When the word appeasement is mentioned, most people immediately remember British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain waving that paper in 1938, announcing he had brought home “peace for our time.” But there is more to that story than the single photo or speech.
If you are to realize why Britain had an appeasement policy, you need to trace your steps to the years following World War I.
The war had caused deep wounds—millions lost their lives, cities were destroyed, and economies were struggling. No one needed to experience such atrocities again. The British people, and even their leaders, simply wanted peace.
Meanwhile, Britain was not quite prepared for another large war. It had its military stretched to the breaking point, and it was still recovering from the Great Depression. So when Hitler began insisting on more land, a lot of Britons believed that appeasing some of his demands could prevent further conflict.
That way of thinking resulted in the Munich Agreement in 1938. Chamberlain sat down with Hitler, as well as with France and Italy, to resolve a crisis concerning an area of Czechoslovakia known as the Sudetenland.
Without Czechoslovakia even being involved in the negotiations, the others decided to let Hitler annex the territory, hoping to appease him and preserve the peace.
Chamberlain returned to triumphant crowds, clutching that now-famous paper. But the party soon ended. Only a few months later, Hitler occupied the remainder of Czechoslovakia, showing that he had no plan to stop. And in 1939, when he invaded Poland, Britain and France finally went to war.
Not all approved of appeasement. Winston Churchill, for instance, was one of the few people who cautioned that Hitler could not be trusted. Even some members of Chamberlain’s cabinet began to lose confidence when Hitler continued to push further.
Now, in retrospect, it’s simple to declare appeasement had been a failure—and in this instance, it was. But to his contemporaries, Chamberlain wasn’t being weak or foolish. He was attempting to keep his nation from relapsing into a horror. He honestly thought that peace was achievable.
Currently, appeasement is frequently mentioned when nations negotiate with belligerent leaders. Some argue that compromising emboldens bullies. Others opine that negotiation may sometimes stall for time or even avert disaster. The truth is most likely somewhere in between.
The Munich lesson isn’t simply a lesson about one bad bargain. It’s a lesson about how fear, hope, and not wanting to go to war can influence the decisions of leaders. It reminds us that foreign policy isn’t simply a matter of power—it’s also a matter of people, judgment, and timing.