<p>Question: Is compromise always the best way to resolve a conflict?</p>
<p>Compromise is one way of solving conflicts and disagreements. It means that some ideas from all sides are considered. But any agreement from a compromise will not be totally to either side. This can have serious implications if the issues in question are important. </p>
<p>Prior to the Second World War, UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler compromised about Germanys expansion in the 1930s. Britain promised to recognize the territories that Germany has acquired as German land. In return, Germany promised no further invasions. Both sides appeared to be happy Chamberlain went home to a heros welcome. But, Germany did not maintain what she had promised. A few months later, they invaded Poland. Soon after, Britain declared war on Germany and for Britain, World War Two began. These events show that when people have strong beliefs, any compromise is actually a foolish way of avoiding the fundamental issues. Hitler was determined to regain the territories that Germany had lost in the Treaty of Versailles. As a result, nothing could stop him. This incident is an example of when compromise does not work. </p>
<p>If we go back further in history, we see other examples of when compromise did not work. Slavery was a divisive issue since the formation of the United States of America. The northern states free were against slavery and generally supported freedom. On the other hand, the southern slave states required slavery for the plantation system. The two sides negotiated many compromises on the issue, e.g. the Three-Fifths Compromise, the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850. However, we know that none of these compromises worked because in 1860 the American Civil War started where the North (Union) fought the South (Confederacy) for the freedom of slaves. Those compromises had avoided temporary conflict but did not explicitly tackle the main issue of slavery. Both sides held principled view: the North was strongly in favour of freedom, whereas the South needed slaves for its economy. So compromise wouldnt work because neither found the others views satisfactory. Again, like the events preceding World War Two, compromise was not a good policy in this situation.</p>
<p>In conclusion, whilst compromise is one method to resolve a conflict, it is not always the best method. The examples above have shown that when peoples beliefs are very strong, compromise can do more harm than good. </p>
<p>Please give a score out of 12. </p>
<p>Thanks in advance :)</p>
much appreciated</p>