I believe that America did not remain neutral from 1914 to 1917. The claimed policy was not kept for several reasons. Even though the people of America were shocked and firmly against involvement in the war, the US president thought of the crisis as a turning point that could significantly change America’s place in the world. From 1914 to 1917, the policy of neutrality was subordinated to this task. It was a way to increase economic power, take important steps in regulating the economic life of society, and gradually strengthen military potential.
The first reason to state that America did not remain neutral is the arms supply. The US actively provided weapons to Britain and France, which increased trade with the Allies from 1914 to 1916 more than three times (Davidson et al., 2022). America got involved in the war economically, favoring supply to one European block, thus not being neutral.
The series of tragic events pushed the US even closer to involvement in the war. On the seventh of May, 1915, the British passenger liner sank because of a German commander, carrying away the lives of 1200 people, including 128 Americans (Davidson et al., 2022). The French liner sank due to a torpedo in a month, and several Americans got injured. Wilson made multiple attempts to be a “mediator” between the two blocs of European states and searched for the principles of “new diplomacy,” but, unfortunately, it was unsuccessful.
After effortless calls for communication with two of the European blocks, Wilson started to promote the expansion of the army and the construction of the navy. It showed that the US was getting ready to get involved in the war, breaking neutrality again.
References
Davidson, J. W., DeLay, B., Christine, L. H., Lytle, M., & Stoff, M. B. (2022). U.S. A Narrative History Volume II (9th ed.). McGraw Hill LLC.