Germany was to blame for the outbreak of the First World War Essay

Germ any was to blame for the eructation of the First humanity War do you agree?I do non agree fully that the Germans were to blame for the extravasation of fightfarefare. German intentions were not to start a struggle, that in that location are a few events where they accident onlyy stand byed to escalate the troops post. There is no doubt that they did help to escalate the situation between Serbia and Austro Hungary. In this hear I will be arguing that Germans did not cause the outbreak of the state of warfare. I will be doing this by discussing the livid cheque, the Schlieffen architectural device, the September programme, the actions of the Kaiser and the actions of Bethmann Hollweg.Many historians manage that because Germany pre- final causeed for war that when the chance of war arose they obviously create it. The severalise for this assembly line is the Schlieffen plan, it was a military outline devised in 1882 as a means of header with a two front war. almost plenty argue that the Schlieffen plan is the get-go traceable occasion why the war started. even this is scarcely accepted the Schlieffen plan was drawn up because of the increasing impel Germany was under because of the triple Entente. Germany was by and by all geographically in bad position on one side they had France and on the other Russia, to make this situation worse France and Russia were allied.Therefore it is not surprising that a plan was created in case a war with the both countries was to occur. A war such as this would fill to be fought on two fronts so to be able to fight a war kindred this on side would have to be disabled quickly. The Germans plans to get to genus Paris in 6 weeks is seen to be an aggressive tactic that is why some people see the Schlieffen plan as a plan to expand Germany if war was to break out. It is garner this is not the case, the Schlieffen plan was a defensive strategy designed to help Germany to bang with a war on two f ronts.The Schlieffen plan can hardly be seen as the Germans supplying for war because other republics had simial plans such as Russia who had to spliff to their plans so in all that hey had to declare war on Germany. An argument has been put forward that Germany declaring war on France is proof that the Schlieffen plan was a form of blowup for Germany and that that it was not a defensive plan. However this is hardly true, Germany declared war on France because Russia had declared war on them and Russia and France were allies. So to Germany I was natural that France would marriage the war because of the alliance system. Russia in addition did the same when the tsar was told that he could not mobilise against Austria alone because the plans were for a war with Austria and Russia.The September programme drawn up by the chancellor of Germany, Bethmann Hollweg is seen as another maculation of evidence suggesting that Germany had planned the war. The September programme was a doc ument that set out Germanys war aims, including a list of territorial acquisitions. This is seen to be incriminatory because it was written so soon after war broke out. However Bethmann Hollweg was under a potful of pressure from military who needed to know their accusatives. It should also be considered that the German army had been mobilised for a few months so plans for the army had to be drawn up. few people argue that because the September programme was released so quickly that these preys must have been premeditate.This is not completely true, it was important for the germens to think quickly what they were going to have to achieve in the war after all they were fighting on two fronts. Some of the objective might have been premeditated notwith stand these were in all likelihood defensive ones thought up long ago. It is clear to see that Bethmann Hollweg was caught between the Kaiser and Moltke. Bethmann Hollwegs behaviour is much criticized during the July crisis. It i s Bethmann Hollwegs actions that are apply as the argument against him. However what he did can be seen as a gamble that went horribly wrong. Bethmann was not consulted on the neat cheque scarce did back it.Some people argue that Bethmann precious to manipulate Russia into mobilising against Germany so they didnt look as if they started the war. This is untrue because rather Bethmann thought that he could keep the Balkan war localized. The evidence for this argument is that Bethmann thought that Russia would not help Serbia if a war happened because the Tsar would not lend his verify to royal assassins. Bethmann also felt that Russia was not military or financially ready for a war. Germanys mobilisation against Russia was only meant to deter Russia from war not to provoke them into war that is where Bethmanns gamble failed.The pinhead cheque is seen as confirming Germanys offense in starting the First World War. The blank cheque is another example of a fracture made by Germa ny. The Kaiser gave unconditional allow to Austria, this was do because Germany felt isolated by the triple entente cordiale and wanted to make it clear to Austria that their alliance was strong. However as professor Rohl argues the Kaiser was a very doubtful man. There is a lot of evidence to support this argument such as when the Kaiser decided to diverseness is mind about the blank cheque but then was convinced by his wife to be a man.The Kaiser was heavily influenced by others and there are many examples, such as the first Moroccan crisis where he was pushed by Bulow and Holstein into provoking the French. The blank cheque is greatly misunderstood the vague phasing used is open to interpretation. The historian Gerhard Ritter argues that Germany sought to deter Russia from war, not to provoke conflict with her. The blank cheque like the September programme is seen as evidence that Germany had wanted a war for some time but really they have both been misinterpreted.The real nation that was to blame for the outbreak of war was Austro-Hungary who even after finding no evidence that linked the assassins to any terror groups in Serbia and after Serbia agreed to their ultimatum understood invaded their country. This is really the behaviour of a nation with war on their agenda. Austro-Hungary it can be said had to avenge the death of Franz Ferdinand. Russia too could have avoided war but much like the Kaiser the Tsar kept on changing his mind.In conclusion from the evidence above it can be seen that everyone muddled into war and that no one power is to blame. The September programme and the Schlieffen plan which are seen to highlight German guilt, do not and are actually defensive precautions not premeditated plans for war. Bethmann Hollweg and the Kaiser both were trying to achieve the same objective but were both communicating very well. The nations twisting in the July crisis can be blamed for standing by their alliances instead of sorting out the sit uation. Germany did carry to the mix up between nations in the Balkans and for inciting Austro-Hungary withal they are not ultimately to blame for the outbreak of war.