In this essay I will argue both sides of this argument using sources to back up my points, however ever maintaining the fact I agree. German aggression can be seen as being responsible for the outbreak of a General European war due to the Schlieffen plan. This plan devised by General von Schlieffen would give Germany the option of fighting a war on two fronts with the French and the Russians. Both sources 1 and 2 agree that this plan was aggressive and therefore agree with the statement herein. Source 1 state’s that ‘as early as 1906, Germany had in place a plan for an aggressive war.’ Suggesting that the plan was put in place to start a war when the time was right.
Bethmann-Hollweg, German Chancellor, told England’s Foreign Secretary that Germany had no intention on military occupation of Belgium or seizing Belgian territory. (Doc L). Germany crossed over into Belgium 4 August 1914, on that same day the UK declared war on Germany. Thus, the war may have possibly been an accident because Germany’s intentions were not fulfilled. It also may be possible to argue that WWI was an accident because the Great Powers took action in order to try to avoid war.
What actually happened: The Schlieffen Plan was a big gamble by the Germans, and it could have well resulted in defeat for France and Russia, however the plan backfired on the Germans. The first problem that the Germans encountered was that the Belgian Army had put up a resistance, which they had not expected which in turn slowed their advances. The next big problem the Germans had not anticipated was that Britain declared war on Germany because of the pledge to protect Belgium, which they had called a ‘scrap of paper.’ Their gamble had not paid off and soon, when the Russian Army was quicker to respond the Germans had to switch troops to the eastern front however the Russians had still invaded Germany 10 days later. Explain why a Stalemate
Source 2, even though it agrees with the statement also disagrees to an extent as well and supports source 3, blaming the immobilisation of Russia for the outbreak of war, linking to source 3 as Russia would have carefully thought out the plan to immobilise and rearm. Source 1 also slightly blames the Austrians for the start of the war due to the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia in relation to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand which is an important reason that should not be overlooked. Another reason for the outbreak of war is also the triple entente between Britain, France and Russia which caused Germany to feel encircled due to these countries geographical location, this could disprove source 2 about the schlieffen plan, arguing it was done in order to knock France out before war began officially and put ends to a 2 front war. Source 1 agrees with the statement that war broke out as a result of decisions made by the German military. ‘German military which ultimately secured by a combination of persuasion and defiance, the mobilisation orders, the ultimata and declarations of war which unleashed the conflict’ This shows the German military were the ones who ordered the mobilisation and rearmament of Germany and the use of the word ‘defiance’ means source 1
They did not receive a satisfactory reply and they declared war on Russia and France. On August 2nd, the Germany sent an ultimatum to Belgium. It was about the countries intent to send troops through Belgium. Belgium refused to grant permission. The British did not want to have war, but after hearing about the ultimatum that was sent to Belgium, Britain sent an ultimatum to Germany asking them to respect that Belgium was neutral.
Explain why international tension increased in Europe in the period from Hitler’s takeover of Czechoslovakia (March 1939) to his invasion of Poland (1 September 1939). Hitler’s actions had clearly threatened peace in Europe with plans to regain the Sudetenland. The Czechoslovakian leader, Edvard Benes, was fully aware of the imminent threat to his country, and appealed for help from the league of nations who reluctantly, agreed to defend Czechoslovakia if it were invaded by Germany, as they wanted to avoid war at all costs Hitler then increased the tension by proclaiming that he would fight for the Sudetenland if he had provoked. This was a bold threat from Hitler, as the Czechs had a powerful army. They also had guarantees of support from Britain and France.
If any of the triple alliance attacks either Russia or France, the other will send aid. Russia and France made this treaty because the triple alliance was too powerful to take them on individually. The whole thing went downhill when Russia not France began mobilizing their troops. When Russia began mobilizing, the Germans Callics of the Austro-Hungarian empire decided to declare war on both Russia and its ally France. Even after the Germans declared war, France did not wish to engage in war.
‘German aggression was responsible for the outbreak of a general European war in August 1914.’ How far do you agree with this judgement? The above judgement outlines a clear debate among historians as to whether German aggression was the main reason the First World War began in August 1914, or whether it was due to various other factors. Gordon Corrigan claims that it was due to German aggression and therefore represents the closest argument to the one made in the question. Corrigan also references Fischer to support his argument, and so supports the Fischer Theory, which holds Germany to be responsible for the outbreak of the First World War due to their aggressive foreign policy. Contrastingly, James Joll suggests that Germany’s defensive offensive war rooted from a fear of encirclement from the countries that it borders, and so presents the opinion most opposing to that of the question.
World War 1 was a ticking time bomb waiting to happen. Countries throughout Europe had agreements of consolidated alliances which would pull European countries into battle. Therefore, if one country were to attack another, a domino like effect would come into play and the allied countries were bound to defend the attacked country. Since Austria-Hungary decided to declare war on Serbia for the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Russia was bound to join the war because of cultural ties and alliances with Serbia. Germany saw that Russia was starting to mobilize troops so Germany decided to declare on Russia which leads to France joining the war because of being drawn against Germany.
If Russia’s economy was relatively healthy in early 1914, how did it manage to be in such a sad state of affairs by 1917? There are many factors that contributed to this: the decision to go to war, the direction of the Russian war effort between 1914 and 1917, economic and social factors as well as political developments. So how did the Russian Empire manage to collapse so quickly? The answer lies in the changing nature of warfare after 1914, as well as the social and economic strains that a war of that magnitude imposes. This is implying of course that the decision by Nicholas II to go to war against Germany and it’s allies in 1914 was wrong, but this is not the case.