Episode Recording -- "Blueprints for Peace: How the League Failed and the UN Emerged"

(0:24-3:45) The League of Nations failure to curb aggression

This section talks about how the League of Nations failed to effectively respond to aggression

using two examples. The first is the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and how the league's

response was unable to prevent the Japanese from seizing Manchuria and led to Japan

withdrawing from the League weakening it further. The section also mentions the Italian

invasion of ethiopia. As well as the Ethiopian emperors appeal to the league that would

ultimately fall on deaf ears.

(3:55-6:45) The founding of the League of Nations and the United Nations

This section discusses the founding of both the League of Nations and the United Nations, the

situations they were founded in, and the goals that their founders had for each organization. This

section also further discusses the differences between the League and the UN.

(6:45-9:47) Why the UN succeeded where the League failed

This final section answers the question of why the UN succeeded where the League failed.

Discussing what makes the UN a more effective global organization that continues to this day

In today's episode of students podcasting history, we are going to be comparing and contrasting

the league of nations with the United Nations, seeing what made the league fail. Why the United

Nations succeeded, as well as discussing the successes and failures of each organization. Now,

without further ado, let's get into it.

One of the league of nation's biggest failures was its inability to enforce its rules.

This led to an ineffective response to both the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and the Italian

invasion of Ethiopia, which we are going to examine today.

In September 1931 Japanese armies staged a railroad bombing known as the Mukden incident in

order to give themselves a pretext for war.

Now the damage of this bombing was so minimal that it didn't even disrupt the passage of an

oncoming train, but it gave Japan what it wanted, an excuse to invade and occupy Manchuria.

The league of nations response to this incident was to send a fact finding commission to the

region to see what was going on and what the response should be.

After a lengthy inquiry, it was decided that Japan had no justification for its actions and should

withdraw immediately. A resolution that was backed up by unanimous decision in the general

assembly.The Japanese rejected this decision and maintained its control of Manchuria and ultimately

withdrew from the league of nations.

The league's failure to respond decisively during the Japanese invasion of Manchuria highlighted

its weaknesses as an organization and on its ability to control affairs outside of Europe.

Furthermore, the league's eventual response led to the Japanese withdrawing from the league

further weakening the organization.

You would think that after this failure that the league would have learned its lesson about dealing

with aggressive states, but you would be wrong, so we're now going to look at the Italian

invasion of Ethiopia.

Between 1935 and 1936, Italy invaded Ethiopia.

Benito Mussolini, the fascist dictator of Italy, wanted to expand his country's empire and show

the world his military might.

Ethiopia, then known as Abyssinia and a league member since 1923 heavily protested this unjust

invasion with the Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie, going to Geneva to give a speech demanding

action be taken against Italy.

Here we have an audio clip of Haile Selassie explaining his reasons for coming.“I decided to come myself to defend the cause of my people before the council of the League of

Nations”

In his speech, Emperor Haile Selassiepassionately condemned the Italian invasion of Ethiopia.

He detailed how Italy's unprovoked military aggression, marked by brutal tactics, including the

use of chemical weapons, violated Ethiopia's sovereignty and international law.

Selassie underscored the principle of collective security, criticizing the league for its failure to

enforce its own standards against acts of aggression, referencing the leagues earlier in action

during the Japanese invasion of Manchuria.

Selassie argued that the recurring reluctance to decisively act against aggressors demonstrated a

systematic flaw in the league's approach to maintaining global peace.

His address was not only an appeal for aid and justice for Ethiopia, but also a stark warning,

without a robust mechanism to enforce collective decisions, international peace would remain

perpetually vulnerable to the whims of powerful states.

Sadly, the response that Selassie hoped for did not come, and the league only ever implemented

mild economic sanctions against Italy, which did nothing to slow the Italian invasion.Italy would eventually annex Ethiopia, but don't forget about highly selacic, as we'll see him

again later. So now that we've discussed some of the flaws present in the league, we're going to

take a step back and look at the founding of the league and the United Nations, who they were

founded by and the goals for each organization.

The league of Nations was formed at the 1919 Paris peace summary in the aftermath of World

War I. Its creation was driven by the victorious allied powers with U. President Woodrow Wilson

being a major advocate as he had outlined his goals for the league in his 14 points.

Despite Wilson's enthusiasm, the United States never joined the league due to domestic political

opposition.

The league was primarily aimed at preventing another global conflict by promoting collective

security.

This involved mutual agreements among nations to maintain peace through diplomatic means.

It focused on settling international disputes through arbitration, negotiated settlements rather than

military force.

An important objective was to encourage nations to reduce armaments and to move towards a

policy of disarmament, reflecting the war weariness of the post world war I era.The United Nations was founded in 1945, following the allied victory in World War II.

Seeing the failure of the league, the founders of the UN were determined to learn from the

mistakes of history and to build a better system for ensuring peace.

The United Nations was founded with a broad mandate to prevent conflicts through collective

security arrangements, structure, especially the security council grants the authority to authorize

peacekeeping missions and when necessary coercive measures. Beyond military matters, the

United Nations mission includes economic, social and cultural cooperation among its members.

This is embodied in agencies like UNESCO and the world health organization.

In a significant expansion over the league schools, the UN is also committed to upholding human

rights, fostering social and economic development, and addressing global issues, poverty,

environmental challenges, and health crises.

So let's look at some of the key differences between the league and the United Nations.

The league of nations suffered from limited membership in the conspicuous absence of powerful

nations, such as the United States, which eroded its global legitimacy.In contrast, the United Nations was designed to be a nearly universal organization, quickly

attracting almost every nation in its foundational phase, which helped secure its authority and

legitimacy in international affairs.

Both organizations had far different ideas on what their role in the world should be, with the

league's primary focus being confined largely to achieving and maintaining peace through

arbitration and disarmament.

The United Nations, however, had a wider mandate that encompasses economic development,

human rights and environmental challenges, reflecting an evolution in how the international

community understands and addresses global challenges.

So with that necessary information out of the way, we are going to finish this episode by

answering the question of why the UN succeeded where the league failed.

The United Nations succeeded, where the league failed for several reasons.

They reflect both its design and the context in which it was born.

The primary reason the UN succeeded was its ability to enforce its decisions.

The league was hamstrung by its lack of strong enforcement tools.In contrast, the UN charter provided the security counts with clear mandates, including the

authority to impose sanctions, authorize peacekeeping operations, and if necessary, carry out

military interventions. By designing a system that directly addressed the enforcement

vulnerabilities of its predecessor, the United Nations was better positioned to act decisively in

times of crisis combining effective enforcement mechanisms with a much more global

participation and the firm backing of major powers, the United Nations achieved a level of

legitimacy that the league never did.

Learning from the limitations of the league, the United Nations was conceived as an organization

with a much broader mandate beyond preventing conflict; the union addressed economic

development, human rights, and social justice through specialized agencies.

This adaptable approach has allowed the UN to remain relevant in the rapidly changing global

landscape.

To provide an example of how the United Nations has overcome the league, we can once again

look at a speech made by Haile Selassie when he addressed the UN in 1963.

See, I told you you'd be back and I quote “today I stand before the world organization which has

succeeded to the mantle discarded by its discredited predecessor.

In this body is enshrined the principle of collective security which I unsuccessfully invoked

Ageneva. Here, in this assembly reposes the best, perhaps the last hope for the peaceful survival

of mankind.In conclusion, both organizations were products of their time, yet their trajectories were very

different.

The League of Nations, for all its promise couldn't prevent the slide into global conflict in the

1930s, its failure to counteract the rise of militaristic regimes and the outbreak of world war II

underscores its limitations as an increasingly complex and competitive world.

The United Nations, on the other hand, has had its share of critiques and challenges from

stalemates in the security council, criticisms over its peacekeeping operations.

However, the United Nations has enjoyed a track record of successes and conflict mediation,

humanitarian assistance, and the promotion of human rights, stability to adapt, create specialized

agencies and involve nearly every nation on the planet has allowed it to address global issues in a

more dynamic and practical way.

The evolution from league to UN is a powerful study in learning from past oversights.

Thank you all for listening.

I hope you enjoyed today's episode about the League of Nations and the United Nations, and I

hope you understand the importance of learning from the mistakes of the past and not dooming

yourself to repeating them.Don't forget to check out our website for more historical podcasts and I'll see you next time.