The question is wether or not the german Kaiser Wilhelm II actually had the power to be alone held responsible for not preventing germany being part of the first world war. I realise that there can be different opinions in this matter and am interested in those different from my school textbooks opinion.
I'm going to go at this from two different angels. First from the Verfassung des Deutschen Reiches (the 1871 Bismarcksche Reichsverfassung., not the 1919 version).
The emperor had exclusive rights to declare war, enter alliances, represent the empire, and appoint chancellors.
Der Kaiser hat das Reich völkerrechtlich zu vertreten, im Namen des Reichs Krieg zu erklären und Frieden zu schließen, Bündnisse und andere Verträge mit fremden Staaten einzugehen, Gesandte zu beglaubigen und zu empfangen (Artikel 11)
And he was the top commander of all military forces
Die gesammte Landmacht des Reichs wird ein einheitliches Heer bilden, welches in Krieg und Frieden unter dem Befehle des Kaisers steht (Artikel 63)
But he must get the approval of the council before he could declare war (barring the case of foreign invasion)
Zur Erklärung des Krieges im Namen des Reichs ist die Zustimmung des Bundesrathes erforderlich, es sei denn, daß ein Angriff auf das Bundesgebiet oder dessen Küsten erfolgt (Artikel 11)
The Chancellor also had to sign off on his edicts
Die Anordnungen und Verfügungen des Kaisers werden im Namen des Reichs erlassen und bedürfen zu ihrer Gültigkeit der Gegenzeichnung des Reichskanzlers (Artikel 17)
From a constitutional standpoint, Wilhelm II was very much to blame (created the treaties, approved the Schlieffen Plan [that disrespected Belgium's Neutrality and helped pull Britain into the war], and declared war on Russia with the Bundesrats approval), but not entirely so, as it still relied on others to make the plans and approve his decisions.
From a more practical standpoint, right before the war, it is not so clear.
By the late 19th century, Wilhelm was doing his best to space himself from the chancellor and the conservative factions in the government. His Bundesrat was getting sick of his meddling in affairs (domestic and especially foreign... if you can see where this is going) ^2
That all being said, Wilhelm II was far from a war hawk, and tired to quell the radicals in his government who wanted a preemptive war with Russia. There was a large idea sweeping the empire of a Darwinian showdown between the Germanic and Slavic peoples^3. He used his title as a means of negotiation between factions and parties in government at this time, but finally relented and granted his power granted to him in Article 63 (above) as supreme commander to his Chief of General Staff.
Wilhelm II started his administration as a more controlling leader, but by the outbreak of the First World War, he really was in over his head and let go of more and more power. I would be hard pressed to blame him for the war, but a more savvy politician may have been able to avoid it. And savvy he was not.
Obst, Andreas Einer nur ist Herr im Reiche
Mommsen, Wolfgang "Kaiser Wilhelm II and German Politics" Journal of Contemporary History vol 25 no 2/3
Heres some charts to help you understand the division of power within the german empire
You might also want to read up on the Sonderweg, it is pretty much the idea that German compared to other European nations took a unique and special path from monarchy to democracy. I recommend reading Otto Pflanze to learn more about this subject
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt112/Milites/ORGGermanII.jpg
Edit: I know this is not answering your question but It is a question that is difficult to answer because it is a hotly debated issue. I hope you read Otto Pflanze and make up your own opinion
I recommend Bismark and the development of germany vol 1 but also go into vol 2-3
