From Anshi’s Desk…
I have written about my interpretation of World War 2, and whether Hitler was truly responsible for World War 2, from my point of view. I decided to write on this topic as it is heavily debated and its wounds are very deep, to come to a conclusion, of which I feel, covers both sides of the argument fully. I have written this essay primarily based upon my classroom knowledge, and some extra research I conducted at home. In this essay, I have tried to stay neutral and cover both sides of the argument in order to reach a non-biased conclusion, which is rather difficult. Side Note: I have used a question to make it slightly easier to understand…
“Hitler can be seen as responsible for causing World War 2” How far do you agree with this interpretation?
I agree with this interpretation to a large extent. This being due to the fact that, although other events occurred during the time which may have added to the trigger of World War 2; had Hitler not taken advantage of these situations, the likely outcome would have been that the chances of World War 2 occurring would have been significantly reduced. Hitler seized the opportunity to take advantage of the Great Depression, the failures of the League of Nations, and the lack of action from France and Britain – including the rearmament of the Rhineland and territorial expansion to reunite all German speakers. However, there are a few factors which suggest that Hitler was not entirely responsible for World War 2, such as the Treaty of Versailles – which can be seen as both a cause itself, and an event which Hitler took advantage of to gain power.
Hitler severely took advantage of the Great Depression, allowing him to gain the nation’s votes and seize power of the country. During the period of hyper-inflation (a point in time where money was becoming worthless) the German people were both scared and angry. This was largely due to the fact that there was a lack of jobs and money, and due to the hyper-inflation, it was extremely difficult for the citizens of Germany to put bread on the table. After Hitler took over the Nazi party, and tried to overthrow the existing government, it seemed like Hitler was the only source of hope for the German people, because of his new ideas and promises. He persuaded the German people to vote for him through fear and anger, as Hitler promised to stop paying the reparations of 6.6 billion pounds from the Treaty of Versailles to Britain and France, allowing him to stabilise Germany’s economy, as well further stabilising Germany’s economy by reducing the hyper-inflation. Not to mention, he also advocated that he would be able to regain all of Germany’s lost land and colonies that were given away to Britain and France, particularly places in Africa, the Rhineland, the Polish Corridor, and Alsace and Lorraine. Furthermore, Hitler had a personal army of approximately 4 million troops; which he vowed to utilise, as well as allowing the government troops to join, which he believed would let them increase their empire, whilst not breaking the Treaty of Versailles. This was a huge factor of the causes of World War 2, as it was because of Hitler taking advantage of the Great Depression, where all the people of Germany were searching for a glimpse of hope, which made Hitler look like a saint, in turn meaning he seized power and was able to invade other countries, break the treaty of Versailles, and cause World War 2, which emphasises my initial statement of believing that Hitler was responsible for World War 2.
Hitler took the opportunity of the failures of the League of Nations in order to seize power and invade other countries. His primary advantage was the fact that the League of Nations did not have an army of their own, and so could only place economic sanctions, of which he could avoid by leaving the league, and trading with other countries outside of the league, such as America. This is exactly what occurred during the disarmament conference of the League of Nations. Hitler protested that after World War 1, Britain and France had not disarmed their countries, and yet Germany’s army was being stripped to the bare bones, which resulted in Hitler simply leaving the conference and intensifying the secret rearmament programme. Hitler made a non-aggression alliance with Poland, meaning they would enjoy cordial relationships for the next five years. This weakened France, who had tried to make sure that no country in Eastern Europe made alliances with Germany. It was because of the failure of the League of Nations, that Hitler was able to carry out Lebensraum – the idea of gaining ‘living space’ for the ever-expanding German population. Not to mention, this further allowed Hitler to gain more power as the League of Nations did not place any sanctions upon Germany, which let Hitler force the Austrian prime minister to allow all important positions within the government be appointed to Nazi’s, which resulted in the Nazi’s winning the election, therefore meaning Hitler was able to overthrow Austria. This sort of scenario occurred in many countries that Germany overthrew, such as the Sudetenland; in which Hitler believed it was not just for German speakers living in the Sudetenland – of which was majority – and wanted Czech to hand it over to Germany, so that German speakers could be united. This led to Slovakia asking for protection from Germany, which they agreed upon whilst subsequently ruling over them. It is due to these significant reasons, that I believe that Hitler was responsible for the cause of World War 2, as had Hitler not taken advantages for the failures of the League of Nations, he would have been able to gain so much power by overthrowing several other countries – which in turn caused World War 2.
Hitler heavily took advantage of the lack of action taken by both Britain and France, which permitted him to reamer the Rhineland, and further expand Germany’s territories; gaining him an abundance of power. During the period running up to World War 2, Britain and France were considered to be the most powerful nations in the world, partly due to the fact that they were part of the Arian race, which was considered the most superior at the time. This therefore meant that their decision on matters was final. One of the points within the Treaty of Versailles, was that Germany must demilitarise the Rhineland, which ergo meant that allied troops were posted throughout the Rhineland. However, on 7th March 1936 32,000 troops entered the Rhineland, meaning it was remilitarised. Britain and France did not react to this in any form, and simply allowed Germany to militarise the Rhineland, giving France no protection from the German troops. This gave Hitler a boost of confidence, as knowing that Britain and France would not react or place sanctions upon Germany for conquering areas of land, he invaded numerous other countries, gaining him both land and power, which were both part of Hitler’s foreign policy aims. By the time Germany had conquered many countries, giving themselves both land and power, Britain formed a treaty of appeasement in order to keep all countries going to war with each other. It stated that Germany had now gained enough land to satisfy themselves and were not permitted to complete anymore territorial expansion. Germany agreed to this treaty, however this was a mere façade, as at that moment in time, Germany had already gained enough power and land to believe that they were capable of winning World War 2, and so they overtook Poland, which was the trigger of World War 2. I believe that this is a significant factor as to why Hitler can be seen as responsible for World War 2, as had he not taken advantage of the lack of sanctions from Britain and France, the treaty of appeasement would not have been required. However, as Hitler broke the treaty, both Britain and France were angered, and after Hitler overthrew Poland, World War 2 was triggered.
Although there are many points to justify how Hitler can be seen responsible for World War 2, there is one cause which I believe illustrates that Hitler was not entirely responsible for World War 2. This is the Treaty of Versailles because of the fact that it was extremely harsh on the Germans, as not only did they have to carry the War Guilt around with them, meaning they were acknowledged as a horrible country, they had to pay a huge 6.6 billion pounds in reparations to Britain and France, meaning there economy took a huge plunge, a significant amount of the population went below the poverty line, not to mention the huge amounts of unemployment making it extremely difficult to pay the reparations. As well as this the military of Germany, often known as its pride and joy, was stripped down to 100,000 men and they lost most of their colonies, particularly in Africa. The Germans were given no say about the fate of the country, as the treaty was a ‘diktat’, which made the German people despise other countries, causing revolts throughout the country. This further resulted in a nationalist and “Forkeed” – a nationalist group – outbreak, aa well as communism causing further revolts. I believe that this was a factor conveying that Hitler was not entirely responsible for the outbreak of World War 2, as the treaty of Versailles was a diktat, meaning the Germans had no say in the fate of their country. As well as this, the land Germany and France had been fighting over, was ceded to France as part of the treaty of Versailles, meaning the Germans had no chance to make an agreement.
To conclude, I firmly agree with the interpretation that Hitler can be seen as responsible for the cause of World War 2, as there is significant evidence to prove this point; including Hitler taking advantage of the failures of the League of Nations, taking advantage of the lack of action from Britain and France, as well as the Great Depression. Whereas, there is only one point to support that Hitler was not responsible for World War 2, the Treaty of Versailles. On balance, I believe that Hitler was responsible for World War 2, and therefore agree with this interpretation due to the fact that there is significant evidence to convey this interpretation, whereas there is little evidence against it.