The Strengths of the League of Nations

The League of Nations was strong in some ways. Its strengths came from the covenant of
the league as well as its members.

The covenant of the league gave the League a means of influence in 4 ways. First it was
able to publicly condemn a nation and public opinion might force a country to stop its
wrong doings. For example in the Greek Bulgarian conflict of 1925, the league
condemned Greece and it stopped its invasion of Bulgaria. The second was that it could
offer arbitration, as in the Aland crisis in 1921. The covenant also permitted the use of
Military and trade sanctions and these, if used properly, could stop an aggressor.

The League also gained strength from its members. From the start it had 42 nations and
by 1930 60 nations had joined. They all signed the covenant, and in particular article 10
which promised collective security. The league had a healthy membership throughout its
life and most countries were part of the league at some point. This meant that collective
security could be offered to more countries and makes it stronger as well – the trade
sanctions would be more effective if more countries cut off financial links with the
aggressor.

The weaknesses of the League of Nations

Although the league was strong in some respects, it also had weaknesses. It major
weakness came from the fact that some of the major world powers were not part of the
League. Also it had no army and the military sanction clauses of the covenant were not
clear.

The main weakness for the league came from the fact that some of the great powers were
always missing from it. The USA with its isolationism attitudes was never a member and
Japan, Italy and Germany left during the 1930s leaving only Britain and France. This
meant that it was never a truly global organization, and this made collective security more
difficult to work as it couldn’t tell counties outside the league what to do during a crisis.
As the USA was not a member of the league, collective security was not as strong as it
could be. The USA was the most powerful nation in the world in terms of economic and
military strength. Most countries relied on the USA for money and as a market for selling
raw materials. If the USA cut off its financial links with another country, then that
country’s economy would be affected more seriously.

Another weakness of the league was that it did not have its own army which meant that
the league could not force its members to stop its wrong doings. Although the original
idea was that strong member states such as GBR would use its army to assist the league,
during the depression, they become much more inward looking and less interested in
world affairs. Also, the military clauses of the covenant were not very clear. For one thing
it never ruled out war as illegal (but this was later amended in 1928 by the Kellogg
Briand Pact). Also the covenant of the league never forced the member states to protect
the covenant – they did not have to do what the league told them to.

Due to these weaknesses, the league was more effective with less powerful countries that
were looking for a peaceful settlement and collective security only worked when the
members listened to the leagues decisions, for example the 1925 Italy + Corfu incident.
Even so the league was quite successful in the 1920s (as it mainly dealt with less
powerful nations). However, in the 1930s, the effects of the depression made some
important members more aggressive (Germany, Italy and Japan) and left the league. This
made it more important that Britain and France should offer strong support and guidance
for the league. However these nations became more inward looking and less interested in
world affairs. This deepened the weakness and led to the collapse of collective security
after the Abyssinian crisis after which league became insignificant to the prevention of
the Second World War.