How far was Hitler’s foreign policy responsible for the Second World War? — Edexcel A-Level History
Verified courseTeaching note checked against the official specification.
How far was Hitler’s foreign policy responsible for the Second World War? explained
How far was Hitler’s foreign policy responsible for the Second World War?
Read the full explanation
covers 4 specification points, including The influence of German history on Nazi… and Hitler’s ideas and his role in the shaping of…. Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
The influence of German history on Nazi foreign policy.
Nazi foreign policy drew on deep currents in German history: the Treaty of Versailles (1919) created grievance over territory, disarmament and the 'war guilt' clause; nineteenth-century nationalism and the 'Drang nach Osten' supplied ideas of eastward expansion; Bismarck's Realpolitik showed pragmatic alliances; and Weimar's revisionism under Stresemann pursued peaceful treaty change. Hitler rejected Weimar diplomacy, blending racial ideology with historical ambition. Students should trace how these legacies shaped aims such as Lebensraum, Anschluss and rearmament, and evaluate whether Nazi policy was a radical break or an extreme continuation. Use specific examples: the 1933 withdrawal from the League, 1935 rearmament, 1936 Rhineland remilitarisation, 1938 Anschluss and Munich, and the 1939 Nazi–Soviet Pact.
Hitler’s ideas and his role in the shaping of Nazi foreign policy.
Hitler's ideas, set out in Mein Kampf and his Second Book, drove Nazi foreign policy: racial hierarchy, Lebensraum in eastern Europe and the USSR, destruction of the Treaty of Versailles, and creation of a Greater German Reich. He aimed to unite all German-speaking peoples (Anschluss, Sudetenland) and secure living space. As Führer, he set broad goals and intervened decisively, but policy was also shaped by others: Ribbentrop, Göring, the military and economic pressures. Students should assess Hitler's role as author, arbiter and opportunist, using examples such as rearmament (1935), Rhineland (1936), Anschluss and Munich (1938), and the Nazi–Soviet Pact (1939).
The reasons for the German invasion of Poland in 1939.
The German invasion of Poland on 1 September 1939 was the outcome of Hitler's long-term ideological goals, medium-term diplomatic and economic pressures, and short-term strategic calculations. Ideologically, Lebensraum in the east and the destruction of the Versailles settlement drove expansion. Diplomatically, the Nazi-Soviet Pact of August 1939 removed the risk of a two-front war and partitioned Poland. Strategically, Hitler believed Britain and France would not fight, and that a quick victory would provide resources and security. The immediate trigger was the fabricated Gleiwitz incident, used to justify retaliation. Thus, the invasion combined racial imperialism, opportunism, and miscalculation about Allied resolve.
The contribution of other nations to the outbreak of war.
While Germany bore primary responsibility for the outbreak of war in 1939, other nations contributed through their actions and inactions. Britain and France pursued appeasement, notably at Munich in 1938, which encouraged Hitler to believe further expansion would go unchallenged. The USSR signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact in August 1939, removing a potential eastern front and enabling the invasion of Poland. Italy, though initially cautious, signed the Pact of Steel in May 1939, aligning itself with Germany. Japan's earlier expansionism in Manchuria and China diverted international attention and undermined the League of Nations. The USA remained isolationist, passing Neutrality Acts that limited early opposition. Thus, the war resulted from a complex interplay of German aggression and the policies of other powers.
Your focus
- Identify at least three historical influences on Nazi foreign policy and give a specific example of each.
- Compare Weimar revisionism with Nazi expansionism, noting similarities and differences.
- Construct a reasoned judgement on whether Nazi foreign policy was a break from or continuation of German history.
Show all 12 objectives
- Summarise Hitler's key foreign policy ideas and give a specific example of each.
- Analyse Hitler's role in shaping policy, distinguishing his aims from those of other actors.
- Evaluate the extent to which Nazi foreign policy reflected Hitler's personal ideology.
- Analyse the ideological, diplomatic, strategic and economic reasons for the German invasion of Poland in 1939.
- Evaluate the relative significance of long-term aims and short-term triggers in explaining the timing of the invasion.
- Construct a coherent argument that links the Nazi-Soviet Pact, the Allied guarantee, and Hitler's calculation about Allied response.
- Explain how the policies and actions of Britain, France, the USSR, Italy, Japan and the USA contributed to the outbreak of war.
- Assess the relative importance of other nations' contributions compared with German aggression.
- Use specific examples, such as the Munich Agreement and the Nazi-Soviet Pact, to support an argument about shared responsibility.
How far was Hitler’s foreign policy responsible for the Second World War? flashcards
Card 1 of 9
Hitler's ideological aims
How far was Hitler’s foreign policy responsible for the Second World War? exam tips
Marking Points
- Explains how the Treaty of Versailles generated revisionist aims: loss of territory, disarmament, reparations and the war-guilt clause.
- Links nineteenth-century nationalism and Pan-German ideas, including eastward expansion, to later Nazi Lebensraum aims.
- Contrasts Bismarck's pragmatic Realpolitik with Hitler's ideologically driven expansionism.
- Assesses Weimar revisionism under Stresemann as a peaceful alternative that Hitler rejected.
- Uses specific events to show continuity and change: withdrawal from the League (1933), rearmament (1935), Rhineland (1936), Anschluss and Munich (1938), Nazi–Soviet Pact (1939).
- Evaluates whether Nazi foreign policy was a radical break from or an extreme continuation of earlier German history.
- Outlines Hitler's core ideas: racial hierarchy, Lebensraum, destruction of Versailles, and a Greater German Reich.
- Explains how these ideas translated into aims such as Anschluss, Sudetenland and eastward expansion.
- Assesses Hitler's role as Führer in setting goals and intervening in key decisions.
- Considers the influence of other figures and factors, including Ribbentrop, Göring, the military and economic pressures.
- Uses specific events to show Hitler's impact: rearmament (1935), Rhineland (1936), Anschluss and Munich (1938), Nazi–Soviet Pact (1939).
- Evaluates whether Nazi foreign policy was primarily Hitler's creation or the product of wider forces.
- Explains how Hitler's ideology of Lebensraum and racial hierarchy made eastern Europe, especially Poland, a target for conquest and colonisation.
- Analyses the diplomatic impact of the Nazi-Soviet Pact, including the secret protocol dividing Poland and removing the threat of Soviet intervention.
- Assesses the strategic calculation that Britain and France would not honour their guarantee to Poland, based on the precedents of remilitarisation and appeasement.
- Evaluates the economic motive of securing Polish resources and territory to sustain German rearmament and autarky.
- Discusses the immediate pretext of the Gleiwitz incident and the broader propaganda narrative of German victimhood.
- Explains how British and French appeasement, especially the Munich Agreement, emboldened Hitler and weakened collective security.
- Analyses the Soviet decision to sign the Nazi-Soviet Pact, including Stalin's security concerns and the secret protocol dividing eastern Europe.
- Assesses Italy's role through the Pact of Steel and its foreign policy ambitions, which reinforced the Axis but did not commit Italy to immediate war.
- Discusses the impact of US isolationism and the 1930s Neutrality Acts in limiting early opposition to German expansion.
- Evaluates Japan's expansionism in Manchuria and China as a factor that undermined the League of Nations and distracted other powers.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Plan an argument that weighs continuity against change, using named examples from 1919–39.
- 💡Define key terms such as Lebensraum and Realpolitik precisely in your introduction.
- 💡Embed historians' interpretations or contemporary views to support your evaluation.
- 💡Use direct references to Hitler's writings and speeches to support your analysis.
- 💡Balance structural factors with Hitler's personal role to reach a nuanced judgement.
- 💡Link each policy example back to Hitler's ideas or his decision-making.
- 💡Plan your answer around distinct factors (ideology, diplomacy, strategy, economics) and make explicit links between them rather than listing them.
- 💡Use precise dates and terms, such as 23 August 1939 for the Nazi-Soviet Pact and 1 September 1939 for the invasion, to demonstrate contextual knowledge.
- 💡Avoid a narrative of the 1930s; instead, select specific actions of other nations and analyse their consequences for Hitler's decision-making.
- 💡Use terms like 'collective security', 'appeasement', and 'isolationism' accurately and explain their significance.
Common Mistakes
- Treating Versailles as the sole cause of Nazi foreign policy; correction: also consider nineteenth-century nationalism, Bismarckian diplomacy and Weimar revisionism.
- Assuming all German history pointed inevitably to Hitler; correction: show alternative paths such as Stresemann's peaceful revisionism.
- Listing events without linking them to historical influences; correction: explain how each event reflects or departs from earlier traditions.
- Treating Hitler as the sole decision-maker; correction: also consider the roles of Ribbentrop, Göring, the military and economic factors.
- Ignoring the distinction between Hitler's long-term ideological goals and short-term tactical decisions; correction: separate aims from opportunistic actions.
- Assuming Mein Kampf was a precise blueprint; correction: recognise it as an ideological statement that was adapted to circumstances.
- Treating the invasion as solely caused by the Nazi-Soviet Pact; correction: the pact was a facilitating condition, not the underlying cause, and must be linked to longer-term aims.
- Assuming Britain and France had no commitment to Poland; correction: they had issued a guarantee in March 1939, and Hitler's belief that they would not act was a miscalculation, not a fact.
- Ignoring the domestic economic pressures; correction: rearmament and the need for resources and food supplies were significant drivers that should be integrated into the explanation.
- Claiming that appeasement caused the war directly; correction: it was a contributing factor that shaped Hitler's perceptions, but German aggression remained the primary driver.
- Overstating Soviet responsibility by ignoring Stalin's security dilemma; correction: the Nazi-Soviet Pact was a pragmatic move, not an ideological alliance, and should be explained in context.
- Assuming the USA was entirely uninvolved; correction: while isolationist and bound by Neutrality Acts, President Roosevelt's moral condemnations and naval rearmament showed growing concern, even if direct intervention was avoided before 1939.