« 19世纪末至20世纪中叶国际关系的演变 » : différence entre les versions

De Baripedia
Aucun résumé des modifications
Ligne 45 : Ligne 45 :
[[File:Battaglia di Solferino (Henry Dunant).jpg|thumb|right|300px|亨利-杜南在索尔费里诺]]
[[File:Battaglia di Solferino (Henry Dunant).jpg|thumb|right|300px|亨利-杜南在索尔费里诺]]


Henri Dunant, a Swiss businessman from Geneva, played a significant role in history, particularly through his humanitarian work, which marked the beginnings of the Red Cross. His encounter with history took place in 1859 during a trip to Northern Italy, where he hoped to meet the French emperor Napoleon III. In 1859, Napoleon III was campaigning in Northern Italy, supporting his ally Victor-Emmanuel II, King of Piedmont-Sardinia. The aim of this alliance was to support the efforts to unify Italy, a historic process known as the Risorgimento. The campaign also had a confrontational dimension against the powerful Habsburg dynasty, which ruled much of central Europe and had possessions in Italy.
亨利-杜南是日内瓦的一名瑞士商人,他在历史上发挥了重要作用,尤其是他的人道主义工作,标志着红十字会的开端。他与历史的邂逅发生在 1859 年的一次意大利北部之行,他希望在那里见到法国皇帝拿破仑三世。1859 年,拿破仑三世正在意大利北部竞选,支持他的盟友皮德蒙特-撒丁岛国王维克多-伊曼纽尔二世。结盟的目的是支持统一意大利的努力,这一历史进程被称为 "意大利大革命"(Risorgimento)。这场战役还涉及到与强大的哈布斯堡王朝的对抗,哈布斯堡王朝统治着中欧大部分地区,并在意大利拥有领地。


Dunant arrived in Italy for commercial reasons and witnessed the horrors of the Battle of Solferino, one of the bloodiest battles of the Risorgimento. Deeply affected by the suffering of the wounded soldiers and the inadequacy of medical care, he organised emergency assistance for the victims, regardless of their nationality. This experience was the catalyst for his commitment to humanitarian aid. His experience at Solferino and his desire to improve the lot of the war-wounded led him to write "Un Souvenir de Solférino", a book published in 1862, in which he called for the creation of national relief societies and the establishment of an international treaty for the protection of war victims. These ideas led to the founding of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in 1863 and the adoption of the first Geneva Conventions. Henri Dunant's chance encounter with history in northern Italy triggered a series of events that led to major advances in international humanitarian law. His vision and actions laid the foundations for modern humanitarian aid and have profoundly influenced the way victims of armed conflict are treated today.
杜南因商业原因来到意大利,目睹了索尔费里诺战役的惨烈,这是起义中最血腥的战役之一。受伤士兵的痛苦和医疗服务的不足深深地影响了他,他组织了对受害者的紧急援助,不分国籍。这段经历是他致力于人道主义援助的催化剂。他在索尔费里诺的经历和改善战争伤员命运的愿望促使他撰写了《索尔费里诺回忆录》(Un Souvenir de Solférino)一书,该书于 1862 年出版。这些主张促成了 1863 年红十字国际委员会(ICRC)的成立和第一批日内瓦公约的通过。亨利-杜南在意大利北部与历史的偶然相遇引发了一系列事件,导致国际人道法取得了重大进展。他的远见和行动为现代人道主义援助奠定了基础,并深刻影响了今天对待武装冲突受害者的方式。


Henri Dunant's presence at Solferino on 24 June 1859 was a decisive moment in the history of humanitarian aid. The Battle of Solferino, where Austrian forces were defeated by a Franco-Italian alliance, has gone down in history as a striking example of the brutality of modern warfare at the time. During the battle, around 40,000 soldiers were killed, wounded or reported missing, highlighting the terrible reality of war and the inadequacy of the medical care available. Dunant, who had arrived in the region for business reasons, was deeply shocked by the scenes of suffering and death he encountered there. He later described these scenes in his book "Un Souvenir de Solférino", published in 1862, which had a considerable impact on public perception of the war. Faced with this reality, Dunant took the initiative of organising aid for the wounded, regardless of nationality. With the help of the local population, he set up emergency care for wounded soldiers, illustrating through his actions the principles of humanity and impartiality that would become the foundations of the Red Cross. He was also struck by the seriousness of the injuries caused by the new weapons of the time, which made conflicts even more deadly and highlighted the urgent need for better care facilities for war victims. Dunant's experience at Solferino not only highlighted the need to improve medical care on the battlefield, but also underlined the importance of international regulation for the protection of war victims. This led to the creation of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the adoption of the first Geneva Conventions, laying the foundations of modern international humanitarian law.
1859 年 6 月 24 日,亨利-杜南出现在索尔费里诺,这是人道主义援助历史上的一个决定性时刻。在索尔费里诺战役中,奥地利军队被法意联军击败,这场战役被载入史册,成为当时现代战争残酷性的鲜明例证。在这场战役中,约有 40,000 名士兵阵亡、受伤或失踪,突显了战争的可怕现实和现有医疗服务的不足。因公务原因来到该地区的杜南被当地的苦难和死亡场景深深震撼。他后来在 1862 年出版的《索尔费里诺的回忆》一书中描述了这些场景,该书对公众对战争的看法产生了相当大的影响。面对这一现实,杜南主动组织了不分国籍的伤员援助活动。在当地居民的帮助下,他为伤兵建立了紧急救护所,用行动诠释了人道、公正的原则,这也是红十字会的基础。他还对当时新式武器造成的严重伤害深有感触,这些武器使冲突变得更加致命,突出表明迫切需要为战争受害者提供更好的救护设施。杜南在索尔费里诺的经历不仅凸显了改善战场医疗服务的必要性,还强调了保护战争受害者的国际法规的重要性。这促成了红十字国际委员会的成立和第一批日内瓦公约的通过,奠定了现代国际人道主义法的基础。


The book "Un Souvenir de Solférino", published by Henri Dunant in 1862, is a poignant testimony to the horror of war and a visionary plea for a more humanitarian world. In it, Dunant not only describes the scenes of suffering and death he witnessed in the aftermath of the Battle of Solferino, but also proposes concrete solutions for improving the care of the war-wounded. Dunant's first suggestion was the creation of voluntary relief societies. The idea was to form groups of volunteer citizens, trained and prepared to provide medical care in wartime. These societies would work alongside the military health services and provide care for the wounded, regardless of nationality. The aim was to ensure that wounded soldiers, whatever their nationality, received the necessary medical care on the battlefield. His second proposal was to convene an international congress in Geneva to obtain government approval for the project. The aim was to create an international legal framework that would enable relief societies to operate effectively in wartime and guarantee the protection of the wounded and medical workers.
亨利-杜南于 1862 年出版的《索尔费里诺的纪念》一书是战争恐怖的有力见证,也是对一个更加人道的世界的美好憧憬。在这本书中,杜南不仅描述了他在索尔费里诺战役后目睹的痛苦和死亡场景,还提出了改善战争伤员护理的具体解决方案。杜南的第一个建议是成立志愿救济协会。他的想法是组建由经过培训并准备在战时提供医疗服务的公民志愿者组成的团体。这些协会将与军队医疗服务机构并肩工作,不分国籍地为伤员提供医疗服务。这样做的目的是确保受伤的士兵,无论其国籍如何,都能在战场上获得必要的医疗服务。他的第二个建议是在日内瓦召开一次国际大会,以获得政府对该项目的批准。其目的是建立一个国际法律框架,使救济协会能够在战时有效运作,并保证伤员和医务工作者得到保护。


These revolutionary proposals laid the foundations of the Red Cross and international humanitarian law. In 1863, on the initiative of Dunant and others, the International Committee of the Red Cross was founded in Geneva. Then, in 1864, the first Geneva Convention was adopted, establishing legal standards for the treatment and protection of war wounded. The impact of "A souvenir of Solferino" and Henri Dunant's initiatives was considerable. Not only did they lead to the formation of one of the world's largest and most respected humanitarian organisations, but they also laid the foundations for international humanitarian law, radically changing the way victims of armed conflict are treated around the world.
这些革命性的建议奠定了红十字会和国际人道法的基础。1863 年,在杜南等人的倡议下,红十字国际委员会在日内瓦成立。随后,1864 年通过了第一份《日内瓦公约》,为治疗和保护战争伤员制定了法律标准。索尔费里诺纪念品》和亨利-杜南的倡议产生了巨大影响。它们不仅促成了世界上最大、最受尊敬的人道主义组织之一的成立,还为国际人道主义法奠定了基础,从根本上改变了世界各地对待武装冲突受害者的方式。


Gustave Moynier, an eminent Swiss jurist, played a fundamental role in giving concrete form and structure to Henri Dunant's humanitarian ideas. After Dunant published "Un Souvenir de Solférino", Moynier recognised the importance and potential of these ideas to transform the care of the war wounded. In 1863, Moynier took the initiative of setting up a committee under the leadership of General Guillaume-Henri Dufour, a respected Swiss officer and engineer. This committee, made up of five members, including Dunant and Dufour, became the first International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The committee's mission was to develop Dunant's ideas and create an organisation that could implement these concepts in a practical and effective way. Moynier's role was crucial in the organisational and legal structuring of the Red Cross. As a lawyer, he helped to develop the principles and legal frameworks necessary for the organisation to function effectively, particularly in times of conflict. Moynier also played a key role in promoting the idea of an international convention for the protection of war victims, which led to the first Geneva Convention in 1864. The creation of the ICRC marked a turning point in the history of humanitarian aid. The organisation quickly gained recognition and influence, setting standards for the fair treatment of the wounded on the battlefield, regardless of their nationality. The principles established by the ICRC, such as neutrality, impartiality and independence, became cornerstones of international humanitarian law.
瑞士著名法学家古斯塔夫-莫尼埃(Gustave Moynier)在赋予亨利-杜南的人道主义思想以具体形式和结构方面发挥了重要作用。在杜南发表《索尔费里诺的纪念》一文后,莫尼埃认识到这些思想在改变战争伤员护理方面的重要性和潜力。1863 年,莫尼埃倡议成立一个委员会,由受人尊敬的瑞士军官兼工程师纪尧姆-亨利-杜富尔将军(Guillaume-Henri Dufour)领导。该委员会由包括杜南和杜富尔在内的五名成员组成,后来成为第一个红十字国际委员会(ICRC)。该委员会的任务是发展杜南的理念,并创建一个能够切实有效地实施这些理念的组织。莫尼埃在红十字会的组织和法律架构方面发挥了至关重要的作用。作为一名律师,他帮助制定了组织有效运作所需的原则和法律框架,尤其是在冲突时期。莫尼埃还在推动制定保护战争受害者国际公约的想法方面发挥了关键作用,这一想法促成了 1864 年第一部《日内瓦公约》的诞生。红十字国际委员会的成立标志着人道主义援助历史上的一个转折点。该组织迅速获得了认可和影响力,为公平对待战场上的伤员(无论其国籍如何)制定了标准。红十字国际委员会确立的中立、公正和独立等原则成为国际人道法的基石。


The International Committee of the Red Cross, spurred on by the ideas of Henri Dunant and with the legal structure provided by Gustave Moynier, organised an international congress in 1863 that marked a major milestone in the history of humanitarianism. This meeting brought together representatives of government committees and experts to discuss ways of improving health services in armed conflicts. The outcome of this congress was the creation of a charter, adopted on 29 October 1863, which laid the fundamental foundations of the Red Cross. These innovative principles included the formation in each country of relief committees to come to the aid of the wounded on the battlefield, regardless of their nationality. In addition, the charter emphasised the importance of neutralising the wounded and medical personnel, thus protecting them from attack and hostility during conflicts.
在亨利-杜南(Henri Dunant)思想的推动下,红十字国际委员会在古斯塔夫-莫尼埃(Gustave Moynier)提供的法律架构下,于 1863 年组织召开了一次国际大会,标志着人道主义历史上的一个重要里程碑。这次会议汇集了政府委员会的代表和专家,讨论如何改善武装冲突中的医疗服务。这次大会的成果是于 1863 年 10 月 29 日通过了一项宪章,奠定了红十字会的根本基础。这些创新原则包括在每个国家成立救援委员会,不分国籍地救助战场上的伤员。此外,宪章还强调了伤员和医务人员中立的重要性,从而保护他们在冲突中不受攻击和敌意。


A distinctive element of this charter was the adoption of a universally recognised distinctive sign: the red cross on a white background. This symbol, chosen in part for its simplicity and visibility, would be used to identify medical personnel and equipment on the battlefield. The choice of the red cross was initially more pragmatic than emblematic, moving away from the original idea of a white armband. It was not until 1870 that the symbolic interpretation of the red cross as a reversal of the colours of the Swiss national flag (a white cross on a red background) was proposed, thus strengthening the links between the Red Cross and its country of origin. The adoption of this charter and the choice of the red cross symbol had a considerable impact on international humanitarian law. They formalised the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality that continue to guide humanitarian action throughout the world. The Red Cross has thus become a key player in efforts to protect and assist the victims of war and armed conflict, playing a crucial role in the development of international humanitarian law.
该宪章的一个显著特点是采用了一个举世公认的特殊标志:白底红十字。选择这一标志的部分原因是它简单易懂,可用于识别战场上的医务人员和设备。选择红十字最初更多的是为了实用,而不是为了象征,这与最初的白色臂章的想法不同。直到 1870 年,人们才提出将红十字象征性地解释为瑞士国旗颜色的反转(红底白字),从而加强了红十字会与其起源国之间的联系。宪章的通过和红十字标志的选择对国际人道法产生了重大影响。它们正式确立了人道、中立和公正的原则,这些原则将继续指导世界各地的人道行动。红十字会因此成为保护和援助战争与武装冲突受害者的重要力量,在国际人道法的发展中发挥着至关重要的作用。


In August 1864, the Swiss Federal Council, under the influence of the International Committee of the Red Cross, played a decisive role in promoting and adopting the humanitarian principles established at the 1863 Congress. The Federal Council invited the States of Europe, as well as the United States, Brazil and Mexico, to take part in an international conference. The aim of the conference, which was held in Geneva, was to formalise the resolutions adopted the previous year and transform them into an international treaty. This historic conference resulted in the adoption of the first Geneva Convention, officially entitled "Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Military Wounded in the Field". This convention represented a significant advance in international humanitarian law. It established clear rules for the neutralisation and protection of medical personnel in wartime, as well as for the humanitarian treatment of wounded soldiers.
1864 年 8 月,在红十字国际委员会的影响下,瑞士联邦委员会在促进和通过 1863 年大会确立的人道主义原则方面发挥了决定性作用。联邦委员会邀请欧洲各国以及美国、巴西和墨西哥参加一次国际会议。会议在日内瓦举行,目的是将前一年通过的决议正式化,并将其转化为一项国际条约。这次具有历史意义的会议通过了第一个日内瓦公约,正式名称为《改善战地伤员境遇公约》。该公约代表了国际人道主义法的重大进步。它为战时医务人员的中立和保护以及伤兵的人道主义治疗制定了明确的规则。


Although the Geneva Convention was adopted in 1864, its effective application in armed conflicts took time. It was first implemented in a limited way during the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. However, it was not until 1885, during the Serb-Bulgarian war, that the Geneva Convention was fully applied by both parties to the conflict. This event marked a turning point in the history of warfare, as for the first time an international agreement governing the treatment of the wounded on the battlefield was respected by all parties involved in a conflict. The progressive adoption and application of the Geneva Convention underlined the growing importance of international humanitarian law and set a precedent for future treaties and conventions. The Geneva Convention of 1864, and its subsequent revisions, continue to form the basis of international humanitarian law, governing the conduct of war and the protection of non-combatants.
尽管《日内瓦公约》于 1864 年通过,但其在武装冲突中的有效应用却需要时间。1866 年普奥战争期间,该公约首次得到有限度的实施。然而,直到 1885 年塞尔维亚-保加利亚战争期间,冲突双方才全面适用《日内瓦公约》。这一事件标志着战争史上的一个转折点,因为关于战场伤员治疗的国际协定首次得到冲突各方的尊重。日内瓦公约》的逐步通过和适用彰显了国际人道主义法日益增长的重要性,并为未来的条约和公约开创了先例。1864 年《日内瓦公约》及其随后的修订版继续构成国际人道主义法的基础,规范战争行为和保护非战斗人员。


The Geneva Convention, a central pillar of humanitarian law, was originally designed to improve the lot of wounded soldiers in wartime. Its origins date back to the first Geneva Convention, adopted in 1864, following Henri Dunant's humanitarian initiative after the Battle of Solferino in 1859. This battle, marked by untold suffering and massive casualties, inspired Dunant to advocate more humane treatment of the war wounded, whatever their nationality. The Geneva Convention of 1864, supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross founded a year earlier, established fundamental principles for the care of wounded soldiers on the battlefield. It introduced the revolutionary idea of neutralising medical personnel and medical facilities, thus protecting them from attack during conflicts. It also established the principle of humane treatment of the wounded, without discrimination on the basis of nationality, marking a significant advance in the way war was conducted.
日内瓦公约》是人道主义法律的核心支柱,其初衷是改善战时伤兵的命运。其起源可追溯到 1859 年索尔费里诺战役后亨利-杜南提出的人道主义倡议后于 1864 年通过的第一项《日内瓦公约》。这场战役给人们带来了无尽的苦难和巨大的伤亡,促使杜南倡导为战争伤员(无论其国籍)提供更人道的待遇。1864 年的《日内瓦公约》在一年前成立的红十字国际委员会的支持下,确立了照顾战场伤兵的基本原则。它提出了使医务人员和医疗设施中立化的革命性思想,从而保护他们在冲突中不受攻击。它还确立了不分国籍人道对待伤员的原则,标志着战争方式的重大进步。


Over the years, the requirements of humanitarian law have evolved with changes in the nature of armed conflicts. The Geneva Conventions have been revised and extended on several occasions to meet these new challenges. For example, the 1949 revision, which took place after the horrors of the Second World War, considerably broadened the scope of the Conventions. This revision gave rise to four separate conventions, covering not only wounded soldiers and prisoners of war, but also the protection of civilians, including those under enemy occupation. These conventions, together with their additional protocols, now form the basis of international humanitarian law. They establish essential rules for the conduct of hostilities and the protection of non-combatants. Their application in various conflicts, such as the Austro-Prussian War in 1866 and the Serb-Bulgarian War in 1885, has demonstrated their importance and effectiveness, although compliance with them remains a constant challenge in conflict zones around the world.
多年来,人道主义法的要求随着武装冲突性质的变化而不断发展。为了应对这些新的挑战,《日内瓦四公约》经过了多次修订和扩展。例如,1949 年的修订是在第二次世界大战的恐怖之后进行的,大大扩大了公约的范围。这次修订产生了四项单独的公约,不仅涉及受伤士兵和战俘,还涉及对平民的保护,包括那些处于敌人占领下的平民。这些公约及其附加议定书现已成为国际人道主义法的基础。它们确立了敌对行动和保护非战斗人员的基本规则。这些公约在各种冲突中的应用,如 1866 年的普奥战争和 1885 年的塞尔维亚-保加利亚战争,证明了它们的重要性和有效性,尽管在世界各地的冲突地区,遵守这些公约仍然是一个持续的挑战。


The major innovation of the Geneva Conventions lies in the establishment of permanent written standards, universal in scope, designed to protect the victims of conflicts. For the first time in history, a multilateral treaty defined clear and binding rules for the treatment of war victims, applicable to all States that ratified it. This universality and permanence mark a decisive turning point in international humanitarian law. The principles established by the Geneva Conventions mainly concern the obligation to treat wounded soldiers without discrimination. This rule represents a radical departure from previous practice, in which captured or wounded soldiers were often left untreated or even mistreated. The Convention establishes a moral and legal obligation to provide medical care to all wounded, regardless of their nationality or role in the conflict. Another crucial aspect of these standards is the obligation to respect the medical personnel dedicated to caring for these wounded, as well as the medical equipment and supplies. These elements are protected by the Red Cross emblem, which has become a universally recognised symbol of neutrality and protection in conflict situations. This symbol ensures that medical personnel and medical facilities are not targeted and can operate safely in war zones. The adoption of these rules represented a major step forward in respect for human rights in wartime. These standards have laid the foundations for an international legal framework that guarantees a certain humanity in armed conflicts, striving to reduce suffering and protecting the most vulnerable individuals. The universal scope and acceptance of the Geneva Convention testifies to its continuing importance and relevance in the contemporary world, despite the constant challenges associated with its application and observance in various conflict situations across the globe.
日内瓦四公约》的主要创新在于确立了旨在保护冲突受害者的永久性、普遍性书面标准。一项多边条约明确规定了适用于所有批准国的具有约束力的战争受害者待遇规则,这在历史上尚属首次。这种普遍性和持久性标志着国际人道主义法的一个决定性转折点。日内瓦四公约》确立的原则主要涉及一视同仁地对待受伤士兵的义务。这一规则与以往的做法大相径庭,在以往的做法中,被俘或受伤的士兵往往得不到治疗,甚至受到虐待。公约》规定了为所有伤员提供医疗护理的道德和法律义务,无论其国籍或在冲突中的角色如何。这些标准的另一个重要方面是,有义务尊重专门护理这些伤员的医务人员以及医疗设备和用品。这些要素受到红十字标志的保护,该标志已成为冲突局势中中立和保护的公认象征。这一标志确保医务人员和医疗设施不会成为攻击目标,并能在战区安全运作。这些规则的通过标志着在战时尊重人权方面向前迈出了一大步。这些标准为国际法律框架奠定了基础,该框架保障武装冲突中的一定人道性,努力减少痛苦,保护最脆弱的个人。尽管《日内瓦公约》在全球各种冲突局势中的适用和遵守不断面临挑战,但《日内瓦公约》的普遍适用和接受证明了其在当今世界的持续重要性和相关性。


The various treaties derived from the Geneva Conventions form the cornerstone of international humanitarian law (IHL). These Conventions, together with their Additional Protocols, establish a detailed legal framework for the protection of persons who are not, or are no longer, taking part in hostilities, including the wounded, sick, shipwrecked, prisoners of war and civilians. International humanitarian law, often referred to as the "law of war" or the "law of armed conflict", is a specific branch of international law that regulates the methods and means of conducting hostilities and seeks to limit their effects. It aims to balance humanitarian considerations with military necessity, protecting those who are not, or are no longer, engaged in combat and regulating the way in which combat is conducted.
由日内瓦四公约衍生出的各项条约构成了国际人道主义法(IHL)的基石。这些公约及其附加议定书为保护未参加或不再参加敌对行动的人员(包括伤员、病人、遇船难者、战俘和平民)建立了详细的法律框架。国际人道法常被称为 "战争法 ""武装冲突法",是国际法的一个具体分支,它规范敌对行动的方法和手段,并寻求限制其影响。它旨在平衡人道主义考虑和军事必要性,保护那些未参战或不再参战的人,并规范作战方式。


The fundamental principles of IHL, such as the prohibition of torture, the humane treatment of prisoners, the protection of civilians and the obligation to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, derive from the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. These treaties have been supplemented and strengthened over time by other international agreements, such as the Hague Conventions and various treaties on specific weapons (such as the treaties banning the use of landmines and chemical weapons). In addition to their normative role, the Geneva Conventions also have an important symbolic role. They embody a global commitment to humanitarian principles, even in the most difficult circumstances of armed conflict. Their existence and observance underline the importance of human dignity and respect for human rights, regardless of the circumstances.
国际人道主义法的基本原则,如禁止酷刑、人道对待囚犯、保护平民以及区分战斗人员和非战斗人员的义务等,均源自日内瓦四公约及其附加议定书。随着时间的推移,这些条约得到了其他国际协定的补充和加强,如《海牙公约》和关于特定武器的各种条约(如禁止使用地雷和化学武器的条约)。除了规范作用,日内瓦四公约还具有重要的象征意义。它们体现了全球对人道主义原则的承诺,即使在最困难的武装冲突情况下也是如此。它们的存在和遵守强调了人的尊严和尊重人权的重要性,无论在何种情况下。


= The League of Nations =
= 国际联盟 =
[[Fichier:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-00678, Genf.- Haus des Völkerbundrates.jpg|thumb|300px|The Palais Wilson in Geneva in 1928, the first headquarters of the League of Nations.]]
[[Fichier:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-00678, Genf.- Haus des Völkerbundrates.jpg|thumb|300px|1928 年的日内瓦威尔逊宫,国际联盟的第一个总部。]]


The creation of the League of Nations on 28 April 1919 was a milestone in the history of international relations and international law. Born of the ashes of the First World War, the organisation's ambition was to establish a system of collective security on a global scale, an innovative idea at the time.
The creation of the League of Nations on 28 April 1919 was a milestone in the history of international relations and international law. Born of the ashes of the First World War, the organisation's ambition was to establish a system of collective security on a global scale, an innovative idea at the time.

Version du 15 décembre 2023 à 11:14

根据维克多-莫尼埃的课程改编[1][2][3]

自二十世纪末以来,规范国家与国际组织之间关系的国际法发生了重大变化,尤其是在国家主权和国际层面强制机制的出现方面。从历史上看,国际法是由主权国家的意愿通过条约和协定形成的。这些条约,如 1919 年的《凡尔赛条约》或 1944 年的《布雷顿森林协定》,确立了规范国际关系的准则和规则。然而,与国内法不同的是,国内法的法律规则的权威是由一个中央权威机构来确保的,而国际法的基础则是主权国家对这些规范的自愿承认。这种自愿承认是国际法的基石,也从根本上区分了国际法与国内法的运作。

然而,二十世纪末出现了具有强制力的国际机构,使传统的国家主权受到质疑。例如,1998 年成立的国际刑事法院就有能力起诉犯有战争罪和种族灭绝罪的个人,这说明了这一趋势。联合国对冲突的干预加强了这一趋势,如 1991 年海湾战争,当时一个国家联盟根据联合国授权采取行动,恢复被伊拉克入侵的科威特的主权。然而,向更强有力的强制机制演变的过程依然脆弱而复杂。这些机构的有效性在很大程度上取决于各国的合作。例如,美国决定不批准设立国际刑事法院的《罗马规约》,就凸显了这些国际机构的局限性以及国家主权的持续优先地位。

国家主权与适用国际准则之间的紧张关系仍然是一项重大挑战。各国往往不愿意服从超国家的权威,这可能导致冲突和适用国际法方面的困难。例如,叙利亚危机和国际应对措施凸显了面对严重违反国际法行为时国际行动的复杂性和局限性。

1815 年维也纳会议

1815 年召开的维也纳会议标志着欧洲历史上的一个关键时刻,其目的是在拿破仑战争引起的动乱之后恢复和平与秩序。维也纳会议是一次规模空前的外交会议,其主要目的是在拿破仑帝国垮台后重新绘制欧洲政治版图。维也纳会议的主要成就之一是在欧洲主要国家之间建立了权力平衡,以防止未来发生大规模冲突。后来被称为 "欧洲协约 "的主要参与者是当时的大国: 英国、普鲁士、俄国、奥地利,还有法国,尽管它是战败国。将法国纳入决策进程是确保持久稳定的战略举措。

维也纳会议建立的 "欧洲协约 "以这些大国之间持续和定期合作的原则为基础。其目的是通过避免单一国家的霸权和集体处理国际问题来维护欧洲的和平与力量平衡。这种合作采取定期举行大会和会议的形式,大国在会上讨论国际问题和紧张局势。在 19 世纪的大部分时间里,这一体系都取得了一定的成功,在 1914 年第一次世界大战之前,欧洲一直没有发生过大规模战争。然而,尽管取得了初步成功,"欧洲协约 "也是有限的。它依赖于列强的合作意愿和对既定平衡的尊重,而事实并非总是如此。更重要的是,该体系没有充分考虑到欧洲兴起的民族主义愿望和革命运动,这最终导致了体系的不稳定。

1815 年维也纳会议建立的欧洲协调机制对国际法的发展起到了至关重要的作用。欧洲协约 "为欧洲主要大国之间的合作与对话建立了框架,促成了重要国际规则的通过和积极国际法的形成,标志着国际关系的转折点。欧洲协约 "的重大成就之一是通过了打击贩卖奴隶的措施。虽然没有立即废除奴隶贸易,但维也纳会议为国际社会谴责这种做法奠定了基础。各大国,特别是英国,于 1807 年废除了跨大西洋奴隶贸易,并向其他国家施加了巨大压力,迫使它们效仿。这是最终在国际范围内废除奴隶制和奴隶贸易的重要一步。实在国际法发展的另一个重要方面是确立了外交代表的特殊地位。维也纳会议帮助正式确定了外交规则和规范,为现代外交实践奠定了基础。这包括承认外交豁免权以及界定大使和其他外交代表的权利和责任。外交关系的标准化对于在更加稳定和可预测的环境中促进国际交流与合作至关重要。维也纳会议和欧洲协约的这些发展说明了各国可以如何共同努力建立国际标准和解决跨国问题。欧洲协约》虽然在某些方面存在局限性,特别是没有考虑到民族主义的愿望或新出现的社会运动,但它为加强国际合作和形成结构更合理、更有效的国际法体系奠定了基础。这些早期的国际编纂与合作努力为后来的国际法发展铺平了道路,如第一次世界大战后成立的国际联盟以及后来的联合国,这表明国际社会仍在继续努力维护和平、安全和国家间的合作。

1815 年维也纳会议承认瑞士的永久中立地位,就是这种国际协商对欧洲地缘政治产生影响的一个典型例子。除了在拿破仑战争后重新划定边界和恢复秩序外,大会还批准了瑞士的中立国地位,这一原则在瑞士今后几个世纪的国家认同和外交政策中发挥了至关重要的作用。瑞士的中立地位得到了欧洲主要大国的正式承认,这使瑞士得以在接连不断的欧洲冲突中保持中立。这种独特的地位使瑞士在国际事务中扮演了重要的调停者角色,并成为众多国际组织的所在地,尤其是在日内瓦。维也纳会议不仅开创了承认国家中立的先例,还为整个 19 世纪和 20 世纪更有组织的国际合作铺平了道路。这种合作有不同的形式,从外交联盟到国际组织。这种合作不断发展,以应对当时不断变化的挑战,特别是第一次世界大战后成立了国际联盟,第二次世界大战后又成立了联合国。这些组织以维也纳会议确立的国际合作理念为基础,旨在促进各国之间的和平、合作与对话。

工业革命和通讯的发展对国际法发展的影响

工业革命和通讯的发展对国际法的发展和国际关系的动态产生了深远的影响。这一始于十八世纪并在十九世纪加速发展的进程不仅改变了经济和社会,还在全球范围内加强和扩大了人类的互动。

工业革命对国际法的主要影响之一是国际贸易和商业的大幅增长。工业化带来了对原材料和新市场的更大需求,促使各国制定更有条理的贸易规则和国际协定。在此期间,双边协议(通常仅限于两个国家)逐渐过渡到涉及多个国家的多边协议。这些多边协定促进了共同标准和规则的建立,推动了现在公认的国际法的发展。此外,以电报和后来的电话等创新技术为特征的通信革命使国家间的通信更加快捷有效。这使得国家间更紧密的协调和更快的谈判成为可能,而这对于处理复杂的国际关系至关重要。

在这些发展的同时,19 世纪和 20 世纪初出现了许多新的国家,这往往是非殖民化进程或帝国解体的结果。这些新国家试图维护自己的主权并参与国际体系,从而增加了国际关系的多样性和复杂性。新国家的出现也导致需要在国际法框架内承认和尊重国家主权,同时处理边界、资源和人权保护等问题。

因此,工业革命和通信技术的进步在改变国际关系和国际法的面貌方面发挥了至关重要的作用。这些变化不仅促进了国际合作和一体化的发展,也对全球监管和治理提出了新的挑战和需求。

1864 年 8 月 22 日《日内瓦公约》或当代人道主义法的起源

亨利-杜南在索尔费里诺

亨利-杜南是日内瓦的一名瑞士商人,他在历史上发挥了重要作用,尤其是他的人道主义工作,标志着红十字会的开端。他与历史的邂逅发生在 1859 年的一次意大利北部之行,他希望在那里见到法国皇帝拿破仑三世。1859 年,拿破仑三世正在意大利北部竞选,支持他的盟友皮德蒙特-撒丁岛国王维克多-伊曼纽尔二世。结盟的目的是支持统一意大利的努力,这一历史进程被称为 "意大利大革命"(Risorgimento)。这场战役还涉及到与强大的哈布斯堡王朝的对抗,哈布斯堡王朝统治着中欧大部分地区,并在意大利拥有领地。

杜南因商业原因来到意大利,目睹了索尔费里诺战役的惨烈,这是起义中最血腥的战役之一。受伤士兵的痛苦和医疗服务的不足深深地影响了他,他组织了对受害者的紧急援助,不分国籍。这段经历是他致力于人道主义援助的催化剂。他在索尔费里诺的经历和改善战争伤员命运的愿望促使他撰写了《索尔费里诺回忆录》(Un Souvenir de Solférino)一书,该书于 1862 年出版。这些主张促成了 1863 年红十字国际委员会(ICRC)的成立和第一批日内瓦公约的通过。亨利-杜南在意大利北部与历史的偶然相遇引发了一系列事件,导致国际人道法取得了重大进展。他的远见和行动为现代人道主义援助奠定了基础,并深刻影响了今天对待武装冲突受害者的方式。

1859 年 6 月 24 日,亨利-杜南出现在索尔费里诺,这是人道主义援助历史上的一个决定性时刻。在索尔费里诺战役中,奥地利军队被法意联军击败,这场战役被载入史册,成为当时现代战争残酷性的鲜明例证。在这场战役中,约有 40,000 名士兵阵亡、受伤或失踪,突显了战争的可怕现实和现有医疗服务的不足。因公务原因来到该地区的杜南被当地的苦难和死亡场景深深震撼。他后来在 1862 年出版的《索尔费里诺的回忆》一书中描述了这些场景,该书对公众对战争的看法产生了相当大的影响。面对这一现实,杜南主动组织了不分国籍的伤员援助活动。在当地居民的帮助下,他为伤兵建立了紧急救护所,用行动诠释了人道、公正的原则,这也是红十字会的基础。他还对当时新式武器造成的严重伤害深有感触,这些武器使冲突变得更加致命,突出表明迫切需要为战争受害者提供更好的救护设施。杜南在索尔费里诺的经历不仅凸显了改善战场医疗服务的必要性,还强调了保护战争受害者的国际法规的重要性。这促成了红十字国际委员会的成立和第一批日内瓦公约的通过,奠定了现代国际人道主义法的基础。

亨利-杜南于 1862 年出版的《索尔费里诺的纪念》一书是战争恐怖的有力见证,也是对一个更加人道的世界的美好憧憬。在这本书中,杜南不仅描述了他在索尔费里诺战役后目睹的痛苦和死亡场景,还提出了改善战争伤员护理的具体解决方案。杜南的第一个建议是成立志愿救济协会。他的想法是组建由经过培训并准备在战时提供医疗服务的公民志愿者组成的团体。这些协会将与军队医疗服务机构并肩工作,不分国籍地为伤员提供医疗服务。这样做的目的是确保受伤的士兵,无论其国籍如何,都能在战场上获得必要的医疗服务。他的第二个建议是在日内瓦召开一次国际大会,以获得政府对该项目的批准。其目的是建立一个国际法律框架,使救济协会能够在战时有效运作,并保证伤员和医务工作者得到保护。

这些革命性的建议奠定了红十字会和国际人道法的基础。1863 年,在杜南等人的倡议下,红十字国际委员会在日内瓦成立。随后,1864 年通过了第一份《日内瓦公约》,为治疗和保护战争伤员制定了法律标准。索尔费里诺纪念品》和亨利-杜南的倡议产生了巨大影响。它们不仅促成了世界上最大、最受尊敬的人道主义组织之一的成立,还为国际人道主义法奠定了基础,从根本上改变了世界各地对待武装冲突受害者的方式。

瑞士著名法学家古斯塔夫-莫尼埃(Gustave Moynier)在赋予亨利-杜南的人道主义思想以具体形式和结构方面发挥了重要作用。在杜南发表《索尔费里诺的纪念》一文后,莫尼埃认识到这些思想在改变战争伤员护理方面的重要性和潜力。1863 年,莫尼埃倡议成立一个委员会,由受人尊敬的瑞士军官兼工程师纪尧姆-亨利-杜富尔将军(Guillaume-Henri Dufour)领导。该委员会由包括杜南和杜富尔在内的五名成员组成,后来成为第一个红十字国际委员会(ICRC)。该委员会的任务是发展杜南的理念,并创建一个能够切实有效地实施这些理念的组织。莫尼埃在红十字会的组织和法律架构方面发挥了至关重要的作用。作为一名律师,他帮助制定了组织有效运作所需的原则和法律框架,尤其是在冲突时期。莫尼埃还在推动制定保护战争受害者国际公约的想法方面发挥了关键作用,这一想法促成了 1864 年第一部《日内瓦公约》的诞生。红十字国际委员会的成立标志着人道主义援助历史上的一个转折点。该组织迅速获得了认可和影响力,为公平对待战场上的伤员(无论其国籍如何)制定了标准。红十字国际委员会确立的中立、公正和独立等原则成为国际人道法的基石。

在亨利-杜南(Henri Dunant)思想的推动下,红十字国际委员会在古斯塔夫-莫尼埃(Gustave Moynier)提供的法律架构下,于 1863 年组织召开了一次国际大会,标志着人道主义历史上的一个重要里程碑。这次会议汇集了政府委员会的代表和专家,讨论如何改善武装冲突中的医疗服务。这次大会的成果是于 1863 年 10 月 29 日通过了一项宪章,奠定了红十字会的根本基础。这些创新原则包括在每个国家成立救援委员会,不分国籍地救助战场上的伤员。此外,宪章还强调了伤员和医务人员中立的重要性,从而保护他们在冲突中不受攻击和敌意。

该宪章的一个显著特点是采用了一个举世公认的特殊标志:白底红十字。选择这一标志的部分原因是它简单易懂,可用于识别战场上的医务人员和设备。选择红十字最初更多的是为了实用,而不是为了象征,这与最初的白色臂章的想法不同。直到 1870 年,人们才提出将红十字象征性地解释为瑞士国旗颜色的反转(红底白字),从而加强了红十字会与其起源国之间的联系。宪章的通过和红十字标志的选择对国际人道法产生了重大影响。它们正式确立了人道、中立和公正的原则,这些原则将继续指导世界各地的人道行动。红十字会因此成为保护和援助战争与武装冲突受害者的重要力量,在国际人道法的发展中发挥着至关重要的作用。

1864 年 8 月,在红十字国际委员会的影响下,瑞士联邦委员会在促进和通过 1863 年大会确立的人道主义原则方面发挥了决定性作用。联邦委员会邀请欧洲各国以及美国、巴西和墨西哥参加一次国际会议。会议在日内瓦举行,目的是将前一年通过的决议正式化,并将其转化为一项国际条约。这次具有历史意义的会议通过了第一个日内瓦公约,正式名称为《改善战地伤员境遇公约》。该公约代表了国际人道主义法的重大进步。它为战时医务人员的中立和保护以及伤兵的人道主义治疗制定了明确的规则。

尽管《日内瓦公约》于 1864 年通过,但其在武装冲突中的有效应用却需要时间。1866 年普奥战争期间,该公约首次得到有限度的实施。然而,直到 1885 年塞尔维亚-保加利亚战争期间,冲突双方才全面适用《日内瓦公约》。这一事件标志着战争史上的一个转折点,因为关于战场伤员治疗的国际协定首次得到冲突各方的尊重。日内瓦公约》的逐步通过和适用彰显了国际人道主义法日益增长的重要性,并为未来的条约和公约开创了先例。1864 年《日内瓦公约》及其随后的修订版继续构成国际人道主义法的基础,规范战争行为和保护非战斗人员。

日内瓦公约》是人道主义法律的核心支柱,其初衷是改善战时伤兵的命运。其起源可追溯到 1859 年索尔费里诺战役后亨利-杜南提出的人道主义倡议后于 1864 年通过的第一项《日内瓦公约》。这场战役给人们带来了无尽的苦难和巨大的伤亡,促使杜南倡导为战争伤员(无论其国籍)提供更人道的待遇。1864 年的《日内瓦公约》在一年前成立的红十字国际委员会的支持下,确立了照顾战场伤兵的基本原则。它提出了使医务人员和医疗设施中立化的革命性思想,从而保护他们在冲突中不受攻击。它还确立了不分国籍人道对待伤员的原则,标志着战争方式的重大进步。

多年来,人道主义法的要求随着武装冲突性质的变化而不断发展。为了应对这些新的挑战,《日内瓦四公约》经过了多次修订和扩展。例如,1949 年的修订是在第二次世界大战的恐怖之后进行的,大大扩大了公约的范围。这次修订产生了四项单独的公约,不仅涉及受伤士兵和战俘,还涉及对平民的保护,包括那些处于敌人占领下的平民。这些公约及其附加议定书现已成为国际人道主义法的基础。它们确立了敌对行动和保护非战斗人员的基本规则。这些公约在各种冲突中的应用,如 1866 年的普奥战争和 1885 年的塞尔维亚-保加利亚战争,证明了它们的重要性和有效性,尽管在世界各地的冲突地区,遵守这些公约仍然是一个持续的挑战。

日内瓦四公约》的主要创新在于确立了旨在保护冲突受害者的永久性、普遍性书面标准。一项多边条约明确规定了适用于所有批准国的具有约束力的战争受害者待遇规则,这在历史上尚属首次。这种普遍性和持久性标志着国际人道主义法的一个决定性转折点。日内瓦四公约》确立的原则主要涉及一视同仁地对待受伤士兵的义务。这一规则与以往的做法大相径庭,在以往的做法中,被俘或受伤的士兵往往得不到治疗,甚至受到虐待。公约》规定了为所有伤员提供医疗护理的道德和法律义务,无论其国籍或在冲突中的角色如何。这些标准的另一个重要方面是,有义务尊重专门护理这些伤员的医务人员以及医疗设备和用品。这些要素受到红十字标志的保护,该标志已成为冲突局势中中立和保护的公认象征。这一标志确保医务人员和医疗设施不会成为攻击目标,并能在战区安全运作。这些规则的通过标志着在战时尊重人权方面向前迈出了一大步。这些标准为国际法律框架奠定了基础,该框架保障武装冲突中的一定人道性,努力减少痛苦,保护最脆弱的个人。尽管《日内瓦公约》在全球各种冲突局势中的适用和遵守不断面临挑战,但《日内瓦公约》的普遍适用和接受证明了其在当今世界的持续重要性和相关性。

由日内瓦四公约衍生出的各项条约构成了国际人道主义法(IHL)的基石。这些公约及其附加议定书为保护未参加或不再参加敌对行动的人员(包括伤员、病人、遇船难者、战俘和平民)建立了详细的法律框架。国际人道法常被称为 "战争法 "或 "武装冲突法",是国际法的一个具体分支,它规范敌对行动的方法和手段,并寻求限制其影响。它旨在平衡人道主义考虑和军事必要性,保护那些未参战或不再参战的人,并规范作战方式。

国际人道主义法的基本原则,如禁止酷刑、人道对待囚犯、保护平民以及区分战斗人员和非战斗人员的义务等,均源自日内瓦四公约及其附加议定书。随着时间的推移,这些条约得到了其他国际协定的补充和加强,如《海牙公约》和关于特定武器的各种条约(如禁止使用地雷和化学武器的条约)。除了规范作用,日内瓦四公约还具有重要的象征意义。它们体现了全球对人道主义原则的承诺,即使在最困难的武装冲突情况下也是如此。它们的存在和遵守强调了人的尊严和尊重人权的重要性,无论在何种情况下。

国际联盟

1928 年的日内瓦威尔逊宫,国际联盟的第一个总部。

The creation of the League of Nations on 28 April 1919 was a milestone in the history of international relations and international law. Born of the ashes of the First World War, the organisation's ambition was to establish a system of collective security on a global scale, an innovative idea at the time.

The concept of the League of Nations was largely a response to the horrors of the First World War (1914-1918), a war that had devastating consequences and left a deep impression on people's minds at the time. The main aim was to prevent future large-scale conflicts by promoting international cooperation and resolving disputes between states peacefully. The founding pact of the League of Nations was included in the peace treaties that ended the First World War, notably the Treaty of Versailles. This pact established the guiding principles of the organisation, including the promotion of international cooperation, respect for the sovereignty of states, and a commitment to the peaceful resolution of conflicts. The League of Nations was an ambitious attempt to create a new international order, based on dialogue and consensus rather than confrontation and conflict. It comprised various bodies, including a General Assembly where each member state had one vote, and an Executive Council made up of permanent and non-permanent members.

Despite its high ideals and laudable efforts, the League of Nations encountered a number of challenges and limitations. It failed to prevent the rising tensions that led to the Second World War. Several major countries, such as the United States, never joined, and others, such as Germany and the Soviet Union, were only members for a limited period. In addition, the League had no armed force of its own to enforce its resolutions, which limited its ability to intervene effectively in conflicts. Despite its shortcomings, the League of Nations laid the foundations for modern international cooperation and influenced the creation of the United Nations in 1945. Many of its principles and structures have been adopted and improved by the United Nations, which has sought to correct the mistakes and fill the gaps left by the League of Nations. So, although the League of Nations failed to fully realise its goal of world peace, its legacy lives on in ongoing efforts for effective international cooperation and governance.

The international enthusiasm that followed the creation of the League of Nations after the First World War was rooted in a deep desire to end the permanent state of war and establish a system of collective security. The aim of the League of Nations was ambitious: to fundamentally transform the way nations interacted, with an emphasis on the limitation of war, disarmament, the peaceful settlement of disputes and the application of sanctions against aggressor states. Limiting war was a central principle of the League of Nations. The idea was to make war less likely by encouraging nations to discuss their differences rather than resorting immediately to arms. This approach aimed to establish international standards of conduct that would discourage aggression and encourage dialogue. Disarmament was also a key objective. After the massive destruction and loss of life of the First World War, there was a strong movement to reduce military armaments. The hope was that, by limiting the military capabilities of nations, the likelihood and scale of future conflicts could be reduced. Peaceful conflict resolution was another pillar. The League of Nations sought to provide a forum where disputes could be resolved by negotiation, mediation, arbitration or judicial recourse, rather than by force. This approach was revolutionary at the time, as it offered systematic alternatives to war. Finally, the Society provided for sanctions against aggressor states. The idea was that if one state violated the principles of the Society by attacking another, the other members could impose economic sanctions or even collective military action to restore peace. Despite these lofty goals, the League of Nations encountered a number of challenges in implementing these ideals. Structural limitations, the absence of some major countries, and the lack of means to enforce its decisions have hampered its effectiveness. However, the framework and principles established by the League of Nations laid the foundations for international cooperation in the pursuit of peace and security, profoundly influencing the formation of the United Nations and the conduct of modern international relations.

The Covenant of the League of Nations, adopted after the First World War, established an organisational structure with three main bodies, each with a specific role in the functioning of this international organisation. Firstly, the General Assembly was the deliberative body in which each member state was represented by a delegation. Each member had a single vote, which ensured fair representation of both large and small states. The General Assembly met regularly to discuss and decide on important issues affecting international peace and security. Secondly, the Council of the League of Nations was made up of permanent and non-permanent members. The permanent members were the representatives of the victorious Great Powers of the First World War, notably Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan. Initially, the United States was also intended to be a permanent member, but the Republican-dominated US Senate after the 1918 elections voted against ratification of the Treaty of Versailles. This prevented US participation in the League of Nations and marked a return to the country's isolationist policy. The absence of the United States, a major world power, was a serious blow to the credibility and effectiveness of the League. Finally, the Secretariat, headed by the Secretary General, was the third main body of the League of Nations. The Secretariat was responsible for the administrative management of the organisation, the preparation of meetings and the implementation of the decisions of the Assembly and the Council. These three bodies formed the basic structure of the League of Nations, each playing a crucial role in its efforts to maintain international peace and security. Although the League faced significant challenges and failed to prevent the Second World War, its existence marked an important milestone in the development of international governance and laid the foundations for the United Nations, which succeeded it after 1945.

The organisational structure of the League of Nations, comprising the Assembly and the Council, was designed to ensure continuity and efficiency in the management of international affairs, particularly with regard to the maintenance of world peace. Both the General Assembly and the Council were political bodies with similar competences, particularly in the crucial areas of international peace and security. Their role was to work together to prevent conflict, facilitate international cooperation and respond to various international crises. The General Assembly, made up of all the Member States, met at regular intervals to discuss and take decisions on issues of global importance. During its sessions, the Assembly had the power to deliberate and take decisions on matters normally dealt with by the Council. This arrangement allowed flexibility in the management of global affairs, ensuring that important issues could be dealt with effectively even when the Council was not in session. For its part, the Council, made up of permanent and non-permanent members, acted when the General Assembly was not in session. The Council was responsible for managing the day-to-day business of the Society and for taking decisions on urgent or sensitive matters relating to world peace. In the absence of the Assembly, the Council therefore assumed the functions and responsibilities of the Assembly, thus ensuring continuous oversight and action on peace and security issues. This organisational structure was designed to allow a degree of flexibility in decision-making and in responding to international crises. However, in practice, the distinction between the roles of the Assembly and the Council was not always clear, and this sometimes led to overlaps and inefficiencies in the operation of the League of Nations. Despite this, the framework established by the League of Nations laid important foundations for the subsequent development of international organisations, in particular the United Nations, which adopted and refined many of its principles and organisational structures.

The Covenant of the League of Nations established the "unanimity rule" for decisions taken by its Council and Assembly, with the exception of procedural matters. This rule meant that for a decision to be adopted, all voting members had to be in agreement. This unanimity requirement was both a guarantee of respect for the sovereignty of Member States and a potential obstacle to effective action by the Society, particularly in situations requiring a rapid or determined response. The unanimity rule reflected the caution with which the Member States of the League of Nations approached the question of national sovereignty. Although the Pact introduced significant innovations in international governance, notably by promoting cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts, it never called into question the sovereignty of States. Each Member State retained its autonomy and decision-making powers, including the right of veto over the Society's decisions.

This approach reflected the context of the time, when the idea of giving up part of national sovereignty for collective international action was still widely controversial. However, the unanimity rule proved to be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it ensured that the decisions taken had broad support among the Member States, thereby respecting their sovereignty. On the other hand, it made it difficult to adopt firm measures, particularly in crisis situations where consensus was difficult to achieve. The difficulty of achieving unanimity often hampered the League of Nations' effectiveness in preventing conflicts and responding to international crises. This limitation was particularly apparent in the years leading up to the Second World War, when the League proved incapable of effectively countering aggression by certain member states.

The unanimity rule within the League of Nations, which gave every member state, large or small, a right of veto, was one of the most distinctive and at the same time problematic features of its operation. This rule meant that any important decision required the agreement of all the members of the Council or the General Assembly, giving each state considerable power over all the Society's decisions. Although this provision was designed to protect the sovereignty of Member States and ensure consensual decision-making, it had the unintended effect of often paralysing the operation of the institution. In practice, the need to achieve unanimity for important decisions made the League of Nations particularly vulnerable to paralysis, especially in situations requiring swift and decisive action.

For example, when a Member State was involved in an international conflict or crisis, it could use its veto to block any action or resolution that did not correspond to its national interests. This dynamic made it difficult for the League of Nations to respond effectively to international aggression or treaty violations. The unanimity rule has been widely criticised for contributing to the ineffectiveness of the League of Nations, particularly in the 1930s, when it faced major challenges such as Italy's invasion of Ethiopia and Nazi Germany's expansionism. These failures highlighted the limitations of a structure based on unanimity and contributed to the evolution towards a different system with the United Nations after 1945, where the right of veto was limited to the permanent members of the Security Council.

The fundamental approach of the League of Nations was based on the search for compromise and consensus rather than the exercise of the veto. The idea was that the most balanced and fair decisions could be taken when all member states reached unanimous agreement after thorough deliberation. This approach aimed to ensure that the interests and concerns of all Member States, large and small, were taken into account, reflecting true international cooperation. However, the challenge of achieving consensus in an increasingly polarised world became particularly acute with the advent of totalitarian regimes in Europe in the 1930s. Countries such as Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and later Franco's Spain adopted aggressive and expansionist policies that were in direct conflict with the League of Nations' principles of peace and cooperation.

These totalitarian regimes, by their very nature, were often unwilling to seek compromise or conform to established international norms. Their unilateral and often aggressive approach seriously undermined the ability of the League of Nations to function effectively as a forum for consultation and peaceful conflict resolution. Events such as Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 and Germany's remilitarisation of the Rhineland in 1936 demonstrated the League's inability to counter such aggression, undermining its credibility and authority. Ultimately, the rise of totalitarianism in Europe not only called into question the League of Nations' ideal of concerted action, but also precipitated its decline and led to its inability to prevent the Second World War. These failures underlined the limits of an international organisation based on the principle of unanimity in a world where divergent national and ideological interests were often irreconcilable. The dissolution of the League of Nations after the Second World War and the creation of the United Nations represented an attempt to learn from these challenges and establish a new framework for international cooperation and peacekeeping.

The refusal of the United States to join the League of Nations in November 1919, following a vote in the Senate, represents a significant moment in the history of international diplomacy and had important implications for the functioning and effectiveness of the organisation. This refusal was largely due to concerns about the League of Nations' principle of universalism and the fear that membership of the League would compromise the sovereignty of the United States and involve it in international conflicts against its will. US Senators, particularly those from the Republican party, were concerned about the clauses of the League of Nations Covenant, particularly those that appeared to oblige member states to take part in collective military action to maintain peace. They feared that this would lead to compulsory military intervention without the consent of the US Congress.

This position was largely influenced by a desire for isolationism, a political and ideological trend in the United States that advocated a non-interventionist foreign policy and maintaining a distance from European affairs. After the human and financial costs of the First World War, many Americans were reluctant to commit themselves to international alliances and commitments that could drag them into further conflicts. President Woodrow Wilson, who had played a key role in the creation of the League of Nations and had championed its membership, was deeply disappointed by this rejection. The absence of the United States, one of the world's greatest powers at the time, weakened the legitimacy and effectiveness of the League of Nations. Without the participation of the United States, the League had difficulty imposing its authority and achieving its objectives of collective security and conflict prevention.

Article 16 of the Covenant of the League of Nations illustrates the organisation's central commitment to the promotion of international justice and international law. This article reflects the desire of the members of the League of Nations to preserve international peace and security by establishing clear consequences for any member state that resorts to war in violation of its commitments. The fundamental principle was that maintaining the territorial integrity and independence of all states was vital to international peace. Under this article, any member of the League that unilaterally initiated hostilities was considered to have declared war on all other members. This provision was intended to deter aggression by imposing severe economic and financial sanctions, as well as severing all commercial and personal relations with the aggressor state. In addition, Article 16 called on the members of the League to support each other in the application of these sanctions and, if necessary, to contribute to the armed forces to enforce the League's commitments. This provision implied a form of collective security, with Member States working together to resist aggression and maintain peace. In practice, however, the application of Article 16 proved difficult. The need for consensus for collective action, the reluctance of Member States to engage in military conflict, and the absence of a standing armed force under the direct control of the League have limited its effectiveness. Cases such as Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 demonstrated the limits of the League's ability to impose such sanctions effectively.

Article 16 of the Covenant of the League of Nations provided that certain sanctions would be automatic in the event of violation of the commitments undertaken by the Member States, particularly in the context of the illegitimate use of military force. The purpose of these sanctions was to provide a coordinated and immediate response to any act of aggression, in order to deter States from resorting to war and to maintain international peace. The automatic sanctions mainly involved severing all trade and financial relations with the aggressor state. This meant that other members of the League of Nations were obliged to cease all forms of trade and financial exchange with the state in breach of the Covenant. These economic measures were designed to isolate the aggressor state and exert economic pressure, in the hope of forcing it to return to conduct consistent with international law and the principles of the League. Alongside economic sanctions, Article 16 also stipulated that military measures could be recommended by the Council of the League of Nations. These recommendations could include the determination of the military, naval or air forces which the members of the League would respectively contribute to the armed forces intended to enforce the League's commitments. In other words, it implied a form of collective military response against the aggressor state. However, implementing these military measures proved problematic in practice. The need for consensus within the League, the absence of a permanent military force under its control, and the reluctance of some Member States to engage in military action have limited the League's effectiveness in applying military sanctions. In addition, the complex political dynamics of the time often hampered the League's ability to respond to aggression in a unified and decisive manner.

The League of Nations, founded in 1919 in the hope of establishing a system of collective security to maintain world peace, faced major challenges from the 1930s onwards, marking a turning point in its history. This system, based on the idea that all member states should collectively defend a member under attack, was intended to guarantee the territorial integrity and independence of each nation. In theory, this collective solidarity would act as a powerful deterrent against any aggression. However, the rise of totalitarian regimes in Europe posed a major challenge to this principle. Germany under Adolf Hitler, Italy under Benito Mussolini, and later Imperial Japan adopted aggressive expansionist policies, in flagrant violation of the principles of the League of Nations. These actions put the collective security system to the test, revealing its intrinsic weaknesses. The inability of the League of Nations to act in a unified and decisive manner was highlighted by several major crises. In 1935, Italy invaded Ethiopia, a clear act of aggression that should have triggered a strong collective response according to the principles of the League. However, the economic sanctions imposed on Italy were too little too late to deter Mussolini. Similarly, in 1936, Germany's reoccupation of the Rhineland marked another breach of international commitments, without leading to any significant response from the League.

These failures highlighted the limits of a system requiring perfect unity and firm political will among its members, conditions rarely met in the complex reality of international relations. The fear of another war, divergent national interests, and the absence of a key player like the United States, which had chosen not to join the League, all contributed to a lack of cohesion and determination. The Second World War, which broke out in 1939, was the final straw for the League of Nations. The failure of the collective security system was a key factor in the inability to prevent this conflict. After the war, the creation of the United Nations attempted to correct the mistakes of the League of Nations, by putting in place a more robust and realistic system of international security, with the creation of the Security Council and permanent members with the right of veto. The aim of this new organisation was to build a more stable and effective world order, drawing lessons from the limitations and failures of the League of Nations.

The history of the League of Nations in the 1930s is marked by a series of international crises that gradually eroded its credibility and underlined its limitations as a peacekeeping organisation. Each of these crises represented a flagrant violation of the principles on which the League had been founded, and their ineffective management revealed the structural and political weaknesses of the organisation. Japan's aggression against Manchuria in 1931 was the first of these major tests. Japan, seeking to expand its empire in Asia, invaded Manchuria, a region in north-eastern China. The reaction of the League of Nations was widely regarded as ineffective, limited to verbal condemnations without concrete measures to counter Japanese aggression. In response, Japan simply left the League in 1933, illustrating the organisation's inability to enforce its resolutions.

The second major crisis was Italy's invasion of Abyssinia (now Ethiopia) in 1935. This aggression, orchestrated by Mussolini as part of his imperialist ambitions, was another blow to the Society. Although economic sanctions were imposed on Italy, they proved insufficient and too late to have a deterrent effect. Italy eventually succeeded in conquering Abyssinia, and the lack of an effective response from the League of Nations further weakened its reputation. The successive annexations of Austria and Czechoslovakia by Nazi Germany in 1938, followed by the invasion of Poland in 1939, were the ultimate proof of the League of Nations' inability to keep the peace. These actions, led by Adolf Hitler, were in direct violation of the principles of non-aggression and respect for national sovereignty. The League of Nations failed to take effective measures to prevent these annexations or to protect Poland, which led directly to the outbreak of the Second World War.

The failure of the League of Nations to prevent aggression by some of its members in the 1930s can be attributed to a lack of political will on the part of its members to fully implement the principles set out in its pact. This led to a period where impunity prevailed, despite flagrant violations of established international norms.

There were several reasons for the reluctance of Member States to apply the measures provided for in the Pact, particularly as regards economic and military sanctions against aggressor states. Firstly, there was a widespread fear of another major war. After the traumatic experience of the First World War, many countries were reluctant to engage in conflicts that could degenerate into another large-scale confrontation. Secondly, divergent national interests often took precedence over collective commitment to the Society's principles. Countries were more inclined to protect their own economic and political interests rather than risk potentially serious consequences by imposing sanctions on other nations. Finally, the absence of certain key players, in particular the United States, weakened the authority and effectiveness of the League. Without the participation of all the major world powers, it was difficult for the League of Nations to present itself as a unified and powerful front against aggression.

The combination of these factors led to a situation where violations of the pact were often treated with indifference or inaction, allowing aggressor states to act without fear of significant reprisals. This period of impunity contributed to the rising tensions that eventually led to the Second World War, and marked the failure of the League of Nations as an effective tool for maintaining international peace. This failure served as a crucial lesson in the creation of the United Nations, underlining the importance of more decisive collective action and better coordination between nations to preserve global peace and security.

Consideration of the need to limit state sovereignty in favour of supranational bodies, such as the League of Nations, is a central debate in the history of international cooperation. Indeed, one of the main lessons learned from the failure of the League of Nations in the 1930s was the recognition of the need for a stronger international system, capable of enforcing international order and sanctioning states that violate established norms. The idea of establishing international justice and a genuine international police force was envisaged as a means of ensuring that decisions taken by international bodies were enforced. Such an approach would potentially have made it possible to monitor and punish states that fail to comply with international rules, by providing coercive means of enforcing the commitments made. However, implementing such a system would have required a significant degree of transfer of sovereignty from States to an international authority. This would have involved the creation of supranational entities with real powers, capable of taking decisions binding on Member States, and the means to enforce them, including international police or military forces.

In the context of the time, such a proposal was extremely ambitious and raised complex questions about sovereignty, national independence and the global balance of power. Many states were reluctant to cede part of their sovereignty to an international organisation, fearing that this would compromise their independence and their ability to defend their own national interests. The experience of the League of Nations nevertheless laid the foundations for thinking about global governance and influenced the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War. Although the UN also has its own limitations and challenges, it has attempted to address some of these concerns by establishing a more robust system for conflict resolution and international crisis management, including the establishment of international tribunals and peacekeeping missions.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are two success stories from the League of Nations era that have continued to play an important role in global governance long after its dissolution. The International Labour Organization, founded in 1919 as an affiliated agency of the League of Nations, aims to promote workers' rights, improve working conditions and advance social justice. The ILO was innovative in its tripartite structure, including representatives of governments, employers and workers, to discuss and formulate policies and international labour standards. Its ability to adapt and respond to changes in the world of work has enabled the ILO to remain relevant and influential, playing a key role in the formulation of international labour standards and the promotion of human rights at work.

On the other hand, the International Court of Justice, although officially established in 1945 as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, has its roots in the Permanent Court of International Justice, created in 1922 under the auspices of the League of Nations. The ICJ, based in The Hague in the Netherlands, plays a crucial role in the peaceful settlement of disputes between states by providing a platform for the legal resolution of international disputes. The ICJ also contributes to the development of international law by providing advisory opinions on important legal questions submitted by United Nations bodies and specialised agencies. The continuity and success of the ILO and ICJ demonstrate that, despite the failures of the League of Nations in maintaining international peace and security, some of its principles and institutions have had a lasting and positive impact on global governance. These organisations have evolved and adapted to the changing world, while preserving the legacy and ideals of international cooperation and peaceful conflict resolution initiated by the League of Nations.

Appendices

References