Which of the following best describes the practice of appeasement?

The practice of appeasement is best described as allowing aggressive actions to avoid conflict. This approach often involves a concession to an aggressor in hopes of maintaining peace and preventing escalation into war. Historical examples, notably the pre-World War II policies where Western powers allowed Nazi Germany to expand its territory without opposition, illustrate how appeasement is typically intended to avoid direct confrontation, even at the cost of ethical and moral considerations.

Negotiating peace would imply active efforts to resolve a conflict through dialogue and mutual agreement, often involving compromises from both sides rather than unilateral concessions. Military intervention denotes a direct involvement, usually through armed forces, which fundamentally contradicts the essence of appeasement, as it would typically escalate rather than de-escalate tensions. Restoring diplomatic relations relates more to re-establishing communication and formal interactions between nations, which does not inherently involve giving in to aggression but rather seeks to create a framework for ongoing dialogue, irrespective of past conflicts. Thus, appeasement distinctly emphasizes yielding to aggression to maintain peace.