 In 1986 , Marks wrote that the German foreign office , supported by military and civilian notables , " focused on Article 231 ... hoping that , if one could refute German responsibility for the war , not only reparations but the entire treaty would collapse " . Manfred Boemeke , Gerald Feldman , and Elisabeth Glaser wrote that " pragmatic requirements characteristically influenced the shaping of the much misunderstood Article 231 . That paragraph reflected the presumed legal necessity to define German responsibility for the war in order to specify and limit the Reich 's obligations " . P.M.H. Bell wrote that despite the article not using the term ' guilt ' , and while " it may be that its drafters did not intend to convey a moral judgement of Germany " , the article has " almost universally " became known as the war guilt clause of the treaty . Margaret MacMillan wrote that the German public 's interpretation of Article 231 as unequivocally ascribing the fault for the war to Germany and her allies , " came to be the object of particular loathing in Germany and the cause of uneasy consciences among the Allies . " The Allies never expected such a hostile reaction , for " no one thought there would be any difficulty over the clauses themselves . " 
