How far do the sources agree about the September programme The sources provided agrees to some extent that the September programme was possibly the cause for world war one in which would make Germany responsible. However, source G and F do not support the question and further believed that any plans made we for the benefit of others too and no way signified the passion for way. The September programme was published by German chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg in 1914 in which stated the countries specific war aims and the conditions they planned to map out upon allies.

The programme itself consisted of plans to annex France and Belgian with the immediate focus of German expansion – however, despite the programme never coming about it still opens the question as to whether Germany was preparing for war. Firstly, source H immediately agrees with the September programme and indicates that Germanys focus was purely on world dominance. The phrase ‘they were aspirations of world power’ highlights significantly how perhaps through the September programme, Germany encouraged war as they saw it as an open opportunity to succeed their expansionist ambition.

Furthermore, ‘annexationist ambition’ further agrees as the plans comprehended consisted of ideas to annex France and Belgian – which morally was an ambition worthy to German expansion. The source suggests that only political members knew about the plan ‘they were shared by civilian ministers, civil servants, catholic and some social democrats’ – perhaps indicating how the plans to annex were kept a secret, especially from general staff (the army).

This supports the September programme further as organisations needed to be kept censored from orthodox people as the programme itself was formed as backup by German leadership as an imminent victory did not occur from previous battles. The source context focuses on Germany’s plans of annexation which would inevitably succeed their aspirations of world wide domination. The methods in which they were plotting to carry out the captivity of France and Belgian can be seen as an introductory to war. It highlights significantly how there has always been a plan pre-made- and just how well Germany was prepared.

However, Source G expresses a different view in which focuses on disagreeing with the question. The source content gives the overview that Germany never had pre-plans in which suggests no support for the September programme. The phrase ‘aims after the war had started were the same as Germany aims beforehand’ could particularly signify ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????