15- Diplomacy in Europe (collective security in the 20s and 30s) Flashcards

1
Q

How was collective security different in the 1920s and 30s?

A

While it can be argued that there were definitely some successes for the League in the 1920s, most historians agree that the 1930s saw the idea of collective security failing to maintain peace or to resolve key issues resulting from the Peace Treaties.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Why did collective security fail to maintain peace or resolve key issues in the 1930s?

A

The situation was complicated by the impact of the Great Depression and indeed it could be argued that this global event made the work of the League impossible given the fact that the economic situation encouraged both extremism and also made the democracies less willing and able to focus on international events.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

How successful was collective security in the 1920s?

A
  • The League attempted to solve various political disputes in the 1920s.
  • However, the structural weakness of the League were already clear and the actions of the key European powers, such as France continued to undermine the work of the League e.g. through the Ruhr Crisis.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

How did the political situation in Europe change after the Ruhr crisis?

A
  • After the Ruhr crisis, the political situation in Europe was improved with the Dawes Plan and also the Locarno Pact of 1925, the Kellogg–Briand Pact of August 1928 and the Young Plan of 1929.
  • However, it should be noted that these agreements took place outside the League of Nations.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Describe the military situation in Europe after French forces left the Ruhr

A
  • There were allied troops in other Rhineland cities, as dictated by the terms of Versailles.
  • Stresemann wanted to rid Germany of these ‘occupying forces’, and he was also keen to quell any movement in support of an independent Rhineland.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What did Stresemann propose at a conference in Locarno in Switzerland in February 1925 and what would this mean for different countries?

A
  • Stresemann proposed a voluntary German guarantee of its western borders.
  • Significantly for the French and Belgians, this meant that Germany was resolved to give up its claims over Alsace-Lorraine, Malmedy and Eupen.
  • In return, Germany had some reassurance that France would not invade again, and it removed any potential for an independent Rhineland.
  • A series of treaties were signed.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Describe the treaties that were signed at Locarno in 1925

A
  • The major treaty guaranteed the boundaries between France, Belgium and Germany.
  • Also present at Locarno were representatives of Italy, Czechoslovakia and Poland.
  • Germany signed treaties with Poland and Czechoslovakia, agreeing to change the eastern borders with these countries by arbitration only.
  • It was also agreed that Germany should be admitted into the League of Nations.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

How did the Locarno agreement impact Europe

A
  • It gave hope for future security.
  • It suggested that former enemies could work together to resolve disputes, and to uphold the Versailles settlement.
  • The new mood became known the ‘Locarno spirit’. When Locarno was followed up with a series of agreements involving the USA, this ‘spirit’ seemed to be embracing even isolationist nations.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Limitations of Locarno agreement - Germany’s borders

A
  • The Locarno Pact seemed to bode well for the future of collective security.
  • However, although this agreement appeared to herald a new era of cooperation between the Western European powers (Britain had been in favour of the agreement, as it expunged French excuses for occupation), what the agreement did not guarantee were Germany’s eastern borders.
  • Italy, present at Locarno, had not managed to get similar agreements from Germany on its southern border.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Limitations of Locarno agreement - France’s traties

A
  • The treaties France had with Poland and Czechoslovakia were little comfort to those respective countries, as it would be strategically difficult to offer tangible support following Locarno.
  • In addition, France had not changed its view of Germany. Rather, it had just changed its strategy for containing Germany. Instead of confronting the Germans with force, France was now attempting to bring Germany into international agreements that involved the guarantees of other powers.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Limitations of Locarno agreement - undermining the ToV and LoN

A
  • Locarno had undermined both the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations.
  • Security for France had been sought outside the League, and only a component of the Versailles Treaty had been guaranteed.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

When was the Young Plan introduced?

A

1929

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What was the purpose of the Young Plan?

A

It attempted to redress some of the problems that remained with the Dawes Plan.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What were some of the aspects of the Young Plan?

A
  • It further reduced the total sum to be repaid by Germany
  • A date was set for completion of repayments – 1988
  • Continued US involvement in reparation payments.
  • As part of the deal, Britain and France agreed to end their occupation of the Rhineland five years ahead of schedule.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What did Keynes write about the Dawes and Young Plans?

A
  • As Keynes had noted in 1926, the foundations for both the Dawes and then the Young Plan, and thus both German and European recovery, was foreign money.
  • Two-thirds of investment in Germany during the 1920s came from America.
  • Keynes wrote in 1926 that the reparation arrangements were ‘in the hands of the American capitalist’.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

When was the Kellog-Briand Pact signed?

A

August 1928

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What was the Kellog Briand Pact?

A
  • It was initiated by American Secretary of State William Kellogg and the French Foreign Minister Aristide Briand.
  • The pact renounced ‘war as an instrument of national policy’; 62 of 64 invited states signed the agreement (Brazil and Argentina declined).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What were the contemporary views of the Kellog-Briand Pact?

A
  • They were often positive; it was seen as an important declaration by governments that they would pursue their objectives through peaceful means.
  • The pact has been viewed as the high point of ‘Locarno spirit’ era.
  • Unfortunately, this perspective would prove to be naive, as the encouraging elements of Europe’s recovery were very fragile.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

How could it be argued that there was no major conflict in the 1920s?

A
  • Because the main revisionist power, i.e. Germany, was still recovering from World War I.
  • In addition, the 1920s were in the main a period of relative economic boom and prosperity, which decreased international tensions and encouraged cooperation.
  • As P.M.H. Bell writes, ‘Europe had survived, but was still on the sick list.’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Give an overview of collective security in the 1930s

A
  • Although the concept of collective security had some degree of success in the 1920s, the League’s failure to resolve key international crises in the 1930s meant that it had completely collapsed by 1939.
  • A major factor in undermining the concept of collective security was the impact of The Depression.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Why were the effects the Great Depression so far-reaching and global?

A
  • Because the USA had become the globally dominant economic power, and this meant that the world’s economy was ominously linked to its fortunes.
  • The impact of the crisis on the economic, social and ultimately political landscape of the world ushered in a return to a world dominated by national self-interest and the dominance of military forces.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

How did the Great Depression affect the US’ economy?

A

The USA’s national income fell by almost 50 per cent between 1929 and 1932, and its government struggled to cope with unemployment and popular discontent.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What political effects did the Great Depression have?

A
  • Poverty and despair have often fostered the rise of extremist groups, and the fragile liberal governments of the 1920s found resurgent nationalist and aggressive political groups very difficult to restrict.
  • The delicate European stability that had been nurtured by the resources of American capitalism was particularly vulnerable to a major economic collapse in the USA.
  • This was equally true of the recently democratic and liberal Japan.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Who was blamed for the Great Depression

A
  • Governments were blamed for the crisis.

- In France, a moderate government was replaced by a radical left-wing government in the May 1932 election.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

How was Britain affected by the GD- economically and poltiically?

A

Iron and stille production fell by 50 per cent and politics shifted to right-wing parties.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

How was the German economy affected by the GD and why?

A
  • Germany had borrowed £9,000 million between 1924 and 1929.
  • When the money stopped, its economy collapsed; German unemployment stood at 1.4 million in 1928 and was over 30% of the population in 1932.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

How did the political situation in Germany change as a result of the GD?

A

The Weimar government and liberal democracy lost credibility and ended when Franz von Papen assumed the role of virtual dictator in May 1932.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

How was Japan affected by the Great Depression?

A
  • In 1931, 50 per cent of factories closed and silk prices fell by two-thirds.
  • There ensued a radical shift to the right, linked to military factions. By 1932, following a series of assassinations, the era of liberal politics in Japan was over.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

How did the political situation in Belgium and Poland change due to the GD?

A

The impact of the Depression led to new government initiatives that looked to improve their defences against a potentially expansionist Germany.

30
Q

How did the Great Depression impact people’s fears about the USSR?

A
  • The Depression heightened the fears of the USSR’s potential for fostering the spread of communist revolution into the impoverished working-class streets of European cities.
  • Soviet propaganda claimed that the Depression demonstrated the inherent failings of capitalism, and its inevitable replacement with the communist system
31
Q

How were Britain and France’s empires impacted by the GD and how did these countries feel about it?

A
  • Britain and France were also alarmed at the escalating nationalist and independence movements in their respective empires, and the corresponding costs of controlling these.
  • With a pressurized domestic situation, it was particularly difficult to manage the growing forces of expansionism in both Europe and Asia.
  • The democratic governments were thus increasingly forced to review their strategies for dealing with international tension.
32
Q

How was the League’s key weapon of economic sanctions viewed during the Great Depression?

A

It was now a weapon most countries would not want deployed as they attempted to protect their own trading interests.

33
Q

How did the USA respond to the GD (in terms of international relations)?

A

The USA pulled away further into isolationism.

34
Q

How did Britain respond to the GD (in terms of international relations)?

A

The British established protectionism for their trade within their empire in the Ottawa Agreements (1932)

35
Q

How were France and Italy affected by the Great Depression?

A

Although they took longer to be affected, as they were not as heavily dependent on international trade, they too had a downturn in their economies.

36
Q

How did international diplomacy change as a result of the Great Depression?

A
  • The responses to the Depression by the democratic states seemed to lead back to an old- style diplomacy, e.g. alliances and agreements outside the League.
  • The strategy of appeasing countries in response to aggression became more realistic.
  • Economic sanctions were not palatable and to take on aggressors by force was not, at least in the early 1930s when the Depression was tightening its grip, a viable option.
37
Q

What does the historian Richard Overy write about the international impact of the Great Depression?

A
  • As the crisis deepened governments struggled to protect the established order and prevent social revolution.
  • Economic nationalism became the order of the day; economic considerations entered foreign policy, so that economic rivalry was expressed in terms of sharper political conflict.
  • It was no mere chance that economic recovery at the end of the 1930s was fuelled by high levels of rearmament.
  • The ‘have-not’ nations were determined to improve their economic situation by force.
38
Q

How did the Depression make work of the League more difficult?

A
  • Impact on the League’s ability to impose economic sanctions
  • Economic protectionism
  • Domestic tensions
  • Cost of military preparedness & defence
  • Political radicalization undermining liberal capitalist democracy
  • Pursuit of economic resources through aggression & expansion
39
Q

What was the first major test for the League of Nations and collective security in the 1930s?

A

The Manchurian Crisis

40
Q

Causes of the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • Japan badly affected by world depression.
  • Some sections of Japanese society believed that the key to Japan’s future economic survival was to expand its empire.
  • However, Asia was already dominated by the European colonial powers: Britain, France and the Netherlands.
  • They would not tolerate any threat to their interests in the region.
  • In addition, the USA was attempting to increase its influence in the Pacific and would be concerned with any ‘aggressive’ expansionism there.
41
Q

Describe the events of the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • In September 1931, the Japanese army in Manchuria, the Kwantung Army (responsible for protecting Japanese interests in the area), claimed that a bomb explosion near the town of Mukden was evidence of growing disorder, and used it as an excuse to conquer the province.
  • In reality, the Japanese forces had planted the bomb, evidence of the Kwantung Army’s desire to expand its influence in the territory.
42
Q

How was the League of Nations associated with the Manchurian Crisis?

A
  • In this incident, one key member of the League had attacked another member, China.
  • China appealed to the League for assistance against an aggressor; here was exactly the type of incident that ‘collective security’ was designed to contain.
43
Q

What actions did the League of Nations take in response to the Manchurian Crisis?

A
  • It condemned Japan’s actions and ordered the withdrawal of Japanese troops. The Japanese government agreed, but their army refused. This outcome exposed the lack of control the Japanese civilian government had over its military.
  • It appointed a commission under Lord Lytton to investigate the crisis. The commission took more than a year to report, by which time the invasion and the occupation were complete. The commission found Japan guilty of forcibly seizing part of China’s territory.
  • It accepted the Lytton Report and instructed all of its members not to recognize the new Japanese state called Manchukuo. It invited Japan to hand Manchuria back to China.
44
Q

Describe Japan’s leaving of the League of Nations due to the League’s response to the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • The Japanese said that they were leaving the League.
  • They claimed that the condemnation of their actions in China was hypocrisy by powers such as Britain, which had a long legacy of using force to achieve its objectives in China.
  • They may have had a point, but the new ideas embodied by the League represented a shift in international tolerance of this kind of empire-building.
45
Q

Why did the League fail to resolve the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • The impact of the Great Depression
  • Imposing any kind of military solution was problematic
  • France and Italy’s occupation with events in Europe
46
Q

Explain how the impact of the Great Depression was a reason why the League failed to resolve the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • The impact of the Great Depression caused the member states to be too preoccupied with their own troubled domestic situations.
  • It also made them unwilling to apply economic sanctions. In any case, Japan’s main trading links were with the USA, which was not a member of the League.
47
Q

Explain how the fact that imposing any kind of military solution was problematic
was a reason why the League failed to resolve the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • Manchuria was geographically remote and only Britain and the USA had the naval resources to confront Japan; again the USA was unwilling to do this.
  • Britain was unwilling to act alone and also did not want to risk a naval conflict in the region, where they might well be outnumbered by the Japanese (following the Washington Conference) and risk threatening their colonial interests.
48
Q

Explain how France and Italy’s occupation with events in Europe
was a reason why the League failed to resolve the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • France and Italy were too occupied with events in Europe and were not prepared to agree to any kind of military or naval action against Japan.
  • Again, as with Britain, France’s colonial interests in the region made for a confused response.
  • Japan was openly condemned, but privately the government sent a note suggesting that it was sympathetic to the ‘difficulties’ Japan was experiencing.
49
Q

Explain how the outcome of the Manchurian Crisis was a failure for the League

A
  • China had appealed to the League for help in the face of an aggressor, but had received no practical support, neither military nor in terms of economic sanctions.
  • The moral high ground offered by the Lytton Report’s verdict was little comfort.
  • The whole affair had suggested that the League lacked the will to follow through with its philosophy of ‘collective security’.
  • The aggressor had ‘got away with it’.
50
Q

What does Richard Overy point out about Japan leaving the League?

A

He points out that by leaving the League of Nations, Japan had ‘effectively removed the Far East from the system of collective security’.

51
Q

How were the Manchurian and Abyssinian crises linked?

A

After the crisis, Mussolini began planning his expansionist adventure into Abyssinia, encouraged by what had happened in Manchuria

52
Q

Give an overview of the impact of the Abyssinian Crisis and how it was similar/different from the impact of the Manchurian Crisis

A
  • The invasion of Abyssinia by Italy was to have catastrophic consequences for the credibility of the League.
  • Like Japan, Italy was a member of the League and like Japan, Italy was invading another country
  • However, this time, the crisis was much closer to home for the key European Powers of the League.
53
Q

What was the Abyssinian response to the Italian invasion?

A

When the 100,000-strong Italian army invaded, the Abyssinian Emperor, Haile Selassie, appealed to the League.

54
Q

How did the League of Nations respond to the Abyssinian Crisis?

A
  • The League’s response came on 18 October.

- Italy’s invasion was condemned and the League decided to employ an escalating programme of sanctions

55
Q

How did Britain and France respond to the Abyssinian Crisis?

A
  • Britain and France worked for a settlement outside the League in an attempt to avoid a breakdown in relations with Italy.
  • France was hopeful of gaining Italian support for an anti-German alignment that might help to contain Nazi aggression.
56
Q

What factor influenced Britain’s response to the Abyssinian Crisis?

A

Britain was faced with possible Japanese aggression in the Far East and also had to consider the dangers of having Italy as an enemy, when Italy occupied an important strategic position in the Mediterranean Sea, a major sea route for Britain through to its imperial possessions.

57
Q

What was the Hoare-Laval Pact?

A
  • In December, 1935 the British Foreign Minister Samuel Hoare and the French Foreign Minister Laval rekindled a plan that had already been considered by the League in September.
  • The plan, called the Hoare–Laval Pact, was to allow Italian control of around two-thirds of Abyssinia.
58
Q

What were the different responses to the Hoare-Laval Pact?

A
  • Mussolini could have accepted this idea, but it was never to be put on the table, as it was leaked to the French press.
  • The pro-League British public was outraged and Hoare was forced to resign. The plan was shelved.
59
Q

Why were the League’s economic sanctions unable to impact the Italian war effort and how did this affect Mussolini’s actions?

A
  • The League’s sanctions were so diluted that they had little impact on the Italian war effort.
  • No embargo was put on oil exports to Italy, and Britain refused to close the Suez Canal to Italian shipping.
  • Mussolini was able to escalate his efforts until May 1936, when the Italians were in control of Abyssinia.
60
Q

P. Bell view on Abyssinian Crisis

A
  • Mussolini had succeeded where the old Italy had failed. He had defeated not only the Abyssinians but the League of Nations.
  • He abandoned his former cautious approach to foreign affairs and looked for new worlds to conquer.
61
Q

Why was the Abyssinian Crisis a disaster for the League?

A
  • A permanent member had again successfully ignored the League and had been victorious through violence and war.
  • The League had proved itself ineffective in using ‘collective security’ to maintain peace.
  • The crisis had revealed (as had already been seen in the Manchurian Crisis) that the leading League powers were not prepared to stand up to other major members of the League if their interests were not directly threatened.
  • It was too dangerous to invoke a conflict with a power that – while upholding the idea of collective security – might adversely affect their own power and international position.
62
Q

How did the League’s inability to control the Abyssinian Crisis affect Italy and Germany?

A
  • Italy, now isolated from its former allies, moved closer to Nazi Germany.
  • The alliance between the British, French and Italians had collapsed.
  • The League’s ultimate weakness was exposed for Hitler to exploit, which he readily did with the militarization of the Rhineland in March 1936.
63
Q

How have many historians viewed the Abyssinian Crisis in terms of its effect on the League?

A
  • It has been viewed as the ‘final nail in the coffin’ for the League of Nations.
  • Thereafter, the League was simply symbolic of an ideal that had arisen out of the tragedy of World War I, an anomaly amidst old-style militaristic alliances and modern expansionist ideologies.
  • The League of Nations could no longer exert any authority; collective security had failed.
64
Q

Give an overview of the attempts for disarmament in the 1920s

A

There were attempts to reduce weapons in the 1920s, though these were done outside the League of Nations rather than through it.

65
Q

Give some examples of attempts that were made to reduce weapons in the 1920s

A
  • The Washington Conference
  • The London Naval Conference
  • The London Naval Treaty
  • The Geneva Disarmament COnference
66
Q

Need details on disarmament conferences?

A
67
Q

Why did the League fail to achieve disarmament and why was this task almost impossible?

A
  • The Great Depression
  • The political instability in Europe
  • The Manchurian Crisis
68
Q

Explain how the Great Depression was a reason why the League failed to achieve disarmament and why this task was almost impossible

A
  • The economic instability of the 1930s following the Great Depression caused, as we have already seen, nations to concentrate on their own problems first rather than work for collective security. Competition for markets grew and with it the dangers of conflict over them.
  • In this position, nations were unlikely to feel that they could reduce their armed forces; indeed, some countries used rearmament as a way of providing employment and thus helping their economies out of the Depression.
69
Q

Explain how the political instability in Europe was a reason why the League failed to achieve disarmament and why this task was almost impossible

A
  • The political instability of Europe, with the new communist regime in Russia, the fragility of new states in Central Europe and a discontented Germany, made many states reluctant to limit their arms.
  • France in particular, neighbouring a potentially powerful Germany and lacking any real commitment of support from Great Britain and America, was unwilling to do anything that would increase its vulnerability.
  • Similarly, Czechoslovakia and Poland were looking for increased security given their proximity to both Germany and Russia.
70
Q

Explain how the Manchurian Crisis was a reason why the League failed to achieve disarmament and why this task was almost impossible

A

Japan’s invasion of Manchuria undermined the idea of collective security and meant that nations with interests in the Asia–Pacific region were unlikely to welcome disarmament suggestions.