Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.767632
Title: Attitudes towards civil war among British officials, 1900-1924
Author: Watling, Jack Merlin
ISNI:       0000 0004 7660 4505
Awarding Body: Birkbeck, University of London
Current Institution: Birkbeck (University of London)
Date of Award: 2018
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Civil wars are defining moments in the history of nations, and consequently attract considerable scholarly attention as events. The concept of civil war has received minimal attention among historians however. The original contribution to our understanding of civil war presented in this thesis lies in its analysis of the conceptual evolution of civil war, which had practical legal and policy implications for British officials in the first quarter of the twentieth century. By charting British officials' responses to conflicts, primarily in Ireland and Russia, this thesis demonstrates how the concept of civil war changed. At the beginning of the twentieth century 'civil war' meant the division of a state's institutions over questions of civic principle, and the continuation of politics by violent means. It was the internal affair of the state. Conflicts in Ireland and Russia did not fit these frameworks, and so the concept expanded to include the breakdown of order, and core assumptions about the dynamics of civil war were reshaped, from a focus on institutions, to an emphasis on communities. Civil war became a threat to international security. These changes fed into a growing acceptance of intervention, and the perception of civil war as a policy opportunity, which was a contributing factor to the emergence of civil war as the predominant form of warfare worldwide. This thesis also contributes to a growing historiography that is integrating national, imperial, European, and world history. The treatment of synchronic crises in Ireland and Russia in this thesis demonstrates how decision making in domestic, imperial, and international contexts were intrinsically interrelated. Civil war is necessarily a paradoxical term, for war is not civil, and therefore cannot be used without elaboration, which provides a valuable lens for gaining new insights into changing ideas about international governance, sovereignty, empire, government legitimacy, and civilization.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.767632  DOI: Not available
Share: