To+what+extent+did+the+League+of+Nations+fail+due+to+or+in+spite+of+its+idealistic+origins?

Jamie Stock December 9, 2009 Research Paper The IB Course Companion for world history refers to the League of Nations as “the most ambitious and idealistic outcome” [|[i]] of the peace settlements following the First World War. The idea of a league to prevent future wars was based in ideology at the time of its creation, with many important factors ignored. The predictable non-participation of the U.S., the absence of influential countries, and the inept system of enforcement inside the league hampered its ability to solve major international crises. These factors would lead to the downfall of the league and the outbreak of a new World War. The League of Nations failed mostly due to its idealistic origin. After the mindless bloodshed of the First World War, the idea of a league to regulate international relations was not a radical idea. Wilson’s plan to establish the league involved “compromis[ing] some of his principles expressed in the Fourteen Points… [and] errors or injustices… could be later resolved through the League” [|[ii]], yet he hardly anticipated the non-cooperation of the most powerful and influential country in the world, the United States. The Senate at the time of the peace treaties was dominated by republicans, with “Wilson’s opponents in the senate… led by Henry Cabot Lodge” [|[iii]], and thus Wilson could have easily seen, but failed to see, the opposition within his own country. Certain parts of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations Charter offended Americans and were perceived as an attack on American international sovereignty, such as “Article X, which stated that ‘all members undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and political independence of all members of the league’” [|[iv]]. Without the U.S., the League did not have a major power to lead it or act as an executive force when rules were disobeyed. This would also be the case with major European powers that emerged out of the ashes of the Central Powers. Russia was not a major power following the First World War, but would become a powerful player and potential enforcer after several years had elapsed. It was ignored and barred from the League of Nations due to anti-communist sentiment and the Red Scare. The major powers in the League Council were to be “the four great victor Powers- Britain, France, Japan, and Italy” [|[v]], while Germany, Russia, and the states that were formerly the Ottoman Empire, were excluded from the league. Any international organization that could hope to last needed “The most powerful nations [to] create and shape institutions.” [|[vi]], and due to the exclusion of the U.S., other major powers would have to step up. Russia would eventually challenge the U.S. for supremacy, and was a major reason for the Allied victory over the Axis powers in the Second World War. Since Russia was barred from the League, it had the same general effect as the non-cooperation of the United States, and would still leave a divided Europe without a major enforcement power in the League. The idealistic centerpiece of the League of Nations was the idea of collective security. John J. Mearsheimer’s definition of a successful international organization requires an institution to “deter cheaters and protect victims. Three messages must be sent to potential cheaters: you will be caught, you will be punished immediately, and you will jeopardize future cooperative efforts.” [|[vii]]. The league failed to meet any of these requirements, and thus the idea of collective security was compromised on many occasions. The Italian invasion of Abyssinia stands out as a major example. Abyssinia was a member of the league, with representation in the assembly and was therefore entitled to League protection. Italy desired for a new empire in Africa, and attacked Abyssinia. The Abyssinian King, Haile Sellasie, brought the matter onto the floor of the League of Nations, hoping to receive aid and gain allies that would threaten or intimidate Italy into submission. No aid came. Some countries, including France and Britain, engaged in talks to punish Italy with sanctions, but in the end “there was no way to stop the Italian invasion without force and neither the UK nor France was prepared to go to that extreme” [|[viii]]. In this way, every country in the League of Nations became a cheater, and did not abide by the rules of the League. The entire premise of collective security had been ignored, and the credibility of the League suffered due to this incident Another major incident that damaged the credibility of the League was the Manchuria crisis, in which Japan invaded Manchuria over a railroad bombing. The league created a panel called the Lytton Commission and decided to partially blame Japan. Japan withdrew from the League, and thus it became a precedent for future powers to disobey the League’s declarations. The Manchuria and Abyssinian crises both stemmed from the lack of enforcement and the “false promise of collective security”. Both led to the demise of the League of Nations. One must not blame everything on the idealistic conditions. While it was indeed idealistically founded, it helped the world in small border disputes, world health, and human rights. The League of Nations helped aid the recovery and spread awareness about the Spanish Flu Epidemic. In addition to succeeding in the realm of health, it helped to free slaves abroad and bring together an international labor organization for worker’s rights. While these successes helped the lives of many people at the time, they were not the original goals that Wilson had set forth in the Fourteen Points. Wilson’s idea had started as an international peacekeeping organization, the violations of human rights abroad and the concerns over health were secondary concerns. A final example of the League’s weakness was the treaties and agreements that took place outside of the League’s jurisdiction. In the Washington conference, it was agreed that “the signatories … [would not] build any warships over 10,000 tons with guns over 8”” [|[ix]], in addition to agreeing on a policy in the pacific that allowed Japan to expand its empire. Major settlements in Europe including the Rapallo treaty took place without the involvement of the League. The Ruhr crisis was solved in similar fashion, and the league continued to be a non-factor in major disputes. In conclusion, the League of Nations failed mostly due to its idealistic origin. Major factors such as the absence of major powers, the lack of leadership, and the lack of enforcement all contributed to its failure, and created an atmosphere that allowed World War Two to occur. These factors could have been avoided or anticipated, but Wilson chose to ignore the problems. The League succeeded in some minor realms, but was largely ineffective in its original purpose- to “discourage cheaters”, to protect its members, and to arbitrate international disputes.

[|[i]] 20th Century World History: Course Companion. Oxford : Oxford U., 2009. Print. Pg. 52  [|[ii]]  Ibid Pg. 52  [|[iii]] Black, Allida, and June Hopkins, eds. //Teaching Eleanor Roosevelt//. New York: Eleanor Roosevelt National Historic Site, 2003. The Eleanor Roosevelt Papers. //National Parks Service Archive//. Web. 9 Dec. 2009. . Pg. 1 [|[iv]]  20th Century World History Pg. 52  [|[v]] Wolfson, Robert, and John Laver. //Years of Change: European History 1890-1990//. 3rd ed. London: Hodder Murray, 2001. Print. Pg. 285 [|[vi]] Mearsheimer, John J. //Essential// //Readings// //in World Politics//. Ed. Karen Mingst and Jack Snyder. New York: Norton W.W. & Company, 2007. Print. Pg. 347 [|[vii]]  Ibid pg 348 [|[viii]] 20th Century World History Pg. 73    [IX]     Wolfson, Robert and John, Laver Pg. 287