To What Extent Was Appeasement Justified? - Essay Sample

Appeasement is a policy that involves settling global disputes through negotiations and conciliation to satisfy specific grievances. Appeasement is an easy way of avoiding material or political conflicts to a particular power which may lead to dangerous wars that may result in bloodshed and loss of resources. In the 1930s, several appeasements were conducted among the Germans, Britain, and France. The significant appeasement happened in 1938 where Britain gave Hitler Sudetenland located in Munich to avoid armed conflicts (Fleming 412-435). However, this issue has elicited many reactions among historians and social commentators on whether to justify appeasement or not. The paper analyses the reasons for and against justification of appeasement.

Firstly, European countries supported appeasement because they were still recovering from the Great Depression in the early 19th century. Britain in specific had experienced substantial economic problems such as inflation and unemployment hence wanted to avoid foreign involvement. According to Britain, delaying engaging in war with Hitler will enable chamberlain to prevent military funding and subsequently fund social issues in the country (Wark 545-562). This strategy worked well for Britain since they created humble time to increase their social welfare and improve the economy. However, they lacked behind in the military because Germans moved ahead to strengthen their military power and became ready for another war with European countries.

Another factor for appeasement is that many people feared war and had anti-war mindset following the negative consequences of the first world war. Politicians as well as citizens especially in Britain and USA supported international peace and advised against engaging in another costly warn (Schmidt 101-24). Similarly, several foreign sympathizers argued that the Germans were mistreated under the Treaty of Versailles. The British people felt that they should avoid going to war over the Rhineland because Germans had previously not been treated as a great power. Therefore, they choose to sign Anglo-German Naval agreement with Hitler in 1936 to avoid possible war over Hitlers remilitarization of Rhineland (Neumann 212-228).

Nevertheless, appeasement was justified based on the reason that the Germans were mighty especially after showing their military strength during the Spanish Civil War. The forces led destroyed the armies led by Franco, the Spanish leader hence showing how they can terrorize other countries in case of another war. Britain, in particular, were not ready for any military engagement since experienced slow rearmament compared to German counterparts. In this case, they delayed the second world war through engaging in appeasement with Hitler while secretly becoming armed and forming allies with Italy and Japan (Halperin 128-64). Eventually, they were ready for the war and finally defeated the Germans during the second world war.

However, several arguments have been made against justification of appeasement. The first argument is that reconciliation was morally wrong since it meant giving in to Hitlers demands even in circumstance his actions were questionable. For example, Hitler was allowed to break international agreements such as the Treaty of Versailles primarily because of fear of a possible outbreak of war. This action was criticized as a sign of weakness for both France and Britain because it led to illegal acquiring of other nations territories such as Czechoslovakia (Wark 545-562). Therefore, it benefited one country at the expense of the other hence causing diplomatic wars.

Secondly, appeasement makes dictators stronger. In this case, continuous appeasement of Britain to Germans made Hitler to grew stronger and powerful. Hitler used this advantage convince other countries like Austria to be their allies and provide them with more supplies and troops. Eventually, German forces grew stronger hence gaining confidence to attack Poland and other weak nations. Similarly, appeasement failed to stop the second world war has had been anticipated by Britain. It however fueled countries to engage in massive rearmament for upcoming international war in 1939 (Trubowitz et al. 289-311).

Finally, appeasement was found to be the main reason for misjudgment of Hitler by the European countries. Chamberlain failed to understand the intentions of Hitler since he viewed him as a typical leader who can be cooperative. He failed to see that by appeasing Hitler, it gave him the opportunity to do any harmful action towards Britain and other countries. Furthermore, appeasement contributed to Britain and France failure to take on Hitler despite having enough power (Robertson 196-234). For instance, they failed to stop Hitler during the disputes over reoccupation of Rhineland despite having a great opportunity. They instead cowardly signed the Anglo-German Naval Agreement because of fear of war. These among other reasons proved that appeasement made Hitler stronger and was the cause of the second world war (Stedman 83-99).

Conclusively, appeasement is still subject to debate because of adverse consequences it caused. In one hand, appeasement led to maintenance of peace and helped countries like Britain prepare for war. On the other hand, it made Hitler be ruthless and stronger thus causing more bloodshed, displacement, and destruction, especially to small countries. In general, appeasement should not have been justified because it makes dictators to be undefeatable and destroys peace in long-term.

Works Cited

Fleming, N. C. "Diehard Conservatives and the Appeasement of Nazi Germany, 19351940." History 100.341 (2015): 412-435.

Halperin, Sandra. "The politics of appeasement: the rise of the left and European international relations during the interwar period." Contested Social Orders and International Politics (1997): 128-64.

Neumann, Sigmund. "Europe before and after Munich: Random Notes on Recent Publications." The Review of Politics 1.2 (1939): 212-228.

Robertson, E. M. "Hitlers Planning for War and the Response of the Great Powers (193839)." Aspects of the Third Reich. Macmillan Education UK, 1985. 196-234.

Schmidt, Gustav. "The Domestic Background to British Appeasement Policy." The Fascist Challenge and the Policy of Appeasement (1983): 101-24.

Stedman, Andrew David. "A Most Dishonest Argument? Chamberlain's Government, Anti-Appeasers and the Persistence of League of Nations' Language Before the Second World War." Contemporary British History 25.01 (2011): 83-99.

Trubowitz, Peter, and Peter Harris. "When states appease: British appeasement in the 1930s." Review of International Studies 41.2 (2015): 289-311.

Wark, Wesley K. "Appeasement Revisited." The International History Review 17.3 (1995): 545-562.