study guides for every class

that actually explain what's on your next test

Policy of Appeasement

from class:

AP World History: Modern

Definition

The Policy of Appeasement refers to the diplomatic strategy adopted by European powers, particularly Britain and France, in the lead-up to World War II, aimed at preventing conflict by conceding to some of the demands made by aggressive states, notably Nazi Germany. This approach was rooted in the desire to maintain peace and stability in Europe after the devastation of World War I, but ultimately failed to stop further aggression and contributed to the outbreak of the war.

Historical Context

The policy of appeasement is most closely associated with the European diplomatic strategies in the 1930s, particularly those of Britain and France towards Nazi Germany. Key figures such as British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain sought to prevent another catastrophic conflict after World War I by conceding to some of Adolf Hitler's demands, including allowing Germany's annexation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia following the Munich Agreement of 1938.

Historical Significance

The policy of appeasement is widely criticized for emboldening Hitler and failing to prevent World War II. Its failure demonstrated that aggressive dictatorships could not be placated through concessions. The term now generally conveys a negative implication about negotiating with aggressive powers and has influenced subsequent foreign policies, making leaders more wary of making concessions to potential aggressors. It underscores a pivotal lesson about the importance of confronting threats early on, shaping international relations theory and practice.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

  1. The Policy of Appeasement was largely driven by the memories of World War I, as many leaders believed that satisfying Germany's demands could prevent another devastating conflict.
  2. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain is often associated with this policy, famously claiming that the Munich Agreement would bring 'peace for our time.'
  3. The strategy ultimately emboldened Adolf Hitler, leading to further invasions and territorial expansions by Germany, including Poland in 1939.
  4. Critics of appeasement argue that it allowed totalitarian regimes to gain strength and territory without facing significant opposition from major powers.
  5. The failure of appeasement is often cited as a significant factor that led to the widespread acceptance of the necessity for military intervention during World War II.

Review Questions

  • How did the Policy of Appeasement influence international relations leading up to World War II?
    • The Policy of Appeasement significantly influenced international relations by encouraging aggressive states like Nazi Germany to pursue expansionist policies without fear of significant backlash. By conceding to Hitler's demands, such as in the Munich Agreement, European powers believed they were preserving peace. However, this approach ultimately failed as it emboldened further aggression, contributing directly to the outbreak of World War II.
  • Evaluate the effectiveness of the Policy of Appeasement in preventing conflict during the 1930s.
    • The effectiveness of the Policy of Appeasement is widely debated. While it initially delayed conflict and reflected a desire for peace after World War I, it ultimately proved ineffective as it allowed aggressive regimes to grow stronger. The concessions made did not address underlying tensions and only encouraged further territorial ambitions, culminating in a more extensive conflict than might have occurred had stronger measures been taken against aggression.
  • Assess the long-term consequences of the Policy of Appeasement on post-World War II foreign policy strategies.
    • The long-term consequences of the Policy of Appeasement led to a reevaluation of foreign policy strategies among major powers after World War II. The failure to contain aggressors through appeasement fostered a commitment to collective security and proactive measures against threats, exemplified by institutions like NATO. The lessons learned emphasized the need for vigilance and intervention rather than concessions, influencing global diplomacy and military strategies throughout the Cold War and beyond.
© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.
AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.