Many in the British government believed that the United States could not be trusted as an ally because the country refused to join the League of Nations and retreated to its usual isolationism. Although the nation as a whole tended to be isolationist at that time, President Roosevelt proposed a working committee of nations that presented a document that covered the essential principles of international behavior. Chamberlain rejected this idea, however, on the grounds that Britain and France were already directly linked to Germany and Italy. Chamberlain preferred a “gentleman`s agreement” (with Hitler) if one were to appease. (Wheeler-Bennett 1948, 270-1) … The solution to the Czechoslovakian problem that has just been found is, in my opinion, only the prelude to a larger colony in which all Europe can find peace. This morning I had another meeting with the German Chancellor, Mr. Hitler, and this is the document that bears his name, as well as mine. Some of you may have already heard what it contains, but I`d just like to read it to you: ` … We consider the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German naval agreement as a symbol of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war again.  Munich`s quotation in foreign policy debates is also common in the 21st century.
 During negotiations on the Iran nuclear deal by Secretary of State John Kerry, a Republican representative from Texas called the negotiations “worse than Munich.” In a speech in France, Kerry himself referred to Munich for military action in Syria: “This is our munich moment.”  Finally, Frank McDonough`s study examines British foreign policy and appeasement in British politics and society in the interwar years. Its stated aim is to “show why politics has provoked such passion and opposition.” (McDonough 1998, 8) It assesses both the causes and effects of appeasement on British society. Andrew David Stedman`s 2011 book Alternative to Appeasement: Neville Chamberlain and Hitler`s Germany examines Chamberlain`s particular circumstances at the time of the agreement. It seeks a global synthesis to analyze the origins, nature and viability of the different alternatives to appeasement. (Stedman 2011, viii) This document contributes to the literature by briefly summarizing the reasons why appeasement was chosen as a response to the 1938 threat and its application to a threat today.