128k views
0 votes
Why did the United States and Britain have much smaller armies than Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, and Russia?

a. Focus on naval power
b. Economic constraints
c. Pacifist sentiments
d. Lack of military expertise

User Kshitij
by
7.5k points

1 Answer

5 votes

Final answer:

The United States and Britain focused on naval power due to geographical protections and isolationist tendencies for the US, and Britain's need to defend its empire. This led to smaller armies compared to continental European powers. The naval focus was reinforced by international treaties in the 1920s aiming to limit naval arms races.

Step-by-step explanation:

The United States and Britain had much smaller armies than Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, and Russia primarily due to their focus on naval power. For the United States, this was aligned with its isolationist tendencies and geographical protection by the oceans, which reduced the necessity for a large army. In contrast, Britain's strategy centered on maintaining a superior navy to protect its expansive colonial empire, especially during the arms race leading up to World War I when naval power was seen as essential to national defense and imperial reach. Consequently, both nations did not prioritize large standing armies in the same manner as continental European powers, where land threats were more immediate.During the period leading up to and including World War I, militarism and territorial ambitions in Europe prompted an arms race. Germany and other continental powers regarded large standing armies as crucial due to their geographical proximity to potential adversaries and the perceived need to be ready for overland conflicts. This contrasted with the US and Britain, where those concerns were mitigated by their strategic emphasis on naval strength.Confirming this strategic focus, the Washington Naval Conference in the 1920s, and subsequent agreements like the Five-Power Treaty, sought to limit shipbuilding and prevent a naval arms race, revealing the importance attributed to naval dominance by the US and Britain.Conclusion In summary, the smaller armies of the US and Britain relative to their European counterparts can largely be attributed to their strategic choice to advance naval capabilities and the inherent protection offered by their geographic positions, which diverted attention from the need to build large ground forces.

User SparkAndShine
by
6.8k points