WAS APPEASEMENT A BAD CHOICE?
How the Allies thought they could satisfy Hitler.
In class, we’ve finally wrapped up the 20s and 30s unit and we’re on to the much more exciting topic of WWII (at least in my opinion). We’ve kind of covered the causes of WWII and the fatally flawed Treaty of Versailles and League of Nations. Now we’re focusing on the rise of Nazi Germany, and the topic that I found most intriguing was the policy of appeasement. Looking back now and being able to easily recognize all the horrible events of WWII and the crimes committed by the Nazis, it’s easy to criticize the Allied leaders and their choice to appease Hitler. I mean, what did they think they were doing giving Hitler free land without any opposition? Hadn’t they learned by now that when Germany showed aggressive attitude, it meant they were aiming for world domination? However, it’s not fair to criticize the decisions of the past without fully understanding the situation at the time.
SO WHAT DO I THINK?
In my opinion, appeasement was a huge mistake on the part of the Allied nations. I believe that appeasement is what caused WWII to occur on an even larger scale than WWI as it allowed Nazi Germany to gain an enormous amount of power, thus posing a threat to all of Europe. Appeasement encouraged Hitler’s aggression as he gained increased confidence after annexing each new piece of land without any intervention by the League of Nations.
The policy of appeasement is what allowed Hitler to successfully transfer troops to the Rhineland in 1936 which led to further military actions (e.g. the annexation of Austria). Hitler later said that the march into the Rhineland was one of the most stressful periods of his life since he knew that if the French opposed them they were not strong enough to put up a decent resistance and would have to withdraw. If the Allied nations had intervened at this point in time, then perhaps Germany’s increasing military aggression could have been suppressed and WWII could have been averted (or at least reduced in size). However, the policy of appeasement gave Hitler what he wanted and nurtured Germany’s confidence in Hitler’s plans of European domination.
“THE 48 HOURS AFTER THE MARCH INTO THE RHINELAND WERE THE MOST NERVE-RACKING OF MY LIFE. IF THE FRENCH HAD OPPOSED US THEN WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO WITHDRAW. OUR FORCES WERE NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO EVEN PUT UP WITH MODERATE RESISTANCE.” — Hitler, 1936
The annexation of new lands by Germany also contributed to the increase in German strength. For example, the Rhineland provided Germany with stronger defense of its borders and Austria provided Germany with gold, weapons, soldiers, and deposits of iron ore (which resulted in the increased production of munitions). All of these things that increased Germany’s strength were made possible by the policy of appeasement and contributed to the enormous scale of destruction in WWII when Germany clashed with the Allied powers.
I also believe that appeasement was a mistake because it provided the public, and even some politicians, with the misconception that peace was restored and war averted when Germany’s demands were met. This was preventing people from realizing Hitler’s true goals (world domination — as stated in Mein Kampf) and taking action to stop him earlier on. Appeasement was said to have been beneficial because it provided the Allies with more time to prepare for war. However, the idea that the Munich Agreement had restored peace fooled the Allies into a stagnant state since none of them were fully prepared for the war when it arrived. The Allied leaders had simply been tricked into a passive state by Hitler.
“THE SETTLEMENT OF THE CZECHOSLOVAKIAN PROBLEM, WHICH HAS NOW BEEN ACHIEVED, IS, IN MY VIEW, ONLY THE PRELUDE TO A LARGER SETTLEMENT IN WHICH ALL OF EUROPE MAY FIND PEACE…I BELIEVE IT IS PEACE FOR OUR TIME.” — Neville Chamberlain, Sep. 20, 1938, after his return from the conference in Munich
Furthermore, I think that appeasement was a mistake since it allowed Germany to make agreements with other countries (which Germany was NOT allowed to do according to the Treaty of Versailles), increasing German confidence in its military dominance. For example, nothing was done in 1936 when the Rome-Berlin Axis formalized the alliance between Italy and Germany. In addition, Germany and the Soviet Union signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact in 1939. This occurred because Russia observed that the allies had not stood up to Hitler when he had invaded Czechoslovakia, thus he thought that the allies would adopt the same nonchalance if Hitler attacked Russia. Therefore, the Nazi-Soviet Pact was made. This pact (in which Russia and Germany secretly agreed to divide Poland between them) permitted Germany to invade Poland, effectively starting WWII. It also increased Germany’s influence in Europe to the east and temporarily removed a major power from the Allied side. All of this contributed to the enlarged scale of destruction and death during WWII.
Therefore, I think that appeasement was a mistake since it failed to achieve its one goal; keep the peace.
BUT DID THE ALLIES HAVE ANY OTHER OPTION?
See this is the tricky part. All the stuff I’ve said above leaves out the fact that the Allied leaders were under a lot of pressure and they had very few options to get them out of a sticky situation. Plus, they were doing all they could to avoid another war like WWI.
“WHEN I THINK OF THOSE FOUR TERRIBLE YEAR [WWI], AND I THINK OF THE 7 MILLION YOUNG MEN WHO WERE KILLED, THE 13 MILLION WHO WERE WOUNDED, I FEEL IT WAS MY DUTY TO STRAIN EVERY NERVE TO AVOID A REPETITION OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR.” — Neville Chamberlain, 1938
Even if the Allied leaders themselves had decided earlier on that military action was necessary, it is quite likely that they wouldn’t have had enough volunteers to sustain a proper military campaign. The citizens of Allied nations mainly supported the policy of appeasement and were not willing to go to war over small, new, foreign lands that they had never heard of before in their lives. Furthermore, at that time many people didn’t see Hitler as a threat and very few outside of Germany knew what he was really planning (despite the fact that he had outlined many of his ideas in Mein Kampf).
“HITLER SEEMED TO BE A MAN OF DEEP SINCERITY AND A GENUINE PATRIOT. HITLER WAS A SIMPLE SORT OF PEASANT, NOT VERY INTELLIGENT AND NO SERIOUS DANGER TO ANYONE.” — Mackenzie King
In addition, during the 1930s, many people (including Canadians) had started accepting that the peace terms imposed on Germany through the Treaty of Versailles were too harsh. They thought that if Germany could regain its national pride and the territories it had lost after WWI then perhaps a war could be avoided. Therefore, considering the fact that Allied citizens didn’t support a war, it would have been the end of the Allied leaders’ political careers if they had made such an unpopular decision. In my opinion, perhaps it would have been possible to influence the public opinion through propaganda in order to garner support for stopping Hitler. Then maybe the Allies could’ve set up an armed force large enough to stop Hitler in the Rhineland (since his forces were weak there). However, the Allied leaders themselves had little idea of Hitler’s true intentions, so they likely had similar opinions to the public at the time and didn’t wish to engage in armed conflict.
Furthermore, the Allies had decreased their armies after the end of WWI while Germany had started doing just the opposite once Hitler came to power. Therefore, the Allies needed more time to build up their militaries before confronting the highly effective Wehrmacht and they gained this time through appeasing Hitler. Lastly, many people feared the communism that had taken hold in the Soviet Union. They believed that Nazi Germany was a necessary asset in holding back the communists from Europe and the rest of the world.
So, you can see that appeasement was quite popular for all the reasons discussed above. People didn’t yet understand the magnitude of Hitler’s plans for all of Europe and they feared the start of another world war. Thus, appeasement was seen as the only option that could keep the peace. If only the Allies had known what was coming…
WHY SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT APPEASEMENT?
It’s important for us to understand the policy of appeasement because it played a huge role in the outcome of WWII. It dictated when and how the war started and it likely influenced both the length and magnitude of the war (considering it took so long for the Allies to get involved). I think that it caused tensions to build up for far too long, thus resulting in a war that affected much of the globe. It’s also significant because it impacted much of the 20th century through the foreign relations that it created. I believe that the beginnings of tense Russian-American relations originated from the decision to appease Hitler. Appeasement resulted in the Nazi-Soviet Pact (as mentioned above) and this, in a way, put the Soviet Union against the Allies. It was simply the dire circumstances of the war that eventually threw them together. After the end of the war, these tensions increased, resulting in the Cold War and the deadly nuclear arms race that threatened world peace once again. It’s also important to understand the meaning of appeasement and the implications that it can have in order to properly assess and act on future world conflicts (while keeping the effects appeasement had on WWII in mind).
Written: Sunday, November 24th, 2013
