- Created by: Belle_Glass
- Created on: 06-03-16 18:08
Although the War guilt clause-1919- TOV burdened G with complete respnsibility for starting WW1- German aggression cannot be held solely as implied by sources 1,2,3.
result of the alliance systems, recent troubles in Balkans, tensions across Europe had been simmering- increased comp between G and GB. - naval war
German War Council 1912 + annexation of Belgium in Summer 1914- G acting aggressively
Firstly, Sources 1 + 2 acknowledge existence of G aggression in run-up to war
Taylor in S1- 'German people had trained themselves pyhscologically for aggression'
Taylor could be alluding to the 1912 War council- this involved Kaiser discussing the possibilty of war with Russia- demonstrating preparation and the possibility- such an eventuality already existed for 2 years by 1914
Furthermore, Eckstein S2- reiterates the responsiblity of G aggression- 'German power, whose time, it was felt, had come'
this 'power' highlighted by Eckstein refers to German annexation of Belgium 1914. Belgium neutrality been guaranteed since 1837 Treaty of London- possible that Germany felt 'grand' enough- invade neautral Belgium in order- victory
subsequent British declaration of war- after the Belgian invasion- main factor in provoking war as GB had failed to ignore G actions
Likewise, Sources 2/3 convey the fundamental role that European Alliances had in triggering WW1.
Source 2 stresses importance of 'The aggressive designs of the hostile powers surrounding G'
hostile nature of the alliances- notably the Triple Entente of GB, France and Russia.
the implications of G being surrounded geographically by the Entente powers imply that Germany would be unable to avoid a conflict with such powers; making this strict Triple Entente imply that G unable to avoid conflict with these powers
Howard in S3 alludes to the other dominant European Alliance…