The League of Nations

Could the League of Nations have done more?

Wilson’s Aims

The League of Nations was set up because President Wilson (USA) wanted this more than anything else.

He wanted the League to be a kind of ‘world parliament’, where nations would sort out their arguments. He hoped this would stop wars.

Wilson also hoped that the League would persuade the nations to agree to disarmament – to put down their weapons. That would make war impossible, and to enforce the Treaty of Versailles

Strengths and Weaknesses

Forty-two countries joined the League at the start. In the 1930s about 60 countries were members. This made the League seem strong.

However, the most powerful countries in the world were not members (USA and Russia) and Germany were not allowed.

What must have happened to encourage a cartoon like this?

What is the message?

The 1920’s

Corfu- 1923 (Island of Greece)- Mussolini invades the island after an Italian is killed- The league intervenes- Mussolini leaves (eventually)

France- 1923 Occupies the Ruhr valley- League doesn’t respond

Bulgaria 1925- Greek soldiers killed on the border of Bulgaria- They invade- The league intervenes- Bulgaria orders its troops to not shoot- Greece leaves

*all of these events were intervened by the League successfully but the League’s initial resolution was met with hostility from the nations involved

Source AA British cartoon of 1925 shows Greece and Bulgaria fighting – like Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee in the story Alice in Wonderland.The League, like the dove of peace, stops the fight.

Manchuria 1931

In the 1930s there was a world-wide economic depression. Japan tried to overcome the depression by building up an empire.

In 1932, the Japanese army invaded Manchuria, threw out the Chinese, and set up their own government there.

China asked the League to help.

A British cartoon of 1933 shows Japan trampling all over the League, whilst Britain powders her nose.

Manchuria 1931

Japan refused to leave Manchuria. Instead, Japan left the League.

Many countries had important trading links with Japan.

The League could not agree on sanctions or even a ban on weapons sales. Britain and France did not want a war, so nothing was done.

The Japanese stayed in Manchuria.

Abyssinia 1935

Mussolini got ready to invade Abyssinia (Ethiopia). He wanted war and glory. Abyssinia asked the League to help.

Mussolini ignored the League, and invaded Abyssinia. The League banned weapons sales, and put sanctions on rubber and metal.(It did nothing else – in fact Britain and France secretly agreed to give Abyssinia to Italy.)

Italy conquered Abyssinia. The League had failed- see a trend?

What the historians say:

The crisis was fatal to the League. Nobody took it seriously again. They got ready for the Second World War.Written by the historian JR Western (1971). After Manchuria and Abyssinia, people decided that it was no longer any use putting their hopes in the League.Written by the historian J Joll (1976). The League died in 1935. One day it was a powerful body imposing sanctions, the next day it was a useless fraud, everybody running away from it as quickly as possible. Hitler watched.Written by the historian AJP Taylor (1966).

A View from CanadaThe most vital lesson to be learned, in my view, is that the League of Nations failed because members and non-members alike – the international community at large – allowed it to fail. Undoubtedly, there were flaws in the Covenant of the League of Nations , but those alone cannot account for the demise of the institution. From the beginning, the League was undermined by a dangerous combination of unrealistic expectations and insufficient commitments. Those difficulties were compounded by a perception that the lofty rhetoric of the Covenant did not correspond sufficiently with the actual values, interests and experience of those members and non-members upon whom its success depended. Some great powers – including the United States , which had played an important role in promoting the creation of the organization – chose to stay on the outside for all or part of its history. Those empty chairs certainly eroded the credibility of the League. But even those states which participated in the debates cannot escape blame.

- Yves Fortier, Canada and the United Nations: A Half Century Partnership (March 6, 1996)Yves Fortier is a Canadian lawyer who from July 1988 to January 1992, was Canada's

Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York. For 1989 and 1990, he also served as Canada's Representative to the Security Council of the United

Nations, and in October 1989, he was the President of the Security Council.

The League WAS DUMBWeak – the League’s ‘powers’ were little more than going ‘tut-tut’. Sanctions did not work. It had no army.America – the strongest nation in the world never joined.Structure – the League was muddled, so it took ages to do anything. Members couldn’t agree – but decisions had to be unanimous. This paralysed the League. Depression – the world-wide Depression Unsuccessful – the more the League failed, the less people trusted it. In the end, everybody just ignored it.Members – the League’s main members let it down. Italy and Japan betrayed the League. France and Britain did nothing to help it.Big bullies – in the 1920s, the League had dealt with weak countries. In the 1930s, powerful countries like Germany, Italy and Japan attacked weaker countries. They were too strong for the League to stop them.

The League and Hindsight

Obviously the League of Nations failed. WWII happened, 55 million people die and we could easily simply state that the League should have been able to do more to prevent that from happening.

But there is problem for thinking historically and using hindsight. We must analyse the sources from the time with the time period in mind not using what we know to cloud our judgements.

Be a good historian and read the following source (ESPECIALLY its origin) and prepare and with reference to its origin, PURPOSE and content explain its value and limitations for historians studying the failure of the League of Nations.

The League (of Nations) failed because it could not create actions from its words. It could not back diplomacy with the credible threat and, where necessary, the use of force. So small evils went unchecked, tyrants became emboldened, then greater evils were unleashed. At each stage good men and women said 'not now - wait, the evil is not big enough to challenge'. Then, before their eyes, the evil became too big to challenge.

Jack Straw, February 2003, British Foreign Minister. During debate on whether Britain should go to war with Iraq and its Dictator Saddam Hussein.