 Stephen Neff wrote that " the term ' war guilt ' is a slight unfortunate one , since to lawyers , the term ' guilt ' primarily connotes criminal liability " while " the responsibility of Germany envisaged in the Versailles Treaty ... was civil in nature , comparable to the indemnity obligation of classical just @-@ war theory . " Louise Slavicek wrote that while " the article was an honest reflection of the treaty @-@ writers ' beliefs , including such a clause in the peace settlement was undiplomatic , to say the least . " Diane Kunz wrote that " rather than being seen as an American lawyer 's clever attempt to limit actual German financial responsibility by buying off French politicians and their public with the sop of a piece of paper " Article 231 " became an easily exploitable open sore " . Ian Kershaw wrote that the " national disgrace " felt over the article and " defeat , revolution , and the establishment of democracy " , had " fostered a climate in which a counter @-@ revolutionary set of ideas could gain wide currency " and " enhanced the creation of a mood in which " extreme nationalist ideas could gain a wider audience and take hold . 
