How significant a role did Britain play in the war against Germany, 1939-45?
How significant a role did Britain play in the war against Germany, 1939-45? On the 3rd September 1939, Britain declared war on Germany after they invaded Poland because Britain and France had made an agreement to defend Poland from a German attack. Despite this declaration of war, Britain and France did very little to defend Poland and no combat by the French or British took place for nine months to follow. This period of time was nicknamed the 'Phoney War'. In April 1940, the Germans invaded Norway; Britain attempted to defend Norway but after their defeat, Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister was forced to resign; Winston Spencer Churchill was appointed Prime Minister and formed a National Government. On the 10th June 1940, France was invaded and defeated by Italian-German forces; this resulted in Britain being alone against GermanY. Germany came up with a plan to invade Britain called 'Operation Sealion' because Churchill refused to negotiate with the Germans. For this plan to work the German Luftwaffe would have to have air superiority. The Luftwaffe had an advantage over the RAF of 2300 more aircraft overall, but they had an equal number of fighter planes. Also, the fighter planes from Germany could only spend 30 minutes over South-East England before having to return to refuel, this sometimes resulted in Bombers being left behind and then destroyed by
Did the Suez Crisis hasten the end of the British Empire?
Did the Suez Crisis hasten the end of the British Empire? The Suez crisis did not hasten the end of the British Empire; it was more of an effect rather than cause of decline. Carlton argues that since Britain only had an average sized population and the corresponding economic strength her overseas territories had caused her to overstretch and over-commit herself from the end of the First World War. Hence one can argue that retreat from empire and fall from her position as a global superpower to that of a medium global power by the 1980s was inevitable and unavoidable. 'Suez, on this view, was a rather dramatic hiccup in a generally well managed transition.'1 This is the point of view that I would agree with when considering the affect of the Suez crisis. However, one must also acknowledge that for some Suez did hasten the end of the British Empire and it was a watershed marking a significant change in direction in Britain's imperial foreign policy. This viewpoint must also be discussed and evaluated. Moving away from just focusing on the effects of Suez one must also discuss the other factors and causes of decolonisation, including the established nationalist, international and metropolitan explanations and how they were represented in the Suez crisis. Firstly I will look at the arguments supporting the opinion that Suez did hasten the end of the British Empire to which
