but THERE WERE significant minorities of german population in the area.
Sometimes democracy fails, like when it coughs up Nazis. Sad but true. Before you can make it succesful again, you have to remove Nazis from the equation.
Regarding Chamberlain and Daladier, I do not think you're judging them fairly: at the time nobody would have dreamed that the situation would evolved as it had. ("Hey, he was elected by a democratic election! germans are serious people: they wouldn't dream of voting for a madman").
Now, if being an idiot carried the death penalty, we'd make Hitler's crimes pale to insignificance, but Chamberlain's policy wasn't all peace-democracy-self-determination-yay!. It was based on miscalculations about Hitler and phobic fear of Soviet Russia. It was a stupid, disasterous policy, even if there were some noble ideals behind it as well as misjudged and ignoble calculations.
The Nazis wanted their war over the Munich Crisis. It was averted by Chamberlain's frantic efforts. When a regime
wants war, you see it off by strength and make sure it behaves, whether or not this means giving them their wish. You don't
increase their strength by stabbing a democratic ally in the back, because if they want war so badly they're obviously going to use it against you soon.
The Nazis didn't demand "self-determination for the Sudetenland". They demanded "German troops occupy the Sudetenland without any pretense of democracy in ten short days, Czechs and Jews can pack their bags and run". You don't give such a regime what it wants, unless you think you can turn its naked aggression against the Evil Russkies, of course. Don't act surprised when they think you're spineless and turn on you, and don't act surprised when the Evil Russkies, after you've brushed off their every attempt to find an understanding with you, decide to look out for number one.
my point is that both the sudetenland and the danzig claims were reasonable in the eyes of european powers, and of course nobody in western europe wanted another War.
There's the simplification of the decade. Churchill and Atlee and The Gang certainly wanted one, if that was what it took. The Czechs would have preffered it to the other option. Most importantly, whatever everybody else thought, Hitler wanted it like nobody's business.
There's a fomous picture of chamberlain waving the piece of paper which "saved the peace of our days", which is often quoted as an exemple of misjudgment. However, if you look at the background, you can see a lot of people rejoicing. C and D just tries to to what people who elected them wanted them to do: trying to preserve peace
Chamberlain was one of the earliest great spinners, however, and euphoric relief combined with extremely skillful news management (a low point in the illustrious history of the BBC, I'm afraid) wore off very quickly (IIRC, there was a Gallup poll suggesting that Britons actually thought, in early 1939, that the government should hurry up and make that Russian alliance, which would figure: the British man-in-the-street isn't fussed about the fate of the Kresy). There was a fatalistic feeling in late-30s Britain. If Chamberlain had let the war that was brewing happen, Britons would have put their shoulders to the wheel just like we did in 1939.
The widespread pacifism of which so much is made A) had passed its peak, B) overlapped quite a bit witb blatant pro-Nazi figures such as the war-reviling Oswald Mosley, C) was never what it might seem. I'm reminded of the bit in Patrick Leigh Fermor's travelogue of 30s Germany where people are asking about the Oxford resolution not to fight for king and country (he being a student). This is Crete guy, yes. Sir Patrick Leigh Fermor DSO OBE, jumped out of a plane, kidnapped General Kreipe. That guy. he notes that a great many of the resolutions signatories would have wartime exploits of their own: the very formulation of the resolution was archaic, a near joke, a rejection of old jingoistic ideals but not of such very British ideas of "Well, it's all pretty terrible, isn't it? Well, musn't grumble." That, and not "Yay! War!", was the spirit of 1939.
what has the Final solution to do with the matter we are discussing?
It could never have happened if not for Britain, in common with everybody else, badly screwing up?