Munich, again: September 30, 1938 - Dilemmas of Diplomacy - James M. Lindsay
Diplomacia e Relações Internacionais

Munich, again: September 30, 1938 - Dilemmas of Diplomacy - James M. Lindsay



History Lessons: The Munich Agreement

by James M. Lindsay
The Water's Edge, September 26, 2012

Share

A new installment of “History Lessons” is now out. This time I examine the signing of the Munich Agreement in the early morning hours of September 30, 1938. (The agreement itself is dated September 29, 1938.) In the video, I discuss the origins of the crisis over the Sudetenland, what British prime ministerNeville Chamberlain thought he was accomplishing in his negotiations with Adolf Hitler, and why the Munich Agreement did not bring “peace for our time.”
Watch the video on YouTube here.
The Munich Agreement has become a classic example of how not to conduct foreign policy, and it turned “appeasement” into a dirty word. But Munich also highlights a classic dilemma of diplomacy: accommodation can signal weakness and invite aggression, but standing firm can trigger conflicts otherwise avoided. Policymakers choose between these two risks at their peril because which of them is greater is clearer when looking backward in history than when looking forward into the future.
So here’s a question to consider when thinking about American foreign policy: on what issue or conflict is the United States most likely to repeat Neville Chamberlain’s mistake?
If you are interested in learning more about the Munich Agreement, here are some books worth reading:
Faber, David. Munich, 1938: Appeasement and World War II (2009).
Goldstein, Erik and Igor Lukes (eds). The Munich Crisis, 1938: Prelude to World War II (1999).
Latynski, Maya (ed). Reappraising the Munich Pact: Continental Perspectives(1992).
Record, Jeffrey. The Specter of Munich: Reconsidering the Lessons of Appeasing Hitler (2006).

Post a Comment4 Comments




loading...

- Oriente Medio: Revisitando Os 14 Pontos De Woodrow Wilson - David Ignatius (wp)
Rethinking Woodrow Wilson’s 14 Points David Ignatius The Washington Post, 9/07/2014 As U.S. policymakers ponder the future shape of the Middle East, they should perhaps recall that the United States was opposed to the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement, the...

- The Evidence On Globalisation - Niklas Potrafke
Um bom amigo, e grande pesquisador dos temas econômicos globais, e das políticas comerciais em geral, Rogerio Farias, me envia não apenas o link mas este trabalho completo: The Evidence on GlobalisationNiklas Potrafke *The World Economy (2014) doi:...

- Israel: Armas Nucleares E Balança Geopolitica No Oriente Medio - Max Fisher (wp World Blog)
WorldViewsWhy is the U.S. okay with Israel having nuclear weapons but not Iran? BY MAX FISHER The Washington Post blog World View, December 2, 2013, at 9:30 am Israel's Dimona nuclear power plant, in the Negev desert, started the country's nuclear...

- Israelis, Saudis And The Iranian Agreement - George Friedman (stratfor)
Geopolitical WeeklyIsraelis, Saudis and the Iranian AgreementBy George FriedmanStratfor, Tuesday, November 26, 2013 A deal between Iran and the P-5+1 (the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany) was reached Saturday night. The...

- Diplomacia Brasileira: Um Balanco Para A Foreign Policy
The Soft-Power Power Susan Glasser, Foreign Policy's editor in chief, met Foreign Minister Celso Amorim in Brasilia for a wide-ranging conversation on Brazil's role as the rest rises. Below, the edited excerpts. INTERVIEW BY SUSAN GLASSER | DECEMBER...



Diplomacia e Relações Internacionais








.