Analysis: Causes of the Conflict – Arguments that have been put forward as to

the outbreak of WWII

1. Aggression of Hitler (& Mussolini)

2. Fault of Britain & France

3. Circumstances of 1930 gave leaders no alternative to policies

4. Failure of Collective Security & League of Nations

5. Failings of Individual Statesmen

1. The outbreak of war was the fault of Hitler (and to a lesser extent Mussolini)

Germany Prior to Hitler Coming to Power

Justification that Hitler had little to

no respect for International Agreements

Evidence that supported the above view •The Holocaust - Liberation of the Concentration Camps (at the end of the war)• Documentary Evidence as to Hitler’s Guilt - Mein Kampf his intentions were spelt out; Hossbach Memorandum; minutes from the Wansee Conference• Aggressive Actions - Continual breaking of his word “I have no further territorial demands”

AFTER THE WARBritish

“We did all we could to avoid

war, look at Munich”

AFTER THE WARGermany

“The war & the camps? It was

Hitler & the Nazi’s, not our

fault”

All these reasons prove that Britain & France had no choice but to fight in 1939

2. The outbreak of the war was the fault of Britain & France

Hitler’s aggression cannot be questioned

Reason behind warThe weakness shown by other powers that allowed Germany to

grow in strength through one aggressive act after another

Examples of British Government’s inaction

• German rearmament – justified – name of equality & a fear of communism

• Hitler’s territorial claims – justified – unfairness of Versailles Treaty• British Armed forces allowed to run down – reached a point by

which standing up to Hitler was not an option• Chamberlain’s refusal to work with the Soviet Union – Stalin no

other choice but to sign the Nazi-Soviet Pact• Neglect of British defences in the 1930’s – lucky to stave off defeat

in 1940

View easy to argue • Self-evident nature of the examples of inaction• Opponents of appeasement (Churchill in particular) dominated historical debate after the war

3. The circumstances of the 1930’s gave western leaders no alternative to the policies they pursued

Condemning Appeasement was simplistic Didn’t take into

account the following

Baldwin & Chamberlain deserve credit rather than ridicule

- Attempting to maintain peace- preparing for war against the odds

• Britain’s strategic burden (1919-1939) – Commitments North Sea to Palestine to Singapore

• Military warned leaders that Britain could not take on Germany, Italy & Japan simultaneously – logical approach was appeasement (reduce potential enemies)

• Economic restraints restricted British options in dealing with Hitler• Chamberlain’s actions reevaluated – more positive

Evidence to support view

• Before 1914 – Britain kept out of European affairs - gets involved when Germany’s plan to dominate the continent became clear

• Before 1939 – Britain attempts hands-off approach - reluctantly involved when Germany’s plan to dominate Europe became clear

Traditional British Foreign Policy Approach

British passing the 30 Year Rule (1967) opened classified information

4. War resulted from the failure of the principle of Collective Security & the operation of the League of Nations

• Caused by forces of nationalism• Propaganda encouraged acceptance of nationalism• Death & destruction bred desire of security & revenge

- Collective Security based on principle of INTERNATIONALISM relied on the sacrifice of national interests for the common good- Factors in the inter-war period prevented this from eventuating

WWI prevented the principle of Internationalism from flourishing

Growth of far right nationalistic thinking & dictatorships

• Votes in the assembly & council needed to be unanimous• Disarmament encouraged – consistent with national safety

where one country was slightly stronger than its neighbour (self-interest rather than the greater good)

• Issues excluded from Leagues jurisdiction powers feared for their national interests

The League of Nations- Needed INTERNATIONALISM to succeed

- NATIONALISM was the driving force

5. War started in 1939 due to the failings of individual statesmen

• Hitler & Mussolini - Less than honest dealings, duplicitous- Opportunism did little create peace and a healthy international

environment (Stalin was also in that position)

• Britain did not possess strong decisive leaders - Baldwin admitted not pushing rearmament (1935 election) public

wouldn’t accept it- Rather than strengthen the League over Abyssinia Hoare & Mussolini

The Hoare-Laval Plan- Chamberlain’s insistence in pursuing appeasement no alternatives

bypassing advice of ministers and diplomats- Lord Halifax still trying to deal with Hitler in May 1940

“ … history is about activities of people not abstractions. Of course people make decisions within a context … But this context does not act as some directing or determining force. What makes history is the human capacity to exercise reason and thought.” GR Elton