World War I: Military and Diplomacy - AP U.S. History

SECTION 1

Historical Context & the Road to War

The outbreak of war in Europe in August 1914 confronted the United States with a crisis that tested the very foundations of its foreign policy tradition. Since the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 and Washington's Farewell Address, American leaders had generally counseled against entangling alliances with European powers, yet the rapid industrialization of the late nineteenth century had integrated the American economy into global trade networks that made genuine isolation increasingly difficult. President Woodrow Wilson initially declared American neutrality, urging citizens to remain "impartial in thought as well as in action," but the interconnected nature of Atlantic commerce ensured that neutrality would be strained almost immediately. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in June 1914 set off a chain of alliance obligations that drew the great powers of Europe into a devastating conflict rooted in militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism—the so-called MAIN causes. Understanding how the United States moved from neutrality to belligerency between 1914 and 1917 is essential for grasping how America's global role fundamentally transformed during this period.

1914 • War Erupts in Europe

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand triggers a cascade of alliance obligations. By August, the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire) face the Allied Powers (Britain, France, Russia). Wilson declares U.S. neutrality.

1915 • Lusitania Sinking

A German U-boat torpedoes the British liner RMS Lusitania, killing 1,198 passengers including 128 Americans. Public outrage intensifies, though Wilson secures a temporary German pledge to restrict submarine warfare.

1916 • Preparedness Movement & Reelection

Wilson signs the National Defense Act, expanding the Army, and wins reelection on the slogan "He kept us out of war." Meanwhile, the Sussex Pledge temporarily halts unrestricted submarine warfare.

1917 • U.S. Entry into the War

Germany resumes unrestricted submarine warfare in January. The Zimmermann Telegram, proposing a German-Mexican alliance, is intercepted and published. On April 2, Wilson asks Congress for a declaration of war.

1918 • Armistice & Wilson's Fourteen Points

American forces tip the balance on the Western Front. Wilson articulates the Fourteen Points as a blueprint for peace. The Armistice takes effect on November 11, 1918.

The critical question this lesson addresses is how and why the United States abandoned its neutrality, what role American military power played in the Allied victory, and how Wilsonian diplomacy at the Paris Peace Conference shaped—and failed to shape—the postwar international order. Understanding these dynamics illuminates broader themes of American expansion, the tension between idealism and realism in foreign policy, and the domestic consequences of wartime mobilization.

SECTION 2

Core Principles of American Involvement

Several interconnected factors propelled the United States from neutrality to intervention, and understanding them as a coherent set of pressures—rather than isolated events—is central to a sophisticated analysis of American entry into World War I. The following principles capture the major forces at work in shaping both the decision to fight and the diplomatic vision Wilson brought to the conflict.

Economic Entanglement

American banks and manufacturers extended billions in loans and sold vast quantities of war matériel to the Allies. By 1917, U.S. economic prosperity was deeply tied to an Allied victory, making true neutrality functionally impossible.

Freedom of the Seas

Wilson insisted on the right of neutral nations to trade freely. Germany's unrestricted submarine warfare campaign directly challenged this principle, sinking American merchant vessels and killing U.S. citizens.

Democratic Idealism

Wilson framed American intervention as a crusade to "make the world safe for democracy." This idealistic rhetoric resonated with Progressive-era values and positioned the war as a moral imperative rather than a mere strategic calculation.

National Security Concerns

The Zimmermann Telegram revealed Germany's willingness to court Mexico as an ally against the United States, transforming the conflict from a distant European affair into a direct threat to American territorial integrity.

Wartime Mobilization & State Power

Entry into the war triggered unprecedented federal expansion: conscription through the Selective Service Act, economic coordination via the War Industries Board, and the suppression of dissent through the Espionage and Sedition Acts.

✦

KEY TAKEAWAY

Think of American neutrality like a dam holding back a rising reservoir. Each provocation—submarine attacks, economic ties, the Zimmermann Telegram—raised the water level incrementally. No single event "caused" the breach; rather, the cumulative pressure of economic interest, ideological commitment, and direct threats made continued neutrality structurally unsustainable. In the same way that systems engineers analyze compound stress loads on a structure, historians must weigh the interplay of multiple causal factors rather than pointing to one decisive moment.

SECTION 3

Visual Explanation: The Path to Intervention

This flowchart traces the causal chain from Wilson's declaration of neutrality in August 1914 through the escalating provocations—economic entanglement, the Lusitania crisis, and the Zimmermann Telegram—that culminated in the April 1917 declaration of war. Note the parallel column of domestic factors, both pro-intervention and anti-war, that shaped the political environment.

As the diagram illustrates, the path to war was neither inevitable nor sudden; rather, it involved a progressive accumulation of provocations filtered through Wilson's evolving diplomatic stance. The economic linkages represented in the upper branch created structural incentives for intervention, while the submarine warfare crises provided the immediate catalysts. Crucially, the left column reminds us that significant anti-war opposition persisted right up to the declaration of war—six senators and fifty House members voted against the war resolution—a fact that complicates any narrative of unanimous enthusiasm for intervention.

SECTION 4

How American Military Power Was Mobilized

The Selective Service System and the AEF

When Congress declared war on April 6, 1917, the United States Army comprised fewer than 130,000 regulars—woefully inadequate for a conflict that had already consumed millions of European soldiers. Wilson and Secretary of War Newton Baker turned to the Selective Service Act of May 1917, which required all men aged 21 to 30 (later expanded to 18–45) to register for a military draft. Over the course of the war, approximately 24 million men registered and nearly 2.8 million were inducted, creating the mass citizen army that constituted the American Expeditionary Forces (AEF) under General John J. Pershing. Pershing insisted that American troops fight as an independent force rather than being amalgamated into depleted French and British units—a decision with both military and symbolic significance, as it ensured the United States would have its own seat at the peace table.

Economic Mobilization and the Home Front

The federal government's wartime reach extended far beyond conscription. The War Industries Board (WIB), headed by Bernard Baruch, coordinated industrial production, allocated raw materials, and set prices—an unprecedented experiment in centralized economic planning that foreshadowed New Deal agencies. The Food Administration under Herbert Hoover encouraged voluntary conservation through campaigns like "Meatless Mondays" and "Wheatless Wednesdays," while the Committee on Public Information (CPI) under George Creel deployed propaganda to build support and demonize the Central Powers. Meanwhile, the Espionage Act (1917) and the Sedition Act (1918) criminalized dissent, leading to the imprisonment of figures like Eugene V. Debs and prompting a wartime curtailment of civil liberties that the Supreme Court upheld in Schenck v. United States (1919).

Social Consequences of Mobilization

Wartime labor demands accelerated the Great Migration, as hundreds of thousands of African Americans moved from the rural South to industrial cities in the North and Midwest to fill factory positions vacated by soldiers and restricted by the cutoff of European immigration. Women entered the industrial workforce in unprecedented numbers, strengthening the suffrage movement and contributing to the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. At the same time, wartime nativism fueled hostility toward German Americans and other immigrant communities, reinforcing the xenophobic currents that would culminate in the restrictive immigration legislation of the 1920s.

This organizational chart maps the three branches of federal wartime mobilization—military, economic, and propaganda/control—and traces their social consequences and postwar legacies. The dashed lines indicate indirect causal relationships between mobilization mechanisms and broader social transformations.

SECTION 5

Wilson's Fourteen Points and the Paris Peace Conference

Even before the fighting ended, Woodrow Wilson articulated a sweeping diplomatic vision that he hoped would reshape the international order. In his address to Congress on January 8, 1918, Wilson outlined the Fourteen Points, a program for peace that called for open diplomacy, freedom of the seas, removal of economic barriers, reduction of armaments, impartial adjustment of colonial claims, and—most ambitiously—the creation of a League of Nations to guarantee the political independence and territorial integrity of all states. Wilson's vision represented a dramatic departure from European balance-of-power diplomacy and reflected the Progressive-era belief that rational institutions could prevent future conflicts. However, the gap between Wilson's idealism and the realities of the Paris Peace Conference (1919) would prove enormous.

Wilson's Key Points	Principle	Outcome at Paris
Open covenants of peace (Point I)	Transparent diplomacy; no secret treaties	Largely ignored; Big Four conducted key negotiations privately
Freedom of the seas (Point II)	Neutral shipping rights in war and peace	Britain refused to accept limits on naval supremacy
Self-determination (Points X–XIII)	Nations should govern themselves	Applied selectively in Europe; colonial peoples excluded via mandate system
League of Nations (Point XIV)	Collective security organization	Included in Treaty of Versailles, but U.S. Senate rejected it
No punitive peace	"Peace without victory"	Article 231 (War Guilt Clause) imposed massive reparations on Germany

Wilson's Fourteen Points vs. Outcomes at the Paris Peace Conference

The Treaty of Versailles and Senate Rejection

The Treaty of Versailles that emerged from the Paris Peace Conference was a compromise that satisfied no party fully: Germany was saddled with the War Guilt Clause (Article 231) and crushing reparations that Wilson had opposed, while Wilson's cherished League of Nations was included in the treaty's text. Back in Washington, however, the treaty faced fierce opposition. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge led the "reservationists," who were willing to join the League with amendments protecting congressional war-making authority, while the "irreconcilables" rejected the League entirely. Wilson, refusing to accept any reservations, embarked on an exhausting national speaking tour to rally public support but suffered a debilitating stroke in October 1919. The Senate ultimately voted down the treaty twice—a defeat that left the United States outside the League and signaled a retreat from Wilsonian internationalism.

💡

EXAM TIP

AP exam questions frequently test the distinction between Lodge's "reservationists" and the "irreconcilables." The reservationists were not isolationists—they were willing to join the League with conditions, particularly reservations protecting Congress's constitutional war-declaring power under Article X. Wilson's refusal to compromise was as much a cause of the treaty's defeat as was Senate opposition.

SECTION 6

Worked Example: Document Analysis

The following worked example models the kind of source analysis and argumentation you will encounter on the AP exam, particularly in the Short-Answer Question (SAQ) and Document-Based Question (DBQ) formats.

Analyzing Wilson's War Message (April 2, 1917)

1
Step 1 — Identify the Historical Context

By April 1917, Germany had resumed unrestricted submarine warfare (January 31, 1917), sinking several American merchant vessels. The Zimmermann Telegram had been published in March, revealing a proposed German alliance with Mexico. Additionally, the February Revolution in Russia had toppled the tsar, removing the awkwardness of allying with an autocratic regime. These events form the immediate context for Wilson's request for a declaration of war.

Context: Submarine warfare + Zimmermann Telegram + Russian Revolution = critical mass for intervention
2
Step 2 — Analyze Wilson's Argument

Wilson framed the war as a defense of American rights and neutral commerce, but his rhetoric also elevated the conflict to an ideological crusade: "The world must be made safe for democracy." This dual framing—practical and idealistic—was strategic. The practical argument justified war under international law (freedom of the seas), while the idealistic argument rallied Progressive reformers who saw the war as an extension of their domestic mission to improve society through rational governance.

Argument: Wilson merged pragmatic legal claims with moral idealism to build a broad coalition for war
3
Step 3 — Evaluate Audience and Purpose

Wilson's immediate audience was Congress, which held the constitutional power to declare war. His broader audience, however, included the American public—many of whom were still reluctant—and international observers, particularly the Allied governments and Germany. The purpose was not merely to secure a congressional vote but to define the war in terms that would justify American leadership in the eventual peace settlement. By casting the conflict as a war for universal democratic principles rather than territorial gain, Wilson was already laying the groundwork for the Fourteen Points.

Purpose: Secure a war declaration while defining America's war aims in idealistic terms that would shape the peace
4
Step 4 — Connect to Broader Historical Developments

Wilson's speech marks a watershed in American foreign policy. It reflects the tension between isolationist traditions and the emerging reality that the United States, as the world's largest industrial economy, could no longer stand apart from global conflicts. The idealistic language foreshadowed the Fourteen Points and the League of Nations proposal, while its practical consequences—conscription, economic mobilization, and civil liberties restrictions—demonstrated the profound domestic impact of foreign policy decisions. The Senate's later rejection of the Treaty of Versailles can be read as a backlash against the very commitments Wilson articulated in this speech.

Broader significance: Wilson's 1917 address reshaped America's global role, inaugurating a debate between internationalism and isolationism that persisted for decades

SECTION 7

Historiographical Debates: Why Did the U.S. Enter WWI?

Historians have offered competing interpretations of American entry into World War I, and understanding these debates strengthens your ability to construct nuanced arguments on the AP exam. Each school of thought emphasizes different causal factors and draws on different evidence, illustrating how the same set of historical facts can support multiple analytical frameworks.

Interpretation	Key Argument	Strengths / Limitations
Submarine Warfare / International Law	Germany's violation of neutral rights, especially unrestricted submarine warfare, was the proximate cause; Wilson acted to defend international law.	Strength: Matches Wilson's stated rationale. Limitation: Ignores why the U.S. did not similarly confront British blockade violations.
Economic Determinism	Massive loans and trade ties to the Allies made U.S. economic interests dependent on an Allied victory. War protected investments.	Strength: Explains pro-Allied bias. Limitation: Oversimplifies decision-making; Wilson was not a puppet of bankers.
Wilsonian Idealism	Wilson genuinely believed in spreading democracy and creating a new international order; intervention was an extension of Progressive reform.	Strength: Captures Wilson's sincere convictions. Limitation: Idealism alone doesn't explain the timing—why April 1917?
National Security / Realism	A German-dominated Europe would threaten U.S. security; the Zimmermann Telegram made the threat tangible.	Strength: Explains the Zimmermann Telegram's impact. Limitation: The U.S. faced no direct military threat from Germany.
Cultural / Propaganda	Anglo-American cultural ties and effective British propaganda shaped public opinion toward the Allied cause.	Strength: Explains asymmetric sympathy. Limitation: Cultural affinity was a background condition, not a triggering cause.

Major Historiographical Interpretations of U.S. Entry into World War I

✦

KEY TAKEAWAY

Think of these historiographical schools as different lenses in a forensic investigation, each illuminating a different set of fingerprints on the same crime scene. No single interpretation is sufficient on its own; the strongest AP essays synthesize multiple causal frameworks—acknowledging, for instance, that economic interests created the structural conditions for intervention while submarine warfare and the Zimmermann Telegram provided the immediate catalysts, all filtered through Wilson's distinctive ideological vision.

SECTION 8

Legacy and Connection to Later Developments

World War I's diplomatic and military legacy extended far beyond 1918, reshaping American politics and foreign policy for decades. The Senate's rejection of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations marked the beginning of a period often characterized as "isolationism," though in practice the United States remained deeply engaged in international affairs through economic channels, arms limitation conferences, and informal diplomacy. Examining how the wartime experience connected to later developments is essential for understanding Period 7 as a coherent unit.

WWI-Era Development	Connection to Later History
Senate rejection of League of Nations (1919–1920)	Interwar "isolationism"; Neutrality Acts of the 1930s; eventual reversal with UN membership (1945)
War Guilt Clause and reparations (Article 231)	German economic instability; rise of fascism; WWII; lessons applied in Marshall Plan (1948)
Great Migration accelerated by wartime labor demands	Urbanization of African Americans; Harlem Renaissance; northern racial tensions; civil rights groundwork
Expanded federal power (WIB, Selective Service, Espionage Act)	Precedent for New Deal agencies; WWII mobilization; modern national security state
Women's wartime contributions	19th Amendment (1920); expanded female workforce; precedent for WWII "Rosie the Riveter"
Wartime nativism and Red Scare (1919–1920)	Immigration restriction (1921, 1924 quotas); 100% Americanism; Second Red Scare of Cold War era

WWI-Era Developments and Their Connections to Later U.S. History

Perhaps the most consequential long-term legacy was the unresolved tension between Wilsonian internationalism and American reluctance to accept binding multilateral commitments. This tension reappeared in virtually every major foreign policy debate of the twentieth century—from the Neutrality Acts of the 1930s to debates over the United Nations, NATO, and interventions in Korea, Vietnam, and beyond. Wilson's vision of collective security was ultimately vindicated by the creation of the United Nations in 1945, but only after a second world war demonstrated the catastrophic consequences of the flawed peace settlement Wilson had tried, and failed, to shape.

SECTION 9

Practice Problems

Question 1: CONCEPTUAL

Which of the following best explains why the United States found it difficult to maintain neutrality during World War I?

A. The United States had formal treaty obligations to Great Britain that required military assistance in wartime.
B. American economic ties to the Allies, combined with German submarine warfare against neutral shipping, made genuine impartiality nearly impossible.
C. The majority of American citizens were recent immigrants from Allied nations who demanded immediate intervention.
D. Germany launched a direct military attack on American soil, leaving Wilson no choice but to declare war.

Show answer (B)

B is correct because American banks and manufacturers had extended approximately $2.3 billion in loans to the Allies by 1917, and German submarine warfare directly threatened American lives and commerce. A is incorrect because the United States had no formal military alliance with Britain; the U.S. tradition since Washington's Farewell Address had been to avoid entangling alliances. C is incorrect because while cultural ties to Britain existed, American demographics included large German-American and Irish-American populations who opposed intervention. D is incorrect because Germany never attacked American soil; the closest was the Zimmermann Telegram's proposal, which was an unrealized diplomatic overture to Mexico, not an actual military assault.

Question 2: BASIC CALCULATION

The Zimmermann Telegram was significant primarily because it

A. revealed that Germany was supplying weapons to Mexican revolutionary forces along the U.S. border.
B. demonstrated that Germany planned to annex American territory in the Southwest.
C. proposed a German-Mexican military alliance against the United States, transforming the European war into a direct security threat.
D. proved that German spies had infiltrated the U.S. State Department, undermining public trust in government institutions.

Show answer (C)

C is correct. The Zimmermann Telegram, intercepted and decoded by British intelligence in January 1917, proposed that if the United States entered the war, Germany would support Mexico in recovering territories lost in the Mexican-American War (Texas, New Mexico, Arizona). This revelation shifted public opinion by transforming the war from a distant European conflict into a direct threat to American territorial security. A is incorrect because the telegram was about a proposed alliance, not active arms supplies. B is incorrect because Germany did not plan to annex American territory itself—it proposed restoring Mexican claims. D is incorrect because British intelligence intercepted the telegram from German diplomatic cables, not from infiltration of the U.S. government.

Question 3: INTERMEDIATE

3 pts

a) Briefly describe ONE specific cause of the United States' entry into World War I. b) Briefly describe ONE specific way in which the federal government expanded its power during World War I. c) Briefly explain ONE specific effect of World War I on American society.

Show answer

Point 1 (part a): One specific cause was Germany's resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare in January 1917. After the Sussex Pledge of 1916, Germany had temporarily agreed to restrict its U-boat campaign, but the decision to resume attacks on all shipping in the war zone led to the sinking of several American vessels and the deaths of American citizens, directly violating the principle of freedom of the seas that Wilson had insisted upon. Point 2 (part b): One specific expansion of federal power was the Selective Service Act of May 1917, which established a military draft requiring all men aged 21–30 to register. This represented an unprecedented peacetime assertion of federal authority over individual citizens, ultimately registering approximately 24 million men and inducting nearly 2.8 million into the armed forces. Point 3 (part c): One specific effect on American society was the acceleration of the Great Migration. Wartime labor demands in northern industrial cities, combined with the cutoff of European immigration, drew hundreds of thousands of African Americans from the rural South to cities like Chicago, Detroit, and New York. This demographic shift transformed northern urban politics, contributed to the Harlem Renaissance, and created new racial tensions that erupted in violence during the Red Summer of 1919.

Question 4: APPLIED

4 pts

Use the following two excerpts and your knowledge of United States history to answer the question. Document 1: Woodrow Wilson, War Message to Congress, April 2, 1917 "The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundations of political liberty. We have no selfish ends to serve. We desire no conquest, no dominion." Document 2: Senator George Norris, Speech Against the War Resolution, April 4, 1917 "We are going into war upon the command of gold… I feel that we are about to put the dollar sign upon the American flag." Evaluate the extent to which economic interests, rather than idealism, drove the United States to enter World War I.

Show answer

Point 1 — Thesis (1 point): A strong response presents a defensible thesis that evaluates the relative weight of economic and idealistic motivations for U.S. entry into WWI. Example: "While Wilson's stated rationale emphasized democratic idealism and the defense of neutral rights, economic entanglement with the Allies created structural incentives for intervention that made his idealistic framing both genuine and strategically convenient." Point 2 — Document Analysis (1 point): The response must analyze at least one document. Document 1 (Wilson) frames the war in purely idealistic terms—democracy, political liberty, no selfish ends—reflecting Progressive-era reform rhetoric extended to foreign policy. Document 2 (Norris) directly challenges this framing by arguing that financial interests ("the command of gold") were the real driver. A strong response notes that both documents are partisan speeches delivered to Congress with specific persuasive purposes. Point 3 — Outside Evidence (1 point): The response uses specific historical evidence beyond the documents. Strong examples include: U.S. banks had extended roughly $2.3 billion in loans to the Allies vs. only $27 million to Germany by 1917; the British naval blockade had effectively channeled American trade toward the Allies; the Nye Committee of the 1930s later investigated war profiteering and arms manufacturers' influence, reflecting the persistence of the economic interpretation. Point 4 — Complexity/Synthesis (1 point): A sophisticated response acknowledges that the two motivations were not mutually exclusive. Wilson's idealism was sincere, but it operated within an economic context that made intervention structurally favorable. The response might also note that the timing of intervention—after the Zimmermann Telegram and submarine warfare—suggests that national security concerns, not just economics, were decisive, demonstrating that mono-causal explanations are insufficient.

Question 5: CRITICAL THINKING

4 pts

Evaluate the extent to which World War I represented a turning point in the role of the federal government in American life. In your response, consider developments in the period from 1914 to 1920.

Show answer

Point 1 — Thesis (1 point): The response must present a historically defensible thesis that makes a claim about the extent to which WWI was a turning point. Example: "World War I dramatically expanded the federal government's role in economic regulation, military conscription, and the control of public discourse, establishing precedents that would be both partially reversed in the 1920s and more fully realized during the New Deal and World War II." Point 2 — Contextualization (1 point): The response situates the argument in broader historical context. Before WWI, the Progressive Era (1900–1916) had already expanded federal regulatory power through agencies like the Federal Trade Commission and legislation like the Clayton Antitrust Act. However, the scale of wartime mobilization far exceeded peacetime progressivism. The response might also reference the limited federal role in previous wars (Civil War excepted) to establish the degree of change. Point 3 — Evidence (1 point): The response must use specific, relevant evidence to support the argument. Key examples include: the Selective Service Act (1917) drafting 2.8 million men; the War Industries Board coordinating industrial production; the Food and Fuel Administrations regulating consumption; the Espionage Act (1917) and Sedition Act (1918) criminalizing dissent; the Railroad Administration nationalizing railroads; Liberty Bond drives mobilizing civilian finances; and Schenck v. United States (1919) upholding limits on free speech. Point 4 — Analysis and Reasoning (1 point): The response demonstrates complex understanding. A strong essay acknowledges that WWI's federal expansion was partially a turning point and partially a continuation: it built on Progressive precedents but exceeded them in scope; many wartime agencies were dismantled after 1918, suggesting the turning point was incomplete; however, the psychological precedent—that the federal government could and should coordinate the national economy in crisis—endured and was invoked during the Great Depression. The essay might also argue that the war's suppression of civil liberties represented a darker dimension of federal expansion that would recur during the Red Scare and later during McCarthyism. Demonstrating this kind of nuance—acknowledging both change and continuity—is essential for earning the complexity point.

SUMMARY

Summary: World War I — Military and Diplomacy

Summary

The United States entered World War I in April 1917 after a complex interplay of factors eroded Wilsonian neutrality: economic ties to the Allies created structural incentives, unrestricted submarine warfare challenged freedom of the seas, and the Zimmermann Telegram transformed the conflict into a direct security threat. Wartime mobilization—the Selective Service Act, the War Industries Board, the Committee on Public Information, and the Espionage and Sedition Acts—expanded federal power to an unprecedented degree and reshaped American society through the Great Migration, women's wartime employment, and nativist backlash.

Diplomatically, Wilson's Fourteen Points articulated an idealistic vision of collective security, self-determination, and open diplomacy, but the Treaty of Versailles imposed punitive terms on Germany, including the War Guilt Clause and massive reparations. The Senate's rejection of the treaty—driven by the conflict between Henry Cabot Lodge's reservationists, the irreconcilables, and Wilson's refusal to compromise—kept the United States out of the League of Nations and inaugurated an era of contested internationalism that would shape American foreign policy through World War II and beyond.