Appeasement Dbq Essay

England and France, fearing another war established a policy of appeasement to by time and rearm its forces. The European countries believed that Hitler would only retake the Sudetenland; this land was historically Germany's homeland(6). This was another mistake by France and England because with the Sudetenland he gained the famous Skoda armament factories and was ultimately a more dangerous military opponent(6). Until the remainder of Czechoslovakia was swallowed in 1939 all Hitler had done seemed reasonable(6). Until then he had only tried to obtain lands where ethnic Germans lived(6). The disregard of the Treaty of Versailles would be the main factor that allowed Germany to regain their power and ultimately bring the world into another war.

If Britain and France had abandoned their policy of appeasement and retaliated against Hitler's aggression war could have been averted. Appeasement was deeply embedded into British foreign policy, even to the the extent were they would not honor their military commitments to France under the Treaty of Locarno, that if Germany were to remilitarise the Rhineland, Britain would offer them support. So, when Hitler ordered armed cars to enter the Rhineland in March 1936, France failed to retaliate. This was the ideal time to have halted Hitler as Allan Bullock quotes Hitler saying “If the French had then marched into the Rhineland we would have had to withdraw with our tails between our legs”, because Germany was still militarily weak and war would have lasted six weeks rather than six years. However, the appeasers were determined to stop any violence, that they failed to see, according to Keith Eubank, had they “retaliated against the remilitarisation with force, the German military units would have withdrawn and perhaps Hitler would have been overthrown; the drift to war would have been halted and World War II averted”.

In 1939 the world plunged into a state of depression and war, each country turning on one another. Diplomatic factors, Hitler's thirst for power, and the political and financial stand point are arrows that point directly to a future of destruction and war, all with the failure of appeasement. Collective security worked as a buffer between conflicts, and was the best response toward aggression. The weakening League of Nations failed to keep collective security intact from any wars. Hitler's leadership threatened the peace in Europe which caused Germany to stir up war around the world. The economic and political stand points were in danger and on the verge of collapsing.

There have been various ideologies, events, and origins of the Cold War that have dominated American foreign policy from 1946 to 1989. The Cold War was a time of conflict between between the U.S. and the USSR; the two Superpowers saw each other as a threat. Thus they continued to fight to preserve their positions. Each side became involved in events such as the Korean War. They each stood behind the other nations fighting. Together the rise in communism, a rise of the Soviet influence dominated American foreign policy, and the creation of the Warsaw Pact.

In the 1930s, European governments found it necessary to appease Hitler and Mussolini. Appeasement is the word that clearly sums up the policies and actions that were taken by the European governments. There were a few reasons that these concessions were offered by European countries: none of the countries wanted another World War, the devastating effects

Document 2 indirectly supports the idea that pro-appeasement ideologies towards German military expansion were also causes that led to World War II by explaining how the League of Nations believed that through appeasement treatment Germany will eventually be satisfied and seize to conquer other lands yet they were wrong therefore once Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party had conquered lands all the way to Poland the allied powers, Great Britain, France, United States, and Russia, declare war on Germany with the hope of stalling Nazi expansion and eluding the possibility to falling into his power. Document 5 is a speech by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain which explains how appeasement was the only way to maintain peace in Europe after World War I and how Britain would only become involved in major conflicts not an invasion of a state. Document 5 is biased since it was written by a prime minister’s point of view that is pro-appeasement and supports the idea that such is the only way that Germany can be stopped without the need of war. Document 5 supports the idea that pro-appeasement ideologies towards German military expansion were also causes that led to World War II by listing textual evidence on how leaders such as Neville Chamberlain allowed Adolf Hitler to spread his Nazi regime through the use pro-appeasement ideals however such

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

France and Britain made Germany sign The Versailles Peace Treaty but once Hitler became the leader of Germany, he wanted to change everything in Germany and make it powerful like it was once before. The League of Nations came into being after the end of World War One. The League of Nation’s task was simple to ensure that war never broke out again but eventually the League of Nations failed. As the League of Nations crumbled, politicians turned to a new way to keep the peace appeasement. This was the policy of giving Hitler what he wanted to stop him from going to war. It was based on the idea that what Hitler wanted was reasonable and, when his reasonable demands had been satisfied, he would stop. There were many reasons why Chamberlin appeased Hitler. A few of them

Appeasement was arguably the only realistic option for British policy towards Germany between 1936 and 1938 when considering the fact that appeasement permitted Britain to rearm, thus preparing her more effectively for war, whilst also giving her the moral high ground. Nevertheless, for some “appeasement has become a dirty word, synonymous with weakness and defeatism in the face of naked aggression” since Britain’s policy of appeasement succumbed to Nazi aggression and failed to actually prevent war. Subsequently many historians argue that alternatives including a ‘Grand Alliance’ and military intervention in the Rhineland (1936) and Czechoslovakia (1938) would have been better options. However, when considering the several hindrances to these alternatives including political and public stance, financial difficulties and the depth of pacifist objection, it appears that appeasement was the only realistic option.

Ultimately, Britain's policy of appeasement had encouraged war and had made Hitler think no one would dare stop him. By never standing up to him he was always prepared to go further as he demonstrated by signing the Nazi-Soviet pact and invading Poland.

Moreover, while Jews in Germany were being tormented and war was approaching, Great Britain did not want to take part. Neville Chamberlain, the Prime Minister of the British from 1937-1940, decided to sign an appeasement “a peace treaty” with Hitler stating that the British only wanted peace (Neufeldt, 109). However, Hitler already had his plans, and the

Appeasement, a foreign policy particularly prevalent in the period of time leading up until the outbreak of World War Two, undoubtedly played a role in the ignition of the second world war, however the extent if this role and the impact it had a cause for the war is debatable. Appeasement was a policy employed as a preventative measure to stop the outbreak of war, at a time when the horrors of the First World War were still affecting European society, and involved making concessions to the opposition, in this case Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. Whilst it is clear that Appeasement was a failure as it did not manage to prevent the outbreak of another war, some historians argue that it in fact was one of the causes of the war. This aspect of the debate was ignited in 1961 by notable historian A.J.P. Taylor, when he asserted1 that the outbreak of War in Europe in 1939 was as much the fault of the politicians of Europe and their persistence with Appeasement, which gradually allowed Hitler and Nazi Germany more freedom then the terms dictated in the Treaty of Versailles and eventually paved the way for militarization and the outbreak of war, as it was in fact Nazi Germany’s. The most commonly accepted views of Appeasement are that of Historians such as Norman Rich who asserted2 that Nazi ideology and Hitler’s aggressive foreign policy made the outbreak of war unavoidable. However, to form a conclusion about these debates, we must first understand the policy of Appeasement and its

In the 1950's the number of people living in the suburbs came to actually equal the number of people living in cities. This wave of people was due mainly to the availability of affordable housing; which allowed middle-class Americans to move to an area previously inhabited only by the wealthy. The houses and neighborhoods built in mass numbers on assembly lines came to look identical to each other. As a result of this, a model American life was created. People all around the country began to follow this model, and before they knew it a race to conform had begun. People no longer strove to be different, neither by ethnicity nor religion; they strove to be the same. David Farber, the author of The Age Of Great Dreams,

The thesis of détente and U.S. domestic politics is that the United States’ policy on détente was in many respects an aberration from the main thrust of American foreign policy from the late 1940 on wards, and as such, was vulnerable to those forces in American political life which were inherently hostile towards Moscow according to the author.

Factors Which Lead to a Policy of Appeasement in Britain In the period 1931-38, there were several reasons that the policy of 'appeasement' was taken up by the British government. There were both long and short-term reasons that contributed. The most important, I believe was Britain's belief in Pacifism. The public could not support the war in terms of soldiers, and the government could not support a war financially.