess-moves and counter-moves (or lack of moves) committed by various European heads of state and diplomats which all conspired to create such a terrible global conflict. Treaties were in place to prevent such a conflict, but the treaties were largely untested, resulting in a giant global game of chicken. Exacerbating the problem was that heads of state rarely spoke for the people they represented, and often they didn't even speak for their collective governing bodies. The emperors of Germany, Russia, and Austria-Hungary were notoriously quick-tempered and mercurial in their decision making, changing course without informing necessary parties. The flow of misinformation was also a problem, as heads of state made sweeping decisions and proclamations with faulty reasoning.

The rest of the book tells a familiar story of the lead-up to World War I but does so with startling detail. In short, Austria could not tolerate its archdukes being assassinated by Serbian terrorists, so it made an ultimatum to Serbia that it must ban all propaganda against the dual monarchy that ran things. However, most everyone—including Austria-Hungary itself—believed that Austria-Hungary could not fight the Serbs on its own. Most predicted that Germany would enter the conflict as well. Meanwhile, France had a longstanding conflict with Germany over land lost to the Second Reich in the Alsace-Lorraine region. This suggested to many that France would use the destabilizing effect of the war to declare war on Germany to take back this land. On the other side of Europe, wanting land it had previously lost in Turkey, Russia believed it could secure that land by promising to take France's side against Germany. Finally, the United Kingdom was part of the Triple Entente alliance with France and Russia, meaning it, too, would be sucked into the conflict if it became big enough, which it did.



As the historical narrative moves forward, Clark cites numerous moments when one actor could have backed down or another could have stood firm, and these moves—collectively or individually—probably would have stopped the war. However, as time moved on and diplomatic brinksmanship increased, the possibility of avoiding war became less possible.

In the end, The Sleepwalkers is most powerful for showing that World War I, despite being the result of decades and even centuries of treaties and land-grabs, could have been avoided had any number of heads of states and diplomats had clearer heads.