Final answer:
Foreign leaders responded differently to Kristallnacht compared to Germany's aggressive expansion into Austria and the Sudetenland. Kristallnacht was widely condemned, while the responses to the expansion were characterized by appeasement.
Step-by-step explanation:
The responses of foreign leaders to Kristallnacht were different from their responses to Germany's aggressive expansion into Austria and the Sudetenland. In the case of Kristallnacht, which occurred in November 1938, there was widespread condemnation of the violent anti-Semitic attacks by Nazi Germany. Many foreign leaders expressed outrage and called for action to address the persecution of Jews. This event marked a turning point in public opinion towards the Nazis.
On the other hand, the responses to Germany's aggressive expansion into Austria and the Sudetenland were characterized by a policy of appeasement. In the Munich Conference of 1938, leaders of France and Britain agreed to allow Hitler to annex the Sudetenland in exchange for his promise to stop further expansion. This policy was aimed at avoiding war, but it ultimately failed as Germany continued its aggressive actions and eventually invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia.
In summary, while Kristallnacht elicited strong international condemnation, the responses to Germany's aggressive expansion were characterized by attempts to appease Hitler.