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

To what extend did German foreign policy become more openly "Nazi", rather than purely nationalist in the course of 1938?

Extracts from this document...


To what extend did German foreign policy become more openly "Nazi", rather than purely nationalist in the course of 1938? In 1925, many of Hitler's ideologies and visions for the future were published in his book, Mein Kampf. He spoke of Gross Deutschland, autarky, lebensraum, anti-Semitism and the Aryan race, amongst many other topics. Factors within this may sound perfectly nationalist - for example, Gross Deutschland was the desire to unite all German speaking people as one. However, the anti-Semitic attitude which Hitler held was purely a hatred for the Jews, and he claimed they were responsible for everything that he did not like. The policy of lebensraum was to provide living space for the people of Gross Deutschland - space which would be claimed by force These attitudes were surely not nationalist, and leads to the view that Hitler was never really just a nationalist; he was just a Nazi whose actions and attitudes could be (and were) well disguised as nationalism. In 1933, Germany left the League of Nations, shortly after also leaving the Disarmament Conference. This move was easily hidden under a veil of nationalism, due to it allowing Hitler the overturn of the Treaty of Versailles - surely a move which any nationalist would have strived for. ...read more.


territory of East Prussia, and cut Poland off from the Baltic Sea), yet Hitler did not appear to have intention of retaking either. He did not desire the colonies at all, and made a much unexpected move with Poland - forming a non-aggression pact. Poland and Germany were renowned for being enemies, but this pact made Poland far more vulnerable. It broke the Little Entente, and ceased relations between Poland and France, also leaving the latter further isolated, much to Hitler's favour. Of course, Hitler never really intended the pact to do what it said on the tin, and Poland was to serve much the same purpose as Austria; that being, a stepping stone to the East, and also to act as a subordinate ally against the USSR if necessary. This move by Hitler would be difficult to claim as simple nationalism, due to it being no benefit to the Gross Deutschland concept or other nationalistic ideas, and that it was, in all, a strange move considering the two countries previously unfriendly stance against one another. It could be said that Hitler was merely trying to act as a peace-maker, but it later came to be clear that this was not his intention, and that the pact would benefit Nazi intentions for the future. ...read more.


The memorandum included the plans for expansion into East Europe for living space, Hitler's desire for small wars to help support the German economy whilst striving for autarky. As for autarky itself, it was detailed that some aspects of it were unachievable at the time, and so war to the East could be considered a necessity to make these aspects possible. Further still, Autarky would have to be achieved in the next 5 years - Hitler wanted war with Britain and France in 1941-44/45. It can be concluded that many of Hitler's policies and aims may well have been nationalistic from the outside, but when read into, left paths to many more radical, Nazi plans. All territorial advances left doors to the East open and benefited the German economy, and in turn, aided the move towards autarky to set the country up for a state of war. Due to the territorial moves being in areas containing German speakers (Sudetenland, Austria), they were simply passed off as nationalism in uniting the German speakers to form Gross Deutschland. Moves such as the remilitarisation of the Rhineland and general rearmament (albeit on an excessive scale) were simply seen as a desire to overturn Versailles and its seemingly harsh terms. Only with the Hossbach Memorandum did it become clear that these moves would piece together to allow far more radical and very much Nazi plans to be undertaken. ...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. A study of why the USSR signed a non aggression pact with Germany rather ...

    Stalin was also influenced by the fact that fighting against the Japanese troops on the Manchurian frontier continued and the probability that he would be able to negotiate a nonaggression pact with Japan, Germany's ally. On August 31 1939 a nonaggression pact was signed with Germany.

  2. "The most important aim of foreign policy 1933-1936 was to overthrow the terms of ...

    was signed which made Germany and Italy allies and partners of business. They shared views over General Franco's Spain and even assisted in the over throwing of the Republican government and lastly they shared the same views about communist Russia.


    I believe the Czech situation portrayed Hitler as a leader which merely curves situations to his advantage rather then creating them, i.e. he was more of an opportunist than a planner and thus took the practical road in pursuing his foreign policy objectives Crisis that leads to the outbreak of World War Two suggests that Hitler took a practical initiative.

  2. Hitlers Germany

    The Nazi accusations were unsophisticated but effective. Lower middle-class unemployed and employed embraced a Nazi party that promised to eliminate this corrupt Weimar system. The economic, social, and psychological crises created by the Great Depression had dire political consequences for Weimar democracy.

  1. Hitler and the Nazi Regime - revision sheet.

    One major style= neoclassical style with the style of the Greeks, but on a massive scale. The individual was dwarfed in front of the building to show authority. Hitler had grand plans for rebuilding Berlin. Media: Press: the regime controlled the press by controlling the journalists, editors and publishers through the Reich Association of the German press.

  2. 'In the years 1933-37, German foreign policy was essentially nationalist rather than specifically Nazi'. ...

    of the Weimar era who had frequently expressed their resent for the 'stab in the back' German surrender in World War One. It is well-known that one of Hitler's main motivations for denouncing the treaty was to try and accelerate his rearmament programme, an idea shared with the Foreign Ministry.

  1. Free essay

    To what extent did German foreign policy become more openly 'Nazi' rather then purely ...

    The methods changed from Nationalistic to Nazi when Hitler realised the joining of Austria would mean for Germany in war preparations and from increasing potential threats. This would have been in order to strengthen Germany from attackers, and to prepare for war, as well as going against the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

  2. The Impact of Stalins Leadership in the USSR, 1924 1941. Extensive notes

    Yagoda organised the 1936 Show Trials but fell out of favour with Stalin and ended up on trial himself in 193. Yagoda?s removal ensured that Stalin had full control of the NKVD. Yezhov. In charge of the NKVD from September 1936 to December 1938.

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