NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... uarantee to Poland of military protection if Germany attacked. The British-French alliance pledged to aide Poland with all available power .".. in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence and which the Polish Government accordingly considered it vital to resist with their national forces. " Calvocoressi and Want point out that this is a reversal of British Foreign Policy. For twenty years she had avoided accepting responsibility for stability in Eastern Europe, but she was now accepting it. Appeasement was backfiring, as Chamberlain was getting in deep over his head and ended up having to defend Poland, which he had never been prepared to do.
Britain would need the help of the USSR - Poland's eastern neighbour - to make the guarantee effective. So, Britain and France negotiated with Stalin throughout the summer of 1939 - four months of complicated diplomatic manoeuvres. Chamberlain wanted to present Hitler with a solid diplomatic front against him. But he really distrusted the USSR and had not much confidence in her military strength. Stalin played along as he wanted time and space. Eventually he opted for the pact with Germany as the best way of protecting his own interests.
So this element of British foreign policy was gone. In fact the failure of the policy of appeasement to prevent war was shameful in that it was actually a cause of World War II. The British government even tried to appease Hitler economically. In the words of H. N. Brailsford England tried to buy peace, if possible, without direct loss to oneself.
Robert S Hudson, head of the English Board of Trade gave Hitler a billion-pound loan. Yet, a loan for defence weapons was denied to Poland who was arming to defend itself against Hitler. In an article entitled "England Shows Her Colours" it was stated, "Britain is not just being cowed by the aggressors: she consistently, in action, gives them assistance. " It seems that Chamberlains fear caused nearsightedness in that he acted at the moment weighing the long-term consequences of his actions. Then on the 1 st September 1939 Germany invaded Poland and on the 3 rd September Britain and France declared war on Germany.
The policy failed to avert war. Calvocoressi and Want say that Britain helped to bring about the war by not acting sooner. They suggest Britain should have acted over the Rhineland in 1936. But counter argument could be made that Britain and France would have helped unite the Germans behind Hitler if they had humiliated him at that stage. It is true that we know the German troops had instructions to withdraw if France fought - but it is arguable that the conflict would have been postponed. Britain should have defended Czechoslovakia in 1938 and 1939.
It would have been a quick war in 1938. There are arguments against this judgement too. We know that Hitler never intended a long war of the type that came. His preparations indicate that he expected a series of short campaigns rather than total war.
Action in 1938 might have led to this - a different war rather than no war. German generals were plotting to remove Hitler in 1938. If Britain and France had faced up to Hitler, the generals might have been successful, but there was no way of proving this. We can question the wisdom of Britain's actions, but there is no way of saying definitely that any other course of action would certainly have been better. The League of Nations had failed to restrain Hitler - it was powerless against any of its members who really wanted to break the rules.
Britain was in a somewhat similar situation. She made mistakes but also bought time in 1938 - 1939 which she used to rearm (the problem was that this also gave Hitler time). Basically, Britain's leaders were deeply anxious to avoid war and so were reluctant to believe that any responsible statesman would use war to get his own way and fulfil his aims. Britain treated Hitler as a responsible statesman and perhaps that was the biggest mistake of all. As we see Chamberlain trying desperately to stay out of war we also see a man compromising values because of fear.
The styles of Chamberlain as compared to Hitler is that of a weak child facing a bully. Hitler refused to back down while Chamberlain took giant steps backward giving Hitler more time. Chamberlains appeasement and hesitation allowed Hitler the badly needed time to better prepare himself for war. In a sense Chamberlain prolonged the war and allowed greater destruction that may have been avoided. The weight of destruction of Europe must weigh heavily on the conscience of the members of the British government because they know they may have been able to prevent some of the destruction and desolation caused by the war. In the late 1930 s, France was divided politically and was unwilling to act against Germany without Britain's help.
The USA was in splendid isolation, Italy was allied with Germany and the USSR was pursuing her own aims. Thus Britain dominated Europe's reaction to Hitler and has been accused of pursuing a course, which led to war. Undoubtedly, Britain's foreign policy has a part to play in the outbreak of war but there is a far wider range of issues to be considered as well. For instance, Hitler's policies as set out in "Mein Kampf", which included a desire to undo the Treaty of Versailles, for lebensraum and a Gro&# 946; deutschland, which ultimately resulted in the invasion of Poland and was equally as critical a factor in the outbreak of World War II. Ultimately, appeasement failed. The commencement of World War II forced the western allies to realise the flaws of the policy of appeasement.
Though appeasement appeared to be the solution to all problems, it ensured a peace that would have been very costly to maintain. To a great extent, appeasement was a course that tended to ignore some hard political ideas. The question of the Rhineland occupation presented differences in diplomatic procedures, testing the durability of the French-British alliance. The western Allies emerged from the war having defeated Hitler and his army in 1945, yet somehow, the word "winner" seems inappropriate. Bibliography: BIBLIOGRAPHY: &# 61607; Calvocoressi &Want Total War &# 61607; Clarke, Peter Hope and Glory - Britain 1900 - 1990 (1996) &# 61607; Fuchser, L.
W. Neville Chamberlain and Appeasement: A Study in the Politics of History (1982) &# 61607; Latin, A. Guilt at Versailles; Lloyd George and the Pre-history of Appeasement (1994) &# 61607; Rock, W. R. British Appeasement in the 1930 s (1977)
Free research essays on topics related to: world war ii, british foreign, britain and france, policy of appeasement, western allies
Research essay sample on World War Ii Britain And France
