Further indicators of and factors in the increased tensions included the naval rivalry between London and Berlin and the appearance of coalitions such as the Pan-German League, developments that had arisen in the context of Germany’s imperialistic Weltpolitik, adopted at the end of the 19th century at the urging of Wilhelm II and nourished by the Kaiser’s fear that Germany would be encircled by hostile neighbours. Germany was also involved in the race to build up colonial empires.

Canada was not immune to pressures to help the mother country in its escalating naval rivalry with Germany. The Liberal government opted to create a Canadian navy that would collaborate with the Royal Navy when needed. This plan had barely been announced when the party lost power to the Conservatives in the federal election of 1911. The new party in office proposed a contribution of 35 million dollars to reinforce the British Navy, but this was voted down by a Liberal-dominated Senate. Thus, in 1914, Canada did not have a naval force worthy of the name, nor was it able to boost the budget of the Royal Navy.  The matter was further complicated by Henri Bourassa’s insistence that a national navy be under domestic command; this Quebec politician had created a podium for his ideas by founding the Montreal French-language daily, Le Devoir. From the North American point of view, the crisis of 1914 was more of a concrete manifestation of European tensions that were already at a flashpoint.

Contemporary historical studies have emphasized the complexity, as well as the subjective aspect, of attempts to establish a chronological framework for the First World War. American historian David Bell, among others, has placed its origins as early as the beginning of the 19th century.  Historians generally agree, however, that the Crimean War of 1853–1856 was the first example of industrial warfare, establishing an inexorable tendency. It was followed by the American Civil War of the 1860s, the Franco-Prussian War a decade later, the Boer Wars at the turn of the century, the Russo-Japanese War of 1905,  and finally, the Balkan Wars were already underway in 1912.

This second question is even more difficult to answer. The situation on that date was also more complicated than it appeared, and generalizations on a global level are misleading.

Russia, for example, signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in March 1917, having effectively withdrawn from the conflict since the 1917 Revolution. In the Middle East, the Armistice of Mudros ended hostilities on October 31, 1918; and it was on November 3 of that same year that the Armistice of Villa Giusti was signed by the chiefs of staff of Italy and those of Austria-Hungary, whose empire had just been dismantled.

On the other hand, the Balkan Wars, which began in 1912, only stopped well after the First World with a Greco-Turkish armistice which was included in the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923. This treaty, moreover, while marking the final demise of the Ottoman Empire, did not bring about an end to conflict in the Middle East.

Thus, amidst the armistices and peace treaties signed between 1918 and 1923, it is not easy to establish a precise, universally applicable date for the end of the First World War.

The term “21-year armistice” is sometimes applied to the inter-war period. In hindsight, we see that the resolution of the First World War only brought ephemeral peace and the Second World War developed largely as a logical continuation of the First.

In any case, we can conclude that it is impossible to clearly define beginning and end points for the Great War on a worldwide scale.