To what Extent was the League of Nations successful in the 1920s?

"The League had no means of enforcing its decisions other than the effect of world opinion. If a power chose to be defiant, there was nothing effective that the League could do." S Reed Brett wrote this in the book, European History 1900-1960, in 1967. This quote exactly described the situation and the conditions of the League of Nations in the 1920s. They were successful in preventing minor conflicts between countries and improving the living conditions of citizens in the world, but whenever a country decided to be defiant or noncompliant, the League of Nations was useless because they were not capable of enforcing their decisions. The League of Nations had 4 main aims and they were to establish self-determination, disarm nations, stop wars, and improve the world. The League of Nations was approximately 50% successful in the 1920s because their aim of improving the world resulted in nearly 100% completion, their aim of disarmament resulted in 50% agreement, their aim of preventing wars resulted in 50% completion, and their aim of self-determination resulted in nearly 0% success, and the average of the success of the League of Nations would be 50%.

The League of Nations was 50% successful in the 1920s because their aim of improving the world was extremely successful and it nearly achieved 100% of their objectives. Although the International Labor Organization failed in winning the support the nations for a 48-hour workweek, the League of Nations oversaw numerous organizations that were successful in other areas. During the 1920s, the League freed over 200,000 slaves in Sierra Leone and formulated attacks to prevent the practice of forced labor in Africa. It even reduced the death rate of workers in Tanganyika from 55% to 4%. The Health Organization worked to prevent diseases such as malaria and leprosy from infecting and killing civilians and it even prevented an epidemic of typhus from dispersing through Europe by intervening the early stages of the problem in the Soviet Union. The Commission of Refugees resettled 400,000 prisoners of wars and wars that primarily came from Russia and it established refugee camps in Turkey in 1922 and a Nansen passport as a form of identification for homeless people. The League of Nations even sent economic experts to Austria and Hungary to advance the economic circumstances. Despite numerous obstacles after 4 years of world war, the League of Nations oversaw organizations that attempted to ameliorate the living standards of citizens, and the efforts prospered in numerous locations. Although chaos filled numerous countries, these organizations significantly eliminated poverty and brought freedom to slaves and prisoners of wars. The League of Nations was nearly 100% successful in the 1920s of achieving their aim of improving the world in nearly every possible aspect in the society.

The League of Nations was 50% successful in the 1920s because their aim of disarmament was 50% successful. The Kellog-Briand Pact, conceptualized by Aristide Briand, was introduced to prevent the emergence of German military aggression and America eventually proposed a multilateral treaty. The League of Nations assisted the progress of this pact and 15 major powers signed unto it in August 1928. On page 61 of the book Conflict, Communism, and Fascism: Europe 1890-1945, it also states:

However, the League of Nations did promote a greater level of international co-operation than had ever existed before. This climate encouraged the signing by Britain, Japan, France, Italy and USA of the Washington Naval Agreement in 1922, which set limits on naval shipbuilding.

However, Britain did not sign a 1923 disarmament treaty and nations such as Germany and the Soviet Union did not dramatically disarm in the 1920s since they were not supervised by the League of Nations. The league achieved 50% in their aim of disarmament in the 1920s because they encouraged and were involved in several disarmament treaties that were signed by many nations, yet other nations did not comply with these treaties and some even expanded their military forces because of the lack of observance of the abiding of the laws.

The League of Nations was 50% successful in the 1920s because they prevented 50% of wars or conflicts from taking place while ignoring or unable to prevent the other 50% of wars from occurring. Sweden and Finland almost fought a war for the Aland Islands, but the League intervened after Sweden raised the issue in 1921 and the crisis was solved peacefully. Albania and Yugoslavia quarreled about the borders, and Yugoslav forces occupied Albanian territories even after the Paris Peace Conference. The Yugoslav forces invaded Albania after encounters with Albanian tribesmen, and the league sent representatives to resolve this dilemma, and war was prevented again. The League also had successes with the prevention of wars between Greece and Bulgaria and between Iraq and Turkey. However, the League failed in other incidents. France and Belgium invaded Ruhr in 1923 since Germany was unable to pay the reparations in 1922. This action was clearly in opposition of the policies of the League, but the League did not act upon the incident since Britain did not want to oppose France. On August 31st of 1923, Italy invaded the island of Corfu because Greece did not pay the reparations for the murders of Italian general Enrico Tellini and his men. The League condemned the occupation, but it was eventually forced to compromise on the terms of Mussolini. The Polish-Lithuanian War happened from August 1920 to October 7 of 1920 due to the disagreements about the control of Vilnius. The League of Nations could have terminated the war, but Britain and France, due to their reliance upon Poland as a future ally against Germany, ignored the war and accepted the Lithuanian capital as a Polish city. The League nevertheless was successful in preventing numerous conflicts from ascending into a full-scale war. Many countries sought for the intervention of the league into the conflicts and these countries obeyed the decisions of the League. However, it also failed in preventing wars because France and Britain, the leaders of the League, positioned their national interests in front of the policies of the League. Numerous defiant nations ignored the decisions of the League and many mistrusted the league because of their unreasonable judgments. The League was 50% successful in the 1920s because they were 50% successful and 50% unsuccessful in achieving the aim of preventing wars.

The League of Nations was 50% successful in the 1920s because the outcomes of their results of the establishment of self-determination were absolutely horrible and ended in 0% success. The League of Nations only saw the deliverance of self-determination to small European countries, yet nations such as Iraq, Libya, and Palestine became mandates for nations such as France and Britain. Even colonies such as Australia and New Zealand received their respective mandates like New Guinea and Nauru. As for former colonies such as India and nearly all the African nations, they were completely ignored about the reception of self-determination. Poland received self-determination when it gained its independence on Nov. 9, 1918, and they received numerous territories like the Polish Corridor from Germany. However, they were not satisfied and they invaded Russia in 1920 and drove the Russians back from Warsaw. Czechoslovakia also received self-determination from the Paris Peace Conference, yet numerous ethnic problems existed in the newly formed nations because the German and the Slovaks were displeased with the industrial and economic condition of the nation. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was another example of a new nation that received self-determination, yet their relations with nations like Hungary and Romania were bitter. All these former Hapsburg Empire's nations were unstable, politically divided, agriculturally inadequate, and industrially receded. Hardly any of these nations were in improved conditions and many were eventually overtaken by dictatorships and oppressions of the public. To make the situation worse, regional and international peace and prosperity were further threatened by self-determination. The League of Nations saw complete failures in their original aims of instituting stability in Europe through self-determination.

The League of Nations faced numerous obstacles during the 1920s, and it overcame them in some situations, but it failed in others. Overall, they met their aims fairly well. The League of Nations was approximately 50% successful in the 1920s because of the average percentage of the success of each aim. The League was nearly 100% successful in improving the world, 50% in disarming and in preventing wars, and 0% in delivering self-determination. The League of Nations was successful to an extent.