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

Germanys invasion of Belgium in 1914 was completely unjustifiable. Use sources A-E to show far the evidence confirms this statement. (AS May/June 2009)

Extracts from this document...


?Germany?s invasion of Belgium in 1914 was completely unjustifiable?. Use sources A-E to show far the evidence confirms this statement. Germany invaded Belgium on 3 April 1414. There is evidence from these sources that both supports and contradicts the claim that Germany?s invasion of Belgium was unjustifiable. In both Source C and Source D, they agree that Germany?s invasion was unjustified, although Source D agrees to this to a limited extent only. Source C describes the invasion in almost personal tones by the use of the word ?painful?. It is clear that the Belgian Government was unsympathetic to the German army?s request of free passage through their country to reach France. Germany?s advance is an ?attack on her independence?, and this is emphasized by ?no military or strategic interest justifies such a violation?. Therefore Source C is of the view that the invasion was completely unjustifiable. Source D makes the point that the British Government was in support of the Belgian Government. ...read more.


In total contrast, Sources B and E share a similarity with the view that the German invasion was completely justified. Source B offers the view that Germany is on the defensive against France, and that the German Government fears that Belgium will be unable ?to resist such a considerable French invasion? without the aid of Germany. This puts the blame of the Belgium invasion squarely on France, as Germany is portrayed as a friend of Belgium who seeks only to help them. The source fails to mention that France was not hostile to Belgium at all. The reliability of this Source is thus questionable. The Schlieffen Plan depended on France declaring war on Germany. However, this had not yet occurred by 2 August, and the Schlieffen Plan was doomed if France did not lead an attack. Therefore, to ensure the Schlieffen Plan worked, Germany had to engage France in war and the only way they could do this was to invade Belgium to cross into France. ...read more.


The Source may be interpreted as being fairly reliable. The report being printed in a German newspaper, and the writer not having injected any personal opinion but only writing down the exact words of the German politicians, shows that there is no bias in the report. However, it is unlikely that ministers and politicians would announce aggressive policies candidly. Source B and E both show a similarity in claiming that the Germans advancement into Belgium as a ?wrong? that they commit. This is corroborated by all the other sources. However, only Source B and E maintain that it is justifiable for several reasons. In conclusion, although there is evidence in the Sources both to challenge and support the claim that Germany?s invasion of Belgium in 1914 was completely unjustifiable, I believe that there was no real cause for the invasion. It was because of the Schlieffen Plan that demanded France?s declaration of war that hadn?t come yet, that led to the invasion. Therefore they invaded for no real justifiable reason. ...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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    ground in which the representatives of the bourgeoisie and the workers and soldiers could work together. In June 1917 there was a boost for the idea of dual power by the All Russian Congress of Soviets which gave a vote of confidence in the Provisional government.

  2. Hitlers Germany

    But there were some who thought the amenities were going beyond nonmilitarist aims, when it was rumored, that the young soldiers were to serve a nine-hour day, and need not salute their officers, or wear uniforms when off duty. The look of the old army would be missing: the militarist haircut was abolished.

  1. How did Britain Survive (June 1940-1943)?

    For example the victories in North Africa were greatly celebrated and gave a feeling of being less hopeless and in a time where Hitler's hot knife seemed to be gliding through the butter that was Europe these victories held great significance in proving that Hitler was not invincible.

  2. Versailles Treaty- evaluation of sources

    not ensure peace as much as it embittered Germany making conflict in the future inevitable. An emphasis of the German problem is made in the opening of interpretation A where an account of the Brest-Litovsk treaty is given. This shows the principle of expansion that the Germans follow.

  1. How far do David Low’s cartoons show the reasons for the failure of the ...

    The Council was a small group made up of the permanent member whom in the 1920's were Britain, France, Italy, Japan and with Germany joining in 1926 and temporary members, which were elected by the Assembly for three year periods.

  2. World War Two Sources Questions

    Stalin was well known for this. Photographs are also only an instant in time, and could be misleading in many ways (we don't get to see the whole picture). Because Stalin was renowned for his propaganda methods, it is probably that the picture was taken for such an effect.

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