The 1930s Appeasement Policy

Appeasement was the policy followed by the British government, especially the Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and the secretary of foreign affairs Lord Halifax, in the 1930s to avoid war with Hitler by giving into his demands. To fully determine if appeasement was justified or if it was a failure we have to see all it involved and the reasons behind it. This policy is mainly considered a failure because it encouraged Hitler and helped a strong enemy grow stronger while its considered justifiable because it bought time for the British to prepare for war and the desire to prevent another Great war, other points also exist and will be mentioned through the essay. As mentioned before appeasement was seen as a failure because it encouraged Hitler, seeing as appeasement centred on the idea of not showing any aggression towards him and giving into his demands this let Hitler do anything he pleased raising the stakes each time. Hitler risked igniting war against Britain and France each time he broke the treaty of Versailles or broke promises he made, he would never be satisfied and kept leading the others on till he completely believed he could invade Poland and the other countries would do nothing about it. Appeasement also had a big loophole because it was based on the incorrect belief that Hitler was an honest man that his requests were reasonable and would cease when the wrongs done by the Treaty of Versailles were finished. Looking at this when Hitler was offered part of the Sudetenland he changed his mind and instead threatened with war if he wasnt given all, Hitler later promised he wouldnt take the whole of Czechoslovakia but eventually did anyway. This situation clearly showed how Hitler was not only power hungry (and not only mending what the Treaty had done to them) but also not reasonable, he at last minute demanded the whole of the Sudetenland, even though the only reason why they should give it to him was because he threatened war, making chamberlain panic and convince France to let him have it. By giving into all of Hitlers demands Britain and France also allowed Germany to become far stronger than they intended, Germany was not only recovering its lost ground but becoming far more powerful than them and scheming ways to prevent defeat. They allowed Germany to remilitarise the Rhineland against the Treaty of Versailles and to increase its navy, eventually they would stop increasing inside the country and moving eastwards as Hitler had planned. Another

reason why appeasement could be seen as causing more problems than solving them is how it scared the USSR, by giving into Hitlers demands Britain and France made it pretty obvious that they had no intent on supporting the USSR in a war against Germany. Britain and France were far more scared of the USSR than of Germany even seeing the last as an ally against the other, the USSR was seen as a bigger threat to the point a British Journalist (John Langdon-Davies in 1936) said Our Government is much more afraid of Communism than it is of Fascism. The biggest reason why appeasement was justified was because there were also a lot of other important matters to consider. Britain also had threats of war from Japan and the USSR made them nervous, Britain and France still suffered from the Great depression with unemployment and debts. Japan was a threat to Britains colonies and if they went to war with Japan they wouldnt be able to sustain one with Germany, the war wouldnt also last long because the economy at the moment was priority. Regarding the British Empire and its allys Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa were great supporters of appeasement and wouldnt support Britain in war, the other possible allys were the USA and the USSR but one is an isolationist and the other could not be trusted. Without allys Britain and France could not afford to go war against Germany, there was also as mentioned before the possible threat of war from Japan and the Asian colonies. If by any chance Britain would have had the Dominions as allys they still would not have been able to go to war as they had out-dated war forces, the British wouldnt have been able to sustain a war against Hitlers army strength. Army strength wasnt the only thing stopping them as it was common knowledge that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and Germany had been on its receiving end, Hitler could have just been settling Germanys problems (unemployment could be solved by the increase of armament production and army power increase) and could have become a peaceful country soon. Hitler wasnt the only one concerned about the USSR either, Britain would not consider it as an ally and saw them as a far bigger threat than Germany. Everything was better with a strong force like Germany between the Soviets and Britain, Germany was seen as a buffer to the threat of Stalin and his rapidly growing communism and a powerful possible ally. Finally the biggest reason was people wanted to prevent another slaughter like in the Great War, Chamberlain had participated in it and wanted to maintain peace at all costs to avoid

people from suffering and the horrors from repeating. After all appeasement was useful to boost the British war morale because everyone believed they did all they could to prevent war till it was impossible to stall it anymore, war was inevitable but they tried. A lot of effort had been put on keeping peace so people expected Germany to become peaceful soon enough; not to mention Hitler was also admired by a lot of people and was declared man of the year in 1938. In conclusion I think appeasement was justified but not the best option, I wouldnt be able to think of any other anyway. It had its loopholes like the reasoning that while it saved Britain a year of rearmament it gave Hitler an extra year too and lots of land, it also made them loose the trust of the USSR that without which Germany wouldnt have invaded Poland and would have been a great ally from the start. Even though appeasement had great consequences and didnt fit well with most war would have been impossible before it, the time was well spent and all in all it is a good option when trapped in a tight problem. The reasons for appeasement go deeper than the consequences seen in the events, though many suffering could have been evaded some was just inevitable and could have been worse if the countries didnt have time to prepare for war. Ana Carolina Martinez

Bibliography
o o o o Aleavy, T. M. (1996). Twentieth Century History. UK: Oriental Press. Chamberlain and Appeasement. (s.f.). Obtenido de BBC UK: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir1/chamberlaina ndappeasementrev3.shtml History Channel Online. (s.f.). Obtenido de World War II, Appeasement: http://www.history.co.uk/explore-history/ww2/appeasement.html Walsh, B. (2001). Modern World History. UK: Hachette UK Company.