The league of Nations

Although the USA had created the League, they were not actually ever part of it. They were worried about what the League would do for trade, they also wanted to avoid getting involved in conflicts, and many Americans were anti-British or anti-French. Without the USA, the League missed out on financial backing, and couldn't deal with larger countries. Many of the problems could have been solved had the USA joined, as countries wouldn't be able to get away with using force against smaller powers than them. This was seen as a huge blow to the League as the main conspirator behind the League refused to finance them and believe in them in situations where they could have been needed the most such as the Vilna crisis and the Corfu crisis. Therefore the failure of America not joining the League was seen as a major cause of the Leagues failures.

The League can be called a success when dealing with border disputes. The League could deal with disputes between two smaller countries, as they wouldn't have anything to fear from either side if they didn't like the decision. This meant the rulings were fair. For example, when Sweden and Finland were both willing to fight for the Aaland Islands in 1921, the League decided they should go to Finland. Sweden accepted and the League avoided a war. Therefore this was a success as the League prevented a war and successfully solved a border dispute.

The League can also be called a success when dealing with many humanitarian issues. The League worked for a better world, and helped the lives of many people in all countries. They helped about 400,000 prisoners of war back to their homelands after the war. For example, when hundreds of thousands of people were placed in refugee camps in Turkey, the League helped battle diseases in the camps and return them to their native countries. The League campaigned for better working conditions everywhere. It limited how long small children were allowed to work, and banned poisonous white lead from paint dramatically improving many workers' health. The health committee ran a global campaign to exterminate mosquitoes, defeat leprosy, and the USSR, even though they hated the League, had enough faith in the health committee to ask them to prevent the plague in Siberia. Therefore in this side of the League’s efforts it was seen as a success as they returned POWs and refugees to their own countries. When others had tried to achieve this it was seen as a failure but the League made it a much smoother process.

The League cannot be called a success when dealing with disarmament. A significant amount of the League's time and energy was devoted to disarmament even though many member governments were uncertain that such extensive disarmament could be achieved or was even desirable. The Allied Powers were also under obligation from the Treaty of Versailles to attempt to disarm and the armament restrictions imposed on the defeated countries had been described as the first step toward world wide disarmament. The League Covenant assigned the League the task of creating a disarmament plan for each state but the Council handed to this responsibility to a special commission set-up in 1926 to prepare for the 1932-34 World Disarmament Conference. Members of the League held different views towards disarmament. The French were reluctant to reduce their armaments without a guarantee of military help if they were attacked, Poland and Czechoslovakia felt vulnerable to attack from the east and wanted the League's response to aggression against its members to be strengthened before they disarmed. Without this guarantee they would not reduce armaments because they felt the risk of attack from Germany was too great. Fear of attack increased as Germany regained strength after the First World War .In particular Germany's attempts to overturn the Treaty of Versailles and the reconstruction of the German military made France and other Allied nations increasingly unwilling to disarm and eventually refuse to do it. The League also created tension with Germany as other powers did not disarm and were not pushed to disarm whereas Germany were forced to disarm completely. Therefore the League failed in their quest for complete disarmament as they refused to push the larger and more powerful members of the League hard enough to disarm.

Therefore in conclusion the League can not be called a success in the 1920s as they set to higher standards in which they hoped to achieve. Also they were not prepared to take a stand against the more powerful members of the League for example Corfu and the Vilna crisis. However they were to some extent successful in many humanitarian issues such as dealing with refugees and POW. They were also successful in sorting out some border disputes such as the Aaland Islands 1921 by preventing a war. So to some extent the League was a success but to many it was seen as a failure.