The origins of World War One
The Fritz Fisher thesis
Fritz Fisher focuses on the Kaiser, Gottlieb von Jagow, Bethmann Hollweg and Helmut von Moltke. These four were the German leading figures at that time; Fischer is convinced that these people were responsible for the outbreak of World War One. Fischer’s three main claims were:
1. Germany was prepared to launch the First World War in order to become a great power.
2. Germany encouraged Austria-Hungary to start a war with Serbia, and continued to do so, even when it seemed clear that such a war could not be localized.
3. Once the war began, Germany developed a clear set of aims, already discussed before the war, to gain large territorial gains in central and eastern Europe, very similar to Hitler’s later craving for Lebensraum (‘living space’) in eastern Europe
Fischer believes that the First World War was not a preventative war, but that it was planed and launched by Germany aggressively in order to dominate whole Europe. Furthermore Fischer sees Bethmann Hollweg in the role of the main constructor of the German policy during the July Crisis in 1914, and also as a central figure in the development of Germany’s expansionist goals once the war started.
The Egmont Zechlin thesis
Egmont Zechlin thinks that Bethmann Hollweg took a “calculated risk in July 1914 to gain diplomatic victory, or if it failed, to fight a “defensive preventive war” with nearly no objectives. This explains that Germany did not prepare a huge plan for expansion. Zechlin’s three main claims were:
1. Germany support for a preventative war grew after the Balkan wars had produced vast gains for Serbia.
2. Bethmann Hollweg lacked the patience to settle matters by negotiation, believed that the Entente powers were paralyzing Germany, and realized that Russia was growing stronger in the Balkans, and Austria-Hungary weaker.
3. When he gave Austria-Hungary the ‘blank cheque’, Bethmann Hollweg realized that the crisis might escalate into a European war.
It appeared like Germany hoped that the Austro-Serb crisis might divide the big Entente powers and with that give Germany a blood free victory. In addition to that Zechlin accepts the fact that Germany took advantage of the crisis to advance its own plan.
The Gerhard Ritter thesis
Gerhard Ritter supposes that Germany can’t be blamed for the outbreak of World War One. Ritter’s six main claims were:
1. There is no evidence of a unified German plan for war or world domination.
2. Germany acted defensively throughout the July Crisis to preserve its position in the existing status quo.
action to prove to the rest of the world that Germany was more powerful than all. In
Germany continued to push buttons resulting in the world jumping into a World War. Nations desired to grow and gain more influence. Danger increased while others selfish dictators were trying to bloom. In The Treaty of Versailles an article stated that German troops were forbidden from entering
Although Fischer’s thesis was widely accepted, there were people who argued against it. Most Germans had accepted the fact that Germany had caused World War II, but they disagreed with the blame Germany took for World War I. World War I was widely regarded as a war forced upon Germany by its encircling enemies. Critics argue that Fischer’s thesis placed Germany outside the real historical context. It is argued that Germany was not the only aggressive a European nation in the early 20th century, as it was a time when Social Darwinism views of struggle were well-known in Europe's ruling classes. Critics also oppose that in the centuries following Columbus's voyages to America, the Western European countries had already acquired vast overseas colonial
The longer it was delayed the less chance Germany had to win. No point avoiding it, they were better off preparing for it. Para5: § Balkan tension unable to be resolved peacefully. Ultimatum to Serbia. However Austria would never have started war with Serbia and Russia without Germany's support.
aggressive added to the expansion in his forces. These reasons lead to the World War 2.
Taylor’s approach is one of “innocent until proven guilty,” which allowed him to distribute accountability to both the Allied and Axis powers. Taylor carefully constructs a historical chain of cause and effect through his unbiased evaluation. The First World War left a structurally sound Germany bent on restoring its independence, and a weakened balance of power in Europe. These facts, along with a morally revolting yet rational leader, faced only with a strict policy of appeasement combined to form the perfect storm, one that would ravage the world in the Second World War.
In the July Crisis Austria-Hungary blamed Serbia for the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand (the heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire) despite not having conclusive proof. Austria-Hungary asked for German support to "eliminate Serbia as a power factor in the Balkans". Germany agreed, offering her full support for Austria- Hungary to start a war with Serbia, and this became known as the "blank cheque". Austria-Hungary and Germany could not have failed to realise the possibility of Russian intervention and a European war, suggesting to me that war was their objective. Austria-Hungary issued an impossible ultimatum to Serbia, which was likely to provoke a war. Serbia was given only 48 hours to reply, so was forced to think quickly, or other countries would be mobilized and ready to attack. Serbia accepted all but one point of the ultimatum. Consequently war was announced. If given more time Serbia could have discussed the issue further in a conference. The British foreign minister, Grey suggested a conference, but this was rejected by Germany and Austria-Hungary, suggesting that they had deliberate aims for war during the Balkan Crisis, rather than the Balkan Crisis being mismanaged.
...n of Austrian Demands. And Russia for its mobilization of its troops that gave the Germans an excuse for mobilizing its own. I would stay with the reduction of German troops and arms to discourage any enthusiasm of going to war anytime soon.
With nationalistic ideals, countries involved in the war went full force with weapons and men. According to document 6, “In the coming century, the German nation will either be the hammer or the anvil.” The Germans need to have a strong military with warfare to prevent them from loosing to keep their nation alive. Document 12 is a graph that shows the amount of money spent during the war. Germany had the highest increase in expenses from 1890 – 1914, as they were going full force in the war. “I believe that a war is unavoidable, and the sooner the better.” (doc. 15) Germany was a very patriotic country; as the war was not avoidable for them. Militarism helped cause World War I because each country with nationalism in its core was heavily devoted to the
Destructive nationalism, or devoted loyalty that can lead people of a similar heritage to form their own nation, caused tension to rise tremendously within and among several lands. Nationalism in Germany was especially prominent. With powerful military forces and an industrial outlook, Germany was thriving. A sense of national unity was dispersed throughout the empire and gave Germany the assurance it needed to expand. Due to German development, several wars broke out with neighboring regions such as France. By gaining the territory of Alsace-Lorraine, German and French border tensions reached new heights. Due to this conflict along with several others, Germany claimed responsibility for the Great War, as exhibited in Document 4. By forcefully signing the Treaty of Versailles, Germany accepted defeat and accountability for World War I. On the contrary, in Document 5, a German nationalist opposed the idea that Germany alone was liable for outbreak of the war. He felt that several forces of opposing countries took part in fighting each battle and ultimately believed that global opposition caused the Great War. Similarly, in the Balkan Region, several ethnic minorities desired independence from Austria-Hungary. As shown in Document 3, The Austro-Hungarian government demanded that action was to be made regarding propaganda against Austria-Hungary. This ultimatum was a result of the assassination of
There were many immediate and underlying or fundamental causes of World War I. The difference between an underlying and immediate cause is that an underlying cause develops over a long period of time and indirectly leads to a specific event, and an immediate cause is a specific short-term event that directly leads to another event or series of events. While the immediate cause of World War I was the assassination of Francis Ferdinand, the archduke of Austria, by a Serbian member of the Black Hand secret society, there were various basic causes of the war. Three of them were nationalism, alliances between European powers, and militarism. Nationalism is a devotion and loyalty to one’s own nation, with a primary emphasis on furthering its interests as opposed to those of other countries.
This ensured that Germany would not have support from the smaller countries in Europe (Document B). Belgium had aligned itself with France previously, and it continued to do so, but Czechoslovakia and Poland joined in the new alliance (Document B).... ... middle of paper ... ...
Besides the assassination of the archduke there were four other reasons for the start of WW1. 1. Militarism- the building of large armies. All the nations in Europe at that time were engaged in what today could only be called an arms race. As soon as one nation built a new weapon, all the others followed suit. 2. Alliance System- The building of alliances to strengthen the borders of a country. In theses alliances if one country went to war all the other countries in the alliance were forced to go to war also. 3. Imperialism- The practice of colonizing other lands by large European nations. 4.Nationalism- The feeling of Patriotism in a country that makes it compete with all other counties in the area in all areas.
of World War I and felt they had acted in self-defence. The views of the German public to this clause is perfectly justifiable. To claim Germany is solely responsible for World War I is completely unrealistic as it was Austria-Hungary who declared war on Serbia. starting a chain of events resulting in a war involving most of Europe.
The unification of Germany threw all of Europe off its axis. With the formation of this new power there were now five major powers instead of four. This would work to unsettle age-old alliances and confuse the entire European continent for more than twenty years. Not least among the nations swept of their proverbial feet was France. France was a rival with the German alliance long before it merged into one state, but the new stability of a unified Germany made it a much more powerful entity. France scrambled to try and establish a sense of security, immediately demanding compensation in the form of the Rhine’s west bank and Belgium, which Bismarck quickly denied (Howard 40). It became quickly obvious that these two nations would be forced to a flashpoint and soon.