To What Extent Was the Policy of Appeasement the Main Cause for the Outbreak of War in Europe in 1939?

Appeasement was a less effective response to aggression because fewer countries agreed with the Munich Agreement. Some of Adolf Hitler’s ideas were stated in Document 1 such as needing colonies in order to enter colonial politics and that oppressed territories were not demoted to nothing by protests but by countries with stronger military forces. Haile Selassie, the emperor of Ethiopia, asked the League of Nations fro help in stopping the invasion after Italy attacked Ethiopia. When the League of Nations’ response was ineffective, Selassie stated “God and history will remember your judgment. It is us today. It will be you tomorrow.” (Doc.2). This statement is like karma; because the League of Nations didn’t help Ethiopia, it would be attacked and get no help. This statement is in the point of view of Ethiopian people, but also for other European countries because when countries are without help, the country it asks will later be without help also. They will be in the same situation as the country asking for its help; “It is us today. It will be you tomorrow.” Document 5 is in the point of view of the British. Document 5

Appeasement may be regarded as a philosophy of the maintenance of peace; in political terms it refers to policy of conciliation with a potential aggressor, often with implications of sacrifice of principles (Oxford Dictionary). The policy of appeasement is one in which both Britain and France and many other nations took towards Nazi Germany and its expansionist aims during the late 1930s, it is one of the most controversial and criticized foreign policies in history (Gelernter D 2002:22). This paper argues that the appeasement policy was for most nations around the world in the 1930s a less challenging way to deal with the problem of Hitler. Nowadays it is a common view that if Britain and France would have taken a harder line against the

Appeasement, when talking about Nazi Germany in 1930, is considered to be against the topics discussed in the quotations. There are a few reasons why I believe that it is considered against the quotations.

After the Great War, the Treaty of Versailles was signed. There were many rules imposed on Germany in this treaty. Once Germany began to break the Treaty of Versailles, this gave rise to appeasement. Germany started rebuilding its military. The Treaty of Versailles was disregarded by Germany based on those actions. Moreover, Germany took control of Rhineland. This was yet another event that broke the treaty. Also, Germany took over Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia. As Germany continued to break the treaty, the other nations decide to appease Germany. The Great War was devastating and the other countries were committed to seeking peaceful resolutions at the time (CITE). The policy of appeasement was used as a chance to preserve peace. It was highly controversial, as it allowed Germany to break the Treaty of Versailles without repercussion. Germany was making further and further advancements in its own personal motive. Appeasement was sighted to be controversial because, in retrospection, Germany was allowed to get out of control. Many of Germany’s surround

Hitler in the early 1930s, started attacking its bordering nations, and so Britain turned to a policy of appeasment zas well as France. For example in 1938, they gave Hitler the sudetenland, without an inch of warning toward the czechslovackinans in the region. France and Britain believd that this would satisfy Hitler and would put a stop to any further attacks. And in America, people believd that

In my opinion, Appeasement was the wrong policy to enact. I completely do not agree with it and if the allies had dealt with Germany firsthand, both appeasement and war would have been avoided. By enacting appeasement, The British government chose to give into Germany’s outrageous demands in order to avoid another devastating outbreak of war. This made the British seem as if they did not want to take action against Hitler. Several sources, a prime example a British political cartoon published in British magazine “The Punch” by critics in 1937. This cartoon portrays the British using appeasement as an excuse to do nothing and waiting for the ticking time bomb Hitler to turn against them. This is important because “The Punch” was an important influence on public opinion; which revealed that even the British

Chamberlain's appeasement policy was derided by British as a failure (Reynolds, 37). Considering that Hitler was deceptive, appeasement will never work. It may have been more strategic if the purpose was to buy time while Britain was preparing for war. On hindsight, the one-year interim period between the Munich agreement in 1938 to Britain’s war in 1939 provided the opportunity for Britain to boost its artillery before going to a crucial war in 1940 (Reynolds, 93).

World War II, a war that was fought globally to get revenge from each country that Germany has lost from World War I, but this whole war was unexpected for any country. This leads to the questions of What were Hitler’s ultimate objectives? Was this war an essential or incidental part of Hitler’s program? Adolf Hitler, Chancellor of Germany, overturned the democratic government, created the Third Reich, persecuted millions, and ultimately led Germany and the world into World War II (definition from the book). There were several objectives for Hitler, such as, the end of Jewish race, taking over Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland, thus leading to a war globally again. However, this war was an incidental part of his program, but Hitler was very enthused with war from the experience of World War I. This essay will discuss about Nazi foreign policy, Hitler’s ultimate objectives, and if the war was essential or incidental.

Germany took advantage of other European countries not doing anything to stop them by conquering a large amount of land. Hitler also pledged that he would undo the Treaty of Versailles. He accomplished this by entering a narrow strip of land known as the Rhineland, which was prohibited by the treaty. France was stunned and were unwilling to risk war. Capturing the Rhineland strengthened Hitler’s power and prestige and changed the balance of power

the false comfort of appeasement in sacrifice Czechoslovakia, which has been repeatedly discredited by history,which led Germany to see dictatorship (Nazi Empire) as a stronger and more effective form of government (Weimar Republic to Third Reich).

In all other words, Yes, an appeasement was the right policy for England at the time, because the people of England didn't want to go through another war. With the anger the people of England already have for their government (about being unnecessarily involved in the first World War), the government wanted to take every procation to not become involved in a war with Germany. Also since England signed the Munich agreement it gave them more time to soldier up, and when war did come upon England the people would become more united knowing that the government did all it could to prevent the war. Some may argue that “it doesn't matter if they had signed it, Hitler still would have broken the agreement”, this is true that Hitler did break his agreement

From 1936 onwards, it is evident that Germany is ready for a war against France and Britain, hence appeasement was chosen to perhaps delay or prevent

The definition of appeasement is to make a concession to an enemy power to avoid conflict; which it was supposed to in WW2. Although appeasement is designed to avoid conflict, some believe that the appeasement in WW2 just created more conflict and ended up lengthening the war. There are numerous reasons as to why appeasement was the right option for Great Britain and France and as to why they not only wanted, but needed to appease. Examples of these reasons are the US Separationist Approach, the damage of WW1 and the lack of army and weapons within Great Britain and France, which was fuelled by the fact that they didn’t expect a war due to Versailles.

After the First World War, Europe was thrown into an economic, social and political tail-spin. European people, along with their countries, were devastated by the effects of the war for many years after it ended. Ernest Hemingway, who was a soldier in the war described it as, “the most colossal, murderous, mismanaged butchery that has ever taken place on earth” (Hughes 58). The only thing that was for certain afterwards was that, next time war would be avoided at all costs. After World War I was over, the Treaty of Versailles was placed, setting up new terms and conditions for the Germans to follow as punishment for losing the war. Many german leaders, including Hitler, viewed this treaty as far too harsh and crippling to their beloved homeland. When Hitler later came into power in the 30’s, his main objectives were to rebuild Germany’s worthless economy, stabilize social unrest and to restore the prominence it once had as a world power. However, Hitler had to overcome the obstacles that were set by the Treaty of Versailles, by constantly testing the limits set against him. In hopes of avoiding any further conflict, Great Britain and France accepted the aggressors request with little opposition. This conciliatory diplomatic approach is referred to as appeasement. Through the policy of appeasement, Great Britain and France hoped to maintain peace throughout Europe by being extremely generous and understanding in negotiations with Germany’s demands. This policy was set into

Churchill predicted that appeasement with Hitler through the Treaty of Munich and Versailles would prove a fatal mistake for Europe while in office as Chancellor of the Exchequer (“Gathering Storm”). The Treaty of Versailles stated that Hitler could not militarize Rhineland, but after a moment of softness towards Hitler, he snatched the opportunity--Britain and France did nothing to stop him while he planned to attack them ("Hitler Reoccupies the Rhineland”). Soon after, Hitler annexed Bohemia and Moravia, Slovakia becoming a puppet state of Germany (“Gathering Storm”). His forces invaded Poland five months later in September. Britain declared war on Germany. After the disastrous Norwegian campaign, Chamberlain resigned in May 1940, following his place: Winston Churchill, trying desperately to remove Britain from the Labour Party who were staging reforms to control education and transportation, etc. In Spain, General Franco had recently overthrown the republic and set up his Falange Francoist Spain refusing to take part in World War II (Berdichevsky). Mussolini, in Italy, was using his charms and the media to portray Italy as a huge economic and military force, using people used to being treated like dirt as his wormhole, while isolating is people from the fact that they didn’t have the military force to fight and refused (Johnson 58),(Zegart).