Chamberlain didn't give Sudetenland to Hitler.

This is perhaps a thread with poor wording. Chamberlain tried to thwart German invasion the Chezch, while sending onvoys to try and have Russia side, or oppose this along sides with Great Britain. When Stalin refused to take up arms for the chezch's, their fate was sealed. Russia's only chance to perhaps do this is with French also, and reluctantly the French abided, and so likewise the Russian, leaving Britain as the scapegoat for handing the Sudetenland over. Before Chamberlain left for Berlin, his meeting with cabinet, and ultimately his conversation with H.C.T. Dowding helped in his decision. Dowding expressed to Chamberlain the plight Britain was in at the time....of all the armed forces, the air-force is the most costly and time consuming to establish...with designs of planes constantly needing updating, factories,and fitter needed to construct planes, airfield built, mechanics trained, and airmen required to fly successfully a painstaking slow process. He pointed out to Chamberlain, that a war with Germany was inevitable. But to come to blows in 1938, with RAF in it's infantcy, would result in the tried, trained, and equipped Luftwaffe having little or no resistance, nay for the defense of Britain was possible as well.

 

The USSR was not invited to the Munich "conference", which was a big mistake if you consider that in 1939 the Western Allies tried to make negotiations with Stalin. So Chamberlain was not discussing the European politics with Stalin in 1938, I think.

In 1938 it is perhaps that Chamberlain partly believed he could do the work himself and get Hitler to agree to a deal. Also the USSR as part of its help proposal required "pathways" through countries to help the Czechs which for countries like Poland was not ok. So Stalin was left out of the negotiations for several reasons.

This was rather interesting as well:

CJO - Abstract - THE SOVIET COMMISSARIAT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND THE CZECHOSLOVAKIAN CRISIS IN 1938: NEW MATERIAL FROM THE SOVIET ARCHIVES

The exchanges between Litvinov in Moscow and the Soviet polpred, Alexandrovsky, in Prague show clearly that the latter was repeatedly cautioned against encouraging the Czech leaders to think that they could rely on the unilateral assistance of the USSR. They reveal, too, the degree to which Litvinov and Potemkin, a deputy commissar, felt that Fierlinger, the Czech minister in Moscow, was misrepresenting the Soviet position in this respect. Additional evidence cited here confirms earlier views that the Soviet leadership was not prepared to act independently of France or outside the League of Nations even when the opportunities for assisting Czechoslovakia were available.

 

Interesting. Also it should be remembered that the USSR had no land border either with Czechoslovakia or Germany, there was at least Poland in the middle, so direct military support would be an interesting venture.

 

Well, all that I've been able to find on this subject is that until Hitler broke the Munich agreement, the British and French thought the Soviet Union was a bigger enemy than Germany. Once Hitler showed his true colors, they then (too little, too late) tried to mend fences with Stalin, but by that time, Hitler was planning to make the pact with the Soviets to keep them quiet till such time as he was ready to take them on.

Comments?

 

A good summary

 

I guess several countries feared there would be a communistic revolution due to the USSR influence , but some pacts were made and some announcements as well:

Chronology of World War II

November 29 1932
France and the Soviet Union sign a Pact of Non-Agression.

May 2 1935
France and the Soviet Union conclude negotiations for a five-year Treaty of Mutual Assistance

March 1936
Robert Vansittart, the Permanent Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs in Great Britain, writes a memorandum warning that Germany's rearmament program would serve Adolf Hitler's plan to annex Austria, the Sudetenland, the Baltic states, and the Polish Corridor to East Prussia.

October 1936
The Joint Planning Committee of the Chiefs of Staff in England declares: "We are convinced that Germany would plan to gain her victory rapidly. Her first attacks would be designed as knock-out blows" referring to London being heavily bombed over a few weeks."

 

Perhaps the Biggest mistake Hitler had shown, was Chamberlains views to the British backing Poland...until then most deals and talks where done indoors, or behind the media spotlight...Hitler views that Britain wouldn't back a Poland failed to realize this was posted public and in speeches to the world...knowing Britains stand and reputation should have told Hitler this threat was not an idle one as had he been able to by-pass up until now...

 

If I recall correctly Hitler also promised in Munich that after the Sudetenland there is absolutely nothing else he wants...which was a lie he knew even himself. However after the conquering of the rest of the Czech area in spring 1939 everybody knew that Hitler was looking for trouble and war and should not be trusted again.

 

I believe once Hitler took over the rest of Czechoslovakia, Chamberlain himself said something to this effect, and this is part of the reason he backed Poland. He understood that he had made a mistake. Chamberlain is known for the appeasement at Munich, but, if I'm not mistaken, he's also the one who set Britain for war by backing Poland all the way to war, if necessary (and it was).

 

I think the irony was that only a dozen years earlier Chamberlain's brother, Austen had crafted the Locarno treaties that guaranteed that Germany would accept the borders pertaining to the Rhineland, the Sudetenland and Poland. They further guaranteed that France and Great Britain would intervene if Germany attempted to regain the territory.

Also, bear in mind that after devouring Austria Hitler declared that Germany had no more territorial ambitions, just like he declared after taking the Rhineland. Why on Earth did Chamberlain believe him after the Sudetenland?

 

Idle hopes? A bad gambler? Whatever we think or do believe, we can't blame it on this man alone. We had a League of Nations and they did ..........................
Uhm, nothing at all.
They just let Hitler get away with it.
Maybe I'm in for war right now, but A.H was a very capable politician who knew how to get the things he wanted. This was all due to the fat he kwew the League of Nations was unwilling to go to war again and would not call his bluff.
Chamberlain is a easy name to pick on but don't forget the bigger picture.

 

Part of the thinking was the perception of unreadyness for for war. As with France many of Britians military leaders were telling the PM & others in the cabinent that they could not adaquately defend the nation. The rearmament program would not mature until 1941-1942. The politcal and military leaders assumed that not only would Britan be subjected to submarine warfare as in 1915-1917 but also subject to air attacks with all the horror they were witnessing in Spain & China. None of them wanted to see another round of six figure casualty lists, that now would include many more civilians.

Had the British and French a better intellgence department they might have understood how much bluff there was in Germanys military posture of 1935-1938, Unfortunatly their data was off and their analysis abysmal.

The half hearted attempts to make a alliance with the USSR and Chamberlains efforts to the last minute to negotiate something-anything came from this reluctance to see the deaths of another ten million people as in the Great War.

 

You know the funny thing is, what if they did call Hitlers bluff and stop him before ww2 started, or at least held the war to a minimun, would we still be having this converstion?

 

That's really the point of the thread, isn't it.

Of course we shouldn't blame Chamberlain for the war in Europe, that falls directly on Hitler and the German people. There were many factors that could have prevented the war way before Chamberlain came to office.

We are certainly using 20/20 hindsight, but that's what you do in a "what if".

 

I never knew the Sudetenland was Chamberlains to give in the first place...all he agreed to do was not go to war over it....as did the French,Russians, poles not lend a hand or raise a finger..interesting side note prior to Chamberlains going to meet Hitler/Ribbentrop, Dowding warned him, war with Germany is/was inevitable, but to go to war now, when the Raf was in it's infancy, defenses not yet ready, the spits and hurricanes without de wault ammo, wooden props, variable non-pitch air screws,against a tried, superior Luftwaffe would have been a disaster...little if anything about Britians home-defense in such peril straights has been revealed/told both in an attempt to thwart public outcry for this, and the lashing the conservative party would have received for allowing a nation to be in such peril position...as source..."A summer bright and terrible" biography/BoB and RAF tactics of Hughford Catskill Tretford Dowding

 

wow, if Britain had the power to give the Sudetenland to Germany,,,they should have raped it first of all armament factories,labour before handing back to Germany...Chamberlain brought back a declaration that Britain wopuld not seek war over the Sudetenland...France or Russia could have done likewise...would this had made it theirs to give....
It was Hitlers blunder to failing to realize the threat Britain made over an invasion of Poland was a publicly made address and to foreign powers, one which a quick dash and to secure the Danzig corridor with hopes of a non-confrontation, even Hitler or Ribbentrop should have heralded as being real or locked the British at their word...HUGE MISTAKE....HUGE...