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

Why did Britain and France pursue a policy of appeasement? Was it successful?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why did Britain and France pursue a policy of appeasement? Was it successful? Appeasement is defined as "a disposition to avoid conflict by judicious concession and negotiation" and it became a key part of Britain and France's foreign policy in the 1930s with the lead up to World War 2 and Hitler's steady rise to power. There is no one reason why Britain and France followed this policy, however it is a combination of reasons all inter-linked and very much based on the people and government of the time. In the aftermath of World War 1, a mutual understanding developed between the British government and society that never again should such a catastrophe occur; it was described as the "war to end all wars", reinforcing the view that it was a cataclysmic event which should never happen again. The frightful events of world war one had instilled a sense of fear and regret amongst British society, and consequently Britain's aim was to prevent any future war, through whatever means necessary. The British public became disillusioned with the use of force in international relations and, as a result, sought an approach consisting of an effective system of collective security through the League of Nations. In post war society anti-war books, films (e.g. ...read more.

Middle

His supposed strength was emphasised through the use of propaganda and his forces' well publicised parades. Partly due to severe losses in World War 1 France was very short of man power and thus Britain and France felt too weak to tackle Germany alone. Because of the Rome-Berlin Axis Italy was no longer supporting Britain and France against Germany and as the USA also had a strong isolationist foreign policy and had made it clear that it would not intervene militarily in Europe to support Britain and France. Thus both Britain and France did not feel confident enough of victory in another (expected) war of attrition with Germany. However Hitler did not stop there, and by the end of 1938 Austria was taken by the German Reich (empire), and Hitler was demanding the Sudetenland (half of Czechoslovakia largely populated by German speaking people). Britain and France had done little to date to stop German expansion, fearing a return to world war. They then signed the Munich Agreement making Hitler promise that he would take no more land after the Sudetenland (Hitler said at the time that the Sudetenland was: "the last territorial claim which I have to make in Europe"). In March of 1939 Hitler broke the pact and took the rest of Czechoslovakia. ...read more.

Conclusion

In 1932 the British MP, Stanley Baldwin, declared that "I think it is well for the man on the street to realize that there is no power on earth that can protect him from being bombed.........the bomber will always get through." Fear of aerial bombing was one of the stronger reasons why Britain decided to follow this policy. In conclusion, many people in Britain and France admired Hitler's achievements especially in the spheres of economic policy. To some extent there was support of fascism. France had steadily lost allies: Italy, Russia and Czechoslovakia ("Czech freedom is not worth a drop of blood") as a result of Hitler's successful foreign policy initiatives during the 1930's. It is difficult to judge the policy and its effectiveness with hindsight as we know what the British public and government did not know: that the policy would lead to world war. At the time, the governments of Britain and France were more concerned with the pressing economic problems inside their own countries (recession, inflation, unemployment) than with stopping Hitler. Those who opposed later claimed: "we have eaten dirt in vain", expressing the fact that Britain had tolerated the deceitful acts of Germany to no avail or success. Appeasement did give Britain time to re-arm, and it is only now that we can see other options, though at the time the British public and government did not want to engage in war under any circumstances. Katie Taylor 11H November 17th, 03 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Germany 1918-1939 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 GCSE Germany 1918-1939 essays

  1. Was appeasement a mistake?

    Although Hitler still decided to keep attacking some countries he was determined to try and build peace between Germany and another country, even if he didn't mean it. Many people thought that Germany had been treated unfairly by the Treaty of Versailles.

  2. The Italian Conquest of Abyssinia: How far was the LoN to blame?

    Source E, however, cannot be as the speech was actually made at the time. In conclusion to this question, I trust source D more when reflecting Britain's attitude to Abyssinia for a number of reasons.

  1. Was Appeasement A Mistake?

    When Germany later invaded Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, the majority of the British public and politicians were reluctant to go to Czechoslovakia's aid because they felt that it was a small, irrelevant country that had hardly anything to do with Britain, and that it was certainly not worth driving the world into another dreadful war over the matter.

  2. Was appeasement Justified? What was "appeasement"?

    Source N4 by A.J.P. Taylor, holds the view that Chamberlain was so confident in his policy that he failed to realize that the concessions that he put forward to Hitler could be turned down with no repercussions from both France and Britain. He also states that nothing could have stopped Hitler, he would have marched on from one conquest to the other.

  1. To What Extent was British Appeasement to Germany in the Interwar Period Justified?

    appeasement shouldn't have been used; it allowed Hitler to feel comfortable with rearming and eventually starting war. Adams appears to possess negative feelings towards British appeasement to Germany. Adams states that, "There seems to be little doubt that the slightest armed resistance by Britain and France would have stopped the march into the Rhineland dead in its tracks.

  2. To what extent can it be argued that appeasement was the cause of the ...

    shows that appeasement was the only viable policy that existed in the eyes of the British government as they avoided at great lengths to prevent an outbreak of war. Britain's policy of appeasement was increasingly tested again in the Spanish civil war in July 1936.

  1. British Policy of Appeasement May 1937 - March 1939.

    * * * The reason why the Policy of Appeasement was so bad is because it gave Adolf Hitler, half of Europe, and 2 years to fully arm himself before any fighting started. If, when Hitler mobilised his forces into the Rhineland the Allies had made a move against him then they could have shut him down fairly quickly.

  2. what were the roots of the british policy of appeasement?

    She would simply be a pretext for going to war with Germany". I believe Chamberlain followed the only realistic policy for Britain in the Munich Crisis, appeasement in 1938. Appeasement was the only realistic policy Chamberlain and his government could have followed.

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