Paper 1 tasks answers
1. a.
According to source D many of the French delegates felt that the League was ridiculous mainly because it outlined what steps should be taken in Europe while knowing full well that it was not capable of enforcing those propositions. Thus this opinion shows that many nations did not fully believe in the power of the League which further affected International Relations. This source also shows how severely the League was limited in its power to assert what authority it claimed it had.
b.Source E shows a defenseless Rabbit with a bow stating "League of nations, the rabbit is in front of an intimidating snake on which is written "International strife". The caption of the cartoon says "The Rabbit. MY OFFENSIVE EQUIPMENT BEING PRACTICALLY NIL, IT REMAINS FOR ME TO FASCINATE HIM WITH THE POWER OF MY EYE." The message that the cartoon is trying to convey is that the League of Nations is nothing more than a fragile rabbit with no real backing. As the caption says the rabbit cannot count on military or much political support thus it must appear to look powerful in order to have any influence on world politics. The intimidating snake also represents the international conflicts going on around the world at this time period. The fact that the international strife is portrayed as deadly and more powerful than the rabbit also shows how the League cannot possibly stand against the tide of conflict surrounding the globe.
2. Both source B and source C argue that one of the main problems with creating a lasting peace is that many times it is not "worldwide" so that there is always an out group. Source B tells of how the idea of "unification of human affairs" is no new idea" but that it has been seen throughout history and thus that it has been shown to always exclude a group of people. What source B is fundamentally arguing is that it is inevitable that nations will try to work together only to be broken apart because of human nature while source C makes a different point. Source C although agreeing in the aspect that there was no "universal or near-universal membership" sin the League it states that the problem could have been corrected by accepting by allowing membership to many of the main powers that were excluded. Source C argues that the failure of the League can be traced to the fact some of the major powers of the world were not part of the League such as the USSR, Germany, and the U.S. Thus what source C is ultimately suggesting is that complete cooperation was the best course for lasting Peace while source B predicts its failure because of historical evidence.
3. Source A
Source A is the Preface to the Covenant of the League of Nations and article 8 and 16 of the covenant, signed in Versailles in 1919-1920. The purpose of Source A was to outline the powers and actions that the League could exercise. Because this source was written during the peace settlements of WWI it is important in considering the psychology of the Europe at that time. Also since it is some of the main tenants of the League this source is important in order to accurately evaluate the events that follow the Peace settlements of WWI such as the conflicts that arose in Europe. Because it is known that Germany was not part of the League until 1926 and since the main contributors to the foundation of the League were the Allies it is a small group of nations trying to speak for the whole of Europe. Because the main writers of his source were the Allies with little assistance from the other nations it is possible that this source is limited in the fact that it does not put into account the events happening in those other nations.
Source B
Source B is called "The Idea of a League of Nations" written by Herbert George Wells published on January 1919 in "Atlantic Magazine". This source was written to make an observation of the formation of the League. This source is valuable because it shows what the public thought of the League, which in turn is a rare perspective. Also because Herbert G. Wells lived through the time period of WWI he can thus provide a more accurate account and so his views have more significance. One of the limitations of this source is that since Herbert was of English origin the bias of the Allied propaganda could have influenced his views. Also since he is speaking about the whole of history he is trying to talk for all history in order to assert his point.
4. The League of Nations was brought forth from the ashes of WWI to bring peace to bitter nations that had only developed hatred and disgust for one another in the four bloody years that was the war. From the beginning the efforts of the League were hindered as it could not reach universal membership, and because it did not have the tools to back up its the authority it claimed it had. America, who had "created" the League became one of the nations that was excluded from the League as well as Germany and the USSR (source C). The failure to include these powers severely limited the powers of the League as it states that "the Members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League." (source A). Thus without the military and political backing of America, Germany, and the USSR the League became nothing but a shell imposing the will of Britain and France or an example of neo-imperialism. Another reason why the League failed to bring lasting peace was the fact that it failed to achieve major approval of the public as source B shows how many thought that history "tells a story of the oscillating action of separatist and unifying forces." thus the League would inevitably fail.
Although there was much discord in the League as many nations were not included and thus could not voice their opinions, it was further blocked by the fact that it did not possess the tools to assert the authority the claimed to posses in article 16 (source A). Throughout the sources certain ideas and steps that the League had set up are mentioned, such as article 8 where it talks about disarmament, Article 22 where it states the procedure of the mandate system, and the actions to be undertaken by the League if it is faced with conflict as stated in article 16 (source A). Yet all that the League encourages though seems to be just as a French delegate said about the "ridiculous position of an Assembly which considers what steps should be taken, though it is perfectly aware that it is impossible for them to be carried out" (source D). This observation by a primary source shows the limitations of the League in its ability to affirm its authority, because if an aggressor does emerge, how can an organization mobilize the military of several nations which have deeply rooted hatred towards each other?
The failures of the League of Nations was indeed great as it did not achieve its main goal to create a long lasting "peaceful world". Many historians see the League as source E portrayed it, a defenseless rabbit against the snake of international strife. Thus the League was severely outmatched by the belligerent nature of Europe at the time and could not but barely hold against the conflicts the appeared from its inability to solve the real issues that caused both World Wars.
According to source D many of the French delegates felt that the League was ridiculous mainly because it outlined what steps should be taken in Europe while knowing full well that it was not capable of enforcing those propositions. Thus this opinion shows that many nations did not fully believe in the power of the League which further affected International Relations. This source also shows how severely the League was limited in its power to assert what authority it claimed it had.
b.Source E shows a defenseless Rabbit with a bow stating "League of nations, the rabbit is in front of an intimidating snake on which is written "International strife". The caption of the cartoon says "The Rabbit. MY OFFENSIVE EQUIPMENT BEING PRACTICALLY NIL, IT REMAINS FOR ME TO FASCINATE HIM WITH THE POWER OF MY EYE." The message that the cartoon is trying to convey is that the League of Nations is nothing more than a fragile rabbit with no real backing. As the caption says the rabbit cannot count on military or much political support thus it must appear to look powerful in order to have any influence on world politics. The intimidating snake also represents the international conflicts going on around the world at this time period. The fact that the international strife is portrayed as deadly and more powerful than the rabbit also shows how the League cannot possibly stand against the tide of conflict surrounding the globe.
2. Both source B and source C argue that one of the main problems with creating a lasting peace is that many times it is not "worldwide" so that there is always an out group. Source B tells of how the idea of "unification of human affairs" is no new idea" but that it has been seen throughout history and thus that it has been shown to always exclude a group of people. What source B is fundamentally arguing is that it is inevitable that nations will try to work together only to be broken apart because of human nature while source C makes a different point. Source C although agreeing in the aspect that there was no "universal or near-universal membership" sin the League it states that the problem could have been corrected by accepting by allowing membership to many of the main powers that were excluded. Source C argues that the failure of the League can be traced to the fact some of the major powers of the world were not part of the League such as the USSR, Germany, and the U.S. Thus what source C is ultimately suggesting is that complete cooperation was the best course for lasting Peace while source B predicts its failure because of historical evidence.
3. Source A
Source A is the Preface to the Covenant of the League of Nations and article 8 and 16 of the covenant, signed in Versailles in 1919-1920. The purpose of Source A was to outline the powers and actions that the League could exercise. Because this source was written during the peace settlements of WWI it is important in considering the psychology of the Europe at that time. Also since it is some of the main tenants of the League this source is important in order to accurately evaluate the events that follow the Peace settlements of WWI such as the conflicts that arose in Europe. Because it is known that Germany was not part of the League until 1926 and since the main contributors to the foundation of the League were the Allies it is a small group of nations trying to speak for the whole of Europe. Because the main writers of his source were the Allies with little assistance from the other nations it is possible that this source is limited in the fact that it does not put into account the events happening in those other nations.
Source B
Source B is called "The Idea of a League of Nations" written by Herbert George Wells published on January 1919 in "Atlantic Magazine". This source was written to make an observation of the formation of the League. This source is valuable because it shows what the public thought of the League, which in turn is a rare perspective. Also because Herbert G. Wells lived through the time period of WWI he can thus provide a more accurate account and so his views have more significance. One of the limitations of this source is that since Herbert was of English origin the bias of the Allied propaganda could have influenced his views. Also since he is speaking about the whole of history he is trying to talk for all history in order to assert his point.
4. The League of Nations was brought forth from the ashes of WWI to bring peace to bitter nations that had only developed hatred and disgust for one another in the four bloody years that was the war. From the beginning the efforts of the League were hindered as it could not reach universal membership, and because it did not have the tools to back up its the authority it claimed it had. America, who had "created" the League became one of the nations that was excluded from the League as well as Germany and the USSR (source C). The failure to include these powers severely limited the powers of the League as it states that "the Members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League." (source A). Thus without the military and political backing of America, Germany, and the USSR the League became nothing but a shell imposing the will of Britain and France or an example of neo-imperialism. Another reason why the League failed to bring lasting peace was the fact that it failed to achieve major approval of the public as source B shows how many thought that history "tells a story of the oscillating action of separatist and unifying forces." thus the League would inevitably fail.
Although there was much discord in the League as many nations were not included and thus could not voice their opinions, it was further blocked by the fact that it did not possess the tools to assert the authority the claimed to posses in article 16 (source A). Throughout the sources certain ideas and steps that the League had set up are mentioned, such as article 8 where it talks about disarmament, Article 22 where it states the procedure of the mandate system, and the actions to be undertaken by the League if it is faced with conflict as stated in article 16 (source A). Yet all that the League encourages though seems to be just as a French delegate said about the "ridiculous position of an Assembly which considers what steps should be taken, though it is perfectly aware that it is impossible for them to be carried out" (source D). This observation by a primary source shows the limitations of the League in its ability to affirm its authority, because if an aggressor does emerge, how can an organization mobilize the military of several nations which have deeply rooted hatred towards each other?
The failures of the League of Nations was indeed great as it did not achieve its main goal to create a long lasting "peaceful world". Many historians see the League as source E portrayed it, a defenseless rabbit against the snake of international strife. Thus the League was severely outmatched by the belligerent nature of Europe at the time and could not but barely hold against the conflicts the appeared from its inability to solve the real issues that caused both World Wars.