Hitler's foreign policy and the outbreak of war in 1939
Trace Hitler's aims and rearmament through the Saar, Rhineland, alliances, Spain, Anschluss, Munich and Poland, weighing these against Versailles, League failure, appeasement and the Nazi–Soviet Pact.
Exam scope and assessment notes
This original lesson maps Cambridge IGCSE History 0977 key question B3 for exams in 2024–2030. 0470 uses grades A*–G; 0977 uses grades 9–1 and has limited zone availability. Cambridge states that the 2029–2030 syllabus has no significant changes affecting teaching and that resources for examinations from 2024 remain suitable. This pathway maps the shared subject content across the published 2024–2030 cycles; always use the exact exam-year syllabus, exam-series prescribed topic and centre route. Cambridge 0977 is offered only in specified administrative zones and locations; confirm that your centre can enter this grading route and exam series. StudyForA explanations, examples and practice are original learning materials, not Cambridge questions, source documents, mark schemes or grades. Paper 2's prescribed topic changes each exam series: use the exact topic for your year and series from Cambridge. Source-analysis exercises here use clearly labelled, invented practice claims and do not reproduce historical documents. Component 3 is centre-approved coursework based on a depth study and needs authentic learner work, supervision, internal assessment and Cambridge moderation; StudyForA cannot conduct, authenticate or award that coursework mark. Practice feedback is formative and is not an official Cambridge grade.
Before you begin
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
How should you approach this question: How far was Hitler's foreign policy to blame for war in Europe in 1939?
What you will learn
- Explain Hitler's foreign policy aims, rearmament, the Saar and remilitarisation of the Rhineland.
- Sequence the Rome–Berlin Axis, Anti-Comintern Pact, Spanish Civil War involvement, Anschluss, Czechoslovakia and Munich, the Polish crisis and war.
- Evaluate the roles of Versailles, League failures, appeasement, the Nazi–Soviet Pact and decisions by Britain and France in September 1939.
Expansion and responses
Study Hitler's aims and rearmament, the return of the Saar, remilitarisation of the Rhineland, the Rome–Berlin Axis, Anti-Comintern Pact and German and Italian involvement in the Spanish Civil War.
Anschluss with Austria and the Czechoslovak crisis culminated in the Munich Agreement. Analyse why other governments responded as they did and whether concessions changed the risks or encouraged further demands.
From Poland to war
The Polish crisis followed earlier expansion and the failure of diplomacy to preserve peace. The Nazi–Soviet Pact changed strategic calculations. Britain's and France's declarations of war in September 1939 followed the German attack on Poland.
The question asks how far Hitler's policy was to blame, so distinguish his decisions from the conditions and policies that enabled or failed to deter them. Consider the long-term consequences of Versailles, the League's failures and arguments about whether appeasement was justified.
Sources for this lesson
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2024–2026 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2024–2026 syllabus update
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2027–2028 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2029–2030 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 · 2024–2026 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 · 2027–2028 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 · 2029–2030 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 qualification page
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 qualification page
Pause and explain
How can a historian evaluate appeasement without relying only on hindsight?
Worked example
Was appeasement justified before 1939?
Show the worked solution
- Explain the aims and limits of appeasement at the time.
- Use the sequence from Munich to the Polish crisis to assess whether it reduced danger.
- Reach a judgement without assuming every alternative would have prevented war.
Answer Appeasement can be understood in the context of the desire to avoid another war and concerns about readiness. Yet concessions did not stop Hitler's expansion, and the Polish crisis ended in war. Its justification depends on the realistic alternatives available, not only on hindsight.
Try a topic test
Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.
Test this topic →From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
Explain how Hitler's foreign policy changed the international situation between rearmament and September 1939.
Give me a hint
Start with one named syllabus fact, explain its effect and connect it to the question.
Compare my reasoning
- Select accurate evidence: rearmament, Rhineland, Anschluss and the Polish crisis show an expanding policy.
- Explain the link between that fact and the issue being tested.
- Add a second condition or limitation before reaching a short answer. A model answer follows: Rearmament and the return of the Saar were followed by the remilitarisation of the Rhineland, closer links with Italy and Japan, involvement in Spain, Anschluss and the crisis over Czechoslovakia. The Polish crisis then led to war. Each stage tested other states' responses and altered the risks of further expansion.
Rearmament and the return of the Saar were followed by the remilitarisation of the Rhineland, closer links with Italy and Japan, involvement in Spain, Anschluss and the crisis over Czechoslovakia. The Polish crisis then led to war. Each stage tested other states' responses and altered the risks of further expansion.
Look for these in your work
- Uses a relevant named fact
- Explains a cause, consequence or comparison
- Qualifies the conclusion with evidence
How far was Hitler's foreign policy to blame for war in Europe in 1939?
Give me a hint
Choose a clear criterion for importance or success; compare evidence before you decide.
Compare my reasoning
- Select accurate evidence: rearmament, Rhineland, Anschluss and the Polish crisis show an expanding policy.
- Compare the strongest supporting evidence with a counterpoint.
- State which factor matters most, for whom and during which period. A model answer follows: Hitler's decisions to rearm and expand, culminating in the attack on Poland, were central because they created the immediate crisis. The failure of the League, the legacy of Versailles and appeasement shaped how other governments responded, while the Nazi–Soviet Pact affected the strategic setting. Context explains opportunities but does not remove responsibility for choices.
Hitler's decisions to rearm and expand, culminating in the attack on Poland, were central because they created the immediate crisis. The failure of the League, the legacy of Versailles and appeasement shaped how other governments responded, while the Nazi–Soviet Pact affected the strategic setting. Context explains opportunities but does not remove responsibility for choices.
Look for these in your work
- Selects evidence from the correct period
- Weighs more than one factor
- Makes a supported judgement
Original StudyForA practice claim (not a historical source): ‘If Britain and France had acted earlier, Hitler alone would not have caused the war.’ Evaluate the claim.
Give me a hint
Treat the prompt as an interpretation to test. Identify what evidence supports it and what it leaves out.
Compare my reasoning
- Select accurate evidence: rearmament, Rhineland, Anschluss and the Polish crisis show an expanding policy.
- Check the claim against at least two relevant pieces of contextual knowledge.
- Explain a limitation or alternative explanation; do not treat an invented practice prompt as a real historical source. A model answer follows: Earlier action might have altered Hitler's calculations, but the claim assumes an outcome that cannot be proven. Assess the timeline, military readiness, public opinion, alliance choices and Hitler's own aims. The outbreak followed both expansionist decisions and other states' responses; a careful answer distinguishes responsibility from counterfactual certainty.
Earlier action might have altered Hitler's calculations, but the claim assumes an outcome that cannot be proven. Assess the timeline, military readiness, public opinion, alliance choices and Hitler's own aims. The outbreak followed both expansionist decisions and other states' responses; a careful answer distinguishes responsibility from counterfactual certainty.
Look for these in your work
- Tests rather than repeats the claim
- Uses contextual knowledge to support or challenge it
- Explains a limitation and reaches a qualified conclusion
Common mistakes
- Explaining 1939 from Hitler's aims alone
- Listing events without showing how decisions changed risk
- Using appeasement as a slogan rather than evaluating contemporary constraints and alternatives
What can you explain now?
How can a historian evaluate appeasement without relying only on hindsight?
Compare with the explanation
What should a causal account of the 1939 outbreak include?
Build an evidence-led answer: describe the relevant context, explain how it supports the claim, test it against another factor or limitation, and reach a qualified judgement.
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
Without looking, state the key question, name two syllabus facts that bear on it, and explain one limit to your first conclusion.
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.