Appeasement In The 1930's

962 Words4 Pages
Looking back at the early 1930’s, there are many people today who would criticize the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain with his policy of appeasement towards the Natzi leader, Adolf Hitler. Appeasement is defined as “the policy of acceding to the demands of a potentially hostile nation in the hope of maintaining peace.” However, historians now know that peace was never an option for the German leader. His invasion of the Rhineland and Austria was only the beginning; Hitler had his eyes set on Poland, Russia and eventually the world. Chamberlain has been heavily criticized for simply handing over the Sudetenland because this action showed that Hitler had the upper hand. It helped the Natzis become much more powerful, encouraged aggression,…show more content…
The British army was weak, financially struggling and had lost hundreds of thousands of men. The army would need more volunteers and very few were likely to step forward. The changes in tactics and technology is also a factor to take into consideration. Airplanes, tanks, dreadnoughts and machine guns were relatively new weapons entering this ancient game. If Britain hoped to gain the upper hand they would need to have not only a better strategy but also be appropriately equipped. Germany, unfortunately was already demonstrating impressive military might in Spain. Initially Germany had rejected the leaders of the military uprising request to help the military uprising during the Spanish civil war in the 1930’s but eventually Hitler relented and gave Germany’s support. This battles gave the dictator an excuse to test-run his army and leave a bold impression on the world. In addition, Hitler’s interference brought Germany closer to Italy, who was also supporting the military uprising,, ultimately befriending the Italians and gain a potential ally for his struggle against the British and the French. This friendship didn’t go unnoticed in the eyes of the allies and weariness began to
Open Document