The
German reoccupation of the Rhineland marked the end of the devices for
security which had been set up after the first World war. The League of
Nations was a shadow; Germany could rearm, free from all treaty
restrictions; the guarantees of Locarno were no more. Wilsonian idealism
and French realism had both failed. Europe returned to the system, or
lack of system, which had existed before 1914. Every sovereign state,
great or small, again had to rely on armed strength, diplomacy, and
alliances for its security. The former victors had no advantage; the
defeated, no handicap. ‘International anarchy’ was restored. Many
people, including some historians, believe that this in itself is enough
to explain the second World war. And so, in a sense, it is. So long as
states admit no restriction of their sovereignty, wars will occur
between them – some wars by design, more by miscalculation. The defect
of this explanation is that, since it explains everything, it also
explains nothing. If ‘international anarchy’ invariably caused war, then
the states of Europe should never have known peace since the close of
the middle ages. In fact there have also been long periods of peace; and
before 1914 international anarchy gave Europe its longest peace since
the end of the Roman empire.
So, don’t panic, NATO. But do keep an eye on Poland.