Option B: 20th Century topic DID THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS HAVE A CHANCE OF SUCCEEDING? Study the Background Information and the sources carefully, and then answer all the questions. Background Information The last of President Wilson’s Fourteen Points was that ‘a general association of nations’ should be set up to ensure the ‘political independence and territorial integrity of great and small nations alike’. In 1920 the League of Nations was established. Its members agreed to protect all members against aggression and to try and resolve disputes peacefully through the League. During the 1920s, the League had to deal with several disputes, including ones over the Aaland Islands and …show more content…
French interests demanded a League with teeth. They made several attempts to create a military force at the League’s disposal, but failed to persuade the British.When Wilson failed to push American membership of the League through Congress, much of theLeague’s deterrent value slipped away.The League was certainly not unimportant; it provided an international forum for discussion, it was a source of influence, and helped tackle the kinds of problems – like the refugee crisis – where a coordinated international response was desirable. Even though it had very limited powers to intervene in the internal affairs of member states, it could help publicise abuses of minority groups and expose governments to the pressure of world opinion. Nevertheless, its influence depended on its members’ willingness to work through it. They were not bound by it, and could conduct diplomacy through other channels. Great Power politics was far from dead. Other more traditional, diplomatic forums remained important: the Conference of Ambassadors was chosen in preference to the League to settle crises in 1923 over Corfu and Vilna. Between 1934 and 1936 the European balance swung away from France and Britain. The British could not afford military commitments …show more content…
Of sixty-six international disputes it had to deal with, it successfully resolved thirty-five and quite sensibly passed back twenty to the channels of traditional diplomacy. It failed to resolve just eleven conflicts. After the First World War Great Britain and France still laid down the law to all Europe. However, everything was soon overtaken in importance by the new institution which came out of the peace conference: the League of Nations. It is true that there was a deep, underlying divergence between Britain and France as to the nature of the League. The French wanted the League to develop into a system of security directed against Germany; the British regarded it as a system of conciliation which would include Germany. The British and French governments were both too distracted by difficulties, domestic and foreign, to have a clear and consistent policy. When Abyssinia was attacked in October 1935, the members of the League responded. The impact of the League’s sanctions was weakened by Germany and the United States, the two Great Powers outside the League. But this was not serious. The real weakness was within the League. France applied sanctions but assured Mussolini that Italy’s oil supplies would not be interfered with. On 1 May 1936, the Emperor Haile Selassie left Abyssinia. A week later Mussolini proclaimed the foundation of a new Roman empire. This was a serious blow
Precisely, as stated by Irreconcilable William Borah in a speech to the Senate in 1918, the League of Nations in particular stands no chance at imposition, and certainly does not stand on its own, for it clearly, contradictorily advocates for the very measures that it seemingly goes against: “The first proposition connected with the proposed league is that of a tribunal to settle the matters of controversy which may arise between the different nations. Will anyone advocate that those matters which are of vital importance to our people shall be submitted to a tribunal created other than by our own people and give it an international army subject to its direction and control to enforce its decrees? I doubt if anyone will advocate that … if you do not do so, Mr. President, what will your league amount to? … In its last analysis the proposition is force to destroy force, conflict to prevent conflict, militarism to destroy militarism, war to prevent war. In its last analysis it must be that if it has any sanction behind its judgment at all.
Additionally, the League of Nations would control the United States's foreign affairs. The goal of the League of Nations is to help foreign countries, therefore the U.S. would always be out helping other nations. These actions would have cost our money, resources, and men. Consistently helping out other countries would cause the United States to run out of resources and energy. The United States would probably not be the world power it is
This quotation also shows how although the League of Nations was formed post World War I to support defenseless countries and help prevent war, the organization ended up doing the complete opposite in order to appease
Over 30 counties, 32 to be exact, had come together in paris, france in january 1919. Here they would attempt to make peace around the world after world war 1. The singing was primarily dominated by the big three, britain, france and the US. italy was left out of the big three because france and britain thought that they didn 't do a good enough job of fighting. Germany and russia were left out of the conference and were forced to met the requirements of what the big three wanted back from the war.
Because of that point, American senators were iffy about ratifying the treaty. They saw the League of Nations as a trap. Basically America would be pulled into all kinds of wars even if they were not the ones directly attacked. If America had decided to ratify it, all of the Americans would be at risk because who is to say a nation not in the
During the first world war, there was little support to the league and it resulted in world war two. However, after the war 50 counties have met up to discuss and prevent war to this
However, Wilson was able to achieve one point that he saw as one of the most important of his points: The League of Nations, a collective group of nations working to solve problems peacefully. This was Wilson’s top priority. While this was perhaps one of Wilson’s greatest achievements in the treaty, it also played
The League of Nations was a treaty to end the first war. Ending the first war, is what America needed and what they wanted. “He presided two amendments” (Witkosi). The two amendments he presided were very important to America and changed the way people voted and how they were. This was significantly important because the people wanted to vote and lowered income taxes for
He effectively rallied the American people in support of the war effort and was especially successful in depicting the war as a battle for democracy (Ibid). After the Germans signed the Armistice in November 1918, Wilson went to Paris to attempt to construct a persevering peace. At the Paris Peace Conference, which opened in January 1919 and incorporated the leaders of the British, French and Italian governments, Wilson arranged the Treaty of Versailles. The treaty of Versailles would ultimately end the War and it reassigned German boundaries and assigned liability for reparations. However, included in this was a charter for the League of Nations; an association expected to referee worldwide question and forestall future wars.
Some of the organizationa were The League of
This decision represents an isolationist viewpoint because it is based on a disdain for Article X, which provided for intervention into foreign nations by the League. All in all, the Great War did little to change the U.S. attitude of isolationism that most people held toward America’s role in the
Isolationism weakened the League of Nations by refusing to sign the League of Covenant and the Treaty of Versailles. Due to the feud between Wilson and Lodge, isolationism will start to grow. Isolationism and the fear of communism will influence the U.S. after World War 1. Americans have moved on and were getting tired of Progressivism and war. They feared unrest labor such as communist, labor unions, and immigrants.
Based on Henry Cabot Lodge’s statement about the League of Nations, one can say that he is willing to join with compromises to certain articles. However, William Borah wants the opposite and no compromises will change his stance. Lodge’s statement suggests that he is for the League of Nations when he speaks about the United States being of great service to world peace. However, Lodge states beforehand that he does not want the Unites State’s actions to be determined by other countries.
Carr emphasises the naivety to base the study of international politics on an imaginary view of how we like to see the world. One such naivety I understood from the text was the establishment of The League of Nations, a collective security instrument. A Utopian concept, Carr is critical of the League due somewhat to his belief that it was trying to generalise world politics between “sixty known states differing widely in size, in power, and in political, economic, and cultural development” (Carr, 1939 p. 30). Another criticism of Carr’s toward the League was the notion that more powerful states would use the League as means to ensure their own interests were
This essay will examine some of the successes and failures of the League of Nations in terms of maintaining peace between countries. The successes of the League of Nations mostly involved disputes between smaller nations. In the year of 1921, the League settled one of the first disputes since its formation. The Åland Islands are located in between Sweden and Finland. The islands were controlled by Finland but the majority of the population was Swedish, and they wanted to be controlled by Sweden.