1 Many historians have attempted to propose several theses on the origins of World War II.

Numerous accounts have laid blame on a variety of factors for the start of the Second World War, such as the Treaty of Versailles, the Great Depression, and even the advent of Anti-Semitism. In the book, The Origins of the Second World War in Europe, P.M.H Bell presented an alternative viewpoint, than that of previous writers. Bell acknowledged the recognised Thirty Years war thesis, which stated that World War II was the second phase of a continuous struggle against German domination in Europe. Bell however stated that this thesis was much too simple to explain the origins of such a massive war effort, and presented his own explanation of factors that caused the Second World War. Bell stated that the war occurred due to a combination of conflicting ideologies, the Great Depression, an upsurge in nationalism, and the emergence of Hitler.1 World War II was different from the First World War in many ways, World War I started swiftly and spread quickly with ultimatums and declarations of war. The Second World War however, started with the Spanish civil war, which marked the outbreak of an ideological conflict, which was already predominant over Europe in the late 1930s.2 The First World War never had such strong ideologies rooted in different states; the nations that went to war were more interested in power, geography, and national interests. WWII however, had a clash of different ideologies such as democracy, fascism, communism, each with different diplomats and plans. These different ideologies were a major factor in contributing to the problems present in the 1930s.3
1

P.M.H., Bell, The Origins of the Second World War in Europe (London: Longman Group, 1997), 17. Ibid., 5. Ibid., 6.

2 3

2 Italian fascism, which rose up under the influence of Mussolini, presented a strong brand of totalitarianism in Italy. Fascist doctrines stressed the importance of the state above all other factors, and encouraged war as a solution to expanding conflicts. Mussolini wrote in his works that, Fascism repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. These strong beliefs caused a natural conflict with the Pacifist ideals of Britain and France who were parliamentary democracies.4 Even though the British and the French had emerged as victors in the First World War, they had suffered heavy losses, and had no intention to engage in such a large-scale conflict again. These democratic nations stressed disarmament in their policies, and formed the League of Nations, a union of European states, where peaceful solutions to conflicts could come about without the use of force. Britain and France refused to step in and stop Germany from conquering Poland until they realised Hitler could not be trusted, and the only way of stopping him was through war. 5 German Nazism which gained strength when Hitler came to power, stressed similar ideals to that of Fascism, it differed in the fact that Nazism had roots in racial theories and social Darwinism. Hitler practiced strong expansionist policies, and repeatedly violated the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles. In Hitlers Mein Kampf he wrote that, Only an adequately large space on this earth assures a nation of freedom of existence. German foreign policy was viewed as outrageous in the 1930s; Hitler had a definite program laid out for world supremacy. He wanted to conquer Europe and the Soviet Union, if possible by using Britain in an alliance, and then take on the United
4 5

Ibid., 65. Ibid., 122.

3 States of America, which would then achieve his ultimate goal of German supremacy and racial superiority of the German people. Nazi beliefs led to an alliance with Italy in which both nations followed similar patterns of foreign policy.6 Soviet Russia with deep-rooted beliefs in Communism and Bolshevism also caused a conflict with Europe. Communism produced a source of suspicion, tension, and conflict unknown to Europe, and many nations did not trust the Soviet Union during the 1930s. As a result, Britain and France choose not to ally themselves with USSR, because it was a viewed as a public alliance with communism. The Soviets eventually fought against Germany in the war, but this was mainly due to self-defence, as Hitler decided to invade the Soviet Union. The result was a situation in which there was ideological conflict between states. An alliance was formed between the Nazi and fascist regimes of Germany and Italy, against Bolshevik Russia, and the parliamentary, capitalist democracies of Britain and France.7 Ideology had an important role in World War II; it was a complicating element in international affairs. Ideology produced lines of division, which ran across several states and caused individuals and politicians to be loyal to an idea, and not to their countries. Ideological links and antagonisms sometimes made it difficult for governments to act solely based on power politics and material interests. According to Bell, the Pacifist beliefs of Britain and France, left an easy path of advance for Germany and Italy, these democracies gave their enemies many opportunities which were exploited, and eventually led to all out world war.8 The effects of such strict principles on a nation and its rulers, is something that the Thirty Years War thesis did not address. Ibid., 95. Ibid., 135. 8 Ibid., 58.
6 7

4 Alliances and diplomatic line-ups differed in both the First and Second World Wars. In the First World War, Austria-Hungary, and Germany were allied together against Britain, France, and Russia. These nations proposed alliances together mainly due to a strong interest in material gain, and power. During World War II however, Italy, and Germany were strong allies, with Japan, joining them after major war was declared. Britain and France allied together against the Nazi threat, while Communist Russia stayed out of any strong alliances until Germany invaded it. Alliances were different in World War II because they ideology was their main cause. Germany and Italy were both strict fascist regimes, with aggressive, expansionist foreign policy. Britain and France were parliamentary democracies and peacemakers, whose only interests were to prevent war from breaking out again. Communist Russia, under Stalin wanted to expand, spread Communism around Europe, wipe out capitalism, and keep its interests secured.9 Nationalism was a major factor that played a part in Bells arguments. Before the First World War, nationalist movements were very predominant in Europe. Nationalist movements encouraged states to damage their opponents, for example, Germany encouraged Polish and Ukrainian nationalism against Russia. Nationalism was also what led to an uproar following the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand, the Austrians were angry that the Serbians had killed one of their leaders, and demanded revenge and war against the Serbs. The Russians stepped in to defend the Serbs against Austria and Germany due to common Pan-Slavism. Before the First World War European states were patriotic because they had their countries interests at heart, they fought for their history, geography, and economic status. Such feelings of strong nationalism however were not present during the pre World War II period, people during the late 1930s fought for
9

Ibid., 129.

5 material interests, and conflicting ideologies. Public officials led their people to war over issues involving ethnic minorities, and power politics. 10 Bell states in his book that Hitler was a major contributor to World War II, another factor that the Thirty Years War Thesis ignores. Bell cites evidence that goes against the argument of German continuity in WWII. He says there is strong evidence that Hitlers personality, the nature and methods of his new regime, and the overriding demands of Nazi ideology constituted a sharp break in German policy, dated either in 1933, when Hitler came to office, or in 1938, when he finally broke the power of the conservative establishment in his foreign office. Even in 1930s the old established German military political and military leaders had grown cautious, and were by no means eager for a war of conquest. Hitler however introduced a new way of thought, new men from far outside, and revolutionary new methods.11 In Mein Kampf, a book, which Hitler wrote, stating his goals on German domestic and foreign policy, he set out a clear and detailed program of his fundamentalist views. Hitler may have not followed everything in his works, but he certainly abided by the world picture that he painted in his writings. Hitlers book was at the least, an authentic reflection if Hitlers mind, and what he intended to do. Hitler lived by his ideas of antiSemitism, race, living space, and the idea of continuous struggle, that he constantly talked about in his works. His book was distributed to the German military, government circles and to average citizens as well.12 As Donald Watt said, Always one returns to Hitler: Hitler exultant, Hitler vehement, Hitler indolent, Hitler playing the great commander And again Hitler willed, Ibid., 29. Ibid., 52. 12 Ibid., 54.
10 11

6 wanted, craved war and the destruction wrought by war.13 This quote reflects the true nature of Hitlers action in the Second World War, something that cannot be ignored as Bell also stated. Bell also introduced an economic argument that the Thirty Years War thesis ignored. He stated that the Great Depression, following the stock market collapse of 1929, was another factor that contributed to World War II. In the mid 1920s Europe was on a path of recovery and reconciliation. This path of recovery however was destroyed by the depression, and world economic collapse. The great stock market crash cut off all hopes of recovery, and the depression wrecked all the gains in terms of economic stabilization, prosperity, and material progress, secured since 1924. It provoked much of Europe into a flight towards political extremes, which plunged the Continent into ideological strife, and various forms of economic nationalism, which generated constant friction. Above all, it destroyed German prosperity and rendered 6 million Germans unemployed, it played a crucial part in Hitler rising to power. According to Bell the depression caused a small chain reaction, the depression brought Hitler, and Hitler brought the war. The origins of the war go back essentially to the insatiable appetites of Adolf Hitler.14 P.M.H Bell was a historian who presented an alternative thesis on the origins of the Second World War. His views provide a valuable viewpoint on conditions that led to outbreak of World War II and are a welcome change from the more popular views of the Thirty Years War thesis. His arguments were well sourced and analysed, and were more

13 14

Ibid., 52. Ibid., 43.

7 significant than the explanation that World War II was just a continuation of German expansionism, from the First World War.