Assessment of the Success of the League of Nations

Assessment of the Success of the League of Nations

In 1914 war broke out in Europe. The war ended in 1918 and Germany

solely blamed. The end of the war was signed with the treaty of

Versailles. From the war was born the League of Nations; who helped

nations resolve disputes peacefully without going to war. When the

League was formed, the defeated nations were not invited to join. The

League originally had forty-two members. All forty-two members made up

the assembly, who met once a year. As incidents occurred more often

there was a smaller group of nations who made the council. The council

had four permanent members Britain, France, Italy and Japan. From the

beginning the league had a major weak point, which was the USA’s

refusal to join, ironically it was Woodrow Wilson’s idea to form the

League of Nations.

Most of the League’s successes were in the 1920’s, mainly problems to

do with territory. In 1921 the League was invited to settle a dispute

between Finland and Sweden. In between the countries were the Aaland

Islands; both countries claimed the land belonged to them. The league

awarded Finland the land, this was a success; moreover a lucky

decision. In 1922-3, the League helped Austria and hungry rebuild

their economy. The league succeeded in this situation, as it took

effective actions quickly. In 1925 the League had success in the

Greek-Bulgarian dispute. Was the league a success overall? The league

did have successes with small nations and did prevent war.

The league had theoretically started failing when the USA refused to

join. The USA was the most powerful country in the world at the time.

In 1923, the league was fac...

... middle of paper ...

...eagues

existence.

In conclusion was the league a success at all? The league did have

successes and would have had many more but the member nations were not

ready to co-operate. It is fair to say the league was a failure

although it is not fair to say it was failure due to its structure.

The failures of the league do out way the successes. The league did

fail in co-operation and working in unity. The major member states

were to blame mainly due to their selfish decisions and disagreements

against the league. The league was a success to the extent where

decisions did not require armed forces or going against a large

nation. The failure of the league was not of the covenant but of the

members themselves. In an ironic way the league brought hope for

future organisations to be formed and to work in unity.