L23: The Response to Nazi Foreign Policy Agenda Objectives: To understand… 1.The options facing Great Britain in 1938 in deciding how to deal with an increasingly aggressive Nazi foreign policy. 2.What the particular path chosen by Britain reveals about the state of the world in an era of totalitarianism. Schedule: 1.Introduction 2.Group work on Nazi Foreign Policy 3.Appeasement Discussion Homework 1.Work Day Tomorrow with me & Matt! Bring any materials needed 2.Unit Test & HW Due: Thurs 4/17 3.Final Paper Due: Thurs 4/17

Introduction

“The End of the Beginning…” Today is the final day of our unit on totalitarianism We will look at the international response to Nazi foreign policy between 1934 and 1938 Our class today is both an end and a beginning: –End our study of totalitarianism by looking at our last segment of Nazi life: foreign policy –“Begin” our study of World War Two, because Nazi foreign policy between 1933 and 1938 culminates with the outbreak of war in September 1939

Essential Questions for Today What were the options facing Great Britain in 1938 in deciding how to deal with an increasingly aggressive Nazi foreign policy? What does the particular path chosen by Britain reveal about the state of the world in an era of totalitarianism?

Foreign Relations and its Complexities: Britain and Germany 1938

Foreign Relations: 1938 In 1938, Great Britain was facing a foreign relations dilemma. To understand this dilemma you will work with a small group to identify the following: –Problem: Using your homework, identify the “top three” moments in Nazi Foreign policy between 1933 and Analyze the possible problems these foreign policy actions posed for Great Britain. –Possible Responses: Using the “fact packet” identify what you see as two viable responses for Great Britain in dealing with Nazi foreign policy between 1933 and Whole Class Discussion

The British Response: Appeasement

Appeasement The response that the British chose was to pursue a policy of appeasement. –“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.” Kennedy, Paul M. Strategy and Diplomacy, : Eight Studies. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983.

The Munich Pact British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain met with Hitler in 1938 following Hitler’s threat to invade the Sudetenland, an area of Czechoslovakia along the German border. Chamberlain promised that he would not stop Hitler from invading in the Sudetenland so long as Hitler signed a peace treaty between the United Kingdom and Germany. Hitler agreed. Following their meeting, Chamberlain returned to Britain boasting that he had achieve “peace for our time.” A year later, in 1939, war would be declared.

The (I)Rationality of Appeasement Was appeasement a rational or irrational decision given the reality of foreign relations in 1938? –Discuss this question with your group based on your prior analysis of foreign relations in –Whole class discussion

Appeasement and a Totalitarian World

The word appeasement has become synonymous with weakness and cowardice. –Many post-war historians denounced appeasement as an irrationally optimistic (hence naïve or dumb) strategy pursued by a weak politician who was afraid to stand up to an intimidating dictator. However, is it possible that Chamberlain’s appeasement, was not naivety, but rather a manifestation of the growing pessimism settling over an increasingly totalitarian world? –“Appeasement was a mood of fear…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.” Gilbert, Martin. The Roots of Appeasement. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, To conclude, what do you think appeasement says about the totalitarian world that we settled into by the late 1930s?