Causes of WWII in Europe The Failure of Collective Security

TIMELINE 1919- T. of Versailles, St. Germain 1920- LON 1922- T. of Rapallo (Germany + USSR) 1923- Fr. into Ruhr 1924- Dawes Plan 1925- Locarno Treaties 1926- Germany into LON 1928- K-B Pact 1929- Young Plan, Wall Street crash 1932- Lausanne Conference (reparations) 1933- Hitler as Chancellor

The LON CS= idea that peace preserved by nations acting together to stop attacks by one nation on another Possible through LON Disputes go through ASSEMBLY If no resolution, Council apply “collective security” As a group, impose moral pressure, economic sanctions, force compliance

The Covenant First meeting in Geneva, 1920 Keep peace, avoid future conflict How? Advise/settle disputes Promote disarmament, oversee mandates, promote int’l good will, int’l cooperation via social/econ development Members @ 32 (Allied states + neutral states) 1926- ex-enemy states enter USSR enter 1934 US not a member

Articles 26 Articles When/how the LON should operate 1-7: membership/organization (Assembly, Council, Secretariat) 8-17: prevention of war 18-21: treaty obligations, expectations of members 22: mandates 23: humanitarian issues Labor conditions, human trafficking, drugs, health, arms trade 24: commissions 25: Red Cross 26: rules for amending

Int’l Disputes Disputes go to: Permanent Court of Int’l Justice, arbitration, OR investigation/enquiry by Council Sanctions placed on member states that did not refer disputes to League Seemed to work as economic blockade of Germany after WWI appeared to be effective Military action as last resort But no LON armed forces and most member states did not want to submit troops under int’l control When and how to use? Ambiguous

Questions What aspects of the Covenant made the LON an organization likely to fulfill its claims of collective security? What aspects weakened the League’s ability to deliver collective security?

Problems Changing membership Absence of major powers Powers in and out as governments shift 1920s- liberal governments rise, economic demise during GD, aggressive right- wing govs w/in league = polarization Shift in late 20s from USSR to Axis as threat Absence of major powers Impacts working/influence of LON US- LON idea of WW, but Congress dispute Pivotal role in ending WWI, but turn to isolationism after

Absence of USA Problems US was most powerful economic nation post-WWI Would have given sanctions more weight w/o US participation, sanctions undermined Makeup of members very European (ex: Japan) Not “worldwide” organization Goals of members? LON could be sidelined for old-style agreements/treaties How US would secure foreign relationships since not w/in LON Many member states in decline

Absence of USSR Excluded- Bolshevik state seen as “pariah” Problems? W. powers involved in Russian Civil War (18-21) w/ “White” counter- revolutionaries Old Euro powers concerned w/ new government Fear of revolution of proletariate spreading  desire to isolate Soviets, not embrace Problems? Weakened LON since USSR sees as “club for capitalists” Used to say LON promoted and protected capitalist interests, empires @ expense of exploited masses.

Absence of Germany Germany excluded @ first Undermine ideals of LON + appearance of “victor’s club” 4 permanent members of Council = victorious Allies Ignore fact that Germany was still strong nation @ end of war Assumption of Allies having strong, clear victory over Germany  belief that Allies had reason for re-ordering Euro politics = FLAW Military defeat in W, but not E Immediate end of war- still see expansionist policy, economy still intact So why not include in LON? Optimism about Germany  entrance in 1926

Weakness of Central Europe A-H empire collapse  small, independent nations based on nationality Political/econ struggles of new states = instability Small, unstable states need support from LON rather than being able to contribute as other large Euro states Issues? Economic development, territorial security

Questions TWE was the LON “doomed to fail” due ot the limitations of its Covenant and structure? Why might the failure of the USA to join the LON be viewed as critically important? How might countries/regions around the world perceive the role of the LON differently?