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

How successful was the League of Nations in the 1920s.

Extracts from this document...


How successful was the League of Nations in the 1920s The League of Nations was a failure in they 1920s but it did have some successes. The main reason for its failure was that it could not control the major powers for example Italy in Corfu. The League of Nations was split into two main parts, the assembly and the council. The assembly was like a parliament every member of the League sends a representative to the assembly that met once a year. The main powers of the assembly were admitting new members to the league, appointing temporary members to the council and deciding the budget of the League of Nations. The council met five times a year and also in emergencies. There were two types of members of the council permanent (Britain, France, Italy and Japan) and temporary (3 years). The council would elect temporary members. When voting the permanent members had a Veto of all decisions. The council was able to issue the three steps of action against countries. These steps were first Moral condemnation this was giving a judgement and verbal warning to the countries involved, the second step is Economic sanctions this when the countries in the league would stop trading with the guilty country and the final step was Military sanctions this was sending troops in to the offending countries. The council had a lot more than the assembly. There were some problems with this set-up of the league firstly the council could be slow to meet in an emergency and also if a country was not elected to the council they had little power. ...read more.


This seemed to be a success but Mussolini used his influence on the assembly to change the council's decision. The Greeks now had to apologise and pay compensation. This was disastrous for the league as Mussolini was able to undermine their authority. The League of Nations showed that they could not control the major powers. Another factor towards the League of Nations being a failure was when they had a chance to improve the League with the Geneva Protocol, a contract that says that members had to obey the decision of the League of Nations. This contract confirmed that the League was failing, as if there wasn't a problem with the league and countries were obeying it then a contract would not be needed. The contract never came in to place any way as the British government was too selfish to sign the Geneva Protocol as it may not be in its best interests to be agreeing with the League all the time. Greece attacked Bulgaria in 1925. The League of Nations stepped in and ordered Greece to withdraw. The Greeks did but they did complain saying that there was one rule for large nations such as Italy and another one for smaller countries like themselves. This shows that many nations felt that the larger nations could do what they liked so the League was a failure. The league did do some good work in the fields of Refugees, Working conditions, Health, Transport and social problems. ...read more.


was another committee of the League of Nations. They worked to defeat the dreaded disease leprosy. They also started a global campaign to exterminate mosquitoes; this had a huge impact on cases of malaria and yellow fever in later decades. Even the USSR took the health committees advice on preventing the plague in Siberia and they were opposed to the League of Nations. So overall on health the League of Nations was a success dealing with many deadly illnesses very effectively. Another area of success for the League of Nations was transport. The league made recommendations on marking shipping lanes. Also they wrote the first international Highway Code for road users, which would have saved many lives on the roads. The League of Nations did a lot of work in solving social problems in the world. The league blacklisted four large German, Dutch, French and Swiss countries, which were involved in the illegal drugs trade. The League of Nations organised the freeing of 200,000 slaves in British owned Sierra Leone. It organised raids against slave owners and traders in Burma. The League of Nations challenged the use of forced labour to build the Tanganyika railway in Africa, where the death rate among the African stood at a massive fifty percent. Through League of Nations pressure this figure was brought down to four percent still too high but a good achievement by the league. In conclusion the League of Nations was a failure in th1920s as it couldn't control major powers such as Italy and it could not achieve disarmament at all, although there were some good successes by the league like their work on Health, refugees and working conditions. Brendan Thorne ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE International relations 1900-1939 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 GCSE International relations 1900-1939 essays

  1. Account for the successes and failures of the League of Nations.

    The Japanese justified the invasion of this mountainous province because it was vital to the defence of Manchuria. The Manchuria affair damaged the reputation of the League. One of its leading members had gone to war with another member and the League had failed to stop it.

  2. The failure of the League of Nations

    They also began to rebuild their own armaments. The disarmament struggled on for another year but it finally ended in 1934. The disarmament conference failed for a number of reasons one was because no one was really serious about disarming to begin with. But it didn't help that in 1935 the British sealed an agreement with the Germans

  1. How successful was the League of Nations in the 1920's?

    Sweden accepted the ruling and war was avoided. Sweden's acceptance not only prevented war but also proved that the league was strong enough to make a country accept its ruling without resorting to military action. Also in October 1925, following an incident where Greek soldiers were killed on the Bulgarian border, Greece invaded Bulgaria.

  2. Why was the Abyssinian crisis a death blow to the league when the Manchurian ...

    However, in the Abyssinian crisis they didn't condemn Italy in fact they came to an agreement with them that basically gave them what they wanted. So they were seen to be giving into the demands of the aggressor. Not only did they give into Italy but the two main powers

  1. The League of Nations in the 1920's - Success or Failure?

    Now, the League did have successes. Examples of these are Upper Silesia in 1921. In Upper Silesia, the Treaty of Versailles gave the inhabitants a vote to see if they wanted to be a part of Poland or Germany. Unfortunately, this could not be decided by the inhabitants of Upper Silesia and could have gone on a quick downward spiral into fighting.

  2. How Successful Was The League of Nations in the 1920s?

    To make sure he got the money he started to bombard Corfu. Even though this was against everything that the League stood for the only thing the League did was to condemn Mussolini's actions and he ended up getting what he wanted.

  1. How successful was the league in the 1920's and 1930's?

    The league gave Germany half of the land and population and Poland received most of the industry. Neither side was completely satisfied but the league did its best as it could and handled the complicated situation well. Both countries accepted the decision of the league and sax the league as an authority and help.

  2. To what extent was the League of Nations successful in the 1920s?

    In 1920 a Polish army took over it. Lithuania appealed to the League as they were both members of the League. Even after the League protesting to Poland they wouldn?t back down. The League should have sent troops out to sort out the issues in Vilna but France didn?t want to upset Poland and Britain wouldn?t act alone.

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