Suchergebnisse

Der Autor geht von dem grundsätzlichen Wandel der amerikanischen Strategie in der Sicherheitspolitik aus. Dabei handelt es sich um die geographische Erweiterung des Kriegsgeschehens, der "horizontal escalation". Darin liegt die Gefahr und Absicht, Deutschland zum designierten Kriegsschauplatz zu machen. Deutschland als mögliches Aufmarschgebiet, um die Sowjetunion von Handlungen in anderen Regionen abzuhalten. (RG)

Robert Foley contends that the first antecedent of the Schlieffen plan was Schlieffen's 1899/1900 war plan, and that Schlieffen could only execute this plan when the modern 'armoured' fortifications at Metz were completed in 1905. Terence Zuber argues that the 1899/1900 war plan was an episode of six months' duration, unconnected to Schlieffen's later planning, and that in the 1906 'Schlieffen plan' Denkschrift, Schlieffen explicitly disavowed any connection between the Denkschrift and the new fortifications at Metz.

In recent years Terence Zuber has maintained that the document commonly known as the 'Schlieffen Plan' was, in fact, no real war plan. This article takes issue with Zuber's far-ranging conclusions. It examines his use of sources, places German war planning in its wider political context, and considers evidence overlooked by Zuber. It demonstrates how a fundamental shift occurred in Germany's strategic situation in 1905 and how this shift led to change in Germany's war plans. Schlieffen's 1905 memorandum took account of this strategic change and allowed Schlieffen at last to place at the heart of his war plan ideas he had been developing since the 1890s. Although modifications were made to meet changes in Germany's strategic situation, this memorandum served as the basis for all German war plans before 1914. Thus, Schlieffen deserves to be remembered as the father of Germany's war plan, with all its strengths and weaknesses, in 1914.