'Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War'

In the; “Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War’, Stepehen Van Evera discusses the race for arms and the ‘strike first’ tactics that caused the third deadliest war in history.  The author views the First World War as a a product of a more aggressive foreign policy emphasizing absolute military power coupled with a constant lookout for the best opportunity to strike first.

Germany’s motivations behind the war were not solely security concerns but rather had a healthy dose of ambition added to the mix. However this serves to fortify the authors theory rather than serving as an impediment, for Germany’s expansionist military policies contributed to the sense of unease and ensuing arms race leading up to the War. Everas analysis can find substantial backing in cases other than the First World War, a notable example of which occurred in the Second World War when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour.

Perhaps with the advent of the nuclear age, the ‘Cult of Offensive’ theory exists in a paradox, where on one side states recognize the unprecedented scale of destruction that nuclear warfare could entail both domestically and globally while on the other, the strike first mentality remains an option despite its ensuing consequences.   A state that strikes first with a nuclear weapon against another nuclear power risks retaliation by the state targeted and it’s allies. However if a state manages to effectively destroy an enemy state in a nuclear attack, there is a possibility that other states, including prior allies might choose to avoid involvement in a conflict that could be a potential Armageddon.