- The 1930s was a decade of increasing tension and conflict in Europe and the Far East.

Few were
surprised when war broke out again in September 1939.
- The first major aggression had come with Japan’s invasion of Manchuria in 1931. Over the course of
next 8 years Abyssinia, China, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Memel, Albania, and Poland fell victim to the
ambitions of Italy, Germany, and Japan.
- Yet in the mid to late 1920s, everything looked very different. The LON seemed to be finding its feet
and series of international agreements such as Locarno and Kellogg-Briand pact were made to bring
peace. Something had gone very wrong.

What were the long-term consequences of the peace treaties of 1919-1923?

(i) Dissatisfied powers
- Japan was disappointed because its idea for a racial equality clause had been rejected at the Paris
Peace Conference and it had expected to receive a greater share of Germany’s former trading rights in
China
- Italy had hoped to receive the Adriatic port of Fiume and a greater share of the former colonies of
Germany and Turkey
- Germany objected to just about every aspect of the TOV – the territorial provisions, the disarmament
clauses, war guilt, and reparations
- The dissatisfied powers were likely to seek peace settlement changes when the circumstances were
favourable. Germany’s dissatisfaction was sharpened by the conviction among many that it had been
‘stabbed in the back’ in 1918
(ii) Germany’s potential
- Not only did the TOV leave Germany dissatisfied, it also failed to disable her and prevent her from
growing into a powerful European state
- Despite the fact that German loss was great (territories including colonies), she was still left with
considerable resources
- It was a combination of Germany’s dissatisfaction with Versailles together with its ability to bring
about a revision of the settlement that proved to be so dangerous
(iii) Hitler’s foreign policy
- Destruction of the Versailles Settlement provided Hitler with a foreign policy agenda
- Hitler’s foreign policies made in 1933-Sept 1939 were all violating the terms of TOV and Treaty of
Saint-German
- E.g.
- German rearmamment and the remilitarisation of Rhineland
- The Anschluss or union with Russia
 - The transfer of the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia
- The occupation of Prague
- The seizure of Memel
- Claims made over Danzig and the Polish Corridor
- As a result, TOV was detested by the Germans and Hitler could ensure his popularity
(v) Impact on British and French opinion
- TOV made impact on Germany, yet impacted British and French as well
- To begin with, British was happy with the hard TOV on Germany, however, they started to say that the
treaty had been way too harsh, and wanted to assist Germany to achieve peaceful revision of the
treaty
- France was not happy as she thought TOV is not being harsh enough to completely disable German. By
mid-1930s, it was certain that Hitler is seeking to overturn the peace settlement → As France was not
confident to stand up to Hitler on their own, they acted in partnership with Britain
(vi) A settlement inconsistencies
- The TOV had created a whole series of inconsistencies and anomalies
- Separation of East Prussia from the main bulk of German territory by the Polish Corridor
- The placing of Danzig, overwhelmingly populated by Germans, under LON’s control
- The placing of three and half million Germans under Czech rule in the Sudeten
- Germany resented, and British felt bad and thought these should be peacefully settled

What were the consequences of the failures of the League in the 1930s?
- After the WW1, LON was established with the purpose of preserving the world peace through
collective security
- Yet within 6 years, LON was doomed due to Great depression, followed by Japanese invasion of
Manchuria, and the Italian invasion of Abyssinia
(i) Manchuria
- When Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931, it was the first time the LON has faced challenges from great
power
- When the LON failed to take any effective action, Japan noticed that without the membership of US or
Soviet Russia, LON can’t do shit about its expansion at the expense of China
- Soviet Russia joined the league in 1934, and Stalin’s priority was to reform agriculture and industries
→ No obstacles to prevent Japan from doing whatever they wanna do → Invasion of China continued
in 1937
- For both Italy and Germany, Manchuria was an encouraging source that had proven the feasibility of
territorial expansion. → But it would take a successful European challenge to the LON to give
Mussolini and Hitler sufficient confidence to take action
(ii) Abyssinia
- Italy invaded Abyssinia in Oct 1935 → LON imposed economic sanctions yet didn't care about the key
commodities such as coal and oil (Hoare-Laval pact of Dec 1935 confirmed this impression) →
Mussolini and Hitler was happy to prove that LON is ineffective and it is impossible to put
internationalism ahead of national interests = Mussolini was likely to show more aggression and Hitler
was likely to use its policies to destroy TOV

The failure of the league and rearmament

- The failure of the League also affected the thoughts and actions of Britain and France. Although they
had never placed so much confidence in the League, it was now obvious that collective security was
dead and that alternative means had to be found to preserve peace
- They decided to rearm to deter Germany and Italy from taking further action
- Rearmamanet was not happening before as..
 - Due to recession, money was scarce
- Both B and F had used collective security as an excuse for underspending on arms
- Public opinions was firmly against the major arms spending, as they had faith in the LON

The failure of the League and appeasement

- By the summer of 1936 it was clear that rearmament was a top priority, but it was unlikely to preserve
world peace on its own as B and F will take some time to fully rearm.
- Therefore, while rearming, policy of appeasement was adopted towards the dictators. (can say that
rearmament and appeasement were the results of failure of LON)
Rhineland
- Rhineland had been declared a demilitarised zone by the TOV
- For Germany, demilitarisation of Rhineland was a big problem as the western armies could invade, just
like the incident in Jan 1923
- With two divisions of troops a possible opposition force of two hundred divisions, German forces
marched into the Rhineland in March 1936
- As Hitler predicted, B and F were not eager to war over this issue as Rhineland was regarded as
Germany’s backyard, and both B and F leaders did not want to risk the peace over whether or not
German troops should be allowed to occupy part of their own country (F was in financial crisis and
was facing election in six weeks’ time)
- Hitler followed his Rhineland triumph with further promises of peaceful intentions, suggesting a
25-year non-aggression pact with the western powers

The Spanish civil war, 1936-39 (battle between diff ideologies: Nationalists and republicans)
- In July 1936, General Franco started the civil war when he led a right-wing revolt against the
democratically elected, republican government of the popular front
- Hilter, along with Mussolini, decided to support his fellow fascist (Franco) while Stalin (Soviet Russia)
supported republicans
- Nationalists won and Franco established a fascist-style government giving advantage to Hitler.
The Anti-Comintern pact, November 1936
- This was a pact signed by Germany and Japan in 1936, with Italy joining in November 1937.
- The agreement was nominally directed against the Comintern, the Soviet agency for promoting
communist revolution abroad.
- The real purpose of the treaty was to ensure that neither Germany nor Japan would assist Soviet
Russia if the latter attacked either country.

The Anschluss, March 1938

- One of the Hiteler’s foreign policy aims was to include all German-speaking peoples in the Reich so as
to form greater Germany → large number of Germans were in Austria (7million)
- However the Union between G and A had been forbidden by TOV
- The problem was Italy. Italy regarded Austria as the sphere of influence and had authorised military
movements in 1934 to prevent Union between G and A
- However Hitler’s relationship with Mussolini got better since 1934 and Hitler was in stronger
military/diplomatic position
- In Feb 1938 a meeting took place between Hitler and the Austrian Chancellor Schuschingg to discuss
the persecution of Austrian Nazis by Austrain gov forces
- During the meeting Schuschnigg was bullied by Hitler into appointing Seyss-Inquart (leading Austrian
Nazi) as a minister of Interior
- Suspecting that Hitler is trying to destroy the Austrian independence, Schuschnigg decided to hold a
plebiscite on this issue on 13 March
- When Hitler found out this he demanded Schuschnigg’s resignation and his replacement by
Seyss-Inquart, making him the chancellor
- Along with the support of Mussolini, Hitler ordered the German army into Austria on 12 March 1938
proclaiming the Anschluss to have taken place. Plebiscites held in the early April confirmed these
events in both Austria and Germany, with overwhelming numbers of votes in the favour of the union
- Aunschluss made allowed Hitler to expand territory, population and resources, adding to Germany’s
military capacity. He had also increased confidence to stand up to France and Britain as those to did
nothing but to protest against German actions of Anschluss (as F and B did not have the support of
Italy)

Sudetenland
Sudetenland was populated by large numbers of Germans, and was located near to Czechoslovakia which Hitler
did not like cuz
(i) It was a creation of Treaty of Saint German which is a part of the TOV’s settlements
(ii) It had an alliance with Soviet Russia and France
(iii) Had a democratically elected government
Munich Agreement
Two summit meetings took place between the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and Hitler before the
Munich conference

Then the Munich conference took place

Was the policy of appeasement justified?
(i) Correcting injustices of Versailles
- Many thought that TOV was too harsh to Germany by 1930s. While no one liked Hitler’s bullying
methods there was some sympathy for his main demands.
- Few thought it is unreasonable that Germany should be allowed the means to defend itself, secure its
frontiers, or make common cause with the substantial pockets of German living under foreign rule
- Until March 1939 there was a good reason to accept Hitler’s demands while deploring his diplomatic
behaviour
- A strong-arm approach would have run the risk of upsetting the public opinion, offending British
Dominions, who supported the notion of self-determination, and intensifying German sense of
injustice
(ii) Increasing militarism in Italy and Japan
- During the late 1930s, Italy invaded Abyssinia, Japan invaded Manchuria, and Italy supported Franco in
Spanish Civil war
- It was likely that British will be in the war with Italy, Japan, Germany with only France as a major ally
→ British though they cannot win such a war
- Appeasement reflected Britain’s military weakness (seemed unwise to issue threats which could not
be backed by adequate force. Meanwhile, Britain gained valuable time to rearm.
How important was the Nazi-Soviet pact?
Why did Britain and France declare war on Germany in September 1939?