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. L.F.C Turner’s opinion arises somewhere between the two other historians’ arguments, and states that Germany was aggressive during Europe’s last month of peace before war, but there were other factors that should be considered equally. On the one hand, it was German aggression that was responsible for the outbreak of a general European war in August 1914. One example of suggested German aggression can be seen in their long term foreign policy, ‘weltpolitik’ (world politics), which had been implemented in 1897. The aim of this foreign policy was to spread German influence throughout the world, the meaning of which is interpreted differently by different people.
Around 1914 Germany started to have a huge increase in military buildup. Considering that Germany started to build up military forced Britain to build up and this lead to another domino effect of European countries building up militaries. This put great amounts of pressure and influenced the standard set of a military. Since the build up of militaries this also put an egotistical mindset on some of the countries
Hitler's pursuit of Lebensraum resulted in Germany exhibiting ultranationalism towards its neighbours. The ultranationalism that Germany was demonstrating led to expansionism and ultimately led the world to a second world war. Hitler created a distorted version of Darwin's Theory of Evolution, known as Social Darwinism. This principle stated that a nations strength was measured by its ability to fight and win wars; any nation displayed to be weak or unable to fight was a target for conquest. Hitler displayed ultranationalism when he put Social Darwinism into action, he was creating a master race.
Considering that Realpolitik focused on preventing a war within Europe and Weltpolitik aggressively asserted German dominance, it can be validly argued that this direct change in German foreign policy played a major role in bringing about the First World War. Another reason that German foreign policy was so greatly scrutinized was because of the Anglo-German naval rivalry which was creating tension within Europe. As long as Germany built, Britain would be a German enemy. The German government dramatically increased the development of German Ships. [i] This arms race and change in German foreign policy, believing they needed to control the seas was seen as a definite and direct cause
You’d be scared that there is an attack coming your way. 2. How did the naval arms race encourage the development of the alliance system the way it did? Be sure to refer to Great Britain, France, Germany, and Russia, as well as each of the alliance groups specifically. The navel arms raced encouraged the Development of the Alliance system, Because the joining of The different countries meant even more power to both Germany and Great Britain.
By doing this Wilhelm aggravated Britain because they had the largest navy in the world and because Wilhelm was colonizing along the borders of British colonies. Wilhelm’s increase in German navy fleets started an arms race with Britain in 1910; losing hope of an alliance with the country and also losing hope of keeping France isolated, a hope in which Bismarck also had. Because Bismarck (along with Wilhelm) dreaded a two front war with France he strung a web of alliances with countries such as Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Italy and was hoping to add Britain to his long list of allies. The differences that Bismarck
The formal unification of Germany into a politically and administratively integrated nation state officially occurred on 18 January 1871 at the Versailles Palace's Hall of Mirrors in France. This process came through due to years of turmoil and war, with many strategies and manipulations (such as the actions of Otto Von Bismarck to manipulate his way into wars). Different processes were set out, and due to them, a unified Germany was formed. The progress of German unification was greatly encouraged by the Zollverin, a customs union in Central Germany, where internal trade tariffs were abolished, and a common trade policy with external states was developed. As a result of the Zollverein, unification was encouraged, as the states within the German Confederation could now trade with each other easily, and their trading interactions helped lead to a common sense of nationalism.
There are many ideas about how far Germany was responsible for causing the First World War, traditionally all major powers are thought to be equally accountable for the pre-war tensions that accumulated throughout the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, with Germany accepting the majority of the blame for the fatal events that ultimately brought about one of the bloodiest wars the globe has ever seen. Its quest for global power and a strong African colonial empire by a megalomaniacal Kaiser is acquitted as one of the biggest causes of World War I, but how far exactly was Germany responsible? German historian Franz Fischer believes it was almost entirely responsible, his first major book makes three key points against Germany: The first being That Germany hoped a war would ensue when it backed Austria-Hungary against Serbia, the second that The Kaisers war plans pre-dated the war, and the final being that it was Germany’s domestic position rather than its international position that instilled the strong feeling of expansionism. Fischer believes the fault lay at Germany’s door since 1890 with the dismissal of Bismark who had been making arrangements to renew the Reassurance Treaty with Russia, the Tsar had been very fond of his policies and ideals, Kaiser William II had other ideas; Bismark lost his position before the treaty with Russia was renewed and his successor General Leo von Caprivi was advised not to pursue it further. Instead he was told to look into forming an alliance which would link Britain to Germany and its allies: Austria-Hungary and Italy.
Although the theory of Pan Germanism became more apparent to most in the 20th Century; its theory had in fact been around for hundreds of years previously, having originated from the desire to unify all the German provinces. Once this aspiration had been achieved in 1871 by Auto Von Bismark and Kaiser Wilhelm 1 had been corinated, it was then the aspiration for colonial expansion and to unite all German speaking peoples including those in Austria-Hungary and Eastern Europe. It was the coronation of the ambitious Pan-Germanist Kaiser Willhelm II in 1888 which resulted in the renewed hunger for the nation to expand its empire and to bring about much needed raw recourses to sustain its growing economy. It was therefore deemed a necessity, in order to protect its expanding territories, to increase military and naval capabilities, resulting in a doubling of the German army from 1870 to 1914 and dramatic increase in its naval capabilities to the second largest in the world. It was the challenge of the previously un-opposed British Navy which would provide the vital foundation for the expansion of Germany’s empire and the Pan-Germanist aspirations.
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.