AIMS, MEMBERSHIP AND STRUCTURE OF THE LEAGUE

The First World War was the first large scale conflict between industrialised nations. Warfare on an unprecedented scale, civilian deaths matched the military ones. Anti war sentiment spread, never happen again.

As early as 1915 before USA entered the war, the League to Enforce Peace (LEP) was established in NY by a group of notable citizens inc former President william Howard Taft. At a conference in Philadelphia in 1915, the LEP proposed an int agreement where countries would ‘jointly use their economic and military force against any one of their number that goes to war or commits acts of hostility against another’

In 1916, the sr B politician Lord Robert Cecil submitted a memorandum to the B gov advocating a int org to settle future disputes bt nations and preserve peace. F and Bel also made similar proposals. In 1918 Jan Smuts of SA who wanted lenience on G, submitted a treatise ‘The League of Nations: a Practical Suggestion’. Wilson got a Nobel Peace Prize in 1919 for the LoN.

If WW didn’t come up with the LON, he was def a strong advocate. At ppc he acted as chairman to come up with rules for LoN. On 28 June 1919, the LoN was formally established.

‘Promote international cooperation and to achieve international peace and security’ ‘obligation not to resort to war’

PREVENTING FUTURE WAR

They think ww1 could be avoided if there had been an int org to settle disputes before armed conflict. LoN would play this role so ww1 would be ‘the war to end all wars’

• Promote disarmament- Article 8 of the covenant ‘Members of the League recognise that the maintenance of peace requires the reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety’

• Abolish secret diplomacy- Wilson strongly believed that the main cause of ww1 was the secret diplomacy that led to the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente. In reality, both of these rival alliances had been created by a series of treaties that were defensive rather than aggressive. If the full details had been known they would’ve caused less panic. Under article 18 any future treaties would have to be registered and published by the LoN.

• Arbitration- member states agreed to arbitration (settling of a dispute bt two countries by an impartial 3rd party) by the LoN as described in (article 13). LoN’s decision would be binding both parties

• Develop collective security- member states work together against any countries who was seen as a threat to peace. By economic sanctions or if they fail, joint military action (article 16)

ADMINISTERING THE POST-WAR SETTLEMENTS

There were two main ways in which the LoN would work to ensure the terms of the peace settlements were carried out.

-       Arranging plebiscites- e.g ToV determined that the Saar Valley should be administered by the LoN for a period of 15 years, after which a plebiciste would take place so that local people could decide for themselves whether they wanted to be French or German. In 1935, the LoN duly arranged this, and the Saar region returned to G.

-       Organising mandates- as a result of the peace treaties ending ww1, many colonies were taken away from the defeated nations. In cases where it was felt that these territories were not yet ready for full independence, they would be run as mandates. This meant that their administration was entrusted to another country (known as the Mandatory) appointed by the League of Nations. The Mandatory had to submit an annual report to the LoN, which established a Mandate Commission to review the progress of each mandated territory.

PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

The LoN aimed to actively work towards improving relations between member states and the lives of their citizens. This would be achieved by:

-       Seeking to improve working conditions and wage levels throughout the world through an International Labour Organisation (ILO)

-       Repatriating pows and resettling refugees

-       Providing loans to new countries, for example Austria and Hungary

-       Encouraging the development of education

-       Promoting improvements in public health, such as the prevention and control of disease

STRUCTURE

In line w the agreements reached at the ppc, the main organs of the LoN were the General Assembly and the Council. These were supported by other institutions, such as the Secretariat, the Permanent Court of Int. Justice, and various commissions and committees established to investigate and deal with specific issues that arose.

The General Assembly

The GA met annually in Geneva; a location selected because Switzerland seemed to symbolise the desire for peace. A neutral country who had taken no part in ww1, S was also the base for the International Red Cross. Each member state could send up to three representatives to meetings of the Assembly, and each state was able to cast one vote. Its main role was to decide general policy, admission of new members and handle the organisation’s finances. Any decision taken in the GA had to be unanimous.

The Council

This was a smaller body, whose role was to settle political disputes between nations. It held four ordinary meetings per year, with extra meetings (known as extraordinary sessions) held in case of emergency. The Council met a total of 107 times between 1920 and 1939. As with the GA, decisions also had to be unanimous. The Council was made up of permanent and non-permanent members:

-       Permanent Members: four o.g perm members- B, F, I, J. G became perm in 1926. When G and J left in 1933, USSR became perm.

-       Non-Permanent Members: initially there were to be four of these, elected every three years by the GA. 1^st npms were Belgium, Brazil, Spain and Greece. Number of npms increased to 6 in 1922, 9 in 1926, and 11 in 1933.

The Secretariat

The Secretariat carried out the day-to-day work of the League: preparing agendas, publishing reports and dealing with vital routine matters. It was based in Geneva and was directed by a Secretary General, the first of which was the B diplomat, Sir Eric Drummond, who held the post 1919-33.

The Permanent Court of International Justice

Based at the Hague in the Netherlands, the PC was designed to deal with legal disputes between states. The PC consisted of 15 judges of different nationalities who were elected for a period of 9 years by the GA. PC ran from 1922-46.

Commissions and Committees

A number of commissions and committees were established by the LoN to deal w specific problems. The main commissions dealt w issues such as the mandates, disarmament, refugees and slavery. There were committees for matters relating to international labour, health, child welfare, drug problems and women’s rights. These achieved some notable success during the 1920s. They facilitated the repatriation of some 400,000 pows, set up refugee camps, began the process of finding preventions to diseases such as malaria and leprosy, closed down a number of Swiss businesses that were selling drugs, and arranged for the freedom of some 200,000 slaves in countries such as Burma. However, little progress was made in the 1920s on disarmament, women’s rights, or restricting working hours.

COLLECTIVE SECURITY AND THE LEAGUE’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES: SUCCESSES

To achieve prevention of war, LoN developed collective security. Members of the league would jointly take eco and if necessary military action.

The intention was that any dispute would be referred to and reviewed by the LoN. LoN would then decide how best to r3solve it, and insist all countries involved accepted the decision. If a country refused and began preparing for war, Lon would do eco sanctions, if failed threaten military action. It was assumved that, confronted bt the combined strength og LoN members, aggressive countries would be forced to back down.

This system allowed League to play a ket role is res of a number of political disputes in the 1920s.

TESCHEN 1920

W rich deposits of coal, the Teschen area had been one of the wealthiest and most industrialised of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire. In 1919, violence erupted bt Czechoslovakia and Poland, who both claimed the region. LoN arbitrated this dispute, splitting Teschen bt the countries. Neither country was entirely satisfied, but accepted it and fighting stopped.

THE ÅLAND ISLANDS 1921

The Lon was equally successful in resolving a dispute over the Åland Islands ( group of some 6,500 islands bt Sweden and Finland). Although the pop was only Swedish speaking, islands had belonged to F since early 1900s. Most habitants wanted to be S , but F didn’t want to lose sovereignty. S gov raised issue w LoN.

After consideration, LoN decided AI should remain with Finalnd. Both countries accepted this – although S was not pleased.

UPPER SILESIA 1921

The ppl of US, and important industrial region, were divided over whether they wanted to be w G or P, both of which laid claim to the area. This led to a series of local riots between 1919-21, at which ponbt LoN became involved. LoN decided area should be divided bt G and P. Accepted by all.

THE YUGOSLAVIA-ALBANIA BORDER DISPUTE 1921

LoN was confronted by open warfare bt Y and Albania. Following outgoing disputes bt countries bc of territory on their joint border. Y troops entered A land in Nov 1921. LoN sent a commission made up of B, F, I and J to investigate cause. On basis of commissions recommendations, LoN found in favour of Albania, Y complained bitterly, but had no alternative but to withdraw troops.

MEMEL 1923

The port of Memel (Klaipedia) and surrounding are was placed under control of LoN by ToV. Lithuania claimed the area and invaded in 1923. LoN decided that area around port would be L’s, but port itself would be an ‘int zone’. L accepted this decision. Action taken by LoN was a success in it prevented bloodshed. However there eas some confusion over League’s decision bc it seemed to condone the fact L had taken it by force.

MOSUL 1924

The city and region of Mosul had been part of Turkish Empire until 1918. Bc of PPC, Mosul, and area in which oil had recently been discovered- became part of the B mandate of Iraq. T demanded that it should be allowed to regain control of the region. In 1924, the LoN found in favour of Iraq and after reaching an agreement w B, T accepted the decision.

GRECCE-BULGARIA BORDER DISPUTE 1925

After a border dispute, Greece invaded Bulgaria in 1925. Bulgaria ordered its troops to onlt offer token resistance in order to avoid open conflict.

This was a clear indication Bulgaria had faith in LoN to find a peace settlement. LoN condemned the invasion, calle for Greece to withdraw and pay com to Bulgaria. Greece complied w this decision.

In each of these disputes, LoN was able to find solutions which was accepted bt both parties and prevented possible wars. The key to the League’s success in dealing w these disputes was the fact that it’s arbitration and decisions were accepted by all parties involved. These were relatively minor disputes and none directly involved worlds major powers.

COLLECTIVE SECURITY AND THE LEAGUE’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES: CHALLENGES

Clear that League’s powers were limited and authority increasingly challenged.

VILNA 1920

First successful challenge. Disoute bt Pol and Lithuania, two countries whose borders had been defined by the ppc. Vilna was the capital of L, but pop was mainly P. In 1920, P troops occupied the city. L requested the league, LoN ordered P to remove troops and tried to org a plebiscite. Although P initially agreed, it reinforced troops and in 1922 annexed the city and surrounding area. P had effectively defied LoN and territory remained P until 1939. b and F supported P, F wanted P as an ally bc G. Wo those supports, LoN was basically powerless. As early as this, weakness was being exposed, own interests.

THE TREATY OF RIGA 1921

In 1920, P invaded R. By 1921, R had no choice but to sign the ToRi by which P gained 80,000 square kilometers. LoN took no action against this. Bc R not a LoN member, commies unpopular in B and F, so had no interest in defending it.

INVASION OF THE RUHR 1923

G failure to pay reps led to Bel and F invading the Ruhr, G’s most important industrial region. By doing this, two members of LoN were effectively breaking the riles they had committed to by signing the Covenant of the League. Both F and Bel were repped on the LoN council, F as a perm and Bel as a non perm. Since decisions had to be unanimous, LoN could not take action. Dawes Plan of 1924 that they finally withdrew.

CORFU 1923

M refused to accept ruling of I troops withdrawing. Threatened to withdraw I from the League and referred issue to CoA. CoA decided Greece should pay considerable reps to I. Exposed 2 flaws- as a member I could prevent LoN from taking action, then was overruled.

During 20s became clear LoN effectiveness heavily dependent on the attitudes of the most powerful members. W their support they could succeed, e.g even tho Sweden disagreed, but had no choice bc of the collective security backed by I, B, F. However ineffective when powerful nations put their own interests above their commitment to LoN e.g Corfu or Ruhr Invasion. Even during the 1920s, many member states expressed concern that the LoN provided no real guarantee of int peace and security.

WEAKNESS OF THE LEAGUE

Number of reasons for LoN weakness:

CREATED BY AN UNPOPULAR PEACE SETTLEMENT

LoN emerged from treaties agreed at ppc. Closely associated w treaties v unpopular in many countries. An org by and for the benefit of the ww1 victors- reinforced by not defeated nations joining.

MEMBER STATES

LoN concieved as an int org. However of world’s major powers, only B, F, J and I were members of LoN throughout 1920s. G not allowed to join until 1926, USSR didn’t until 1934, and USA never a member.

USA REFUSAL TO JOIN THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS (structural)

USA rejected post-war settlement and LoN, despite the fact WW had been so instrumental in creation of both. By the time WW returned to the USA from ppc, Republicans had control over the senate. For all Wilson’s attempts to convince Americans of League’s importance, both to themselves and the world in general, Senate voted against it in November 1919. To most As best way of ensuring no more war for Americans was to return to the policy of isolationism. USA’s refusal to join was an sig blow to its prospects of success, reducing both its credibility and financial security.

OTHER ORGANISATIONS

The authority of loN was frequently undermined. E.g com had been established to administer the post war settlements until the LoN was fully operational. In reality, it continued to function until 1931 and on several occasions disagreed w and took precedence over, the lon decisions e.g corfu. Similarly, countries ignored the League entirely and made their own agreements e.g Locarno Treaties of 1925.

THE NEED FOR UNANIMITY (structural)

The Covenant of the League required that decisions, both within the GA and the council, must be unanimous. This was inevitable. Countries didn’t want to accept the possibility that their actions might be determined by the vote of other nations. So they had veto. This slowed down the decision making process, esp since many decisions required ratification by the GA, which met only once a year. LoN appeared slow and indecisive.

COLLECTIVE SECURITY

Lon’s ability to confront aggression and threats to world peace was dependent on collective security- members working together to impose eco sanctions or military action. Article 11 states ‘Any war or threat of war, whether immediately affecting any Members off the League or not, is hereby declared a matter of concern to the whole league, and the League shall take any action that may be deemed wise and effectual to safeguard the peace of nations’

In the absence of its own army, the League expected member states to provide troops (article 16). However a resolution passed in 1923 meant each member state could decide for itself whether or not to provide armed forces in a crisis. This clearly undermined the entire principle on which collective security is based. In both B and F, where public opinion was strongly anti war, there was understandable reluctance to commit to military action. Govs in both countries believed they were militarily weak and that war must be avoided at all costs.

NATIONAL INTERESTS

At times, countries discovered that the LoN was diff to their national interests. In 1921, the LoN took no action in response to P’s conflict w the USSR bc self interest. In the final analysis, the LoN was only as strong as the willingness of its member states to support it. That willingness was often found wanting.

ROLE AND IMPACT OF THE AGENCIES

Most successful work in the 1920s

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION (ILO)

The International Labour Organisation was created by and financed through the LoN. Under the leadership of Frenchman Albert Thomas, the ILO enjoyed some success in working conditions. govs were persuaded to fix max working hours (per day and per week) to establish minimum wage levels, to provide sickness and unemployment benefits and to introduce old-age pensions. In 1928, ILO’s decision to establish a minimum wage was ratified by 77 countries. At the end of the 1920s social security schemes were common in Europe. Such measures made an enormous diff to the lives of underprivileged ppl. However not all decisions were a success. E.g banning night work and ensure workers received paid holidays were rejected, one delegate arguing such schemes would require his country ‘to commit industrial suicide’

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR REFUGEES

Under the director, the Norwegian Fridtjof Nansen, the ICR helped to resettlement over 500k pows stranded in R. In 1922, they introduced the Nansen passport, the first int. recognised identity card for stateless refugees. When violence erupted in T in 1923, the commission helped find homes, food and jobs for almost 1.5 million refugees, working w other agencies to prevent spread of disease such as typhoid and cholera. Got Nobel Peace Prize for Nansen Passport.

THE HEALTH ORGANISATION

Specific problems like large numbers of refugees in Turkey. Causes and possible preventions of epidemics- typhus in Russia, research on diseases like leprosy. Vaccines were introduced worldwide for diseases such as tuberculosis, diphtheria and tetanus.

THE MANDATES COMMISSION

These supervised territories taken from G and T in the ppc. Supervision was intended to ensure these territories were well governed and adequately prepared for own independence. E.g facilitated the Leagues efficient administration of the Saar Region until 1935 and then arranged the plebiscite which chose G. Demanded regular reports from mandatory powers (b, F, Bel) in order to ensure they were following the strict rules laid down by the league. While the commission didn’t hav the power to carry out inspections to ensure the accuracy of these reports, there is clear evidence that the mandatory powers treated these territories differently from their other overseas possession. E.g B allowed its Mandate of Tanganyika to purchase USA goods that were cheaper than their B equivalent. In truth, however, little was done to prepare these territories for future independence.

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

LoN was able to provide vital financial assistance to many countries facing economic difficulties. E.g Austria and Hungary were facing bankruptcy, LoN arranged loans for the two nations, and sent commissioners to offer advice on how to best spend the money in 1922-23. Set A and H on the road to recovery.

OTHER ACHIEVEMENTS

The LoN played a significant role in responding to issues such as the exploitation of women and children, drug trafficking and slavery. It helped to free 200,000 slaves in places such as Sierra Leone and Burma. In 1930, they investigated rumours of forced labour in the independent African state of Liberia, concluding that the president, Charles D.B King, and senior gov officials were guilty of exploiting the situation. President was forced to resign and LoN insisted that new gov carried out reforms.

These agencies continued to carry out important work during the 1930s. Fitting tribute to their achievements that, when the UN was established at the end of ww2, it retained many of the agencies. The ILO still exists, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World Health Organisation (WHO)