Share.

    6 Kommentare

    1. WarHeritageInstitute on

      King Albert I and Archduke Franz Ferdinand walking in the dunes of Raversijde on the Belgian coast in 1913.

      What makes it especially poignant is that Franz Ferdinand had planned to return to the Belgian coast in the summer of 1914. The assassination on 28 June changed not only those plans, but the course of European history. Within weeks, Europe was at war, and Belgium would soon find itself at the centre of the conflict.

      📸 Photo courtesy of Atlantikwall Raversyde

    2. Serbia, backed by the Russian Tsar, wanted to expand territory at the time, by which they directly pushed against the Austro-Hungarian empire.

      When a Serbian nationalist assassinated Franz Ferdinand, with his position as heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, this gave Vienna the perfect pretext to act against its troublesome neighbor.

      Not to forget: The Balkan wars of 1912-1913, where Serbia nearly doubled in size, making them a significant threat in the eyes of Austria-Hungary.

      Austria-Hungary sought and received a promise of unconditional support from Germany, and with that, Austria-Hungary delivered a list of deliberately unacceptable demands to Serbia, designed to be rejected.

      The Tsar mobilized his armies, to protect Serbia. Germany saw this, demanded they stop, and mobilized their own armies against Russia and France(Russia’s fierce ally at that point).

      And then it all started rolling…

      Some consequences:

      Germany and France allied with several arabic forces, at the time. However…

      In 1916, the middle of WW1, France and Great-Britain then stabbed them in the back by secretly deciding on how to colonize and split the lands of their „allies“: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2016/05/16/britten_en_fransenverdelenmidden-oostensykes-picot-1-2653790/

      As Bjorn Soenens more recently wrote: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2026/05/06/de-lijn-die-de-wereld-veranderde-hoe-twee-diplomaten-in-1916-he/

      This is largely the basis for all current conflict in the middle east. What we today know as Iraq, is technically a whole bunch of rivaling tribes, now suddenly the same „nation“ where there was no such concept at the time, needing a powerful army to keep them oppressed, while the west stole their land’s resources. That’s how you get people like Saddam Hussein, like all leaders of the region: installed by western forces to allow for the west to steal their resources.

      For anyone wondering why the region is unstable, and unfriendly towards the west, that’s not random, that’s not religion-based, that’s not by chance. It’s because they were murdered and plundered, and they remember who did it and got away with it. „Bringing democracy“ to the middle east is historically what already happened and caused the problem in the first place. People remember their history. People ignorant of this history, insisting we „need to bring democracy to the middle east“, are inadvertently repeating the mistakes of the past. And the local people know this history that many here do not. And it’s why they resist.

    3. They got assassinated? Aw man that sucks. I hoped to see them live in concert soon.

    4. Makes you wonder how different life would be if WWI had never happened or lasted much shorter. Four empires destroyed, lots of nations in economic ruin, millions of young men dead, setting up the stage for the rise of the US as a global superpower, as well as the prelude for another war barely two decades later that concluded in half of Europe getting occupied for half a century.

    Leave A Reply