Debate: Was Germany Responsible for the Outbreak of the First World War - Fischer's controversy

Please note, these are just my revision notes it may not fully cover everything. This post will briefly outline the arguments that Germany was indeed responsible, I will then post another arguing that it was a shared European guilt and further go into details.

Fritz Fischer - ultimately set the foundation for the debate

The debate on the origins of the First World War created much controversy when historian, Fritz Fisher published his thesis whereby the German government planned for the War in 1914. In Sewell words, 'Fischer believed that the truth about Germany guilt or innocence could only be determined by the official documents' these showed expansionist aims in Germany during the war. His thesis is 'associated with the idea of German responsibility for the outbreak of the war. Fisher claims that:

• Germany was prepared risk the First World War in order to gain great power and European hegemony
• Germany encouraged Austria-Hungary to start a war with Serbia
• Clear war aims that were discussed prior to the war - large territorial gains
• Planned the outbreak of the First World War from 1912 onwards

Fischer's argument was also highly criticized, some examples are that his books was accused of being 'Germanocentric' and that he neglected the policies of other powers and failed to place German policy within the context of a broader European and international developments.

Sewell further illustrated that Gerhard Ritter, a German historian stated that Fischer's work was an act of 'national disloyalty'. Ritter believed that it was unfair to blame Germany exclusively for the outbreak of war. Ritter further claims that:

• Germany acted defensively throughout the July Crisis to preserve its position in existing status quo.
• The main aim was to support their ally, Austria-Hungary.
• The German government put too much reliance on military planners who devised their war plans which were bound to lead to an escalation of the crisis.
• Germany ultimately stumbled into war by supporting Austria Hungary and by allowing military planners to 'roll the dice' and was essentially 'defensive' - you can further support this by mentioning Germany's fear of encirclement by the Entente.

Sewell: German actions in July 1914 were really a gamble which went horrendously wrong. Where Fischer saw premeditation and intent, Ritter saw blindness and miscalculation; where Fischer saw aims, Ritter saw tactics.

Fischer supporters examples

Immanuel Geiss: dominant long-term cause of the First World War was the German desire for Weltpolitik

Rohl: German government was pursuing pre-existing plans during the July crisis.

I will further go into details on the factors below in upcoming posts.

Was Germany responsible for the outbreak of the First World War:

• Flottenpolitik  - Launched in 1906 introduced a series of Navy Laws. To directly challenge British Naval supremacy. 'Their impact was to spark a naval race
• Schlieffen Plan - a plan to have wars on two fronts - to quickly finish off the French in weeks by entering through neutral Belgium then turn to focus on the Russians before they mobilize. - As General von Moltke has stated 'the sooner (for war) the better'.
• September Program 1914

Fritz Fischer further supports this side of the argument which ultimately heated up the debates in which we now refer to as the 'Fischer controversy'. As a German himself, he caused an outrage amongst the Germans and others in his findings.

• Bethman-Hollweg's aggressive foreign policy prior to 1914
• September Progra,,e
• July Crisis was an opportunity to achieve expansionist aims
• Decision makers intentionally risked a full fledged European war knowing that the Austo-Serbian war will escalate
• 'War of design'
• Domestic problems within Germany forced them to move the focus away from the inner problems and onto war
• Fischer refutes the view that Germany was innocent in the lead up to war

Wars of Illusion - Fischer placed more emphasis on the Germen domestic tensions and foreign policy.

• The German government used war as a solution to different internal problems
• War in 1914 was a leap forward - flucht nach vorn - to establish German hegemony and domestic peace.
• The whole decision making elite had to take responsibility for war - intentionalist

Flaws in Fischer's argument

• Evidence Fischer used

Diaries of Admiral Muller (published in 1965) in which there was a reference to a meeting on 8th Dec 1912 of the Kaiser and top military advisors

•  Fischer states that this was the War Council Dec 1912 - this meeting provides evidence that the path to war had already been decided and postponed according to Germany's need for preparation.

Emphasis on the War Council

• Bethmann was not present at this meeting and did not endorse its conclusions (Stachan)
• Policy followed by Germany (Dec 1912 - July 1914) is not marked by the consistency which would endorse Fischer's argument.
• Muller's own conclusion was that this meeting amount to 'almost 0'
• It was a reaction and response to Britain's declaration that they would support France unconditionally in the event of a war.

Fischer links Germany's Welpolitik, Flottenpolitik, the belligerence of its pre-war diplomacy and conduct in July Crisis together in a coherent and plausible manner. It was more convincing that the interpretation that suggests Europe stumbled into a war in 1914. However, his interpretation of the War Council (1912) did not ultimately in fact make a decision to go to war - some historians argue that this was merely a defensive meeting if Germany was to go to war. The September programme was written after the war had begun therefore cannot be taken as evidence of prewar intents. There is also no solid evidence that showed Germany's leaders were influenced by the inner domestic policies.