Belgian and Polish territory, including 'ethnic cleansing' (by famine) of the annexed area of Russian Poland

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_the_outbreak_of_war_in_Europe_in_1914_due_to_an_aggressive_German_foreign_policy#ixzz2lrfGmhzm suggested defensive policies could have just as easily been seen as aggressive. In the Morocco crisis for example, Germany encouraged Moroccan independence in an aggressive attempt to break the entente and once again involving themselves in unrelated affairs. This plan backfired and resulted in the entente strengthening and Germany being pushed even further out, ultimately increasing their sense of isolation which is so strongly referenced too as a valid reason for aggressive policies, as sources V and X encourage that anything after isolation was defensive as they had been singled out so should not be to blame. This is incorrect as it is clear that they would not have been isolated if they had not made aggressive movements which increased global tensions. Aggressive foreign policy is particularly prominent in the deliverance of Germany’s blank cheque to Austria On July 5, 1914, on the brink of war. In Berlin, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany pledged his country's unconditional support for whatever action Austria-Hungary chooses to take in its conflict with Serbia, a long-running rivalry. paranoia about encirclement which had been emphasised by the isolation, Germany passed the 1913 army bill for defensive reasons on a continental basis according to source V and not on an international one. However as a result of this rearmament the Triple Entente understood this as a direct aggressive threat so decided to rearm accordingly, thus heightening tensions and increasing the inevitability of a war. Source X supports source V as they both argue that Germany were far too occupied on the domestic front in supporting Austria in their battle against Serbia and in responding to tensions