Preview

How Did Arthur Neville Chamberlain's Decision To End Appeasement

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
151 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
How Did Arthur Neville Chamberlain's Decision To End Appeasement
Arthur Neville Chamberlain’s contentious decision to end appeasement and institute a wartime policy against Germany, was important for the protection of Great Britain and the social-stability of Europe as a whole. Chamberlain was a central figure in British politics during a tumultuous decade in European history. As Prime Minister, he addressed a series complex of problems that reached the rise of Nazi Germany. Chamberlain initially believed that he could reconcile with Hitler through his policy of appeasement, which was based on pragmatic intentions that would seek to prevent war and establish diplomatic relations in Europe. Chamberlain sought for Germany to remilitarize the Rhineland and unite the Germans as a means to appease Adolf Hitler

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    German Aggression Dbq

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages

    He also points out that his policy served to repair the damage caused by the Treaty of Versailles. Chamberlain further states: “Really I have no need to defend my visits to Germany last autumn, for what was the alternative? Nothing that we could have done, nothing that France could have done, or Russia could have done could possibly have saved Czecho-Slovakia from invasion and destruction.” There existed no other solution to German aggression against Czechoslovakia. With the Munich Agreement signed, Germany invaded Czechoslovakia. On the other hand, without an Agreement, it still would have been likely that Germany invaded Czechoslovakia. Thus, Chamberlain remains blameless for German aggression because the German Empire would have invaded Czechoslovakia in either case. After establishing his innocence, Chamberlain states the inevitability of war against the German Empire: “Does not the question inevitably arise in our minds, if it is so easy to discover good reasons for ignoring assurances so solemnly and so repeatedly given, what reliance can be placed upon any other assurances that come from the same source?” How can any of the European powers trust the German Empire after the Munich Agreement was so abruptly ripped up? Any further peace talks will not produce satisfying results because there will always be doubt regarding the German intent to expand its territory. Chamberlain…

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    DBQ world war 2

    • 2303 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Prime Minister Chamberlain suggested the best way to deal with Hitler was a policy of appeasement.…

    • 2303 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Arthur Neville Chamberlain was a British politician who served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1937 - 1940. He signed the Munich Agreement in 1938. When Hitler continued his aggression on Poland, Chamberlain promised to defend Poland's independence, therefore Britain declared war on, and Chamberlain led Britain through the first eight months of World War II. “On the Nazi invasion of Poland” speech was announced hours after Hitler's troops had invaded Poland. He died of cancer after six months of leaving the premiership and was replaced by Winston Churchill. This speech was announced to show the cruelty of the Nazi government and to stop the Germans aggression…

    • 482 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One argument is the view that appeasement was the only realistic option because public opinion supported it and for Chamberlain to lead Britain to war would go against public favour. The First World War savaged Europe and Britain was hit very hard in terms of Human losses. Many families lost men within the family and left psychological scars nationwide. Chamberlain was therefore desperate to avoid another war on the continent at all costs. If Britain was to go to war they would have to rearm and build on their armed forces which had been neglected since world war one. However public opinion was that if Britain was rearming then they would be preparing for war, which was incredible unpopular. Evidence of this was in east Fulham by-election of 1933 the conservative who advocated rearmament turned a majority of 14,000 into a defeat by 5000 at the hands of his labour approach who supported disarmament. This illustrated the political affect that rearmament and policies that move towards War had which was a reason as to why Chamberlain saw appeasement as the only realistic option.…

    • 747 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The philosophies behind the appeasement as the solution to peace were littered with faults which Germany capitalized on. In the wake of World War One the great powers established the Rhineland demilitarized zone, as part of the Treaty of Versailles. The demilitarized zone worked as a collective security as a buffer between Germany and France to lessen the tension between the historically rival nations who fought over this piece of land. Hitler had said that the Rhineland was German land and believed he had the right to reoccupy it. “Berlin, March 7 [1936] – Germany today cast off the last shackles fastened upon her by the Treaty of Versailles when Adolf Hitler, as commander-in-chief of the Reich defense forces, sent his new battalions into the Rhineland’s demilitarized zone (Document 3) .” When Hitler reoccupied the Rhineland in clear defiance of Treaty of Versailles France’s immediate response was a call to the other powers to pressure the German government into removing its soldiers from the demilitarized zone but because of the…

    • 1068 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Intimidation from Fascist leaders was a factor that led to the illogical events of World War II. Adolf Hitler, chancellor of Germany, justified his barbaric actions on his attempt to benefit the "superior" German race. The effects of his ambitions were displayed during the Munich Conference in 1938. Hitler invited the Prime Minister of Britain and the Premier of France and demanded that the Sudetenland become part of Germany. Due to France and Britain's fear of another war, Hitler's demand was accepted. The appeasement, or agreement in order to maintain peace, at the Munich Conference was said to have "saved Europe from a world war," as stated by William Shirer. Contrary to Shirer, Europe would still be involved in war and things would only get worse.…

    • 436 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I think the most effective response is with out a doubt collective security. (Doc 4) In 1938 Britain, France, and Italy met with Hitler to discuss his demand for the Sudetenland. Hitler got what he wanted from this meeting because of appeasement. Europe was happy from this because it avoided war. This did not benefit the Czechs at all though. For some reason Neville Chamberlain favored appeasement. (Doc 5) He thinks appeasement is the best way because he believes war is a "fearful thing." He thinks that appeasement will benefit Europe. Winston Churchill disagreed with Chamberlain's policy of appeasement. (Doc 6) He believed that keeping peace depends on holding back the aggressor. He also thinks we lost many opportunities in the quest for peace. He believes it was the people in control of our political affairs fault. Another view on appeasement was also put out there by A.J.P. Taylor. It stated that since the majority of German people put Hitler into power they were the only ones that could turn him out. Also he said some "appeasers" feared that the defeat of Germany would be followed by Russian domination over most of Europe. In another excerpt an author named Keith Eubank states that stopping Hitler prior to 1939 was not an issue. (Doc 9) He says that Hitler had too massive of a force and that nothing he had done had been considered that dangerous at that point in time. All this options but still if the rest of the country didn't do something besides just keeping appeasement Hitler was going to just keep demanding more and more. This would have left Europe ten times worse off. They made the right choice on going into Collective Security. They should have done this from the beginning instead of wasting so much time and losing so much, to just end up going into war anyways, just later in time. Collective Security…

    • 838 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Initially, Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King warmly supported British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasing German leader Adolf Hitler. When Chamberlain postponed war by sacrificing Czechoslovakia in the Munich crisis of September 1938, King thanked him publicly, and Canadians in general certainly agreed. Nevertheless, the shock of this crisis likely turned opinion towards accepting war to check the advance of Nazism. Only gradually did ongoing Nazi aggression alter this mood to the point where Canada was prepared to take part in another great war. King himself had no doubt that in a great war involving Britain, Canada could not stand aside.…

    • 1385 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Munich agreement encouraged Hitler to take more land and spread militarism. Neville Chamberlain should have stopped Hitler in his tracks, and gathered Allies to defend Poland, as well…

    • 471 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    France and UK came up with the policy of appeasement which was a policy with nazi germany that would allow hitler to take a lot more land than he was supposed to. The reason being is the policy was put into place so that the UK and france would let Hitler do what he wanted as long as he didnt do what they told him not to do. The policy of appeasement however did not work because Hitler was not someone you could appease. Once Hitler invaded poland the policy ended thus ending the reign of letting hitler walk all over…

    • 545 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    The phrase “sex, drugs, and rock and roll” held true to its well-earned spot in 1970’s and 1980’s society. With a new, looser culture, explicit music, raunchy and rambunctious movies as well as a societal focus on many things immoral, it was an era of challenging social norms. As the use of recreational and psychoactive drugs, as well as alcohol, increased, a new problem arose; how does law enforcement and the government undo the damage being made by this new society? Laws were passed, bureaus and commissions were formed, and the President of the United States began what he called “The War on Drugs”. Over the years, some of these solutions have proven to make some impact. The initiation, tactics, and attempts at dealing a major blow to drug abuse have all affected the way America sees drugs today. A new type of warfare had made its way into the country, and after all these years, it has made its fair share of positive and negative effects.…

    • 1554 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Appeasement was the right policy for England in 1938. This is because It was based on the idea that what Hitler wanted was reasonable and, when his reasonable demands had been satisfied, he would stop. Appeasement was the only practical action that could be held during that time. England and France were not ready to get into another war. They already had severe damages that they couldn’t afford to get into another war. This gave them time to prepare for war since it is inevitable anyways. It also gave them time to prepare for old and broken equipment. Alliances needed to be made and through this, that was all possible. Also, through this policy, they were able to get public support. Appeasement also allowed Britain time to retool factories for war. Many Britons during that time saw Hitler as a defence against Russian Communism. This all happened because they thought that Hitler would soon be satisfied after remilitarizing the Rhineland, annexation of Austria and czechoslovakia. Wanted to please Hitler this way. The empire was already overstretched and its financial resources quite limited. The U.S. was isolationist. Soviet communism was feared, France was weak. This was all done to prevent war and preventing war is something needed to be done. Their objective was for the collaboration of all nations in building up a lasting peace for Europe. The Czechs, left themselves and told they were going to get no help from the Western Powers, would have been able to make better terms than they have got. This also gave the greatest chance of securing protection for the country. Czechoslovak State would’ve not been able to be an independent entity without this. Chamberlain remembered the slaughter of the…

    • 2172 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    As Americans we have civil liberties. Civil liberties are basic rights and freedoms that are guaranteed to American citizens (Thompson). For example, as Americans one of our civil liberties is to keep and bear arms. In our society, this civil liberty has become an issue due to several incidents involving firearms. Therefore, a bill has been constructed threatening our right to bear arms. I feel that as Americans we have many reasons that we should have this civil liberty is because the right to bear arms involved in the second and fourth amendments. The second amendment clearly states “a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right if the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. If our government can take away our rights like it’s nothing, then what else can they take from us? We have many rights as Americans. The right to bear arms is one of the biggest. Some of the reasons why we shouldn’t have guns banned are second and fourth amendments, hunting, they will not end deaths, and how there are many other reasons of death that we should be worried about. Although these are just among the few that I have mentioned there are plenty more reasons why Americans should be able to have guns in our nation.…

    • 1506 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Chamberlain suggested appeasement in hopes of keeping peace and avoiding war. He wanted to avoid war for as long as possible and keep the Europe out of war unless a bigger reason arose.…

    • 728 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    How does Oscar Wilde satirize Victorian society in his play The Importance of Being Earnest?…

    • 1658 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays