appeasement interpretations

Question 1

interpretation 1: popular majority view (1937-38)

Answer 1

• most people approved of chamberlain’s actions
• he was treated like a hero when he returned to britain after signing the munich agreement: he received an estimated 40,000 letters and was applauded by the majority of parliament
• lord halifax, amongst other members, became a stronger supporters of appeasement than chamberlain himself
• the US ambassador to britain, joseph kennedy, was also a strong supporter of chamberlain’s policies

Question 2

context for popular majority view (1937-38)

Answer 2

• people wholeheartedly supported appeasement because they were haunted by the memories of WW1 and didn’t believe it was worth going to war over such a small, distant country like czechoslovakia

Question 3

impact of popular majority view (1937-38)

Answer 3

• the interpretation was short-lived as people began to feel bad about whta had happened in czechoslovakia and that britain had failed to stand up to hitler
• they also realised that the signing of the munich agreement only brought the chance of potential peace. they understood that chamberlain had not created lasting peace
• opinion polls at the time showed that the majority of the population didn’t trust hitler at all

Question 4

challenges to the popular majority view (1937-38)

Answer 4

winston churchill (1938):
- “we have suffered a total defeat…”
- “czechoslovakia will be engulfed in the nazi regime”
- “this is only the beginning of the reckoning”

the yorkshire post (1938):
- “by repeatedly surrendering to force, chamberlain has encouraged aggression”
- “policy throughout has been based on a fatal misunderstanding of the psychology of dictatorship”

Question 5

interpretation 2: popular and political view (1939-48)

Answer 5

• during WW2 a new view developed that appeasement was foolish, cowardly and immoral - it was widely accepted by politicians and the general public
• 1940 ‘guilty men’ written by cato (three authors) stated that the 1931 british leaders had made concessions to japan, italy and then germany which strengthened dictators and weakened britain. they had also ignored the dictators’ plans, failed to prepare britain for war and left the country vulnerable and defenceless.
• the book was key in the shift of attitude towards appeasement

Question 6

quotes supporting the ‘guilty men’ view

Answer 6

‘guilty men’ (1940):
- “how many warnings had previously been issued to britain? hitler himself had written it in mein kampf”
- “our rulers turned themselves to the task in a more leisurely manner”
- “the british government didn’t exert itself to any great extent in the arming of our country”

Question 7

context for the popular and political view (1939-48)

Answer 7

• many felt ashamed of what had happened in munich, especially when hitler invaded czechoslovakia and when war broke out.
• by this point, many wanted chamberlain to be ousted as PM so he resigned and was replaced by winston churchill
• the start of the war had been disastrous for the country after the evacuation of dunkirk

Question 8

impact of the popular and political view (1939-48)

Answer 8

• it had a huge impact as it helped churchill defeat halifax and carry on to become the undisputed leader of war policy
• however, the policy also played a huge hand in unseating churchill as the labour party argued that it was a conservative government that had been responsible for appeasement
• they used churchill’s own condemnation to condemn his conservative party and win the election + further damage chamberlain’s reputation
• the interpretation helped change the way people thought about appeasement and chamberlain in the long run. appeasement became something that no political leader ever wanted to be accused of

Question 9

challenges to the popular and political view (1939-48)

Answer 9

• at the time there were no challenges to the interpretation
• but later historians have been very critical of the interpretation as a piece of historical writing
  us historians frederik lovegall and kenneth osgood (2010): “munich” and “appeasement” have been among the dirtiest words in american politics.’
  harry truman (1948): “appeasement leads only to further aggression and ultimately to war”
  british historian derek dutton (2011): “it’s black and white depiction of complex issues shows no understanding of the dilemmas which confronted the policy makers of the1930s”
  historians argue that ‘guilty men’ is less accurate as an assessment of british political leadership in the 1930s than as a lasting influence on how people viewed appeasement

Question 10

interpretation 3: ‘orthodox’ view - churchill’s view (1948-60s)

Answer 10

• churchill was critical of appeasement but took a softer approach than ‘guilty men’. he didn’t say that chamberlain was weak or immoral. he argued that although chamberlain had good intentions, he completely miscalculated and misjudged hitler
• he claimed that chamberlain should’ve formed an alliance with france, the US and USSR to stop japan, italy and germany.
• churchill wrote all this in his book ‘gathering storm’ after losing the general election in 1945
• gathering storm (1948): “it is impossible for me not to refer to the long series of miscalculations and misjudgements which he made. the motives which inspired him have never been questioned.”

Question 11

context: orthodox view (1948-60s)

Answer 11

• the churchill factor; churchill was well known for his self promotion. he himself said in 1943 that ‘history will be kind to me as i will write history’. he was also disappointed that he lost the 1945 election and didn’t want his reputation to suffer at its expense
• the cold war; churchill was concerned about the USSR being a threat to the world and that the US and its allies should not make the same mistakes again instead of standing up to stalin.

Question 12

impact of the orthodox view (1948-60s)

Answer 12

• although churchill wasn’t the only one who had this view, his account became the accepted view - orthodox view - due to his prestige
• throughout the 1940s and 50s no historians challenged his account.
• gathering storm also became a tv doc series in the 1960s
• churchill influenced politicians like truman who took an aggressive stance against the USSR : the truman doctrine and JFK in 1962 in the missile crisis
• tony blair (2003) : “he was a good man who made a bad decision”

Question 13

challenges to the orthodox view (1948-60s)

Answer 13

• very few challenges at the time but later historians started to challenge churchill’s version of events
• british historian john charmley (2011): “churchill’s version of events is no more than an exercise in self-promotion”

Question 14

interpretation 4: academic revisionist view - rehabilitating chamberlain (1960s-90s)

Answer 14

• historians started revising the orthodox view in the 1960s
• ajp taylor argued (1961) that hitler did not have a clear plan in the 1930s, he simply took advantage of opportunities as they came along so chamberlain couldn’t be blamed not knowing what hitler aimed to do - most didn’t agree but it started the revisionist process
• historians carried out many studies in the 1960s to produce a revisionist view
• some argued that appeasement was the right policy because it bought britain time to build up its (air defence) forces. by 1939 people didn’t want war but were united against hitler so some historians went on to praise chamberlain for his handling of the situation
• british historian donald cameron watt (1965): “this is a welcome change from the dismissal of all those involved in appeasement as stupid, weak or ill-informed”
• ‘realities behind diplomacy’ british historian paul kennedy (1981): “appeasement was a natural policy for a small island state gradually losing its place in world affairs…and economic burdens… as a democracy (it) had to listen to the desire of its people for peace”
• ‘appeasement revisited’ david dilks (1972) “chamberlain’s policy sensibly became one of deterrence and resistance”

Question 15

context: revisionist view (1960s-90s)

Answer 15

• radical thinking: many traditional views in society were being questioned especially that of history where new ideas emerged
• vietnam war: 1960s - US’ dislike of appeasement dragged them into the vietnam war which suggested that appeasement may not have been a bad policy after all
• new british sources during the 1940s-50s historians relied on limited resources but in 1958 the government passed a public records act which meant that official government papers could be studied 30 after they were created. by the 1960s huge amounts of gov docs became available allowing more insight into the situation
  + economic problems: britain couldn’t afford a war so the treasury blocked chamberlain’s plans to increase britain’s armed forces
  + public opinion: chamberlain didn’t believe that people would support going to war in 1938
  + empire: it was struggling to hold its empire together and it faced problems in many of its colonies eg. the independence movement in india
  + fear of USSR: chamberlain was concerned about stalin, as well as hitler, was a threat to britain
  + USA: didn’t trust the usa much because it was still isolationist and not prepared to involve itself in european problems
  + the military: lack of confidence in their armed forces and unsure if they were a match for germany in 1938

Question 16

impact: revisionist view (1960s-90s)

Answer 16

• didn’t have a huge impact on politicians or the public view of appeasement
• it had a huge impact on professional historians for whom it sparked a debate for many decades

Question 17

challenges to the revisionist view (1960s-90s)

Answer 17

the academic counter-revisionist view was the one that re-evaluated this in the 1990s

Question 18

interpretation 5: counter-revisionist view (1990s-2000s)

Answer 18

• chamberlain overrated his own abilities and importance in thinking that he could talk hitler into being reasonable
• chamberlain completely failed to understand hitler because he was unable to change his own views about international relations
• chamberlain ignored the advice of many officials
• chamberlain did betray czechoslovakia in 1938 and should be held responsible

Question 19

context: academic revisionist view (1990s-2000s)

Answer 19

• historical debate: it is an academic historian’s job to disagree, challenge and refine previous interpretations . many disagreed with the revisionist because it let chamberlain off the hook
• new soviet sources: USSR docs became more available in 1989 + german docs which gave more of an insight into appeasement and dealings between hitler and chamberlain

Question 20

impact: counter-revisionist view (1990s-2000s)

Answer 20

• wasn’t as controversial as the orthodox view so didn’t have much of an effect on politicians or the public
• continued the debate amongst historians
• some revisionist historians, such as donald cameron watt, changed their view. he emphasised that as well as the revisionist factors, chamberlain’s behaviour and personality also was a part

Question 21

challenges: counter-revisionist view (1990s-2000s)

Answer 21

• some have question what other alternatives were available to chamberlain
• british historian paul kennedy (1993): “in seeking to explain appeasement, have also tended to justify it… by 1939 at least, makimg concessions to germany was neither as logical nor as natural as might have been the case in 1936” “increasingly viewed a policy that lacked practical wisdom and moral idealism”
• ‘alternatives to appeasement’ andrew stedman: “it is easy to criticise chamberlain from the sidelines . it was more difficult to suggest a constructive, coherent alternative”

Question 22

what did hitler gain during the period of appeasement?

Answer 22

• 1938: anschluss with austria, sudetenland, munich agreement
• 1939: naz-soviet pact, czechoslovakia, invasion of poland