Download League of Nations

League of Nations
BRAMUN XV
​ hair​: Ana Rocha Bennati
C
​Vice-Chair​: João Pedro Tavares
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
2
The League of Nations
Context
Procedure
4
4
4
Topic A: Peace Treaties
Historical Context
German War Guilt
Reparations
French Demands for reparations
British reparation demands
Setting up the Reparation Commission
The Saarland
The Rhineland
Germany’s eastern frontiers
Military Restrictions
Territorial Changes
The Shandong Problem (Shantung)
German Colonies
Position of Nations
Timeline of Events
Guiding Questions
Further Research
Works Cited
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
13
14
14
15
Topic B: The Mukden Incident
Historical Context
The first Sino-Japanese war 1894-95
The First World War and Japanese Nationalism
Post WWI Japanese Sentiment and Nationalism
Growing Militarism and Nationalism
Position of Nations
Timeline of Events
Guiding Questions
Further Research
15
15
15
16
16
17
20
22
23
24
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
2
Works Cited
​
Topic C: The Abyssinian Crisis
Historical Context
Italian Empire
Position of Nations
Timeline of Events
Further Research
Guiding Questions
Works Cited
24
25
25
26
26
28
29
29
30
"Kingsnews - An Online Children's Web Magazine." ​The League of Nations| Kingsnews.
N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Nov. 2016.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
3
INTRODUCTION
Dear delegates,
It is a pleasure and great honor to be chairing the League of Nations
committee in BRAMUN XV! We do hope you are just as excited as we are for this
conference. The League of Nations committee allows delegations to delve into the past and
forge the future of world history, and with this responsibility, delegates should be more
prepared than ever. They will have the advantage of knowing what went wrong in the past,
and should analyze how actions could have been taken differently. Ultimately, the objective
of this committee is to fix the failures of the League of Nations, in order to preserve world
peace and prosperity.
For the first time in BRAMUN history, delegates will be able to travel back in time almost
one hundred years to an age before the creation of the UN itself. We will be debating three
topics which marked the long term reign of the League of Nations in international security:
The drafting of the Treaty of Versailles, The Mukden Incident and Abyssinian Crisis.
Sincerely,
Ana Rocha Bennati
St.Pauls School
[email protected]
João Pedro Tavares
St.Nicholas School
[email protected]
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
4
The League of Nations
Context
The League of Nations was established on the 10th of January 1920, following the end of
the First World War in 1918. It lasted for 26 years, until being replaced by the United Nations
in 1946 following the League’s failure to prevent a Second World War. The League was the
first ever international organisation which aimed to provide world peace above each nation’s
own personal interest. The League was established under the “Covenant”, which similar to
the UN charter, dictated the procedure, rules and regulations of the league. The League
would be made up of a General Assembly (representing​ all member states), an Executive
Council (with membership limited to major powers), and a permanent secretariat. In the
League of Nations Committee here are BRAMUN, we will be representing the General
Assembly. Member states were expected to "respect and preserve as against external
aggression" the territorial integrity of other members, and to ​disarm​ "to the lowest point
consistent with domestic safety."
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
5
Procedure
Although we strive to remain as faithful to the League of Nations, there will be some change
in regards to procedure and historical context for simulation purposes here at BRAMUN.
Below are the changes in procedure and historical context.
1) We are aware that the League of Nations was established d
​ uring​ the Paris peace
conference following WWI. Therefore, for topic A, the house will meet as a “peace
conference”, and will debate (and construct resolutions) on the creation of the
league. Since topic A will not take place during the League, t​ he U.S.A. will have
voting powers.
2) We will be following standard MUN procedure, as it is very similar to that of the
League of Nations. Therefore, procedure in the League will not differ from that
usually carried out in BRAMUN.
3) The house will disregard other resolutions passed and topics discussed when
debating a resolution. Therefore, if a resolution is passed in topic B (1931), we will
pretend it does not exists for topic C (1936) and work with real life historical facts.
Therefore, resolutions do not possess the power to prevent the brink of other topics.
(A good resolution in the topic of the Manchurian crisis, cannot prevent the
Abyssinian crisis from happening).
4) Unanimity was required in the league in order to pass decisions. For simulation
purposes, unanimity will not be required and voting procedure will proceed as usual:
amendments, resolutions and motions will need a majority to pass.
5) The United States:​ In the first topic (topic A), the US participates in the peace
treaties as any other member in the committee, they have voting rights. For topics B
& C, since the U.S. is not part of the League of Nations, it will not have voting rights
but will be an observer state for simulation purposes.
6) The Council & Power of VETO: The council was one of the three bodies of the
league of nations, made up of around four permanent members and nine
non-permanent members. The council will only be in function for topics B & C, n
​ ot
topic A. The council met separate from the General Assembly. For simulation
purposes, members of the council will have a power of VETO when voting on
resolutions. In order to VETO however, a majority of the members of the council must
vote for VETO. Below are the members of the Council for each topic;
a) Treaty of Versailles: N
​ O council as the League of Nations is not functioning
yet.
b) The Invasion of Manchuria: U
​ nited Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan. ¾ of
the members must agree in order to VETO a resolution.
c) The Abyssinian Crisis: ​United Kingdom, France, Italy, USSR. ¾ of the
members must agree in order to VETO a resolution.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
6
Topic A: Peace Treaties
Historical Context
By January 1919, Europe was in turmoil. The sudden and complete defeat of the central
powers had made Europe vulnerable to the spread of Communism from Russia. There was
a fear of a revolution. The problems facing the statesmen in Paris were thus not only the
negotiation of peace and the drawing up of new frontiers, but also the pressing need to avert
economic chaos and famine. There was a continued strength of nationalist feeling among
the populations of the victorious powers. Public opinion in Britain, the USA, France and Italy
viewed the Peace Conference as the final phase of the war in which their leaders must
ruthlessly consolidate the gains made on the battlefields in order to shatter the enemy.
Settlement with Germany
The key clauses in Versailles were the result of fiercely negotiated terms, which were often
only reached when the conference appeared to be on the brink of collapse. The first 26
articles (which appeared on all other treaties as well) contained the Covenant of the League
of Nations and were agreed unanimously.
German War Guilt
There was universal agreement among the victorious powers that Germany was guilty of
having started the war. It was this principle of war guilt which was to provide the moral
justification for the reparation clauses of the treaty, as was stressed in Article 231.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
7
Reparations
There was considerable debate about the amount that should be payed to Germany for
reparations. There was also debate about the nature of the damage deserving compensation
and how Germany could raise large sums of money without rebuilding an export trade which
might then harm the Allied industries. The major issue behind the Allied demands was the
compelling need to recover the costs of financing the war. At a time of severe social
distrusts, no Allied country could easily face the prospect of financing debt repayments by
huge tax increases and savage cuts in expenditure.It was hoped the USA could be
persuaded to continue wartime inter-Allied economic co-operation and cancel the repayment
of Allied war debts. But, by the end of 1918 Wilson dissolved all the agencies for inter-Allied
co-operation in Washington. Britain stopped all economic assistance from Britain to France
in March 1919, France had no option but to seek reparation from Germany.
French Demands for reparations
The French finance minister, Klotz, urged a policy of maximum claims and coined the slogan
“Germany will pay”. However, Loucheur, the minister for reconstruction, pursued a more
subtle policy and informed the Germans that the French economy needed an immediate
injection of cash, but his government would settle for a more moderate sum which Germans
could raise quickly. The German government, however, suspected that these overtures were
merely a means of dividing Germany from the USA which was seen as the most sympathetic
country towards Germany’s situation.
British reparation demands
The British delegation consistently maximised their country’s reparation claims on Germany,
because of the pressure exerted on the government by the electorate. Lloyd George claimed
that “the imposition of a high indemnity… would prevent the Germans from spending money
on an army”. High indemnity would also ensure that there would be money left over for
Britain and the Dominions after France and Belgium claimed their share. The Imperial War
cabinet urged that the cost of war pensions should be included in the reparation bill.
Setting up the Reparation Commission
British pension claims made it more difficult for the Allied financial experts to agree on an
overall figure for reparations. It was agreed that the Reparation Commision should be set up
to assess in detail what the German economy could afford by the 1st of May in 1921.
Meanwhile, Germans would make a payment of 20 milliard gold marks and raise 60 milliard
through the sale of bonds. In December 1919, Britain and France agreed on the ration 25:55
as the percentage of the total reparations which each of the two powers should receive.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
8
Belgium was the only power to be awarded full compensation for its losses and was a
priority in payment for the first sums due from Germany.
The Saarland
Clemenceau insisted on the restoration to
France of that part of the Saar which had been
given to Prussia in 1814. He Aimed to detach
the mineral and industrial basin to the north
(had never been French) and place it under
non-German
administration.
He
also
Demanded full French Ownership of the Saar
coal mines as compensation for the
destruction of the pits in northern france by the
Germans. There was a clash between the
national interests of the French and the
self-determination enshrined in the fourteen
points.
Lloyd George persuaded Wilson and Clemenceau to reach a compromise whereby the
mines would be of French ownership for fifteen years while the actual government of the
Saar would be entrusted to the league. After fifteen years there would be a plebiscite on
returning to German control.
The Rhineland
There was a bitter clash between Britain and France. The British had no ambition in the
Rhine, but to the French, the occupation of the Rhine was a unique opportunity to weaken
Germany permanently, as it would deprive Germany of the natural defensive line of the
Rhine. The British feared this would create a new reason for tension and conflicts between
France and Germany as it would tilt the balance of European power to the French.
Clemenceau agreed to limit the Allied occupation of the Rhineland to a fifteen years period in
return for and Anglo-American treaty guaranteeing France against a new German attack.
The Rhineland would be permanently demilitarised after those fifteen years.
Germany’s eastern frontiers
Commission of Polish Affairs recommended on 12 March that Danzig, Marienwerder and
Upper Silesia should all be included in the new Polish state to give it access to the sea. Only
Allenstein was to be decided by plebiscite. Lloyd George opposed the inclusion of Danzig
and Marienwerder as he feared the long-term resentment of the local population as he was
afraid the Germans might turn to Bolshevik Russia for help. Lloyd threatened to withdraw
from the Anglo-American guarantee pact and forced Clemenceau to agree to the holding of
a plebiscite in Marienwerder and the establishment of Danzig.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
9
Military Restrictions
Part V of the treaty speaks about the military restrictions for Germany:
● German armed forces cannot be more than 100000 troops, conscription is abolished
● Enlisted men will be retained for 12 years, officers for 25
● German naval forces will be limited to 15000 men, 6 battleships, 6 cruisers, 12
destroyers, and 12 torpedo boats
● The import and export of weapons is prohibited
● Poison gas, armed aircraft, tanks and armored cars are prohibited.
● Blockaded on ships are prohibited
● Restriction on manufacture of machine guns and rifles
Territorial Changes
Germany’s borders were established in
1871. Germany laid claim to land and cities
that it viewed as historically “Germanic”. In
Versailles, Germany agreed to return
disputed lands and cities to various
countries.The Province of West Prussia
would be ceded to Poland, granting it
access to the Baltic Sea via the “Polish
Corridor”, this turned east Prussia into an
exclave,
separated
from
mainland
Germany.
Other Annexations:
● Alsace and part of Lorraine
(France), both German speaking,
became part of Germany in 1871. Versailles returned them to France.
● Northern Schleswig was returned to Denmark
● Prussian provinces of Province of Posen and of West Prussia which Prussia had
annexed in the 18th century were returned to Poland,
● Hultschin area of Upper Silesia transferred to Czechoslovakia without a plebiscite
● Eastern part of upper Silesia was assigned to Poland- voted with a plebiscite
● Area of Eupen-Malmedy was given to Belgium, the Vennbahn railway was also
transferred to Belgium.
● Area of Soldau in East Prussia (railway junction on the Warsaw-Danzig route) was
transferred to Poland without plebiscite.
● Northern part of East Prussia (Memelland or Memel Territory) was placed under the
control of France and later annexed by Lithuania
● The Important port of Danzig with the delta of the Vistula River on the Baltic sea was
separated from Germany as the Free city of Danzig
● Anschluss forbidden (Austria merging with Germany)
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
10
The Shandong Problem (Shantung)
Japanese were determined to hold on to the ex-German leasehold territory of Kiaochow in
Shantung China. The Chinese government argued that all formed German rights should
automatically revert to the Chinese state, but in 1915 China had agreed to recognise
Japanese rights in Shantung. Wilson was anxious to block Japanese expansion in the
Pacific and thus supported China, France and Britain wanted to protect their own rights in
China and backed Japan. USA had not option to concede as it was worried with its own
territorial disputes in Fiume (with Italy). This defeat did much to turn the US Senate against
the Treaty of Versailles.
Article 156 of the treaty transferred German concessions in Shandong, China, to Japan
rather than returning authority to China. Chinese outrage led to demonstrations and cultural
movement known as the May Fourth Movement and influence. China thus did not sign the
Treaty of Versailles and signed its own treaty with Germany in 1921.
German Colonies
Wilson insisted the League should have
ultimate control over the former German
Colonies. This was accepted by the
British Dominions of New Zealand,
Australia and South Africa. Britain, France
and South Africa were allocated most of
the former German colonial empire in
Africa, while Australia, New Zealand and
Japan secured German concession in the
Pacific. Italy was awarded control of the
Juba Valley in east Africa, and territorial
adjustments were made to its Libyan
frontier with Algeria.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
11
Position of Nations
USA
The United States believed Germany should be punished for its actions in the war and so
they would be excluded from the League during a period of time. Woodrow Wilson also
suggested the ‘Fourteen Points’, which he claimed that they would be pivotal for lasting
peace. Points I to V focused on diplomatic issues, specifying rules of free trade, navigation,
colonial adjustments and the cutting down of national weaponry. Points VI to XIII specified
territorial remarks, by calling for evacuations in Russia, returning territories to France and
liberating Belgium, while also creating independent states and redefining borders.
Ultimately, the fourteenth point was the creation of
the League of Nations. However, Woodrow Wilson
was willing to reach an agreement with other Nation
States. Point II declared free trade, although he
agreed that this would not lift the blockade on
Germany as this would satisfy Great Britain.
Furthermore, even if it is not stated in the XIV points,
the US was dedicated in rebuilding Germany. In
addition, Italy was promised territory up to the
Brenner Frontier (Austria) and the fate of the
German colonies and former Turkish territory would
be given as a mandate to League powers. The XIV
points were not fully accepted by the allies, since
there were issues between allies that it failed to
overcome. British and French claims in the Middle
East were not mentioned, as well as American,
Japanese and British imperialism in the East.
Furthermore, it did not provide a solution to the
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
12
territorial disputes between the Serbs, Slovenes and Croats with Italy.
France
The French priorities relied on a weak Germany. The territorial consequences of the war
made Germany a larger potential threat to a war exhausted France. Because of this,
Clemenceau called upon a continuous development of relations with the US and Great
Britain, through means of financial co-operations to restore its economy. He was aware that
France had suffered a lot with the war (1.3 million casualties and 2.8 million wounded) and
faced a Germany which, as a consequence of the collapse of Austria-Hungary and tsarist
Russia, was potentially stronger than in 1914. France desired this to such an extent, that it
proposed giving a considerable amount of Middle Eastern (Palestine and Mosul) oil fields to
Great Britain to gain support throughout Europe for such an accord.
Clemenceau was prepared in containing and limiting Germany from becoming this threat,
and so Woodrow Wilson’s proposal did not please him. Furthermore, France wished to
completely disarm Germany while flooding them with war debt. In order to dissolve
Germany’s power in the region, France proposed the formation of Rhineland, while also
developing a thriving independent Czechoslovak, Polish and Yugoslav states. In conclusion,
France feared Germany would become a stronger power, and so proposed more radical
solutions to impede German growth.
Great Britain
David Lloyd George was concerned with the spread of Russian Bolshevism in Europe, and a
stable Germany would be a sufficient measure to this fear. Furthermore, he thought that a
divided Germany would be a root to new conflicts, as he also wanted less british
commitment in Europe. This was exactly the opposite proposition of French policy, by acting
with the intent of rebuilding instead of weakening. Britain seeked to repair Germany, while
still having them assume the war guilt. Britain was also pressured by its self governing
dominions to receive German debt.
Unlike France, Great Britain had achieved what they expected from the war, since they
managed to eliminate Germany as a trade rival while their colonies had also been
dismantled. The true British interest was imperialism in the Middle East.
Italy
Orlando had the intention of raising the morale of the Italian public by praising Italy’s
performance in the war. Italy was also excited to receive what it was promised by the
Entente in the Treaty of London. This treaty specified the territories Italy would gain if they
joined the triple entente in case of a victory against Germany.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
13
Japan
In order to protect Japanese immigrants in the US, Japan wanted a clause for equality in the
League’s covenant. Furthermore, Japan wished to have its newly acquired territories be
recognized.
Timeline of Events
1914
August: Germany invaded Belgium and
France.
Battle of tannenberg
August 23: Japan declares war on
Germany
1915
April 26: Treaty of London Signed by Italy,
France, Britain and Russia
1917
February: First Russian Revolution
October: Bolshevik Revolution (Second
Revolution)
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
14
1918
March 3: Treaty of Brest-Litovsk
March - April: German Offensive on the
western front
Nov 11: German Armistice
1919
Jan 18: Peace Conference opened at Paris
June 28: Treaty of Versailles signed with
Germany
Guiding Questions
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Was the treaty of versailles unfair?
Was peace possible without a group of victors?
Did the treaty of versailles ensure widespread peace?
Would the best approach be with diplomatic options?
Should the treaty have been more aggressive (as suggested by France at the time)?
Would peace be ensured by division of territories or overall economic and diplomatic
stability?
What measures would create such stability and diplomacy?
What territorial decisions would limit growth for Germany?
Should the league establish more control over Germany?
What measures would ensure that Germany would stop being a threat?
How would the colonies be managed?
From this point onwards, how should the balance of power in the League function? A
bipolar or multipolar power system?
Further Research
(We will post a folder on the facebook group with more documents)
Link to PDF of the full treaty of versailles:
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-0043.pdf
Great video on position of nations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YJfOZkriyk&list=PL5959C6ED1CD7CFC3
Video on the league of nations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdHA5uT9ocg&list=PL5959C6ED1CD7CFC3&index=4
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
15
Weaknesses on the foundation of the league:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4xwXnHWxp8
Works Cited
Williamson, David G. ​War and Peace: International Relations 1890-1945. 4th ed. London:
Hodder Education, n.d. Print.
(With the help & Guidance of Mr Kennedy, St Paul’s)
Topic B: The Mukden Incident
Historical Context
The first Sino-Japanese war 1894-95
In the late 19th century, it soon became clear that Japan had imperialist aims regarding its
neighbours in Asia and the Far east, especially Korea. In 1876, Japan forced Korea to
establish political relations, and to agree to an “unequal treaty”, which gave special rights to
Japanese living in Korea. When this led to riots in Korea, both Japan and China sent troops
into Korea as they both had their mindset on this territory. Tensions over Korea led to the
First Sino-Japanese War. The Japanese Navy and Army had been modernised in 1868 and
so managed to consistently defeated the poorly trained Chinese army, this then compelled
China to seek for peace in 1895. The Treaty of Shimonoseki, April 1895, resulted in
Chinese recognition of Korean independence and saw Japan obtaining various territories
including Formosa (Taiwan). China also had to sign a commercial treaty with Japan, as well
as grant manufacturing rights to Japanese firms. This war resulted in strong nationalistic
sentiments in Japan, and previously liberal politicians began to advocate for imperialism and
militarism as well.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
16
The First World War and Japanese Nationalism
Another factor which led to increasing nationalism in Japan was the First World War and its
aftermath. The Anglo- Japanese Alliance of 1902 was renewed in 1905, and entered on the
side of the Triple Entente by the time world war I had begun. The main aim in war for Japan
was to take over the German concessions in China. On January 1915, Japan secretly
presented China with 21 demands. These included Chinese recognition of special Japanese
interests in various areas, including South Manchuria, while it also demanded that Japan
would have influence over aspects of China’s political, financial and military affairs including that China should accept Japanese “advisors in its government”. Japan was forced
to withdraw these more contentious items and China signed the agreement.
Post WWI Japanese Sentiment and Nationalism
One of the main causes for the Mukden incident is a sentiment of mutilated victory among
the Japanese following the first world war (1914-1918). Japan had been disappointed from
the gains in the 1919-1920 peace settlements. Although its control of German Concessions
in the Shandong peninsula and of the pacific islands was approved. Japan felt it had not
been fairly treated and did not obtain all if wanted to obtain. Japan and Italy alike, felt like
“disappointed losers”, the two would eventually join with Germany by various treaties and
agreements which would then emerge as the Axis powers in the Second World War. Another
important cause for the nationalistic sentiments’ rise after the peace conferences was that, in
1919 Japan proposed a “Racial equality” clause to be part of the Covenant of the new
league of nations. This would give Japan the same rights as other members, such as Britain
and France, to establish an overseas empire and expand. This was blocked by both the US
and Britain, this increased Japanese Nationalism, it also turned Japan away from Western
cooperation.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
17
Growing Militarism and Nationalism
The Samurai Legacy
The people in Japan had an enormous sense of national pride, they viewed that Japan
deserved a special status as they believed that the Sun Goddess had selected Japan as her
“chosen land.The military had enormous respect and prestige in Japanese society. This was
a result of the Samurai legacy of pre 1868 Japan, this respect of the military brought in
elements of loyalty to the emperor and self-sacrifice. The Samurai followed the “Bushido
Code” which translates to “Samurai’s way” entirely based on honor, loyalty, and fighting to
death. In the early 20th century, elements of the Bushido Code were given greater
importance than in the Tokugawa shogunate (a period in Japanese history lasting from
1837-1913 in which the Tokugawa clan dominated Japan). In the 20th century military and
civilian nationalists adapted and developed the bushido code.
Militarism and Politics after the First World War
During the 1920’s militarism increased (especially after the start of the Great Depression),
and was strongly associated with the idea of territorial expansion and making Japan a
regional and global power. Before the second world war, Bushido was impressed upon
Japanese soldiers to convey the idea that war was purifying and death was a soldier's duty
along with the idea that Bushido would provide soldiers with a “Spiritual shield” to fight till the
end. These beliefs culminated the Kamikaze suicide attacks. In the 1920s an officer class
emerged which acted outside the control of civilian politicians. This is significant as these
officers became convinced that Japan had been treated unfairly by the allies and the League
during the 1920 peace treaties. They became convinced that the only way to ensure Japan's
survival as a great nation was to expand into new territories and culminate more raw
material. By the 1930s, as the economic depression (caused by the crash of 29’) hit Japan, it
was evident that overpopulation and lack of raw materials were the main cause of Japan’s
difficulties. Worldwide restrictions on Japanese immigration and goods were contributing to
Japan’s economic and social difficulties, and the growth of support for expansionist policies
The Washington conference
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
18
Both Nationalism and Militarism in Japan grew as a result of attempts by the Western
powers to limit the expansion of Japan’s Navy. In 1921-22 the main powers had agreed on
naval limitations. In 1930, the powers met again and agreed to a 10 : 10 : 6, USA : Britain :
Japan ration on heavy cruisers and a 10:10:7 ration in destroyers. For submarines, Japan
was allowed to have as many as the USA. However Japan’s naval leaders were heavily
against the ratio for heavy cruisers. Yet the decision had been made by the government
overruling the opinion of the military. Many argued that the supreme command of the military
was actually independent of the government and the government should not interfere in
militaristic affairs. These arguments against the naval agreement were used to challenge
civilian governments in the early 1930s (By civilian government it is meant that a country's
government is not comprised of the military). Those naval leaders who had signed the
London agreements became assassination targets by ultra-right wing groups.
Nationalism, Militarism and the Great Depression
As the economic crisis hit Japan after 1929,
nationalists and militarism demanded Japanese
expansion on Mainland Asia. Like in Germany, the
Japanese believed their country needed to end their
dependence on Western powers and should be self
sufficient. Japan going to another world war only
became possible because of two factors: the impact of
the Great Depression, and the fact that Japan’s
Military leaders increasingly adopted such views of
expansionism and nationalism and were prepared to
act on them. From the late 1920s, young military
officers began to organise nationalistic political circles,
this was in part a result to opposition to the
Washington Naval Conference. Others were angered
by the luxury lived in the cities whilst the peasants
starved due to the depression, this was a main reason
for the assassination of prime minister Inukai in 1932.
People came to believe party politics was wearing
Japan as a power in Asia and that the answer relied on the military. Moreover civilian
nationalists were increasingly opposed to western nations and all aspects associated with
western culture, as they wanted to restore Japanese “spiritual values”, which consisted of
the belief that the emperor was set by god and that Japan was superior. Liberalism and
democracy thus opposed the fundamentals of “Japanism”.
Impact of the Depression
The economic impact of the depression lead to an increase in discontent and hostility of
right-wing militarists who argued for an expansionist policy. The depression had caused
many nations - including Britain and the USA - to protect their domestic industries by raising
tariffs on foreign goods. Thus Japan was increasingly denied access to markets and sources
of material on equal terms. Increasingly, Britain and France (who had empires in Asia and
Africa) - acted as models for the expansionists in Japan who argued that Japan needed
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
19
expansionism to improve its economic condition. As the Depression worsened, they began
to argue for a crusade against the West and for a “new order” in Asia. Japanese
expansionists viewed northern China (Manchuria) as the best place for expansionism.
Overall, the impact of the Great Depression was arguably the main factor in worsening
relations between major world states. In Japan, the economic and social impact of the
Depression pushed increasing numbers towards aggressive nationalism and a growing
hostility towards liberalism and party politics. Japan, Italy and Germany were calling for a
“new international order”. According to Mussolini, such countries were “have not” nations
(had not benefited from WWI) which were deliberately being unfairly denied the vast
territories and economic resources enjoyed by “bourgeois” nations such as the US, Britain
and France.
Manchuria 1931
Japanese Nationals had hoped to expand into Manchuria for several decades, already
before 1931, companies had made considerable investments there. Manchuria was the
perfect place of expansion for Japan, it was four times its size and had a low population, it
also had the resources Japan needed: cotton, vast forests, coal, iron, aluminium, magnesite,
gold and lead among others. Japan was also increasingly concerned with communism, and
Manchuria shared a 3200 km border with the Soviet union. Japan believed that by taking
control of manchuria, they would make it less likely for the Soviet Union to foment
communism in East Asia. Moreover, if Japan were to have any disputes with the Soviet
Union, they would occur in Manchuria rather than in Japan’s home island.
Manchurians were also seen as a possible source for cheap labour, which had already been
established before 1931. The ​South Manchurian Railway was a company established by
the Japanese in manchuria, it was an important element in Japan’s growing economic
control of the province. There were enormous differences in average monthly salaries for
Japanese and Chinese workers in the SMR. in 1926, the monthly salaries of Japanese
regular and temporary employees were, respectively, 7.6 and 4.2 times higher than the
wages of Chinese temporary workers. Moreover, from 1909-30 just over 3800 Japanese
were killed or injured working on the railroad, compared to the 115000 Chinese. However,
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
20
Japan also took great advantage of the political instability in China. In 1927, after 16 years of
turmoil (read more on the chinese instability), China had finally achieved something like a
unified government under Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kaishek in another spelling). Jiang was
determined to exert control over all of China, including Manchuria which was under the
control of warlord Zhang Zuolin since 1916. Officers in Japan’s Kwantung (Guandong) army
were determined to prevent china’s new nationalist government under Jiang Jieshi to take
control of Manchuria. For these and many other reasons, Japan’s army acted
insubordinately.
On september 18 1931 a bomb explored on the South Manchurian Railway outside the
leading city of Manchuria, Munkden. This minor explosion, did not prevent trains from using
the railway but had occurred near a garrison of Japanese soldiers protecting the South
Manchurian Railway operated by Japan, this became known as the Mukden Incident. Many
historians believe that the Kwantung army officers (Japan) planted the bomb and planned
the attack, but Japan blamed it on the Chinese. The Kwantung Army used the Mukden
incident as an excuse to occupy all of Manchuria. The rest of Manchuria was progressively
occupied during the next few months.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
21
Position of Nations
China
Many Chinese political groups decided to force the Chinese leader Chiang-Kai-shek to
resign, and Wang Jingwei assumed his position. The former leader became the head of
Chinese military. During the invasion Chiang did not assume that the Japanese army was
significantly stronger, as he also decided to handle the current conflicts in the rest of China.
Considering these factors, the Japanese had a fairly easy invasion as they conquered
Manchuria with a small amount of casualties and war exhaustion. With the clear advantage
in battle, by May 1933 Japan extended its conquest until the Chinese province Jehol and the
northern Chinese region (Manchukuo). China then signed a truce in the 31st of May of 1933
(Tanggu Truce). The Truce recognized Japanese control over Manchuria and Jehol, as well
as ensuring China would not attempt to take the lands back. Furthermore, the treaty
declared a neutral zone between the two regions, despite the fact Japan continued to
expand its territory. Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was gaining grounds,
yet Chiang remained concentrated in defeating the CCP and eventually managed to win the
conflict.
USA
Despite Woodrow Wilson’s convictions of a united world, the USA was not a part of the
League since the Senate barred the country’s participation. The Senate believed it would
lead to improper representation of the American people and the American States. The US
had previously opened its market with China, and there could be a potential economic loss in
trade as a repercussion to the invasion. With this concern, the US government decided to
remain impartial by continuing to trade with both China and the Japanese Manchuria. This
“solution” to their concerns was created by Henry Stimson (Foreign Minister), which is why it
is called the Stimson Doctrine.
The Soviet Union
The Soviet Union was experiencing a difficult transition at the time, by attempting to
collectivize (All production is directed to the government and is redistributed to the people)
its agricultural and industrial sectors. The government focused in reducing famine and
avoiding uprisings by increasing supply of food and raw materials. Yet the harsh weather,
poor industry conditions and a population starving to death made this a difficult process. In
addition, The Soviet Union owned a Railway in Manchukuo (Chinese Eastern Railway) but
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
22
could not use it due to Japanese expansion. Due to this, The Soviet Union sold its railway to
Manchukuo in a negotiation made solely out of Japanese terms.
Japan
The government of Japan was not aware that the Mukden Incident would take place, the
crisis itself was an act of defiance and insubordination by the Japanese military. The
government only managed to change the military’s general hours before the invasion, and so
could not take any action. Despite the government’s desire to conquer Manchuria, Japan
had no intention in creating negative repercussions in the international community. The
Japanese government wished to condemn and arrest the participants of the incident,
however the military refused and slowly toppled the government. Because of the incident,
military ideology and government ideology where now the same.
What actions did the League take?
The League was in a difficult situation due to several conflicts of interest which led to its
failure in this crisis. The most active and powerful members of the League (Britain and
France) feared any interference so they could protect their asian colonies. The international
community did not take any action regarding the Manchurian crisis, despite the fact they all
reacted negatively to the event. The members of the League of Nations where economically
exhausted with the Great Depression, and would not risk an intervention. At the time, China
was occupied with its own war with Communist revolutionaries, and so Japan had the
perfect opportunity for an invasion. This also made it so that anti-communist states did not
wish to interfere with Japan’s control in the area, considering the possibility of a communist
China.
The League of Nations was called upon by China by the time the Japanese had conquered
all of Manchuria. The League decided to approach this issue cautiously, by forming the
Lytton Committee (December, 1931) to analyse and see through the Japanese invasion.
However, the committee only began investigating in January of 1932, and only finished its
goal by October 1932. In October, the committee reported a presence of a corrupt Chinese
government before the invasion, as well as describing the major Japanese investments due
to the attack. Furthermore, the Lytton committee also claimed that the Japanese reason for
the invasion as means of freeing the people of an inefficient government was false. The
committee concluded that their recommendation would be to force Japan to leave the region.
In February 1933, the General Assembly passed a vote in relation to the report.
The only delegation to vote against this resolution was Japan, outraged with the ‘unfair’
decision. Japan then decided to leave the League of Nations one month later. This choice
was troubling for the League, because no country wished for a distant war which could
disrupt national economies as well as colonial interests. The only action the League took
was not recognize Manchukuo as a legitimate state.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
23
Timeline of Events
1889
Meiji Constitution declared
1894
Japan occupies Korea
1894-95
First Sino-Japanese war
1895
Tripartite Intervention by Russia, Germany,
France
1902
Anglo-Japanese Alliance
1904-1905
Russo-Japanese war, Japan takes control
of the South Manchurian Railroad
1914-18
First World War, Japan takes Shantung
Peninsula, Japanese economy grows
rapidly
1919-23
Japan’s economy constricts causing
hardship for farmers and workers
1921-2
Washington naval conference and treaties
that limit the Japanese Navy
1923-7
Economic revival through rebuilding Tokyo
earthquake damage
1925
Peace Protection Law allows arrest of
communists and others who advocate
government failures
1927
Bank failures, economy rapidly constricts
1928
Army fraction assassinated warlord ruler of
Manchuria
1929
Great depression constricts economy
further
1930
London Naval Conference, limits Japanese
navy
1931
September: Mukden incident, invasion of
Manchuria by Japan
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
24
Guiding Questions
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Should the personal interests of nation states surpass the values of international
peace?
Would any change in European colonial management affect the results of the event?
Is there any way to isolate or solve the factors that created the inability when taking
action?
Would a financial institution within the League be helpful when ensuring international
peace (allowing economic stability for any major course of action)?
Considering that nation states thought on their personal reasons on why to avoid
acting, is there any form of cooperation plan between nations that would make an
interference feasible?
To what extent was the Lytton committee helpful? Could it be improved?
Could there be a diplomatic agreement with Japan in order to stop the invasion?
Considering what Japan felt at the time, (nationalism, unfair treatment by the west),
what approaches could reach a consensus?
Further Research
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/mukden-incident
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/09/17/commentary/memories-1931-mukden-incide
nt-remain-divisive/
http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=18
Videos:
False Flag 2 :1931 Mukden Incident
The 1931 Manchurian Crisis by Mr Carse
Manchuria Under Japanese Rule | Manchukuo | Documentary Film | ca. 1937
Works Cited
Dailey, Andy. ​The Move to Global War. London: Hodder Education, 2015. Print.
Todd, Allan. ​The Move to Global War. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015. Print.
N.p., n.d. Web. <​http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/ww2/manchurian.htm​>
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
25
Topic C: The Abyssinian Crisis
Historical Context
Italian Nationalism
Benito Mussolini became Italian prime minister in 1922, he
and his party called for glory, war and empire. Fascism was a
ruling philosophy of nationalism which supported industrialists
and (supposedly) workers, emphasized order and obedience
to the state and enforced a single-party government. Although
Italy was a WWI victor, it was still weak since it struggled
during the war. This was evident when Italy was not granted
the territories it had been promised in the Treaty of London in
1915. Moreover, it is important to note that Italy lacked
colonies as it had missed out on the “scramble for Africa” in
the 19th century. In 1917 Italians suffered a terrible defeat in
the hands of the Austrians, the nationalists blamed the
government for being inefficient and failing to supply the
troops with enough equipment. Although victory was seen
through the war, the italians remembered the defeats and
high casualties. As a consequence, many Italian nationalists
expected to obtain the lands and colonies they had been promised after the war ended.
Although Italy did receive most of what it wanted, there were some executions: there was to
be nothing in Africa, and Britain and the United States refused to Grant Italy Fiume and
northern Dalmatia, arguing that these were vital for the new state of Yugoslavia. Italy then
dominated the Adriatic coast, since Austria Hungary ceased to exist after the war.
Italy was already severely divided internally
as the result of regional, economic and
political issues before its entry into WWI.
Participation in the war brought even
harsher economic strains. Promises made
to their 2 million soldiers, such as granting
them farmland ownership, were not fulfilled
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
26
and the government owed huge amounts to banks and industrialists that had been borrowed
for the war effort. Riots, strikes, violence and religious interference by the Catholic Church as
well as the spread of communism led to several turbulent years. Mussolini formed a gang
called the Blackshirts formed by industrialists and bankers, soon it had grown enormously in
power. By 1922 Mussolini was already supported by the king, industry leaders and the
middle economic classes. He threatened to march on Rome and seize government. The king
responded by naming him prime minister that year. Soon, Italy became a one party state
with heavy censorship and banning of opposition. Mussolini attempted to portray his rise as
the rise of the Roman empire, using imagery, roman letters, new versions of Roman-inspired
architecture, public sculpture and more.
Italy and its Foreign Policy
Fascism advocated for war and imperialism. In terms of foreign policy, Italy was
economically weak and therefore military weak. Italy’s economy was dependent on Britain,
France and the USA in 1929, because of this, Italy’s had to be cautious. Therefore, Italy’s
foreign policy in the 1920s was primarily opportunist, taking advantage of small incidents to
gain politically, for instance, the Corfu incident.
The creation of an italian empire was not entirely Mussolini’s idea, it had been Italian policy
for decades. Before the First World War, Italy managed to wrest control of today’s Libya from
the Ottoman Empire. This territory had few people and few resources, and oil had yet to be
discovered. This empire was more of a burden than an asset. Soon Italy added Eritrea and
Italian Somaliland, part of today’s Somalia. Again, these were poor territories that did not
add to the glory or economy of Italy.
The Great Depression and Italy
As with most countries, the Great depression severely weakened Italy’s economy, it had to
export its manufactured goods to pay for food import and, fuel and raw material. Its main
trade partners (Britain, France and USA) erected trade barriers to protect their industries. To
survive, Italy turned away from the west and trade more with the Balkan states, Yugoslavia,
Austria, Hungary and Romania. In terms of foreign policy Italy had less fear of economic
retaliation than before. In effect, the Great depression gave Italy more freedom to operate its
foreign policy than previously, thus they could expand their Fascist ideology.
Italy’s government then took more control of its industries during the Great Depression. The
government attempted to have industries work closely with it. With this method, they
eliminated competition, meaning that all major Italian industries survived the depression. The
government also turned to Deficit spending, borrowing large sums of money and making
large orders in co-operating businesses. The army and navy were both massively expanded,
providing jobs for up to 1 million men by late 1935.
Mussolini’s Italy was, as a result, prepared for a more aggressive foreign policy. The country
relied less on Western Europe and the USA, and the government now had better control
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
27
over industry and was producing large quantities of military equipment. Mussolini’s fascist
goals were now reachable. In 1933, he reorganized his government accordingly.
The Intimidation of Germany, July 1934
Germany was a challenge to Italy’s growing strength. In 1933, Hitler became Chancellor of
Germany and the country was under the Nazi party. Austria was a buffer state between Italy
and Germany, and Italy had worked to weaken Germany in the peace treaties together with
France and the UK. Italy feared German expansion into Austria and south east Europe. Italy
wanted Austria to remain in its sphere of influence, not Germany’s. In 1934 the Nazi Party
assassinated Engelbert Dollfuss, Austria’s dictators wanting to overthrow the austrian state
and merge germany with Austria (which was forbidden by the Treaty of Versailles but
eventually achieved in 1938). Mussolini immediately sent troops to Austria’s borders with
Italy. Mussolini wanted Austria to remain independent. Germany was wear army wise and
Hitler did not fully control hi military yet. Thus, Hitler’s government did not interfere and the
assassins and their conspirators were captured.
Stresa Front 1935
In april 1935, heads of the British, French and Italian government met to discuss diplomatic
measures against Germany, after its attempt to annex Austria and its announcement that it
would begin rearmament. Britain and Germany signed a naval treaty without consulting Italy
or France, demonstrating that the Stresa front countries were not united.
Italian Empire
At the time, Mussolini was seeking expansion in order to create a prestigeful Italian Empire.
Different to France and Britain, Italy had a small amount of prestige internationally, and so
Mussolini seeked to end such Italian embarrassments. The current Italian territories in Africa
(Eritrea, a portion of Somalia and Libya) were not half as resourceful as the other colonies
from France or Britain, while Abyssinia was located beside such colonies. It was the perfect
opportunity for the desired prestige, and Mussolini ignored Italy’s inability to fund a war.
The Wal-Wal incident
The Wal-Wal oasis was located
approximately eighty kilometers away
from the border of Italian Somaliland.
Once Italian troops crossed the
border, they were engaged in conflict
with Abyssinian men, leading to the
death of only two Italians and over
one hundred Abyssinian soldiers. As
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
28
a response to this conflict, Italy claimed that Abyssinia should make an official apology, as
well as paying an amount of $100,000. The Abyssinian repercussions to these demands was
appealing to the League of Nations, which created a committee to see through the Wal-Wal
Incident, to which they concluded nor Italy or Abyssinia was to be blamed. Nonetheless,
Mussolini had already given orders to his army for the invasion before the committee
managed to finish its conclusion. Both France and Britain feared interfering, since they
considered Italy’s alliance against Germany a more important asset. By October 1935,
Abyssinia was invaded and was easily conquered, considering the Abyssinian troops had
outdated weaponry technology. The Italian colonies in Africa merged into the so called
‘Italian East Africa’, where the Italian king was to be named the Emperor of Ethiopia. Italy
managed to devastate Abyssinia by the use of poisonous gasses, which killed a great
amount of people and cattle, while poisoning the fertile plantations and water supplies.
Position of Nations
Abyssinia
Abyssinia's livestock and villages were scorn by the Italians. After the crisis Abyssinia
suffered to develop, since over 750,000 Abyssinian people were killed, and a great portion of
the country was devastated by the Italian invasion. Mussolini’s direct orders to the invasion
was to eliminate all types of resistance, rebellious villages were gassed and those taken as
prisoners were to be executed. Abyssinia was not capable of conducting any major revolt
with its lack of weaponry and organisation against the merciless Italian forces.
League of Nations:
In 1935 both Britain and France publically opposed to Italy’s course of action, while
proposing sanctions as a repercussion to their acts. The League did not chose to take any
other form of action, for instance, oil embargoes were disregarded because it would collapse
the Italian economy. The British people did not support a war, and so its government ruled
out the option. Consequently, France (previously unsure of what to do) took the same
decision. Furthermore, Great Britain feared taking any intervention in the Suez Canal as
there would be the risk of war breaking loose. Since neither of such decisions were taken,
Italy’s access to Abyssinia was fairly easy, and Abyssinia was conquered by 1936 in May.
Selassie, the Abyssinian Emperor, spoke in the League of Nations shortly after, and as a
consequence Italy decided to leave the League of Nations.
Repercussions to the Abyssinian crisis in the League
The Abyssinian crisis demonstrated to the international community how incapable it was to
act when a problem is to be faced. Furthermore, the response to the Abyssinian crisis made
it clear that both France and Britain commanded the League, instead of a distributed form of
power between member states. In addition, both nations were hypocrites when taking
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
29
actions that benefit them, yet contradict the covenant they pledged to. Their lack of attitude
destroyed the alliance built with Italy, thus bringing Italy diplomatically closer to Germany.
This was concrete proof that the League could not face any menacing issue regarding
international security.
Britain and France:
Mussolini did not predict any repercussions from the international community, due to the fact
that in 1935, a French foreign minister named Laval stated directly to Mussolini that France
would not interfere an invasion. While in that same year, the British attempted to negotiate
land with Italy to prevent a catastrophe, or by diplomatically assisting Italy in acquiring
Abyssinia without annexation. French opposition parties had conflicting beliefs, yet they
continued to fear that without Italy, the German threat would be larger. Furthermore, nor
France or England could finance a war during the Great Depression, and so any form of
action in Abyssinia would be contested for some reason. The British had bigger matters at
hand, its forthcoming election in 1935, where the polls indicated that the British people
desired sanctions towards Italy, while condemning any form of military intervention. Both
France and Britain recognized that Italy was anti-communist, and so if it were to be stronger
it could be another force in the predicted battle against the communist ideology. In
December of 1935, the British and French Foreign Ministers (Hoare and Laval) proposed the
Hoare-Laval pact as a possible repercussion to the invasion. This made it so that ⅓ of the
newly acquired Italian territory would be given to Abyssinia in order to continue having an
independent state. This ⅓ of territory was known as ‘the corridor’, which would have a port
and would ideally develop a stable economy for the Abyssinian people. This proposal did not
go through, as the plan ended up in the hands of the French media. Consequently, when it
eventually reached the British populus, they forced Hoare’s resignation, causing the pact to
fail. The pact was criticized for not taking into account the Abyssinians views on it.
Timeline of Events
1919
Italy joins the League of Nations
1923
Abyssinia joins the League of Nations
(sponsored by Italy)
1928
Italy and Abyssinia sign the
Italo-Abyssinian Treaty of Friendship
Italy and Abyssinia sign the Kellogg-Briand
Pact
1930
Italy builds a fort at Walwal (in Abyssinia) in
violation of the Treaty of Friendship
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
30
1934
Italy and Abyssinia release a joint
statement repudiating aggression against
one another.
Abyssinian militia marches to Walwal and
demands that the garrison leave. They
refuse.
1935
Abyssinia asks the League of Nations to
arbitrate the dispute.
FM Pierre Laval (France) and FS Samual
Hoare (Britain) meet with Mussolini and
agree to the Stresa Front.
France and Italy sign the Franco-Italian
Agreement giving Italy parts of Djibouti and
a free hand to deal with Abyssinia in
exchange for a promise of support against
Germany.
Abyssinia protests the Italian military
build-up and asks the League for
arbitration. Italy agrees.
League holds a special session to discuss
Abyssinia but decides not to take
immediate action.
Britain imposes an arms embargo on Italy
and Abyssinia, Britain removes its naval
fleet from the Mediterranean.
Britain and France offer Italy much
Abyssinian territory in exchange for
avoiding war. Italy rejects the offer.
League commission declares Abyssinia
and Italy both innocent of the Walwal
skirmish.
Britain and France agree on limited
economic sanctions against Italy.
Abyssinia’s request for neutral League
observers along the border is ignored.
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
31
Abyssinia mobilizes its army.
Italy launches a surprise invasion of
Abyssinia.
Further Research
Mussolini:
http://www.iapss.org/2015/06/26/the-fascist-foreign-policy-and-its-legacy-in-the-post-war-wor
ld/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uNYe9UB3K4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugR7y20dv_8
Corfu Incident: ​https://www.britannica.com/event/Corfu-incident
Video on Abyssinia: ​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwbrg0R5o8w
General Websites on the topic:
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-1980/italy-1900-to-1939/a
byssinia/
http://www.johndclare.net/EL6.htm
http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=82
Guiding Questions
●
●
●
●
●
●
Would the Hoare/Laval pact be effective?
Could it be changed?
How could nation states change the balance of power within the League? Would that
determine different results to the issues?
Should Abyssinia have had more involvement in the decision making process?
How can the League be more inclusive?
Are there any economic moves which could open more options as to what decision
could be made?
BRAMUN XV 2017 | League of Nations Committee
32
●
●
What types of diplomatic approaches could be made to reach a consensus between
Italy and Abyssinia?
Considering Italy’s interests at the time, are there any approaches the League could
make?
Works Cited
Dailey, Andy. ​The Move to Global War. London: Hodder Education, 2015. Print.
Todd, Allan. ​The Move to Global War. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015. Print.