The Failure of the League of Nations Seen Through Manchuria

To date, there has not been a war that rivalled the overwhelming destruction and fatalities of World War I. Earning the title The Great War, World War I saw the demise of millions of soldiers and civilians in muddy trenches and on bloody battlefields as countless thousands were left with life altering injuries. Countries were torn apart; Europe was left in shambles. Though, above all the misery and pain there was an overwhelming sense of victory that permeated through the Allies. November 11, 1918 saw the beginning of a new future with the signing of a ceasefire that declared peace had been achieved. With the onslaught of World War I officially over, the world could finally settle back into a regime of harmony and prosperity. Yet, how was the world to pull itself back together and trudge on? Britain, France and Germany were obliterated to the point the map of Europe had been redrawn. Suddenly, the world saw the end of the age of empires as powerless, brand new independent countries began to emerge all over Europe. Amidst all this chaos, there had to be a group ready to accomplish what had never been done before: world solidarity. The League of Nations stepped up to this challenge and on January 20, 1920 set to work. Sadly, for all the good the League of Nations accomplished, their numerous failures eventually lead to their downfall. As seen through the Manchuria Problem, the League of Nation’s lack of the United States, inability to maintain aims and lack of armed forces make the League of Nations what it tries to prevent: a disaster.

To commence, although the initial conception of the League of Nations is in fact American, America did not participate in the League (Heater 19). Due to the fact the United States did not join the League of Nations, a considerable ally as well as political power is missing form the League (Heater 19-20). Of all the crucial errors the League would inevitably participate in, the exclusion of the United States will prove to be their most fatal. After the Great War, the economy of Europe is brittle and in dire need of outside assistance (Sauvain 43). As one would expect, countries begin to act in their own self-interest to preserve the future of the nation (Sauvain 43). The United States is the only country to be involved in the War to emerge politically, economically and militarily superior and unscathed (Ambrosius 10). Seeing as how the United States became wealthier as a result of the war, Europe relies heavily on German reparations and American trade and funding to rebuild their shattered continent (Sauvain 38). Yet, despite the knowledge European countries can barely support their own interest, almost every major powers sign the Covenant of the League of Nations (Wikipedia). This overbearing compulsion for self-interest will rot the League of Nations, due to the fact the members will not act as a collective, never agreeing on a decisive plan of action (Timms). Great Britain and France subsequently hold a majority of the power in the League, yet the animosity between the two neighbouring nations become unbearable (Timms). France has been decimated by trench warfare and is virtually penniless (Goldstein 14). Great Britain is unwilling to look beyond the problems of their own doorstep and there is a lingering paranoia concerning the potential rise of France (Goldstein 14). Yet, due to the reparations owed by Germany, under the Dawes Plan, France laid claim to several areas of wealth and potential prosperity (Carr 83). Had the United States joined the League of Nations, it would have been a primary power holder and the Charter of the League of Nations would have been exercised fully under the wealthy grip of America (Walter 68). Instead, the League decides to trek on, internally feeble, suspicious and tentative.

Additionally, since the League of Nations has very little international power, they are unable to uphold the goals highlighted in conception. As stated in the Covenant, the League of Nations primarily came to be to, "promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security" (Wikipedia). Their goals include:
a) Disarmament to rid the threat of future attacks,
b) The prevention of war through collective security to avoid bloodshed like that of World War I,
c) Settling disputes between countries through negotiation and diplomacy for international peace and security and,
d) Improving global welfare for world peace and well being (Goldstein, 38).
These goals are to be accomplished using certain articles in the League of Nations’ charter; more specifically Article 8: the disarmament of member nations to the barest minimum, Article 10: the preservation of peace democratically, Article 12: the decree that all conflicts are to be democratically resolved via the Council of the League of Nations and Article 16: the decree that economic sanctions will be implemented against a nation if peace is disrupted (Goldstein, 38-39). Although the aims of the League of Nations are reasonable, the League itself lacks inner power to fully inflict their international law (Timms). Moreover, seeing as how the League of Nations cannot enforce its laws on the United States, economic embargoes become useless, as is the case when Japan invades Manchuria (Background of the League of Nations).

In September 18, 1931, Japan invades Manchuria claiming Chinese bandits are sabotaging the South Manchurian Railway near Mukden, the railway being a vital necessity in Japanese trading (Carr 163). For the next few days, Chinese towns within a 200-mile radius of Mukden are placed under Japanese authority (Carr 163). Although this may be viewed as a controlled containment to prevent future problems, Japan continues to march into China until all of Manchuria is under Japanese control (Carr 163). China is in a rage; they, “at once appeal to the League of Nations under Article 11 of the Covenant- the Article under which decisions could be taken only by a unanimous vote” (Carr 163-164). Japan, a key member of the League of Nation’s Council, repeal China’s claim, asserting their annexing of Manchuria is necessary for the protection of Japanese civilians (Carr 164).

Furthermore, the League of Nations could not sufficiently enforce their decisions due to the fact the League did not possess armed forces (League of Nations). Of all the members of the League, Great Britain and France possess the largest armies, thus making them the most powerful (League of Nations). Naturally, seeing as how Great Britain and France are relied upon the most, they are the ones who are most reluctant to deploy troops (Timms). In fact, Britain and France are much more inclined to appeasement than collective security (Timms). With the two most powerful members unable to invoke a sensation of solidarity, the League becomes crippled. Tragically, the more influential powers are not fully committed to the League seeing as how there is a high self-interest among participants (Timms). When Japan initially entered Manchuria in 1931, it took an exceedingly long time for the League of Nations to organize themselves and properly handle the situation (Wikipedia). So, in an attempt to uphold Article 10, their democratic view of international law, the League commissions V. Bulwer-Lytton to investigate (Carr 167). In 1933, Lytton issues the Lytton Report, which maintains that Japan is in fact the aggressor (Wikipedia). Yet, by this time Japan has established a puppet government in Manchuria, now called Manchukou (Wikipedia). As Article 12 dictates, a ballot is passed in the Assembly and Japan, under the Charter of the League of Nations, lost the vote for Manchuria 42-1 (Carr 170). Yet, seeing how the League had very little power to accentuate their dominance, Japan effectively left the League of Nations in 1932 (League of Nations). Now free to pursue Manchuria without the impositions of the League, Japanese “air and sea forces bombard the Chinese city of Shanghai” (Wikipedia).

Article 16, the most important article in the Charter, is called forth; economic sanctions are to now be implemented (Carr 290). Yet, once again the League has no outside power to influence countries that are not part of the League of Nations; mainly the United States (Wikipedia). To quote the League of Nations handbook, “As regards the military sanctions provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 16, there is no legal obligation to apply them… there may be a political and moral duty incumbent on states… but, once again, there is no obligation on them" (Wikipedia). Seeing how the United States did not have to abide by the League’s sanctions, they continued to trade with Japan, thus undermining the original goal of the League (Wikipedia).

Moreover, the effects of the Great Depression are just beginning to make itself known (Carr 247). To place a country under an economic sanction when supplies are scarce and trading is the only means to gaining the necessary supplies is incredibly difficult (Carr 247). Considering the United States is hit the hardest during the collapse of Wall Street, it would be cruel to demand that they not trade with Japan; a relatively wealthy country (Carr 247). As a direct result of the Depression and the incapability to legitimately enforce economic sanctions, the League of Nations had an increasingly difficult time trying to keep Italy from annexing Abyssinia (Timms). This will later become a sore point for Italy, which will cause their exit from the League (Wikipedia).

Slowly, the League began to internally implode as crucial members begin to leave the mockery of an international organization. After Japan exited, a year later in 1933 Germany quit, which was soon followed by Italy in 1937 then the Bolshevik Soviet Russia in 1939 (Wikipedia). Now England and France are the only two major powers to remain in the League of Nations. Yet, both superpowers never quite trusted the other and only joined the League of Nations to ensure that neither country became too powerful in the delicate stages of the rebuilding of Europe (Timms). With distrust running rampant and an overwhelming sense of powerlessness, the League of Nations is left crippled and weak. With virtually all members disbanded, tensions waxed high and the end of the 1930’s saw the beginning of World War II (League of Nations). Seeing as how the League of Nations was created for the sole purpose of preventing another world war, the last and final aim has gone unprotected. The League of Nations collapsed completely in 1939 like a poorly constructed card castle.

Indeed, the League of Nations seemed doomed from the very start. Without pivotal powers like that of the United States to enforce resolutions, the inability to maintain and execute Covenant goals and a lack of military, the League is left vulnerable. Yet, one must look past the assumed failure of the League of Nations to witness the accomplishments it would later flourish. The United Nations is now a testament to the adage, “if at first you do not succeed, try, try again”. Seeing as how the UN has stood proud for over half of a century, the world has obviously figured out the kinks and flaws that made the League of Nations so helpless.





Bibliography

Ambrosius, Lloyd. Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition: The Treaty Fight in Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Background of the League of Nations. November 3, 2005. ONLINE AVAILABLE: , 2003.

Carr, Edward Hallett. International Relations Between the Two World Wars. London: Macmillan, 1963.

Cecil, Robert. A Great Experiment: An Autobiography. London: Jonathan Cape, 1941.

Goldstein, Erik. The First World War Peace Settlements 1919-1925. London: Pearson Education, 2002.

Heater, Derek. Our World this Century. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.

League of Nations. November 3, 2005. ONLINE AVAILABLE: , 2005.

Sauvain, Phillip. Key Themes of the Twentieth Century. England: Stanley Thornes Ltd, 1996.

Timms, Jonathan. The Failure of the League of Nations. November 2, 2005. ONLINE AVAILABLE: , 2005.

Walters, F. P. History of the League of Nations. New York: Oxford, 1961.

Wikipedia. The League of Nations. November 2, 2005. ONLINE AVAILABLE: , November 2, 2005.