OCR Specification focus:
‘appeasement policies of Britain and France; the Spanish Civil War and its impact on international relations’
Introduction
The policy of appeasement, central to British and French diplomacy in the 1930s, reflected caution, weakness, and hopes of preventing conflict while balancing domestic and international pressures.
Appeasement Policies of Britain
The Meaning of Appeasement
Appeasement was the diplomatic strategy of conceding to some demands of aggressive powers to maintain peace and avoid another major war.
Appeasement: A policy whereby states concede to the demands of a potential aggressor to preserve peace and stability.
This policy was most strongly associated with British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in the late 1930s, though it began earlier under his predecessors.
Chamberlain and Daladier meet Hitler and Mussolini at Munich in September 1938 to manage the Sudeten crisis. The scene typifies the diplomatic style and aims of appeasement. Source
British Motivations
Britain’s approach to appeasement arose from multiple domestic and international factors:
Memories of the First World War, which fostered a determination to avoid another devastating conflict.
Economic weakness following the Great Depression, limiting military spending.
Public opinion, which strongly favoured peace over confrontation.
Imperial commitments, stretching British resources across Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.
Strategic under-preparedness, particularly in air defence, which gave urgency to buying time for rearmament.
Key Features of British Appeasement
Willingness to negotiate with Germany and Italy rather than oppose them militarily.
Acceptance of limited territorial changes, so long as they were seen as justified (e.g., revising the Treaty of Versailles).
Reliance on international agreements, such as the Kellogg-Briand Pact and the Locarno Treaties, to maintain peace.
Appeasement Policies of France
French Position and Constraints
France, more directly threatened by Germany, faced a different situation from Britain.
Geographical vulnerability made French policymakers highly security-conscious.
Political instability weakened France’s ability to adopt consistent foreign policy.
Reliance on alliances with smaller Central and Eastern European states, the Little Entente, proved ineffective.
The French economy, strained by the Depression, could not sustain long-term rearmament at sufficient scale.
French Strategy
France supported appeasement largely in coordination with Britain, unwilling to act alone against Germany or Italy.
French governments were wary of aggressive policies without full British support.
The Maginot Line symbolised French defensive strategy, focusing on fortification rather than offensive deterrence.
The Spanish Civil War and International Relations
Outbreak of the Conflict
The Spanish Civil War (1936–1939) broke out when right-wing Nationalists, led by General Francisco Franco, rebelled against the elected left-wing Republican government. It quickly became an international conflict due to foreign intervention.
General map of the Spanish Civil War indicating initial Nationalist zones and subsequent advances, with Republican areas and major fronts. Source
Britain and France: The Policy of Non-Intervention
Britain and France both adopted a Non-Intervention Policy in August 1936, establishing the Non-Intervention Committee.
Their motivations included:
Preventing escalation into a wider European war.
Avoiding direct involvement in ideological conflict between fascism and communism.
Fear that intervention could destabilise their own domestic politics.
In practice, the policy failed because Germany and Italy supported Franco, while the Soviet Union aided the Republicans.
Impact on Britain and France
The conflict exposed the weakness and ineffectiveness of appeasement in practice.
Britain and France appeared passive, allowing fascist powers to grow bolder.
Public opinion in both countries became polarised:
Left-wing groups strongly supported the Republicans.
Right-wing voices often sympathised with Franco.
Wider International Impact
The Spanish Civil War became a testing ground for new military technology, especially the German Luftwaffe’s Condor Legion, which carried out the bombing of Guernica in 1937.
Ruins in Guernica following the 1937 raid by the Condor Legion, exemplifying the civilian devastation that shaped international opinion. The image highlights air power’s role and the weakness of non-intervention. Source
It strengthened ties between Germany and Italy, paving the way for the Rome-Berlin Axis (1936).
The USSR’s involvement deepened fears of communism in Western Europe, which reinforced appeasement towards fascist states.
The Interconnection Between Appeasement and the Spanish Civil War
Diplomatic Consequences
By refusing to intervene decisively, Britain and France demonstrated their unwillingness to confront fascist aggression.
Appeasement in Spain emboldened Hitler and Mussolini, reinforcing the perception that Western powers lacked resolve.
Strategic Lessons
Fascist powers tested strategies of aerial bombardment and rapid military coordination, which foreshadowed the tactics of the Second World War.
Britain and France failed to respond, thereby compromising their deterrent credibility.
Link to Wider Appeasement
The Spanish Civil War highlighted the limits of collective security under the League of Nations. Just as with Abyssinia (1935–1936), Britain and France prioritised narrow national interest and stability over active resistance to aggression.
Key Points for Study
Britain’s appeasement was driven by public opinion, economic weakness, and military under-preparedness.
France’s appeasement stemmed from political instability, reliance on Britain, and defensive strategy.
The Spanish Civil War undermined appeasement, strengthened fascist alliances, and exposed Western weakness.
Appeasement policies and the handling of Spain shaped the path to the Second World War by emboldening aggressive dictators.
FAQ
Although 27 nations signed up to the Non-Intervention Agreement, its enforcement was weak.
Germany and Italy quickly ignored restrictions, sending troops, aircraft, and supplies to Franco.
The Soviet Union also violated the agreement by supplying arms and advisers to the Republicans.
Britain and France, who chaired the Committee, refused to act decisively against these breaches, prioritising stability and avoiding escalation.
This made the Committee largely symbolic and ineffective.
The devastation of Guernica in April 1937 shocked world opinion, but Britain’s government responded cautiously.
While newspapers highlighted the brutality of aerial bombing, officials downplayed the event, refusing to condemn Germany outright. Appeasement dictated restraint: Britain wanted to avoid confrontation and still viewed Germany as a potential partner against communism.
This muted response reinforced perceptions of Western weakness.
France was deeply divided along ideological lines.
Left-wing Popular Front leaders wanted to aid the Spanish Republicans, fearing the spread of fascism.
Right-wing conservatives sympathised with Franco, seeing him as a bulwark against communism.
Political instability, frequent changes of government, and economic strain limited decisive action.
Ultimately, French governments fell back on appeasement and cooperation with Britain’s Non-Intervention stance.
The conflict provided the first major opportunity for joint military cooperation between Hitler and Mussolini.
German aircraft and Italian ground forces coordinated in support of Franco.
Both leaders found common ground in suppressing left-wing movements.
Shared success in Spain strengthened diplomatic ties, leading to the Rome-Berlin Axis of 1936 being reinforced by practical collaboration.
The war thus cemented the partnership that shaped later European diplomacy.
Military observers noted several developments:
The effectiveness of aerial bombardment, as seen in Guernica.
The importance of mechanised units and modern tactics.
The danger of underestimating ideological conflicts turning into proxy wars.
Despite these insights, appeasement thinking meant Britain and France were slow to adapt their strategies, leaving them poorly prepared for the realities of the Second World War.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks):
Give two reasons why Britain pursued a policy of appeasement in the 1930s.
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for each valid reason, up to 2 marks.
Valid reasons may include:
Memories of the First World War and a desire to avoid another major conflict.
Economic weakness following the Great Depression.
Public opinion strongly in favour of peace.
Military unpreparedness, particularly in air defence.
Imperial commitments overstretching resources.
Question 2 (6 marks):
Explain how the Spanish Civil War affected international relations between 1936 and 1939.
Mark Scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Limited explanation with simple statements, e.g. “It made Germany stronger” or “Britain and France did nothing.” Minimal detail or accuracy.
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Some explanation with relevant knowledge, e.g. reference to German and Italian support for Franco, Soviet support for the Republicans, or Britain and France’s policy of non-intervention.
Level 3 (5–6 marks): Developed explanation showing clear understanding of the impact, e.g. how the war strengthened ties between Germany and Italy (Rome-Berlin Axis), tested new military technology (Condor Legion and bombing of Guernica), deepened fears of communism, and demonstrated Western weakness by reinforcing appeasement. Clear linkage to changes in international relations.
.svg){kind=link}
