• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Do Kehr's essays imply a coherent theory about the origins of the First World War?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

18th February 2003 Do Kehr's essays imply a coherent theory about the origins of the First World War? Eckart Kehr is often described as the father of revisionist thought concerning imperial Germany and the road to war. His seminal collection of essays, Der Primat der Innenpolitik, was dismissed at the time and for a number of decades subsequent to its publication, for the primacy of foreign policy continued to dominate historical thinking. Kehr argued that Germany, for a number of domestic reasons, was pursuing a Weltpolitik that eventually led to the First World War. She rearmed and reorganised because of internal political tensions and squabblings, not because of any real provocation or threat from abroad. This theme has been taken up by other revisionist historians, most notably Fritz Fischer in 1961, but it is a rather one-sided view. It is impossible to view Germany's actions purely in isolation, and Kehr fails to take into account the activities and manoeuvrings of Germany's neighbours and rivals. She was not necessarily following a unique course, nor was she always the first to adopt certain measures. More recent historians, such as David Blackbourn and V.R. Berghahn, whilst not necessarily returning to the views of the orthodox school so violently rejected by Kehr, argue nevertheless that his theory presents only one side of the debate. ...read more.

Middle

Political wranglings and tensions meant that before long, they were soon demanding a similar expansion. The military's abandonment of the policy of steady troop increases was also due to the shrewd realisation that the extent of the navy's enlargement was such that it would inexorably lead Germany into conflict in the near future. Again, according to Kehr, it was Germany's sudden rearmament which prompted her neighbours to follow suit, in order to defend themselves from possible attack. Kehr also claims it was internal pressures which led to an increase in tensions in Germany's foreign relations. She had, towards the end of the nineteenth century, begun to import vast amounts of Russian grain and rye, which was vital to fund the Tsarist Empire's push for progress and modernisation. However, once the East Elbian landowners had introduced tariffs to protect their own agricultural interests, the effects on the Russian economy were dramatic. Thus domestic policies influenced Germany's foreign affairs, for this new policy led to a severe deterioration in Russo-German relations, and meant that, because the adage "countries who trade with one another do not fight each other" no longer applied, it was more likely that, in any future conflict, the two would be on opposite sides. ...read more.

Conclusion

Kehr's essays do present a coherent theory as to the origins of the First World War. It is possible to see how Germany's domestic actions could have led her towards war, and to go even further, as Fischer does in his Germany's Grasp for World Power in 1961, that 1914 was the outbreak of a world war that she had been actively working towards since 1912. Kehr does not go quite so far, but he refuted the previously held belief that Germany was innocent in the build up to war (indeed, his claims have a curious resonance in Friedrich Meinecke's Die deustche Katastrope, when he holds Prussian-German militarism for the event of World War One - curious because Meinecke was one of the historians Kehr had in mind when countering the orthodox point of view). However, Kehr's theory, no matter how coherent, is not necessarily correct. This debate has raged for decades, and will, no doubt, continue for many more, but the behaviour of other European powers, and their impact on Germany and the outbreak of war should also be taken into consideration. Placing the blame on Germany alone is to be as one-sided as those who Kehr was contradicting in his essays. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Why did tension increase in Europe between 1900 and 1914?

    * Roosevelt, the US president, was prepared to believe Stalin's promises about free elections, provided that Stalin was prepared to declare war on Japan and to join the UNO. The Yalta Conference In February 1945 Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin met at Yalta in the southern Soviet Union to plan the end of the Second World War.

  2. Assessing the impact of the first world war on international relations in the decade ...

    empowered to solve disputes by negotiation and compromise in the process maintaining international relations and peace. Another factor that made the nations to come together after the First World War was the fear of Bolshevism. By 1917,protracted war was producing revolutionary strains on all the belligerent countries.

  1. Khrushchev's attempts at modernisation.

    After twenty-five years of central planning by Moscow, local areas needed real incentives to use their initiative. Khrushchev: an assessment Under Khrushchev there certainly was a relaxation of government repression following the frighteningly arbitrary ruthlessness of Stalin's dictatorship. The inmates of the gulags were released and censorship was relaxed.

  2. American economic foreign policy and the origins of the cold war

    Assuming that only their country had the power and influence to carry out this task, United States officials set to reshape the future of the world economy even before formal entry into the war. Needless to say, Hull's objective of creating a so-called "open door" world in which nations enjoyed

  1. The Origins of the First World War - Sources Questions

    However, it had had little power. Von Bulow's proposals would have been employed. Germany's dilemma to help Austria - Hungary, after the attack on Serbia, and the fear of encirclement is expressed by Kaiser Wilhelm II in a secret memorandum, concerning July 1914 in source four.

  2. Who is to be blamed for the outbreak of the First World War?

    into the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (an extended form of Greater Serbia). The Serb government was involved in underground and terrorist activities directed against Austria-Hungary. Austria-Hungary was worried about the possible dissolution of its empire. It desired to crush Slav nationalism, the main factor of instability.

  1. How Stable Was the Tsarist Autocracy in 1914?

    Dismantling the commune would in itself be a major barrier to agricultural improvement, and "for the vast majority, the option of leaving the commune held little attraction and resistance to Stolypin was fierce." (Acton) Few left it and few new useful ideas came out of those who had.

  2. ‘In origins andoutcome, the Spanish Civil War was a Spanish and not a European ...

    strategic, and alliance matters, although he put the ideological factor to the forefront. Hitler decided to support the Nationalists and meet Franco's inquiry for transport planes on 25 July 1936, along the advice of Hermann Goering, the German minister for war and the officer of the 'Vier-Jahresplan'.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work