Caught in the Middle: Neutrals, Neutrality and the First World War (War, Conflict and Genocide Studies)

During World War I, aggressive countries infringed on the rights and privileges of neutral nations such as the Netherlands and Switzerland as they had been defined in prior international agreements. The essays in this critical collection provide comparisons of the history of neutrality in several countries involved in World War I and analyze the concept of neutrality from multiple perspectives: political, economic, cultural, and legal. During the First World War, belligerents infringed on the rights and duties of neutrals, as these had been codified in international agreements. Both the Allies and the Central Powers pressured the neutrals to modify their policies to favour them over their adversaries. During the four-and-a-half years the war lasted, this pressure mounted until the neutrals were left with very little room to manoeuvre. More than fifty years ago, Nils Ørvik stated that this disregard for international law, combined with the relative weakness of the European neutrals, spelled the end of traditional political neutrality. Caught in the Middle discusses this thesis based on new research from Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Spain and the USA. The result is the first comparative study in English on First World War neutrality. The contributors cover not only several countries involved, but also multiple aspects of the concept of neutrality: political, economic, cultural and legal. They reassess the notion of neutrality and the role of neutrals during the First World War, making this collection of great value to all scholars of both neutrality, the history of individual neutral countries, and of the war itself Tijdens de Eerste Wereldoorlog pleegden de oorlogvoerenden op grote schaal inbreuk op de rechten van neutrale partijen zoals die waren vastgesteld in internationale verdragen. Zowel de Geallieerden als de Centrale mogendheden oefenden druk uit op de neutralen om hun beleid te hunner gunste aan te passen. In de ruim vier jaar die de oorlog duurde, nam die druk zo sterk toe, dat de neutralen zich met handen en voeten gebonden voelden. Ruim vijftig jaar geleden stelde Nils rvik dat deze minachting van het internationale recht, gecombineerd met de betrekkelijke zwakte van de Europese neutrale staten, het einde betekende van de traditionele politieke neutraliteit, een begrip dat hij gelijkstelde met niet-gebondenheid en afzijdigheid. Dit boek bespreekt die stelling in het licht van nieuw vergelijkend onderzoek in Scandinavië, Nederland, Spanje, Argentinië en de VS. Het resultaat is de eerste Engelstalige vergelijkende studie naar neutraliteit tijdens WWI. De opstellen behandelen niet alleen meerdere landen, maar ook meerdere aspecten van het neutraliteitsconcept During the First World War, belligerents infringed on the rights and duties of neutrals, as these had been codified in international agreements. Both the Allies and the Central Powers pressured the neutrals to modify their policies in favour of one side or the other. During the four-and-a-half years the war lasted, this pressure mounted until the neutrals were left with very little room to manoeuvre. More than fifty years ago, Nils Ørvik stated that this disregard for international law, combined with the relative weakness of the European neutrals, spelled the end of traditional political neutra Contents Acknowledgements 1. Introduction 2. Dutch Neutrality and the Value of Legal Argumentation 3. ‘Upon the Neutral Rests the Trusteeship of International Law’ 4. Spanish Neutrality During the First World War 5. Britain’s Global War and Argentine Neutrality 6. Not Neutrality 7. From Parasite to Angel 8. Colour-blind or Clear-sighted Neutrality? 9. The Hottest Places in Hell? 10. The Other End of Neutrality About the Contributors

A lively debate on the recently published American and Dutch translations of Dante's masterpiece.

Johan Den Hertog & Samuël Kruizinga (eds.). Includes Bibliographical References.