• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month


Extracts from this document...


'PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS OUTWEIGHED IDEOLOGY IN FOREIGN POLICY' IN RELATION TO GERMANY IN THE YEARS 1933-41 Adolf Hitler was made Chancellor of Germany in 1933, and had a practical set of objectives on how to re-establish Germany as a super power once again. Bullock argued, 'Hitler had clearly identified aims'. Treaty of Versailles shattered the whole of Germany and Hitler saw it as a national humiliation, he promised to reverse the treaty and restore Germany's borders. Hitler dreamed of building a vast German Empire sprawling across Central and Eastern Europe. Lebensraum could only be obtained and sustained by waging a war of conquest against the Soviet Union: German security demanded it and Hitler's racial ideology required it. In his book Mein Kampf he argued that the Aryan race demanded Lebensraum in the East, and how he hoped for a united Germany. Nazi ideology was centred around the importance of belief in racial purity, in the importance of balancing population, resources and soil, and the necessity of acquiring 'living space' in the East - which made Hitler's foreign policy so dynamic and so difficult to combat. Taylor's interpretation of Hitler's foreign policy aims after 1933 is now seen as fatally flawed because it completely ignores the dynamic ingredient of Nazi ideology. Hitler's foreign policy aims accorded with the goals and ideologies of Germany's traditional rulers in that the aim was to make Germany the most powerful state in all of Europe. Where Hitler departed from this traditional scenario was his obsession with his ideology of racial supremacy. In 1936 Hitler was informed by the regime's top officials that Germany must be ready for war by 1940 it. In response, the Four-Year Plan was established. Developed under the direction of Hermann Goering, it set forth production quotas and market guidelines. Efforts to regiment the economy were not without conflict. Some of the economic elite desired that Germany be integrated into the world's economy. ...read more.


A J P Taylor presents an argument that Hitler ".did not make plans- for world conquest or anything else. He assumed that others would provide opportunities and that he would seize them." Taylor believes , that Hitler did not intend war to break out in September 1939, that he lacked any real plan for the conquest of Europe or the world, and that other governments played a crucial role in unleashing German expansion, 'are no longer regarded as valid'. Hitler used the threat of force to obtain Austria and a similar threat would give him the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. After the success of Anschluss his confidence grew, and wanted to build on creating a 'Greater Germany'. More than three-quarters of the population of the Sudetenland were ethnic Germans. Hitler stirred up nationalism to gain support of his ideas by claiming 'Germans are creators of God'. He used the argument of the Sudeten Germans' right to self-determination. The area also contained key industries and was vital to the protection of Czechoslovakia. Without this area heavily fortified Czechoslovakia could not hope to withstand German aggression. Sudetenland Germans, encouraged by the Nazis, began to denounce the Czech government. The Sudetenland was important due to giving German's their 'living space' - Lebensraum. Hitler once again was waiting for the opportunity to capitalise. Chamberlain continued to carry out an appeasement policy and also had sympathy for Hitler. He believed it was a reasonable transfer of Czechoslovakian land and viewed the land as being unimportant and that it was Hitler's 'last' territorial demand. Hitler's propaganda machine accused the Czech government of hideous crimes and warned of retribution. He ordered his generals to plan an invasion of Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain decided to intervene. This crisis led to the Munich Agreement in 1938, agreeing that all Czech troops in the Sudetenland would be replaced by German troops. Britain and France had shown was their own weakness and this weakness increased Hitler's appetite for even more territory. ...read more.


If USSR was conquered it would have been a major economic boost to Germany. I believe practical consideration was taking into account also aswell as ideology when planning to invade USSR. The raw materials gained from the USSR would have eased the domestic and economic problems. In Mein Kampf Hitler wrote about his vision that it would be a 'strategic and economic necessity' in conquering USSR. The economic pressure would be eased via gaining grain supply from the Ukraine aswell as having the oil reserves in Baku. He believed t would be a practical thing to do as using Slav labour to collect reserves from the large reservoir. Also in conquering USSR the practical consideration involved the expansion of Balkans and the Romanian oil fields. The invasion and defeat of France had a military logic. The ideology was to defeat France was essential in reversing the humiliation of 1918, and Hitler saw French responsible for them agreeing to Versailles. The opportunity was once again there for Hitler and once gain he took it with both hands. France was following a policy of appeasement and also economic difficulties aswell as bitter political divisions paved the way for Hitler to seize the initiative. Their long term strategy was once conquering France to dominate continental Europe. This could not be achieved without the destruction of France. At the end of 1941 Europe was 'scared' to an extent. Even though Hitler and Germany were eventually defeated Hitler met his foreign policy in what he got. In answering the question did practical considerations outweighed ideology in foreign policy, I believed both did play a part in achieving Hitler's foreign policy aims as both factors did compliment each other for example, Hitler's search for East expansion(Lebensraum) good not be done without a strong economy and strong military support. Also Hitler's talent of be being able to seize the opportunity was vital in securing foreign policy success. ?? ?? ?? ?? FAHIM TALUKDER U6SD ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Mussolini's foreign policy.

    3 star(s)

    Mussolini on the 3rd of October 1935 launched his attack, without first declaring war. Modern weaponry including poison gas, aircraft and tanks, ensured victory over the poorly equipped Ethiopians. Haile Selaisse, the emperor of Abyssinia appealed to the League of Nations and economic sanctions were imposed.

  2. Was Hitler a weak dictator?

    This was the first actions he took to establish good relations with the army. But, also he created the SS that infiltrated every organism in Germany, including the army. However, he never used the power of the Gestapo, or he couldn't so so, in order to infiltrate the army.

  1. Assess the view that the failures of the Congress of Vienna outweighed the successes.

    Congress of Verona in 1822, the idea of consulting and cooperating survived well into the second half of the century, and may be deemed one of the most lasting achievements of the Vienna statesmen, hence constituting a success of the Congress.

  2. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1936 and 1939 rested on his remarkable tactical skills ...

    benefit the German economy - which, in it's strive for autarky, was overheating and struggling. It was a radical move at the time - Hitler's previous actions had been hidden under a veil of nationalism, and were never outwardly "Nazi".

  1. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    The Historical Roots Bolshevism - Stalin's use of terror has been seen as a continuation of the trends established by Lenin after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. A regime, which was highly centralised around its leader and relied on terror to maintain itself in power.

  2. To what extent can Hitler be considered to be "weak"?

    for instructions and decisions. Looking at primary evidence, Ernst Von Weizsacker memoirs, shows how in the third Reich, Hitler went about making decisions. I see in the source that Hitler rarely made a sustainable decision and when he did, it was said that he made a slight remark or "murmur"7 that then was sent of as "Order of the Furher"8.

  1. To what extent was Hitler responsible for the outbreak of the Second World War ...

    Again the evidence, if we take the Intentionalist view is that he had planned a war of aggression from the outset.

  2. Assess the short-term significance of the Treaty of Versailles.

    This might help to explain the lack of resistance to the Franco - Belgian invasion of the Ruhr. It may also help to explain the rapid increase in Germany?s armed forces following Hitler?s rise to power. Germany would once again establish a sizable army, a devastating air force (the Luftwaffe)

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work