An Unmitigated Failure - How Far Is This a Fair Estimate of the League of Nations?

The terms of the Treaty of Versailles decided during the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, were mainly regarding Germany and her allies, however one of the least harsh ones was the term stating the creation of the League of Nations. The League has been primarily Wilson's idea, an American contribution. During the early 1920's, while Europe had a sense of enthusiastic co-operation, the conditions seemed just right for the League to prosper. Nevertheless, with the coming of the 30's, Mussolini and Hitler, the League failed to satisfy her aims and actually prevent the arising tension. Therefore, in order to judge just how far it was a failure, it's important to assess all the factors from the beginning.

The four aims of the League of Nations were such: to discourage aggression from any nation, to encourage countries to cooperate, to encourage disarmament and to improve living and working conditions for all. To see how far the League has failed to fulfill them one must start from the beginning. The League had initial strengths and weaknesses. Her strengths included the revolutionary step away from the old alliance system, the presence of 24 member nations, her clear defined organization and covenant, the possibility to impose sanctions and undertake humanitarian activities and finally there was a genuine air of cooperation and wide-spread support. This of course appears like the League had good reasons to prosper, nonetheless, the weaknesses were there: the leading power, USA, did not join, Britain and France were no longer as powerful as pre-war, the had no armed forces, the membership was predominantly European, Germany was excluded and hence hostile and finally the League purely depended upon the goodwill of the nations, which proved fatal to its existence in years to come. Thus, it is already suggested that the League was not originally flawless and had the potential to fail, but also to succeed.

The League cannot completely be stated as an unmitigated failure, because the early 1920's she could be said to have prevented a global conflict from taking place. For example, the Health Organization prospered, plebiscites like the one in Upper Silesia were set up, and the Aaland island conflict was solved peacefully. However, these were only minor and there were no great threats imposed upon the League. It should be taken into account that the period of 1924-29 was known as the Locarno Honeymoon and outlined a period of general cooperation and enthusiasm, a post war impulsive hope, which in turn allowed the League to carry on without fault, it simply benefited from these circumstances.

Following on the Leagues early successes, the 1930's showed her real weaknesses. In 1931, Japan had invaded Manchuria, which in turn was to be sorted out by the League. Japan was clearly the aggressor, but also a permanent member in the League. A commission of enquiry from the League was sent to Manchuria; however it took 2 years to come up with a report. In two years, things will have progressed further, the Japanese army became more secured the League's influence became smaller. To add to that mistake, the sanctions were hardly anything, and the League had no army to enforce her ideas. In fact, it can be stated that the League had no point to sanction Japan for self-interest reasons of Britain and France: Japan was the only non-European permanent member, if she left, the League would be ignored and considered a Ð''European Club'. Britain also did not wish to spoil her relations with Japan diplomatically and therefore no concrete actions were taken. Consequently, the Leagues first aim and her reputation were shattered.

Self-interest was becoming