The League of Nations and International Peace Flashcards
when did GB leave the LoN?
1945
when did GB join the LoN?
1919
when did France leave the LoN?
1945
when did France join the LoN?
1919
when did Italy leave the LoN?
1937
when did Italy join the LoN?
1919
when did USSR leave the LoN?
1939
when did USSR join the LoN?
1934
when did Germany leave the LoN?
1933
when did Germany join the LoN?
1926
when did Japan leave the LoN?
1933
when did Japan join the LoN?
1919
which countries carried the league and why was this bad?
- GB and France (mainly) appeared to have the burden of the league on their shoulders as they were the only main powers who were in it for the whole duration
- they were distracted (ie by their own empires) and couldn’t be expected to do everything
why did the USSR not join the league until 1934?
some people in britain still feared communism more than hitler, and other countries such as poland feared them too - but by 1934 enough people were worried about hitler to invite the USSR
what was the international state of europe by the early 30s and how did this hint at another war?
began to split into 2 camps - Axis vs Allies - it is similar to WWI
what was the covenant?
rule book containing 26 articles (semi-religious term - mocked)
what was the LoN’s aim?
to ‘promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security’
How did the LoN aim to aimed to ‘promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security’?
- political: discourage aggression through collective security
- military: encourage world disarmament
- social: improve living and working conditions
- economic: get countries to co-operate in work and trade
which points of LoN aims will it struggle to achieve and why?
- political: political and military aims contradict each other, may conflict with countries’ self-interest, very big conflict of ideas etc
- military: france and england and others won’t want to disarm
which points may the LoN have some success in and why?
- social: positive change most countries would want (would also reduce radicalism)
- economic: trade would be mutually beneficial and lots of countries already trade
Why did USA not join the LoN?
- Many Americans hated the idea of the League and did not want to be involved in European affairs
- Wilson campaigned to get USA to join but lost the Presidential Election
- USA followed an isolationist policy in the 1920’s
- USA did not want American troops to be under the control of an outside power.
what were the main parts of the league?
- the assembly
- the council
- the secretariat
- the permanent court of international justice
- the agencies and commission
what was the assembly and what did it do?
- every country in the league sent a representative to the assembly
- it could recommend action to the council and vote on various issues (eg budget and admission of new members)
- met once a year in the League’s headquarters, in Geneva
- decisions had to be unanimous
what was the council and what did it do?
- smaller group that met several times a year and during emergencies
- council had permanent members (in 1920, these were Britain, France, Japan and a 5th place reserved for USA) and non-permanent members (elected by the Assembly for 3 year periods)
- each of the permanent members had a veto - a single ‘no’ vote could stop a decision being passed
what was the secretariat and what did it do?
- kept records of meetings and prepared reports
- many of its staff were linguists - english and french main languages used
- very under-staffed
what was the permanent court of international justice and what did it do?
- based at the Hague in the Netherlands
- intended to help settle disputes peacefully
- decisions made by judges from the member countries
- had no way of enforcing its rulings
what were the agencies and what did they do?
they were bodies set up to deal with some of the world’s major problems
what were the strengths of the assembly?
- provided a forum for discussion and decision-making
- each country was represented
- democratic system
- based in neutral territory
what were the weaknesses of the assembly?
- not a permanent body + only meets once a year (what if something happens?) = assembly is sidelined
- hard to make decisions because of the veto (allies within allies)
- lacked enforcement power
what were the strengths of the council?
- got more done perhaps? because there were less people so they could agree easier?
- the burden of the league would have sat with them so it makes sense that these countries deserve more say
- provided a platform for international co-operation and and dispute resolution
what were the weaknesses of the council?
- power imbalance - main powers (ignores smaller countries?) - self-interest - victors only - excludes people
- lack of enforcement power
- inability to prevent aggressive actions by member states - veto - if one of the members became the aggressor, they can veto action against them
what was a weakness of the secretariat?
under-staffed - won’t work properly
what was a strength of the secretariat?
efficient in carrying out administrative tasks - left a paper trail - organisation is necessary to take action
what was a strength of the permanent court of international justice?
provided a forum for peaceful resolution of disputes - this is the aim of the league
what was a weakness of the permanent court of international justice?
lack of enforcement power - pointless - would have to then bring it up at council/assembly - then a veto is possible
the Covenant of the League of Nations set out 3 ways in which the League could act to settle disputes. What were these?
H: a hearing by an impartial, neutral county
I: an inquiry by the Council of the LoN
R: a ruling by the International Court of Justice
if the initial 3 ways in which the League could act to settle disputes didn’t resolve the dispute, or if a country ignored the LoN’s decision, what action would the League then take?
M: moral persuasion; the league could put pressure on the offending country by lining up world opinion against it
E: economic sanctions; members of the league could refuse to trade with the offending country
M: military force; the armed forces of member countries could be joined together and used against the offending country
what are the strengths of the powers of the league?
- all league countries could feel supported
- use a scaling system
- HIR tries to nip it in the bud - solve it before it escalates
- moral persuasion could work
- economic sanctions could work by ruining the economy so the country can’t invade
what are the weaknesses of the powers of the league?
- economic sanctions only work if everyone participates, but stopping trade will hurt yourself (self-interest)
- not all countries are in the league so it is hard to enforce anything eg economic sanctions
- moral persuasion could only work if the offending country is moral
- military force relies mainly on GB and Fr again a) what if they are the aggressor, b) they won’t want to offer up their armies (self-interest), c) what about disarmament?
- military force could escalate rather than de-escalate and worsen tensions
summarise the overall strengths of the league.
- when it was set up, there was almost universal good will to it from ordinary people and from most governments
- people genuinely wanted to prevent a war land most believed this goal was achievable
- most of the world’s leading nations joined, and the defeated countries were allowed to join later on
- by the 30s, they had 59 members and every member had signed the covenant
- by the 20s, technological developments (eg international air travel, telephone) suggested it would be easier for countries to act together
- promoted disarmament
- resolved minor disputes
- provided humanitarian aid - commissions made some valuable impacts on global issues
summarise the overall weaknesses of the league.
- relied heavily on good will and persuasion - very little real power and no permanent army
- a number of important nations were missing at various points: USA, germany, japan, Italy, USSR - these absences greatly weakened the LoN
- countries made treaties and alliances outside of the league - undermined collective security
- general disarmament still a hope not a reality eg Disarmament Conference (1932-4) tried without success to find a way forward
- wartime resentment and anger persisted - the very treaties that created the LoN also created the resentment that later destroyed it
- countries still suspicious of each other and traditional rivalries remained
what were the disputes in the 1920s?
Vilna 1920, Upper Silesia 1921, Aaland Islands 1921, Corfu 1923, Bulgaria 1925
give an account of the events of the Vilna dispute 1920.
- after WWI countries that had belonged to Austro-Hungarian empire given independence - lots of new countries created incl. Lithuania and Poland
- Vilna was to be the capital of Lithuania but the majority of people living there wanted to be Polish
- a Polish army took control of the city and Lithuania asked the LoN for help
- Poland was acting in violation of the LoN’s values but had a valid point
- LoN protested to Poland and told them to remove its army but was refused.
- according to the covenant, at this point, the LoN could have intervened further, but France saw Poland as a potential long-term ally against Germany and Britain was not willing to send troops without the support of other countries
- the first time the LoN was asked to settle a dispute, they did nothing, and Poland took Vilna
was Vilna 1920 a failure or success for the league?
failure: the covenant set out by the league was not used and article 10 was ignored in favour of self-interest. this set a precedent for the rest of the league’s actions in later years; the league only really intervened when it benefitted them
give an account of the events of the Upper Silesia dispute, 1921.
- industrial region on border of Germany and Poland - at end of WWI, both Germans and Poles lived there
- both nations wanted to claim the area as it was important to iron and steel production
- 1921 plebiscite organised. britain and france sent troops to police voting stations and ensure the vote was fair and calm. germany won 60% of the total votes, but poland claimed that many of the people who voted for germany no longer lived in Upper Silesia
- Poland complained and LoN decided to split Upper Silesia into regions according to how the people had voted. Germany received most of the rural areas, while Poland received the industrial zones
- the outcome was accepted by both poland and germany and the LoN ensured the partition went smoothly by ensuring rail links, water and electricity still supplied to each side
- final settlement considered unfair by the Poles and germans; Poles received ~1/2 the population but only 1/3 of the land and around 1/2million Poles now in confirmed German territory. germany had lost 3/4 of the coal mines they had owned prior to the settlement
- 1922 german govt complained to league and was awarded right to import coal at a heavily discounted rate
- when this agreement ended in 1925, relations between germany and poland worsened
when was the plebiscite for Upper Silesia?
1921
what was the result of the 1921 plebiscite for Upper Silesia?
germany won 60% of the total votes, but poland claimed that many of the people who voted for germany no longer lived in Upper Silesia
what was the final settlement given by the LoN about Upper Silesia?
Poles received ~1/2 the population but only 1/3 of the land and~1/2million Poles now in confirmed German territory.
Germany lost 3/4 of the coal mines they had owned prior to the settlement
when did the german govt complain to league about Upper Silesia? and what did the LoN do?
- 1922
- was awarded right to import coal at a heavily discounted rate
was the Upper Silesia dispute 1921 a failure or success for the league?
initially a success - a temporary fix: both countries did accept the intial agreement but actually living by this proved difficult and increased tensions
give an account of the events of the Aaland Islands dispute, 1921.
- both sweden and finland wanted control of Aaland Islands which were midway between them
- both countries were threatening war on each other the fight for them
- they appealed to the league who investigated each countries’ claim
- the league said the islands should go to finland, providing it did not build forts on the island so it could be used as a base from which to attack sweden
- sweden accepted the league’s ruling and war was avoided
was the Aaland Islands dispute 1921 a failure or success for the league?
success - war was avoided, a clear order of process was used and both countries agreed to the deal and the deal did not break down
give an account of the events of the Corfu dispute, 1923.
- post-WWI, boundaries of Greece and Albania still to be agreed upon
- LoN gave job to Italian general Tellini but while he was surveying an area of Greece (27th August) he and his team were murdered
- Mussolini was furious and blamed the Greek govt. 29th Aug demanded it pay compensation to Italy and execute the murderers - the greeks had no idea who the murderers were
- 31st Aug Mussolini bombarded then invaded Corfu - 15 people killed
- Greece appealed to LoN for help - situation similar to 1914 which had triggered WWI - Council already in session so league acted quickly
- 7th Sep had prepared its judgement - condemned Mussolini’s actions but also suggested Greece pay compensation but that money be held by the League so the money could be paid to Italy if and when Tellini’s killers were found
- officially, Mussolini accepted the League’s decision but persuaded the Conference of Ambassadors to undermine the league and change its ruling
- greeks forced to apologise and pay compensation directly to italy
- 27th sept Mussolini withdrew his troops, boasting of his triumph
when was Tellini assassinated?
27th August 1923
when did Mussolini demand for the Greek govenrmnet to pay compensation to Italy and execute the murderers of Tellini?
29th August 1923
when did Mussolini bombard then ivade Corfu?
31st August 1923
when did the LoN prepare its judgement on the Corfu incident?
7th September 1923
when did Mussolini withdraw his troops from Corfu?
27th September 1923
was the Corfu dispute 1923 a failure or success for the league?
failure - completely undermined the League’s authority ⇒ if no one does as they say, whats the point? allowed for later arguments ie Bulgaria 1925, like treaty of Lausanne. showed that the LoN could be ignored and overturned by other international groups when a large country threatened a smaller with military action
give an account of the events of the Bulgaria dispute, 1925
- Oct 1925 border clash between Greek and Bulgarian troops - Greek troops invaded Bulgaria after an incident on the border where some Greek soldiers had been killed
- Bulgaria appealed for help from the LoN but prepared its army too
- LoN condemned the Greeks, ordered them to withdraw their troops and pay compensation to Bulgaria
- Greece though LoN was being hypocritical as Mussolini got away with similar actions in 1923
- faced with the disapproval of the major powers in the League, and as a small country, didn’t want to risk poor relations with them, so obeyed
was the Bulgaria dispute 1925 a failure or success for the league?
mixture - whilst greece did obey, it heightened tensions between both Greece and Bulgaria and the rest of the League and highlighted the hypocritical self-interest rooted in the league which undermined most of its actions (there seemed to be one rule for some, and a different for others)
how did the LoN respond the Great Depression?
- 1929 american economy crashed and because of how much money it had lent during and after the war, global economy also destroyed
- people lost faith in existing governments and turned to extremist parties and away from peace and democracy - Japan, Italy and Germany increasingly began to see war as an answer
- league was powerless (no army to fight aggressive dictators and members didn’t want the expense and responsibility of war, especially during the depression) to help people or control new party leaders, despite their aims being in direct opposition of the league’s fundamental principles; they weren’t interested in collective security nor scared by moral condemnation
- the only sanctions the league could impose were economic; in times of economic crisis, countries weren’t willing to stop trading with others as this would create more unemployment and hurt their own people
why could you argue that the great depression killed the league?
- at times when it was very much needed, the league had no power or strength; all of its aims were disregarded
- economic crisis weakened countries’ ability to support the league’s efforts and prioritise international cooperation
what was the conference of the ambassadors?
- during WWI, the Allies created Supreme War Council (group that directed military effort)
- at the end of WWI, the victorious powers chose to continue this organisation to discuss key issues between themselves and to have the ability to enforce peace treaties and mediate various territorial disputes among european states
- members were ambassadors of britain, italy, japan, and the french minister of foreign affairs - ambassador of USA attended as an observer because they weren’t an official party to the Tov
what were the problems with the conference of the ambassadors?
- it was another ‘victor’s club’ which created more resentment
- undermined the league’s authority, like the external agreements
- exclusion of smaller countries + USSR again
what were the strengths of the Agencies?
- lots of them established
- positive actions
what was a weakness of the Agencies?
how do you solve a global issue? especially when the whole globe isn’t even involved?
what commissions were set up by the LoN?
- International Labour Organisation
- The Commission for Refugees
- The Slavery Commission
- The Health Committee
- The Permanent Central Opium Board
- The Economic and Financial Committee
- The Organisation for Communications and Transport
what was the aim of the International Labour Organisation?
to bring workers, employers and govts together to improve the conditions that people worked in
what were the successes of the International Labour Organisation?
- 1922 - recommended banning the use of white lead paint as it was poisonous
- 1928 - 77 countries agreed to set a minimum wage
- 1930 - helped Greece set up social insurance
- in Tanganyika, Africa, slave labour was being used to build a new railway but conditions were so bad that 50% of workers died; the league challenged this and reduced the death rate to 4%
when did the International Labour Organisation recommend banning the use of white lead paint, as it was poisonous?
1922
when did the International Labour Organisation convince 77 countries to set a minimum wage?
1928
when did the International Labour Organisation help Greece set up social insurance?
1930
in Tanganyika, Africa, slave labour was being used to build a new railway but conditions were so bad that 50% of workers died; the league challenged this and reduced the death rate to what?
4%
what were the failures of the International Labour Organisation?
- 1919 - tried to stop children <14 from working; this suggestion was not adopted by most members because they thought it would cost too much money
- 1935 - suggested that the working day should be limited to 8 hours; when members voted on this, only 4 voted in favour, saying it would cost industries too much. Similarly, the suggestion that workers should be paid for their holidays was unpopular - one member said it would be ‘industrial suicide’
when did the International Labour Organisation try to stop children <14 from working?
1919
when did the International Labour Organisation suggest that the working day should be limited to 8 hours?
1935
what was the aim of the Commission for Refugees?
to return PoW home and support refugees by improving camp conditions, finding new homes, or returning them to their own countries once the threat of conflict had passed
what were the successes of the Commission for Refugees?
- 1917 - revolution led to civil war in Russia; by 1921, 1.5 million people had fled Russia to refugee camps and the LoN helped them find new homes
- 1921 - helped free ~427,000 out of 500,000 PoW still imprisoned from WWI and returned them to their homelands
- 1922 - Turkey clashed with Greece and the violence forced people to flee; LoN set up refugee camps and sent doctors to help treat diseases (cholera, smallpox). Homes were found for ~600,000 Greeks fleeing from Turkey from 1919-1923
- Created the Nansen Passport (document that could be used as ID by refugees)
by 1921, how many people had fled Russia to refugee camps?
1.5 million
