CHINA AND APPEASEMENT, PART 1 
full: (_http://www.henryckliu.com/page130.html_ 
(http://www.henryckliu.com/page130.html) ) 
 
Beyond Munich: Geostrategy and betrayal 
By Henry C K Liu 
 
The Munich Pact of September 30, 1938, has become an icon of the failure of  
appeasement. What is generally left unmentioned by many Anglo-US historians is 
 the fact that the Munich Pact, in addition to allowing Germany to annex the  
Sudetenland, an area of Czechoslovakia heavily populated by ethnic Germans, 
also  allowed Poland and Hungary, eventual victims of German expansionism, to 
seize  respectively the Teschen district and parts of Slovakia. 
 
Munich is mainly viewed in the West as a symbol of the lack of resolve on  
the part of the two great powers of Western Europe, Britain and France, to  
resist German expansionism that later led to the outbreak of a European war 
that  
quickly became a world war. Most Western historians subscribe to the view that 
 had the Western European Allies drawn a firm line in the sand backed by 
credible  threat of force, Germany might not have been tempted by 
Franco-British  
appeasement to push beyond the line of peaceful co-existence. Yet the 
historical  facts behind Munich do not support the simplification of it as a 
case of 
pure  appeasement. Geopolitical calculations played a large role in the Munich  
decisions. 
 
Appeasement by one nation in international relations is a policy of  
accepting, rather than resisting, the illegitimate imposition by another nation 
 of 
aggressive geopolitical expansion or interference or intrusion in the  
appeasing 
nation's internal affairs or in the development of its indigenous  
socioeconomic and political system in ways that sacrifice indigenous cultural  
values, 
ideological principles, or national interests. In the case of Munich,  
appeasement was accomplished not by sacrificing the national interests of the  
appeasing powers but by sacrificing a helpless third nation whose opinion was  
never 
sought. 
 
The compromise in appeasement is usually rationalized by an allegedly  higher 
principle of a non-violent means of avoiding war. As Henry Kissinger,  
arguably the greatest statesman in Cold War realpolitik, famously said of the  
policy of detente, which some criticized as appeasement: "Peace too is a moral  
imperative." Notwithstanding post-Cold War distortion of the meaning of the 
term  
by neo-conservative ideologue hawks in the administration of US President 
George  W Bush, a willingness to negotiate does not in itself constitute a loss 
of  "moral clarity" or appeasement, which is the unwarranted and 
counterproductive  capitulation before or during negotiation. 
 
Yale historian Paul Kennedy (Strategy and Diplomacy, 1983) defines  
appeasement as "the policy of settling international quarrels by admitting and  
satisfying grievances through rational negotiation and compromise, thereby  
avoiding 
the resort to an armed conflict which would be expensive, bloody and  possibly 
dangerous". 
 
While appeasement had at times led to successful outcomes, as in the  
Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921, albeit not without the tragedy of igniting a civil  
war, 
war hawks have used Munich to reinforce the negative notion of appeasement  as 
a policy of failure. Since Munich, the term "appeasement" has gained a  
disparaging overtone in US political discourse, as a code word for moral  
weakness 
and political cowardice in the face of evil and strategic  self-deception that 
would eventual fail the peace. 
 
Nevertheless, Munich is deemed strategically successful by some historians  
of geopolitics for yielding critically valuable months (1938-39) for British  
rearmament. Munich also relieved pressure on Western Europe by channeling 
German  expansion eastward. The sacrifice of Czechoslovakia to German 
geopolitical  
ambition, a development that the Franco-British alliance was not in a timely  
position to prevent anyway, had been rationalized by its effect on the  
strengthening of the subsequent defense of the British Isles. 
 
Yet Germany was also able to boost its offensive power significantly in the  
time thus granted, and quite possibly to a greater extent than the Allies, 
since  Germany had no illusion about Munich being a path to "peace for our 
time". 
More  significant, the annexation of Czechoslovakia provided German 
militarism  much-needed validation in German domestic politics. Munich also 
gave the 
German  war machine access to well-developed Czech industrial resources and  
significantly improved German strategic standing, avoiding an otherwise costly  
conflict presented by the heavily fortified terrain of the Czech-German border. 
 German occupation of Czechoslovakia also lengthened Poland's border with  
Germany, making Polish defense more vulnerable. 
 
Munich took place in an anti-war atmosphere in Western Europe in reaction  to 
the mass slaughter of World War I. Fear of otherwise avoidable war with  
France and Britain also motivated the German high command, being apprehensive 
of  
Adolf Hitler's reckless overrating of German military strength, to try at  
several points to move toward removing the adventurous little corporal Fuehrer  
from power to put a stop to his overreaching foreign policy. Forty days after  
Munich, buoyant in domestic popular support by its surprising success, the 
Nazis  staged a massive, coordinated attack on German citizens of Jewish 
ethnicity  throughout the Third Reich on the night of November 9, 1938, and 
into the 
next  day, which has come to be known as Kristallnacht or the Night of Broken 
Glass.  Kristallnacht was the opening salvo of methodical Nazi persecution of 
the Jews  of Europe. 
 
Great powers maneuver for war Yet Munich was motivated by more than mere  war 
avoidance. Geopolitical maneuvering on the part of Britain and France was  
clearly also a key factor. 
 
The Munich Pact followed Franco-British rejection of two successive Soviet  
offers (in 1934 and 1937) to form an alliance against Germany in Europe and  
Japan in Asia, thus pushing the USSR to enter the Soviet-German Non-aggression  
Pact of August 23, 1939, less than a year after Munich. From the Soviet  
perspective, Munich was a Western scheme to turn Nazi aggression eastward and  
use 
German fascism to counter Soviet communism. The Soviet-German Non-aggression  
Pact was an attempt to turn the tables against capitalism by freeing up 
fascism  against it. 
 
Munich convinced the USSR that the Western powers were pursuing a policy of  
selective appeasement only toward German eastward expansion and were not  
interested in joining the Soviet Union in an anti-fascist alliance promoted  
through a popular front. In addition, there was concern about the possibility  
that 
Britain and France would stay neutral in a war initiated by Germany against  
the USSR, hoping that the two warring Eastern powers would wear each other out 
 and put an end to both the Bolshevik Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. In this  
sense, Munich was less a strategy of appeasement to secure peace than Western 
 capitalist democracy's strategy of directing war eastward between fascism 
and  communism. 
 
There is also historiographical evidence of international acclaim for the  
Munich appeasement at the time of the pact's signing. Munich was praised by  
practically all Western leaders, including pope Pius XI, defender of the true  
faith, and US president Franklin D Roosevelt, defender of liberal democracy.  
Prime minister Neville Chamberlain was applauded by the British public for  
having cleverly avoided another war in the West at the expense of the East. It  
was viewed as another shining example of the triumph of high-minded British  
foreign policy rewarded by a bonus of collateral practical payoff of 
instigating  
war between fascism and communism. 
 
France paralyzed by democracy France had fallen into foreign-policy  
paralysis through chaotic multiparty democracy. During the decade leading up to 
 
Munich, cabinets in France fell with maddening frequency. One government lasted 
 
but a single day; another only two days. 
 
Leon Blum became France's first Socialist and Jewish premier on June 4,  
1936, and immediately became the prime object of hate to the Catholic and the  
anti-Semitic right. On February 13, 1936, shortly before becoming prime  
minister, Blum was dragged from a car and beaten to near-death by members of 
the  
Camelots du Roi, a group of anti-Semite royalists. Blum formed a Popular Front  
government that lasted an unprecedented period of more than a year, during 
which 
 time it introduced the 40-hour week, paid holidays, collective bargaining, 
and  other socialist reforms for worker rights. It also nationalized the Bank 
of  France and the armaments industry into service to the French nation rather 
than  for the benefit of private capital. 
 
With no effective capital control, the result was capital flight from  France 
at such an alarming pace that the Bank of France, striving to halt the  
exodus, had to raise the central bank's already-high discount rate of 4% to a  
"panic rate" of 6%. The Blum cabinet was desperately short of cash throughout  
its 
tenure, leaving most socialist programs unfunded. Finance minister Vincent  
Auriol devalued the franc by 40% and borrowed 8 billion francs to deal with the 
 liquidity crisis. The government's Exchange Equalization Fund had been  
exhausted, and only support from Washington and London kept the exchange rate 
of  
the franc from slipping further. The need for foreign financial support kept  
Blum's Socialist government from moving further to the left. 
 
The French Popular Front had a majority in the chamber composed of a  
coalition of radical socialists, socialists and communists. The communists 
alone  had 
no cabinet appointments. Nominal meanings notwithstanding, the radical  
socialists were literally less radical than the socialists in French politics.  
At 
the emergency session, the radical socialists and socialists quarreled over  
anti-labor tax policy. To deal with the financial crisis, the cabinet asked the 
 National Assembly for dictatorial powers over the French economy and finance 
 markets for six weeks, despite the fact that the left had always decried 
such  power "as the opening wedge to fascist dictatorship". 
 
The communists, with 72 swing votes indispensable to the Blum cabinet, at  
first refused to go along but finally fell in line after securing the  
government's promise to aid the Spanish Popular Front. By a vote of 346-247, 
the  
chamber voted "full powers" for six weeks to the Blum cabinet, but the bill was 
 
rejected by the Senate. Blum took his bill back to the chamber, got it approved 
 
again before midnight by a margin of 346-248, but was rebuffed again by the  
Senate 168-96. The Blum cabinet resigned the next day, on June 23, 1936, after 
 only 19 days in office. 
 
Soviet leader Josef Stalin's political purge of the Red Army was confirmed  
in France by news of the execution of Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky and seven  
generals in Moscow on June 11, 1937. The news profoundly affected French  
political opinion, greatly weakening the French communists. It revived France's 
 
long-standing doubt on whether the Red Army was good enough to make the  
Franco-Soviet military alliance an effective check on Germany, France's eternal 
 
enemy. With the Red Army weakened by a political purge of its ablest  
professional 
leaders, Paris was forced toward conciliation with Berlin, and  under 
pressure from Stanley Baldwin and Anthony Eden of Britain, rejected  communist 
demands to help the Spanish Popular Front and adopted a policy of  neutrality, 
which 
had the practical effect of being pro-German. 
 
A few days after news of the Red Army purge, for the first time since  before 
World War I, a high-ranking German staff officer, General Ludwig Beck,  was 
in Paris to confer with General Marie-Gustave Gamelin of the French General  
Staff, to share with him the German Secret Service dossier on political  
developments in Moscow. Veteran Paris correspondent John Elliott of The Herald  
Tribune reported: "There can be no doubt that the [German] general's visit was  
inspired by the British Foreign Office, anxious to break up the Rome-Berlin 
axis  
and establish co-operation between Britain, France and Germany.”
 
 
 
 



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

_______________________________________________
Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list

Reply via email to