Name: Audrey Goh and Goh LiTing Class: 3 GY History CA 2 Performance Task 1
To what extent was Hitler’s foreign policy aim to be blamed for the outbreak of World War Two (WWII)?
Hitler’s foreign policy aim is to be blamed for the outbreak of WWII to a large extent. His policy aim was the main cause of his acts of aggression towards other countries, provoking war. The Policy of Appeasement was only a response to Hitler’s actions but it encouraged him to take more gambles, making war even more likely. The weaknesses and failure of the League of Nations also gave Hitler more confidence in carrying out aggressive actions and ensured an easy path for Hitler.
Firstly, according to Hitler, the aggressive foreign policy was “preparation for war and war itself”.[1] Hitler’s foreign policy of creating a Greater Germany and Lebensraum, and abolishing the harsh Treaty of Versailles (TOV) gave rise to his use of violent means to achieve his aims, which brought the world closer to war. For example, rearmament in 1935, the occupation of the demilitarised Rhineland in 1936, the reunification with Austria in 1938, the annexation of Sudetenland in 1938 and the invasion of the rest of Czechoslovakia and Poland in 1939 were actions of attaining territory and clear violations of TOV.
Hitler’s actions were inevitably pointing towards war as he violated the sovereignty of Austrian, Czechoslovakia and Poland. At that time, Hitler kept expanding and it seemed like he had no intention to stop his conquest for new territory; Germany was becoming too powerful and posed a dangerous threat to the other countries. Hitler also showed that he wanted to got to war and was already preparing for war by rearming and reintroducing conscription. Hitler’s foreign policy aims created tensions and conflict, causing deteriorating relations between Germany and its eastern neighbours, making war very likely. Therefore, when Germany invaded Poland, it was the last straw to Britain and France and in 1939, Europe was plunged into war. Hence, Hitler’s foreign policy aim had soured relations with other countries so much that it provoked WWII.
Secondly, the Policy of Appeasement entailed war on a grander scale as it emboldened Hitler to take more gambles and fuelled his insatiable appetite for more territories and a stronger military force. Britain and France failed to take action against Germany several times such as during rearmament and the occupation of the Rhineland and Austria. Originally, Hitler wanted only certain parts of the Sudetenland. However, he changed his mind later and wanted all of the Sudetenland. Britain and France eventually gave in to Hitler’s demand and in 1938, signed the Munich Agreement, giving the Sudetenland to Germany. Also, during the period of Appeasement, in 1939, Germany and USSR signed the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. With the guarantee of Russian Neutrality in the event of war, Hitler was more willing to risk war knowing that Germany would not have to fight war on two fronts. The Policy of Appeasement bought Germany precious time and with hindsight, it allowed her to grow too strong and much more powerful than Britain or France—Appeasement was counter-productive and only further encouraged Hitler to be more aggressive and willing to wage war.[2]
The Policy of Appeasement allowed Hitler to take advantage of Britain’s and France’s passivity and reassert German strength. Hence, Appeasement made war more inevitable as it allowed Germany to grow so powerful that the only way to stop her was through war.
Lastly, the weakness of the League of Nations and its incapability to prevent and stop acts of aggression encouraged Hitler to take risks and defy the League. The League had an ineffective system of collective security and a reluctant, half-hearted attitude when it came to curbing acts of aggression. During the Manchurian Incident from 1931 to 1932, the League only ordered a moral condemnation of Japan but was unwilling and reluctant to take firm, decisive actions against Japan. Hence, Japan continued her conquest and succeeded. Also, during the Abyssinian Crisis from 1935 to 1936, the League condemned Italy and introduced half-hearted sanctions, but they were abandoned after a few weeks. Eventually, Italy completed the conquest and the League was successfully flouted.
Italian dictator Benito Mussolini stated that “The League is very well when sparrows shout, but not good at all when eagles fall out.”[3] The League’s failure to curb acts of aggression also convinced Hitler that it was too weak to take swift and firm actions against powerful aggressor countries for fear of angering the country and provoking war. The League only had a rather “porous system of sanctions”[4] and lacked an armed force of its own. Hence, the League could only introduce economic sanctions and could not impose its resolutions if a country chose to ignore it.[5] Furthermore, members of the League were too self-interested and were unwilling to execute actions, as seen during the Manchurian Incident and the Abyssinian Crisis. This also made Hitler confident that the League would be unwilling to take action and risk war against such a powerful force like Germany. Hence, Hitler was further encouraged by Japan and Italy’s success to carry out his plans and defy the League, and made him certain that he would be able to get away easily with his actions. The weakness and failure of the League cleared a path for Hitler to carry out his plans smoothly and conveniently, eventually provoking WWII.
Hitler’s foreign policy aim is still to be blamed for the outbreak of WWII to a large extent. Hitler tried to achieve his foreign policy aim through violent and aggressive means towards other countries, which led to deteriorating relations between Germany and the other countries, causing rising tensions and making war very likely. The Policy of Appeasement was merely a response to the German aggression that further encouraged Hitler to take huge gambles and resulted in a greater war, but it was not the main cause of the outbreak WWII. The weakness and failure of the League only further encouraged Hitler to carry on with his plans, made matters easier for Hitler and showed that the League was unwilling to take actions, fearing that it would be risking war. Hitler, on the other hand, having imposed an aggressive foreign policy, was already determined to start a war. Therefore, seeing as the aggressive foreign policy was the most significant cause in causing the German aggression and hence, WWII, Hitler’s foreign policy aim is to be blamed for the outbreak of WWII to a large extent.
1052 words
Bibliography
Yeo, L. and Arasumani, R. (2007) Crisis and conflict: An Inquiry Approach to Modern World History Textbook. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Education. Chapter 6
Walsh, B. (2001) GCSE Modern World History (2nd edition). London: John Murray Publishers. Chapter 9
Lowe, N. (2005) Mastering Modern World History (4th edition). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 46-48
Leitz, C. (2004) Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933-1941: The Road to Global War (1st edition). London: Routledge. Chapter 1
“Hitler’s aims and actions”:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir1/hitlersaimsandactionsrev1.shtml (accessed 17th May 2009)
“The Elusiveness of Trust: the experience of Security Council and Iran”: http://www.transnational.org/Area_MiddleEast/2008/Jahanpour_SC-Iran.pdf (accessed 21st June 2009)
[1] Leitz, C. (2004) Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933-1941: The Road to Global War (1st edition). London: Routledge, p. 1
[2] Walsh, B. (2001) GCSE Modern World History (2nd edition). London: John Murray Publishers, p. 264
[3] “The Elusiveness of Trust: the experience of Security Council and Iran”: http://www.transnational.org/Area_MiddleEast/2008/Jahanpour_SC-Iran.pdf (accessed 21st June 2009)
[4] Leitz, C. (2004) Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933-1941: The Road to Global War (1st edition). London: Routledge. p.21
[5] Lowe, N. (2005) Mastering Modern World History (4th edition). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 47