Appeasement in the 1930s

Appeasement may be regarded as a philosophy of the maintenance of peace; in political terms it refers to policy of conciliation with a potential aggressor, often with implications of sacrifice of principles (Oxford Dictionary). The policy of appeasement is one in which both Britain and France and many other nations took towards Nazi Germany and its expansionist aims during the late 1930s, it is one of the most controversial and criticized foreign policies in history (Gelernter D 2002:22). This paper argues that the appeasement policy was for most nations around the world in the 1930s a less challenging way to deal with the problem of Hitler. Nowadays it is a common view that if Britain and France would have taken a harder line against the Nazis then Hitler's aggressive policy would not have remained unchecked and German expansionism may not have endangered the anti Nazi nation states of Europe and beyond. This essay will also explore the view that appeasement was necessary for many different countries at the time, as a way of buying time for rearmament, so that they would be able to oppose militarily Nazi Germany. The appeasement policy reflected the general consensus of people who where opposed to going to war again so soon when they still were feeling the devastating effects of the World War One (WW1). In regards to whether appeasement in the 1930s was defensible we have to look at the justifications for the policy of appeasement. We ultimately have to understand if it was a bid to reach a peaceful understanding with Germany or nations looking after their own interests. An important matter to note is that the major powers were anxious to stop any German influence over Eastern Europe at any cost (Day D 2003:8-10).

The term appeasement is used to describe the response of Western European governments, mainly Britain and France, to the expansionist activities of Germany under Hitler and to some extent Italy under Mussolini in the 1930s (The Roots of European

Bibliography: 1. Appeasement, Historical Association Studies – second edition, Keith Robbins, copyright 1997, Blackwell Publishers Inc (Maldan, MA, USA) 2. Author(s): Ralph B. A. Dimuccio, Source: Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Mar., 1998), pp. 245-259, Publisher: Sage Publications, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/425524 [11 April 2008] The Study of Appeasement in International Relations: Polemics, Paradigms, and Problems 3. Bridge, Carl. Appeasement and after: towards a re-assessment of the Lyons and Menzies government 's defence and foreign policies, 1931-41. [Paper in special issue: The Liberal Tradition in Australian Foreign Policy. Lowe, David and Bridge, Carl (eds).] [online]. Australian Journal of Politics and History, v.51, no.3, Sept 2005: (372)-379. Availability: <http://search.informit.com.au.wwwproxy0.nun.unsw.edu.au/fullText;dn=200510635;res=APAFT> ISSN: 0004-9522. [cited 11 April 2008] 4. David Gelernter (2002, September). The roots of European appeasement. The Weekly Standard, 8(2), 19-25. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Academic Research Library database. (Document ID: 196601911). 5. The Fall of France – The Nazi Invasion of 1940, Julian Jackson, Oxford University Press (Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP) 6. The Politics of War, David Day, copyright 2003, HarperCollinsPublishers (Sydney, NSW, Australia) 7. Watson, Raymond. The history of appeasement repeats itself [online]. National Observer, no.56, Autumn 2003: (12)-22. Availability: <http://search.informit.com.au.wwwproxy0.nun.unsw.edu.au/fullText;dn=200304771;res=APAFT> ISSN: 1442-5548. [cited 11 Apr 08]. 8. Williamson Murray (2008, March). CHURCHILL Takes Charge. Military History, 25(1), 26-33,4. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Academic Research Library database. (Document ID: 1423706721). 9. Woodard, Garry. The diplomacy of appeasement [online]. Quadrant (Sydney), v.43, nos 1-2, Jan-Feb 1999: 48-53. Availability: <http://search.informit.com.au.wwwproxy0.nun.unsw.edu.au/fullText;dn=990606442;res=APAFT> ISSN: 0033-5002. [cited 11 Apr 08].