Appeasement

From Encyclopedia Jr, free information reference for Kids

Appeasement is a policy of accepting the imposed conditions of an aggressor in lieu of armed resistance, usually at the sacrifice of principles. Since World War II, the term has gained a negative connotation, in politics and in general, of weakness, cowardice and self-deception.

[edit] Different views on appeasement

The meaning of the term "appeasement" has changed throughout the years. According to Paul Kennedy in his Strategy and Diplomacy, 1983, appeasement is "the policy of settling international quarrels by admitting and satisfying grievances through rational negotiation and compromise, thereby avoiding the resort to an armed conflict which would be expensive, bloody and possibly dangerous."

Further quotations:

"At bottom, the old appeasement was a mood of hope, Victorian in its optimism, Burkean in its belief that societies evolved from bad to good and that progress could only be for the better. The new appeasement was a mood of fear, Hobbesian in its insistence upon swallowing the bad in order to preserve some remnant of the good, pessimistic in its belief that Nazism was there to stay and, however horrible it might be, should be accepted as a way of life with which Britain ought to deal." Martin Gilbert, The Roots of Appeasement, 1968.

"Each course brought its share of disadvantages: there was only a choice of evils. The crisis in the British global position by this time was such that it was, in the last resort, insoluble, in the sense that there was no good or proper solution." Paul Kennedy, Strategy and Diplomacy, 1983.

"The word in its normal meaning connotes the pacific settlement of disputes; in the meaning usually applied to the period of Chamberlain's premiership, it has come to indicate something sinister, the granting from fear or cowardice of unwarranted concessions in order to buy temporary peace at someone else's expense." D.N. DIlks, Appeasement Revisited, Journal of Contemporary History, 1972.

[edit] Appeasement of Hitler

Main article: Appeasement of Hitler

By far the most well-known case of appeasement is one which ultimately failed — the appeasement of Adolf Hitler's Germany by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's government in the late 1930s. The Munich Agreement in particular stands as a major example of appeasement. There is, however, a large historiographical debate about appeasement.

[edit] Peace for our time

Main article: Peace in our time

Chamberlain holds the paper containing the resolution to commit to peaceful methods signed by both Hitler and himself on his return from Germany at Croydon Airport in September 1938. He said:

My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time.

Chamberlain's peace for our time deal (i.e. the surrender of the Sudetenland to Germany) with Hitler was internationally acclaimed and praised at home and abroad, by among others Pope Pius XI, Ireland's Eamon de Valera, the United States administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Canada's Mackenzie King. Chamberlain was acclaimed by many British people for avoiding another war. He was greeted by cheering crowds on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, alongside King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, who themselves supported his policy, both having lost friends and relatives in the last war.

[edit] Appeasement's effect on the Second World War

It has been argued that if an overly belligerent war enthusiasm had produced the mass slaughter of World War I, then the resulting determination to avoid war at all costs in the 1930s proved equally counterproductive, with Europe's failure to oppose Hitler leading him to be more aggressive. However, fear of war also motivated the German Army, which at several points was on the verge of removing Hitler because he was too belligerent. It is both unclear if earlier military actions would have been any more effective, or even if they could reasonably have taken place, and these assumptions are entirely dependent on hindsight and speculation.

It is also possible that west Europe's failure to oppose Hitler was more than simple appeasement. After Hitler rose to power in 1933, it is not altogether credible that the governments of Britain or France thought Hitler could be appeased into peaceful co-existence. After all, the Munich Pact followed the rejection of Stalin’s two attempts (in 1934 and 1937) to form an alliance with France and Britain against both Germany and Japan. Taken in this context it is possible to read Munich as a cynical attempt to turn Hitler’s aggression east giving the west more time to prepare for inevitable war and, in the meantime, killing off millions of Germany’s troops as well as millions of Soviet troops. Among other things, such an interpretation suggests additional motivations behind the 1939 Hitler/Stalin pact.

[edit] Appeasement of terrorists

On July 13, 2006, Senior Bharatiya Janata Party leader Keshri Nath Tripathi blamed the "politics of appeasement" for the 11 July 2006 Mumbai train bombings. ^[1]

[edit] References

[edit] Bibliography

• Alex Alexandroff and Richard Rosecrance, "Deterrence in 1939," World Politics 29 (1977)
• Robert J. Beck, "Munich's Lessons Reconsidered," International Security 14 (1989) in JSTOR
• John Charmley, Chamberlain and the Lost Peace (1989)
• Richard Cockett, Twilight of Truth: Chamberlain, Appeasement, and the Manipulation of the Press (1989).
• Oliver J. Y. Denton, Appeasing Times: Geoffrey Dawson, The Times and the Appeasement of Nazi Germany 1936-1940 (2006).
• Christopher Hill, Cabinet Decisions on Foreign Policy: The British Experience, October 1938-June 1941 (1991)
• James Levy. Appeasement and Rearmament: Britain, 1936-1939, (2006)
• Frank McDonough, Richard Brown, and David Smith. Hitler, Chamberlain and Appeasement (2002)
• Peter Neville. Hitler and Appeasement: The British Attempt to Prevent the Second World War (2005)
• Gaines Post Jr.; Dilemmas of Appeasement: British Deterrence and Defense, 1934-1937 Cornell University Press. 1993
• G. C. Peden, "A Matter of Timing: The Economic Background to British Foreign Policy, 1937-1939," History 69 (1984)
• Stephen R. Rock. Appeasement in International Politics (2000)
• Donald Cameron Watt, How War Came: The Immediate Origins of the Second World War, 1938-1939 (1989).
• Robert Paul Shay, Jr., "British Rearmament in the Thirties: Politics and Profits" Princeton University Press" (1977).

[edit] See also

• Finlandization - the influence that one neighboring powerful country can have on the policies of a smaller nearby country

[edit] External links

• Eulogy for Neville Chamberlain by Winston Churchill
• "Then and now, evil always wants more" by Max Boot, published in the LA Times July 14, 2005
• "Appeasement Then and Now" by Jamie Glazov, published in FrontPage Magazine December 13, 2002

[edit] Useful textbooks (especially A-level-oriented)

• British Foreign and Imperial Affairs, 1919-39 - Alan Farmer (2nd Ed.)
• British Foreign Policy 1919-39 - Paul W Doerr
• British Appeasement in the 1930s - William R Rock
• Churchill - Roy Jenkins
• Baldwin - Roy Jenkins
• Anthony Eden: A Life and Reputation - David Dutton
• Eden - D. R. Thorpe
• Europe and the Czechs - Penguin Books Shiela Grant Duff, September 1938
• Neville Chamberlain - David Dutton
• The Fascist Challenge And The Policy Of Appeasement edited by Wolfgang J. Mommsen and Lothar Kettenacker, London : G. Allen & Unwin, 1983 ISBN 0-04-940068-1.
• The Parting of Ways - A Personal Account of the Thirties. Peter Owen, 1982, ISBN 0-7206-0586-5
• Munich : Prologue to Tragedy - Sir John Wheeler-Bennett, New York : Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1948.