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

"War became inevitable by 1939 and, when it came, it was a surprise to hardly anyone." Assess the validity of this view.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"War became inevitable by 1939 and, when it came, it was a surprise to hardly anyone." Assess the validity of this view. Historical debate surrounding the war has provided various interpretations of its causes and origins, some of particular relevance to the view in question. The inevitability of the war - how far it was inevitable, and if it was at which point it became so - is a point of contention which depends upon the view one takes of many other factors: for example, if one took the intentionalist view of Hitler's role in the war as "master-planner", one would view war in 1939 as inevitable because it was planned by Hitler; if one were a Marxist historian one might view the incidence of the war as "historically inevitable" in much the same way that Khrushchev in Source A takes the view that the Nazi-Soviet Pact was historically inevitable, although perhaps not for entirely the same reasons. Later historiography, particularly after AJP Taylor's Origins of the Second World War, would dispute the "inevitability" of war in 1939 and certainly the idea that Hitler was a master-planner - for if he were not, actions by other powers perhaps may have prevented war at that point; or perhaps ...read more.

Middle

Indeed the Soviet Union did precisely that and got "the best terms they could for themselves" when they agreed to carve up Poland with Germany in 1939. That Britain and France did decide to guarantee Poland's security and did decide in September 1939 to honour that guarantee thus appears by this account to have been the immediate cause for war in 1939. If, then, there was a real possibility of Britain and France not doing so (and since they had been somewhat content to avoid war in September 1938 by signing away Czechoslovakia's sovereignty at Munich, it would seem there was), then war could not be said to have been entirely inevitable in 1939. Taking the source at face value, then, in this respect the view in question would not (even though the source claims war could only have been avoided in three ways, which suggests a degree of inevitability) appear to be entirely valid. That the war was "a surprise to hardly anyone", however, is very debateable. It implies very strongly that most of the European powers were predicting war by 1939 and were aware of its imminence and inevitability. ...read more.

Conclusion

(The argument Richard Overy puts forward concerning the power balance of Europe is relevant here in explaining that there was a limit to how much of a blow to the European power status quo - which Germany wanted, as in WWI, to surpass - the West would tolerate.) Overall, then, the view is semi-valid; its claims are supported in some ways but contradicted in others (e.g. the claim implies rhetorically that no one was surprised by war and that everyone knew it was going to happen, when Hitler, crucially, probably did not). That war was inevitable by 1939 is arguable, but probably not entirely true purely in the sense that it's difficult to argue that anything was completely inescapable. In the context of the situation at the time, however, what was politically and economically possible (e.g. Britain calculated by 1939 that it could not sustain armaments on the scale it had been for much longer at all, and thus if war was going to happen it had to happen sooner rather than later) made war a far more difficult eventuality to avoid and a far more likely solution to be chosen. ...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. Vietnam war

    conduct or activities are deemed dangerous to the security of South Vietnam". This law targeted communists, but predictably, thousands of others with no subversive intentions were swept up by the police and army security networks. By 1961, more than 60,000 South Vietnamese now lived in gaol.

  2. Hitlers Germany

    The Nazis were flexible, however. In areas where anti-Semitism was not popular, the Nazis would drop the attacks on Jews and focus instead on anticommunism, nationalism, and the defense of religious values. The last of these issues was important for Protestant voters.

  1. The origins of the first world war

    In 1907, Britain obtained 4 battleships and Germany had none but a little under a year, Britain had 6 and Germany had 4 battleships. By the beginning of the war, Britain had 38 dreadnoughts and battle Cruisers while Germany had 24 dreadnoughts and battle cruisers in their fleetv.

  2. "The first world war was the result of long-standing rivalries between the great powers". ...

    It spurred the formation of the alliance between Britain and France, which proved to be a vicious circle concerning the development of hostility, that is, Germany felt further threatened by this alliance. It can also be argued that Britain would not have entered the fray of war, were it not for the imperialistic rivalry with Germany.

  1. "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".

  2. Did the policy of appeasement go to any great lengths toward stopping the outbreak ...

    The civil war, which erupted in Spain in July 1936, was perceived by the majority of Europe as a struggle between the aggressive and advancing doctrine of fascism and the weakening force of democracy. It was essentially a divided nation "fascism v democracy The Spanish civil war was initially the

  1. To What Extent Was a War Between Nazism and Bolshevism Inevitable?

    resigned; it is at this point that foreign relations took a downward turn. As Kershaw points out, "German foreign policy had no single, clear direction...it was characterised by Hitler's own dilettante opportunism"4. However in the years between the taking and consolidating of power Hitler also took and consolidated his thinking

  2. Albert Speers Role as German Armaments Minister during the War

    When he was finally released from prison, Speer started work on writing an autobiographical book. For several years Speer carried around the image, which he created himself, as an apolitical technocrat who had rejected Nazism although he was Hitler?s architect, Minister of Armaments and friend, and historians accepted his word as an accurate source.

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