The Policy Of Appeasement During The Outbreak Of War 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.

This essay analyses the origins of the Second World War by briefly summarizing the events from 1919-1939. However, most emphasis is put on the amount of responsibility the Treaty of Versailles deserves for the outbreak of war. Other than analysing the Treaty of Versailles on its own, it also analyses the effects of the 1929 Wall Street Crash on the world, the rise of Fascism and Nazism, as well as the rise of Adolf Hitler, the failure of the League of Nations and the appeasement of the Fascist and Nazi regimes by Britain and France throughout the 1930s. Hence the Treaty of Versailles plays a

On June 28th 1919, in the Versailles Palace of France, the treaty of Versailles officially ended World war one. The signers of this treaty implemented certain restrictions on Germany that were to guarantee Germany would never start another world war. This begs the question, “what did the end of one war have to do with the start of World War Two?”. The evidence shows that it was this treaty’s influence on Adolf Hitler that led to the Versailles Treaty’s ultimate failure and provoked the start of the next world war. Because of this treaty Adolf Hitler’s economic plan, proposed while he was seeking political election, was focused on rebuilding and reclaiming Germany. This went hand in hand with the nationalist ideas of the Nazi party.

     Britain’s policy of Appeasement (May/June 1937 – March 1939) was also a cause of World War Two. Neville Chamberlain became the British Prime Minister on May 28, 1937, and followed the policy of appeasing Germany, believing that all Hitler wanted to do was unite German-speaking people. In doing so, Hitler would break the Treaty of Versailles but Chamberlain did not believe Hitler would cause war. Churchill disagreed, citing Mein Kampf (1924) where Hitler has written that Germany must regain lands ‘in the East… by the power of the sword.’ Little did Chamberlain know that he had misinterpreted Hitler’s aims.

As I’m sure most people know Adolf Hitler was the leader of the Germans from August 2 1934 to April 30 1945, but do you know that as Fuhrer of Germany he was the driving force behind the start of WWII. During his reign he tried to bring Germany back to the powerful country it had been before the First World War. In this paper I will prove that Hitler’s actions lead to start of WWII, and I plan to prove how his direct disregard of the Treaty of Versailles pushed the world into WWII.

The policy of appeasement was widely pursued by Britain and France in the 1930s, when it referred to attempting to satisfy Germany's demands by negotiation and compromise, which would avoid war. However due to its failure the policy of appeasement, to a large extent was responsible for the outbreak of war in 1939. It is clear that if the Western Powers had retaliated against Hitler, war could have been avoided, it encouraged Hitler, Hitler could never be appeased, and that it prompted the Nazi-Soviet Pact. Despite large extent the policy of appeasement in the outbreak of war it is superseded by other factors such as the Treaty of Versailles.

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.

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

Even though the 1920’s began with a favorable outlook for peace, toward the end of the decade

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.

that Hitler was a “sincere man who had no intention to provoke a war.” He too,

Throughout history, negotiation has been a powerful tool used by world leaders to avoid violence and solve conflict. When negotiation succeeds all parties can feel that that have achieved their goals and met their expectations, but when negotiations go awry countries and relationships can be damaged beyond repair. The Munich Agreement of 1938 is a primary example of this type of failure, which was one of the catalysts to the start World War II and Czechoslovakia’s loss of independence. The Czech people were greatly overlooked during this agreement process, which still in some instances affects the country today. The 1930s were a challenging time for Europe and the powers within it due to the aftermath of WWI and the worldwide economic

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.