• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

"The League of Nations representedno more than

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

16/11/04 Jayant Mathur History Essay - The League of Nations "The League of Nations represented no more than the hopes of decent men." The League was set up as a result of President Wilson's 'Fourteen Points'. It managed to accomplish a reasonable amount of social work. However it was outrageously bad at resolving political issues, seeing that it was set up to be a political organization. 'The setting up of the league was mainly for four reasons: to prevent future wars by the peaceful settlement of international disputes. To promote disarmament. To supervise the mandated territories1 referred to it by the peace treaties, such as the former German colonies and the Saarland. To promote general international co-operation by its various organizations for social and economic work.'2 The league had five major 'body parts' to it. One was the General Assembly where all the member states met and voted. Another was the Council which proposed ideas to the assembly for voting, and which consisted of five major powers. The Secretariat was a group of officials who prepared statistics, reports and records to the league. The International Labor Organization was a group of people who advised countries on social and economic matters. The other major department was the Permanent Court of Justice which consisted of 15 judges who judged international disputes, who were based in The Hague. The league did a lot of work, social and political. ...read more.

Middle

The league was powerless to do anything. Firstly the league did not have an army so no offensive action could be taken. Secondly who was going to pay for the league and its activities; nobody was willing to make any financial commitments to the league, therefore it had to be extremely careful with its funding. And thirdly would the leaders be aiming to resolve national interests or global interests; like the Italians and Japanese. Thus all the leaders saw that the Security Council, like Italy and Japan members were bypassing the League and continuing with their global interests. Since the league could not take a stand, and did not pose any real threat to the Italians or Japanese people started not taking the league seriously. The league did not have any political force behind it anymore, and its decline had already begun. "The real death of the league was in 1935. One day it was a powerful body imposing sanctions, the next day it was an empty sham, everyone scuttling from it as quickly as possible. Hitler Watched."4 Another reason why nobody paid anymore heed to the league was because the major powers in the world were not present, like America and the U.S.S.R. The league needed a kind of watchdog or headmaster to make sure all the nations behaved themselves, however the country to play this role was missing and consequently all the member states ...read more.

Conclusion

"The implications of the conquest of Abyssinia were not confined to East Africa. Although victory cemented Mussolini's personal prestige at home, Italy gained little or nothing from it in material terms. The damage done, meanwhile, to the prestige of Britain, France and the League of Nations was irreversible. The only winner in the whole sorry episode was Adolf Hitler."6 T.A. Morris is obviously speculating on Hitler's benefits from the Abyssinian crisis. Morris is correct in stating that Hitler was the only winner because he was. "After seeing what happened in Manchuria and then in Abyssinia, most people drew the conclusion that it was no longer much use placing their hopes in the league."7 This was evident as the membership in the league dramatically started to fall after the Abyssinian crisis. The fate of the league had now been sealed, with its failure in Manchuria and Abyssinia. This was mainly because it had not been prepared; did not have an army, the world powers were not present. The men who helped set the league up had the welfare of the world in mind; what they got was a political group which was destined for political demise. The league just did not have what it took to be a political world entity, thus it represented no more than the hopes of decent men. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Why did the League of Nations fail?

    5 star(s)

    Mussolini was a fascist and dreamt of building a 'second' Roman Empire. He needed to show Hitler (who had become German Chancellor in 1933) that Italy was a force to be reckoned with; Mussolini was suffering from the beginnings of an inferiority complex.

  2. Why did the League of Nations fail in the 1930s?

    The Pact gave Mussolini two thirds of Abyssinia in return for calling off the invasion. Neither Haille Selassie nor the League were consulted in the proposal of the plan. France told the British that if they did not agree to the plan, France would no longer support the sanctions on Italy.

  1. Why was the league so ineffective in dealing with the Abyssinian Crisis?

    And they were worried about this because they were scared of Germany, and if Germany attacked they wanted Italy as an ally. Although both Italy and Abyssinia were supposed to do as the league told them to do, if Italy didn't agree with the leagues decision then they weren't going

  2. Why was the League of Nations a failure in the 1930's?

    On February 24 the report was approved by 42 votes to 1 -only Japan voted against. After this 'insult' to Japan, it resigned from the League on 27th March 1933. It invaded Jehol the next week. The League was powerless to do anything-without the USA it could not discuss any real economic sanctions, s it was Japan's main trading partner.

  1. Why was the league so ineffective in dealing with the Abyssinian Crisis?

    With this the Italians then fully invaded Abyssinia and the league do nothing to stop it as the two main powers didn't want too provoke the Italians. So basically it was because Britain and France were too worried about what might happen to them if Italy wasn't on their side.

  2. Why would there have been a lot of support in Britain for the League ...

    This links to why Article X was partly in Britain's interest; if all member states of the League agreed to Article X, less of the responsibility would fall on Britain to protect weak countries, thereby resulting in less British fatalities and less strain on the economy.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work