Was Appeasement The Wrong Policy To Enact?

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.

On February 3, 1933 during a meeting with German military leaders Hitler said his foreign policy was the conquest of Eastern Europe (Weinberg, 1970), also in 1933 Germany withdrew from the League of Nations, which should have been a warning sign that they were planning something big. This along with the increase of the Wehrmacht (German Army) to 600,000 should have thrown up some red flags to Britain and France that Hitler was up to no go. This was another of Hitler’s direct violations of the Versailles Treaty, yet no one stopped him, instead they let him continue untouched. Then in March of 1936

Appeasement was destined to fail because Hitler could never be satisfied and the appeasers did not understand they were dealing with an aggressive, unreasonable dictator. Hitler Nazi ideologies stated the future of the German people could

As stated in the New York Times, "...Germany today cast off the last shackles fastened upon her by the Treaty of Versailles when Adolf Hitler, as commander-in-chief of the Reich defense forces, sent his new battalions into the Rhineland’s demilitarized zone. . . ." (Document3). Hitler had challenged every condition in the Treaty of Versailles and violated every negotiation made. Territorial aggression and pushed every limit he was given, that disrupted peace. Hitler himself expresses his idea as stated "Oppressed territories are led back to the bosom of a common Reich, not by flaming protests, but by a mighty sword" (Document1). He also, rebuilt the German military and used extreme nationalism to unite Germany. A British historian, A.J.P Taylor expressed, " ...Hitler when he had come to power by constitutional means and was apparently supported by a large majority of the German people?"(Document8). Hitler had gathers supporters through his ideas and his speeches of hope. Hitler's leadership threatened the whole continent of Europe's peace. If his leadership was the ignition to the fire then state or the economy kept the fire running through the

Britain still hoped to avoid the war at this time and offered an appeasement to Germany stating that they would willing give Sudetenland to them if they left the rest of

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

Prime Minister Chamberlain suggested the best way to deal with Hitler was a policy of appeasement.

Taylor, wrote in The Origins of the Second World War that other countries should have become involved by armed force in 1933, to overthrow Hitler when he had come to power and was supported by a large majority of the German people. Taylor thought that if more countries became involved with this issue, Czechoslovakia would have been secure. He also believed the German people were the only ones who could turn Hitler out because they were the ones that put him in power. He stated that “the ‘appeasers’ feared that the defeat of Germany would be followed by a Russian domination over much of Europe” (Document 8) which many people did not want. By using appeasement, they only allowed Hitler to become stronger and feel more powerful by giving him what he

World War II officially racked the world from 1939 to 1944, but before any one nation actually declared war, Hitler was trying to take land. To respond with appeasement or collective security was debated by many as to which would avoid damage in the most efficient manner. Document 3, Document 4, and Document 6 show how collective security was definitely a more beneficial strategy than appeasement to respond to aggression.

Hitler, A Tyrannical dictator, A murderer, But also an outlandish Military Leader. An Austrian Man who ruled the Weimar Republic from 1933 to 1945. But to wonder, How well did Adolf Hitler dictate The Weimar Republic to the extent where the German people supported his motives and Ideas. Though he was convincing he was a brutal man when it came to threatening other Nations, And that’s how Adolf Hitler used Appeasement to his advantage. But yet, Adolf Hitler was a well spoken man, He himself was able to convince multiple Germans In ether beer halls to Entire crowds of people watching and being converted to Hitler’s Vocabulary of Loathlyness.

However, British and French military intervention in the Rhineland incident, 1936 could have been an alternative to appeasement. Their reluctance to take action permitted Germany to increase her power (within 18 months Germany’s rate of rearmament surpassed that of Britain and France), whilst also contributing to the burgeoning belief that the League of Nations was ineffective. Hitler himself stated that "If France had then marched into the Rhineland; we would have had to withdraw with our tails between our legs." Indeed, many historians concur as invading the

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

however it did not. Adolf Hitler proves that he is ruthless, a risk taker, and

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

The fact that A. J. P. Taylor does not utilise Mein Kampf or other memorandums as a valid source provides historians such as; Hugh Trevor-Roper and Richard Overy a means to pick apart his argument. Overy states that “the 1936 memorandum... was developed as the basis for a complex and far reaching transformation of German foreign, economic and military policy.” This in essence argues that it is apparent that Hitler had premeditated the ways in which Germany would move forward to achieve greater power in the world. When considering the part that Western statesmen played, A. J. P. Taylor believes that the policy of ‘appeasement’ was