The policy of appeasement significantly affected Britain's international relations, particularly with France and the United States. France, which had a mutual defence pact with Czechoslovakia, felt betrayed by the Munich Agreement and Britain’s unilateral decisions. This strained Anglo-French relations, as France was forced to accept the agreement despite its reservations, undermining the trust and cooperation between the two nations. Regarding the United States, appeasement initially aligned with the American policy of isolationism. However, as the policy's flaws became evident, it led to concerns in the U.S. about Britain's ability to stand against Nazi aggression. This skepticism was a factor in the U.S. initially adopting a cautious approach to involvement in European affairs, though American opinion shifted following the outbreak of WWII.

Within the Conservative Party, there were notable figures who opposed the policy of appeasement, the most prominent being Winston Churchill. Churchill consistently criticised Chamberlain’s approach, warning that it would only serve to embolden Hitler. He argued for a stronger stance against Nazi Germany, emphasising the need for military preparedness and a more assertive foreign policy. Other Conservative critics included Duff Cooper, the First Lord of the Admiralty, who resigned in protest over the Munich Agreement, and Anthony Eden, the former Foreign Secretary, who disagreed with Chamberlain’s conciliatory tactics. These figures represented a minority within the party but played a crucial role in challenging the prevailing policy and shaping the subsequent shift towards a more confrontational stance against Nazi Germany.

The policy of appeasement had a significant impact on British military preparedness and defence spending. Initially, the focus on appeasement meant that military spending and preparations were not prioritised, as the government hoped to avoid war. However, as the 1930s progressed and the threat from Nazi Germany became more apparent, there was a gradual shift. By the late 1930s, especially after the Munich Crisis, the government began to increase defence spending and accelerate rearmament. This included expanding the Royal Air Force, modernising the navy, and increasing the size of the army. Despite these efforts, Britain entered WWII with its military forces not fully prepared for the scale and intensity of the conflict, a legacy of the earlier focus on appeasement and delayed response to the growing threat.

The British media played a critical role in shaping public opinion about the policy of appeasement. Initially, much of the press supported Chamberlain’s efforts, reflecting the general public’s desire to avoid war. Newspapers like The Times and the Daily Mail praised the Munich Agreement, portraying it as a success in securing peace. However, as the situation in Europe deteriorated and Nazi Germany's aggressive intentions became clearer, the media's tone shifted. Critical voices in the press, such as The Observer and the Manchester Guardian, began to question and criticise the policy of appeasement. This shift in media sentiment influenced public opinion by raising awareness about the potential flaws and dangers of appeasement, contributing to a broader reevaluation of the policy among the British public.

Neville Chamberlain's personal beliefs and leadership style were pivotal in shaping the policy of appeasement. Chamberlain, deeply influenced by the desire to avoid another catastrophic war like WWI, believed that diplomatic engagement and concessions could maintain peace in Europe. His approach was rooted in a somewhat naïve optimism about the nature of diplomacy and a misjudgment of Hitler's intentions. Chamberlain's style was characterised by a strong commitment to peace and a reluctance to engage in military conflict. This perspective led him to prioritise negotiation and agreement, often at the cost of overlooking the expansionist and aggressive nature of Nazi Germany. His leadership thus significantly steered Britain's initial response to Nazi threats towards appeasement, reflecting his personal conviction that peace could be achieved through dialogue and compromise.