Preview

Was and Appeasement a Mistake

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
300 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Was and Appeasement a Mistake
Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler shook hands at the Munich Conference in 1938. This resulted in the pact, signed Sept. 29th, which recognized the German annexation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia in return for a promise that there would be no further aggression. This policy of appeasement failed to prevent the outbreak of World War II.
Below there are a number of arguments. Some prove that appeasement was a mistake and some suggest that appeasement wasn’t a mistake.
Create a table with two headings - ‘A mistake’ and ‘Not a mistake’. Write each argument in the correct column.
- Germany deserved a fair deal - Germany treated too harshly at Versailles, so were only being given their rightful land.
- Germany was growing stronger - Allowed Germany to grow stronger meant it would be far more difficult to defeat.
- The British people had to want war - In 1938, public opinion was against war - so the policy of appeasement was sensible.
- Fear of another war - People wanted to avoid another terrible war and did everything possible.
- Appeasement scared the USSR - When Britain and France did not stand up to Hitler, the USSR became worried about German power - and began thinking about deals with Hitler.
- It encouraged Hitler - Giving into Hitler only made him feel he could do what he wanted - without fear of being stopped.
- Britain needed time - By giving Hitler what he wanted, Britain had more time to build up her armed forces.
- Munich Agreement was a disaster - Churchill said Czechoslovakia was sacrificed for nothing - Hitler had fooled everyone.
- Fear of Communism - It was felt better to support a strong leader of Germany rather than risk Communist takeover.
- Hitler was determined to conquer Eastern Europe - Hitler had made his plans clear - the policy of appeasement was clearly doomed from the start - Hitler just

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    The representatives in the conference decided to give Hitler what he wanted. He felt that most Europeans would be happy they wouldn’t have to fight a war, though Czechoslovakia wouldn’t be happy because they had to give away their land.…

    • 728 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Through the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 1939, Stalin was advancing his own hostile outside arrangement in eastern Europe by making 'mystery conventions' inside the agreement with Germany, utilizing those conventions to progress into free Finland, Estonia, Latvia and other Baltic States and effectively supporting Germany in the war with the Western forces to meet his own particular…

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    One argument is the view that appeasement was the only realistic option because public opinion supported it and for Chamberlain to lead Britain to war would go against public favour. The First World War savaged Europe and Britain was hit very hard in terms of Human losses. Many families lost men within the family and left psychological scars nationwide. Chamberlain was therefore desperate to avoid another war on the continent at all costs. If Britain was to go to war they would have to rearm and build on their armed forces which had been neglected since world war one. However public opinion was that if Britain was rearming then they would be preparing for war, which was incredible unpopular. Evidence of this was in east Fulham by-election of 1933 the conservative who advocated rearmament turned a majority of 14,000 into a defeat by 5000 at the hands of his labour approach who supported disarmament. This illustrated the political affect that rearmament and policies that move towards War had which was a reason as to why Chamberlain saw appeasement as the only realistic option.…

    • 747 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Assess the view that appeasement was the only realistic option for British policy towards Germany between 1936 and 1938…

    • 2327 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Why was the world plunged into WWII in 1939, what is the most effective response to aggression, appeasement, or collective security?…

    • 436 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    France and UK came up with the policy of appeasement which was a policy with nazi germany that would allow hitler to take a lot more land than he was supposed to. The reason being is the policy was put into place so that the UK and france would let Hitler do what he wanted as long as he didnt do what they told him not to do. The policy of appeasement however did not work because Hitler was not someone you could appease. Once Hitler invaded poland the policy ended thus ending the reign of letting hitler walk all over…

    • 545 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    I am going to start with how the Germans had fear of Germany becoming a communist country like Russia. At the end of the war, many people hoped that democracy would spread to most countries of the world. They did not want to be controlled by a dictatorship which would lead them into a communist country.…

    • 1205 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hitler could not negotiate for equality in power so he could attack all the weak countries as Czechoslovakia to create his empire.…

    • 366 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Appeasement which was done by chamberlain was to satisfy Germany for preventing war. Actually, at that time, Germany was demanding many things which it lost through Treaty of Versaille. Chamberlain who was British prime minister thought Germany was too punished and had rights to return their prohibited things, and he also thought if he did appeasement, it will make Hitler who was the leader of Germany satisfy and war won't happen. So appeasement started. Nowadays, in general, people think Chamberlain was wrong and he shouldn't do appeasement. But it isn't true. Even if appeasement failed and war started, I think appeasement was good.…

    • 675 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of the key arguments for using appeasement at the time was because of Britain’s imperial, Economic and defence weaknesses. They had a lack of unity or coherent organisation in the empire therefore if they were to have to go to war they would not be ready. The threat of Arab and Indian nationalism would hinder this as soldiers would be needed to control rebellions and uprisings and that would mean less soldiers fighting in the war. The immense cost of world war one had made the cost of maintaining the empire, rearming and rebuilding Britain difficult as they would not be able to rearm fast enough to fight. There were also doubts of the integrity of the empire, would they even want to fight in another war to sort out something in Europe that has nothing really to do with them. The impact of world war one had made the GB feel vulnerable. Despite some recovery this decline continued raising fears bankruptcy if another war was declared Taking all this into account appeasement would seem the right way to go to help prevent war as Britain’s defence was weak and they were clearly not ready to fight in a war due to the mess of the empire and economic problems like the cost of war.…

    • 1219 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It all started when Britain and France started negotiating with Hitler on the matter of Czechoslovakia and whether its occupants should accept the new German rule of their land. The leader of the Nazi Party eventually convinced both Chamberlain and Daladier, representatives of England and France, respectively, that refusal to cooperate would result in certain war. With no other way out in sight, the two countries retreated, convincing the Czechs that submission was the only safe alternative. At the Munich Agreement, Britain and Germany signed a peace treaty, which resulted in Hitler’s occupation of what would soon be a dismantled Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain returned home, claiming to have secured “peace for our time”. Truthfully, he could not have been more mistaken.…

    • 667 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Factors that Motivated Britain and France to Adopt a Policy of Appeasement during the 1930s…

    • 1943 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Appeasement was the right policy for England in 1938. This is because It was based on the idea that what Hitler wanted was reasonable and, when his reasonable demands had been satisfied, he would stop. Appeasement was the only practical action that could be held during that time. England and France were not ready to get into another war. They already had severe damages that they couldn’t afford to get into another war. This gave them time to prepare for war since it is inevitable anyways. It also gave them time to prepare for old and broken equipment. Alliances needed to be made and through this, that was all possible. Also, through this policy, they were able to get public support. Appeasement also allowed Britain time to retool factories for war. Many Britons during that time saw Hitler as a defence against Russian Communism. This all happened because they thought that Hitler would soon be satisfied after remilitarizing the Rhineland, annexation of Austria and czechoslovakia. Wanted to please Hitler this way. The empire was already overstretched and its financial resources quite limited. The U.S. was isolationist. Soviet communism was feared, France was weak. This was all done to prevent war and preventing war is something needed to be done. Their objective was for the collaboration of all nations in building up a lasting peace for Europe. The Czechs, left themselves and told they were going to get no help from the Western Powers, would have been able to make better terms than they have got. This also gave the greatest chance of securing protection for the country. Czechoslovak State would’ve not been able to be an independent entity without this. Chamberlain remembered the slaughter of the…

    • 2172 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    I believe that appeasement was the reason for the breakout of World War 2, as Hitler had violated so many rules of the Treaty of Versailles and invaded so many countries without having anyone stop him. The Policy of Appeasement failed to work, as the more land and power Hitler received, the more he wanted to get. Britain and France should have taken matter in their own hands and stopped Hitler before it was too late, rather than simply allowing him to do whatever he wanted, whenever he…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The appeasement policy was adopted by Britain and France, meaning to pacify the aggressors, like Germany and Italy, by satisfying their wants. They believed that by satisfying the aggressors’ limited wants, they could eliminate the possibility of wars. It was their mild attitude that caused the aggressive countries to start expanding their territories. In 1939, Germany invaded Poland. Britain and France finally dropped the policy as they thought they could not neglect the German invasion. Hence, the Second World War started. In fact, the appeasement policy only led the aggressors to expand their spheres of influence. It did not directly lead to war. If the policy continued, the war might not start. Therefore, the appeasement policy did not make the Second World War inevitable. It purely made the war more likely to happen.…

    • 752 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays