Lecture 20

48 views5 pages
3 Nov 2010
School
Department
Course

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

L20
League of Nations
Realism Æ Liberalism
- based on Bismarckian idea that force and power is the motive of diplomacy & only thing
that matters
- as of first world war, resulting carnage/psychological damage to the people who had
constructed the 19th century system -- led to want to try to create an alternate shift
* based on balance of power (that no Æ arbitration (diplomacy should not revolve around
one nation would be stronger than force and power, but collectivism)
another)
- trying to ensure that the problem won't arise in the first place
- liberalism = arbitration on the idea that it will lead
to a succession on hostilities or provide a security
based on collectivism
* web/bloc alliances Æ collective security
- after WWI, more dependence on collective security
toward what Wilson wanted (move away from big
power politics towards idea of working together)
- block alliances, security was kept on the basis of threat
* arms build up Æ disarmament
- safeguard was supposed to be equal disadvantage - not advantage
- no state was allowed to build up arms
- realism was modelled/based on the
ideology that humanity is corrupt,
power is natural, force keeps
everything in check
* is anarchial model of state system Æ state relations based
- only arms can keep the balance, bloc can keep against, balance of power is worthy of holding
peace
- states used to only listen to force, - based on moralities/ethics
only thing to overpower them
- based more on the reconstruction/re-
understanding of diplomacy on the idea that it could
work -- ethics and morality should be the basis of
diplomacy, not force and power
- became obvious that great power only listened to their own interests as they did prior
WWI
- though nations formed diplomacy under these conditions/ideals - great powers began to
pursue their own interests irrespective of joint objectives
Locarno Treaty - 1925 - Stresemann
Æ Stresemann reintroduced Germany into the European system
- shrewd in attempting to achieve what he wanted to
- successfully reincorporated Germany into the diplomatic system as Versailles kept
Germany out of the new system
- saddle Germany with reparations, things that made Germany the ferriferous state of
Europe
- Stresemann acknowledged that Germany would act as another responsible state and an
agreement was made between Germany and the nations of
Æ Britain, France, Belgium, Italy, Germany [great powers of the days]
www.notesolution.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
- Britain and France concluded a treaty to bring Germany back into the league
Æ Germans willing to be acknowledged as a responsible state to take part in League of
Nations [but did not admit wrongs] - guaranteed them Western borders
[- =/= Eastern German borders & Eastern European security ignored]
- Germany did not want to rewrite Versailles, redefine borders
- did not promise anything about the Eastern border
- did not take long for Hitler to expand in Eastern Europe
- Locarno did not include the guarantee Eastern nations - their interests were ignored
- have a problem with Eastern ideologies
- as long as Western borders were secure, everything was fine
Washington Naval Agreement (1921-1922) - to whom naval properties mattered
- of how large powers did not allow the League to function in terms of collective security
- Washington, London, Tokyo - 3 powers who concluded the treaty
London Naval Treaty (1930) - follow up regarding power of Japanese
- Pacific region was a region of imperialism (British, Americans, Japanese)
- restatement and updating the treaty
- pledged to regulate naval naval/submarine warfare in the Pacific, submarines, quotas,
where to place them, what to do with them
- ratio of 5:5:3 (British, USA, Japan) - what they could have
- realism is about anarchy but not how the world should function -- but how it did function
and continued to function (looked after own interests through bloc alliances)
Interwar crises of the 30s
- coinciding with rise of Fascism and Communism
1. Pacifism
- as a result of the First World War experience
- led to demographic problem, etc
- mostly in Britain and France, a shy away from militarism (military power)
- try to be something different, conflict resolution based on something more civil, not war
- aggression was blatantly regression
- democratic governments were more responsible for civilians
- affected governments to see whether aggression could be solved not by response but by
collective measure
- don't want this to happen again - but is happening and probably going to continue
happening
2. no solidarity between Western powers
- all wanted something differently regarding the Germans
- security
3. No cooperation or league action
- league was not allowed to function by the great power - exercised veto or powers
disregarded the league
- Japanese vs. Chinese 1931, Italians vs. Ethiopians Æ aggression but security did not
impose collective measures - did not believe in it and left
4. Allied distrust of the Soviet Union (collective security)
- Germany gotten out by a lot of clauses, good relations of great powers
- Soviet Union distrusted until French allowed them to come back by sponsoring
membership into the League
5. Toleration of Fascism
- potential fascism that was arising or surge of communism
- in only collective foreign policy
www.notesolution.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class