To date, there has not been a war that rivaled the overwhelming destruction and fatalities of World War I. Earning the title The Great War, World War I saw the demise of millions of soldiers and civilians in muddy trenches and on bloody battlefields as countless thousands were left with life altering injuries. Countries were torn apart; Europe was left in shambles. Though, above all the misery and pain there was an overwhelming sense of victory that permeated through the Allies. November 11, 1918 saw the beginning of a new future with the signing of a ceasefire that declared peace had been achieved. With the onslaught of World War I officially over, the world could finally settle back into a regime of harmony and prosperity. Yet, how was the world to pull itself back together and trudge on? Britain, France and Germany were obliterated to the point the map of Europe had been redrawn.
Suddenly, the world saw the end of the age of empires as powerless, brand new independent countries began to emerge all over Europe. Amidst all this chaos, there had to be a group ready to accomplish what had never been done before: world solidarity. The League of Nations stepped up to this challenge and on January 20, 1920 set to work. Sadly, for all the good the League of Nations accomplished, their numerous failures eventually lead to their downfall. Specifically seen through the Manchuria Problem, the League of Nations is one of the fundamental reasons as to why the Second World War broke out. The impotency of the League to resolve critical global issues spawned unrest within traumatized nations that placed their faith within the League. As hindsight would reveal, the League of Nation�s lack of the United States' superpower and resources, the League's inability to maintain their target aims, and their lack of armed forces to police misbehaving countries made the League of Nations what it tried to prevent; a disaster that spawned exactly what it was set up to avoid: another world war.
To commence, the League of Nations' foundation was always unstable. When the League was created, the United States refrained from joining (Heater 19). Although American President Woodrow Wilson in fact created the initial conception of the League of Nations, America did not participate in the League (Heater 19). Instead, the United States, under the control of Warren G. Harding, opted for a strict isolationism policy (Heater 18). Due to the fact the United States did not join the League of Nations, a considerable ally as well as one of the political superpowers was missing form the League (Heater 19-20). Of all the crucial errors the League would inevitably participate in, the allowance of the exclusion of the United States would prove to be their most fatal. After the Great War, the economy of Europe is brittle and in dire need of outside assistance (Sauvain 43). With the Treat of Versailles signed, reparations from Germany flow into Britain and France (Sauvain 44). Sadly, the money is not enough, for, as one would expect, countries began to act in their own self-interest to preserve the future of their individual nations (Sauvain 44). Due to their late entry, the United States is the only country to be involved in the War to emerge politically, economically and militarily superior and unscathed (Ambrosius 50). Seeing as how the United States became wealthier as a result of the war, Europe relied heavily on American trade to and funding to propel their economies and rebuild the shattered continent (Ambrosius 58). With so much disposable income, the United States was in a primary position of power that would have assured them complete dominance within the League of Nations. Isolationism kept the United States firmly focused on their own needs and left Europe and the League of Nations to organize themselves.
Initially, American self-interest remained an American trend. Despite the knowledge that European countries could barely support their own interest, almost every major European power signed the Covenant of the League of Nations (Cecil 127). Yet, a time will tell, this act of solidarity was merely a superficial formality. Within the League itself, countries refused to spend the necessary money or interfere with neighboring problems (Walters 153). Britain especially refrains from donating a significant outside assistance due to the domestic problems that it suffers throughout the postwar reconstruction (Walters 156). France, the only other superpower to join at the time, was financially, economically, and structurally (therefore culturally) crippled (Walters 156-7). The war had taken the heaviest toll on France. During the War, French architecture and culture took a serious blow (Heater 84). Bombings, tanks, troops, and French fortifications�all tore down the delicate society that France and built (Heater 84). This can be seen, in particular with the Maginot line that now resembled a giant scar running right across French borders (Heater 88). Symbolically, this scar would take years to heal. France would pump millions upon millions of dollars into repairing itself, and subsequently, would only focus on its own needs over global disputes.
France and Britain's superficiality will not be exclusive to them b any means. This overbearing compulsion for self-interest will be seen in every major country within the League. This will be the linchpin that rots the League of Nations. As a result, the membering nations do not act as a collective, never agreeing on a decisive plan of action (Cecil 183). Great Britain and France subsequently hold a majority of the power in the League, yet the animosity between the two neighboring nations become unbearable (Cecil 183). France has been decimated by trench warfare and is virtually penniless (Goldstein 14). Great Britain is unwilling to look beyond the problems of their own doorstep and there is a lingering paranoia concerning the potential rise of France (Goldstein 14). Yet, due to the reparations owed by Germany, under the Dawes Plan, France laid claim to several areas of wealth and potential prosperity (Carr 83). Had the United States joined the League of Nations, it would have been a primary power holder and the Charter of the League of Nations would have been exercised fully under the wealthy grip of America (Walter 68). Instead, the League decides to trek on, internally feeble, suspicious and tentative.
Additionally, since the League of Nations has very little international power, they are unable to uphold the goals highlighted in conception. As stated in the Covenant, the League of Nations primarily came to be to, "promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security" (Goldstein 49). Their goals include:
a) Disarmament to rid the threat of future attacks,
b) The prevention of war through collective security to avoid bloodshed like that of
World War I,
c) Settling disputes between countries through negotiation and diplomacy for
international peace and security and,
d) Improving global welfare for world peace and well being (Goldstein 48).
These goals are to be accomplished using certain articles in the League of Nations' charter; more specifically Article 8: the disarmament of member nations to the barest minimum, Article 10: the preservation of peace democratically, Article 12: the decree that all conflicts are to be democratically resolved via the Council of the League of Nations and Article 16: the decree that economic sanctions will be implemented against a nation if peace is disrupted (Goldstein 38-39). Although the aims of the League of Nations are reasonable, the League itself lacks inner power to fully inflict their international law (Heater 122). Moreover, seeing as how the League of Nations cannot enforce its laws on the United States, economic embargoes become useless, as is the case when Japan invades Manchuria (Carr 240).
In September 18, 1931, Japan invades Manchuria claiming Chinese bandits are sabotaging the South Manchurian Railway near Mukden, the railway being a vital necessity in Japanese trading (Carr 163). For the next few days, Chinese towns within a 200-mile radius of Mukden are placed under Japanese authority (Carr 163). Although this may be viewed as a controlled containment to prevent future problems, Japan continues to march into China until all of Manchuria is under Japanese control (Carr 163). China is in a rage; they, "at once appeal to the League of Nations under Article 11 of the Covenant�the Article under which decisions could be taken only by a unanimous vote" (Carr 163-164). Japan, a key member of the League of Nation�s Council, repeal China�s claim, asserting their annexing of Manchuria is necessary for the protection of Japanese civilians (Carr 164).
Furthermore, the League of Nations could not sufficiently enforce their decisions due to the fact the League did not possess armed forces (Carr 170). Of all the members of the League, Great Britain and France possess the largest armies, thus making them the most powerful (Carr 170). Germany, under the Treaty of Versailles, Germany's army was limited to a few thousand soldiers and absolutely no tanks, planes, or armories (Ambrosius 67). Even though Germany's might was indeed superior in man ways, they were incapable of actually of exercising their abilities. Naturally, seeing as how Great Britain and France are relied upon the most, they are the ones who are most reluctant to deploy troops (Timms). In fact, Britain and France are much more inclined to appeasement than collective security (Timms). With the two most powerful members unable to invoke a sensation of solidarity, the League becomes crippled. Tragically, the more influential powers are not fully committed to the League seeing as how there is a high self-interest among participants (Timms). When Japan initially entered Manchuria in 1931, it took an exceedingly long time for the League of Nations to organize themselves and properly handle the situation (Ambrosius 81). So, in an attempt to uphold Article 10, their democratic view of international law, the League commissions V. Bulwer-Lytton to investigate (Carr 167). In 1933, Lytton issues the Lytton Report, which maintains that Japan is in fact the aggressor (Carr 167). Yet, by this time Japan has established a puppet government in Manchuria, now called Manchukou (Carr 168). As Article 12 dictates, a ballot is passed in the Assembly and Japan, under the Charter of the League of Nations, lost the vote for Manchuria 42-1 (Carr 170). Yet, seeing how the League had very little power to accentuate their dominance, Japan effectively left the League of Nations in 1932 (Ambrosius 124). Now free to pursue Manchuria without the impositions of the League, Japanese "air and sea forces bombard the Chinese city of Shanghai" (Ambrosius 124).
Article 16, the most important article in the Charter, is called forth; economic sanctions are to now be implemented (Carr 290). Yet, once again the League has no outside power to influence countries that are not part of the League of Nations; mainly the United States (Goldstein 185). To quote the League of Nations handbook, "as regards the military sanctions provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 16, there is no legal obligation to apply them� there may be a political and moral duty incumbent on states� but, once again, there is no obligation on them" (Goldstein 185-6). Seeing how the United States did not have to abide by the League�s sanctions, they continued to trade with Japan, thus undermining the original goal of the League (Goldstein 186).
Moreover, the effects of the Great Depression are just beginning to make itself known (Carr 247). To place a country under an economic sanction when supplies are scarce and trading is the only means to gaining the necessary supplies is incredibly difficult (Carr 247). Considering the United States is hit the hardest during the collapse of Wall Street, it would be cruel to demand that they not trade with Japan; a relatively wealthy country (Carr 247). As a direct result of the Depression and the incapability to legitimately enforce economic sanctions, the League of Nations had an increasingly difficult time trying to keep Italy from annexing Abyssinia (Timms). This will later become a sore point for Italy, which will cause their exit from the League.
Slowly, the League began to internally implode as crucial members begin to leave the mockery of an international organization. After Japan exited, a year later in 1933 Germany quit, which was soon followed by Italy in 1937 then the Bolshevik Soviet Russia in 1939 (Walters 239). Now England and France are the only two major powers to remain in the League of Nations. Yet, both superpowers never quite trusted the other and only joined the League of Nations to ensure that neither country became too powerful in the delicate stages of the rebuilding of Europe (Timms). With distrust running rampant and an overwhelming sense of powerlessness, the League of Nations is left crippled and weak. With virtually all members disbanded, tensions waxed high and the end of the 1930�s saw the beginning of World War II (Walters 214). Seeing as how the League of Nations was created for the sole purpose of preventing another world war, the last and final aim has gone unprotected. The League of Nations collapsed completely in 1939 like a poorly constructed card castle.
Indeed, the League of Nations seemed doomed from the very start. Without pivotal powers like that of the United States to enforce resolutions, the inability to maintain and execute Covenant goals and a lack of military, the League is left vulnerable. Yet, one must look past the assumed failure of the League of Nations to witness the accomplishments it would later flourish. The United Nations is now a testament to the adage, if at first you do not succeed, try, try again. Seeing as how the UN has stood proud for over half of a century, the world has obviously figured out the kinks and flaws that made the League of Nations so helpless.
Works Cited
Ambrosius, Lloyd. Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition: The
Treaty Fight in Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Carr, Edward Hallett. International Relations Between the Two World Wars. London:
Macmillan, 1963.
Cecil, Robert. A Great Experiment: An Autobiography. London: Jonathan Cape, 1941.
Goldstein, Erik. The First World War Peace Settlements 1919-1925. London: Pearson
Education, 2002.
Heater, Derek. Our World This Century. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.
Sauvain, Phillip. Themes of the Twentieth Century. England: Stanley Thornes Ltd,
1996.
Timms, Jonathan. The Failure of the League of Nations. March 26, 2008. URL:
, 2005.
Walters, F. P. History of the League of Nations. New York: Oxford, 1961.
