On the pacific front, Imperial Japan was fighting a war of conquest in Manchuria and Southeast Asia. Although Japan had similar ambitions and methods of Nazi Germany, unlike Nazi Germany with Hitler, there was no cult of personality in the government of Japan. Unlike Hitler who used mass media to generate a heroic image of himself and his regime, the Japanese Imperial government did not appeal to the people this way. In this sense, the Nazi regime was totalitarian, whereas the Japanese regime was authoritarian. Another difference between the two nations at the time was the manner in which decisions were made. Nye (2008) wrote “While Hitler had military and industrial support in Germany; he made decisions largely on his own. In Japan, there was a greater diffusion of power at the top and decisions were more the result of consensus among the political and military elite.” (p. 109) The Soviet Union also played a major role in aggravating the war, highlighted by the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939 (known as the “Winter War”) and the non-aggression pact between Soviet leader Josef Stalin and Hitler that same year. The pact in particular gave Hitler a “free hand to do what he wanted in the west [of Europe]” in the words of Nye, because it removed the threat of the Soviet Union in the east. (p. 101) The Soviets had ambitions of their own, and their initial cooperation with the Nazis helped the war happen. The British and French were very worried that the Soviets and Nazis might make a formal alliance next, and if that happened, Britain and France might have been done for. Luckily for the British and French, Hitler had no such intention. He regarded the Soviets (especially the large population of Slavic peoples among them) as “untermenschen” (subhuman). He railed against what he referred to as their “Bolshevism”, a reference to their communist form of government, and he also deplored what he called their “Jewry” (a reference to their large population of Jews). In addition, he viewed the Soviet Union as standing in the way of the Nazi goal to acquire “lebensraum” (living space for Germans).
American isolationism also played a decisive role in allowing WWII to happen. The American government had opposed intervention in European affairs since before World War I, seeking to avoid undesired expenditures on their part. To quote Nye (2008) on this point, “Opponents of American involvement in world affairs claimed that the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 limited American interests to the Western Hemisphere, and noted George Washington’s warning that the United States should avoid “entangling alliances”.” (p. 91) The U.S. Senate did not ratify the Versailles Treaty, which established the League of Nations, much to the disappointment of President Woodrow Wilson (who was an adamant supporter of America joining the League). Without what would have been its strongest member, the League of Nations held substantially less power than it would have had the U.S. joined. The League lacked its own military and so depended on the to enforce its resolutions, keep to economic sanctions that the League ordered, or provide an army, when needed, for the League to use. However, they were often reluctant to do so. British academic historian (1973) has suggested that, had the United States been a member of the League, it would have also provided backup to France and Britain, possibly making France feel more secure and so encouraging France and Britain to co-operate more regarding Germany and so made the rise to power of the party less likely. (League of Nations, 1924, p. 175) Sanctions could also hurt the League members imposing the sanctions and given the pacifist attitude following World War I, countries were reluctant to take military action. In short, WWII was caused by a series of events brought about by ambitious aggression from a few states that went unchecked by the opposing powers in the world until it was too late. The presence of three respective, powerful states with leaders who would use any means necessary to achieve their ominous goals, as well as the lack, as well as the lack of any effective check on the actions of those states and their leaders, made World War II inevitable.
References
Jervis, R. (1978). Offense, Defense, and the Security Dilemma. John Hopkins University Press. (9th ed.), International Politics (p. 153-173). New York: Pearson-Longman.
League of Nations (1924). "”. The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. p. 175.
Nye, J. S. (2008). Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History (7th ed.). New York: Pearson-Longman.
