This is my no

1. Collective Security
Context
- League Covenant  Article X, “all members undertake to respect and preserve
as against external aggression the territorial integrity and political independence
of all members of the League”, this was the basis of concept security
- This also means that all League members should assist in resistance to
aggression even if it is not of concern to their interests, it reverses the traditional
European attitude towards diplomacy
- Absence of the defeated states, these states had no desire to support the League
and its principles and ToV, it also pronounced the death of disarmament
provisions as Russia and Germany signed the Treaty of Rapallo
- Absence of America  challenges to status quo established at Versailles would
meet limited resistance from a collection of small states, also its rejection of the
principle of collective security undermined LoNs credibility and its fundamental
principles
- Absence of major powers meant that LoNs could not effectively deter aggression
and negotiate peaceful settlements of their grievances as collective security is
based on collective action
- Particular dispute between France and Britain as to how Germany should be
treated  France wanted the heaviest restrictions upon Germany but Britain did
not support that, it wanted to rebuild the German economy to improve British
trade and also act as a counterweight to French ambitions
What is collective security?
- Cornerstone of LoNs
- New departure in diplomacy whereby the old alliance systems and the balance
of power would be left aside in favor of collective security
- Old alliance system: alliances made between nations with mutual interests and
were aimed to protect against specific threats or nations, they contain clear
terms of their duties are and what their national interests, thus they had a clear
mind when formulating foreign policy
- On the contrary, collective security is an abstract concept, it does not specify the
threats and what responses should be made under the respective circumstances

2. - Requires a level of altruism (concern to the welfare of others) that was not in
line with the world in 1920s, as it demands nations to give up their national
interests for matters that are not of concern to their core aims
- Inbred weakness with the absence of three major powers
Weaknesses of collective security
- Few members of LoNs were willing to take on the open-ended commitments
that collective security required
- Prospect of armed intervention was not favored in many nations after WWI as
there was widespread opposition towards the use of military force to resolve
disputes between nations
- Uncertain economic situation further undermined the concept of armed
intervention
Early attempts at peacekeeping 1920-25
- Mandate called on to intervene in a number of disputes between nations
- Success: the Aaland Islands, Upper Silesia, the Greco-Bulgarian War of 1925
- Failure: the seizure of Fiume by D’Annunzio, Vilna, the Russo-Polish War, the
Corfu incident and the Ruhr invasion
- Success? Involving nations that were small or medium powers who were
unwilling to resort to violence, allowed the League to negotiate and enforce a
settlement that both parties would accept
- Failure? Involving major powers who refused to submit to the League or those
that were determined to resort to violence
- Corfu incident  diplomatic crisis between Italy and Greece in 1923, LoN’s
suggestion that 50 million lire to be paid and an enquiry to be set up was turned
down by Mussolini who claimed the League had no right to intervene, had to rely
on Britain to resolve the crisis
- Problems: absence of America, which subsequently increased the reluctance of
successive British governments in the 1920s to underwrite in any tangible way
the European territorial settlement
The Ruhr Crisis – early failure of LoNs and the concept of
collective security
- French were anxious to enforce reparations settlement as they owed money to
the United States, they also hoped that it would continue to weaken Germany by

3. collecting the reparations and thus limiting the speed and extent of German
economic recovery
- Growing sympathy towards the treatment of Germany in UK and USA, especially
in UK as it hoped that by allowing Germany to recover economically as a way to
promote general European recovery
- French were convinced that Germany was trying to avoid her obligations and
should be made to pay
- 11 January 1923 French and Belgian troops invaded the Ruhr as Germany was
unable to deliver timber as part of her payments, French objective was to collect
reparations through seizing the output of mines and factories of the Ruhr and
shipping them to France
- German workers refused to co-operate and went on strike while engaging in acts
of sabotage to prevent the French from obtaining any materials, this led to
violence and the imprisonment of leaders of the resistance movements
- Catastrophic inflation happened as Weimar government printed more money to
support the workers’ actions
- Middle class was hit the hardest, many turned to extreme ideology such as the
Nazis
- Clear signal to the Allies that German was in danger of complete collapse and
that a state of anarchy might well develop, also made Germany vulnerable to
communism, it also meant that they would not be receiving reparations
payments which would prevent general European economic recovery
- Crisis resolved when Stresemann called off the passive resistance in the Ruhr and
announced that Germany would comply with her obligations under the treaty of
Versailles, French called off the invasion“Policy of Fulfillment”
- Key player was America who approved the Dawes Plan to allow Germany
reschedule her reparations payments so that the total amount was reduced and
the deadlines were extended, while allowing extensive foreign loans and foreign
investments to flow into Germany  League was not a key player and collective
security did not resolve the crisis
Locarno Treaty 1925
- Signed in Oct 1925, guaranteed by Italy and Britain, Germany would accept its
borders with France and Belgium as permanent, it would also join the LoNs
- Genuine breakthrough, but Germany seek to revise her Eastern borders with
Poland and Czechoslovakia, Britain refused to guarantee the countries to the
east of Germany which allowed Germany to assume that her Eastern borders
could be changed with little objection  Collective security abandoned

4. - A sense of euphoria, spirit of Locarno
- League was not strengthened and the principle of collective security remained
uncertain
- Largely dependent on the economic health of Europe in the 1920s, and American
support
The Great Depression 1929 and its effects
- Nations were longer willing to co-operate through trade and exchange,
international co-operation was replaced by an exclusionary, bomb-shelter
mentality where they cut off contact with their neighbors, raised tariffs and
ceased to care much about the world beyond their own borders
- Domestic hardship was the focus not armaments to control aggressive foreign
states  death of collective security and beginning of appeasement
- Produced aggressive states who saw war and conquest as a solution to their
problems
- Brought Hitler to power  Lebensraum  greatly undermined the concept of
collective security and attempts to prevent war
- Created reasons for aggression in Manchuria and robbed nations of the physical
ability and motivation to co-operate to preserve peace
- LoNs and the concept of collective security exposed as hollow and impotent
Manchurian Crisis 1931-33 – latter failure of LoNs and the
concept of collective security
- Exposed British and French weakness, encouraged further aggression in the form
of Abyssinian Crisis
- Japan suffered greatly under Great Depression as it depended on the export of
manufactured goods primarily to America
- Demands for actions by radical nationalist groups to take over the Chinese
province of Manchuria which held a vast wealth of natural resources of all kinds
- Japan invaded Manchuria using the excuse that Chinese troops attacked its
citizens and property, Chinese were rapidly defeated and in 1932 the puppet
state of Manchukuo was established
- China was a member of LoNs, appealed for support against Japan
- UK and USA followed a policy of appeasement, hoped that by accommodating
the demands of the revisionist powers in the hopes that they would become less
aggressive and not create conditions for another global conflict  blow in the
face of collective security

5. - Absence of motivation to undertake a military mission from Britain and France,
also lacked the bases in the Far East to counter Japanese forces
- USA supported China’s Open Door Policy and suspicious of Japanese rivalry in
the Pacific but did not take action due to isolationism mentality and the Great
Depression
- Also, UK and USA had extensive trading networks and investments in China and
Far East, any serious attempt to oppose the Japanese might result in these being
severely threatened
- League was largely ineffective as it lacked forces of its own, moral condemnation
and disapproval were useless
- Lytton Commission set up as a fact finding mission on the Manchurian Crisis, but
it did no more than recognizing some of Japanese justifiable grievances and
suggesting the independence of Manchuria and withdrawal of Japanese forces
- Japan refused to accept the criticism and withdrew from the league  authority
of league was undermined and collective security was nowhere to be seen
Abyssinian Crisis 1935-36 – last blow to the collapse of
collective security pre WWII
- Italy’s role as a defender of the ToV and a key player in central Europe was
weakened by German resurgence, encouraged Mussolini to look elsewhere for
territory, empire and a sense of importance diplomatically, which was also in line
with national strength and pride emphasized in the Fascist ideology
- Stresa Front 1935, an initial agreement between Italy, France and Britain to
deter German attempt to modify ToV, seems like a guarantee of collective
security, most importantly France and Britain conceded that Abyssinia lay within
Italian sphere of interest  principles of collective security and self-
determination abandoned
- Mussolini wanted to satisfy his dreams of a “new Roman Empire”
- Abyssinia was the only African territory available, it was also located next to two
existing Italian colonies
- Large oil deposits in the region, potential outlet for the surplus Italian population,
these factors also encouraged Mussolini to invade Abyssinia
- Dispute referred to the League for arbitration in September 1935, the invasion
began in October 1935, 7 October Italy declared as the aggressor and on 18
November 51 states voted to impose economic sanctions against Italy (did not
include oil and steel) League was not seen as a genuine force for peace and

6. the Allies were unable to appease Italy in order to maintain the Stresa front
against Hitler, again, collective security was not practiced
- Hoare-Laval Pact devised to settle the crisis and avoid losing Italy as an ally, the
proposal was leaked and thus failed due to the lack of public support and
Mussolini’s refusal to accept only part of Abyssinia
- No way to stop Italy after Hoare-Laval Pact’s failure, but neither UK or France
was prepared to use force  death of collective security
- May 1936 war ended and Italy had the whole of Abyssinia
- As leading powers were unwilling to apply military intervention, the concept of
collective security was exposed as entirely hollow, so was the LoNs as these
major powers denounced the aggressors but did not prevent their course of
actions
- Mussolini allied with Hitler as a result, which ensured the total elimination of
collective security as a viable possibility in the later years of 1930s