To what extent was the outbreak of war in 1939 a result of Hitler's long-term plans?

The outbreak of World War II in 1939 was a complex event with multiple contributing factors. While it is impossible to isolate a single cause, the question of whether Adolf Hitler's long-term plans were the primary driver of the war remains a subject of debate among historians. This essay will explore both sides of the argument, examining the intentionalist view that emphasizes Hitler's agency and the functionalist perspective that highlights the role of structural factors.

The Intentionalist View: Hitler's Grand Design

Proponents of the intentionalist view argue that Hitler's ideology and expansionist ambitions, clearly articulated in "Mein Kampf," were the driving force behind the war. From the moment he assumed power in 1933, Hitler embarked on a systematic plan to dismantle the Treaty of Versailles, rearm Germany, and achieve "Lebensraum" (living space) in the east. His withdrawal from the League of Nations in 1933, the introduction of conscription in 1935, and the remilitarization of the Rhineland in 1936 were all clear violations of the treaty and demonstrated his disregard for international norms.

Furthermore, Hitler's actions in the years leading up to the war suggest a calculated strategy of expansion. The Anschluss with Austria in 1938 and the annexation of the Sudetenland later that year, achieved through a combination of threats and diplomatic maneuvering, demonstrated his willingness to use force and exploit weaknesses in the international system. The eventual invasion of Poland in September 1939, which finally triggered the war, can be seen as the culmination of these aggressive policies, a calculated risk taken by Hitler to achieve his long-held territorial ambitions.

Examples that support the intentionalist view include:


⭐"Mein Kampf" (1925): This autobiographical manifesto outlines Hitler's ideology, including his hatred for the Treaty of Versailles and his desire for German expansion eastward.
⭐The Hossbach Memorandum (1937): This document records a meeting where Hitler outlined his plans for German expansion through war, indicating a premeditated strategy for achieving his goals.


The Functionalist Perspective: Structural Factors and Appeasement

However, the functionalist perspective offers a more nuanced interpretation. While acknowledging Hitler's role, this view emphasizes the significance of structural factors and the failures of other European powers in preventing the war. The legacy of World War I, the economic crisis of the 1930s, and the weakness of the League of Nations all contributed to an unstable international order that Hitler was able to exploit.

Furthermore, the policy of appeasement pursued by Britain and France, particularly evident in their response to the remilitarization of the Rhineland and the annexation of the Sudetenland, emboldened Hitler and created a climate of impunity. By repeatedly conceding to his demands, they convinced him that further aggression would be met with similar inaction. This, coupled with the miscalculation that a war could be localized in Eastern Europe, ultimately enabled Hitler to take the gamble of invading Poland.

Examples that support the functionalist perspective include:


⭐The Locarno Treaties (1925): These treaties, meant to secure peace in Europe, left Germany's eastern borders vulnerable, creating an opportunity for future expansion.
⭐The Munich Agreement (1938): This agreement, in which Britain and France allowed Hitler to annex the Sudetenland in exchange for a promise of peace, is often cited as a prime example of appeasement that emboldened Hitler.


Conclusion: A Complex Interplay of Factors

In conclusion, the outbreak of war in 1939 was not solely the result of Hitler's long-term plans. While his ideology and aggressive foreign policy played a significant role, structural factors and the failures of other European powers were also crucial. The policy of appeasement, driven by a desire to avoid another devastating war, ironically contributed to the outbreak of the very conflict it sought to prevent. Ultimately, the road to war was paved by a complex interplay of Hitler's ambition, international instability, and the miscalculations of other key players. It is this complex interplay, rather than a single cause, that offers the most accurate explanation for the outbreak of World War II.