The beginnings of the contemporary international system: 1870 - 1939

Based on a lesson by Ludovic Tournès

Languages

Deutsch

Español Français Italiano

Introduction to the history of international relations

Perspectives on the studies, issues and problems of international history ● Europe at the centre of the world: from the end of the 19th century to 1918 ● The era of the superpowers: 1918 - 1989 ● A multipolar world: 1989 - 2011 ● The International System in Historical Context: Perspectives and Interpretations ● The beginnings of the contemporary international system: 1870 - 1939 ● World War II and the remaking of the world order: 1939 - 1947 ● The international system in the test of bipolarisation: 1947 - 1989

From 1870 to 1939, a crucial era in world history witnessed the genesis of the contemporary international system. It was during this period that nation states expanded, giving rise to increasingly sophisticated multilateral diplomacy. It was also a period when tensions between the great powers soared, leading to devastating conflicts such as the First World War.

In 1815, the Congress of Vienna had laid the foundations for a multilateral European diplomatic system. For more than half a century, it succeeded in establishing a climate of peace on the continent. However, the decisive turning point came in 1870, with the Franco-Prussian War and the emergence of Germany as the preponderant power, marking the end of this established diplomatic system.

The new international order that emerged after 1870 was under the aegis of the great European powers, notably Germany, France, Great Britain and Russia. These nations sought to forge alliances and maintain a balance of power to avoid the outbreak of war. However, Germany's rise to power led to an arms race, which inevitably led to the First World War.

In the wake of this conflict, the League of Nations was born with the mission of preserving international peace. Unfortunately, the organisation proved powerless against the rise of totalitarian regimes in Europe, a weakness that paved the way for the Second World War.

Establishing the order of nation-states

The order of nation-states represents an international system in which sovereign states are seen as the main players on the international stage. These entities are organised into distinct political communities, each exercising absolute sovereignty over its territory. This order crystallised mainly in the 19th century, in the wake of the liberal and nationalist revolutions that swept Europe. The foundations of this order were laid by the Treaties of Westphalia in 1648, which enshrined the concept of state sovereignty. These treaties set a major precedent by establishing the principle that every state, regardless of its size or power, has equal rights on the international stage. Under this order of nation states, each state has absolute authority to take independent decisions on its internal and external affairs. This means that each state has complete freedom to conduct its policy as it sees fit, without outside interference. None of these decisions can be challenged or revised by other states, guaranteeing the primacy of national sovereignty.

The nation-state order is an international system marked by intense rivalry between nations, each seeking to increase its power, guarantee its security, acquire resources and gain recognition and legitimacy on the world stage. This rivalry has often led to conflict and war. However, despite these tensions, the nation-state order has also laid the foundations for international cooperation. In particular, it has led to significant collaboration in the economic sphere. States have founded international organisations to regulate trade and economic relations between nations. Notable examples include the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In this way, the order of nation-states, while generating fierce competition between nations, has also fostered international collaboration, particularly on economic issues. This international system places states as the primary actors, organised as distinct sovereign political entities.

What is the Westphalian system?

The genesis of the Westphalian system

Banquet of the Amsterdam Civil Guard celebrating the Peace of Münster (1648), exhibited in the Rijksmuseum, by Bartholomeus van der Helst.

The Westphalian system takes its name from the Treaties of Westphalia, concluded in 1648, which marked the end of the Thirty Years' War in Europe. These treaties ushered in a new political order on the European continent, defined by the assertion of the sovereignty of states and the establishment of a system of international relations between them. Before the adoption of the Westphalian system, Europe was a complex collection of kingdoms, empires and principalities, with fluctuating borders and often in conflict with each other. The Westphalian system marked a significant turning point in this dynamic, establishing clear borders and recognising the independence and sovereignty of each state, thus laying the foundations of the modern international system.

The Treaties of Westphalia established state sovereignty as a fundamental principle, establishing each state as an autonomous entity. This meant that each state had a clearly defined territory, a distinct population and a government exercising independent authority. In addition, the Westphalian system established a framework for international relations based on diplomacy and negotiation between sovereign states. In this context, states gradually built up structured diplomatic relations and began to draft treaties to codify their reciprocal interactions. These agreements covered various aspects, including trade, peaceful conflict resolution and military alliances. The consolidation of this system was significantly influenced by the emergence of nation states in the 19th century. These intensified the notion of sovereignty, emphasising the unique national identity of each state, shaped by elements such as language, culture, history, and the population's sense of belonging. In this way, the Westphalian system is often seen as the foundation of contemporary international relations. It promoted nation-states as the dominant players on the international stage, a principle which, although undermined by certain contemporary dynamics such as globalisation and the emergence of non-state actors, remains fundamental to the understanding of international relations today.

The Thirty Years' War marked a period of significant regression for the Holy Roman Empire, which had once dominated Central Europe. The war greatly weakened the Holy Roman Empire, resulting in a considerable loss of territory and population, and a drastic reduction in its political and military power. Founded in 962 AD by Emperor Otto I, the Holy Roman Empire was an ambitious project aimed at revitalising the greatness of the Roman Empire in Western Europe. The Empire aspired to establish a universal monarchy, uniting all European peoples under the authority of a single sovereign. However, this aspiration came up against the political complexity of medieval Europe, characterised by intense political fragmentation and the existence of numerous independent kingdoms and principalities. To adapt to this reality, the Holy Roman Empire evolved into a confederation of sovereign territories under the governance of an elected emperor. The Thirty Years' War was a real turning point in the history of the Holy Roman Empire, as it revealed the limits of its power and influence. At the end of the war, Emperor Ferdinand II was forced to recognise the independence of Switzerland and the United Provinces, and to grant greater autonomy to the German princes. This change symbolised the end of the idea of a universal monarchy in Europe, and encouraged the emergence of nation states. The latter gained in importance, positioning themselves as pre-eminent players on the international stage from the 19th century onwards.

The Holy Roman Empire lasted until 1806, when it was dismantled by Napoleon Bonaparte. However, by the 17th century, the Empire had already suffered a significant loss of power and political influence. Over the course of the century, the Empire was beset by numerous challenges. These included religious conflicts between Catholics and Protestants, intra-German rivalries between princes, and the rise of France under Louis XIV. At the same time, the role of the Holy Roman Emperor was greatly diminished, often reduced to a symbolic figure. At the same time, the German states began to define themselves as autonomous political entities, consolidating their sovereignty and independence from the Empire. This led to political fragmentation in Germany, transforming it into a collection of sovereign states, each with its own government and politics. This diversity made it difficult to establish a uniform foreign policy for Germany, at the same time encouraging the emergence of foreign powers such as France and Great Britain. So, although the Holy Roman Empire survived until the 19th century, it had largely lost its political influence by the 17th century. This weakening paved the way for the emergence of new political entities on the European continent.

The conclusion of the Thirty Years' War in 1648, sanctioned by the Treaties of Westphalia, ushered in an era in which the Catholic Church saw its temporal influence gradually decline. During the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church exerted a decisive influence on the political and social life of Europe, positioned as a universal power alongside the Roman Empire. As a major player in international relations, it played a leading role in mediating and resolving conflicts between states. Nevertheless, the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century began to undermine the authority of the Catholic Church. This religious revolution promoted an interpretation of Christianity based exclusively on the Scriptures, rejecting at the same time the clerical hierarchy of the Catholic Church. The Reformation led to a split in Europe between Catholic and Protestant nations, weakening the power of the Catholic Church. The conclusion of the Thirty Years' War in 1648 confirmed this decline. The Treaties of Westphalia established the separation of Church and State and put an end to the religious war that had divided Europe. This separation restricted the Church's temporal power, relegating it to a primarily spiritual role. In addition, the 18th century, marked by the Enlightenment, saw the authority of the Church called into question. The thinkers of this era favoured reason and science over religion. The ideas of the Enlightenment encouraged a gradual secularisation of society, further eroding the political influence of the Church. Thus, since the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648, the political role of the Catholic Church has been gradually reduced to focus on its spiritual mission. This change favoured the emergence of the modern nation-state, in which religion no longer plays a central role in the political and social sphere.

The principles of the Westphalian system

The Westphalian system, the foundation of the modern international political order, is based on a number of essential principles that have ensured stability in the international sphere for several centuries.

• One of the fundamental pillars of this system is the principle of great power balance. According to this concept, a balance of power must be maintained in Europe to prevent any one nation from becoming dominant and trying to subjugate the others. In other words, the European powers must counterbalance each other in terms of military, economic and political power, to ensure a stable and balanced system.
• The second principle is that of national sovereignty, symbolised by the saying "cuius regio, eius religio" ("to each prince his religion"). According to this principle, each ruler has the right to choose the religion of his state, and the population follows the religion of its ruler. This principle also encompasses the idea that each state has inalienable sovereignty over its own territory and that other states have no right to interfere in its internal affairs.
• The third principle of the Westphalian system is non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. According to this principle, each state exercises total sovereignty over its territory and cannot be subject to intervention by another state in its internal affairs. This principle enshrines the idea of national sovereignty, which is one of the cardinal principles of the Westphalian system.

These three principles have helped to maintain a degree of stability and peace in the international system, despite the many conflicts and wars that have punctuated European history.

The principles of the Westphalian system are based on the balance of great powers, the inviolability of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. These principles have ensured the stability of the international system for several centuries, and are still widely respected today.

The Treaty of Westphalia was a major breakthrough in European history, putting an end to the Thirty Years' War and laying the foundations of the contemporary international system. This pact established the primacy of states as the main players on the international stage, superseding the notion of a universal monarchy, as embodied by the Holy Roman Empire. In addition, the political role of the Roman Catholic Church was largely diminished, as national sovereignty and the inviolability of state borders came to the fore. The Treaty of Westphalia thus marked the end of the Church's omnipotence in political matters, while at the same time reinforcing the pre-eminence of states in international relations. The Treaty of Westphalia was therefore a decisive step in the history of Europe, signalling both the rise of the state system and the decline of the aspirations of the Church and the Holy Roman Empire. This pact laid the foundations for an international system based on respect for national sovereignty and the balance of power, a system that continues to this day.

The Treaty of Westphalia, signed in 1648, was a crucial turning point in the history of Europe. It brought the Thirty Years' War to a close and laid the foundations for today's international system. This treaty clearly established the preponderance of states as major players on the international stage, putting an end to the aspiration for a universal monarchy, symbolised until then by the Holy Roman Empire. In addition, the political influence of the Roman Catholic Church declined sharply in favour of the principle of national sovereignty and respect for the territorial integrity of states. In this way, the Treaty of Westphalia sounded the death knell for ecclesiastical hegemony in political affairs and simultaneously strengthened the role of states in international interactions. The Treaty of Westphalia was an important milestone in European history, marking the emergence of the state system and the retreat of the ambitions of the Church and the Holy Roman Empire. This treaty laid the foundations for an international system based on respect for national sovereignty and the balance of power, principles that endure to this day.

Since the conclusion of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, the principle of raison d'Etat has become an essential foundation of international relations. Reason of State is based on the idea that states should act and make decisions by prioritising their own national interests, rather than by adhering to specific moral or religious precepts. This concept postulates that states have the right to act selfishly, aiming to maximise their own power and wealth, even if such actions could have harmful consequences for other states. In other words, the survival, security and well-being of the state and its citizens are the primary concern, overriding all other considerations. This logic of the primacy of the nation-state has prevailed for several centuries and has influenced the foreign policy of many countries, particularly the great European powers. Indeed, it has fostered a political realism in which actions and policies are guided less by ideological, religious or moral ideals than by pragmatic concerns for power, security and national interest. Nevertheless, while this doctrine may have led to policies of expansion, domination or rivalry between states, it has also fostered the emergence of a system of diplomacy and negotiation, in which each state recognises the existence of others and their right to defend their own interests. Thus, despite its sometimes conflicting aspects, raison d'État has helped to establish a certain form of balance and stability in international relations.

The challenges of the Westphalian system

The First World War (1914-1918) marked a critical turning point in the history of international relations and fundamentally challenged the Westphalian system that had governed Europe for almost three centuries. The war highlighted the dangers of exacerbated nationalism and imperialist rivalries between the great European powers, which led to a destructive conflict on an unprecedented scale.

For the first time, war involved the total mobilisation of societies, meaning that not only armies, but also civilian populations and entire national economies were devoted to the war effort. This "total war" resulted in unprecedented human and material losses, and deeply shocked the world's conscience. In the post-war period, many leaders and political thinkers concluded that a new international system was needed to prevent a recurrence of this kind of devastating conflict. They sought to establish an order based on international cooperation, disarmament and the peaceful settlement of disputes through international law, rather than through force or war. This ambition led to the creation of the League of Nations in 1920, the first permanent international body designed to maintain world peace.

However, the League of Nations proved incapable of preventing another world war due to a number of institutional and political weaknesses. The absence of the United States, which had refused to join the organisation despite President Woodrow Wilson's central role in its conception, dealt a severe blow to its authority and effectiveness. In addition, the rise of totalitarian regimes in Italy, Germany and Japan in the 1930s, which rejected the existing international order, ultimately led to the Second World War. Nevertheless, the ideals that animated the creation of the League of Nations survived its failure and influenced the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War, a body that continues to play a central role in international relations to this day.

Despite the profound changes in the international system since the end of the First World War, nation-states have remained the principal actors on the international stage. The principle of national sovereignty, which was reinforced by the Westphalian system, has remained a central principle of international relations. After the end of the Second World War, states sought to establish a new world order based on international cooperation, the promotion of human rights and economic development. This led to the creation of the United Nations Organisation (UNO) in 1945, which sought to provide a forum for dialogue and the resolution of international conflicts. Alongside the UN, other international organisations were created, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, to promote economic stability and development. In addition, the process of regional integration, such as the creation of the European Union, has also changed the role of states in the international system. However, despite these changes, states remain central players in global governance. They remain the main signatories of international treaties and the key players in international negotiations. What's more, the majority of decisions taken at international level still require the approval of states, whether on issues of security, trade or environmental protection. Although the international order has evolved considerably since the Treaty of Westphalia, states remain the most important players on the international stage. However, their role and influence have had to adapt to the new realities and challenges of today's world.

States remain major and fundamental players in the contemporary international system. As sovereign political entities, states are the main holders of power and authority over their territory, which gives them a central place in international relations. States are able to negotiate treaties and agreements with other states, take military or diplomatic action, and participate in international organisations. They can also exercise sovereignty by regulating internal affairs, such as security, justice, public health and the economy. States can be divided into different categories according to their size, wealth, military power, cultural influence and geopolitical position. However, whatever their relative position, all states are important players on the international stage and have a role to play in defining world order.

Consolidating national diplomacy

The increased role of diplomats and the role of elites

With the decline of the Westphalian system, states strengthened their prerogatives and their diplomatic action increased. National diplomats became central players in the management of international relations, representing the interests of their state abroad and negotiating agreements and treaties with other states. Diplomats are experts in international relations, with in-depth knowledge of the culture, politics and interests of their country and those of other states. They are often involved in complex diplomatic negotiations on issues such as security, trade, the environment, human rights and conflict resolution. National diplomats have also developed networks of contacts and influence around the world, in order to defend their state's interests and promote its foreign policy. This can include participating in international organisations, establishing bilateral relations with other states or mobilising public opinion abroad.

In the mid-19th century, the diplomatic apparatus of the European powers consisted mainly of delegations responsible for representing their country to other states. These delegations generally consisted of an ambassador, one or more diplomatic counsellors, secretaries and attachés. They are responsible for negotiating treaties, providing information on foreign affairs and representing their country at international conferences. However, despite their relatively small numbers, these diplomats play a crucial role in strengthening their country's national prerogatives. Their presence enables states to learn more about the intentions and policies of other states, and to defend their interests in international negotiations. National diplomacy was therefore a way for states to project their power and influence abroad, and to reinforce their status as full members of the international community.

During this period, states' foreign policy was mainly directed by small diplomatic elites, made up of a few dozen people. Ambassadors and other diplomats stationed in foreign capitals were the main players in national foreign policy, and played a central role in negotiating treaties, agreements and alliances. This situation strengthens national prerogatives, as national diplomacy has a major influence on decisions taken in international relations. Diplomacy is a means for states to defend and promote their interests on the international stage. By strengthening their diplomatic apparatus, states have consolidated their power and influence in international relations. Ambassadors and diplomats have played a key role in negotiating international treaties and agreements, managing crises and conflicts, and representing the interests of the international community.ation de leur pays à l'étranger. Cela a renforcé la souveraineté nationale et l'autonomie des États dans la conduite de leur politique étrangère.

The professionalisation of diplomacy

Today, the diplomatic apparatuses of states have become veritable bureaucracies, with increasingly complex and large structures. Diplomatic missions abroad, for example, often have large budgets and numerous staff, with specialised sections in areas such as economic, cultural, scientific and environmental affairs. State foreign ministries are also important institutions, playing a crucial role in the formulation and implementation of foreign policy. Diplomatic institutions and foreign ministries are increasingly active and professional. They are responsible for implementing the foreign policy of states, negotiating international agreements, maintaining relations with other states and international organisations, promoting national interests and protecting the citizens and economic interests of states abroad. These institutions have also developed the capacity to analyse international developments, assess risks and opportunities, and provide advice to political decision-makers.

Until the mid-nineteenth century, European diplomacy was largely monopolised by aristocrats. Ambassadors and special envoys were often chosen on the basis of their social standing rather than their competence. Over time, however, the professionalisation of diplomacy has led to a diversification of the social origins of diplomats, as well as a greater emphasis on training and expertise. Today, most countries have diplomatic academies or training programmes for diplomats. Over time, the diplomatic service has become increasingly professional, with the adoption of competitive recruitment and the promotion of social inclusion. This has led to a diversification of profiles and greater technical expertise in the fields of diplomacy, foreign policy and international cooperation. In addition, globalisation and the growing complexity of international issues have led to an increase in the number of staff in diplomatic services to meet these challenges. With the professionalisation of diplomacy, the sociology of diplomatic circles has undergone significant change. Whereas in the past, diplomatic posts were often awarded to members of the nobility or upper middle classes, today recruitment is open to all and is often based on competitive examination. What's more, diplomacy has become a profession in its own right, with specific training courses in political science and diplomatic schools. This has opened up the social fabric and diversified the profiles of diplomats, who are now recruited on the basis of their skills and merit rather than their social background.

Broadening the scope of diplomatic action

New areas for diplomatic action

In recent decades, the scope of diplomacy has expanded considerably. Diplomats are increasingly involved in issues of security, trade, development, human rights, migration, the environment, health and many other areas. For example, in the field of security, diplomats play an important role in negotiating disarmament treaties, fighting terrorism, preventing conflicts and maintaining peace. In trade, they are involved in negotiating trade agreements and international trade regulations. In development, they work on humanitarian aid, post-conflict reconstruction and economic development projects. Diplomacy has become a crucial tool for resolving complex international problems and promoting cooperation between states.

Since the end of the Second World War, the practice of diplomacy has become increasingly intense, with more and more states entering the international arena. Following decolonisation, many new states were created in Asia, Africa and Latin America. This has led to an increase in the complexity of international relations and a proliferation of diplomatic players. International organisations, such as the United Nations (UN), also played an important role in extending the scope of diplomacy.

Until the 19th century, diplomacy was seen as a power politics, a defence of interests and a struggle for influence that could sometimes lead to armed conflict. States sought to protect their economic, territorial, political, cultural and religious interests abroad and to extend their influence through alliances, treaties, negotiations and diplomatic manoeuvres. Wars were often started to settle border disputes, commercial rivalries, dynastic feuds, territorial ambitions or nationalist aspirations. However, with the rise of political ideologies and awareness of global issues, diplomacy has evolved to include concerns such as human rights, the environment, international security, economic cooperation, regulation of world trade, public health, culture, etc. Until the 19th century, diplomacy was primarily a power-political tool for defending national interests and influencing international decisions. This practice could extend to war, which was often seen as an extension of diplomacy. After this period, diplomacy continued to be an important tool of foreign policy, but it evolved towards a more multilateral approach, where states sought to cooperate and resolve conflicts through negotiation rather than military force. Diplomacy is also becoming more complex, with non-state actors such as international organisations and civil society increasingly involved in international affairs. Modern diplomacy therefore involves a range of skills such as communication, mediation, negotiation, conflict resolution and multilateral cooperation.

If we look at long-term developments, we can see an extension of the fields of action of diplomacy, particularly with the emergence of cultural diplomacy and economic diplomacy. Cultural diplomacy involves using cultural and artistic exchanges between countries to promote understanding and relations between them. This form of diplomacy emerged in the 20th century in response to the rise of globalisation and international communication. It has become an important part of contemporary diplomacy, with organisations such as UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) and numerous cultural cooperation programmes between countries. Economic diplomacy, on the other hand, became an important prerogative of states from the end of the 19th century, when countries began to look for ways to promote their economic interests abroad. Economic diplomacy aims to promote trade, foreign investment and economic cooperation between countries. It is often carried out by embassies and specialised government bodies such as the Ministries of Trade and Foreign Affairs.

Economic diplomacy

At the end of the 19th century, economic globalisation experienced strong growth, fuelled in particular by the expansion of international trade and investment. National economies were increasingly integrated into a constantly evolving global economic system. In this context, the conquest of new foreign markets became a major challenge for states seeking to strengthen their economic power. From the end of the 19th century onwards, multilateral trade negotiations began to emerge with the aim of regulating economic trade between countries. This was notably the case with the signing of the Free Trade Treaty between France and Great Britain in 1890, which marked the start of a period of international trade negotiations aimed at reducing tariff barriers and promoting free trade. This movement was strengthened after the First World War with the creation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in 1919 and the International Trade Organisation (ICO) in 1948, which became the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995. The aim of these multilateral organisations is to regulate international economic trade by promoting free trade and reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers between member states. Economic diplomacy has gained in importance since the end of the 19th century. States began to realise the importance of international economic exchanges for their prosperity and power. This led to an intensification of diplomatic efforts to promote exports, attract foreign investment and negotiate bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. Over time, economic diplomacy has become an integral part of every country's foreign policy. States have created specific ministries to deal with international economic issues and have deployed networks of diplomats specialised in promoting national economic interests.

Cultural diplomacy

Cultural diplomacy emerged at the end of the 19th century, mainly under the influence of European countries. It consists of promoting a country's culture abroad to strengthen its image and influence in the world. This may involve setting up cultural institutes, organising cultural events, promoting the language, distributing works of art, etc. Cultural diplomacy can thus be used as a soft power tool to strengthen relations between countries and improve cooperation. Cultural diplomacy is often used as a means of compensating for a country's declining geopolitical power. It enables a country's values, language and culture to be promoted abroad, thereby strengthening its image and influence in the world. France was one of the pioneers in this field with the creation of the Alliance française in 1883, followed by other countries which also developed cultural diplomacy institutions and programmes.

In many countries in the 19th and 20th centuries, institutions were created to promote cultural influence. Examples include the Alliance Française in France, the British Council in the UK, the Goethe Institute in Germany, the Cervantes Institute in Spain, the Confucius Institute in China and the Japan Foundation in Japan. The aim of these institutions is to promote the language and culture of their country abroad, but also to encourage cultural exchanges and artistic collaboration between different countries. These institutions are often funded by governments, but have a degree of autonomy and work in collaboration with other cultural players in the foreign countries where they are based.

The expansion of the areas in which diplomacy intervenes has led to the creation of new institutions and structures to meet these new needs. Economic, cultural and environmental diplomacy, as well as social and humanitarian affairs, each have their own field of action and require specific skills. Governments have therefore created specialised organisations and agencies to manage these different areas, while working in collaboration with foreign ministries to coordinate their action abroad.

The impact of nationalism and imperialism at the end of the 19th century

The process of nationalisation of international relations has been a key feature of diplomatic developments since the 19th century. The emergence of nation states and their assertiveness on the international stage led to a strengthening of national sovereignty and an affirmation of foreign policy as an instrument for defending and promoting national interests. This was also encouraged by the conquest of colonial empires and the rivalry between the great powers for access to resources and markets in these regions. Diplomacy was therefore used to defend national interests on the international stage and to negotiate agreements aimed at strengthening national power. Colonial conquest is an example of the manifestation of nationalisation in international relations. Nation states seek to extend their influence and territory by conquering colonies on different continents, which can be seen as a competition between colonial powers for territorial domination. This process also led to the creation of colonial empires and the establishment of colonial regimes that have shaped international relations for centuries.

The end of the 19th century saw the emergence of new types of state - empire states. These are characterised by their domination of territories outside their own national territory. They can take different forms, such as the colonial empires that developed particularly in Europe, Asia and Africa, or multinational empires, such as the Austro-Hungarian Empire or the Russian Empire, which brought together different nations under a single authority. This territorial expansion was often linked to the quest for power and wealth, as well as strategic and geopolitical considerations. There is a strong link between the assertion of nation states and colonial expansion. Nation-states sought to extend their influence and power over external territories by creating colonies. Imperialism was a way for nation states to strengthen their position and to position themselves in a global hierarchy of powers. It was also accompanied by an ideology of the cultural and racial superiority of the colonising nations. Nationalism and imperialism were therefore driving forces behind colonial expansion at the end of the 19th century.

Nationalism is a phenomenon that manifested itself all over the world, not just in Europe. In the context of the period we are talking about, namely the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, we can observe the emergence of nationalist movements in many Asian and African countries. These movements were often triggered by colonisation and the political, economic and cultural domination of the European powers, leading to demands for independence and national self-determination. This dynamic contributed to the complexity of international relations at the time, creating new players and new demands that had to be taken into account by the major powers. There are several reasons why the colonies were never completely pacified. Firstly, nationalism is a global phenomenon that has also manifested itself in the colonies. Nationalist movements in the colonies began to demand independence and political, economic and cultural autonomy, which led to conflicts with the colonial powers. The colonial powers then used violent methods to impose their domination, which often led to violent reactions from the colonised populations. The methods of colonial domination included economic exploitation, political repression and physical violence. Finally, colonial powers often used policies of division and conquest to maintain their dominance over the colonies. These policies created tensions between the different ethnic and religious communities within the colonies, which often degenerated into violence.

The emergence of new players on the international scene

The emergence of the first international organisations

International organisations first appeared at the end of the 19th century, with the creation of the International Telegraph Union in 1865 and the Universal Postal Union in 1874. However, it was mainly after the First World War that the creation of international organisations intensified, with the founding of the League of Nations in 1919 and numerous other organisations specialising in areas such as health, education, trade and international security. Since then, many other international organisations have come into being, such as the United Nations in 1945, and they have played an important role in cooperation and coordination between member countries.

From the 1850s and 1860s onwards, there was an accelerated process of economic globalisation, with the expansion of international trade and the growth of capital exchanges. This led to the need to standardise trade rules between different countries. States began to negotiate bilateral trade agreements to regulate their trade. However, these agreements were often limited to certain specific sectors or products and it was difficult to harmonise the rules between different countries. This is why, at the end of the 19th century, initiatives were launched to establish common international standards and regulate trade on a global scale. The need for international standardisation became apparent at the end of the 19th century with the growth in international trade. Countries began to realise that it was difficult to trade with countries that did not apply the same standards, whether in terms of customs, taxes or trade rules. This led to the creation of the first international organisations, such as the Universal Postal Union in 1874 and the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to Bills of Lading in 1924. The aim of these organisations was to facilitate trade between countries by establishing common standards.

This first phenomenon of international organisations emerged in the 1860s with the International Unions:

• The International Telegraph Union (ITU) was created in 1865 with the aim of facilitating telegraph exchanges between countries. It was the first international body to be set up to regulate international telecommunications. The UTI played an important role in expanding the use of the telegraph worldwide, facilitating exchanges between the various national telegraph networks and harmonising tariffs and billing procedures. It was replaced in 1932 by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
• The Universal Postal Union (UPU) is an international organisation founded in 1874 in Berne, Switzerland, to coordinate postal services between member countries. The UPU's mission is to promote the development of postal communication and to facilitate international mail exchanges by establishing international standards and tariffs for sending mail between different countries. Today, the UPU has 192 Member States and is based in Berne.
• The International Union of Weights and Measures (UIPM) was founded in 1875 with the aim of establishing international cooperation in metrology and ensuring the uniformity of weights and measures used in international trade. This organisation established the International System of Units (SI) in 1960, which is now used in most countries of the world.
• The International Union for the Protection of Industrial Property was founded in Paris in 1883. It later became the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), with its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. WIPO is a specialised agency of the United Nations whose mission is to promote the protection of intellectual property throughout the world by providing a legal framework for the protection of patents, trademarks, industrial designs, copyright and geographical indications.
• The International Union for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (UIPLA) was founded in 1886 in Berne, Switzerland. It was created in response to the need to protect the intellectual property rights of artists and authors on an international scale. Today, UIPLA is known as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and is a specialized agency of the United Nations.
• The International Union of Agriculture was founded in 1905 to promote international cooperation in agriculture and the improvement of agricultural methods. It was replaced by the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) in 1945.
• The International Office of Public Hygiene was created in 1907. It is an international organisation responsible for monitoring and promoting public health throughout the world. It was created in response to a series of global pandemics, notably the plague and cholera, which affected many countries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The International Office of Public Hygiene was replaced in 1948 by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

The aim of the international unions was to establish common standards and regulations to facilitate trade between member countries. This made it possible to harmonise communication and measurement systems, protect industrial and intellectual property, and ensure health and food safety. These unions have therefore contributed to the growth of international trade and cooperation between nations.

The role of experts

International organisations require specific skills that may differ from those of traditional diplomats. They are often made up of technical experts in specific fields, such as trade, health, the environment, human rights and so on. Diplomats work with these experts to develop international policies and standards in their specialist areas.

The problems that have emerged in the twentieth century, such as armed conflicts, economic crises, environmental and public health challenges, have necessitated the creation of new international organisations with greater involvement of experts in their operation. Among these organisations was the League of Nations, created in 1919 following the end of the First World War, whose mission was to maintain international peace and security. Despite its efforts, the League of Nations was unable to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War and was replaced by the United Nations Organisation (UNO) in 1945. The UN has become one of the most important international organisations, with missions ranging from international peace and security to the promotion of economic and social development, the protection of human rights, the prevention of natural disasters and the management of health crises. The composition of the UN also reflects the emergence of new international players, such as developing countries and civil society organisations.

Experts played an increasingly important role in international negotiations during the 19th century. States realised the importance of having specialists in specific fields in order to negotiate with other states and reach common agreements. The harmonisation of measurement systems is an example of this collaboration between international experts. The metre became a recognised international unit of measurement in 1875 thanks to the efforts of scientists and engineers from several countries. This international recognition facilitated trade and scientific exchanges between countries.

The administrative unions

Administrative unions have played a fundamental role in the development of multilateral negotiations between states. By meeting regularly, states have been able to engage in dialogue and debate in order to establish common standards, regulations and public policies. This has facilitated international cooperation and encouraged the harmonisation of policies on a global scale. These experiences of multilateral collaboration laid the foundations for the subsequent creation of larger international organisations, such as the League of Nations and the United Nations. These organisations consolidated the role of multilateral negotiation in international relations, providing a permanent forum for dialogue, cooperation and conflict resolution between states. They have thus contributed to the establishment of a more stable and predictable international system, based on international law and respect for the sovereignty of States.

The establishment of an international system with universal aspirations can sometimes clash with the particular interests of certain nation states, creating tensions and conflicts in international relations. A common example is the issue of human rights. The idea of protecting human rights on an international scale can sometimes be perceived by certain states as interference in their internal affairs, calling their sovereignty into question. These States may wish to maintain their own national norms and values and, consequently, resist the adoption of international standards that could run counter to them. This is why, although certain standards are considered universal and legitimate by the majority of the international community, their implementation can sometimes encounter obstacles. These frictions highlight the constant challenge of reconciling the universal principles of international law with respect for national sovereignty in the contemporary international system.

Introduction of non-governmental actors

Defining non-governmental organisations

Under public international law, only States and international organisations have international legal personality. Non-governmental actors such as individuals, companies, NGOs and social movements do not have international legal personality, although they may participate in negotiation and consultation processes as observers or consultants. However, these actors can exert a significant influence on international policies and decision-making. Non-governmental actors are not recognised by international law as legal entities in their own right, but their role is increasingly important in international relations. This can pose problems of regulation and participation in international decision-making. Some non-governmental organisations have managed to gain recognition from international organisations and have been granted consultative status. This allows them to take part in meetings and contribute to debates, but their decision-making power remains limited.

Defining non-governmental organisations is not easy, as there is no universal or official definition. However, it can be said that they are private, not-for-profit organisations that have a public service or general interest mission, and that operate outside the government apparatus on a not-for-profit basis. NGOs can operate at different levels, from the local community to the international level, and can work on a wide range of issues such as environmental protection, the promotion of human rights, humanitarian aid, etc. The status of non-governmental organisations is complex and their definition varies according to context and country. They can have very diverse missions and be involved in areas such as environmental protection, the defence of human rights, humanitarian aid, public health, etc. Some organisations are very small, while others are very large. Some organisations are very small, while others are major players in civil society. In addition, some organisations have close relations with governments, while others are completely independent. It is therefore difficult to define them clearly and to determine their place in international law. With the emergence of peace movements and the idea of international regulation of problems, non-governmental actors began to play an important role in international relations. However, their legal status was unclear at the time, and it was several decades before their role was recognised in international law. Today, non-governmental organisations play an important role in international life and are recognised as players in their own right.

The emergence of non-governmental actors

From the end of the 19th century, the landscape of international relations began to diversify with the emergence of new non-state actors. These included peace movements, civil society organisations and committed intellectuals, all of whom showed a particular concern for issues of peace and international conflict resolution. These new players, although not professional diplomats in the traditional sense of the term, have brought a fresh and innovative perspective to the management of disputes between states. They have played, and continue to play, an essential role in influencing public discourse, proposing alternative solutions to conflicts and contributing to the establishment of international norms and principles. Their work often focuses on promoting mutual understanding, diplomacy and dialogue as a means of resolving conflict, and they seek to highlight issues such as human rights, social justice and the environment, which can sometimes be overlooked in negotiations between states. These non-state actors have enriched the field of international relations by introducing new ideas and methods, while contributing to a more peaceful and equitable world.

The growing involvement of non-state actors in international relations has added considerable complexity to the dynamics of this field. This has led to the emergence of a multitude of new voices, creating an increasingly dense and interconnected web of actors and issues. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs), associations, social movements, transnational companies and even individuals are now in a position to participate actively in the formulation and implementation of international policies and standards. They often collaborate with states and international organisations, contributing to a change in the very nature of international governance. This new polyphonic world order has also contributed to the emergence of global issues, such as the environment, human rights, public health and global governance, to name but a few. These transnational issues have given rise to new debates and encouraged the emergence of new forms of cooperation between the various players involved. Far from being the sole preserve of states, international relations are now a stage on which a diversity of players interact, discuss, negotiate and collaborate, which represents both a challenge and an opportunity for global governance.

The fields of action of non-governmental organisations

Non-governmental organisations operate in many different fields.

Humanitarian organisations

Humanitarian organisations have played an important role in international relations, and among them, the Red Cross stands out as one of the most emblematic and oldest worldwide. The organisation was founded by Henri Dunant, a Swiss philanthropist, following his harrowing experience on the battlefields of Solferino in Italy in 1859. Horrified by the unspeakable suffering of the wounded soldiers and the lack of medical assistance, Dunant mobilised volunteers to help the wounded, regardless of which side they were on. This act of human solidarity, transcending national borders and political affiliations, left a lasting impression and planted the seeds of an international humanitarian assistance movement. Motivated by his experience, Dunant envisaged the creation of an international humanitarian movement, capable of providing assistance in times of war and enjoying the protection guaranteed by an international convention. This concept led to the founding of the Red Cross in 1863, an organisation that has evolved to become a universally recognised symbol of neutral medical care and humanitarian aid.

The Red Cross emerged as a truly unique organisation, dedicated to helping the most vulnerable in times of war and peace. Dunant's innovative concept inaugurated a new approach to humanitarian diplomacy, where compassion and humanitarian aid transcend political and military conflicts. The principles of the Red Cross - humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity and universality - have guided its action throughout the world, whether in providing relief to victims of armed conflict, natural disasters or pandemics. Following the creation of the Red Cross, a series of Geneva Conventions were drawn up and ratified by a multitude of countries. These conventions formalised the principles of humanitarian warfare, such as the protection of the wounded and sick, medical personnel and civilians in wartime, thereby strengthening the role of the Red Cross on the international stage.

The impact of the Red Cross is not limited to humanitarian assistance in times of crisis. Its ongoing work to promote respect for international humanitarian law, to improve the living and health conditions of vulnerable populations, and to prepare communities for emergencies, makes it a key player in the global humanitarian field. Over time, the Red Cross has become a global network, with National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies in almost every country in the world, as well as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the International Committee of the Red Cross. This has enabled an even greater scope and effectiveness in the response to humanitarian crises.

Pacifism

Pacifism, an international movement that took off in Europe and North America at the end of the 19th century, gained influence in the United States during the Spanish-American War of 1898. This war marked the first major armed intervention by the United States outside its own territory, triggering a significant pacifist reaction. In response to the war, American pacifists founded a number of organisations, including the Anti-War League in 1898, followed by the Society of Friends of Peace in 1905. These organisations aimed to raise public awareness of the devastating human and economic consequences of war, while actively promoting diplomacy and negotiation as more humane and effective alternatives to resolving international conflicts. These groups have played a crucial role in raising public awareness of the importance of peace, spreading the idea that war, far from being an inevitable solution, can be avoided through a commitment to diplomacy, fairness and mutual understanding.

Pacifism, which developed in both Europe and North America in the late 19th century, was stimulated by various wars and international tensions of the time. The movement gained particular prominence in the United States during the Spanish-American War of 1898. This conflict, which saw the United States engaged in a military confrontation outside its borders, sparked a national debate on the question of military interventionism and propelled pacifism to the forefront of the political and social scene. In response to the war, American pacifists formed the Anti-Imperialist League in 1898. This organisation opposed the expansion of American influence through military force and promoted peace, democracy and human rights as guiding principles of foreign policy. The League attracted a wide range of members, from intellectuals and political leaders to labour and civil rights activists, reflecting the breadth and influence of the peace movement during this period. In parallel with the development of pacifism in the United States, the Anglo-American pacifist movement played an important role in spreading ideas of peace in Europe. This movement promoted diplomacy and negotiation as preferable alternatives to war as a means of resolving international conflicts. It also encouraged the creation of international organisations and legal institutions to maintain peace and prevent war. The spread of pacifist ideals has had a considerable impact on international relations, stimulating dialogue between nations and encouraging a more peaceful and cooperative approach to resolving conflicts. This has led to a gradual transformation of international norms, which have become more focused on promoting peace, respect for human rights and cooperation between states.

The Société de la Paix et de la Liberté, founded in Geneva, played a pioneering role in the pacifist movement in Europe. Founded in 1867, this organisation promoted international cooperation and international law as means of preventing war and resolving conflicts. The Society brought together intellectuals, politicians, writers and activists from all over Europe, creating an international network of people committed to peace. Similarly, the Société des Amis de la Paix, founded in France by Frédéric Bastiat, sought to establish links between peace and free trade. Bastiat, a renowned economist and fervent advocate of free trade, believed that international economic cooperation could contribute to peace by creating interdependence between nations and reducing trade tensions. The Society advocated free trade, international economic cooperation and arbitration to resolve trade disputes between nations. These organisations have played a key role in raising public awareness of the human and economic costs of war and the importance of diplomacy and negotiation in resolving conflicts. They have also helped to promote a more inclusive and democratic vision of international relations, encouraging dialogue and cooperation between nations, and advocating respect for human rights and social justice.

Pacifism, which emerged in force at the end of the 19th century, is therefore a response to the intensification of international tensions and the destructive wars that resulted. The movement comprises several distinct branches, each adopting a particular approach to promoting peace and countering war. Legal pacifism and parliamentary or political pacifism are forms that rely on international law and diplomacy as means of resolving international conflicts. Rather than resorting to war, these forms of pacifism advocate the use of legal and political instruments such as treaties, peace agreements, negotiation and mediation to maintain peace. Religious pacifism is rooted in faith and in the conviction that violence and war are contrary to the teachings of certain religions. Proponents of this type of pacifism often draw on spiritual principles of non-violence, love of neighbour and forgiveness. Militant pacifism, on the other hand, advocates conscientious objection and non-violent direct action to protest against war and injustice. Supporters of this form of pacifism are often prepared to actively and publicly resist war, through means such as civil disobedience, peaceful demonstrations and other forms of non-violent resistance.

Legal pacifism

Legal pacifism is a philosophy that seeks to ensure peace through the framework of international law. This school of thought aims to develop a legal doctrine of peace by establishing clear rules for the peaceful resolution of international conflicts. To achieve this, it advocates tools such as international arbitration, mediation and diplomatic negotiation as the preferred means of resolving conflicts between states.

Two international peace conferences, held at The Hague in the Netherlands in 1899 and 1907, marked significant advances in this field. They led to the codification of several essential rules of international humanitarian law, representing an important step towards an international legal framework aimed at minimising the devastating effects of war.

These conferences also led to the creation of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, an international institution dedicated to resolving disputes between states through arbitration. This court serves as a neutral platform where states can resolve their disputes peacefully and fairly, embodying the ideals of legal pacifism.

Pacifism in parliamentary and political circles

Pacifism in parliamentary and political circles is based on the conviction that dialogue and cooperation between national parliaments can promote international peace. A major player in this movement is the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), founded in 1889, making it one of the oldest intergovernmental organisations in the world.

The IPU was established with the aim of facilitating cooperation and dialogue between parliaments in different countries. By promoting the exchange of ideas and experiences among its members, the IPU aims to resolve conflicts peacefully and encourage international cooperation.

More specifically, the IPU is dedicated to promoting democracy and human rights. It also encourages the peaceful resolution of international conflicts and supports initiatives for sustainable development and economic cooperation. In this way, the IPU embodies an important dimension of political and parliamentary pacifism, putting forward the idea that diplomacy and political dialogue are essential tools for maintaining and promoting peace.

Industrial pacifism

Industrial pacifism, which emerged at the beginning of the 20th century, focused on mitigating the underlying socio-economic causes of conflict. This movement, which found a notable echo in Europe and the United States, advocates a vision of an economy geared towards cooperation rather than destructive competition.

Proponents of industrial pacifism advocate fair and environmentally friendly business practices, in the firm belief that peace can be fostered through a better understanding and judicious management of economic complexities. They oppose the arms race and wars, often seeing these conflicts as motivated by economic gain rather than socio-political ideals.

Many industrial pacifists have played an active role in various social movements, including the civil rights and labour movements. These activists aim to create a world where economic prosperity is not synonymous with conflict, but with collaboration and social justice.

Scientific and technical cooperation

In the complex international landscape of the 21st century, scientific and technical cooperation has become a key player in the development and progress of nations. These organisations, often funded by wealthy philanthropists, aim to stimulate research, innovation and technology transfer by supporting projects in a wide range of fields, including health, agriculture, energy and information and communication technologies.

The Rockefeller Foundation, created by American oil magnate John D. Rockefeller, is one of the oldest and most influential private foundations in the world. Since its creation in 1913, it has played a major role in shaping the global landscape of public health, education, scientific research and agricultural development.

The Rockefeller Foundation has been particularly active in public health. One of its most remarkable successes was its contribution to the eradication of yellow fever in Latin America. In the 1920s and 1930s, the Foundation funded pioneering research into the transmission of this disease and supported large-scale vaccination programmes. In the 1940s, it also played a crucial role in the fight against African sleeping sickness, a neglected tropical disease that had ravaged the continent. In the field of education, the Rockefeller Foundation has funded numerous programmes and institutions around the world, including the prestigious University of Chicago and the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health. It has also supported the training of thousands of researchers and health professionals in developing countries, strengthening their capacity to respond to public health challenges. In agriculture, the Rockefeller Foundation was a driving force behind the Green Revolution, an initiative launched in the 1960s to increase agricultural production in developing countries. By supporting the development of new varieties of high-yielding cereals and promoting the adoption of modern irrigation and fertilisation technologies, the foundation contributed to a spectacular increase in food production in Asia and Latin America.

The Rockefeller Foundation is a good example of how private organisations can transform health, education, research and agriculture on a global scale. Through its strategic vision, long-term commitment and investment in research and innovation, it has been able to make a significant difference to the lives of millions of people.

Religious organisations

The definition of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can be quite broad, encompassing a range of not-for-profit organisations that operate independently of governments. These organisations can have a wide range of objectives, from environmental protection to education, public health, human rights and more. Within this broad spectrum, religious organisations can find their place, particularly when they are involved in humanitarian or social initiatives. However, what distinguishes religious organisations from other types of NGO is that they usually have an inherent spiritual or religious mission. For example, a religious organisation may have a mission to spread a certain set of beliefs or values, to provide religious services, or to support a community of believers. At the same time, these organisations may also engage in activities that fall within the remit of NGOs, such as helping people in need, defending human rights or protecting the environment.

These organisations, although often acting like NGOs, are driven by a spiritual or religious dimension that guides and enriches their work. They seek not only to meet the material needs of the people they help, but also to meet their spiritual needs, offering hope, comfort and a sense of community. It is this combination of humanitarian service and religious mission that makes these organisations unique in the NGO landscape.

The YMCA (Young Men's Christian Association) is an excellent example of a religious organisation that is also involved in a wide range of humanitarian and social activities. Founded in 1844 in England by George Williams, a draper who wanted to provide a safe and constructive place for young men in the city to spend their free time, the YMCA has since grown to become a worldwide organisation with branches in many countries. While YMCAs have roots in the Protestant Christian faith and seek to promote Christian values such as love of neighbour and integrity, they are also committed to providing practical support for young people. YMCAs are perhaps best known for their physical education programmes and sports facilities, having even helped to invent sports such as basketball and volleyball. However, they also offer educational and personal development programmes, providing life skills, employment opportunities and mentoring to young people. In addition, YMCAs play an important role in community service. They offer programs to help the homeless, childcare, literacy programs, meals for those in need, and many other community services. Although their mission is rooted in the Christian faith, YMCAs strive to be inclusive and open to all, regardless of religion, age, gender or ethnic background. In this way, while retaining their religious identity, YMCAs illustrate how an organisation can balance a spiritual mission with an active commitment to the social and physical well-being of the communities they serve.

Feminist organisations

Feminist organisations play a crucial role in the fight for gender equality and women's empowerment. Their work aims to challenge gender stereotypes, fight discrimination and gender-based violence, and promote equal rights and opportunities for all, regardless of gender. The International Council of Women (ICW) is one of the oldest feminist organisations, founded in 1888. Since its inception, the ICW has been at the forefront of the fight for gender equality, campaigning for issues such as women's suffrage, girls' education and an end to violence against women. Its activities have led to major advances in the recognition of women's rights and gender equality in many countries.

Today, there are many other feminist organisations active around the world, each focusing on specific gender equality issues. For example, some focus on improving women's political representation, encouraging more women to run for leadership positions and fighting sexism in politics. Others focus on health issues, such as access to reproductive health and sexual rights. Some organisations work to tackle pay inequality, lobbying for laws guaranteeing equal pay for equal work and encouraging companies to review their pay policies. Still others focus on combating gender-based violence, including sexual harassment, rape and domestic violence.

Cultural and intellectual exchange organisations

Cultural and intellectual exchange organisations generally work to foster greater understanding and mutual respect between the world's different cultures and societies. Their work helps to break down barriers, overcome prejudice and foster peaceful relations between nations.

The Alliance Française, founded in 1883, is one of the oldest organisations of its kind. Its aim is to promote the French language and French culture abroad, while encouraging cultural exchanges. It has centres and associations in many countries, offering French language courses, organising cultural events and encouraging intercultural dialogue. The British Council, set up in 1934, is another key organisation in this field. It aims to promote knowledge of British culture and to develop positive cultural and educational relations with other countries. It offers opportunities to learn English, provides resources for teachers and organises cultural, artistic and educational events. The Fulbright Programme, launched after the Second World War by the US government, is another example of cultural and intellectual exchange. It offers scholarships to enable students, researchers and professionals from various countries to study, teach or conduct research in the United States, and vice versa. These organisations and programmes play an essential role in bringing cultures closer together and promoting mutual understanding, helping to build a more peaceful world that respects diversity.

Esperanto is an artificial language created at the end of the 19th century by Dr Ludwig Lazarus Zamenhof, a Polish ophthalmologist. Zamenhof had a vision of a universal language that could be easily learned and used by everyone, regardless of their mother tongue, to facilitate communication and understanding between peoples. To promote the use of Esperanto, Zamenhof and his supporters set up Esperanto clubs and associations. These clubs played an important role in providing resources for learning Esperanto, organising meetings and exchanges between Esperantists, and defending the use of Esperanto in different international contexts. As well as promoting the language itself, Esperanto clubs also defended values such as peace, mutual understanding and international cooperation. They saw Esperanto as a tool for achieving these goals by eliminating the linguistic and cultural barriers that can sometimes lead to misunderstanding or conflict.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is undoubtedly one of the most recognised non-governmental organisations in the world. Created by Pierre de Coubertin, the IOC is a private organisation that works to promote Olympism throughout the world. The IOC's role goes far beyond the organisation of the Olympic Games. It also works to promote the values of Olympism, which include excellence, respect and friendship. It seeks to use sport as a means of promoting peace and mutual understanding between people of different cultures and backgrounds. However, the IOC could not achieve these objectives without the help of the National Olympic Committees (NOCs). The NOCs are independent organisations that represent each country participating in the Olympic Games. They are responsible for selecting the athletes who will represent their country at the Olympic Games, as well as promoting the values of Olympism in their respective countries. Together, the IOC and the NOCs work to make the Olympic Games an event that brings together people from all over the world and celebrates our common humanity through sport. Although each edition of the Olympic Games presents its own challenges, the ultimate goal always remains the same: to use the power of sport to build a better and more peaceful world.

International scientific congresses are an integral part of scientific culture. They provide platforms where researchers can share their discoveries, discuss new ideas and collaborate on future projects. They also allow researchers to learn from their peers, be inspired by innovative work and keep abreast of the latest advances in their field. One of the oldest and most renowned scientific congresses is the Solvay Congress, which began in 1911. Held every three years in Brussels, Belgium, the Congress brings together leading scientists from around the world, particularly in the fields of physics and chemistry. The discussions and debates that have taken place at the Solvay Congresses have helped shape the direction of scientific research in the 20th century.

NGO structures and objectives

Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) play a major role in various aspects of contemporary society, from providing humanitarian aid to defending human rights, protecting the environment and promoting social justice. However, there is great diversity among these organisations in terms of structure, methodology, objectives and sources of funding. This diversity can sometimes make it difficult to assess their role and effectiveness.

In terms of funding, some NGOs are mainly financed by private donations, while others receive funds from governments or international organisations. This can raise questions about their independence and ability to act impartially. For example, an NGO that receives a large proportion of its funding from a government or a company may be perceived as less independent or likely to be influenced by the interests of its funders. In terms of the political role of NGOs, some are actively engaged in the political process, seeking to influence public policy and legislation to promote their objectives. Others, on the other hand, focus primarily on humanitarian aid or development initiatives, avoiding direct political engagement. There is also a tension between NGOs that prefer to work in collaboration with governments and those that adopt a more adversarial approach. Finally, the effectiveness of NGOs is a widely debated issue. While some NGOs have been very effective in achieving their goals, others have been criticised for their lack of effectiveness or inability to bring about lasting change. This debate is complicated by the fact that effectiveness can be difficult to measure, especially for long-term or non-quantifiable objectives.

Public/private boundary

The boundary between public and private in non-governmental organisations (NGOs) is often complex and difficult to draw. Although NGOs are generally considered to be part of the private sector, being independent of government, they frequently interact with public institutions and may be involved in the delivery of public services. This interaction can sometimes blur the distinction between public and private. One example of this interaction is funding. Although NGOs are independent of government, many receive some of their funding from government sources. This can be particularly common in areas where NGOs are involved in the delivery of public services, such as health or education. In these cases, NGOs can be seen as extensions of public institutions, even if they remain technically private. In addition, many NGOs work closely with governments to achieve their objectives. For example, an environmental NGO may work with government agencies to develop conservation policies. Or an NGO dedicated to fighting hunger may work in partnership with public institutions to distribute food. In these situations, the line between public and private can also be blurred. There are also cases where NGOs are created or supported by private companies as part of their corporate social responsibility initiatives. Here again, the boundary between public and private can be difficult to determine.

The Red Cross is an excellent example of how the line between public and private can be blurred in the world of non-governmental organisations. As an international humanitarian organisation, it operates independently of governments, but it also maintains close relations with them, particularly within the framework of the Geneva Conventions, which are international treaties. These conventions, signed by many countries, give the Red Cross a mandate to provide humanitarian assistance in times of war. In this sense, although the Red Cross is a private organisation, it fulfils a very specific public function, defined by international agreements. This gives the Red Cross a unique position on the international scene, with special responsibilities and protections. In addition, the Red Cross is largely funded by private donations, although it also receives subsidies and support from governments. So although it has an international mandate defined by governments, its day-to-day operations are privately funded. This further highlights the ambiguity of the boundary between public and private for organisations such as the Red Cross. The Red Cross is a good example of how an organisation can operate in both the public and private spheres, and how the distinction between these two spheres can often be less clear than it first appears.

Network organisations

Networking is an important feature of non-governmental organisations. Networks enable organisations to work together to achieve common goals, share information, resources and skills, coordinate efforts and build capacity.

NGO networks can take a variety of forms, depending on their objectives, scope and structure.

A formal network is usually characterised by established governance structures, decision-making mechanisms and clear communication protocols. These networks may involve formal agreements between member organisations, and may have dedicated staff to manage and co-ordinate the network. In contrast, informal networks can be more flexible and less structured. They can form around common objectives or shared challenges, and can evolve organically according to the needs of their members. An example might be an informal group of NGOs working on child protection in a specific region, who share information and resources, but have no formal governance structure. The scope of a network can also vary. Some networks are global, involving organisations from different countries and regions of the world. Others are regional, focusing on a specific geographical area. There may also be thematic networks, focusing on specific issues or challenges, such as human rights, health, education or the environment. Finally, NGO networks may involve a diverse range of actors. In addition to NGOs, they can include intergovernmental organisations, governments, businesses, universities and even individuals. This reflects the interconnected and complex nature of contemporary global challenges, which often require a multi-sectoral approach and close collaboration between different actors.

Rival organisations

Although NGOs share a common commitment to the social good, they are not immune to the rivalries and conflicts that characterise any diverse group of actors. These rivalries may arise from ideological differences, competition for limited resources, or differences over the best strategies for achieving common goals.

For example, in the environmental field, different NGOs may have different approaches to tackling climate change. Some may advocate a rapid transition to renewable energy sources, while others may focus on forest conservation or adaptation to climate change. These differing priorities and approaches can sometimes lead to tension or conflict between these organisations. Rivalry between NGOs can also be exacerbated by competition for limited resources. NGOs often rely on private donations, public funding or grants to support their work. When these resources are limited, this can lead to intense competition between NGOs to obtain them. This competition can sometimes create tensions or rivalries, particularly when NGOs feel obliged to "sell out" or change their objectives in order to attract funding. Unfortunately, these rivalries can sometimes distract attention from the core issues and hamper the effectiveness of NGOs. They can lead to fragmentation of efforts, duplication of work and inefficient use of resources. For this reason, it is important that NGOs are able to manage these tensions constructively, for example by establishing coordination mechanisms, sharing information and resources, and seeking to resolve disputes peacefully.

The case of the International Council of Women is a good example of how differences in vision, priorities and approaches can lead to tensions and splits within non-governmental organisations. When it was founded, the International Council of Women was an attempt to bring together women from different countries to work together to improve the status of women. However, as history has shown, unity within this movement was not easy to maintain. Women within the movement had different views on key issues, such as the relative importance of political activism, the extension of public rights to women, and the approach to international tensions. In response to these differences, some Council members chose to create new organisations, such as the International Suffrage Alliance and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, which focused more on their specific concerns. These splits, while they may have caused tensions in the short term, also led to the birth of new organisations that have played an important role in the history of feminism. This highlights one of the major challenges facing non-governmental organisations: how to manage the diversity of opinions and interests within their own organisation. In some cases, this can lead to splits and the creation of new organisations. However, it can also lead to greater diversification of the movement, with different organisations focusing on different facets of an issue, which can ultimately strengthen the cause as a whole.

The emergence of new influential players in international politics

The end of the 19th century marked a period of transition in the world order. It was at this time that many non-state actors began to emerge and gain influence on the international scene. These actors include non-governmental organisations (NGOs), multinational companies, social movements and the international media.

NGOs, for example, have begun to play an increasingly important role in various fields, such as human rights, the environment, public health and economic development. Thanks to their ability to mobilise public opinion and put pressure on governments, they have succeeded in bringing to the fore certain issues that would otherwise have been neglected.

Multinational companies, for their part, have begun to have a significant impact on the global economy. By establishing operations in several countries, they have created new commercial and economic dynamics. Their influence on the global economy has also grown through their ability to move resources across borders, influence government policies and shape the norms and rules of international trade.

Social movements, such as the women's movement and the labour movement, have also begun to have an impact on the international scene. By mobilising masses of people around common causes, these movements were able to draw attention to important issues and push for political and social change.

Finally, the international media have begun to play a key role in disseminating information and shaping public opinion. Thanks to increasingly advanced technologies, they have been able to disseminate information on an unprecedented scale, contributing to greater awareness and understanding of global issues.

In short, these non-state actors have added new dimensions to the international scene, making the international system more complex and interconnected. They have changed the way international affairs are conducted, shifting power from states alone to a multitude of actors with different objectives and means of action. This evolution continues to influence the nature of international relations today.

The beginnings of regionalism: the example of the Pan-American Union

The founding of the Pan-American Union

The Pan-American Union is an early example of regionalism, which emerged at the end of the 19th century in Latin America under the impetus of the United States. The Pan-American Union is an organisation that marked an important stage in the evolution of international relations in the Americas. Founded in 1890 at the first American International Conference in Washington D.C., its aim was to encourage dialogue and cooperation between American nations, resolve conflicts peacefully and promote trade and cultural cooperation.

Regionalism is both a political and cultural movement that aims to intensify cohesion and unity between the nations of a specific geographical area. This dynamic often emerges in response to external pressures or in opposition to universalism. At the dawn of the twentieth century, the dichotomy between nationalism and universalism stimulated the birth of regionalist movements. Their ambition was to strike a balance between the preservation of national interests and the need for regional cooperation. Regionalism is often seen as a response to nationalism, which emphasises the identity and sovereignty of individual countries. However, regionalism can also be seen as a complement to nationalism, insofar as it aims to preserve and enhance the common interests of countries located in the same region.

The Pan-American Union was an important milestone in the establishment of regional institutions in Latin America, making a significant contribution to the region's political and economic stability. Its successor, the Organisation of American States (OAS), continues to play a key role in promoting democracy, human rights and economic development throughout the Americas. The idea of regionalism has also inspired the founding of other regional organisations and initiatives around the world, including the European Union, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). The aim of these organisations is to strengthen collaboration between member nations and promote regional integration, while at the same time respecting the sovereignty and identity of each country.

The very first Pan-American Conference, held in Washington, D.C., between 1889 and 1890, marked the beginning of a series of Pan-American dialogues. The Pan-American Union, formally born in 1910 following the ratification of the Buenos Aires Convention, is the fruit of these initiatives. The main objective of this first conference was to establish a system of cooperation and dialogue between the countries of North, Central and South America. The central theme was the promotion of economic integration and inter-regional trade. A number of proposals were discussed at the conference, including the adoption of common standards for trade and shipping, arbitration to resolve inter-state disputes and the creation of a customs union. Although not all of these ideas were put into practice immediately, the conference paved the way for increased cooperation and economic integration initiatives in the following years. The Pan-American Union, as the successor to the Pan-American Conference, continued efforts to promote economic integration and inter-regional trade between the countries of the Americas. Playing a role in coordinating and facilitating economic relations between its members, the organisation organised conferences and meetings to discuss issues of common interest and promoted economic and technical cooperation projects.

The Pan-American Union's main objective was to resolve border disputes between its member countries peacefully and without violence. Following the dissolution of the Spanish empire, many Latin American countries inherited poorly demarcated and imprecise borders, a source of tension and conflict between neighbouring states. Against this backdrop, the Pan-American Union has worked for the peaceful settlement of these border disputes, promoting dialogue, negotiation and arbitration between the parties concerned. The organisation has also established itself as a mediator, offering legal and technical advice and facilitating talks between countries at odds. Over time, the Pan-American Union and its successor, the Organisation of American States (OAS), have succeeded in resolving a number of border disputes in the region. For example, the OAS played a key role in mediating the dispute between Belize and Guatemala over their shared border. Promoting the peaceful resolution of border conflicts has been an essential pillar in avoiding armed confrontations and strengthening political and economic stability in the region. By promoting cooperation and dialogue between member countries, the Pan American Union and the OAS have helped to create a climate conducive to development and regional integration.

Wilson's influence on the Pan-American Union

Woodrow Wilson

Woodrow Wilson, the 28th President of the United States, took office in 1913, three years after the creation of the Pan-American Union. Although the Pan-American Union was founded before his presidency, Wilson supported and encouraged the deepening of economic and political integration between the countries of the region. Wilson was a fervent advocate of international cooperation and diplomacy as a means of preventing conflict and promoting peace. His approach to foreign policy, known as "Wilsonism", emphasised democracy, the free determination of peoples and multilateralism.

Wilson's Fourteen Points, presented in 1918, were a set of principles intended to serve as a basis for peace after the First World War. Although these points were not directly linked to the Pan-American Union, they reflect Wilson's commitment to international cooperation and the self-determination of nations. Several of the Fourteen Points were relevant to Latin America and the aims of the Pan-American Union. For example, the principle of free navigation of the seas, the lowering of economic barriers and the creation of a general association of nations to guarantee the political security and independence of states. Although Wilson's Fourteen Points were not directly linked to the Pan-American Union, they shared similar objectives and reflected Wilson's vision for a more peaceful and cooperative world. During Wilson's presidency, the United States continued to support the Pan American Union and sought to deepen economic and political integration in the region. However, it should be noted that Wilson's foreign policy in Latin America was also criticised for its interventionism and paternalism, particularly through the Monroe Doctrine, which aimed to protect American interests in the region.

Woodrow Wilson's idea of collective security was a key element of his vision for the Pan-American Union and for international cooperation more broadly. Wilson argued that peace and stability could be guaranteed by encouraging nations to work together to resolve disputes and by ensuring collective security. With this in mind, the Pan American Union was envisaged not only as an instrument to foster economic and political integration, but also to address other key issues, such as security, development and regional cooperation. The Union was conceived as a forum for dialogue and the peaceful resolution of conflicts, embodying the ideal of collective security promoted by Wilson. This concept, promoted by Wilson, played a precursory role in the formation of the international security structure we know today, including the establishment of organisations such as the United Nations which, like the Pan-American Union, aim to promote cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts between nations.

Over time, the Pan-American Union has broadened its mandate to encompass a range of responsibilities, including the peaceful resolution of conflicts, the promotion of human rights, cooperation for development and environmental protection. The idea of collective security inspired the founding of the Organisation of American States (OAS) in 1948, which succeeded the Pan-American Union. The OAS, following in the footsteps of its predecessor, is committed to maintaining regional peace and security, promoting democracy, encouraging economic and social development and protecting human rights. The basic principles of the OAS still reflect those of the Pan-American Union, with a renewed emphasis on regional collaboration and the maintenance of security and stability in the Americas. This demonstrates the persistence of the idea of collective security in structuring inter-state relations in the region.

Through its Charter, the OAS is firmly committed to key principles such as non-intervention, the peaceful resolution of conflicts, democracy, human rights and economic and social solidarity. These principles guide its day-to-day action and structure its efforts to strengthen regional cooperation and integration. Today, the OAS plays an essential role in maintaining collective security and promoting cooperation within the Americas. It makes a point of preventing and resolving conflicts peacefully, encouraging democracy and the protection of human rights, and stimulating socio-economic development in the region. The OAS remains a vital forum for dialogue and cooperation in the Americas, defending common values and promoting regional integration for the well-being of all its members.

The evolution of the Pan-American Union into the Organisation of American States is a testament to how regional organisations can adapt to deal with an ever-expanding and interdependent range of issues. These institutions were shaped by ideologies such as Woodrow Wilson's, which argued forcefully for the need for international cooperation and a system of collective security to guarantee peace and prosperity. As they have developed, these organisations have taken on board a growing range of challenges - economic, political, social and environmental - and have sought to promote regional and collaborative solutions. Their existence underlines the importance of multilateral cooperation in navigating a complex and interconnected world, while respecting the principles of national sovereignty and self-determination. In this way, the history of the Pan-American Union and the OAS offers valuable lessons on the crucial role that regional organisations can play in promoting peace, development and inter-state cooperation.

Expanding the scope of the Pan-American Union

The Pan American Union expanded its prerogatives and areas of action in the early 20th century to address a range of regional issues, including health, science, law and defence.

The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), originally established as the Pan American Sanitary Bureau in 1902, represents a significant cooperative effort in public health in the Americas region. Its creation was motivated by the need to combat epidemics and improve public health standards across the region. As the world's first international health organisation, PAHO has made a major contribution to the establishment of disease surveillance systems, the management and control of epidemics, and the setting of public health standards. Through its efforts, the organization has played a major role in improving the health and well-being of people in the Americas. Still active today, PAHO continues to promote health collaboration, innovation and equity throughout the Americas. It works with its member countries to combat disease, promote effective health policy, and achieve health-related sustainable development goals. As the regional office for the Americas of the World Health Organization (WHO), PAHO is also a key player in coordinating the international response to global health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Inter-American Juridical Committee, established in 1928, was conceived with the ambition of stimulating legal cooperation and promoting the harmonisation of legislation among member states. This body made a major contribution to building the inter-American legal framework, and eventually led to the creation of the Inter-American Court of Justice in 1948. The Inter-American Court of Justice, now more commonly known as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, plays a fundamental role in resolving legal disputes between member states. Its mission does not stop there, as it is also responsible for ensuring respect for human rights, in accordance with the American Convention on Human Rights. Through its decisions and rulings, the Court contributes to the development of human rights jurisprudence in the region. It provides essential legal supervision, ensuring that member countries comply with their obligations under regional human rights treaties.

Scientific and academic organisations have also been set up to stimulate collaboration, knowledge-sharing and intellectual debate between academics and researchers throughout the Americas. These bodies have played a crucial role in advancing innovation and scientific progress in a multitude of fields, from technology to the environment and the social sciences. These associations not only create stronger and more lasting links between researchers, but also highlight the latest discoveries and innovations in their respective fields. They are an important vehicle for the exchange of ideas and mutual enrichment, promoting the academic and scientific development of the region. They have helped to make America a major player in global scientific and technological research.

The notion of collective security was given concrete expression with the establishment of the Pan American Defence Organisation in 1942, at the height of the Second World War. Its mission was to promote defence coordination and cooperation between the countries of the region to counter shared threats and ensure regional security. This initiative laid the foundations for security cooperation within the framework of the Organisation of American States (OAS), established in 1948. In this way, the Pan American Defence Organisation was a key step in establishing regional security mechanisms, reinforcing stability and peace throughout the Americas.

These developments show how the Pan American Union has evolved over time to address a wide range of regional issues and challenges. The resulting initiatives and institutions continue to play an important role in promoting regional cooperation and integration in the Americas.

The influence of the Pan-American Union on the League of Nations

The evolution of regionalism, which began at the end of the 19th century with the Pan-American Union, has notable parallels with the League of Nations (League) and, later, the United Nations (UN). These organisations are based on shared principles, such as the encouragement of international cooperation, the peaceful resolution of conflicts, the safeguarding of human rights and the stimulation of economic and social development. In this respect, the Pan-American Union can be seen as a precursor of the UN model, having established mechanisms for regional and multilateral cooperation that were subsequently taken up and expanded by the League of Nations and the UN.

The Pan-American Union and the League of Nations, while sharing similar objectives in terms of international cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts, operated at different geographical levels. The Pan-American Union's main objective was to promote regional cooperation and integration within the Americas. In contrast, the League of Nations, and later the United Nations, was truly global in scope and aimed to maintain international peace and security. Therefore, although the Pan-American Union can be seen as a precursor to the UN model in terms of multilateral cooperation mechanisms, it is important to note these differences in scope and objectives. However, the Pan American Union's contribution to promoting regional cooperation and stability has undeniably had a positive impact on Latin America and has laid the foundations for the creation of other regional organisations in other parts of the world.

The United Nations (UN) works closely with regional organisations, such as the Organisation of American States (OAS), to achieve its objectives of maintaining international peace and security, promoting respect for human rights and economic and social development. This is in line with Article 52 of the United Nations Charter, which encourages states to settle their disputes through regional arrangements or agencies before taking their case to the UN Security Council. This means that the OAS, as a regional organisation, plays a crucial role in the global collective security system. In fact, the OAS has often worked closely with the UN on a number of issues, including conflict resolution, the promotion of human rights, the fight against drugs and crime, and sustainable development. Similarly, other regional organisations such as the African Union in Africa, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Asia and the European Union in Europe also play important roles in working with the UN to address issues that are specific to their respective regions. These regional organisations complement the work of the UN and enable it to address problems that are often specific to certain regions. Together, they work to promote peace, stability, respect for human rights and sustainable development throughout the world.

The Pan-American Union and the League of Nations had different mandates, reflecting their unique backgrounds. The older Pan-American Union was a regional institution, focusing primarily on issues related to the Americas. Its main objective was to promote economic and political cooperation and integration between the countries of the continent, as well as to facilitate the peaceful resolution of regional conflicts. On the other hand, the League of Nations, established after the First World War, had a global mandate. Its aim was to maintain international peace and security and to promote cooperation between nations on a global scale. It aimed to prevent another world war by providing a forum for the peaceful settlement of international disputes and encouraging disarmament and diplomatic cooperation. So while there were opportunities for cooperation between the two organisations, it is important to note that their nature and objectives were distinct. The differences between the Pan American Union and the League of Nations reflect the complexities of global governance in the inter-war period, a period marked by tensions between nationalist and universalist aspirations, as well as the delicate balance between regional and global affairs.

The Pan-American Union played a key role in regionalism and laid the foundations for regional integration in the Americas. It has created a framework for cooperation and dialogue between the countries of the continent, promoting the harmonisation of policies, the exchange of ideas and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. At the same time, it provided a space where Latin American countries could assert their common identity and interests, while participating in an international system based on multilateralism and cooperation. As such, the Pan-American Union has played an essential role in helping Latin American countries to navigate between preserving their national sovereignty and integrating into the international system. This tension between nationalism and universalism is not, however, unique to Latin America or to the inter-war period. It is a constant challenge of global governance, and one that continues today. Regional organisations, such as the Pan American Union, can play an important role in helping states to navigate this complex landscape, providing them with a space for cooperation and dialogue on a more manageable scale, while integrating them into the wider international system.

The principles and mechanisms developed by the Pan American Union influenced the creation of other regional organisations and helped shape the international system that emerged after the Second World War, notably with the creation of the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation of American States (OAS).

The League of Nations : Towards the formation of a universal system?

The League of Nations (League) was created in the wake of the First World War in the hope of preventing future large-scale conflicts. The League of Nations was an ambitious organisation designed to facilitate international dialogue and cooperation, resolve international conflicts peacefully and coordinate action on global issues such as disarmament and economic cooperation. The United States, despite President Woodrow Wilson's decisive role in developing the concept of the League, never joined the organisation. This was largely due to opposition from the US Senate, which feared that membership of the League would interfere with US sovereignty and lead to international conflict. Germany and the Soviet Union, which were considered pariah states after the First World War, were not admitted to the League until later. Germany was admitted in 1926 but left the organisation in 1933 when Adolf Hitler came to power. The Soviet Union joined the League in 1934 but was expelled in 1939 after its invasion of Finland. Despite its high ideals, the League encountered difficulties in maintaining international peace and security, particularly in the 1930s in the face of aggression from fascist states. These failures eventually led to the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War, an organisation that sought to correct some of the SDN's weaknesses.

Origins and foundations of the League of Nations

The influence of intellectuals, humanitarians and pacifist activists

Ideas for international cooperation, peace and world organisation were put forward by various intellectuals, humanitarians and peace activists long before the League of Nations or the United Nations Organisation was created. The idea of an international organisation to maintain peace was inspired in part by the devastating experiences of war and by the progress of globalisation and international interdependence in the 19th century. Victor Hugo, for example, proposed the idea of a "United States of Europe" in several speeches and writings. He envisaged a confederation of European nations to maintain peace and foster cooperation. Although his vision was not realised in his lifetime, it has inspired generations of pacifists and internationalists. Bertrand Russell, philosopher and peace activist, also championed the idea of international cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Although he lived mainly in the 20th century, his ideas were influenced by the pacifist and humanitarian movements of the 19th century. It is also important to mention the role of pacifist movements and non-governmental organisations, such as the Red Cross, which lobbied for international conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war and other humanitarian issues. These movements helped to lay the foundations for more formalised international law and intergovernmental cooperation. The impact of these ideas and movements was evident after the First World War, when the League of Nations was created with the aim of maintaining international peace and security.

Alfred Nobel, Henri Dunant and Gustave Moynier all played an important role in promoting the idea of international cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Alfred Nobel, best known for inventing dynamite, left most of his fortune to establish the Nobel Prizes, which reward achievements in various fields, including peace. The Nobel Peace Prize, in particular, has been awarded to individuals and organisations who have worked for peace and conflict resolution. Henri Dunant is the founder of the International Red Cross and was one of the main instigators of the first Geneva Conventions, which established rules for the humanitarian treatment of war victims. He was the first winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1901. Gustave Moynier was the first president of the International Red Cross and worked with Dunant to develop the Geneva Conventions. He also proposed the creation of an international court to resolve conflicts between nations, an idea that was ahead of its time. These three men contributed to the evolution of international thinking and the recognition of the need for organisations and mechanisms to resolve conflicts between nations peacefully. Their efforts and those of many others eventually led to the creation of the League of Nations after the First World War, an important step towards the establishment of our modern international system.

The devastating scale of the First World War, with its appalling toll of death and destruction, underlined the need for an international organisation dedicated to conflict prevention. World leaders at the time recognised that the existing system of international relations was not sufficient to maintain international peace and security, hence the creation of the League of Nations. The League of Nations was the first major international body to be created for the specific purpose of promoting international cooperation and preventing war. Although ultimately ineffective in its mission to prevent the Second World War, the League of Nations laid the foundations for the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War. Both the League of Nations and the United Nations are examples of what are known as intergovernmental organisations, which are formed by agreements between different governments to work together on common problems. The work of the peace movements of the time, which argued for international conflict resolution mechanisms, was crucial in shaping the concept and structure of these organisations. The idea of peaceful conflict resolution and international cooperation was relatively new at the time, and was shaped in large part by the efforts of these peace movements.

The Hague Congresses of 1899 and 1907

The concept of a supranational authority responsible for regulating conflicts and guaranteeing peace was a revolutionary one. It challenged the absolute primacy of national sovereignty, a sacrosanct principle of international politics since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. Despite this, the appeal of a mechanism capable of preventing another catastrophe like the First World War convinced many states of the need for the League of Nations. The Covenant of the League of Nations was incorporated into the Treaty of Versailles, which officially ended the First World War. One of the aims of the League of Nations was to prevent war through collective security, the peaceful settlement of disputes between states and disarmament. It also aimed to improve global living conditions and protect the rights of minorities.

The Hague Congresses of 1899 and 1907 were important milestones in the development of international law and multilateral diplomacy. They were among the first significant attempts to establish international rules governing the conduct of war and to promote the peaceful resolution of conflicts between states. The first Hague Congress in 1899 was convened on the initiative of Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, with the aim of limiting the escalation of armaments, particularly in the naval field. The congress brought together 26 states and led to the signing of several conventions, including that concerning the laws and customs of war on land, which established important rules on the conduct of hostilities. These included a ban on the use of certain weapons, such as explosive bullets, and the principle that civilians should not be targeted in war. The Second Congress at The Hague in 1907 was broader in terms of participation, with 44 states represented. It broadened the scope of international humanitarian law and led to the signing of several additional conventions. These included a convention on the peaceful settlement of international disputes, which promoted the use of peaceful means, such as arbitration and mediation, to resolve conflicts between states. Despite their limitations, notably the fact that their implementation depended largely on the goodwill of States, these congresses laid the foundations for the subsequent development of international humanitarian law and multilateral diplomacy. They were important precursors of the international organisations of the twentieth century, such as the League of Nations and the United Nations.

The Hague Congresses played a fundamental role in establishing the principles of multilateral diplomacy and the peaceful resolution of international conflicts. The resulting conventions were among the first international treaties to define the laws and customs of war, including protections for civilians and the wounded, and to promote international arbitration as a means of resolving disputes. These initiatives set a precedent for future efforts to regulate international relations through law and multilateral cooperation. They also helped lay the foundations for the League of Nations, and later the United Nations Organisation, which sought to establish an international system to prevent war and promote cooperation between states. Despite their limitations and failures, the Hague Congresses were an important milestone in the history of international law and multilateral diplomacy. They represented a first attempt to create a system of rules and international institutions to manage relations between states and promote international peace and security.

The first congress in The Hague in 1899

Tsar Nicholas II of Russia initiated the first Hague Peace Congress in 1899. Concerned about the accelerating arms race and growing international tensions, Nicholas II proposed an international conference to discuss peace and disarmament. The conference, held in The Hague in the Netherlands, brought together 26 nations, including many European countries as well as non-European countries such as the United States, Mexico, China, Japan and Persia (now Iran).

The aim of the first Hague Peace Congress was to discuss ways of limiting armaments and preventing war. Although the conference failed to reach agreement on disarmament, it did succeed in adopting several important conventions, including the Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes. This convention established rules for the peaceful resolution of international disputes and provided for arbitration as a means of resolving disputes that could not be resolved by negotiation. It also laid the foundations for the creation of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which was intended to provide a forum for the arbitration of international disputes.

One of the major achievements of the First Hague Congress was the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). It was designed to facilitate arbitration between states in the event of international disputes. This Court has no permanent judges, but each signatory state to the Convention has the right to select up to four arbitrators, who may be chosen by the States Parties to resolve their disputes. In 1907, a second Hague Congress was held. This was a larger conference, involving 44 states, and resulted in the adoption of 13 new conventions that expanded and clarified international law in many areas. However, despite these efforts, neither the First nor the Second Hague Congresses succeeded in establishing binding arbitration as the norm for the settlement of international disputes, which limited their effectiveness in preventing conflict.

Although the Permanent Court of Arbitration was created at the First Hague Congress in 1899, it is not a "court" in the traditional sense of the term. It does not have permanent judges, but a list of arbitrators appointed by the member states of the Convention. When a dispute arises and the parties choose to settle it by arbitration, they can select arbitrators from this list. In addition, the Permanent Court of Arbitration can only hear a case if the States concerned have agreed to submit their dispute to arbitration. This is known as the "consent of States" principle. This means that the Court cannot impose its jurisdiction on a State without its consent. Finally, the Court's decisions depend on the voluntary compliance of States. There is no binding enforcement mechanism at international level to guarantee compliance with arbitral decisions. However, non-compliance with an arbitral award can have political and legal consequences, and can affect a state's reputation on the international stage.

The first congress in The Hague in 1907

The Second Congress strengthened and expanded the framework for international arbitration established in 1899.v The PCA, as its name suggests, is a permanent institution that offers a variety of services to resolve disputes between states, international organisations and, in some cases, private parties. The PCA does not have its own panel of judges, but has a list of potential arbitrators who are nominated by the member states of the Convention. When a dispute is submitted to arbitration, the parties involved select the arbitrators from this list. The Second Hague Congress in 1907 also revised and extended some of the conventions adopted in 1899. However, despite these advances, arbitration remained a voluntary process, meaning that states could not be forced to submit their disputes to the PCA without their consent.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is open to all states that ratify or accede to the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. This Convention, often referred to as the 1899 Hague Convention, created the PCA and established the fundamental principles of its operation. States that are party to the Convention undertake to have recourse to the PCA for the peaceful settlement of international disputes that have failed to be resolved by diplomatic means. However, arbitration is voluntary and depends on the mutual consent of the parties. This means that a state cannot be forced to submit a dispute to the PCA without its consent. The PCA does not have its own permanent body of judges. Instead, each State party to the Convention has the right to nominate up to four "members of the Court", who may be called upon to serve as arbitrators in specific cases. The arbitrators do not represent their home states but act in their personal capacity. Since its creation, the PCA has dealt with hundreds of cases involving a variety of disputes, ranging from territorial and maritime disputes to trade and investment issues. Despite its limitations, the PCA has played an important role in promoting the peaceful resolution of international disputes.

The creation of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) marked an important step in the evolution of the international system. It was the first time that an institution had been created with the explicit aim of providing a forum for the peaceful resolution of international disputes. The PCA established international arbitration procedures, thereby contributing to the codification and development of international law. International arbitration provides an alternative to resolving disputes by war or more traditional diplomatic means. It enables state and non-state entities to resolve their disputes peacefully, with the help of neutral third parties. The PCA also paved the way for the creation of other international tribunals and courts, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, and the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is responsible for trying the most serious crimes of international concern. Although the PCA has not succeeded in preventing all wars and international conflicts, its creation represents a significant step towards a more peaceful and just international order.

Although the Permanent Court of Arbitration was created and recognised by the Hague Conventions, the participation and cooperation of states was and still is voluntary. Arbitration, unlike the jurisdiction of national or supranational courts, is based on the consent of the parties involved. Consequently, despite the establishment of the Court, its effectiveness depended on the willingness of states to use it to resolve their disputes. In addition, some States were reluctant to ratify the Hague Conventions, mainly because of concerns about their sovereignty. They feared that submission to international arbitration might limit their ability to act independently in their own interests. These concerns hindered the universal adoption of international arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. Despite these obstacles, the Permanent Court of Arbitration has succeeded in establishing itself as an important institution in the international legal landscape and continues to play an important role in the peaceful resolution of disputes between states.

Although the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) had modest beginnings, it has nevertheless dealt with a series of international disputes since its creation. For example, in the early 20th century, it handled cases concerning territorial disputes, compensation claims, nationality issues and human rights, among others. The PCA offers a range of services, including mediation, arbitration and the resolution of environmental, trade and investment disputes. Although the court does not have the capacity to impose sanctions or enforce decisions, it has succeeded in setting a standard for the peaceful resolution of disputes that has helped shape the landscape of international law. The PCA has also evolved over time to meet the changing needs of the international community. For example, it has adapted its procedures to deal with disputes involving non-state entities, including international organisations and corporations. This has enabled the PCA to remain relevant and effective in the modern and complex world of international law.

The principle of arbitration put to the test by tensions between powers

Léon Bourgeois was a pioneer of legal pacifism and a fervent advocate of international arbitration. His contribution to international peace efforts was recognised by the award of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1920. His influence was decisive in establishing the first foundations of what is now the United Nations. In addition to his role in promoting arbitration at the Hague Peace Conference, Léon Bourgeois is also famous for his concept of the "League of Nations", which laid the foundations for the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War. He championed the idea of an international community based on law and mutual respect, rather than power and domination. This vision has been incorporated into the UN system, where mechanisms for the peaceful resolution of conflicts, such as arbitration and mediation, are central. The thought and action of Léon Bourgeois were therefore decisive in establishing the first mechanisms of global governance and in promoting a more peaceful and just world.

Despite the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the emergence of new international tensions and rivalries at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries made it difficult to apply and respect the principles established by the Hague Conferences. Although these principles were adopted at the conferences, their actual implementation depended on the voluntary consent of States. In the absence of a binding enforcement mechanism, the Permanent Court of Arbitration could only function when states agreed to submit their dispute to arbitration and abide by the decision rendered. The rise of nationalism and tensions between the great powers eventually led to the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, demonstrating the limits of these early attempts at international regulation. However, despite these failures, the ideas and principles established at the Hague conferences laid the foundations for future efforts to build an international system based on law and cooperation, including the creation of the League of Nations after the First World War and later the United Nations Organisation after the Second World War.

The failure of traditional systems to prevent a conflict of the scale and brutality of the First World War led to a major overhaul of the way states interacted with each other. There was a growing consensus that traditional methods of diplomacy and international relations were not sufficient to prevent such a catastrophe. The League of Nations was created as part of the Treaty of Versailles, which officially ended the First World War. Its main aim was to provide a platform where international conflicts could be resolved peacefully, rather than by war. Among the main objectives of the League of Nations were the encouragement of international cooperation, the improvement of the quality of life in the world, the promotion of disarmament and the prevention of war through collective security, the settlement of disputes by negotiation and the improvement of world welfare.

The League of Nations was set up with laudable intentions and the desire to establish a lasting peace following the First World War. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, the League of Nations failed to keep the peace. One of the main reasons was the lack of participation by all the world's major powers. For example, the United States, despite President Woodrow Wilson's key role in formulating the idea of the League of Nations, never joined the organisation due to opposition from the US Senate. Moreover, Germany and the Soviet Union were not admitted to the League until later, in 1926 and 1934 respectively. The departure of these nations, and several others, in the 1930s further weakened the organisation's effectiveness. Moreover, the League of Nations lacked the coercive means to force nations to comply with its resolutions. It was essentially dependent on the voluntary cooperation of member states, which limited its effectiveness. Ultimately, the outbreak of the Second World War demonstrated the failure of the League of Nations to maintain peace, leading to its dissolution. After the war, the United Nations was created to replace the League of Nations, in the hope that it would be more effective in preventing future international conflicts.

Impact of the First World War and the Treaty of Versailles

Putting the history of the League of Nations into perspective

The creation of the League of Nations was the subject of intense debate between the great powers at the end of the First World War. US President Woodrow Wilson played a crucial role in the creation of the League of Nations. He presented his idea of the "League of Nations" as a means of maintaining lasting world peace in his famous "Fourteen Points" speech in 1918. Wilson firmly believed that the creation of an international organisation promoting cooperation and dialogue between nations could prevent another world war. However, some European leaders such as British Prime Minister David Lloyd George and French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau had different views. For them, the main objective was to ensure the security of their respective nations and prevent future aggression from Germany. They were more concerned with issues of war reparations, border redefinition and national security. In addition, the US Senate was itself divided on the question of US membership of the League of Nations. Many U.S. Senators were concerned that U.S. membership of the League of Nations might compromise U.S. sovereignty and draw the United States into undesirable international conflicts. These differences of opinion eventually led to compromises in the structure and operation of the League of Nations. However, as mentioned earlier, despite the organisation's noble intentions, it was unable to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War, which eventually led to its dissolution and replacement by the United Nations.

The League of Nations was created with high hopes of preventing another devastating global conflict like the First World War. However, it faced a number of major challenges that hampered its effectiveness. One of these challenges was the fact that some major powers, such as the United States, never joined the League of Nations. Despite the central role played by US President Woodrow Wilson in the creation of the League of Nations, opposition within the US Senate prevented the United States from joining the organisation. This deprived the League of Nations of the authority and credibility it needed to intervene effectively in international conflicts. In addition, the League of Nations was handicapped by its inability to prevent military aggression. In the 1930s, several of its members, notably Japan, Italy and Germany, began to pursue aggressive policies of military expansion and colonialism. The League of Nations was largely powerless to stop these actions, which contributed to the erosion of its credibility and authority. Ultimately, the League of Nations proved unable to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939. After the end of the war, it was replaced by the United Nations in 1945, which was designed to address some of the weaknesses of the League of Nations.

The challenges faced by the League of Nations were partly rooted in the conditions that existed prior to its creation. To illustrate, the determination of national boundaries, a problem inherited from the devastation of the First World War, persisted as an irritating thorn in the international landscape for many years. The complexity of this task has sown discord, exacerbated nationalist tensions and, ultimately, strained the diplomatic skills of the Society. At the same time, the notion of national sovereignty gave rise to heated debate within the League of Nations. Members were divided by their differing interpretations of the relationship between their national autonomy and the international organisation to which they belonged. The delicate navigation between the demands of individual sovereignty and collective aspirations for peace was often a source of friction, highlighting the precarious balance that had to be maintained. Finally, one of the main objectives of the League of Nations - to guarantee international security - became a matter of major concern. The inherent difficulty of achieving this goal contributed significantly to its failure as a peacekeeping body. Lacking effective coercive means to enforce its resolutions, the Society has often been powerless in the face of aggressive behaviour by certain states. These issues reflect the complex challenges faced by the League of Nations. Despite its failures, it laid important groundwork for the creation of its successor, the United Nations, which sought to learn from the challenges faced by the League of Nations.

The competing projects

There were three competing plans for the creation of the League of Nations under discussion at the Versailles conference.

The Wilson project

Woodrow Wilson's plan was to establish a universal organisation committed to promoting collaboration and the peaceful resolution of disputes between its members. He envisaged a proactive entity, with explicit guidelines and monitoring mechanisms, to regulate inter-state relations, with the aim of preventing conflict rather than merely resolving it after it has arisen.

One of the cornerstones of Wilson's project was the principle of sovereign equality among member states. This meant that every state, regardless of its size or power, would have equal decision-making weight within the organisation. This notion was intended to serve as a basis for genuine multilateral cooperation, where each State would have an equal voice in discussions and decisions.

It should be noted that these ideas laid the foundations for the guiding principles of the United Nations Organisation, which succeeded the League of Nations after the Second World War. Wilson's project therefore had a lasting influence on the conception of international governance, even if not all its aspirations were realised during the lifetime of the League of Nations.

Lord Robert Cecil's vision

The project proposed by Lord Robert Cecil, while seemingly innovative in its broad outlines, in reality contained a desire to return to the balance of European power that prevailed before the First World War. Cecil's proposal was clearly rooted in a Eurocentric vision of the world. He aspired to a system of global governance in which the great European powers would play a leading role.

The idea behind this concept was to maintain a stable balance on the European continent so that the United Kingdom, whose representative Cecil was, would not have to intervene directly in European affairs. Cecil's proposal was therefore not only a return to the policy of balance of power, but also an attempt to guarantee the United Kingdom's interests on the international stage.

Cecil's proposal was therefore to create a kind of "Directory" made up of the major European powers. This board would have had a leading role in resolving international conflicts, with a particular influence in favour of European interests. This European-centred vision of the world, although shared by some of the other European powers of the time, was in marked contrast to the universalist ideal promoted by other key players such as US President Woodrow Wilson.

Despite its interesting elements, Cecil's project was not fully integrated into the final structure of the League of Nations. However, his influence on the debates surrounding the creation of this international institution was undeniable and continues to shape thinking on global governance to this day.

The vision of Léon Bourgeois

Léon Bourgeois' bold proposal reflected a vision of the world based on unprecedented international cooperation and integration. He envisaged the formation of a true society of nations, complemented by a world government with coercive powers to maintain peace and resolve conflicts. In addition, he proposed the establishment of an international tribunal to arbitrate disputes and an international military force to enforce the tribunal's decisions.

This vision was far more ambitious than that of Woodrow Wilson, who, although he promoted the idea of multilateral cooperation, did not envisage such a high level of global integration. Bourgeois argued that the war stemmed from the absence of an effective regulatory mechanism at international level. He felt that a powerful international organisation capable of active intervention was needed to prevent and resolve conflicts.

Although Bourgeois' proposal was not adopted in its entirety, his ideas greatly influenced the conception and creation of the League of Nations. The latter, established after the First World War, was committed to maintaining international peace and security, although it was not as comprehensively integrated as Bourgeois had envisaged. His vision, however, has continued to inspire debate about how the world order should be organised, a legacy that lives on today.

The League of Nations: a compromise project

The French Prime Minister of the time, Georges Clemenceau, did not support Léon Bourgeois' visionary proposal. Known for his pragmatic stance and focus on national security, Clemenceau favoured solidifying France's position within Europe through strategic alliances with other powers. The idea of a universal organisation, such as that proposed by Bourgeois, seemed to Clemenceau to be less tangible and less immediately beneficial to French interests. This difference of opinion between Clemenceau and Bourgeois was representative of the tensions that existed during the negotiations for the Versailles peace conference. Leaders had to reconcile their immediate national needs with the long-term prospects of world peace and stability. In this context, Bourgeois's ambitious plan, while progressive and innovative, was seen as less pragmatic and directly useful to France's national security than the more traditional alliances preferred by Clemenceau. This is why Bourgeois' plan, despite its visionary nature, was not adopted at the Versailles peace conference in 1919.

To reach a compromise acceptable to all parties, it was necessary to merge the American and British drafts and to incorporate some of the concerns and demands of France and other countries. The product of this compromise was a conception of the League of Nations as an international organisation made up of sovereign states committed to cooperation and collective security. Membership of the League of Nations implied a commitment to the peaceful resolution of disputes and an obligation to support any member state that was the victim of aggression. In extreme circumstances, this commitment could require collective military action. In addition, Member States were also required to respect certain obligations in terms of disarmament, respect for international law and the promotion of human rights. This compromise was finally accepted at the Versailles Conference in 1919, giving birth to the League of Nations. The organisation's mission was to maintain international peace and security, an ambitious goal that reflected the lessons learned from the devastation of the First World War. As for France, some of its specific demands and concerns were taken into account to facilitate its adherence to the compromise. For example, guarantees were established for France's security, notably through alliances and specific commitments on the part of certain major powers to defend France in the event of aggression. This attention to France's national security was an important concession in obtaining France's acceptance of the creation of the League of Nations.

The structure of the League of Nations included a General Assembly where each member state, regardless of its size or influence, had one vote. This configuration symbolised the principle of sovereign equality among nations, an idea dear to Woodrow Wilson. In addition, in response to the concerns of France and other countries, a Permanent Council was created. This Council, whose permanent members included the major powers of the day, was responsible for maintaining international peace and security. France hoped that the Council would have sufficiently broad powers to prevent large-scale international conflicts, such as the catastrophe of the First World War. Despite various difficulties and compromises, the League of Nations was officially established in 1920, in the hope of providing a lasting solution to the threat of international conflict. Its primary mission was to preserve world peace and security, a goal that its members would strive to achieve despite the major challenges that lay ahead.

The structure of the League of Nations was the result of many compromises, reflecting the differences between the various proposals put forward at the Versailles Conference. The idea of collective security, a central concept of Woodrow Wilson's project, was incorporated into the League of Nations Covenant. According to this principle, an attack on one member state was perceived as an attack on the whole community, prompting a collective response. However, the practical implementation of this collective security was hampered by profound disagreements between the Member States. As a result, the League of Nations had neither an armed force at its disposal nor sufficient legal power to compel states to abide by its decisions. These limitations ultimately undermined the organisation's effectiveness in achieving its main objective: maintaining international peace and security. Thus, despite its well-established institutional framework, the League of Nations lacked tangible means of effectively enforcing global peace and security. The inevitable consequence of these weaknesses was its inability to prevent the rise in tensions and hostilities that led to the Second World War. This inability ultimately led to its dissolution and replacement by the United Nations, which sought to learn from these shortcomings.

The creation of the League of Nations at the end of the First World War was the result of a complex compromise between the victorious Allied Powers. The ambitious proposals of Léon Bourgeois, who advocated international justice and an international armed force to keep the peace, were considered but ultimately not adopted. Anglo-Saxon visions prevailed, putting forward a League of Nations based on dialogue and cooperation between member states, rather than on a coercive and punitive logic. This approach aimed to encourage the peaceful resolution of disputes and promote a culture of international collaboration. Despite its limitations and the difficulties encountered in preventing the outbreak of the Second World War, the League of Nations left a significant legacy. It laid the foundations of modern international law and helped to develop a global awareness of the need for international regulation to manage relations between states. This principle has become a fundamental element of the architecture of the post-Second World War international system, embodied by the United Nations Organisation.

Differences in conception

La Société des Nations is the French expression used to refer to the League of Nations, the official name of the international organisation established in 1920 at the conclusion of the First World War. Interestingly, these variations in terminology may reveal some divergent perspectives between the English and French-speaking communities on the role and approach of the League of Nations. Representing a large proportion of French-speaking voices, figures such as Georges Clémenceau argued for an institution with a solid structure and a degree of authority. The idea was to set up a body that could effectively prevent international conflicts and stimulate cooperation between member nations. On the other hand, the English-speaking countries, attached to the autonomy of their states, adopted a more cautious approach. They sought to maintain national sovereignty and avoid any unwanted intrusion into their internal affairs. As a result, they favoured an organisation that would emphasise coordination and mediation, rather than authoritarian decision-making or regulatory mechanisms.

The fundamental differences in perception between the French and English-speaking communities were certainly a significant obstacle to the effectiveness of the League of Nations. The Anglo-Saxon perspective tended to favour the notion of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. This approach was reflected in their vision of the League of Nations, where the organisation was primarily intended to play a coordinating and mediating role rather than a regulatory authority. In contrast, the Francophone vision envisaged the League of Nations as a more structured international institution with real power to regulate and supervise international relations. This perspective, however, was often in tension with respect for national sovereignty, which was sacrosanct for many members of the League. These differences helped to paralyse the organisation in the face of several major crises, particularly during the 1930s. The rise of Nazism in Germany and the civil war in Spain are two striking examples of where the League of Nations proved powerless. These failures, partly due to differing visions of the organisation's role, ultimately contributed to its decline and dissolution after the Second World War.

The absence of the United States, the main proponent of international government, was undoubtedly a severe blow to the League of Nations from its inception. The absence of this great economic and military power limited the resources available to the League of Nations, thereby reducing its ability to achieve its objectives. The absence of the United States not only undermined the legitimacy of the League of Nations, but also contributed to its gradual decline. As the prime mover behind the idea of such an organisation, the United States could have played a crucial role in promoting the aims and ideals of the League. The absence of US support has left a significant gap. The American refusal to ratify the Treaty of Versailles and to participate in the League of Nations reinforced isolationism in their own foreign policy while undermining the organisation's credibility internationally. This defection also created a more permissive environment for expansionist regimes, such as Nazi Germany, paving the way for the rise of fascism in Europe and ultimately the Second World War. It is clear, then, that the absence of the United States had profound and lasting consequences for the effectiveness and fate of the League of Nations. The history of this organisation illustrates the extent to which international cooperation is essential to the promotion and maintenance of global peace and security.

The origins of the League of Nations date back to well before the First World War, and can be found in various initiatives to promote peace and international cooperation. Leading figures such as the Frenchman Léon Bourgeois played a crucial role in formulating these ideas. However, the League of Nations as established after the war in Versailles was the result of a compromise between the great powers. The divergence of visions and interests had a profound impact on its operation and effectiveness. Universalism is a key concept in many international organisations, including the League of Nations and its successor, the United Nations. However, the interpretation of universalism varies considerably from one country and culture to another. For some, universalism means promoting human rights and democracy. For others, it means defending national sovereignty and non-interference in a country's internal affairs. These differences of interpretation can lead to disagreements and deadlock within international organisations. This is a key issue in the management of international relations and a constant challenge for multilateral organisations seeking to foster cooperation while respecting national and cultural differences.

Functioning and organisation of the League of Nations

The operating principles of the League of Nations

The League of Nations, with its bold conception, marked a breakthrough in the conduct of international relations, embodying the first major initiative to build an organised and structured international order. Its principal mission was to resolve international conflicts peacefully and prevent the escalation of tensions leading to war. This political innovation was radical for its time, symbolising a significant turning point in the way the international community managed its affairs. Although the League of Nations failed to fully achieve its objectives, it nevertheless laid a solid foundation for the future development of international organisations. Despite its failures, the lessons drawn from its experience were fundamental to the creation of the United Nations Organisation (UNO) in 1945. In this way, the League of Nations played a crucial pioneering role, establishing a structure and a philosophy that have continued to influence the management of international relations through the UN, despite the disappointments and failures encountered.

The League of Nations made a major contribution to the emergence and acceptance of multilateral diplomacy and international cooperation as fundamental tools for managing relations between nations. Although the organisation itself did not survive, its principles have shaped the architecture of today's world order. By promoting dialogue and the peaceful resolution of conflicts, the League of Nations laid the foundations for multilateralism, which has since been at the heart of most diplomatic interactions. Through multilateral diplomacy, states are encouraged to coordinate their actions, discuss common problems and find collective solutions. Similarly, the concept of international cooperation, which was central to the League of Nations, has continued to develop and expand. Today, this cooperation is no longer confined to the prevention of armed conflict, but extends to a multitude of other areas, such as economic development, environmental protection, human rights and public health. Despite its failures and dissolution, the League of Nations has left a lasting legacy. Its principles and practices paved the way for today's international order, characterised by ubiquitous multilateral diplomacy and increasingly wide-ranging and complex international cooperation.

The League of Nations was a milestone in the evolution of international law and global governance. It introduced the concept of supranationality, which implies an authority superior to that of individual sovereign states. In so doing, it overturned the traditional world order, which was based primarily on bilateral relations and balances of power. The League of Nations established a framework for the peaceful resolution of conflicts, promoting dialogue and negotiation rather than force or coercion. It also created a system of collective decision-making, although its ability to implement these decisions was hampered by respect for national sovereignty and the absence of effective binding mechanisms. That said, despite its shortcomings and failures, the League of Nations played an essential role in laying the foundations for a cooperative international order. Nevertheless, the failure of the League to prevent the Second World War underlined the need for a more robust and effective organisation to maintain international peace and security. Consequently, after the Second World War, the United Nations was created to fulfil the role envisaged for the League of Nations, but with stronger institutional structures, more universal representation and more powerful mechanisms for action. The creation of the UN was therefore a direct realisation of the experience gained with the League of Nations and its contribution to the development of international law and global institutions.

Organisation chart of the League of Nations

The League of Nations (League) introduced a complex and permanent bureaucratic structure, marking a major step in the evolution of international cooperation. The establishment of a permanent secretariat, specialised technical commissions and a general assembly represented a significant innovation for the time.

The secretariat was responsible for the day-to-day administration of the organisation, ensuring the smooth and efficient running of the Society. The technical committees were responsible for specific areas such as disarmament, refugee management and economic affairs. These committees played a crucial role in providing technical expertise for the decisions taken by the Society. The General Assembly, which brought together all the members, served as a forum for dialogue and decision-making on major international issues. However, this bureaucratic structure was also a source of criticism. Despite its advantages in terms of managing international affairs, the SDN's bureaucracy was criticised for its lack of transparency. In addition, the predominance of the major powers of the day often influenced the way the organisation operated and made decisions, calling into question the fairness of the system and limiting its effectiveness.

That said, the institutional structure put in place by the League of Nations laid the foundations for modern international organisations, such as the United Nations, which have learned from these challenges and sought to overcome them through more balanced representation and more transparent and inclusive decision-making processes.

The League of Nations had a specific organisational structure comprising several bodies. This structure was designed to provide overall governance of international peace and security, and to foster international cooperation in specific areas. The architecture of the League of Nations was carefully designed to foster international peace and security while promoting cooperation in various fields. The Council and the General Assembly were the main decision-making bodies, dealing respectively with urgent matters and more general issues. Their decisions were then implemented by the Secretariat, which constituted the organisation's administrative structure. In addition, the League of Nations housed a series of Technical and Advisory Commissions to deal with specific issues, such as disarmament, public health, or social and economic welfare. These commissions enabled the League of Nations to tackle a wider range of international issues than just peace and security. The system was designed to work holistically, with constant interaction between the different bodies and commissions. The idea was that peaceful conflict resolution and international cooperation were interdependent and needed to be approached in a comprehensive way to maintain lasting peace. Unfortunately, due to a variety of factors, including geopolitical tensions and the rise of nationalism, the League of Nations was unable to fully realise this objective.

Assembly of States

The Assembly of States of the League of Nations operated on the principle of "one State, one vote", reflecting the organisation's commitment to the principle of sovereign equality. This meant that each member state, regardless of its size, economic power or political influence, had an equal voice in the decisions of the Assembly. This principle helped to ensure that all Member States were fairly represented. It respected the fundamental principle of sovereign equality, a central concept in international law which states that all states are equal and have the same sovereignty.

The principle of "one state, one vote" at the League of Nations Assembly introduced an element of democracy into international debates, giving small states a unique opportunity to be heard on the world stage. However, this approach has also attracted criticism. On the one hand, some observers argued that the system favoured small states at the expense of major powers, since a small state had as many votes as a major power. This could create tensions, especially when the interests of small and large states came into conflict. On the other hand, the diversity and large number of members of the Assembly could make collective decision-making difficult and slow. With so many different voices to listen to and reconcile, reaching a consensus or unanimous decision was often a challenge. Despite these limitations, the principle of "one state, one vote" helped to democratise international relations and to include a variety of different perspectives in discussions and decisions. Although the major powers retained significant influence, smaller states had a real opportunity to make their voices heard and contribute to international debate.

The United Nations (UN) has adopted the principle of "one state, one vote" in its General Assembly. This Assembly brings together all the Member States of the UN, and each Member State has one seat, one vote. This means that each State, regardless of its size, population or economic or military influence, has the same weight in the decisions taken by the General Assembly. This is a key element in the way the UN works, and reflects the organisation's commitment to the principle of the sovereign equality of States. However, the UN Security Council, which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security, operates differently. It has five permanent members (the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom) who have the right to veto any decision, and ten non-permanent members elected for a two-year term. So, although the UN has adopted the principle of "one State, one vote" for the General Assembly, it also recognises the special role of the major powers in maintaining international peace and security.

One of the major differences between the League of Nations (League) and the United Nations (UN) is their ability to enforce their decisions. Although the League of Nations had some means of exerting pressure, such as economic sanctions or the exclusion of a member country, it did not have the power to impose its decisions coercively on its members, which limited its effectiveness in preventing conflicts. In contrast, the UN, through its Security Council, has greater coercive power. The Security Council can take decisions that are binding on all member states, and has the power to authorise the use of military force to maintain or restore international peace and security. This has been used on several occasions since the creation of the UN, for example during the Korean War in 1950 or more recently in Libya in 2011. However, the Security Council's use of these powers is limited by the right of veto of the five permanent members (United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom). This means that if one of these countries opposes a resolution, it cannot be adopted, regardless of the opinion of the other members. This has been a source of controversy and criticism, with some arguing that it gives disproportionate power to the major powers and can paralyse the Security Council.

Permanent Council

The Permanent Council was the forerunner of the UN Security Council. It was made up of five permanent members (France, the United Kingdom, the German Empire, the Japanese Empire and the Russian Empire) and four non-permanent members elected for three-year terms. The task of the permanent Council was to maintain international peace and security, but it did not have the power to take coercive measures to achieve this. This is why the UN Security Council, created in 1945, was given enhanced powers to act in the event of a threat to the peace, a breach of the peace or an act of aggression. The UN Security Council, on the other hand, has the power to take decisions that are legally binding on all UN member states, and can authorise the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security. It is therefore a body with much greater powers than those of the Permanent Council of the League of Nations.

The Permanent Council of the League of Nations was replaced by the Council of the League of Nations in 1922. The latter consisted of four permanent members (Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan) and nine non-permanent members elected for three-year terms. The Council of the League of Nations was an important body within the organisation, playing a crucial role in the management of international affairs. The Council was made up of permanent and non-permanent members, all of whom were responsible for monitoring and preventing international conflicts, making recommendations for international peace and security, resolving international disputes and coordinating the actions of member states.

The Council of the League of Nations had greater powers than the General Assembly, as it had the power to make binding decisions and take coercive measures against states that did not comply with the Council's decisions. The Council's effectiveness was often limited by the principle of unanimity, which required all decisions to be approved by all its members. This meant that each member had a right of veto, allowing a single state to block any decision. In addition, many Member States were reluctant to use force to enforce the Council's decisions, further limiting its effectiveness.

The unanimity requirement can often lead to a status quo, especially when issues are controversial. If one country, for various reasons, opposes a decision that has the support of the majority of the other members, the organisation can find itself at an impasse. This can be very frustrating and can lead to inaction by the organisation on important issues. This is why the UN has introduced a system of qualified majority voting for certain important decisions, notably within the Security Council. Within the United Nations (UN), the Security Council is one of the six principal organs and has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It has 15 members, five of whom are permanent: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China. These five countries have the right of veto, which means that they can block any Security Council resolution, even if all the other members vote in favour. The presence of the veto has been the subject of debate and controversy since the creation of the UN. On the one hand, the right of veto can enable a major power to block action that it considers contrary to its interests. On the other hand, it was designed to ensure that the major powers would actively participate in the UN and respect its decisions, given that the failure of the League of Nations was partly due to a lack of commitment on the part of the major powers.

During the inter-war period, the member states of the League of Nations often preferred to act through bilateral diplomacy or regional consultations, rather than working through the organisation. There were several reasons for this. Firstly, the League of Nations was often perceived as ineffective, particularly because of its inability to prevent or resolve major conflicts, such as Japan's invasion of Manchuria in 1931 or Italy's aggression against Ethiopia in 1935. Secondly, national interests have often taken precedence over international commitments. Member States, particularly the major powers, have often preferred to act outside the League of Nations when they felt it was in their best interests to do so. Thirdly, the emergence of aggressive authoritarian regimes in the 1930s challenged the international order and undermined confidence in the League of Nations. These regimes, such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, did not respect the rules and principles of the League of Nations and often acted outside it. Finally, there was also a general reluctance to cede national sovereignty to an international organisation. Although League of Nations member states had accepted the idea of collective security in principle, they were often reluctant to take coercive action against other states, not least because of the costs and risks associated with the use of military force. These factors contributed to weakening the League of Nations and reducing its effectiveness as an international organisation. The experience of the League of Nations influenced the design of the United Nations, which was created after the Second World War with the aim of avoiding the mistakes of its predecessor.

The absence of certain major powers was a key factor in the ineffectiveness of the League of Nations. Some of the major global players of the time were not members or were members only briefly. For example, the United States never ratified the Treaty of Versailles, so it never became a member. The Soviet Union was admitted only in 1934, and Germany was a member from 1926 to 1933. The absence of these great powers considerably weakened the Society's authority. Another problem was that nations often put their own national interests ahead of their obligations to the League of Nations. Not only did this undermine the strength of the organisation, it also undermined the concept of collective security that was at the heart of the League's mission. The League of Nations also suffered from a lack of enforcement power. It had no armed forces of its own and depended on member states to enforce its resolutions. Moreover, it had no legal power to compel nations to comply with its decisions. Finally, the requirement of unanimity for important decisions often hampered the Society's ability to act decisively and quickly. These limitations ultimately contributed to the failure of the League of Nations to prevent the Second World War, leading to the creation of the United Nations in 1945. The UN has sought to resolve some of these problems, for example by creating a Security Council with peacekeeping powers and adopting the two-thirds majority principle for certain decisions. Nevertheless, challenges remain, notably the right of veto of the permanent members of the Security Council.

Incomplete membership and the behaviour of the major powers were two of the main problems of the League of Nations. Firstly, the fact that some of the world's major powers chose not to participate or left the League of Nations considerably weakened the organisation. The United States, for example, never joined the League, despite the fact that the original idea came from US President Woodrow Wilson. This deprived the League of a potentially powerful member that could have helped enforce its decisions. Secondly, the unilateral actions of the Great Powers outside the League of Nations often undermined the effectiveness of the organisation. The great powers, in pursuing their own national interests, have often acted in contradiction to the principles of the League, undermining its legitimacy and credibility. Ultimately, these and other problems led to the failure of the League of Nations to prevent another world war, a tragic reality that eventually led to the dissolution of the organisation and the creation of the United Nations.

Secretary

The Secretariat was responsible for preparing and implementing the decisions taken by the Assembly and the Council. It was also responsible for various administrative tasks, such as maintaining the archives, organising conferences and publishing documents and reports. The Secretary General, as head of the Secretariat, had a central role in coordinating the work of the organisation. He was responsible for managing the Secretariat's staff, overseeing the work of the Society's various commissions and committees, and representing the Society in its relations with Member States and other international organisations. The Secretary General could also play an important role in mediating international disputes and promoting the League of Nations' objective of maintaining international peace and security. He had the power to bring to the attention of the Council any matter that might threaten international peace.

The first Secretary General of the League of Nations was Sir Eric Drummond, a British diplomat. Drummond served from 1919 to 1933 and played a crucial role in establishing the organisation's procedures and practices. Léon Bourgeois played a key role in the creation of the League of Nations. He was Chairman of the League of Nations Commission at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, where the League of Nations Pact was drawn up. As such, he is often credited with being the "father" of the League of Nations. The Secretariat, under the leadership of the Secretary General, was made up of a diverse group of international civil servants from many member countries. These officials worked together to ensure the smooth running of the organisation and to provide the administrative and technical support necessary to achieve its objectives. The work of the Secretariat covered a wide range of areas, including the preparation of reports on international issues, the organisation of conferences and meetings, and the co-ordination of the work of the various League of Nations Commissions and Committees.

The Secretariat was a major innovation in the administrative structure of international organisations. Its main role was to provide administrative and bureaucratic support to the various structures of the League of Nations. The Secretary General, at the head of the Secretariat, played a crucial role in overseeing all operations and coordinating the actions of the various departments. The presence of a permanent international staff also provided continuity in the work of the League of Nations, ensuring that initiatives and programmes continued even when the political representatives of the Member States changed. This has fostered a more coherent and sustainable approach to international issues. In addition, having an international staff helped to promote a sense that the League of Nations was a truly global organisation, not an extension of the influence of a small number of major powers. The staff worked together in the common cause of peace and international cooperation, reinforcing the ideal of a united and collaborative international community.

The Secretariat of the League of Nations was an essential body that facilitated international cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Its multinational composition fostered a sense of inclusiveness and balanced representation of all regions of the world. The cultural diversity and international representativeness of the Secretariat's staff were key elements in fostering mutual understanding and cooperation between nations. In this way, it enabled the League of Nations to function as a truly international organisation, preventing it from being dominated by a small handful of major powers. The Secretariat has also played an important role in the implementation of numerous projects and initiatives. In the field of public health, for example, the League of Nations has played a key role in the fight against epidemics and diseases, thanks in large part to the work of its Secretariat. Similarly, in the fields of science, technology, education and economic development, the Secretariat has helped to coordinate international efforts and share best practice. For example, the Secretariat contributed to the creation of the International Union for Scientific and Technological Cooperation, which was one of the first international bodies to promote cooperation in research and development. Overall, the Secretariat has been a major player in the League of Nations, helping to achieve its goals of international cooperation and world peace.

The outline of a global system

An attempt to find a global solution to international problems

The League of Nations represented an unprecedented attempt at a global solution to international problems. By bringing together the nations of the world under a single umbrella, its aim was to manage international challenges in a systematic and coordinated way. This global approach was evident in the League of Nations' vast areas of competence. Its role was not limited to resolving conflicts or promoting collective security. It also extended to protecting human rights, improving public health, regulating labour, helping refugees, combating drug trafficking and preventing international crime. The underlying idea was that all these problems were interconnected and that solving one of them could help solve the others. For example, promoting human rights could help prevent conflict, while improving public health could contribute to social and economic stability. This represented a holistic approach to global governance that went far beyond traditional diplomatic efforts.

The League of Nations had been founded with noble intentions. Its main objective was to maintain international peace and prevent another catastrophe such as the First World War. Its mandate was to implement the peace treaties signed at the end of the war, in particular the Treaty of Versailles, which defined the terms of peace with Germany. Within this framework, the League of Nations sought to resolve conflicts between its member states through negotiation and mediation, instead of war. At the same time, it encouraged international cooperation and worked for disarmament, with the aim of reducing international tensions and promoting peace. However, the implementation of this global approach came up against serious political and legal obstacles. The major powers of the time often put their own national interests ahead of those of the international community, which hampered the efforts of the League of Nations. Moreover, the lack of effective coercive means to enforce its decisions hampered its ability to maintain peace and enforce peace treaties. Despite these challenges, the experience of the League of Nations has provided valuable lessons for future international organisations, highlighting the importance of international cooperation and the peaceful resolution of conflict, while also highlighting the challenges inherent in implementing these ideals.

The aim of the League of Nations was to promote international cooperation in many areas, a first for an international organisation on this scale. This ambitious programme was reflected in the various missions it set itself. The League of Nations aimed to resolve international conflicts peacefully, by bringing them to the attention of the international community and seeking peaceful means of resolving them, instead of resorting to war. The League of Nations also worked to reduce armaments, considering that the arms race was a major cause of international conflict. It sought to promote disarmament through international agreements and diplomacy. The protection of minorities was also a major concern for the League of Nations, as ethnic tensions and minority conflicts were common at the time. The League of Nations sought to protect the rights of minorities and prevent abuses against them. In addition, the League of Nations sought to promote human rights, both by working for the establishment of international human rights standards and by trying to ensure that these standards were respected by its member states. Disease prevention was also a major concern, particularly in the post-war context where health conditions were often precarious. The Organisation had set up a number of programmes and initiatives to combat disease and promote public health. Finally, the League of Nations sought to foster economic cooperation between nations, with the aim of promoting economic stability and avoiding economic crises that could lead to conflict.

The technical sections

The technical sections of the League of Nations represented a new and pioneering approach to international governance. These sections tackled a multitude of global problems and were organised around specific areas of expertise. Their role was to analyse, research and make recommendations on issues ranging from public health to disarmament and the protection of minorities.

The Health Section, for example, played a crucial role in combating disease and promoting public health worldwide. It has helped coordinate international efforts to control epidemics and promote cooperation between nations on health issues. The Disarmament Section dealt with all matters relating to arms reduction and the prevention of war. It worked to promote disarmament through international agreements and to set up arms control mechanisms. The Mandates Section was responsible for overseeing the management of League of Nations mandated territories, which were mainly former German and Ottoman colonies after the First World War. It ensured that the mandating nations fulfilled their obligations to the populations of the mandated territories. The Minorities Section was responsible for protecting the rights of ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities in League of Nations member states. It worked to promote equality and non-discrimination and to resolve problems relating to minorities. Finally, the Economic and Financial Section dealt with international economic and financial issues, including the regulation of international trade, financial stability and economic cooperation. It also played an important role in managing economic and financial crises.

The technical sections of the League of Nations were an essential part of its organisation and operation. These sections, made up of international experts in various fields, were tasked with solving the technical and practical problems associated with their respective areas, such as public health, education, security and disarmament, among others. Each technical section operated as a forum where experts could share ideas, research and best practices. They were responsible for advising the other organs of the League of Nations, in particular the Council and the Assembly, on technical and practical matters falling within their remit. These sections contributed to the development of international standards, the establishment of cooperation between countries, the exchange of information, the development of policies and the implementation of specific initiatives. For example, the Health Section has played a key role in the fight against contagious diseases, while the Labour Section has contributed to the improvement of working conditions and the promotion of workers' rights around the world. However, the success of the technical sections has been limited by a number of factors. Firstly, the lack of political will on the part of Member States has sometimes hampered their work. Some countries were reluctant to cooperate fully or to implement the technical sections' recommendations, for fear of interference in their internal affairs or for reasons of national interest. In addition, financial and human resources were often limited, restricting the Technical Sections' ability to carry out their tasks. Finally, the League of Nations' lack of executive power meant that the Technical Sections could not force Member States to comply with their recommendations.

The pragmatic and technical approach adopted by the League of Nations has had a profound influence on international architecture. It laid the foundations for many international organisations that are still in place today. The creation of the Hygiene Organisation, for example, prefigured that of the World Health Organisation (WHO), founded in 1948. The WHO inherited the Hygiene Organisation's mission to promote public health, prevent disease and improve health care throughout the world. It has expanded and strengthened this mandate to become the world's largest and most influential international health organisation. Similarly, the Economic and Financial Organisation of the League of Nations laid the foundations for the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), founded in 1964. UNCTAD drew on the approach of the Economic and Financial Organisation to promote economic development, particularly in developing countries. It expanded this mandate to include the promotion of fair trade, technical assistance to developing countries and the promotion of the integration of developing countries into the world economy. These examples show how the League of Nations foreshadowed the emergence of a more integrated and cooperative international system after the Second World War. It laid the foundations for the creation of the United Nations in 1945, which adopted a more global and inclusive approach to international governance. The United Nations developed and consolidated the system put in place by the League of Nations, creating a large number of specialised organisations to deal with specific issues ranging from education and culture (UNESCO) to food and agriculture (FAO), labour (ILO) and many others.

The International Labour Organisation and the Permanent Court of International Justice

There are also two organisations that are not strictly speaking part of the League of Nations: the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the Permanent Court of International Justice.

The International Labour Organisation was created in 1919, alongside the League of Nations, with the aim of improving working conditions and promoting social justice throughout the world. It was the first international organisation to adopt a tripartite approach, involving governments, employers and workers in its decision-making. The ILO has contributed to the development of international labour standards and the promotion of workers' rights, safety at work and social protection. Today, the ILO is a specialised agency of the United Nations and continues to play a leading role in promoting decent working conditions throughout the world.

For its part, the Permanent Court of International Justice was created in 1920 with the aim of settling disputes between states peacefully. It was based in The Hague, Netherlands, and was the first international institution responsible for settling legal disputes between states. Although the Court was not formally attached to the League of Nations, it worked closely with it. After the dissolution of the League of Nations, the Permanent Court of International Justice was replaced by the International Court of Justice, which is now the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.

The pioneering role of the League of Nations

The global system of the League of Nations, with its broad scope and multiple competencies, represented an ambitious step forward in international governance. The aim was to create an organisation that could respond to a multitude of global problems and facilitate effective international cooperation. The League of Nations had a broad and complex mission. It was to serve as a forum for resolving international conflicts and promoting international peace and security. It also aimed to promote cooperation between nations, combat disease, fight poverty and unemployment, and uphold international treaties and human rights. As an organisation, its ambition was to become a universal institution capable of managing all international problems. The aim was to create a platform for the effective and collaborative resolution of global problems, to improve people's living conditions and to promote international peace and security. In theory, the League of Nations had the capacity to manage a range of international problems, from conflicts between states to public health issues. In practice, however, it proved more difficult. Despite its ambitious mission, the League of Nations struggled to achieve all of its objectives due to a variety of challenges and obstacles, including the resistance of some major powers to submit to its authority.

The League of Nations recognised early on the importance of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in international affairs. Understanding that governments alone could not solve all international problems, the League integrated NGOs into its operations and encouraged their active participation in its various bodies. In 1921, the League of Nations set up a consultative committee specifically for international non-governmental organisations. This was the first formal recognition of the significant role that these bodies could play at international level. This committee made it possible to incorporate varied and independent perspectives into the debates and decisions of the League. The Advisory Committee was replaced in 1946 by the Liaison Committee with International Non-Governmental Organisations. This committee was even more involved in the activities of the League of Nations, showing an evolution in the way international organisations began to value and integrate the work of NGOs. NGOs participated in the League of Nations' efforts in many areas, including the protection of minorities, disarmament and international economic cooperation. Their contribution has been invaluable in bringing different perspectives, working in the field and helping to implement the decisions of the League of Nations. This collaboration also helped to set a precedent for NGO involvement in international affairs, a principle that is now widely accepted and practised.

The League of Nations paved the way for greater inclusion of civil society in global governance. It has recognised the importance of the contributions of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and has allowed them to have a voice and participate in its work. This has included a variety of organisations, such as professional associations, trade unions, humanitarian organisations and human rights groups. This pioneering role of the League of Nations in including civil society marked an important step in the way international organisations perceive and engage non-state actors. It paved the way for closer cooperation between governments and civil society in solving global problems. The United Nations, which succeeded the League of Nations after the Second World War, continued and strengthened this trend. It created formal mechanisms for NGOs to participate in its work. These mechanisms include the accreditation of NGOs to the UN, which allows them to participate in many meetings and conferences, and the creation of consultative forums, which give NGOs the opportunity to make a significant contribution to the development of UN policies. The experience of the League of Nations laid the foundations for a growing and diversified involvement of civil society in global governance processes.

The League of Nations was a first attempt to establish an international system of governance designed to prevent conflict and encourage cooperation between nations. However, it faced several major challenges that hampered its effectiveness. These included

• The non-participation of certain major powers: The United States, for example, never joined the League of Nations, despite the fact that the idea for its creation came from American President Woodrow Wilson. What's more, other major powers such as Germany and the Soviet Union only joined the League belatedly and eventually withdrew from the organisation. The absence of these countries seriously limited the Society's ability to maintain world peace.
• The principle of unanimity: The League of Nations operated according to the principle of unanimity, which meant that all decisions had to be taken by consensus. This principle often made it difficult to reach decisions, especially on controversial issues.
• Lack of means of enforcement: The League of Nations had no military force of its own and depended on member states to enforce its resolutions. This limited its ability to prevent conflict and enforce its decisions.

Despite these challenges, the League of Nations was an important precursor and paved the way for the creation of the United Nations in 1945. The United Nations adopted many of the principles and structures of the League of Nations, but also made significant improvements, particularly in terms of decision-making and the implementation of resolutions.

The political commitment of the League of Nations

The League of Nations (League) was in fact an organisation based on the principle of consultation and consensus, not coercion. This meant that its effectiveness depended largely on the willingness of member states to join and abide by its decisions. The League had no armed forces of its own, nor did it have the power to impose economic sanctions. It therefore depended on the willingness of its members to implement its resolutions. This meant that when the major powers chose to ignore the League's decisions, there was little the League could do to force them to comply. Moreover, the need for unanimity for important decisions meant that a single nation could block the Society's action. This made the League largely powerless in the face of aggression from powerful countries, as was the case when Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935. Despite these limitations, the Society nevertheless managed to achieve a number of things, notably in the fields of public health, economic cooperation and the protection of minorities. These achievements laid the foundations for some of the structures and processes that are at the heart of the United Nations system today.

Implementation of peace treaties

The League of Nations (League) was designed to play a central role in the implementation of the post-First World War peace treaties, in particular the Treaty of Versailles. The idea was to establish an international organisation that would be able to resolve international disputes peacefully and, it was hoped, prevent another world war. Article 10 of the SDN Covenant, for example, stipulated that each member state must respect and preserve against aggression the political independence and territorial integrity of all other member states. This was an expression of what is now known as the "principle of collective security", the idea that peace can be preserved by joint action against aggression. In the event of a dispute between member states, the League was supposed to step in and provide mechanisms for the peaceful resolution of disputes, such as arbitration and mediation. If a state refused to comply with an arbitration decision or attacked another member state, the League could impose sanctions, including economic sanctions. However, as mentioned earlier, the effectiveness of these sanctions depended entirely on the willingness of member states to implement them, and the League did not have the means to impose them coercively.

The failures of the League of Nations (League) are well documented and exposed the limits of its ability to maintain international peace and security. The Manchurian crisis (1931-1933) is a striking example of the limitations of the League of Nations. This crisis erupted when Japan invaded Manchuria, a Chinese region. Faced with this act of aggression, the League of Nations adopted a position of condemnation, calling on Japan to withdraw. However, far from complying with this demand, Japan chose to leave the League of Nations in 1933, leaving the organisation powerless. Italy's invasion of Ethiopia between 1935 and 1936 also highlighted the shortcomings of the League of Nations. Despite desperate pleas for help from the Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie, the League of Nations was unable to prevent or stop the Italian invasion. The organisation did attempt to impose economic sanctions on Italy, but these proved largely ineffective, as they did not include oil, a crucial commodity, and many member states chose not to apply them. Finally, the Munich Agreement of 1938 was another significant failure of the League of Nations. As part of these agreements, France and the UK agreed to allow Nazi Germany to annex the Sudetenland, a region of Czechoslovakia, in an attempt at conciliation. This action, which bypassed the League of Nations, clearly demonstrated the impotence of the organisation and the failure of its collective security policy. Each of these incidents contributed to undermining the credibility of the League of Nations, demonstrating the limits of an international organisation whose effectiveness depends entirely on the political will of its members. These lessons were taken into account when the United Nations was created after the Second World War.

The Saarland administration

Following the First World War and as a result of the stipulations of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, the Saar region was placed under the control of the League of Nations. This arrangement was made primarily to manage the region's coal production and heavy industry, which were vital to the European economy at the time. France, as the Mandatory Power, was responsible for the administration of the region. It obtained the right to exploit Saarland's coal mines to compensate for the massive destruction of its industrial and mining infrastructure during the war. The region was strategic and rich in resources, and France had suffered greatly from the German occupation during the war. This arrangement was to last for fifteen years, at the end of which a plebiscite was to be held to determine Saarland's future.

During the fifteen years of the League of Nations' mandate over the Saar, its role was to arbitrate and supervise the administration of the region. Its mandate included protecting the human rights of the Saar's inhabitants, supervising the economic exploitation of the region by France, and preventing any escalation of tensions between France and Germany. In 1935, a referendum was held under the aegis of the League of Nations to decide the future of the Saar. With an overwhelming majority, the inhabitants voted in favour of reintegration into Germany. Following this decision, the League of Nations ceased its supervision of Saarland, marking the end of this special mandate. The situation in the Saarland is an example of the League of Nations' efforts to maintain international peace and stability between the wars. Despite its limitations and failures in other situations, it succeeded in maintaining peace in the Saarland for fifteen years and overseeing a peaceful and democratic referendum process.

The League of Nations' efforts to administer the Saarland were not without their challenges. One of the major problems was the dissatisfaction of the local population, who aspired to return to Germany and felt deprived of their fundamental rights. This resentment sometimes led to tensions and demonstrations, testing the League of Nations' ability to maintain order and protect human rights. In addition, the complex economic situation in Saarland exacerbated tensions between France and Germany. France, as the Mandatory Power, had significant economic interests in the region, particularly related to the coal industry. France sought to protect these interests by imposing various restrictions, which led to tensions with Germany, which saw these measures as a hindrance to its economic recovery. Despite these challenges, the League of Nations administration of the Saarland managed to maintain relative peace in the region for a period of fifteen years. It succeeded in managing tensions and preventing an armed conflict between France and Germany, demonstrating the effectiveness of the multilateral approach to managing international conflicts.

Situation of the Danzig corridor

The Free State of Danzig represents one of the most contested territorial decisions of the Treaty of Versailles. Situated on the Baltic Sea, the city of Danzig (today Gdańsk, in Poland) was populated mainly by Germans, but the newly independent Poland claimed it to guarantee its access to the sea. So the Treaty of Versailles decided in favour of a complex compromise: the creation of the Free State of Danzig, an independent semi-state under the protection of the League of Nations. At the same time, Poland obtained administration of the port, which was crucial to its trade and maritime defence. This solution created persistent tensions between Germany and Poland in the years that followed. Germany aspired to regain control of the city, while Poland fought to maintain its access to the sea. These conflicts culminated in Nazi Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939, which marked the start of the Second World War.

The situation around the Free City of Danzig (Gdańsk in Polish) is considered one of the triggers of the Second World War. Despite its predominantly German population, Danzig was established as a semi-independent city under the protection of the League of Nations in 1919, following the Treaty of Versailles. Poland, which had been granted the use of the town's port, nevertheless aspired to make Danzig part of its territory. These claims led to tensions with Germany, which also wanted the city back because of its strategic importance and its German majority. In 1939, these tensions came to a head when Nazi Germany decided to annex Danzig, in violation of existing international agreements. This event was one of the triggers of the Second World War.

The status of the city of Danzig (now Gdańsk) and the Danzig corridor were among the main causes of tension between Poland and Germany after the First World War. Established as a Free City under the protection of the League of Nations in 1920, Danzig was neither German nor Polish, although Poland had access to the sea via the city's port. This status was particularly unstable and contributed greatly to the political tensions of the time. A free zone was set up in Danzig to guarantee Poland free access to the sea. Administered jointly by Poland and the League of Nations, the zone was managed by a governing council made up of representatives from both sides. At the same time, the Danzig Corridor - a strip of territory running through East Prussia to link Poland to the Baltic Sea - was also a source of conflict. Although these arrangements were intended to resolve post-war territorial problems, they failed to ease tensions between Germany and Poland. In fact, they were one of the main causes of the escalating tensions that led to the Second World War. Germany, in particular, perceived these provisions as unfair and sought to reintegrate Danzig and the Danzig corridor into its territory. These claims eventually led to Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939, marking the start of the Second World War.

Settling border disputes

The League of Nations has played a role in settling certain border disputes in Europe. It has implemented several procedures to resolve these disputes, including mediation, conciliation and arbitration. Notable examples include the border dispute between Hungary and Czechoslovakia in 1938, the dispute between Germany and Poland in 1920 and the dispute between Germany and Czechoslovakia in 1923. These examples demonstrate how the League of Nations attempted to resolve international disputes peacefully through formal procedures. However, the reality of international political power at the time often meant that the great powers bypassed the League of Nations and imposed their own solutions to these disputes. A striking example is Germany's annexation of Austria in 1938, an action that clearly violated the principle of national sovereignty and the rules of international law, but against which the League of Nations was powerless to act effectively. Ultimately, these situations highlighted the limits of the League of Nations' authority and effectiveness in resolving international conflicts.

The Åland Islands: 1919 - 1921

The Åland Islands (Grande carte)

The Åland Islands are located in the Baltic Sea, between Sweden and Finland. The islands are largely populated by Swedish speakers, and have a cultural and historical history closely linked to Sweden. Historically, they were part of Sweden, but came under Russian control in 1809, when Russia annexed Finland. In 1917, the Russian Revolution led to major political changes in Europe, including Finland's independence. At the time of Finland's independence, the inhabitants of the Åland Islands, the majority of whom were Swedish-speaking, expressed their desire to remain under Swedish sovereignty rather than become part of the new Finnish nation. This led to a territorial dispute between Sweden and Finland, who both claimed sovereignty over the islands. This dispute was exacerbated by questions of linguistic and cultural rights. The inhabitants of the Åland Islands feared that, under Finnish rule, they would lose their Swedish language and cultural identity. They therefore asserted their right to self-determination and expressed a preference for integration with Sweden, where they would feel more in tune with the linguistic and cultural majority. The situation was complicated by the fact that the Åland Islands are of strategic importance due to their position in the Baltic Sea. They were considered a key element in the defence of the Baltic Sea and were therefore coveted by several countries. Faced with this complex and potentially destabilising territorial dispute, the League of Nations was called upon to arbitrate.

The issue was referred to the League of Nations, which undertook a mediation process to resolve the dispute. The aim was to prevent this territorial dispute from developing into an open conflict between Sweden and Finland, with potentially disastrous consequences for the stability of the region. The League of Nations took a series of measures to try and resolve the conflict. It sent fact-finding missions to the area to assess the situation and gather first-hand information about the living conditions and wishes of the local population. These surveys revealed that, although the local population was Swedish-speaking, it was divided over the question of sovereignty over the islands. In 1921, the League of Nations took the decision to keep the Åland Islands under Finnish sovereignty, while granting the local population a large degree of autonomy, including the right to use their own language (Swedish) and to preserve their own culture. The decision also stipulated that the Åland Islands should remain demilitarised, in order to prevent any future military escalation in the region. This decision was accepted by both parties and led to a peaceful resolution of the territorial dispute. It also set an important precedent for the role of the League of Nations as an international arbitration body. However, although this decision was a success for the League of Nations, it also showed the limits of its power. The League of Nations had no power to force Finland or Sweden to accept its decision, and its success depended on the willingness of both countries to abide by the agreement. In the end, the resolution of the Åland question depended more on the political will of the countries concerned than on the power of the League of Nations.

The management of the dispute over the Åland Islands is considered to be one of the major successes of the League of Nations. The question of the Åland Islands posed a real challenge to the nascent organisation, with two European nations claiming sovereignty over the archipelago. However, through careful mediation, thorough investigation and judicious decision-making, the League of Nations was able to avert a potentially destabilising conflict between Sweden and Finland. The resolution of this dispute showed that international mediation and arbitration could be effective tools for resolving territorial disputes. It set a precedent for the role of the League of Nations and international organisations in general in the peaceful resolution of disputes. However, as mentioned earlier, this success also showed the limits of the League of Nations' power, which ultimately depended on the willingness of member states to abide by its decisions.

Situations in Albania, Greece and Serbia

Albania, which became independent in 1912, was a constant source of regional tension between the wars. Its borders were disputed by its neighbours, notably Greece and Yugoslavia, and the League of Nations was called in on several occasions to try and resolve these disputes. Despite the efforts of the League of Nations, Albania continued to experience border disputes and incursions from its neighbours. These conflicts were exacerbated by the lack of recognition of Albania's independence by some of its neighbours. The situation in Albania was further complicated by the fact that the major powers of the day were not prepared to fully support the League of Nations' efforts to stabilise the region. The League of Nations found it difficult to enforce its decisions in Albania, not least because of its lack of means of action and the lack of support from the Great Powers. These difficulties were highlighted when Fascist Italy, under Benito Mussolini, invaded Albania in April 1939. This act of aggression underlined the limitations of the League of Nations as a peacekeeping body and contributed to its eventual dissolution and the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War.

The question of Albania's borders was a source of constant tension in the Balkans between the wars. The League of Nations attempted to resolve these disputes by fixing the borders of Albania in 1921, but this decision was challenged by Greece and Yugoslavia, who invaded Albania in 1923. In response to this crisis, the League of Nations set up a control commission in Albania. This commission succeeded in securing the withdrawal of Greek and Yugoslav troops and the establishment of a more stable Albanian government. These efforts temporarily stabilised the situation in Albania and prevented an escalation of the conflict in the region. Despite these efforts, Albania continued to face border problems with its neighbours throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Albania repeatedly appealed to the League of Nations to help resolve these conflicts, but the organisation often struggled to enforce its decisions, contributing to continuing instability in the region.

The League of Nations' intervention in resolving territorial disputes in Albania is an example of the organisation's successes despite its limitations. The League of Nations set up an International Control Commission for Albania, which supervised the withdrawal of foreign forces and helped to establish a stable Albanian government. The Commission also worked to demarcate Albania's borders. This has been a long and complex process, involving numerous negotiations and sometimes marked by tensions. However, despite these challenges, the League of Nations succeeded in obtaining recognition of Albania's borders by Greece and Serbia. This success demonstrated the League of Nations' ability to resolve territorial disputes peacefully. It reinforced confidence in the organisation's potential to promote international peace and security, even if, as we have seen subsequently, the challenges it faced were considerable.

The Corfu affair

Incident in Corfu.

The Corfu Affair began in August 1923, when Italian General Enrico Tellini and his delegation, who were demarcating the border between Greece and Albania, were murdered near the Albanian border. In response to this incident, Italy demanded an apology from Greece, as well as financial compensation. Greece agreed to investigate the incident, but refused to apologise or pay compensation, arguing that the incident had not taken place on its territory. In retaliation, Italy, under the leadership of Benito Mussolini, bombed and occupied the island of Corfu in September 1923. Greece appealed to the League of Nations to resolve the conflict. After deliberations, the League of Nations asked the International Court of Justice in The Hague to rule on the case.

The commission of enquiry sent by the League of Nations therefore worked to calm the situation in Corfu. After a meticulous study of the conflict, it proposed several measures to resolve the dispute. In particular, it recommended that the borders between Greece and Albania be clarified to avoid any future confusion. It also suggested that steps be taken to prevent similar incidents in the future. These recommendations were presented to the Greek and Albanian governments, who accepted them. This helped to defuse tensions and put an end to the crisis. The Corfu incident was therefore resolved peacefully, thanks to the intervention of the League of Nations. This demonstrates the crucial role that the League of Nations has been able to play in maintaining international peace and stability. Although the League of Nations had its setbacks, not least because of a lack of support from the major powers, it helped to establish an international mechanism for resolving conflicts, which laid the foundations for its successor, the United Nations.

However, before the International Court of Justice could deliver its verdict, Italy and Greece reached an agreement through the Italian speaker. As a result, Greece agreed to make a formal apology and pay compensation to Italy. In return, Italy agreed to withdraw its troops from Corfu.

The Chaco conflict

The situation before the Chaco war.

The Chaco War was one of the deadliest conflicts in South America in the 20th century. Bolivia and Paraguay fought for control of the Chaco Boreal, a semi-arid region to the west of Paraguay and south-east of Bolivia. Despite its inhospitable nature, the region was suspected of harbouring vast oil reserves, fuelling tensions between the two countries. War broke out in 1932 when Bolivia launched an offensive in the Chaco, hoping to take control of the region. However, Paraguay resisted vigorously and the war quickly bogged down, with heavy casualties on both sides. Despite its efforts, the League of Nations was unable to resolve the conflict. Attempts to mediate were made by other countries and by the Committee of Neutrals, formed by the United States, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Peru and Uruguay, but they all failed. Finally, the war ended in 1935 with the signing of the Treaty of Buenos Aires. Paraguay gained control of most of the disputed territory, but the victory came at a huge cost: it is estimated that almost 100,000 people died, mostly from disease and malnutrition. The failure of the League of Nations to prevent or resolve this conflict highlighted the limitations of the organisation and contributed to the perception that it was incapable of enforcing peace and resolving international conflicts effectively.

The conflict between Paraguay and Bolivia over the Chaco region, known as the "Chaco War", was one of the largest and deadliest wars in Latin America in the twentieth century. The origins of the conflict date back to the colonial period, when the borders between the Spanish colonies in South America were not clearly defined, leaving many border areas disputed after independence. The Chaco, a vast semi-arid wilderness, was one such area. In the early 20th century, discoveries of oil and natural gas deposits in the Chaco attracted the interest of both countries. Bolivia, in particular, hoped to exploit these resources to help rebuild its economy after the devastation of the Pacific War against Chile at the end of the 19th century. Paraguay, for its part, saw the Chaco as an essential part of its national territory. The situation deteriorated in the early 1930s, when armed clashes broke out between Bolivian and Paraguayan troops. Despite mediation attempts by the League of Nations and other countries, war broke out in 1932. The war was fierce and costly, claiming tens of thousands of lives and devastating the economies of both countries. Finally, after three years of conflict, both sides agreed to end the war in 1935. A peace treaty was signed in 1938, which finally awarded most of the Chaco to Paraguay. The Chaco War is a striking example of how natural resources can fuel territorial conflicts, and of the limits of international efforts to prevent and resolve such conflicts.

Although the League of Nations was created with the aim of preventing international conflicts and resolving disputes peacefully, it was hampered by a number of factors. One of these was the absence of certain key players on the world stage, in particular the United States, which was not a member of the organisation. In the case of the Chaco War, the absence of the United States had a significant impact on the League of Nations' efforts to resolve the conflict. The United States had major economic interests in the region, particularly through the Standard Oil Company, which had oil exploitation rights in Bolivia. As a result, they were reluctant to see a resolution to the conflict that might have compromised their economic interests. Despite not being a member of the League of Nations, the United States offered to mediate in the Chaco conflict. However, this offer was rejected by Bolivia and Paraguay, who preferred to pursue the conflict by force. Finally, a peace treaty was signed in 1938 that ended the war and divided the disputed region between Bolivia and Paraguay. This treaty was negotiated with the mediation of the United States, and eventually awarded most of the Chaco to Paraguay. After the war, the region was placed under the supervision of a League of Nations commission made up of representatives from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru and Uruguay. The commission's remit was to monitor the implementation of the peace treaty and ensure that the terms of the agreement were respected by both parties. The Chaco War is a striking example of the inability of the League of Nations to prevent and resolve international conflicts, and highlights the crucial role played by the great powers in the management of international affairs.

Mandates under the aegis of the League of Nations

The League of Nations system of mandates

The League of Nations (League) system of mandates was established by Articles 22 to 26 of the League of Nations Covenant, which was signed at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 following the First World War. This system was conceived as a "compromise between imperialism and idealism", i.e. it attempted to balance the interests of the colonial powers with the principles of the right of peoples to self-determination. The territories subject to the League's mandate were mainly located in Africa, the Middle East and the South Pacific. They were former German colonies or former territories of the Ottoman Empire that had fallen under the control of the Allies during the war. The idea was that these territories were not yet ready to govern themselves and should therefore be administered by proxies of the League of Nations - mainly Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa - until they were ready to become independent.

After the First World War, the German and Ottoman colonies were distributed among the victorious Allied Powers in the form of mandates by the League of Nations (League).

In Africa:

• German Togoland and Cameroon were divided between France and the UK.
• German South-West Africa (now Namibia) was allocated to the Union of South Africa.
• Rwanda-Urundi (now Rwanda and Burundi) was given to Belgium.
• Tanganyika (now part of Tanzania) came under British control.

In the Middle East, mandates were granted for the former territories of the Ottoman Empire:

• The UK was granted mandates for Iraq, Palestine (which included present-day Jordan) and Transjordan.
• France received mandates for Syria and Lebanon.

In the Pacific, the former German colonies were divided between Japan and the British dominions of Australia and New Zealand.

The idea behind this system of mandates was that these territories would be managed by the Mandatory Powers until they were deemed ready for autonomy or independence. In practice, however, the Mandatory Powers often used these mandates to expand their own colonial empire, and many Mandatory Territories did not achieve independence until decades later, often after a protracted struggle.

The purpose of the mandates

Although the main purpose of the mandates was to prepare the territories concerned for independence, in reality they often functioned as extensions of the colonial empire of the mandating powers. This means that the mandatary nations sometimes acted in an authoritarian manner and largely exploited the resources of these territories for their own interests. The development of infrastructure, administration and the local economy was often geared towards the profit of the proxy powers, rather than the welfare and development of the local population. The proxy powers often imposed their own political and economic systems, disregarding the traditions and aspirations of the local populations. In addition, local populations had little say in the management of their own affairs and were often marginalised in the decision-making process. This led to feelings of resentment and frustration, and in some cases to resistance movements against the proxy regime. These factors led to much criticism of the mandates, mainly because of their lack of equality and self-determination. Many felt that the mandates were simply a disguised form of colonialism, allowing the great powers to maintain control over resource-rich territories without having to assume the responsibilities of colonisation. These criticisms ultimately contributed to the end of the mandate system after the Second World War.

The League of Nations system of mandates was a concept full of ambiguities. On the one hand, it was presented as a way for more developed nations to help less developed territories achieve full and autonomous independence. The underlying idea was that these territories, which had been colonies of the German Empire and the Ottoman Empire, were not yet ready for self-government and required a transition period during which they would be administered by proxy nations. In practice, however, it was clear that the Mandatory Powers also had their own interests at heart. These territories were often rich in natural resources, and their control offered significant economic and strategic advantages. Mandatory powers often set up systems of resource exploitation that primarily benefited themselves, not the local populations. Moreover, although the Mandatory nations were formally charged with helping to prepare the territories for independence, there was often little real effort to develop effective local governance or to promote the education and economic development of the local populations. These contradictions inevitably led to tensions between the proxy powers and the local populations. In many cases, this has led to uprisings and conflict, as local populations have sought to fight exploitation and claim their right to self-determination. Overall, despite its laudable intentions, the League of Nations mandate system was often seen as a continuation of colonialism, rather than a genuine effort to prepare territories for independence.

The League of Nations system of mandates was supposed to represent a new approach to the administration of decolonised territories, an evolution from the old colonial system. In practice, however, it presented many problems and ambiguities. On the one hand, it was supposed to put an end to the direct domination of the major colonial powers over these territories. Mandatory nations, such as France and Great Britain, were supposed to help these regions develop and prepare for autonomy. But in reality, they often simply continued to administer these territories as colonies, using their resources to their own economic and political advantage. On the other hand, the League of Nations had the task of supervising and regulating the management of the mandates. However, there were serious questions about its ability to fulfil this role effectively. The League of Nations lacked the resources and authority to effectively control the actions of the Mandatory Powers, and it often failed to prevent abuses. These factors led to significant criticism of the mandate system. Many felt that it was a form of colonialism in disguise, allowing the great powers to continue exploiting the resources of these territories under the guise of international administration. This underlined the limitations of the League of Nations as an international body for maintaining peace and promoting justice.

Managing mandates in practice

The League of Nations system of mandates was an attempt to strike a balance between the aspirations of colonised peoples for self-determination and the interests of the colonial powers. It reflected a growing awareness of the importance of human rights and the need to review the colonial system. In theory, the aim of the mandate system was to gradually prepare the mandated territories for autonomy or independence. Mandatory powers, such as France and Great Britain, were supposed to administer these territories in the interests of their inhabitants and contribute to their economic, social and institutional development. However, in practice, the system of mandates was often used by the Mandatory Powers to maintain control over these territories and exploit their resources, often to the detriment of the local populations. This has led to accusations of neo-colonialism and has provoked criticism and resistance.

The League of Nations system of mandates certainly marked an evolution in the way the international community viewed colonialism and the self-determination of peoples. Nevertheless, control and administration of these territories was still largely in the hands of the major colonial powers, and the League of Nations' power to regulate these mandates or impose sanctions in the event of abuse was limited. The system of mandates therefore reflected a tension between the existing colonial order and the idea of international regulation, with the ambition of preparing these territories for autonomy or independence. In practice, however, this system has often been criticised for allowing the major powers to maintain their control over colonised territories under the cover of an international mandate. In short, although the system of mandates represented a step towards the international regulation of colonialism, it remains marred by ambiguities and limitations that have often led to abuses and inequalities. It represents a complex chapter in the history of international relations, illustrating the persistent challenges associated with decolonisation and the realisation of the right to self-determination.

Types of mandate

Mandates in Africa and the Middle East.1 - French mandate in Syria 2 - French mandate in Lebanon 3 - British Mandate in Palestine 4 - British Mandate in Transjordan 5 - British Mandate in Iraq 6 - British Mandate in Togo 7 - French Mandate in Togo 8 - British Mandate in Cameroon 9 - French mandate in Cameroon 10 - Belgian Mandate in Ruanda-Urundi 11 - British Mandate in Tanganyika 12 - South African Mandate in South West Africa

According to paragraph 3 of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, the character of the mandate should differ according to the degree of development of the people, the geographical situation of the territory, its economic conditions and any other similar circumstances. This meant that each mandate had particular characteristics according to its geography, its people and its level of economic development.

The mandated territories were divided into three categories, according to their degree of development, their geographical location and other relevant circumstances.

Type A mandates

The territories under Type A mandate were recognised as being closer to autonomy and having reached a more advanced level of development. Their administration was therefore envisaged as temporary trusteeship rather than long-term colonial control. The task of the mandataries, in this case France and the United Kingdom, was to prepare these territories for full sovereignty.

In the case of Lebanon and Syria, under the French Mandate, and Iraq and Palestine, under the British Mandate, this preparation for independence included the development of infrastructure, the establishment of education and health systems, and the introduction of modern political institutions. However, this process was not without its tensions and conflicts, as the mandators sometimes acted in their own interests, and local nationalist aspirations were often suppressed.

Type B mandates

The territories under Type B Mandate were mainly located in sub-Saharan Africa and were mainly former German colonies. According to the League of Nations Covenant, these territories were considered to have "a level of civilisation" that required more direct administration.

Type B mandates included Cameroon and Togo (under the French mandate), Tanganyika (under the British mandate) and Rwanda-Urundi (under the Belgian mandate). The mandating powers were responsible for improving the living conditions of local populations by developing infrastructure, improving education and health systems, and promoting economic development. However, these mandates also attracted criticism, as some saw them as a continuation of colonialism, rather than a genuine attempt at emancipation and development.

Type C mandates

Type C mandate territories were territories that, due to their geographical remoteness or small population, were deemed unable to support themselves independently. These territories were administered as an integral part of the agent's territory, rather than as separate entities.

These territories included New Guinea, administered by Australia; Nauru, administered by an Anglo-Australian consortium; Western Samoa, administered by New Zealand; and South West Africa (now Namibia), administered by South Africa. The responsibilities of the Mandatory Powers in respect of these territories were less clearly defined than in the case of Type A and Type B mandates, and the Mandatory Powers were largely free to manage these territories as they saw fit. As with other types of mandate, this led to criticism that the mandate system was in fact perpetuating colonial inequalities under a different name.

The logic of prioritising mandates

The League of Nations mandate system, while attempting to introduce a measure of international responsibility into the administration of former colonial territories, retained many of the attitudes and practices of traditional colonialism. The distinctions between Type A, B and C mandates were based on notions of civilisation and economic development which were widespread at the time, but which are now widely regarded as paternalistic and ethnocentric. The mandate powers were supposed to act as guardians for the peoples of the mandate territories, helping them to progress towards autonomy and independence, but in practice they often continued to exploit the resources of these territories for their own benefit. The mandate system did, however, represent an innovation in that it recognised, at least in theory, the principle of self-determination and the right of peoples to govern themselves. It also introduced a form of international oversight of colonial governance, although this oversight was often insufficient to prevent abuses.

The League of Nations mandate system was conceived as an attempt to reconcile the political reality of colonial rule with emerging principles of human rights and national sovereignty. In theory, it represented a form of international management of colonial territories, with some supervision and regulation to ensure the welfare of local populations. In practice, the mandate powers often used the system to perpetuate colonial rule under a different name. Despite this, the mandate system was an important precursor to decolonisation and the emergence of modern international law. It introduced principles such as international trust and the responsibility of nations towards colonised populations which, despite the many shortcomings of their implementation, formed the basis of many subsequent reforms in international law and the management of international relations.

The League of Nations Mandates Commission

The League of Nations introduced the system of mandates at the end of the First World War. The aim was to entrust nations, designated as mandataries, with the administration of territories formerly under the control of defeated countries, such as the Ottoman Empire or the German Empire. These territories, placed under the aegis of the League of Nations, were supposed to be guided towards independence by their proxy. France and the United Kingdom, as the victorious great powers of the war, were entrusted with the majority of these mandates, mainly in Africa and the Middle East. Other countries, such as Belgium, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, were also appointed as mandataries for certain territories. The mandataries were responsible for managing the territories entrusted to them, with the task of fostering their economic, social and political development. The League of Nations, for its part, set up a Mandates Commission to oversee the administration of these territories. The purpose of this Commission was to ensure that the local populations were treated fairly and that their rights were respected. However, the implementation of this system gave rise to much debate and controversy, particularly on the issue of self-determination for colonised peoples.

The Mandates Commission of the League of Nations played a key role in the supervision and control of mandated territories. It was headed by a Chairman, William Rappard, an eminent Swiss diplomat and professor who contributed greatly to the formation of the League of Nations. The Commission was made up of representatives of the member countries of the League of Nations. Its main role was to oversee the administration of the mandated territories, to ensure that they were managed in a way that respected the rights and interests of the local populations. To fulfil this function, the Commission produced annual reports on the situation in each mandated territory. These reports were based on information provided by the mandating powers, as well as the Commission's own independent investigations. These reports assessed the way in which the territories were run and provided recommendations for improving their administration. The Mandates Commission also acted as an advisor to the Mandatory Powers. It helped them define the best strategies for managing the territories under their control and preparing them for independence. This included recommendations on issues as diverse as education, administration, economic development and public health.

The League of Nations Mandates Commission had a relatively limited capacity for action. Despite its official role as overseer of the mandated territories, the Commission had no binding enforcement powers. The recommendations it issued could only be implemented if the mandating powers decided to do so. This situation often led to frustration and criticism of the Commission. Defenders of the rights of colonised peoples claimed that the Commission did not have the capacity to prevent or sanction abuses committed by the proxy powers. This fuelled perceptions of the Commission's powerlessness and raised questions about its real effectiveness in securing the welfare of indigenous peoples. Nevertheless, the Mandates Commission played an important role in bringing a degree of transparency to the administration of the mandated territories. The annual reports it produced documented the situation in these territories and exposed the abuses committed by the mandating powers. Despite its limitations, the Mandates Commission played a crucial role in the decolonisation process and contributed to the evolution of international standards on the rights of colonised peoples.

The League of Nations Mandates Commission played a central role in the mandate system, overseeing the administration of territories by the Mandatory Powers. Its purpose was to ensure that these powers complied with the principles of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which required them to act in the interests of the populations of the mandated territories and to prepare them for autonomy or independence. Despite its lack of coercive power, the Commission had some influence, as it was able to gather information, report on the situation on the ground and draw the attention of the international community to possible abuses. The annual reports and recommendations it produced were a form of moral pressure on the mandating powers, encouraging them to respect their obligations and act in the interests of the populations under mandate.

Controversial management

In other cases, mandate powers used the mandate system to extend their geopolitical influence, particularly in strategic regions such as the Middle East and Africa. For example, the British mandates over Palestine and Iraq and the French mandate over Syria and Lebanon enabled these powers to control key regions for access to oil resources and trade routes. The Mandates sometimes adopted "divide and rule" policies, exacerbating tensions between different ethnic or religious groups in order to maintain control. These policies have left lasting legacies of conflict and division in many mandated territories. Although the mandate system was intended to prepare territories for independence, few mandates led to independence during the League of Nations. Most of the mandated territories only gained independence after the Second World War, often after long national liberation struggles.

The British Mandate over Palestine was one of the most controversial and left a complex and painful legacy that persists to this day. The Balfour Declaration of 1917, which promised the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, while declaring that "nothing shall be done which prejudices the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine", created an ambiguous and potentially divisive situation. The British Mandate attempted to navigate the conflicting promises made to the Jewish and Arab communities, but ultimately failed to satisfy either side. Jewish immigration to Palestine increased significantly during the period of the Mandate, partly as a result of the persecution of Jews in Europe, culminating in the Holocaust during the Second World War. However, this immigration was strongly opposed by the local Arab population, who feared losing their land and political rights. The situation eventually degenerated into violence and open conflict, with Arab revolts against British rule and Jewish immigration policy in the 1930s, and increasingly violent confrontations between Jewish and Arab communities. In 1947, unable to find a satisfactory solution, the British referred the question of Palestine to the UN, which voted in favour of the plan to partition Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state. However, this plan was rejected by Arab leaders and led to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, after which the State of Israel was established. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which continues to this day, is a direct consequence of the British Mandate in Palestine and the way it was managed. It illustrates the difficulty and complexity of managing mandates, particularly in regions with diverse ethnic and religious communities and competing claims to the same territory.

The French mandate over Syria and Lebanon was based on the concept of the "civilising mission", which assumed that the peoples of the Middle East needed the help of the European powers in order to develop. However, this paternalistic vision was often at odds with local nationalist aspirations for self-determination and independence. In Syria, France encountered significant resistance to its presence. Syrian nationalist demands for independence were strong, and several revolts against the French mandate took place during the 1920s and 1930s. In 1946, France finally granted independence to Syria after numerous negotiations and confrontations with Syrian nationalist leaders. In Lebanon, the situation was slightly different. Lebanon had a mixed population with a large Maronite Christian community that had historical links with France. The French favoured the Maronite community in their administration of Lebanon, which fuelled tensions with other ethnic and religious groups. The political system based on confessionalism, where political positions are divided between the different religious communities, was put in place during the French mandate and contributed to sectarian and political tensions that eventually degenerated into civil war in 1975.

Challenging the colonial order

The mandates were perceived by many peoples under their administration as a continuation of colonialism disguised as a "civilising" mission. They often reinforced existing political, economic and social structures that served the interests of the great powers. In several regions under mandate, resistance movements and struggles for independence emerged. These movements were often based on a specific national or regional identity and sought to rid themselves of foreign domination.

In India, for example, the independence movement, led by figures such as Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, adopted methods of non-violent civil disobedience and eventually succeeded in gaining the country's independence in 1947. In Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh led the resistance movement against French rule and declared independence in 1945. However, Vietnam was then plunged into a devastating war against French and later American colonial forces. In Africa, independence movements also emerged in a number of countries under mandate. These movements were often met with violent repression by the colonial powers. However, despite these challenges, the majority of African countries finally gained their independence in the 1960s and 1970s. These independence movements were important not only for their struggle against colonialism, but also for their contribution to the emergence of a political consciousness and a national identity in the countries under mandate. They played a key role in decolonisation and the transformation of the international system after the Second World War.

Mandates were supposed to be a means of helping colonised peoples achieve independence and sovereignty, but in practice they were often used to maintain colonial rule. Mandatory powers were supposed to act in the interests of indigenous peoples, helping them to develop politically, economically and socially. However, in many cases, they instead used the mandates to further their own interests, in particular by exploiting the natural resources of the mandated territories. The League of Nations had the task of overseeing the management of the mandated territories and ensuring that the rights of the indigenous peoples were respected. However, it did not have the power to impose its recommendations on the mandating powers and was therefore often unable to prevent abuses. These factors led to a great deal of dissatisfaction and protest among the colonised peoples, and gave rise to resistance movements and demands for independence. The period of the mandates was therefore marked by tension and conflict, and laid the foundations for many of the political and social problems we still see today.

The League of Nations (League) provided a platform for the nations of the world to voice their concerns about the mandated territories. This allowed for a measure of international oversight of how the mandataries managed these territories. The Mandates Commission of the League of Nations regularly examined reports submitted by the Mandate Powers and made recommendations on how they could improve the management of their mandates. However, as mentioned earlier, the Commission had no power to force the Mandatory Powers to follow its recommendations. Countries such as Japan and Germany, which were members of the League of Nations, also raised concerns about the mandate system. They criticised the system as a continuation of colonialism and argued that all peoples had the right to self-determination. Unfortunately, despite these criticisms and the existence of the Mandates Commission, abuses continued in many mandated territories. These abuses often led to tension and conflict, and left a legacy of social and political problems that continue to this day.

The League of Nations (League), although intended to promote world peace and stability and to act as an international watchdog, had significant limitations in terms of enforcement power. The League established commissions of enquiry and produced reports on human rights abuses in mandated territories. However, it had no concrete mechanisms for enforcing the recommendations resulting from these investigations. In many cases, the mandating powers ignored the recommendations of the League and continued to manage the mandates according to their own policies and interests. The lack of coercive power of the League became particularly evident in the 1930s, when international tensions began to escalate, eventually leading to the Second World War. Although the League of Nations came to an end with the outbreak of the Second World War, the concept of international mandates continued in a modified form with the United Nations trusteeship system after the war. However, despite these efforts, the problems associated with the administration of dependent territories by foreign powers persisted.

The League of Nations, through the Mandates Commission, succeeded in introducing a degree of transparency and global reflection on the problems of colonisation. The Mandates Commission's reports, public debates and international pressure revealed the abuses committed in certain mandated territories and prompted some of the Mandatory Powers to make improvements. The League of Nations also played a crucial role in developing concepts such as the right of peoples to self-determination and the duty of colonising nations to prepare colonised peoples for autonomy or independence. However, it is true that progress has been uneven and often insufficient. Colonial structures and practices persisted in many mandated territories, and many local populations continued to suffer oppression and exploitation. In addition, the League of Nations had difficulty in imposing its recommendations and enforcing the principles of the mandate system, due to the lack of effective enforcement mechanisms. Overall, although the mandate system was a step towards recognising the rights of colonised peoples, it had significant limitations and often failed to fully achieve its objectives. It should be noted, however, that it served as an important precedent for subsequent decolonisation efforts and the establishment of the United Nations trusteeship system after the Second World War.

Protection and rights of minorities

Population movements and deportations in 20th-century Europe.

Creating new frontiers

The redrawing of borders after the First World War led to the creation of many new states, but also to the dispersal of various ethnic and national groups, creating numerous minorities in these new states. In Eastern Europe, for example, the peace treaties created a reunited Poland that included large populations of Ukrainians, Belorussians, Germans and Lithuanians. Similarly, the new Czechoslovakia included large German and Hungarian minorities. The situation was similar in the Balkans with the creation of Yugoslavia, which included Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians, Macedonians and others. In the Middle East, the borders drawn by the Sykes-Picot agreements and the League of Nations mandates created a series of new states, such as Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Transjordan (later Jordan), which brought together many different ethnic and religious groups, including Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen, Christians, Druze, Yezidis and Jews. These redefinitions of borders and the creation of new minorities have often led to ethnic, nationalist and religious tensions, discrimination and conflict. Minority rights were often neglected, leading to resistance movements, insurgencies and, in some cases, civil wars and genocide. These problems persisted long after the end of the First World War and had a lasting impact on the history of the 20th century and beyond.

The end of the First World War and the dismantling of multinational empires, such as Austria-Hungary, led to a major redistribution of borders in Europe and the creation of many new nation states. However, this process was not straightforward. The borders drawn did not always correspond to existing ethnic, cultural or linguistic lines. As a result, many ethnic and national groups found themselves in the minority in the new nation states. In the new Czechoslovakia, for example, large German and Hungarian populations found themselves in the minority, leading to ethnic tensions and conflicts. Moreover, minority rights were not always respected and were often subject to policies of discrimination, forced assimilation or even ethnic cleansing. In the Balkans, for example, the creation of Yugoslavia brought together several different ethnic and religious groups, leading to long periods of tension and conflict, which eventually led to the violent break-up of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. In addition, large multinational empires, such as Austria-Hungary, generally had policies that allowed a degree of autonomy for their various nationalities or maintained a delicate balance between them. When these empires collapsed and new nation-states were formed, this balance was upset, often leading to conflict and violence between different groups.

The redrawing of borders following the First World War and the dissolution of large empires resulted in a multiplicity of new nations that included many ethnic minorities, sometimes poorly integrated. The newly created Czechoslovakia was a multicultural country with a large Sudeten German population, especially in the regions bordering Germany. These populations experienced tensions and discrimination, exacerbated by the rise of nationalism and the Sudeten crisis, which led to the annexation of these territories by Nazi Germany in 1938 under the Munich Agreement. In the case of Bulgaria, a large Turkish population lived (and still lives) in the country, particularly in the south-east. These minorities have sometimes faced policies of forced assimilation, such as the Bulgarisation of family names campaign in the 1980s, which led to tension and violence. In Romania, the situation was also complex. The regions of Transylvania and Banat, annexed to Romania after the First World War, were home to a large Hungarian minority, as well as German (Transylvanian Saxons) and Serbian communities. Ethnic tensions have been a constant feature of Romania's modern history, with periods of discrimination and repression. These examples illustrate the complexity of managing ethnic minorities in the new nation states formed after the First World War. Inter-ethnic tensions, sometimes fuelled by policies of forced assimilation or discrimination, led to numerous conflicts and left an indelible mark on the history of these countries.

The creation of new nations in the post-war period and the redrawing of borders created a host of problems for the ethnic minorities who found themselves within these new states. Many groups, such as the Hungarians in Czechoslovakia and the Germans in Poland, were marginalised and discriminated against. These minority groups were often perceived as outsiders or enemies, particularly in the context of post-war nationalist animosity and resentment. In some cases, this has led to mass expulsions, such as the expulsion of several million Germans from the newly Polish and Czechoslovak territories after the Second World War. In other cases, this has led to policies of forced assimilation or restrictions on the use of minority languages. These situations have often led to long-lasting inter-ethnic tensions and conflicts. Even today, relations between ethnic groups in some of these countries are marked by the legacy of these policies and past conflicts. Consequently, the protection of minority rights remains a major issue in Central and Eastern Europe, and more generally throughout the world.

Population movements

The post-war period saw massive population movements, both as a result of the collapse of the old empires and because of the ethnic or national policies implemented by the new states. People displaced by these changes often faced difficulties integrating into their new host communities, and governments struggled to manage the diversity of their new populations. The example of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia is illustrative of these challenges. Sudeten Germans, who formed a large minority in Czechoslovakia, demanded greater autonomy and rights, but the Czechoslovak government resisted these demands, exacerbating tensions. This ultimately led to the Sudeten crisis in 1938, when Hitler used the issue of Sudeten German rights as a pretext to annex the region. In Yugoslavia too, the country's ethnic and religious diversity contributed to political instability and communal tensions. After the death of Tito, the leader who had managed to hold the country together despite its internal divisions, these tensions erupted into a series of violent conflicts in the 1990s, leading to the collapse of Yugoslavia and the creation of several new states. These examples illustrate the challenges of managing ethnic and religious diversity in the new states after the First World War. They also highlight the importance of protecting minority rights for stability and peace in these countries.

The Second World War accentuated the problems of minorities and population movements in Europe. The policies of expulsion, deportation and genocide pursued by the Nazi and Soviet regimes resulted in the deaths of millions of people and led to massive population movements across the continent. The 1945 Yalta Accords established the transfer of populations between Germany and Poland, leading to the expulsion of millions of Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia and other parts of Central and Eastern Europe. Similarly, the deportation of Crimean Tatar populations by the Soviets and the expulsion of Turks from Greece led to massive population movements in the region. These events left deep and lasting traces in the history of Europe and have influenced relations between the countries of the region right up to the present day.

New minorities and increased ethnic tensions

The Second World War led to unprecedented population movements and massive atrocities in Europe. The extermination and expulsion policies implemented by totalitarian regimes had dramatic and lasting consequences. The policy of deporting Germans after the Second World War was one of the largest population movements in history, with some 12 to 14 million Germans moved from Central and Eastern Europe to Germany. This policy was justified by the Allies as a necessary measure to ensure the stability of the region after the war. However, it was implemented in an often violent manner, with much death and suffering for the displaced people. Stalin's deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1944 is another example of forced population movements. Wrongly accused of collaborating with the Nazis, around 200,000 Crimean Tatars were deported to Central Asia and Siberia, where many died as a result of the harsh conditions. The Greek-Turkish war of 1919 to 1922 also led to one of the first large-scale population exchanges of the 20th century, when around 1.5 million Orthodox Christians from Anatolia were moved to Greece, and around half a million Muslims were moved from Greece to Turkey. These forced population movements left deep scars and helped to shape the history of Europe in the 20th century. They are also a reminder of the importance of protecting human and minority rights to prevent such abuses in the future.

Statelessness is a serious humanitarian problem with major consequences for those affected. The situation of stateless people is often very precarious, as they have no legal protection from a State and are deprived of many fundamental rights. They may have difficulty accessing education, healthcare, housing, employment and other essential services. They are also often exposed to discrimination, exploitation and other forms of violence. A number of factors can lead to statelessness. These include border changes, discriminatory nationality laws, inadequate birth administration, loss of nationality and armed conflict. People can also become stateless as a result of documentation problems, such as failure to register at birth or loss of identity documents. To combat statelessness, several countries and international organisations have adopted laws and policies to prevent and reduce statelessness, and to protect the rights of stateless persons. For example, the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness are two important international treaties that establish legal standards for the protection of stateless persons. Despite these efforts, statelessness remains a major problem worldwide, affecting millions of people. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), there were around 3.9 million stateless people in the world in 2020, although the true figure is probably much higher. The UNHCR has launched a global campaign to end statelessness by 2024, urging countries to reform their nationality laws, register births and facilitate the naturalisation of stateless people.

Minority protection clauses

The issue of ethnic and religious minorities was crucial in post-First World War Europe. The war and the subsequent redrawing of the boundaries of Europe led to large-scale population movements and created many new ethnic minorities. These changes created new tensions, both within and between the newly formed nation states. The Treaty of Versailles and other peace treaties following the First World War often included specific provisions for the protection of minorities. This was particularly true in the case of new states or territories whose borders had been redrawn, such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East. For example, Poland, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were forced to accept provisions for the protection of minorities in exchange for international recognition of their independence. The League of Nations, which was created in the wake of the First World War, also had an important role to play in the protection of minorities. It created a system of mandates to oversee the territories formerly controlled by the defeated Central Powers, with the stated aim of preparing these territories for independence. The League of Nations also established procedures for complaints about violations of minority rights.

Despite its mandate to preserve peace and protect minority rights, the League of Nations faced many challenges in achieving these goals. One of these challenges was the Society's lack of executive power. Although it was able to issue recommendations and establish commissions to monitor the conditions of minorities, it did not have the power to enforce its recommendations or impose meaningful sanctions on states that failed to respect minority rights. In addition, the Society also faced opposition from many Member States. Many of these States viewed the protection of minority rights and international intervention in these issues as interference in their internal affairs. This made it difficult for the League to take effective measures to protect minorities. Finally, the League of Nations was also limited by a lack of resources. This meant that it often did not have the means to implement its programmes or respond effectively to crises. This was particularly evident in the 1930s, when the rise of fascism and the outbreak of the Second World War posed major challenges to the League. Despite these limitations, the League of Nations has played an important role in setting international standards for the protection of minorities and in promoting international dialogue on these issues. Although its effectiveness has been limited, it has laid the foundations for subsequent efforts by the United Nations to protect minority rights and promote international peace.

The minority protection clauses drawn up by the League of Nations aimed to guarantee the rights of ethnic, religious and linguistic minority groups in these new States. They stipulated that these States should respect and protect the rights and freedoms of these minorities, including the right to life, liberty, security of the person, equality before the law, freedom of conscience, religion, speech, assembly and association. These clauses also stipulated that these States must not restrict the use of minority languages in private life, in business, in religion, in the press or in publications of any kind, or in public meetings. They also required these States to grant minorities equal access to education and justice. These clauses were included in the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain-en-Laye and Trianon, which redrew the borders of Eastern Europe and created new States.

The post-First World War Minority Treaties represented an unprecedented effort by the international community to establish legal protections for minority groups in the context of peace agreements. These treaties, signed by emerging nations and former imperial powers, recognised a variety of rights for national and linguistic minorities. One of these rights was equality before the law. The treaties stipulated that minorities should be treated in the same way as the majority, without discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin, language, religion or culture. Another important right was the right to education and the use of the mother tongue. The treaties recognised the right of minorities to educate their children in their own language and to use their language in public and private life. The treaties have also prohibited discrimination against minorities on the basis of their ethnic origin, language, religion or culture. They have also recognised the right of minorities to practise their own religion and to maintain and develop their own culture. Finally, the treaties have recognised the right of minorities to participate in political life and to be represented in government institutions. Despite these protections, the implementation of these treaties was often hampered by opposition from national governments, lack of resources and the inability of the League of Nations to enforce them effectively. The inter-war period, marked by the rise of nationalism and totalitarianism, saw numerous violations of minority rights, culminating in the genocide of the Second World War.

The League of Nations petition system

One of the mechanisms that the League of Nations put in place to protect minorities was the petitions system. This system allowed members of minorities to bring any violations of their rights directly to the attention of the League of Nations, rather than having to go through their national government. Once a petition was received, it was examined by the Secretariat of the League of Nations, which decided whether it was admissible. If it was, the petition was then sent to the country concerned for a response. The petition, together with the government's response, was then examined by the Council of the League of Nations, which could decide to take a series of measures. These ranged from a simple expression of concern to recommendations, more in-depth investigations and diplomatic interventions.

The petitions system set up by the League of Nations to protect minority rights has had mixed success. When it worked as intended, it could provide some protection for minorities and give a voice to marginalised groups. However, these successes were often limited by a number of factors. One of the biggest challenges was the lack of cooperation from some member states. Although the League of Nations had the power to investigate allegations of violations of minority rights, these investigations often depended on the willingness of the State concerned to cooperate. If a State refused to provide information or to allow investigators to enter its territory, it was very difficult for the League of Nations to verify the allegations contained in the petitions. In addition, the petitions system was often perceived as interference in the internal affairs of states. This created diplomatic tensions and sometimes led to a reluctance on the part of states to respect the decisions of the League of Nations. Countries that felt targeted by petitions could resist intervention by the League of Nations, which made it difficult to effectively implement protections for minorities. The petitions system only applied to states that had signed specific minority treaties. This meant that many minority groups in countries that had not signed these treaties had no recourse if their rights were violated.

The League of Nations petitions system certainly helped to resolve some minority conflicts during the 1920s. It provided a framework within which minorities could voice their concerns and obtain some form of redress. However, the effective protection of minorities depended largely on the political will of the Member States of the League of Nations. Unfortunately, not all Member States were willing to act in favour of minorities, particularly when they felt that doing so might compromise their national sovereignty or internal interests. In many cases, the League of Nations lacked the authority to enforce its decisions, which made the protection of minorities more difficult. This highlights one of the key limitations of the League of Nations in minority protection: although it has been able to resolve some minority conflicts through its system of petitions, it has often been hampered by a lack of political will on the part of member states. This reflects the fundamental tension between respect for national sovereignty and the protection of human rights, a tension that continues to challenge the international community today.

When Member States joined the League of Nations, they undertook to respect the minority treaties they had signed. This meant that they had to guarantee certain fundamental rights to their minorities, such as the right to non-discrimination, the right to culture, religion and language, and the right to political representation. The League of Nations petitions system provided minorities with an important means of drawing attention to violations of their rights. Petitions were considered by committees of the League of Nations and, if deemed admissible, could lead to an investigation on the ground. The League of Nations investigators could then draw up a report on the situation and recommend measures to remedy the situation. In some cases, these investigations led to remedial action by Member States. However, as noted earlier, the success of these efforts depended largely on the willingness of the Member State concerned to cooperate with the League of Nations and to take the necessary steps to protect the rights of the minority concerned. Moreover, even where remedial action was taken, it was often insufficient to address the systematic problems at the root of minority rights violations.

Despite the efforts of the League of Nations to protect the rights of minorities and prevent conflict, the system showed its limitations in the face of the rise of authoritarian regimes in the 1930s. The rise of Nazism in Germany, Fascism in Italy and militarism in Japan led to an escalation of violence and aggression, including against minorities. In this context, the protections afforded by the treaties relating to minorities were systematically violated. In addition, the League of Nations itself was weakened by the refusal of certain Member States to cooperate. The lack of effective enforcement mechanisms has made it difficult to apply minority protections and resolve conflicts. For example, the League of Nations was unable to prevent Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935, or Nazi Germany's annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia in the years that followed. These failures helped to discredit the League of Nations and led to its dissolution after the Second World War. However, the experience of the League of Nations influenced the creation of the United Nations and contributed to the development of international standards for the protection of minority rights.

The system of monitoring and control established by the League of Nations played a significant role in easing tensions between States and their minorities during the 1920s. Through this system, members of minorities could petition the League of Nations to report violations of their rights. These petitions were then examined by the League of Nations, which investigated the allegations. On the basis of these investigations, the League of Nations could make recommendations or adopt resolutions addressed to the States concerned. This system has made it possible to draw attention to the problems of minorities, to make States face up to their responsibilities and to encourage reforms to improve the situation of minorities. However, this system also has its limits, particularly when States have refused to cooperate or have ignored the recommendations of the League of Nations.

The League of Nations petitions system also included the sending of fact-finding missions to the field. The aim of these missions was to assess the situation of the minorities concerned in more detail, by meeting both State and minority representatives and by observing living conditions on the ground. Based on the results of these investigations, the League of Nations could then make recommendations for improving the situation of the minorities concerned. This approach made it possible to establish a dialogue between States and their minorities, thereby helping to prevent open conflicts. By making problematic situations public, the League of Nations was able to exert pressure on States to respect minority rights. However, this system has also been the subject of much criticism. On the one hand, some minorities have complained about the slowness of the procedures and the lack of concrete action following investigations. On the other hand, some States have accused the League of Nations of interfering in their internal affairs. Finally, the effectiveness of the system depended largely on the willingness of States to respect their obligations towards minorities, which was not always the case, particularly with the rise of authoritarian regimes in the 1930s.

The Kurdish question

The Kurdish question is a complex and persistent example of the challenges associated with managing ethnic minorities. The Kurds are one of the largest ethnic groups without a state of their own. After the First World War, the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres envisaged the creation of a Kurdish state, but this project was never realised. Instead, the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne established the borders of modern Turkey, without mentioning the Kurds. As a result, the Kurdish population found itself divided mainly between four states: Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. Each state has adopted its own policy towards the Kurdish minority, often oscillating between repression and the granting of certain rights. In Turkey, the Kurds have faced policies of forced Turkification and restrictions on the use of their language and culture. In Iraq and Syria, Kurds have also faced discrimination and Arabisation policies. In Iran, although the Kurds enjoy a degree of autonomy, they have also suffered discrimination and persecution.

The Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, which replaced the Treaty of Sevres, redefined the borders of modern Turkey, but did not establish an independent Kurdish state. As a result, the Kurds found themselves spread across several territories, including Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. In each of these countries, the Kurds have often been considered an ethnic and linguistic minority, and have often faced discrimination, marginalisation and sometimes even efforts to suppress their culture and identity. This has led to a long history of conflict and demands for greater autonomy or even independence. The situation of the Kurds is therefore an example of the complexity of the problems associated with the management of ethnic minorities, and of the difficulties that can arise when national borders do not correspond to ethnic or cultural divisions.

The Kurdish question is a complex, multidimensional problem that has been going on for almost a century. With the rejection of the Treaty of Sèvres and its replacement by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, the promise of an independent Kurdish state evaporated. The Kurds were integrated into several new nation-states - principally Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria - where they became minorities. In these countries, Kurds have often been subjected to policies of forced assimilation, discrimination and repression. These policies and the resulting Kurdish resistance movements have often led to violence and conflict.

The Kurdish uprising of 1925, also known as the Sheikh Said Rebellion, is an important example of the struggle for Kurdish autonomy and the harsh response of national governments. Sheikh Said, a Kurdish tribal leader, led an uprising against the government of the Republic of Turkey, with the aim of creating an independent Kurdish state. However, the uprising was quickly and violently put down by Turkish forces. Thousands died in the fighting and many Kurds were displaced. In addition, the rebellion led to increased repression of the Kurds by the Turkish government, including restrictions on the use of the Kurdish language and the practice of Kurdish customs.

The situation of the Kurds in Turkey in the 1930s was complex and difficult. The government of the young Republic of Turkey had a policy of "turquification" aimed at creating a unified Turkish national identity. In this context, the Kurds were subjected to a great deal of discrimination and restrictions on their language and culture. The Dersim rebellion (1937-1938), also known as the Tunceli event, is an example of the violent repression of the Kurds in Turkey. Unfortunately, the League of Nations, despite the efforts of some members, was unable to intervene effectively to protect the rights of the Kurds. The Treaty of Sèvres, which could have established an independent Kurdistan, had already been replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne, which made no provision for a Kurdish state. The situation of the Kurds in Turkey, as well as in the other countries where they are present, remains complex and often precarious. The Kurds continue to fight for recognition of their cultural, linguistic and political rights, as well as for greater autonomy or independence.

The PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) in Turkey is a notable example of this conflict. Founded in 1978, the PKK initially sought to establish an independent Kurdish state. However, in the face of intense repression and political change, the PKK later shifted its focus to greater autonomy and cultural and political rights for Kurds in Turkey. The conflict between the PKK and the Turkish government has been marked by decades of violence, displacement and human rights abuses. It illustrates how minority issues and population movements can lead to protracted and deep-rooted conflicts.

The Kurdish question remains a major concern in the Middle East. The Kurdish people, estimated to number between 30 and 40 million, are one of the largest populations in the world without a nation state of their own. The Kurds are mainly concentrated in a region known as Kurdistan, which stretches across parts of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. In Turkey, tensions between the Kurds and the Turkish government are recurrent, often marked by episodes of violence. The Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), considered a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the European Union and the United States, has led an armed insurrection to obtain Kurdish autonomy since the 1980s, provoking persistent conflicts. In Iraq, the Autonomous Region of Kurdistan was created after the 1991 Gulf War and gained further autonomy after the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. However, there are ongoing conflicts over control of resources, particularly oil, and disputed territories, such as the city of Kirkuk. In Iran, the Kurds have also demanded greater rights and autonomy, but have often faced severe repression. In Syria, the civil war that began in 2011 has created space for Kurds to claim autonomy in the north of the country, although this autonomy remains precarious given the ongoing regional and international conflicts.

The League of Nations and the challenge of minorities

In the 1920s, the League of Nations set up a system to monitor the treatment of minorities in Europe. This international institution was created after the First World War with the aim of maintaining international peace and security. It was charged with guaranteeing respect for minority rights in accordance with the Paris Peace Treaties (1919-1920), which recognised the principle of national and linguistic minorities. These treaties contained specific clauses to protect minorities. For example, they guaranteed freedom of religion and the right to education in the mother tongue. The Member States of the League of Nations undertook to respect these rights and to guarantee the protection of minorities on their territory. The League of Nations set up a petitions system to monitor compliance with these commitments. Minorities could send petitions to the League of Nations to report any violation of their rights. These petitions were then examined by the League of Nations, which could make recommendations to Member States to improve the situation of minorities. Overall, this system helped to contain some of the tensions surrounding minorities in Europe during the 1920s. However, it had its limitations, such as the fact that it depended on the willingness of member states to honour their commitments to minorities. Furthermore, the League of Nations did not have the power to enforce its recommendations, which limited its effectiveness in protecting minorities.

The League of Nations introduced a system of petitions, enabling individuals or groups belonging to minorities to report violations of their rights directly to this international institution. This procedure was a major advance for its time, as it gave minorities a voice at international level. The main aim of the petitions system was to prevent conflicts by addressing problems as soon as they were reported. If minority rights were violated, the League of Nations would investigate and, if the allegations were found to be well-founded, it could make recommendations to the country concerned to remedy the situation. However, this system had its limits. For example, the League of Nations had no coercive means of forcing a state to change its practices. Moreover, its effectiveness depended largely on the political will of Member States to take on board the League of Nations' recommendations. Nevertheless, the petitions system played an important role in providing minorities with a means of making their concerns heard at international level.

The failure of the League of Nations to prevent the Second World War was largely attributed to its inability to manage tensions over national minorities, particularly in Eastern Europe. The Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia is a particularly notable example. Populated mainly by German speakers, this region was claimed by Nazi Germany. Adolf Hitler used this claim as a pretext to demand the annexation of the Sudetenland. Despite efforts by the League of Nations to resolve the crisis peacefully, the region was finally annexed by Germany at the Munich Conference in 1938, an event that marked a turning point in the rising tensions that led to the Second World War. Similarly, the Danzig Corridor, a strip of territory linking Poland to the Baltic Sea and populated mainly by German speakers, was also claimed by Germany. The failure of the League of Nations to resolve these disputes peacefully contributed to the escalation of tensions and eventually led to the outbreak of the Second World War. These examples illustrate the limitations of the League of Nations' approach to minority protection and the disastrous consequences of these failures. Even today, the management of minorities remains a major challenge for international peace and stability.

The question of minorities played a central role in the diplomatic and political tensions that preceded the Second World War. Despite the efforts of the League of Nations to protect the rights of minorities and prevent conflict, tensions rose, largely as a result of the discriminatory and aggressive policies adopted by certain States towards minorities on their territory. In some cases, these tensions have resulted in aggressive territorial claims, such as those of Nazi Germany over the Sudetenland and the Danzig corridor. In other cases, they led to policies of oppression and persecution against certain minorities, as was the case with the Jews in Germany and other parts of Europe. The failure of the League of Nations to resolve these problems not only highlighted the limitations of its approach to the question of minorities, but also contributed to undermining its credibility and authority on the international scene. This failure contributed to the rising tensions that eventually led to the Second World War. Minorities continue to be an important issue in international relations today, and the need to protect minority rights is widely recognised. However, the question of how to protect these rights effectively remains a complex and sensitive one.

Collective security policy

The principles of the League of Nations' collective security policy

The policy of collective security, as adopted by the League of Nations, marked a major break with the previous system of balance of power. Instead of maintaining a delicate balance between different powerful nations to prevent war, collective security sought to unite all countries in a common effort to prevent aggression and maintain peace. This concept is based on the idea that the security of one country is intrinsically linked to the security of all the others. In other words, it is not in the interest of one country to allow aggression against another, as this could disrupt global peace and stability and ultimately threaten its own security. Under this system, all member states of the League of Nations undertook to defend any other member that came under attack. In theory, this should have deterred any attempt at aggression, as the aggressor would have faced a collective response from all other League of Nations members.

With the policy of collective security, the idea was to prevent armed conflicts before they even occurred, by ensuring that all member states showed solidarity with each other. It is an interdependent system. The policy of collective security is based on the idea that the Member States of the League of Nations are interdependent and that aggression against one Member State is aggression against all Member States. This means that Member States have an obligation to cooperate to ensure the security of all Member States and to maintain international peace and security. Thus, the collective security policy was designed to deter potential aggression by ensuring that an attack on one state would be treated as an attack on all. This was based on the idea that every state had an interest in preserving international peace and security, as the violation of these principles would not only have affected the victim state, but would have destabilised the international order as a whole. The aim of this policy was to create an environment in which States would feel deterred from using force against other States, in the knowledge that such action would provoke a collective response from the international community.

The effectiveness of the collective security policy has been hampered by a number of factors. Firstly, the commitment to intervene in defence of other member states was, in practice, often considered too risky or costly by some states, who feared being drawn into conflicts that did not directly affect their own national interests. Secondly, the League of Nations had no armed forces of its own and depended on its member states to implement its resolutions. This meant that it could not guarantee an effective military response in the event of aggression. Thirdly, the absence of certain major powers, such as the United States, also weakened the credibility and effectiveness of the League of Nations. The refusal of these countries to join the League of Nations or to actively support its efforts to maintain peace undermined the organisation's authority and its ability to effectively implement the policy of collective security. Finally, the League of Nations was designed to keep the peace in peacetime, but it was not equipped to deal with open aggression or all-out war. When Germany and Italy began to rearm and challenge the world order in the 1930s, the League of Nations was unable to stop them, which eventually led to the Second World War.

The legal bases of the League of Nations' collective security policy

Articles 8 and 16 of the Covenant of the League of Nations are the legal and intellectual foundations on which the collective security policy of the League of Nations rests.

Article 8 states that "the Members of the League recognise that the maintenance of peace requires the reduction of national armaments to a minimum consistent with national security and the application by all Members of the League of international sanctions against any Member which violates the Covenant". This article established the principle of arms reduction and the commitment of Member States not to use military force aggressively. Article 8 of the League of Nations Covenant represents one of the first multilateral efforts to control and reduce armaments. It recognises the idea that the maintenance of international peace requires the limitation of armaments to the minimum level necessary for national security. This approach was intended to deter military escalation and promote confidence between member states. The Council of the League of Nations was to work on disarmament plans and member governments were expected to approve and implement them. In practice, however, this provision encountered many obstacles. Some member states were reluctant to disclose detailed information about their armed forces and limit their ability to defend themselves. Furthermore, without an effective capacity for enforcement and control, this article was often ignored, particularly during the 1930s, when international tensions began to rise, eventually leading to the Second World War.

Article 16 states that "any Member of the League which resorts to war in violation of the undertakings given in Articles 12, 13 or 15 shall ipso facto be considered as having committed an act of war against all the other Members of the League". This article established the principle of collective security by making aggression against one Member State an aggression against all other Member States. Article 16 of the Covenant of the League of Nations provided that any State committing aggression or war against another State would be considered as having committed an act of war against all the other Member States. The latter would then be obliged to break off all commercial and financial relations with the aggressor State, to refuse all support to the latter and, if necessary, to give it military assistance.

The aim of this provision was to discourage aggression through economic sanctions and possible collective military action. It is based on the idea of deterrence: if a State knows that aggression on its part will result in sanctions by all the other States, it will be less likely to commit such aggression. However, this policy showed its limits in practice. Many states were reluctant to intervene in the conflicts of other states, and the League of Nations did not have the capacity to force its members to abide by its decisions. In addition, some major powers, such as the United States, were not members of the League of Nations, which limited its ability to enforce its resolutions. As a result, despite the existence of this article, the League of Nations failed to prevent the aggression that led to the Second World War.

Peacekeeping mechanisms

One of the main aims of the League of Nations was to establish a policy of collective security. This policy aimed to ensure that all member states worked together to maintain international peace and security, supporting each other in the face of any aggression by a member state. To achieve this goal, the League of Nations put in place various mechanisms, such as international conventions, disarmament conferences and economic sanctions against aggressor states.

The League of Nations played a key role in facilitating and guaranteeing numerous international agreements and pacts. The Pact of Paris or Briand-Kellogg Pact in 1928 was one such effort. This was an international treaty in which the signatories promised not to use war as a means of resolving conflicts or disputes. The treaty was signed by most of the major powers of the day, and the League of Nations was charged with guaranteeing it. Similarly, the Locarno Treaty of 1925 was another major effort to secure peace in Europe after the First World War. This was a series of agreements between Germany, Belgium, France, the United Kingdom and Italy, which guaranteed the borders of France and Belgium against German aggression. In exchange, France and Belgium agreed to normalise their relations with Germany and recognise it as an equal power on the international stage. These agreements were supposed to maintain peace and stability in Europe and represented a new approach to international security, based on diplomacy and international law rather than military force. However, despite these efforts, the League of Nations failed to prevent the rise of militarism and the outbreak of the Second World War.

The Geneva Disarmament Conference

The Geneva Disarmament Conference, held from 1932 to 1934, was one of the League of Nations' most ambitious efforts to achieve global disarmament. It brought together representatives from 60 countries, and its main objective was to reduce armaments to their simplest form in order to limit the possibility of war between nations. The conference called for significant reductions in military forces on land, sea and in the air. It also proposed measures to improve transparency and the application of disarmament agreements, for example by requiring countries to provide detailed information on their military forces and defence plans.

However, despite initial hopes, the conference failed to reach a significant agreement. A number of major obstacles hampered the negotiations. The major militarised countries, such as Germany, Japan and Italy, insisted on equal arms rights, while the already heavily armed powers (such as the UK, France and the US) were reluctant to disarm to the level desired by these countries. In addition, a lack of political will, rising international tensions and a failure to put in place effective control measures also contributed to the failure of the conference.

The conference officially ended in 1934 without any significant agreement being reached, and marked a major failure for the League of Nations. This failure illustrated the limitations of the organisation to effectively control armaments and maintain peace in an increasingly tense period.

The Locarno Pact

The Locarno Pact, sometimes referred to as the "Locarno Treaty" or the "Locarno Accords", was signed on 1 December 1925. It represented a turning point in post-First World War international relations, as it symbolised reconciliation between Germany, France and Belgium. The Locarno Agreement comprised several separate treaties. The most important was the Franco-German Arbitration Treaty, in which the two countries undertook not to resort to war and to settle their differences through arbitration. Similar arbitration treaties were signed between Germany and Belgium and between Germany and Poland. In addition, Germany agreed to recognise the borders established by the 1919 Treaty of Versailles and undertook to respect the borders of France and Belgium. In return, France, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Italy agreed to provide mutual assistance in the event of unprovoked aggression against any of them by Germany.

The Locarno Pact, signed in 1925, was widely regarded at the time as a major turning point and a symbol of hope for peace and stability in Europe. It created a sense of optimism, as it seemed to signal a willingness on the part of the European powers, particularly Germany, to resolve their differences through diplomatic and peaceful means rather than war. However, this optimism was short-lived. With the rise of nationalism and militarism in Germany in the 1930s, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the terms of the Locarno Pact were ignored. In 1936, Germany remilitarised the Rhineland, a region that the Locarno Treaty had declared demilitarised, in direct violation of the agreement. The inherent weakness of the Locarno Pact was that it relied on the will of the signatories to honour their commitments. When that will failed, there was no way of forcing a country to respect the terms of the pact. The collapse of the Locarno Pact marked the failure of the inter-war approach to international diplomacy, based on multilateral agreements and the goodwill of nations. It also demonstrated the inability of the League of Nations to prevent aggression and preserve peace, ultimately leading to the outbreak of the Second World War.

The Locarno Pact was a crucial step in establishing collective security in Europe in the 1920s. Collective security is the concept that the security of one state is intrinsically linked to the security of all the others. Consequently, the mutual guarantee of borders between these European countries strengthened regional stability and was seen as an important measure to prevent another major conflict in Europe. The nature of the Locarno Pact, which involved several mutual guarantees of non-aggression and respect for borders, created collective security between the signatories. These guarantees constituted a collective commitment to maintain peace, reinforcing the interdependence of the signatory countries for their security. Germany's entry into the League of Nations in 1926, facilitated by the Locarno Pact, also marked a significant moment in international relations at the time. It was recognition that Germany, as the defeated nation of the First World War, was once again an important player on the international stage. It was also further proof of Germany's commitment to respecting international norms and working by peaceful means to resolve disputes. Nevertheless, these commitments did not prevent the outbreak of the Second World War a decade later.

The Briand-Kellogg pact

Signatory countries of the Briand-Kellogg pact.

The Briand-Kellogg Pact, also known as the Paris Pact, was signed on 27 August 1928. It was initiated by Aristide Briand, the French Foreign Minister, and Frank B. Kellogg, the US Secretary of State. The Pact is essentially a multilateral treaty that prohibits the use of war as a means of resolving international conflicts or disputes. Instead, it encourages the peaceful settlement of disputes between nations. The pact did not provide for sanctions in the event of non-compliance, and therefore, despite the large number of signatory countries (in total, around 63 countries eventually joined the pact), it had limited effectiveness.

The Paris Pact or Briand-Kellogg Pact marked a turning point in international law, in that it established aggressive war as an illegal act. The Pact was primarily moral and legal in nature, and was intended to convince the nations of the world that war as an instrument of national policy was unacceptable and should be renounced. However, although the pact was an important step towards the international condemnation of war, it failed to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War a decade later. The Pact did not include mechanisms to ensure compliance or to punish those who violated it, which largely limited its effectiveness. Despite these limitations, the Paris Pact has left an important legacy. It provided the basis for the subsequent development of international law on war and peace, and its principle of aggressive war as an international crime was reaffirmed at the Nuremberg trials after the Second World War.

The Briand-Kellogg Pact, signed in 1928, marked a turning point in the international community's approach to war and the settlement of disputes. It was signed by almost all the nations of the world at the time, with the express aim of renouncing war as an instrument of national policy. Nevertheless, although the pact represented a pacifist ideal, it suffered from several major limitations. It did not include provisions for the application or enforcement of its terms, nor did it include specific sanctions for countries that violated the pact. Furthermore, although the pact prohibited war as an instrument of national policy, it did not prohibit the use of force in self-defence. These limitations, combined with the absence of an effective international body to enforce the pact, ultimately limited its effectiveness. Despite this, the Briand-Kellogg Pact remains an important symbol of the aspiration for international peace and security during the inter-war period, and it laid the foundations for some of the fundamental principles of international law that were subsequently developed, including the idea that aggressive war is an international crime.

The Briand-Kellogg Pact, despite its laudable intention, failed to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War. The lack of coercive mechanisms to ensure compliance with the commitments made by the signatory states and the inability of the League of Nations to prevent aggression and war were largely responsible for this failure. It is important to note that the Briand-Kellogg Pact, like many other diplomatic efforts of the time, was based on the diplomatic concept of "pacta sunt servanda", which means that "treaties must be respected". However, without adequate means to enforce this norm, it remained largely theoretical. Despite its failure, the Briand-Kellogg Pact set an important precedent in international law by making aggressive war an illegal act. It laid the foundations for the rules and principles of international law that were developed after the Second World War, notably through the United Nations.

The project to federate the peoples of Europe

In 1929, Aristide Briand, as France's Minister of Foreign Affairs, proposed the idea of a European federal union. His aim was to strengthen peace in Europe and mitigate the harmful economic effects of the system of national frontiers. In a memorandum to the League of Nations in 1930, Briand set out his vision of a European union based on economic and political solidarity. He saw this as an extension of the logic of collective security, where nations share responsibility for maintaining peace and security. However, Briand was not seeking to create a European superstate, but rather a confederation of sovereign states that would choose to cooperate in their common interests. Unfortunately, this proposal was not implemented at the time due to a lack of political support and growing tensions in Europe. However, the idea of a European union never completely disappeared and finally took shape after the Second World War with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, which later evolved into the European Union.

While some countries welcomed the idea of European union proposed by Briand, others were more reticent. Britain, for example, was concerned about the idea of sharing sovereignty or engaging in further political integration in Europe. It feared this would damage its relationship with the Commonwealth and weaken its international influence. Other countries, such as Germany and Italy, were also reluctant to embrace the idea of European union because of their own nationalist and expansionist agendas. Moreover, the economic instability of the time, marked by the Great Depression, made it difficult to realise ambitious projects like Briand's. In the end, Briand's project for a European union did not come to fruition at the time. However, the idea of European cooperation survived and took shape after the Second World War with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community, the forerunner of today's European Union.

Although Aristide Briand's project for a European federation did not come to fruition in the 1920s, it nevertheless laid the foundations for future European cooperation. The principles of cooperation and integration he promoted influenced the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, which later evolved into the European Economic Community in 1957 and finally the European Union of today. It also marked the beginning of an ongoing debate on the nature and extent of European integration, which remains a key issue in European politics.

The inability of the League of Nations to keep the peace

The rise of totalitarian regimes, notably Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, severely tested the League of Nations' ability to keep the peace. Despite attempts by the League of Nations to implement a policy of collective security and disarmament, these regimes pursued their expansionist ambitions, which ultimately led to the Second World War. These actions, including the rearmament of Germany, the remilitarisation of the Rhineland and the Anschluss (or annexation) of Austria in 1938, were in flagrant violation of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and the principles of the League of Nations. The failure of the League to prevent these actions underlined its weakness and undermined its credibility. The failure of the League of Nations eventually led to its dissolution in 1946 and its replacement by the United Nations, an international organisation whose aim was to avoid the mistakes made by the League of Nations and prevent another destructive world conflict.

Several factors contributed to the inability of the League of Nations to maintain international peace and security.

The unanimous vote

This unanimity rule was one of the main structural weaknesses of the League of Nations. It often prevented the organisation from taking decisive and effective action in times of crisis, as every member state, regardless of its size or power, had the ability to block a resolution. As a result, the organisation was often unable to resolve conflicts or prevent aggression, particularly in the 1930s, with the rise of totalitarian regimes and the outbreak of the Second World War.

This was one of the lessons learned from the experience of the League of Nations when the United Nations was created after the Second World War. In the UN system, certain decisions, particularly those concerning security issues, can be taken by majority vote, not unanimity. Only the five permanent members of the Security Council - China, the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Russia - have the right of veto.

The absence of major powers such as the United States and the Soviet Union for much of the League of Nations' existence has certainly weakened its authority and ability to act decisively. US membership of the League of Nations was rejected by the US Senate in 1919, mainly because of concerns about loss of sovereignty and involvement in European affairs. This considerably diminished the legitimacy and effectiveness of the League of Nations, given the economic and military weight of the United States on the international stage.

The Soviet Union did not join the League of Nations until 1934. However, it was excluded in 1939 following its invasion of Finland, another member of the League of Nations. The League of Nations suffered from a lack of commitment from some of the major powers, which contributed to weakening its authority and effectiveness. The lessons learned from this experience also helped shape the structure of the United Nations after the Second World War, which from the outset included all the major powers among its founding members.

No enforcement mechanism

One of the main weaknesses of the League of Nations was its inability to apply effective punitive measures against countries that broke the organisation's rules. With no armed forces of its own, the League of Nations relied heavily on the goodwill of its members to respect and enforce its resolutions. When a country chose to ignore these resolutions, as happened with Italy's aggression against Ethiopia in 1935, the League of Nations was largely powerless to respond effectively.

Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 and Japan's withdrawal in 1933 are key examples of how the League of Nations was unable to enforce its own resolutions. Despite the economic sanctions imposed by the League, Italy continued its invasion of Ethiopia, highlighting the ineffectiveness of these measures. Moreover, Japan was able to withdraw from the League without major consequences after its invasion of Manchuria. These failures seriously discredited the League of Nations and showed the limits of its collective security approach to maintaining international peace. These lessons were taken into account when the United Nations was created after the Second World War.

These events contributed to the League of Nations' loss of credibility and highlighted its structural weaknesses. These failures influenced the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War, which was given stronger powers to maintain international peace and security, although these powers also remain limited.

Incomplete universalism

The universalism of the League of Nations (League) was incomplete. Despite the central role played by US President Woodrow Wilson in the conception of the League of Nations, the United States never joined the organisation. Indeed, US membership of the League of Nations required ratification of the Treaty of Versailles by the US Senate, which included the Charter of the League. However, a number of US Senators were reluctant to commit to international obligations that they felt might compromise US sovereignty or involve the US in future conflicts. As a result, the Senate refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles, preventing the United States from joining the League of Nations. The absence of such an important global player undoubtedly weakened the effectiveness and credibility of the League of Nations. Consequently, although the idea of an international organisation for peace and security was avant-garde, practical implementation and universal membership were insufficient.

The initial exclusion of the defeated countries of the First World War - Germany, Austria, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire - also limited the universalism of the League of Nations. After the First World War, these countries were widely regarded as responsible for the conflict and were excluded from the League of Nations when it was founded. This led to a sense of injustice and resentment in these countries, particularly in Germany, which was treated particularly harshly by the Treaty of Versailles. Germany was not admitted to the League of Nations until 1926, and left in 1933 under the Nazi regime. The Soviet Union, which had not taken part in the Paris Peace Conference that created the League of Nations, did not join the organisation until 1934, but was expelled in 1939 after its invasion of Finland. This initial exclusion of the defeated countries, as well as other world powers, contributed to the ineffectiveness of the League of Nations and ultimately limited its ability to prevent another world war.

The Soviet Union was admitted to the League of Nations in 1934, a decade after its creation. This was an important step for the international community as the Soviet Union was one of the largest and most powerful countries yet to join. However, when the Soviet Union invaded Finland in 1939, during the Winter War, the League of Nations condemned this aggression and expelled the Soviet Union from the organisation. This expulsion demonstrated the inability of the League of Nations to prevent aggression by one of its members against another, thus underlining its fundamental weaknesses. The expulsion of the Soviet Union also highlighted another major weakness of the League of Nations: its inability to involve all countries in constructive dialogue and to keep all the major powers on board. Thus, despite its initial ambitions, the League of Nations proved powerless to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War.

Despite its universal objectives, the League of Nations encountered difficulties in maintaining the support and active participation of all its members. Several Latin American countries, including Argentina and Brazil, left the organisation during the 1930s, often in response to specific disagreements over the way the League of Nations dealt with international conflicts. Argentina left in 1933 in protest at the League of Nations' handling of the Chaco War conflict between Bolivia and Paraguay. Brazil left the organisation in 1935, unhappy with the way the League of Nations responded to the Spanish Civil War. These departures demonstrated not only the League of Nations' inability to manage international crises effectively, but also its inability to maintain membership and manage internal disagreements. These and other weaknesses eventually led to the collapse of the organisation and its replacement by the United Nations after the Second World War.

The incomplete universalism of the League of Nations contributed to its loss of legitimacy and its weakness in the face of rising international tensions in the 1930s. Indeed, the failure of the United States to join, despite the key role played by US President Woodrow Wilson in the creation of the organisation, weakened the League of Nations from the outset. In addition, the initial exclusion of Germany and the Soviet Union - two of the major powers at the time - contributed to the impression that the League of Nations was a club for the victors of the First World War rather than a genuine international organisation. In addition, the withdrawal of the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and Japan from the League of Nations in the 1930s underlined its inability to maintain international order. These factors undermined the credibility and authority of the League of Nations, and contributed to its failure as a peacekeeping institution. This lesson was taken on board when the United Nations was created after the Second World War, seeking to involve all the nations of the world from the outset.

The disagreement between the major powers that were members of the group

Disagreements between the great powers were a key factor in the failure of the League of Nations to maintain international peace. The absence of the United States, a major world power, certainly limited the influence and effectiveness of the League of Nations. In addition, the United Kingdom and France, the most powerful members of the League of Nations, often had conflicting interests and were not always prepared to take firm action to enforce the League's decisions. The rearmament of Germany and the remilitarisation of the Rhineland in 1935 is a classic case of the failure of the League of Nations. Despite the fact that these actions were clearly contrary to the Treaty of Versailles, the League of Nations was unable to prevent Germany from carrying them out. This failure not only underlined the impotence of the League of Nations, but also encouraged other countries to challenge the international order, contributing to the rising tensions that eventually triggered the Second World War. The divergence of interests between the great powers, the lack of will to act decisively, and the inability to enforce international rules all contributed to the failure of the League of Nations to maintain international peace in the 1930s.

The divergence of vision and interests between France and the United Kingdom, two major members of the League of Nations, was a major obstacle to the organisation's effectiveness. France, which had suffered heavy damage in the First World War and shared a border with Germany, tended to take a hard line towards Germany. It wanted to impose strict sanctions for breaches of the Treaty of Versailles and maintain a strong collective security system to deter further German aggression. The UK, on the other hand, was more concerned about the general economic and political stability of Europe, and feared that taking too hard a line against Germany would lead to an even more devastating conflict. The UK therefore often advocated a more conciliatory approach towards Germany and resisted calls for strong collective action from the League of Nations. These differences often paralysed the League of Nations and prevented it from taking decisive action to maintain international peace and security. Ultimately, these differences and the inability of the League of Nations to resolve conflicts effectively undermined its credibility and contributed to its ultimate failure.

France, having suffered great human and material losses in the First World War and sharing a border with Germany, wanted strong collective security to prevent future aggression. French leaders feared that Germany would seek revenge for the Treaty of Versailles, which imposed severe sanctions. They therefore supported a strong League of Nations with the power to punish violations of the Treaty of Versailles. On the other hand, the UK, although concerned about European security, was also aware of domestic economic and political pressures. British leaders feared that taking too hard a line against Germany would further destabilise the country and increase the risk of conflict. In addition, they felt that the recovery of the German economy was essential for the overall economic stability of Europe. As a result, they supported a softer approach towards Germany and were generally reluctant to support tough economic sanctions. These differences of opinion often made it difficult to reach consensus within the League of Nations and undermined the organisation's effectiveness in keeping the peace.

These differences of opinion and priorities between France and the United Kingdom certainly contributed to the weakening of the League of Nations. France was uncompromising in its desire to maintain security at all costs, often to the detriment of the League of Nations' ability to take effective and timely decisions. The United Kingdom, on the other hand, was often criticised for its hesitancy and lack of commitment to the League of Nations. This was seen by some as an unwillingness to take firm action to prevent conflict, which in turn undermined the credibility of the League. The failure to resolve these differences and to work in a unified manner led to a lack of effectiveness of the League of Nations as an international peacekeeping body. The League of Nations was increasingly perceived as powerless and unable to prevent conflict, a factor that contributed to the rising tensions that led to the Second World War.

After the devastating experience of the First World War, France sought to guarantee its future security by promoting a collective approach to resolving international conflicts. The idea of collective security, as promoted by Léon Bourgeois, was based on the idea that states should work together to maintain peace and deter aggression. According to this principle, an attack on one state would be considered an attack on all, and all member states of the League of Nations would have an obligation to help the attacked state. In theory, this system could have discouraged aggression by increasing the potential cost to the aggressor. However, in practice, the League of Nations often found it difficult to gain unanimous support for collective action, partly because of the unanimity rule. Moreover, as the League of Nations had no armed force of its own and could not impose effective sanctions, it had few means of enforcing its resolutions. Despite these difficulties, France's commitment to collective security was a determining factor in its foreign policy between the wars and influenced its efforts to support and strengthen the League of Nations.

Britain had global concerns, largely due to the size of its empire. It had a wider perspective than European security alone and was also concerned about global stability and the maintenance of colonial order. On collective security, Britain was concerned that it might be drawn into conflicts that were not in its direct national interest, or that it might be forced to support sanctions or military action that it did not support. As far as Germany was concerned, some British politicians felt that the Treaty of Versailles had been too harsh and that some concessions might help to pacify Germany and avoid another war. However, this approach sometimes conflicted with the stronger positions of France and other countries towards Germany. These different perspectives often led to disagreements and tensions within the League of Nations, limiting its effectiveness as a peacekeeping institution. Despite this, Britain remained a member of the League of Nations until its dissolution in 1946 and helped to create its successor, the United Nations.

Britain played a key role in both of these initiatives to stabilise the situation in Europe after the First World War. The Locarno Agreement, signed in 1925, was a major effort to ease tensions between Germany, France and Belgium. Under the supervision of Great Britain and Italy, these agreements saw Germany recognise its borders with France and Belgium, and these countries in return assured Germany that they would not seek to alter these borders by force. This was seen as a major step forward for peace in Europe at the time. The Dawes Plan, meanwhile, was an attempt to deal with the problem of German war reparations, which were weighing heavily on the German economy. Introduced in 1924 and overseen by the American politician Charles G. Dawes, this plan revised the timetable and amount of reparations owed by Germany following the Treaty of Versailles. It also provided for a system of loans to Germany, mainly financed by the United States, to help it pay these reparations. Great Britain played a decisive role in negotiating this agreement. However, despite these efforts, tensions in Europe did not completely disappear and eventually led to the Second World War.

The divergence of vision between France and Great Britain certainly played a role in the ineffectiveness of the League of Nations. While France wanted strong collective security to protect itself from Germany, Britain preferred a more moderate approach to peacekeeping. France, as the country most affected by the First World War, wanted a stricter approach to prevent another conflict on this scale. However, Great Britain, less affected by the conflict and with a global empire to manage, had different priorities. In addition, the two countries had different relations with Germany. Britain wanted to help rebuild Germany and normalise relations with it, while France was more suspicious of Germany. These differences created tensions and disagreements within the League of Nations, which contributed to weakening the organisation and limiting its effectiveness.

The divergence of interests between major powers such as Great Britain and France hampered the effectiveness of the League of Nations. Britain, as a global colonial power, was more concerned with protecting its economic and imperial interests around the world. As a result, it was less inclined to become involved in European or other conflicts that did not affect it directly. On the other hand, France, which had been badly damaged in the First World War, was keen to maximise security in Europe to avoid further German aggression. It often found itself isolated in these efforts, especially when it came to implementing punitive or preventive measures against countries that threatened the peace. These fundamental disagreements undermined the League of Nations' ability to take collective and decisive action to prevent aggression and maintain international peace. In the end, misunderstanding and incomprehension between the Great Powers contributed to the collapse of the League of Nations.

The work of the technical sections

Despite the many political failures of the League of Nations, its technical sections carried out very important work and were often hailed as one of the most successful aspects of the organisation. These technical sections, also known as "technical committees" or "specialised agencies", covered a wide range of non-political issues. These sections included the International Labour Office (ILO), the Health Commission, the Economic and Financial Organisation, and the Committee on Intellectual Circulation and Educational Exchanges, among others. The work of these sections often led to significant advances and laid the foundations for many of the specialised international organisations we know today. For example, the work of the Commission for Health laid the foundations for the World Health Organisation (WHO), while the International Labour Office became a specialised agency of the United Nations. These technical sections enabled the League of Nations to have a concrete and lasting impact on many aspects of daily life around the world, despite its failures on the political front.

The Technical Sections of the League of Nations were specialised bodies designed to foster international cooperation in a variety of non-political areas. Their remit was to bring together best practice, establish standards and protocols, and encourage the exchange of information between member countries. These technical sections were an essential aspect of the League of Nations' vision, which sought to promote peace not only by resolving political conflicts, but also by improving living conditions and promoting cooperation in all aspects of society. In the field of health, for example, the Office International d'Hygiène Publique (OIHP) worked to control the spread of infectious diseases. It has coordinated international vaccination and quarantine campaigns, and has played a major role in the fight against diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis. In the field of education and culture, the League of Nations created the International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation (IICI), which worked to promote intellectual and scientific cooperation, to establish universal standards in education, and to promote mutual understanding between peoples and cultures. In the economic sphere, the League of Nations has worked to stabilise national economies, regulate world markets and improve working conditions. The International Labour Office (ILO), for example, has established international labour conventions, including standards on working time, minimum wages, and safe and healthy working conditions.

The League of Nations' ambition was not limited solely to the prevention of armed conflict and the promotion of peace, but also extended to various other areas of international life. This holistic vision of international cooperation was very avant-garde and marks the beginning of what we now call global governance. The technical sections and specialised commissions of the League of Nations dealt with a range of subjects from public health and education to economics and trade. For example, the International Labour Office, one of the most active bodies of the League of Nations, was created to promote workers' rights, improve working conditions and promote social justice. Similarly, the Economic and Financial Commission was set up to deal with issues relating to the world economy and international trade, while the Commission for Intellectual Co-operation was concerned with promoting international collaboration in the fields of education, science and culture. This shows that the League of Nations had an ambitious vision for the organisation of international cooperation, which went far beyond the simple framework of security and peace.

Economics and finance

The concept of international economic regulation

The notion of international economic regulation emerged after the First World War, with the creation of the League of Nations. The leaders of the time realised that war was often the result of economic tensions and trade rivalries between nations, and so sought to regulate these exchanges to avoid further disasters. The League of Nations created a number of specialised economic organisations, such as the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in 1919 and the Universal Postal Union (UPU) in 1920. It also encouraged international cooperation in trade and investment through bilateral and multilateral treaties.

Prior to the First World War, the idea of international economic regulation was not widespread. The 19th and early 20th centuries were marked by a period of laissez-faire economics, characterised by minimal state intervention in the economy and a strong belief in free market mechanisms. However, the First World War and the economic crises that followed demonstrated the limits of this approach. The devastation of the war and the resulting economic instability convinced many leaders of the importance of some form of economic regulation to ensure stability and prosperity. The creation of the League of Nations and its specialised economic and financial bodies was an attempt to establish such regulation on an international scale.

At the time, the notion of national sovereignty was sacrosanct and the idea that the international economy could be regulated by a supranational entity like the League of Nations was quite revolutionary. This led to considerable resistance from many Member States, who saw it as interference in their internal affairs. Moreover, at that time, globalisation had not yet reached the level we know today. National economies were still relatively autonomous and international trade was limited compared with today's levels. This reduced the perceived urgency of economic regulation on an international scale.

After the devastation of the First World War, many recognised that the absence of strong international structures to regulate the economy had contributed to the rising tensions that led to the war. There was a desire to avoid repeating these mistakes and to create a more stable and cooperative system. One of the major initiatives of the League of Nations was the creation of the International Economic Conference in 1927. This conference brought together experts from many countries to discuss global economic problems and propose solutions. Although the conference did not succeed in reaching a consensus on all the issues, it laid the foundations for subsequent discussions on international economic regulation.

The League of Nations has made many efforts to address the issue of economic regulation on an international scale. The International Labour Organisation (ILO), founded in 1919 as a specialised agency of the League of Nations, is an excellent example. The ILO's mission is to promote decent work opportunities for all. It sets and promotes international labour standards, develops policies to create jobs, improves social protection and strengthens dialogue on labour issues. Another example is the International Refugee Office, founded in 1921, which looked after the many refugees from the First World War, many of whom were homeless and unemployed. The Office worked to help refugees resettle, find work and reintegrate into society.

The League of Nations played an active role in promoting international economic cooperation and establishing common rules for economic transactions. For example, the Geneva Convention on the International Carriage of Goods by Road, known as the TIR Convention, was adopted in 1949 under the auspices of the United Nations, but its origins can be traced back to League of Nations initiatives to facilitate international transport. The International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to Bills of Lading, also known as the Hague Rules, was adopted in 1924. It establishes uniform rules concerning the rights and obligations of carriers of goods by sea, which has contributed to the standardisation and predictability of international maritime transport. These conventions and other similar economic initiatives demonstrated the willingness of the League of Nations to extend its influence beyond simple questions of security and peace to encompass broader aspects of international cooperation. While not always fully successful, these initiatives laid the foundations for the international economic cooperation we see today under the aegis of the United Nations and other international organisations.

Despite its notable failures in conflict prevention, the League of Nations played a pioneering role in the development of international economic cooperation. The idea of international economic regulation continued to mature between the wars and was taken up by the Allies during the Second World War. The Bretton Woods system, set up in 1944, created the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The IMF was designed to supervise the international monetary system and prevent currency crises, while the World Bank was tasked with financing the reconstruction of Europe and Japan and promoting economic development in less developed countries. As for the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), it was concluded in 1947 with the aim of reducing trade barriers and promoting free trade. It became the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995. These organisations have been far more effective than the League of Nations in regulating the international economy and promoting economic cooperation. However, they owe much to the experience and lessons learned from the League of Nations.

Post-war economic problems

The break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire

The demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire led to the creation of several new states, including Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later to become Yugoslavia). These newly created countries had to set up their own economic and financial systems, which posed many challenges. The new borders hampered trade, as goods and people could no longer move freely as they had within the empire. Regions that had previously been interconnected found themselves isolated, disrupting production and supply chains.

The establishment of these commissions by the League of Nations was essential in stabilising the economies of the new states and averting a major financial crisis. These commissions helped to reform monetary systems, establish new financial institutions and put in place sound economic policies. In Austria, for example, after a period of hyperinflation, the League of Nations helped stabilise the currency by providing a loan and overseeing monetary reform. The Austrian Bank of Issue was created to control the money supply and the Austrian National Bank was restructured. In Hungary, the League of Nations also oversaw monetary reform and the stabilisation of the currency, the pengő, which replaced the Hungarian crown. In addition, the National Bank of Hungary was created to control monetary policy. Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia also received assistance from the League of Nations to reform their financial and monetary systems. These initiatives had a significant impact and enabled these countries to stabilise their economies, restore investor confidence and facilitate post-war reconstruction and economic development. However, the situation remained complex and fragile, with many challenges to overcome.

The break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire had significant economic consequences for Europe. Not only did it create instability for the countries that had emerged from the empire, but it also disrupted the wider European economy. Before the First World War, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was a major economic power. It encompassed a wide range of industrial and agricultural sectors, and its central position in Europe facilitated trade with the rest of the continent. With its break-up, these economic links were severed, leading to trade disruption. In addition, the Austro-Hungarian Empire used a single currency, the Crown, which was stable and widely accepted. After the break-up, each new state introduced its own currency, leading to problems of inflation, devaluation and conversion, which made economic transactions more complicated.

The end of the Austro-Hungarian customs zone created significant barriers to trade between the new states that had emerged from the Empire. Before the break-up of the Empire, there was free movement of goods and people across the zone, which encouraged trade and economic integration. After the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, each new country established its own customs policy, introducing tariffs and border controls. This hampered trade between these countries and made trade more expensive and complicated. In addition, political and economic instability in the region has also discouraged foreign investment, exacerbating economic problems. These new trade barriers have had a detrimental effect on the economies of these countries, as they have disrupted existing production and distribution chains. Many companies operating on an Empire-wide scale suddenly found themselves cut off from their markets and sources of supply. Faced with these challenges, states sought to conclude bilateral trade agreements to facilitate trade, but these agreements were often insufficient to compensate for the disruption caused by the disappearance of the Austro-Hungarian customs zone.

The new countries that emerged from the Austro-Hungarian Empire had to build their own economic and financial infrastructure, which took time and resources. During this period of transition, they faced major economic challenges, such as a contraction in economic activity, rising unemployment and falling living standards. These problems had repercussions for the European economy as a whole, in particular by causing instability in the financial markets and reducing trade volumes. Against this backdrop, the League of Nations attempted to stabilise the situation, for example by providing financial aid to some of the new states, but these efforts had limited success.

The League of Nations played a crucial role in helping the countries that had emerged from the Austro-Hungarian Empire to overcome the major economic challenges they faced. The new states faced a myriad of economic problems, including high inflation, rising unemployment, the depreciation of the new currencies and reduced trade due to the introduction of new customs barriers. The League of Nations set up economic and financial commissions to help these countries restore their economic stability. These commissions were made up of international experts who worked with local governments to implement appropriate monetary and fiscal policies. They also helped restructure international debts and create new financial institutions. In Austria, for example, the League of Nations played a crucial role in stabilising the economy after the war. It coordinated a programme of international loans that enabled Austria to stabilise its currency and revive its economy. The Society also helped introduce tax reform and restructure Austria's debt. In Hungary, the League of Nations also played an important role. It facilitated an international loan that enabled Hungary to stabilise its currency, the pengő. In addition, the League oversaw a tax reform and helped restructure Hungary's debt.

The creation of new financial institutions and the implementation of new economic policies were major challenges for the countries that emerged from the Austro-Hungarian Empire. To meet these challenges, the League of Nations set up commissions of experts to advise these countries. These commissions were generally made up of experienced economists and financiers from various countries. They worked with local governments to help restructure financial and economic systems. Their work included the creation of new central banks, the establishment of new currencies and the implementation of new economic policies. In Austria, for example, the Commission helped establish a new central bank and stabilise the new currency, the Austrian schilling. In Hungary, the Commission helped with debt restructuring and currency stabilisation. In addition, in several countries, the commissions helped to introduce policies to stimulate economic growth and employment.

The Austro-Hungarian Empire was a cornerstone of the European economy before the First World War. Its dismantling left an economic vacuum that disrupted the continent's economic balance. Austria and Hungary were particularly important because they were at the crossroads of Europe's trade routes. Their destabilisation therefore had repercussions for the whole continent. The League of Nations commissions worked with local governments to rebuild their economic and financial systems. They also helped to establish trade agreements between the new states to facilitate trade and contribute to the economic stability of the region. However, despite these efforts, the new states have faced many challenges, including inflation, unemployment and public debt. Some experienced long-term economic difficulties that lasted for several decades. The League of Nations nevertheless played a key role in stabilising the situation and laying the foundations for future economic cooperation in Europe. This experience set an important precedent for international efforts at economic stabilisation after the Second World War, including the creation of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

The role of the League of Nations in guaranteeing international loans

The League of Nations attempted to stabilise the economic situation in the post-First World War world by acting as a guarantor for international loans. This mechanism was designed to reassure creditors and facilitate access to credit for states that needed funds to rebuild after the war. The Society organised international loans for several countries, including Austria, Hungary, Greece and Bulgaria. The funds raised were used to stabilise currencies, reform tax systems, finance infrastructure and other development projects, and repay war debts.

The Greek-Turkish war, which ended with the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, led to a massive exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey. As a result, almost one and a half million Greek Orthodox refugees from Turkey arrived in Greece, exacerbating the country's economic problems and creating a major humanitarian crisis. The League of Nations played a key role in managing this crisis. It helped coordinate humanitarian assistance to the refugees, including the provision of food, water, shelter and medical care. It also set up the Commission for Refugees, which was responsible for overseeing the resettlement of refugees and providing them with the necessary assistance. In addition, the League of Nations helped Greece to obtain international loans to finance the costs of resettling refugees. In 1924, the League guaranteed a £12.5 million loan to Greece to help cover the costs of resettlement. This enabled Greece to build housing, schools and other necessary infrastructure for the refugees, and also helped to stimulate the Greek economy. The League of Nations' response to the refugee crisis in Greece is often regarded as one of its most important successes. It showed how an international organisation could effectively coordinate humanitarian aid and help resolve a large-scale refugee crisis. However, the crisis also highlighted the limits of international action, as many refugees continued to live in difficult conditions for many years.

International conventions to regulate and encourage trade

The League of Nations facilitated the adoption of a number of economic conventions and agreements to harmonise regulations and standards between countries. This approach was guided by a desire to make international trade more predictable and equitable, to promote economic growth and to prevent economic tensions that could lead to conflict.

Among these agreements is the Geneva Convention on the International Carriage of Goods by Road, which aimed to simplify customs formalities and facilitate the international transport of goods. Another example is the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to Bills of Lading, which aimed to establish uniform rules for maritime transport documents. The Convention on Freedom of Transit was one of the first international agreements to facilitate international trade by eliminating restrictions on the transit of goods. Signed in 1921, it laid the foundations for a multilateral trading system. The main idea behind this convention was that goods should be able to move freely from one country to another, without hindrance or discrimination. It therefore included provisions to guarantee freedom of transit through the territories of the States parties, which implied non-discrimination, equal treatment and the absence of unreasonable obstacles. This Convention therefore played a crucial role in the development of international trade between the wars, establishing key principles that were taken up in subsequent trading systems. It was an important milestone towards the creation of a more open and equitable multilateral trading system. The Convention was registered in the League of Nations Treaty Series on 8 October 1921, confirming its legal value and international importance.

The League of Nations also attempted to coordinate the monetary policies of member countries to avoid disorderly fluctuations in exchange rates that could disrupt international trade. These efforts laid the foundations for the multilateral trading system we have today, which is based on common rules and internationally negotiated agreements. However, it should be noted that the League of Nations was not able to solve all the trade problems of the time, not least because of the protectionist tensions of the Great Depression of the 1930s.

The work of the League of Nations was fundamental in laying the foundations of what would become today's international trading system. By harmonising international economic rules and simplifying customs formalities, it sought to facilitate trade and promote peaceful economic cooperation between nations.

The conventions and treaties adopted under the aegis of the League of Nations covered a wide range of areas.

The Paris Convention of 1919, more formally known as the "Convention regulating air navigation", was a major step in establishing international regulation of air transport. It was conceived at the International Air Navigation Conference in Paris in 1919, a meeting of 27 nations organised by France under the aegis of the League of Nations. The Convention established a series of fundamental principles that are still at the heart of international air transport regulation. For example, it affirmed that each state had complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory. It also stated that aircraft could only fly over or land on the territory of another contracting state with its agreement. The Paris Convention of 1919 also saw the creation of the International Commission of Air Navigation (CINA), which was responsible for facilitating the regulation of international civil aviation. However, with the rapid growth of commercial aviation, it became clear that the framework established by the Paris Convention was not sufficient. This led to the Chicago Convention in 1944, which established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as we know it today, and laid the foundations for modern international air law. The Paris Convention of 1919 was an important milestone in the development of international air transport regulation, even if it was superseded by the Chicago Convention.

The League of Nations Convention on the Transit of Goods through the Territories of Member States was a major effort to standardise and simplify customs procedures. The Convention was designed to facilitate international trade by eliminating unnecessary obstacles and making procedures more predictable and transparent. This included provisions to reduce transit fees, simplify the documents required for the transit of goods and ensure fair treatment for all Member States. In addition, the Convention also included provisions to help resolve trade disputes and encourage international cooperation. This was one of the League of Nations' many efforts to promote international economic cooperation and world peace. Although the League of Nations ultimately failed and was replaced by the United Nations, many of its principles and initiatives in trade and economic regulation have had a lasting influence.

The Madrid Convention concerning the International Registration of Marks, originally concluded in 1891, has undergone several revisions and amendments over the years, notably under the aegis of the League of Nations. This Convention created a system for the international registration of trademarks, enabling trademark owners to protect their marks in several countries by filing a single application for international registration. The 1925 revision, for example, was carried out under the auspices of the League of Nations. It made a number of important changes to the system of international trademark registration. The Madrid Convention continues to be administered today by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), a specialised agency of the United Nations. The Madrid System facilitates the international registration of trademarks and contributes to the harmonisation of intellectual property rights around the world.

These initiatives contributed to the establishment of an international regulatory framework to govern trade. Although the League of Nations ultimately failed to keep the peace and prevent another world war, its economic and trade efforts laid the foundations for the post-war international economic order, embodied in organisations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation.

The League of Nations played an important role in harmonising international economic rules and organising arbitration. It also helped states to obtain loans from major international banks, guaranteed loans, signed bilateral treaties and set up commissions to help newly-created countries rebuild their banking and financial systems. All this was aimed at reorganising the world economy after the First World War and avoiding economic conflict between nations. The UN took over some of the mechanisms put in place by the League of Nations, particularly in terms of economic regulation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. For example, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), created in 1945, succeeded the International Institute of Agriculture (IIA) created in 1905 under the aegis of the League of Nations. Similarly, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), whose mission is to settle legal disputes between States, replaced the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), created in 1920 by the League of Nations.

Participation in international economic conferences

Four major international conferences were held in the years that followed. These conferences were important for international economic regulation in the inter-war period.

The Brussels Financial Conference of 1920

The 1920 Brussels Financial Conference was convened by the League of Nations to find solutions for rebuilding the European economy after the First World War. It was held from 24 September to 8 October 1920 in Brussels, Belgium, and brought together representatives from 34 countries. It was the first opportunity for the world's leading countries to come together to discuss global economic and financial problems in the post-war period. Discussions focused on the stabilisation of currencies, the resolution of war debt problems, the harmonisation of economic and trade policies, and the creation of an International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

The Brussels Financial Conference in 1920 played a similar role to that of the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, in attempting to structure the world economy following the First World War. This conference addressed major economic issues and was prepared by leading economists of the time. Among them was Gijsbert Bruins, a Dutch economist renowned for his contributions to the quantitative theory of money. He played a key role in shaping discussions on international currency stabilisation. Gustav Cassel, a Swedish economist, also took part in the conference. Cassel was famous for his work on the theory of social exchange, as well as for his contribution to the theory of purchasing power parity, key concepts for discussions on the harmonisation of economic policies. Frenchman Charles Gide was another important participant at the conference. As co-founder of the cooperative movement in France, Gide brought a unique and important perspective to the table. Italian economist Maffeo Pantaleoni also played a crucial role at the Brussels conference. Renowned for his work on capital and interest, Pantaleoni was a leading representative of the neoclassical school in Italy. Finally, the British economist Arthur Pigou brought to the conference his work on the theory of welfare economics and the introduction of the concepts of external costs and benefits into economics. These ideas were essential for understanding and managing the social impacts of economic policies. Together, these economists brought their expertise to the Brussels Financial Conference, helping to develop solutions to the complex economic problems of the post-war era.

The 1920 Brussels Financial Conference marked a turning point in the way the world economy was to be managed after the chaos of the First World War. The delegates present stressed the crucial importance of maintaining a balanced budget to guarantee economic stability. This decision was aimed at limiting the use of excessive budget deficits, which could lead to inflation and economic imbalances. However, the most significant and controversial decision taken at the conference was the return to the gold standard. The principle of the gold standard implies that each currency is converted into a specific quantity of gold, thereby fixing its value. The aim of this measure was to restore stability to the global financial system after the war, by avoiding excessive currency fluctuations and establishing a climate of confidence between different nations. However, the return to the gold standard was widely criticised by some economists. They felt that this decision considerably limited the ability of governments to manage their economies by adjusting the value of their currency. Under a gold standard, the amount of gold a country owns largely determines the value of its currency. This means that governments have little room for manoeuvre to adjust the value of their currency according to economic conditions, which can lead to unfavourable economic situations in certain circumstances.

The Brussels Conference in 1920 emphasised the importance of exchange rate stability and the fight against inflation in restoring confidence in national monetary systems. Delegates were unanimous that economic recovery required a coordinated and coherent approach to these issues. They understood that monetary stability was a prerequisite for economic growth and post-war reconstruction. In addition, the conference reinforced the notion of international cooperation to ensure monetary stability. Excessive exchange rate fluctuations were recognised as harmful to international trade and global economic stability. It was therefore agreed that countries should work together to avoid such fluctuations and maintain a stable international monetary system. This desire for international cooperation in economic and financial matters was an important step towards the creation of international financial institutions in the decades that followed.

The Genoa Conference of 1922

The Genoa Conference of 1922. British Prime Minister Lloyd George is in the front row on the left.

The Genoa Conference, held from 10 April to 19 May 1922 in Italy, brought together representatives from 30 countries to discuss the economic reconstruction of Central and Eastern Europe and to improve relations between Soviet Russia and the European capitalist regimes. The Genoa Conference was a major step in the post-war attempts to restore economic and political stability in Europe. In particular, it aimed to resolve the persistent financial problems that had arisen as a result of the First World War and the Russian Revolution of 1917.

Discussions at the conference focused on financial and economic issues, such as the stabilisation of national currencies and the reconstruction of European economies. The conference was marked by a strong desire for international cooperation to restore confidence in the international monetary system and stimulate economic growth. The conference was also used as a platform to improve relations between Soviet Russia and European capitalist regimes. In a climate of mutual distrust, the participants sought to find ways of cooperating to ensure stability and peace in Europe.

The question of the economic restoration of Soviet Russia was a major topic at the Genoa Conference. The economic situation in Russia was disastrous as a result of the civil war and the Communist war policy. Western countries saw an opportunity to help rebuild the Russian economy and, at the same time, reintegrate Russia into the world economic system. To address this issue, the conference set up four commissions to study ways of mobilising foreign capital for the restoration of Russia. However, these efforts were hampered by differences of opinion among the participants. In particular, France and Belgium insisted on full repayment of pre-war loans and full restitution of foreign property that had been confiscated in Soviet Russia. These demands created tensions and eventually led to the collapse of the negotiations. The issue of Russia's economic restoration remained unresolved and continued to weigh on international relations in the years following the conference. This failure underlines the complexity of the challenges faced by the leaders of the day in trying to restore stability and prosperity to Europe after the First World War.

The Treaty of Rapallo, signed by Soviet Russia and the Weimar Republic (Germany) on the fringes of the Genoa Conference in 1922, marked a significant turning point in post-First World War international relations. The terms of the treaty provided for the mutual renunciation of all territorial and financial claims arising from the First World War. In addition, Germany and Soviet Russia agreed to normalise their diplomatic and trade relations. This reconciliation between two powers that had been enemies during the war surprised many observers and changed the balance of power in Europe. While the treaty itself did not include secret military provisions, it was soon followed by secret military cooperation between the two countries. This was partly due to the fact that both countries were diplomatically isolated and restricted by post-war peace treaties. For example, the Treaty of Versailles strictly limited Germany's military development. By secretly cooperating with Soviet Russia, Germany was able to circumvent some of these restrictions. The implications of the Treaty of Rapallo were widely felt across Europe and contributed to a new dynamic in international relations between the wars.

The 1927 Geneva Economic Conference

The 1927 Geneva Economic Conference, organised by the League of Nations, was the first attempt to organise international economic relations in Europe. It was organised in response to two previous failures, economic war and the bilateral approach to economic problems.

French economic leaders realised that their tripartite approach with Belgium and Germany risked ending unfavourably for their country, so they decided to extend the Franco-German dialogue to the Belgians. Belgium's financial shift towards the Anglo-Saxon powers and the City of London's attempt to take charge of the financial reorganisation of the continent also justified this initiative. The French government, led by L. Loucheur, took this initiative following the meeting of the League of Nations in Geneva in September 1925. Loucheur's vision for an economic league of European nations was highly ambitious. It envisaged coordination of the economic and trade policies of the member states, as well as the creation of a European common market.

Loucheur's vision for an economic league of European nations was certainly ambitious, but it was also avant-garde for its time. His idea foreshadowed future developments in European economic integration, leading to the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC) after the Second World War and ultimately to the European Union of today. Loucheur's proposal aimed to coordinate the economic and trade policies of the Member States, introduce common rules on trade and competition, and promote the free movement of goods, services and capital. Loucheur also envisaged the establishment of common institutions to oversee and manage this common European market.

However, the political and economic context of the time was not conducive to the realisation of these ideas. Tensions between European countries were still high after the First World War, and the economic situation was unstable, with the rise of protectionism and the economic crises of the 1920s and 1930s. What's more, the institutional structure of the League of Nations was not designed to facilitate such economic integration. It was not until after the Second World War that Loucheur's ideas took shape. The Marshall Plan of 1947, which aimed to rebuild Europe after the war, encouraged economic cooperation between European countries. And in 1957, the Treaty of Rome created the European Economic Community, laying the foundations for European economic integration as we know it today.

One of these failures was the inability to prevent or manage the economic war that had emerged after the First World War. This referred to a series of protectionist policies and trade barriers erected by many countries in order to protect their own economies. These policies, however, hampered international trade and contributed to global economic instability. Another failure was the bilateral approach to solving economic problems. Rather than seeking collective solutions to global economic problems, countries often negotiated bilateral agreements to protect their own interests. However, this approach often led to tensions and conflicts between countries, and failed to resolve the underlying economic problems.

The Geneva conference therefore attempted to create a multilateral framework for managing international economic relations. Delegates discussed a range of issues, including setting standards for international trade, arbitrating trade disputes and cooperating to stabilise national currencies. Unfortunately, despite the efforts made at the Geneva conference, global economic problems continued to worsen in the 1930s, eventually leading to the Great Depression. This demonstrated the difficulty of managing international economic relations and highlighted the need for more effective global economic cooperation, a problem that would later be addressed with the creation of the Bretton Woods institutions after the Second World War.

The 1933 London Economic Conference

The 1933 London Economic Conference was organised to try to find solutions to the world economic crisis that had begun in 1929. The aim of the participating countries was to reach an agreement to stimulate international trade and avoid protectionist economic policies that could worsen the situation. The conference also sought to stabilise exchange rates, which was essential to restore confidence in the international financial markets. Unfortunately, the conference failed to achieve all its objectives and did not result in a binding international agreement. One of the highlights of the conference was the speech by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who rejected calls for a return to the gold standard to stabilise exchange rates. He declared that the priority should be domestic economic recovery, even if this meant protectionist measures.

The London Conference of 1933 was conceived as a response to the deepening global economic crisis and rising trade barriers between countries. The economic crisis of 1929 had triggered a wave of protectionism across the world, with tariffs rising and measures adopted to limit imports of foreign products. This had a devastating impact on the global economy, reducing trade and exacerbating the economic crisis. Faced with this situation, there was growing pressure in the late 1920s to liberalise international trade. Advocates of this approach argued that the elimination of customs barriers and the adoption of policies favouring free trade would stimulate global economic growth and help resolve the crisis. It was against this backdrop that the London Conference was held. Participants hoped that by reducing trade barriers they could stimulate international trade and economic growth. Unfortunately, despite considerable efforts, the conference failed to produce a global agreement to reduce trade barriers and boost international trade. This failure underlined the difficulty of achieving international economic cooperation at a time of deep economic crisis.

At that time, the international monetary system was not regulated and exchange rates between different currencies fluctuated freely according to the markets and the monetary policies of different countries. This instability in exchange rates created difficulties for international trade, made economic planning difficult and was liable to trigger international financial crises. The experts of the time therefore sought to find solutions to regulate the international monetary system and avoid excessive exchange rate fluctuations. Against this backdrop of instability, delegates at the 1933 London Conference attempted to establish a system of fixed exchange rates to stabilise the world economy. The idea was that if exchange rates were kept constant, countries would be able to plan their exports and imports more effectively, avoid economic shocks caused by exchange rate fluctuations and stimulate international trade. However, setting up such a system required international agreement and close coordination between countries. It also required each country to be prepared to intervene in the foreign exchange market to maintain its fixed exchange rate, which could be costly and politically difficult. Unfortunately, the conference did not succeed in setting up such a system. The divergence of interests between countries, as well as the inability of some of them to support their exchange rates due to the economic crisis, prevented a consensus.

The 1933 London Economic Conference was an ambitious initiative aimed at solving the global economic problems of the time. The conference was intended to be a platform for nations to discuss and implement collective solutions to stimulate international trade and emerge from the Great Depression. However, the discussions were hampered by a number of problems. On the one hand, there were profound differences of opinion on how to deal with the economic crisis. Some countries favoured protectionist policies to protect their domestic industries, while others advocated greater liberalisation of international trade. In addition, international political tensions also played a role, as each country sought to protect its own national interests. The failure of the 1933 London Conference highlighted the difficulty of reaching international consensus on complex economic issues in times of crisis. It also underlined the need for strong international institutions to manage the global economy, a lesson that was put into practice after the Second World War with the creation of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

The position of the United States, as one of the world's largest economies at the time, played a crucial role in the negotiations at the London Economic Conference in 1933. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt refused to link the dollar to gold and give up the possibility of devaluing the US currency, it undermined one of the main aims of the conference - the stabilisation of exchange rates. Roosevelt believed that devaluing the dollar would help stimulate the US economy by making American exports cheaper and more competitive on international markets. However, the policy also raised concerns about a possible "currency war", where countries would seek to devalue their own currencies to maintain their competitiveness, which could lead to global economic and financial instability. Roosevelt's decision to prioritise domestic interests over efforts at international economic coordination was a blow to the London Conference and contributed to its failure. It was only after the Second World War, with the creation of the Bretton Woods system, that world leaders succeeded in establishing a stable international monetary system based on fixed but adjustable exchange rates.

The failure of the London Conference in 1933 is often credited with deepening the Great Depression and exacerbating the international tensions that led to the Second World War. The lack of an effective mechanism for international economic cooperation allowed protectionist policies to continue and hampered global economic recovery. The experience of this period was a key factor that led to the creation of the Bretton Woods system after the Second World War. The Bretton Woods agreements created a new structure for international economic cooperation, centred on institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which were designed to promote global economic stability and prevent future economic crises. At the same time, the United Nations (UN) was created to facilitate international cooperation on a wide range of issues, including international security and economic development. Together, these developments mark a major turning point in the history of international economic governance.

The meetings of the G7, G20 and other modern international fora are manifestations of the legacy of historic economic conferences such as those mentioned above. These current forums play an essential role in global economic governance by providing platforms for discussion, policy coordination and decision-making. The G7 and G20, for example, bring together some of the world's richest and most powerful countries. Their discussions and the policies they implement often have a profound impact on the global economy. They cover a wide range of economic issues, including economic growth, international trade, financial regulation, taxation, employment, development and innovation.

Review of inter-war conferences

After the First World War, the world economy was marked by a series of economic and financial crises. War reparations, sovereign debt, monetary instability, high trade barriers and banking regulation were among the major problems addressed at the various economic conferences of the inter-war period.

The 1920 Brussels Financial Conference, for example, attempted to solve some of these problems by promoting monetary stability and tackling the issue of war debts. Similarly, the 1933 London Economic Conference aimed to stimulate international trade by reducing tariff barriers and stabilising exchange rates. However, these conferences did not always succeed in achieving their objectives, partly because of the divergent interests of the various participating countries. These economic conferences played a crucial role in defining the world economic order of the time, despite their failures. They helped to raise awareness of the importance of international economic cooperation and policy coordination for global economic stability and prosperity. This legacy continues to this day in international economic forums such as the G7 and G20.

The damaging role of economic nationalism and protectionism was widely recognised after the economic crises of the early twentieth century. World leaders realised that economic isolationism and protectionist policies only exacerbated economic problems and hampered economic recovery. With this in mind, the creation of the GATT in 1947 marked a turning point in the way countries managed their international economic relations. GATT promoted free trade and aimed to reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers to international trade. This agreement laid the foundations for greater global economic integration and paved the way for the creation of the World Trade Organisation in 1995. The WTO pursued the GATT objective of trade liberalisation and added areas such as services, patents and other intellectual property rights to its mandate. This reflected a growing recognition of the importance of international economic cooperation and free and fair trade to global prosperity. It is important to note that, despite these advances, the debate over free trade versus protectionism remains a key issue in international economics, particularly in times of economic slowdown or geopolitical tensions.

Health policies and actions

The League of Nations Hygiene Organisation

The creation of the Hygiene Organisation by the League of Nations (League) in 1923 marked a milestone in the history of international public health. It was responsible for monitoring and combating infectious diseases throughout the world, promoting hygiene and conducting research into public health issues. This organisation was a forerunner in many areas of public health, including the launch of large-scale vaccination campaigns and the development of occupational health standards in collaboration with the International Labour Organisation. The Hygiene Organisation has also set up a worldwide disease surveillance system to prevent outbreaks of infectious diseases such as influenza. The Hygiene Organisation thus laid the foundations for the work carried out today by the World Health Organisation (WHO). Created in 1948 as a specialised agency of the United Nations, the WHO took over from the Hygiene Organisation of the League of Nations and has continued to work on these issues, with an even broader mandate to promote health on a global scale.

The Hygiene Organisation of the League of Nations was truly a forerunner in coordinating international efforts to combat disease and promote health on a global scale. Despite its dissolution after the Second World War, its principles and work have continued through the World Health Organisation. The WHO, created in 1948, took over and expanded the work of the Hygiene Organisation. It seeks to lead and coordinate international efforts to monitor health risks, combat infectious diseases, improve maternal and child health, promote mental health, prevent non-communicable diseases and support health systems. The WHO also plays a major role in tackling global health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, by providing advice and coordination to its Member States and working with other organisations to respond to these challenges. International cooperation on health is more important than ever, and the WHO is at the heart of these efforts.

Genesis of the Hygiene Organisation

The First World War had a devastating impact on public health. Poor living conditions and hygiene in the trenches and soldiers' camps created an environment conducive to the spread of infectious diseases. In addition, stress, malnutrition and war wounds weakened soldiers' immune systems, making them even more vulnerable to infection. Spanish flu, which broke out towards the end of the war in 1918, is a striking example of the effects of war on public health. This pandemic claimed millions of lives across the world, far more than the conflict itself. The movement of troops and refugees, as well as overcrowding in military camps and towns, facilitated the rapid spread of the virus. Typhoid and dysentery, two diseases linked to water and hygiene conditions, were also rife during the war. Many soldiers were infected by drinking contaminated water or eating poorly prepared food. Finally, tuberculosis, a disease that was already common before the war, spread even further because of the living conditions in the trenches and the poor sanitary conditions. Overall, the First World War had a profound impact on public health, underlining the importance of hygiene, nutrition and preventive medicine in wartime. These lessons were incorporated into the preparation and response to the next war.

The Hygiene Organisation of the League of Nations, created in 1923, marked a milestone in the history of international public health. Its aim was to coordinate international efforts to combat disease, monitor epidemics and improve sanitary conditions on a global scale. The organisation's work was wide-ranging and varied. In particular, it was involved in the fight against infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and malaria, the promotion of vaccination and the establishment of international health standards. It has also worked on issues related to nutrition, drinking water and sanitation. The Hygiene Organisation's efforts made a major contribution to improving global health and preventing new epidemics in the years following the First World War. However, despite its successes, the organisation faced many challenges, including the resistance of some countries to the introduction of international health regulations and the difficulty of coordinating public health efforts at international level.

Ludwig Rajchman is an important figure in the history of international public health. A physician and diplomat, he devoted his career to improving health around the world, particularly by fighting infectious diseases. Rajchman played a key role in the creation of the League of Nations Hygiene Organisation, of which he was the first director. Under his leadership, the Organisation set up programmes to control epidemics, provide vaccinations and train medical staff in developing countries. These programmes had a significant impact on public health and helped to prevent the spread of dangerous diseases. Rajchman also worked for other international health organisations, such as the World Health Organisation, and helped found UNICEF after the Second World War. His work had a major influence on international public health policy and continues to have an impact today. Rajchman dedicated his life to improving public health and his legacy lives on through the organisations he helped to create and the programmes he initiated. His work has demonstrated the importance of international cooperation in combating disease and improving public health worldwide.

Ludwik Rajchman has undoubtedly left an indelible mark on the field of global public health. His work at the League of Nations led to the creation and implementation of crucial health programmes that improved the lives of millions of people around the world. His vaccination campaigns helped prevent the spread of deadly diseases such as diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough. By encouraging breastfeeding, Rajchman has helped to improve infant nutrition, a key factor in reducing child mortality. His work on malnutrition has also helped to raise awareness of the dangers of hunger and malnutrition, which remain major problems in many developing countries. Rajchman's efforts to improve healthcare in disadvantaged regions have also been significant. Under his leadership, numerous health centres have been set up in these regions, providing vital medical care to people who desperately needed it. Finally, Rajchman's impact was not limited to his own time. The World Health Organisation, the successor to the League of Nations Hygiene Organisation, continues to build on the foundations laid by Rajchman and his colleagues. Through his work and dedication to the cause of global public health, Rajchman left a lasting legacy that continues to benefit people around the world.

1922 Warsaw Conference on epidemics

The Warsaw Conference on Epidemics in 1922 marked an important milestone in international cooperation in public health. The conference was one of the first attempts to coordinate an international response to epidemics, a problem that grew in importance with the increasing interdependence of nations in the 20th century. Conference participants discussed a variety of topics, including disease prevention, epidemic control, and the standardisation of health measures in different countries. Discussions also focused on specific topics such as the fight against malaria, tuberculosis, plague and other infectious diseases.

The Warsaw Conference led to the adoption of an international health convention. This convention established standards for the control of epidemics and provided for the creation of an international body to coordinate cooperation in public health. The Warsaw Conference marked a turning point in the international community's approach to public health issues. It emphasised the importance of international cooperation in the fight against disease and laid the foundations for the World Health Organisation, which was created several decades later.

The International Sanitary Convention adopted at the Warsaw Conference in 1922 was one of the first attempts to establish international standards for the prevention and control of infectious diseases. The aim of the Convention was to minimise the risk of infectious diseases spreading between countries, while avoiding unnecessary disruption to international trade and travel. To achieve this, the convention established rules for reporting epidemics to other countries, quarantining infected people, and disinfecting ships, aircraft and goods. Despite its limited adoption, the International Sanitary Convention played an essential role in establishing the principles of international public health and paved the way for the creation of the World Health Organisation (WHO). The WHO, which was founded in 1948, took over and expanded the role of coordinating international public health that the Convention had envisaged.

Health statistics

Health statistics play an essential role in public health. They are used to understand the health status of populations, monitor disease trends, identify high-risk groups, plan and evaluate health programmes, and guide policy decisions and research:

• Disease surveillance: Health statistics can help identify disease outbreaks and track their progress. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, health statistics on the number of cases, deaths and vaccinations were essential for understanding the spread of the virus and guiding response efforts.
• Evaluation of health programmes: Health statistics are used to evaluate the effectiveness of health programmes. For example, vaccination statistics can be used to assess vaccination coverage in a given population.
• Public health research: Public health researchers use health statistics to study disease trends, identify risk factors and assess the impact of health interventions.
• Policy-making: Decision-makers use health statistics to set health priorities, allocate resources and develop health policies.

It is therefore essential that health statistics are accurate, reliable and up-to-date. To achieve this, health surveillance systems must be robust and data must be collected in a systematic and standardised way.

Epidemiological intelligence is one of the pillars of public health. It involves the collection, analysis and interpretation of data to monitor the health status of populations and to understand the distribution and determinants of health problems in these populations. Epidemiological intelligence was essential for coordinating international efforts to combat disease. The health data collected through epidemiological intelligence was used to create directories and hygiene bulletins, which played a key role in disease surveillance and epidemic prevention. This health information has made it possible to detect epidemics, assess the impact of health interventions and guide public health decision-making. It has also been used to highlight health disparities and inform the development of policies and programmes to address these disparities. Today, epidemiological intelligence has become even more sophisticated and essential, particularly with the development of information and communication technologies that enable health data to be collected, analysed and shared in real time.

International standardisation of vaccines

Standardisation of vaccines is crucial to guaranteeing their efficacy and safety. This means that all vaccines, whatever their origin, must meet strict standards of quality, safety and efficacy. At the beginning of the 20th century, vaccine production varied considerably from one country to another. This led to inconsistencies in the efficacy and safety of vaccines, making it difficult to combat disease on a global scale. International standardisation of vaccines began under the League of Nations, with the Hygiene Organisation, which recognised the need for uniform standards for vaccines. Vaccine standardisation helps to ensure that people everywhere have access to safe and effective vaccines. This has led to improved disease prevention and has played a key role in the eradication of diseases such as smallpox and in reducing the incidence of many other diseases.

International standardisation of vaccines was a crucial aspect of the global fight against infectious diseases. It ensured that vaccines produced in different countries were of comparable efficacy and safety. It also facilitated international cooperation in public health, enabling countries to share vaccines and coordinate their vaccination efforts. The 1935 conference organised by the Hygiene Organisation of the League of Nations was a major step in this process. Participants at this conference worked on establishing standards for vaccine production, including manufacturing methods, quality tests and efficacy standards. These standards have been widely adopted and have helped to improve the quality and efficacy of vaccines. This has had a significant impact on global public health. Thanks to the standardisation of vaccines, it has been possible to intensify large-scale vaccination campaigns and fight infectious diseases more effectively. This has played a crucial role in eradicating diseases such as smallpox and reducing the incidence of other diseases such as measles, polio and diphtheria.

Health campaigns

The health campaigns conducted during the inter-war years played a decisive role in shaping modern public health strategies. These campaigns not only highlighted the importance of disease prevention and treatment, but also emphasised the importance of health education, personal hygiene and improved living conditions in promoting general health.

For example, campaigns were run to promote vaccination against diseases such as diphtheria and tuberculosis, to improve water and food hygiene, to combat mosquito-borne diseases such as malaria, and to promote personal hygiene and hygiene in schools. These campaigns were often conducted on an international scale, with the participation of international organisations, national governments, non-governmental organisations and sometimes private companies. They demonstrated the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary and multisectoral approach to improving public health.

Many of these strategies are still used today in modern public health campaigns. For example, large-scale vaccination campaigns, health education and the improvement of hygiene and living conditions are still key elements of public health efforts. In addition, the importance of international cooperation and coordination in the fight against disease, which was emphasised during these campaigns, is still central to modern efforts to improve global public health.

Study trips for health officials

Study tours for health officials have helped to improve public health practices and strengthen international cooperation. Officials had the opportunity to visit other countries to observe first-hand their health systems, medical facilities and public health programmes. They were able to learn about innovative and effective practices that could be applied in their own countries. This exchange of knowledge and experience was beneficial to all participants. The host countries had the opportunity to showcase their progress and successes, while the visitors were able to gain valuable knowledge and skills that they could then use to improve healthcare systems in their own countries. These study tours have helped to strengthen links between countries and promote international cooperation in public health. They have also helped to establish international healthcare standards and contributed to the spread of effective public health practices around the world. This model of sharing knowledge and experience is still used today in many areas of public health.

These study tours have played a crucial role in disseminating knowledge and best practice in the field of public health. By visiting different countries, health officials were able to share their experiences and learn new approaches to tackling various public health problems. This gave them the opportunity to understand the specific challenges faced by other countries and to observe how these challenges were being addressed. This not only allowed for the exchange of knowledge, but also strengthened international cooperation in the field of health, by showing that health problems know no borders and require joint efforts to be resolved. These exchanges have also helped to create mutual understanding and strengthen links between countries, fostering more effective health policies and programmes. Today, similar initiatives still exist and play an essential role in the global response to health issues.

The emergence and development of the concept of public health led to the establishment of public health ministries or agencies in many countries. These bodies were responsible for managing health problems at national level, including disease prevention and control, health promotion, public health surveillance and response to health emergencies. The League of Nations, through its Hygiene Organisation, has played a key role in coordinating these national efforts and in promoting an international approach to public health. It has facilitated the exchange of information and best practice, coordinated the response to health problems of international concern, such as epidemics, and promoted the establishment of international health standards and regulations. This paved the way for the creation of the World Health Organisation (WHO) after the Second World War, which continues to fulfil this coordinating role on a global scale. The WHO works with national governments and other health actors to address global health problems, promote health and well-being, and achieve public health goals.

Humanitarian action initiatives

The League of Nations (League) was created after the First World War with a clear mission: to promote international cooperation and peace in the world. One of the aspects of its work was humanitarian intervention, aimed at helping populations affected by conflicts and humanitarian crises.

The League of Nations carried out humanitarian actions to help people affected by conflicts and humanitarian crises. One of its missions was to carry out humanitarian actions to help populations affected by conflicts and humanitarian crises. During the 1920s and 1930s, the League carried out a number of humanitarian actions, particularly in the Balkans, Turkey, Syria, Iraq and China. In the Balkans, the League was involved in initiatives to help refugees and rebuild after the conflicts that followed the First World War. It helped coordinate international aid, resettle refugees and resolve border disputes. In Turkey, the League responded to the refugee crisis that resulted from the Greco-Turkish War of 1919-1922. The League of Nations High Commission for Refugees, headed by Fridtjof Nansen, helped resettle over a million Greek refugees from Turkey. In China, the League responded to the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931. Although its efforts to resolve the conflict failed, it provided humanitarian aid to people displaced by the conflict. In Iraq and Syria, the League was involved in efforts to protect religious and ethnic minorities and to promote economic and social development. The League's interventions in humanitarian assistance laid the foundations for the international approach to humanitarian aid that we see today.

The capacity of the League to carry out humanitarian action was limited by a number of factors, including resistance from member states to the coordination of humanitarian efforts, lack of funding and personnel, and rising international tensions prior to the Second World War. Firstly, the League of Nations was a voluntary organisation, which meant that its member states were not bound by its decisions. So if a country opposed humanitarian intervention or refused to fund it, it was difficult for the League to carry it out. Secondly, the League had a limited budget and staff. Member states were often reluctant to increase their financial contributions to the organisation, which limited its ability to carry out large-scale humanitarian operations. In addition, the League often lacked qualified staff to manage these operations, which also hampered its effectiveness. Finally, with the rise of international tensions and nationalist movements in the 1930s, the League found it increasingly difficult to maintain peace and carry out humanitarian operations. Events such as the SDN's inability to prevent Italy's aggression against Ethiopia in 1935, or Japan's invasion of Manchuria in 1931, highlighted its limitations and undermined its credibility.

Despite the many challenges it faced, the League of Nations played a crucial role in establishing the basic principles of humanitarian aid. Through its work, it has promoted values such as impartiality, neutrality and respect for human dignity. Impartiality underlines the importance of providing humanitarian assistance to all those in need, regardless of race, religion or nationality. Neutrality requires that humanitarian aid be provided without taking sides in conflicts or political tensions. Finally, respect for human dignity emphasises the idea that every person has the right to respectful treatment and decent living conditions, whatever the circumstances. These principles, established by the League of Nations, still underpin the work of modern humanitarian organisations. They guide their efforts to help people in need around the world and enable them to navigate often complex and difficult situations. It is clear that despite its limitations and failures, the legacy of the League of Nations continues to be relevant in today's humanitarian context.

The creation of the High Commission for Refugees in 1921

The work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees

The inter-war period was a crucial time in the modern history of refugee protection. The 1920s and 1930s saw huge population movements, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Balkans following the First World War and the Russian Revolution. In response to these challenges, the League of Nations established the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees, headed by the Norwegian diplomat Fridtjof Nansen. The role of Nansen and the High Commission was to provide assistance to refugees, in particular by supplying them with travel documents (known as "Nansen passports") to facilitate their movement and resettlement. The Nansen initiative was an important step in recognising the need for international protection for refugees. It laid the foundations for modern refugee protection structures, which were developed after the Second World War with the creation of the United Nations and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The work of Nansen and the League of Nations was therefore a fundamental step in the creation of the universal refugee protection regime we know today.

The creation of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees by the League of Nations in 1921 represented a significant step forward in the management of refugee issues on an international scale. Under the leadership of Fridtjof Nansen, the High Commission's mission was to coordinate aid to refugees, mainly from Russia following the civil war, and to seek lasting solutions to their situation, whether through repatriation, local integration or resettlement in a third country. The Office has also worked to ensure the rights of refugees, notably by introducing the "Nansen passport", a travel document for stateless people. The Office has worked with host governments, non-governmental organisations and other relief agencies to help refugees find a safe place to live. It has also undertaken efforts to mobilise the necessary financial resources to support these initiatives. The work of the League of Nations High Commission laid the foundations for international refugee protection as we know it today, which is now provided by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

The work of the League of Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was pioneering in many respects. It introduced specific categories of refugees based on nationality and used an empirical approach to tackle their problems, focusing on the concrete realities of displaced people rather than on theoretical concepts. In addition, the UNHCR began to work on the idea that refugees were in need of international protection, which was a relatively new concept at the time. This eventually led to the creation of an international legal framework for the protection of refugees.

The work of the League of Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has been very influential in the way we approach the refugee issue today. The holistic vision it has adopted has helped to shape a more inclusive and humane approach to managing refugee crises. By focusing not only on immediate assistance, but also on long-term solutions, the UNHCR has initiated efforts to ensure the resettlement of refugees in third countries and to facilitate their integration into their new communities. This approach has led to the recognition that refugee protection is not just about immediate survival, but also about guaranteeing their fundamental rights and dignity over the long term. The impact of these efforts is still being felt today. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the successor to the League of Nations agency, continues to build on these principles to protect and assist refugees around the world. Ultimately, the work of the League of Nations High Commission was fundamental in establishing the universal refugee protection framework we use today.

The Nansen passport

Fridtjof Nansen's work as the first High Commissioner for Refugees was revolutionary and laid the foundations for modern international efforts to resolve refugee crises. His actions demonstrated a deep understanding of complex refugee issues and contributed to the development of innovative solutions. Coordinating the repatriation of over 400,000 prisoners of war and over 1.5 million Greek and Turkish refugees after the Greco-Turkish War was a monumental task that required considerable commitment and determination. It is a testament to Nansen's humanity and pragmatism. The creation of the "Nansen passport" is another remarkable example of his innovative approach to solving refugee problems. This international travel document provided a concrete solution to one of the major problems facing stateless refugees at the time: the lack of official travel documents. By giving refugees the opportunity to cross borders, the "Nansen passport" offered a new life to hundreds of thousands of people. Nansen's work set a precedent for international efforts to resolve refugee crises, and his legacy lives on in the work of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) today.

Fridtjof Nansen's tireless commitment to refugees earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1922. He remains an emblematic figure in the field of humanitarian action and is often cited as one of the founding fathers of modern international diplomacy focused on humanitarianism. His work laid the foundations for what is now the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The UNHCR, established in 1950, continues Nansen's legacy by protecting and supporting refugees and displaced people around the world. They strive to ensure that everyone has the right to seek asylum and find safe refuge in another state, with the option of returning home, integrating locally or resettling in a third country. In recognition of Nansen's legacy, the UNHCR awards the Nansen Refugee Award each year to a person or group who has provided outstanding service to the cause of the displaced.

The International Conference on Refugees in 1922 was an important step in the recognition of the refugee question as an international problem requiring an international solution. The conference not only raised awareness of the plight of refugees, but also led to the adoption of agreements that laid the foundations for international refugee policies. The conference led to the adoption of two major agreements: the 1922 Arrangement and the 1924 Arrangement on the Identity of Nansen Passports for Refugees. These arrangements made it possible to issue travel documents, known as "Nansen passports", to refugees who were otherwise stateless and unable to cross international borders. More than 50 governments recognised these passports, allowing refugees to move more freely and seek refuge in other countries. The conference and these agreements marked a turning point in the way the international community manages refugee crises. In particular, they established the principle that refugees are an international responsibility and that their protection and assistance require international cooperation.

The international conferences of the time provided a platform for developing collective solutions to common international problems. These conferences not only enabled countries to discuss common problems, but also fostered the creation and consolidation of international organisations that are still active today. The League of Nations, the forerunner of the United Nations, was founded in this spirit of international collaboration.

Cover of a Nansen passport.

The Nansen passport represented a major advance in the protection of the rights of refugees and stateless persons. This travel document, named after Fridtjof Nansen, the League of Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, has been recognised by 52 countries. The Nansen passport was issued mainly to people who had become stateless as a result of the political and territorial upheavals of the First World War and the Russian Revolution. This gave these people the ability to travel legally between countries and provided them with a form of legal identity. Although the International Nansen Refugee Office was dissolved in 1938, the idea of providing travel documents to refugees persisted. Today, the United Nations, through the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees, continues to issue travel documents to refugees who are unable to obtain a passport from their country of origin. The Nansen passport not only helped thousands of people to move on and restart their lives after the devastation of war and revolution, it also laid the foundations for modern international efforts to help and protect refugees and stateless people.

The Nansen passport was an essential tool for helping stateless or stateless refugees in the tumultuous post-First World War period. Created in 1922 by the Geneva Conference on Refugees, it provided a legal identity and travel documents to those who would otherwise have been deprived of these fundamental rights. Many refugees were rendered stateless or without nationality as a result of the territorial and political upheavals that followed the First World War and the Russian Revolution. The absence of a state to officially recognise them left them in a precarious situation, depriving them of legal protection and preventing them from moving freely. The Nansen passport overcame these obstacles. Recognised by more than 50 countries, it gave these refugees the opportunity to travel legally and benefit from legal protection. It facilitated the resettlement of refugees, enabling thousands of people to start a new life in a new country.

The Nansen passport was undoubtedly a significant step forward in the protection of refugees and the granting of rights to stateless people. This travel document, recognised by over 50 countries, opened the door to international mobility and security for those who were otherwise marginalised and left unprotected. With this document, stateless people were able to cross international borders safely, without fear of detention or refoulement. It was an essential tool for ensuring the protection of refugees, as it gave them a legal means to flee persecution and seek safe haven. But more than that, the Nansen passport gave a legal identity to those who were deprived of one. It meant that they were recognised and protected by international law, a crucial step towards obtaining their fundamental rights. As a result, the Nansen passport promoted not only the physical safety of refugees, but also their dignity and autonomy. It marked the beginning of a more empathetic and respectful approach to managing refugee crises. The passport has helped to highlight the common humanity and inherent dignity of every person, regardless of their nationality or refugee status. It is a legacy whose impact still resonates today in international efforts to protect and support refugees.

The Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees

The 1933 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees was a major international treaty in the field of refugee protection. It was adopted at a time when many refugees were fleeing persecution and instability in Europe, particularly with the rise of Nazism in Germany. The text of the convention sought to guarantee a certain level of protection and rights for these displaced persons. The convention defined who could be considered a refugee and set out the rights and obligations of states towards such people. It recognised the right of refugees to seek asylum and stipulated that signatories should not expel or return a refugee to a territory where his or her life or freedom would be threatened.

This convention was particularly relevant in the political context of the time. With the rise of Nazism, Europe was faced with a large influx of refugees, which made the international protection of refugees all the more urgent. The 1933 Convention represented a major advance in the field of refugee protection and laid the foundations for the international refugee protection regime that was later codified in the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. However, due to the outbreak of the Second World War and the failure of the international community to prevent the Holocaust, the 1933 Convention was unable to fully achieve its objective of protecting refugees.

The 1933 Geneva Convention marked a significant turning point in the international protection of refugees. By introducing concrete obligations for signatory states, it strengthened the legal framework for the assistance and protection of refugees to a level never before achieved. These obligations covered a variety of areas, including access to education, employment and social assistance, as well as the non-expulsion or non-refoulement of refugees to countries where they could be at risk. The establishment of refugee committees was another important innovation introduced by the Convention. These committees were responsible for implementing the provisions of the convention and supervising their application. This made it possible to ensure that states respected their commitments to refugees and to monitor potential situations of violation of refugee rights. Overall, the 1933 Geneva Convention laid the foundations of the international refugee protection system, providing a robust legal framework and institutional mechanisms to ensure respect for the rights of refugees. However, its impact was limited by the outbreak of the Second World War and the massive refugee challenges that resulted.

The 1933 Convention relating to the International Status of Refugees was an important milestone in setting standards for the treatment of refugees. It addressed a series of key issues concerning the status and rights of refugees. The Convention dealt firstly with the issue of "Nansen certificates", also known as Nansen passports. These documents were issued to enable stateless refugees to travel abroad. It also established the principle of non-refoulement, stipulating that a refugee cannot be returned to a country where he or she fears persecution. On the legal front, the Convention stressed the importance of granting refugees a legal identity, protecting them from arbitrary arrest and guaranteeing their access to judicial services. It also addressed issues such as working conditions, stipulating that refugees should be treated in the same way as citizens of the host country. On the social front, the Convention dealt with accidents at work, stating that refugees should enjoy the same protection as citizens of the host country in the event of an accident at work. It also emphasised the obligation of States Parties to provide assistance to refugees in need, including access to health services and social assistance. With regard to education, the Convention stated that refugees should have access to public education under the same conditions as citizens of the host country. In tax matters, it stipulated that refugees should be subject to the same tax obligations as citizens of the host country. In addition, it introduced the concept of reciprocal exemption, meaning that refugees were entitled to certain benefits, even if they could not offer similar benefits in return. The Convention also provided for the establishment of refugee committees in each State party. These committees would have the task of supervising the application of the provisions of the Convention and assisting in the protection of refugees. However, the effectiveness of the Convention was hampered by the outbreak of the Second World War and the considerable refugee challenges that ensued.

The 1933 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees laid the foundations for the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, which is the founding document of current international refugee law. This 1933 treaty addressed a multitude of crucial issues that have shaped the foundations of international refugee protection. First of all, it highlighted the importance of administrative measures, such as the issuing of "Nansen certificates", to facilitate the international movement of refugees. It also provided legal clarification, defining the fundamental rights of refugees and affirming the obligation of states to respect these rights. With regard to working conditions, the Convention specifies that refugees must be treated fairly, in the same way as nationals of the host country. It also stressed the importance of social protection, assistance and education for refugees, emphasising the responsibility of States to provide these services. In the area of taxation, the Convention established that refugees should be subject to the same obligations as citizens of the host country. It also introduced the concept of reciprocal exemption, which means that refugees can benefit from certain rights even if they cannot offer the same thing in return. Finally, the Convention established a system of refugee committees to oversee the application of the Convention's provisions and to look after the needs of refugees. These committees have played an essential role in implementing the protections provided by the Convention. Although the 1951 Convention is generally regarded as the foundation of international refugee law, it has deep roots in the 1933 Convention, which laid the foundations for the international protection of refugees.

The 1933 Convention marked a turning point in the history of international refugee law. It laid the foundations on which subsequent conventions were built, establishing a set of principles and rules designed to protect the rights of refugees. It recognised the need to offer legal protection to refugees, establishing standards for their treatment and spelling out the obligations of states towards them. It also emphasised the provision of humanitarian assistance to refugees, setting up structures to ensure their access to education, employment, social assistance and health services. In addition, the Convention introduced the idea of shared responsibility for refugees, requiring all signatory states to cooperate to protect the rights of refugees. It also set a precedent for the creation of specific committees for refugees, to oversee the implementation of the Convention and ensure that the needs of refugees are taken into account. Overall, the 1933 Convention played a crucial role in laying the foundations for a more robust and comprehensive legal framework for the protection of refugees, and set an important precedent for future international agreements on refugee rights.

Role of non-governmental organisations

Collaboration between the League of Nations (LON) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) was fundamental to its approach to refugee protection. This was crucial in complementing and supporting the League's efforts, as NGOs often had a field presence and links with refugee communities, enabling them to respond more flexibly and directly to refugee needs.

The All-Russian Committee for Aid to Victims of War and Revolution, or Zemgor, played a crucial role in assisting Russian refugees displaced by the First World War and the Russian Revolution. Created in 1915 under the presidency of Prince Georgy Lvov, the organisation endeavoured to provide direct aid to displaced persons, often in the form of food, clothing and medical assistance. As the situation in Russia deteriorated after the 1917 revolution, Zemgor adapted its operations to help the many Russians fleeing political violence and persecution. This work required close cooperation with other international organisations, including the League of Nations and its High Commission for Refugees. Zemgor not only provided emergency aid to Russian refugees, but also worked to help them resettle and integrate into their new host communities. This included initiatives to help refugees find work and access educational and social services, as well as efforts to raise public awareness of the challenges faced by refugees.

Zemgor played a crucial role in helping Russian refugees by working closely with the League of Nations and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. The organisation actively sought lasting solutions for these displaced people. In addition to providing immediate aid, Zemgor adopted a long-term approach to helping Russian refugees. This included finding third countries willing to accept refugees for resettlement. Zemgor acted as a mediator, facilitating negotiations between governments, refugees and other stakeholders to enable resettlement. In addition, Zemgor was committed to helping refugees integrate into their new communities. This often involved providing assistance in learning the local language, finding employment and accessing social and educational services. In this way, Zemgor sought to ensure that Russian refugees could not only escape the immediate dangers of their homeland, but also begin to build stable new lives in their host countries.

After Zemgor was disbanded by the Bolsheviks in 1919, a group of former civil servants who had fled Russia decided to revive the organisation in exile. They kept the same shortened name, Zemgor, to continue to carry out the mission of helping Russian emigrants. In 1921, the organisation was officially registered in Paris, marking the beginning of a new phase in its work. Its official names, "Российский Земско-городской комитет помощи российским гражданам за границей" in Russian, and "Comité des Zemstvos et Municipalités Russes de Secours aux Citoyens russes à l'étranger" in French, reflect his commitment to helping Russian citizens living abroad. Zemgor's work in exile has continued to play a crucial role in protecting and assisting Russian refugees, in collaboration with other international organisations, including the League of Nations and the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees.

Prince Georgy Lvov, a Russian politician and the first Prime Minister of post-imperial Russia, was the first President of the Paris-based Zemgor organisation. He was followed in this role by A.I. Konovalov and A.D. Avksentiev, both also important figures in Russian politics. In the early years following its creation in Paris, Zemgor became a leading organisation in social assistance to Russian émigrés, providing crucial support to those who had been displaced by political unrest in Russia. Unfortunately, with the passage of time, Zemgor's work has been forgotten, both in the history of the Russian diaspora and in that of international aid to refugees. Zemgor's role in providing aid to Russian refugees and his work in collaboration with international organisations such as the League of Nations and the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees remain important early examples of the international effort to help refugees and displaced persons.

Promoting intellectual cooperation

The International Commission for Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC) was set up by the League of Nations in 1922, with the aim of fostering international intellectual collaboration and the exchange of ideas among academics and intellectuals from different countries. The ICCI was made up of many of the leading intellectuals of the day, including the scientist Marie Curie and the philosopher Henri Bergson. The commission set up a series of initiatives to promote intellectual cooperation, including the translation of important books into different languages to encourage the sharing of knowledge across linguistic boundaries. It has also organised international conferences on various subjects to promote dialogue and the exchange of ideas. In addition, the Commission has worked to establish international research centres to facilitate research cooperation and collaboration. The ICCI has played an important role in establishing links between intellectuals from different countries and has helped to promote a culture of international intellectual cooperation and exchange.

The International Institute for Intellectual Cooperation (IICI) was founded in 1926 by the League of Nations to serve as the operational arm of the International Commission for Intellectual Cooperation. Based in Paris, the IICI aimed to encourage mutual understanding and international cooperation in the fields of education, science, culture and communication. The Institute set up various projects to achieve these objectives. For example, it has promoted the publication of scientific journals to disseminate cutting-edge knowledge in different fields. The IICI has also organised symposia and conferences to facilitate dialogue and the exchange of ideas between academics, scientists and intellectuals. In addition, the Institute created cultural exchange programmes to foster greater understanding and mutual respect between people of different cultures. These programmes included exchanges of renowned artists, writers, musicians, scientists and other intellectuals, which helped to build cultural and intellectual bridges between nations.

The International Commission on Intellectual Cooperation

The Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) has played a crucial role in encouraging intellectual and cultural collaboration at international level. Created in 1922 by the League of Nations, the main aim of the ICCI was to promote mutual understanding between peoples. To achieve this goal, it worked to facilitate the free flow of ideas, information and cultural works across national borders. The Commission has played an active role in promoting dialogue and cooperation between intellectuals from different countries. It sought to create a platform where thinkers, researchers, artists and intellectuals from all nations could exchange ideas and perspectives. These exchanges have helped to deepen mutual understanding, deconstruct prejudice and promote international peace.

The Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) played a crucial role in preventing conflict and building peace. Created by the League of Nations in 1922, the Commission's main objective was to foster mutual understanding between peoples, in particular by encouraging intellectual cooperation on an international scale. The ICCI's ambition was to promote "moral disarmament", the idea of reducing tensions and prejudice between nations by fostering greater mutual understanding. This idea was based on the principle that dialogue and cooperation could help to reduce the animosities and misunderstandings that are often at the root of international conflicts. The creation of the ICCI was therefore motivated by a spirit of peace and the desire to prevent future conflicts. By encouraging the exchange of ideas and dialogue between intellectuals from different countries, the Commission aimed to create an environment conducive to peace and mutual understanding. This approach paved the way for later organisations such as UNESCO, which took up and developed these efforts to promote peace and international cooperation.

The International Commission on Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC), set up by the League of Nations after the First World War, was guided by the ambition to establish lasting peace by promoting mutual understanding between peoples. This initiative took place in a post-war context where the devastating consequences of war had made political and intellectual leaders aware of the importance of international cooperation and understanding. The ICCI's mission was to promote the free flow of ideas and cultural works. By encouraging dialogue and international intellectual cooperation, it aimed to ease tensions between nations and minimise the risk of conflict. This aim was pursued by eliminating the nationalistic and bellicose ideologies that had led to the First World War, while promoting a more peaceful and cooperative vision of the future. Based on the conviction that mutual understanding and dialogue are essential to prevent conflict, the ICCI worked to create a global environment conducive to peace. In doing so, it laid the foundations for international intellectual cooperation, a principle that was subsequently taken up and developed by organisations such as UNESCO.

The Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) identified education as a key area for encouraging greater understanding between peoples, and set up the Commission for the Revision of School Textbooks. The task of this group was to examine and revise the textbooks of the member countries of the League of Nations. The aim was to eliminate any stereotyped, biased or inaccurate representation of different cultures and nations. The ICCI firmly believed that education had a crucial role to play in shaping positive and respectful perceptions of different cultures. Therefore, the Commission aimed to ensure that school textbooks offered an accurate, balanced and respectful representation of different countries and cultures. In this way, it hoped to reduce prejudice and tension between nations and foster a culture of mutual respect and understanding. These efforts were guided by the belief that education is a powerful tool for shaping attitudes and perceptions. By ensuring accurate and nuanced education, the Commission hoped to contribute to a more peaceful and tolerant world.

The Textbook Review Committee

The Textbook Review Commission has played a crucial role in the ICCI's mission to promote international peace and harmony. By revising curricula and eliminating stereotypes and prejudices from textbooks, the Commission sought to instil in students a more respectful and objective understanding of foreign cultures and nations. The commission believed that biased or inaccurate ideas and perceptions can lead to mistrust and conflict. On the other hand, an accurate and respectful understanding of other cultures can lead to tolerance and cooperation. Thus, by working to eliminate stereotypes and prejudices from school textbooks, the Commission sought to promote peace and mutual understanding. This initiative has underlined the importance of education in promoting international peace and harmony. It also demonstrated the importance of ensuring that teaching materials are accurate, fair and free from bias or stereotyping.

Although the Textbook Review Commission has made many recommendations to improve the objectivity and accuracy of textbooks, not all have been adopted or implemented by Member States. It is important to note that the League of Nations, and therefore its associated commissions such as the ICCI, did not have the power to impose their recommendations on Member States. Member States were free to choose whether or not to follow the recommendations. Consequently, in some cases, governments may have chosen not to implement the proposed reforms, either because they disagreed with the recommendations or because of practical or political constraints.

The recommendations of the Textbook Review Commission were sometimes perceived as interfering with the national interests or ideological orientations of different countries. This could be the case, for example, when a government wanted to promote a certain version of history or a certain point of view on controversial political issues. In addition, implementing the Commission's recommendations could entail significant costs for textbook publishers. Revising texts, updating illustrations, reprinting textbooks - all this could represent a significant financial investment. Publishers also had to take into account the fact that revised textbooks might not be accepted by teachers, parents or educational authorities, which could affect their sales. In addition, in some cases, there may have been logistical challenges in implementing the recommendations. For example, in countries with many dialects or regional languages, it may be difficult to produce a revised version of the textbook that would be acceptable to all language groups. Despite these challenges, the work of the Textbook Review Commission has nevertheless helped to raise awareness of the importance of promoting mutual understanding and respect between nations through education.

Despite the obstacles encountered, the Textbook Review Commission has continued its vital work. It has continued to advocate for a more accurate, objective and nuanced representation of different cultures in education, with the aim of promoting mutual understanding and reducing prejudice and stereotyping. It has encouraged governments to examine their curricula and change inaccurate or stereotypical representations of other nations and cultures. It has also worked with textbook publishers to encourage them to adopt a more inclusive and respectful approach to the presentation of different cultures. The impact of this work may not have been immediate or universal, but it has helped to lay the foundations for a growing awareness of the importance of education for intercultural understanding and mutual respect. Although the Commission has faced challenges, its work has been an important step towards a more comprehensive and balanced approach to intercultural education.

Although not all the recommendations of the Textbook Review Commission were immediately adopted, the impact of its work has been felt in the long term. It has helped to raise public awareness of the importance of education in promoting international peace, tolerance and understanding. She emphasised that education is a powerful tool for deconstructing stereotypes, promoting cultural diversity and instilling values of respect and peaceful coexistence. So, even if the immediate results have been mixed, the Commission's influence on the evolution of educational policies and practices should not be underestimated.

The Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) initiated the "World Classics" project to promote a better understanding and appreciation of foreign cultures. The aim of this programme was to select significant works of world literature, from all times and cultures, which were considered to be of universal value. Once selected, these works were then translated into several languages and distributed throughout the world. The idea was to make these literary texts accessible to as wide an audience as possible, in order to promote mutual understanding and respect for different cultures and literary traditions. This programme was in line with the ICCI's wider objectives of promoting dialogue and international intellectual cooperation.

The "World Classics" translation programme of the Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) was designed to encourage mutual understanding and cultural tolerance. By making landmark literary works accessible to a global audience, the programme aimed to stimulate intercultural dialogue and promote mutual respect among nations. Sharing world literature contributes to an appreciation of cultural diversity and helps to transcend linguistic and cultural barriers. By helping readers to familiarise themselves with diverse viewpoints and experiences, it was hoped that this would foster empathy and mutual understanding, thus contributing to world peace and stability - which were the main aims of the League of Nations. Literature, as a means of human expression, has the power to foster empathy and understanding by allowing us to see the world through someone else's eyes. So by promoting the exchange of literature across borders, the ICCI hoped to strengthen the bonds between nations and peoples.

By translating and disseminating classic works of world literature, it sought to show that despite cultural differences, there is a common heritage that all peoples can appreciate. Authors such as Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Balzac, Goethe and Shakespeare have produced works which, although deeply rooted in their specific cultural contexts, speak to universal themes of human experience. Similarly, important philosophical and scientific texts often transcend cultural and linguistic barriers, as they address fundamental questions of knowledge and existence. By making these works accessible to a wider audience, the ICCI has helped to promote a deeper and more nuanced understanding of other cultures, which is essential for fostering tolerance and international peace.

By facilitating the translation and dissemination of classics of world literature, the programme of the Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) has played a key role in promoting mutual understanding between peoples of different cultural backgrounds. It has broken down linguistic and cultural barriers and helped familiarise people with literary works from other cultures that might otherwise have remained inaccessible. By enabling people to appreciate works that transcend cultural boundaries, the programme has helped to promote a shared global culture, which is essential for encouraging tolerance, empathy and mutual understanding. The dissemination of world literature and thought is a powerful tool for building bridges between cultures and fostering international peace and cooperation. This initiative also helped to lay the foundations for future similar initiatives, notably those carried out by UNESCO and other international organisations after the Second World War.

Librarians played an essential role in the intellectual cooperation programme of the League of Nations' International Commission on Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC). Librarians, as custodians of information and knowledge, were encouraged to facilitate the exchange of books and information between libraries around the world. The ICCI organised several conferences and meetings for international librarians, where they could discuss best practices, challenges and opportunities related to information exchange. These meetings have also created networks and collaborations between librarians and libraries from different countries, facilitating the exchange of resources. In addition, the ICCI has encouraged the creation and development of international bibliographies and union catalogues, with the aim of facilitating access to information and promoting the dissemination of knowledge. These initiatives have contributed to the construction of a global information infrastructure, laying the foundations for the bibliographic cooperation practices we see today. The importance of these cooperative efforts between libraries should not be underestimated. By facilitating access to information and knowledge on an international scale, they have played an essential role in promoting international understanding and cooperation.

These congresses have enabled librarians from different countries to meet, exchange ideas and discuss best practice in the management and dissemination of library collections. They also led to the creation of several international library organisations, including the International Union of Library and Information Institutions (IUDI), founded in 1924. In 1971, IUDI was renamed the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). IFLA continues to be an active and influential organisation, promoting international co-operation, dialogue and research in library and information services. This includes providing advice and setting standards for services and practices, supporting professional education and advocating on behalf of libraries and library users worldwide.

The International Union of Library and Information Institutions (IFLA) is a major example of an international organisation that has grown out of these initiatives. Founded in 1924, IFLA has been a catalyst for promoting international cooperation between libraries and has played a key role in improving library services worldwide. The creation of IFLA and other similar organisations is a concrete demonstration of the long-term impact of the ICCI's efforts to promote intellectual cooperation. By organising international congresses and facilitating exchanges between librarians, the ICCI has helped to lay the foundations for stronger international cooperation in the field of information and libraries. These efforts have not only improved library services worldwide, but have also contributed to the dissemination of knowledge and the promotion of international understanding and cooperation. So even though the ICCI itself no longer exists, the legacy of its efforts to promote intellectual cooperation lives on through organisations such as IFLA.

The increased sharing of books and information between libraries has played a major role in promoting intercultural understanding and tolerance. By facilitating access to a variety of different information and perspectives, libraries have enabled readers to discover and understand other cultures, their histories, ideas and experiences. This exposure to a diversity of thought and experience can help to broaden readers' horizons, deconstruct stereotypes and promote empathy towards others. In this way, libraries, supported by the efforts of the Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) and organisations such as IFLA, have played a significant role in promoting international peace and harmony.

The scientific study of international relations

Recognising that understanding the root causes of conflict is essential to promoting peace, the Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) has placed the study of international relations at the heart of its concerns. It has mobilised experts from a variety of disciplines to examine the complex mechanisms that lead to international tension and conflict. By providing a platform for interdisciplinary dialogue, the ICCI has not only contributed to a better understanding of the dynamics of international relations, but has also helped to identify strategies to prevent future conflicts. These efforts have played a key role in the development of the field of international relations as an academic discipline, underlining the importance of the scientific approach to solving international problems.

The Conférence Permanente des Hautes Études Internationales, established in 1928, was an international forum set up to foster intellectual cooperation on important international issues. This forum brought together academics, researchers, civil servants and other professionals from various countries to share their knowledge, discuss international problems and contribute to the search for peaceful solutions to these problems. These interdisciplinary discussions made it possible to tackle complex issues from different angles, calling on experts in fields such as economics, politics, sociology and culture, among others. The aim was not only to foster mutual understanding and cooperation between nations, but also to contribute to the resolution of international tensions and conflicts through discussion and the exchange of ideas. The Conférence Permanente des Hautes Études Internationales has played an important role in promoting the scientific study of international relations and in disseminating knowledge on international issues. It has helped to raise public awareness of the importance of international cooperation and the need to solve global problems in a peaceful and concerted manner.

The discussions, debates and exchanges of ideas that have taken place at these conferences have helped to share knowledge and diverse perspectives, resolve misunderstandings and tensions, and encourage cooperation and dialogue between nations. The Conférence Permanente des Hautes Études Internationales has also played a key role in promoting the importance of diplomacy, dialogue and peaceful conflict resolution in international relations. Participants have been able to address complex global issues in a spirit of mutual respect and understanding, helping to strengthen international relations and promote peace. In addition, the conference helped to highlight the importance of intellectual cooperation in building a more peaceful and just world. By bringing together experts from different countries and fields of study, the conference demonstrated that international cooperation and the sharing of knowledge can play a key role in solving global problems and promoting international peace and security.

It is normal for experts from different countries, cultures and backgrounds to bring different perspectives to the table, which can lead to disagreements and heated debates. Indeed, in the context of international relations, complex issues such as the role of states, respect for human rights, international security, trade, among others, can be interpreted in different ways depending on national, historical, cultural and political contexts. However, it is important to stress that these debates and disagreements are an integral part of the process of dialogue and mutual understanding. Even though discussions may come to a standstill, these situations also provide an opportunity to overcome differences, seek compromise and strengthen international cooperation. Diversity of viewpoints can be an asset rather than an obstacle, provided it is managed with respect and open-mindedness. Disagreements can stimulate reflection and lead to innovative solutions, provided they are approached in a spirit of dialogue and cooperation, rather than confrontation.

The debates and tensions that can arise at these conferences reflect the complex challenges of managing international relations, where national interests can often conflict with a more global perspective. However, it is important to emphasise that the Commission Internationale de Coopération Intellectuelle (CICI) and the Conférence Permanente des Hautes Études Internationales have played a key role in providing a space for dialogue and exchange, despite the tensions and differences of opinion. These initiatives have brought together experts from different countries and disciplines to discuss major international issues, encouraging the sharing of knowledge, the debate of ideas and mutual understanding. These efforts have helped to lay the foundations for a more collaborative and enlightened approach to managing international relations, which recognises the complexity of the issues and seeks to promote peace, cooperation and mutual understanding. While conflicts may arise, these forums serve to facilitate dialogue and seek common solutions, demonstrating the importance of intellectual cooperation in promoting international peace and stability.

Italy's conquest of Ethiopia revealed the limits of intellectual cooperation structures and economic sanctions in conflict prevention. The event highlighted the major challenges of balancing national sovereignty and international law, as well as the need for stronger and more effective international institutions to maintain peace. That said, although intellectual cooperation on its own was unable to prevent the Italian aggression, it is important to stress that it did play a crucial role in raising awareness of the importance of respecting international norms and promoting peaceful dialogue between nations. Despite this failure, the efforts of the Conférence Permanente des Hautes Études Internationales have helped to lay the foundations for a more enlightened and collaborative approach to the management of international relations. Moreover, this experience has underlined the importance of complementing intellectual cooperation with more concrete measures to keep the peace, such as more effective economic sanctions, more robust conflict resolution mechanisms and, above all, a stronger commitment on the part of states to respect and uphold international law. These lessons were taken into account in the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War, which sought to create a more effective international system for maintaining international peace and security.

Despite the difficulties and failures encountered, intellectual cooperation initiatives have had a lasting impact on the world. For example, the International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, by facilitating the exchange of knowledge and information across borders, has helped to promote a culture of cooperation and international understanding. It has encouraged the dissemination of ideas and knowledge, contributing to the birth of a truly international intellectual community. Similarly, the Commission for the Revision of School Textbooks has initiated an important reflection on the role of education in promoting peace and understanding between peoples. Its efforts have helped to raise awareness of the importance of an education that fosters mutual respect and understanding of other cultures, rather than the propagation of stereotypes and prejudice. These initiatives laid the foundations for many future initiatives in the field of intellectual cooperation, and left an important legacy that continues to influence practices and policies in education, culture and science today. Their history reminds us of the importance of intellectual cooperation in building a more peaceful and understanding world.

Intellectual cooperation has certainly helped to lay the foundations for a wide range of disciplines and fields of study. Exchanges of ideas and knowledge have stimulated the development of new perspectives and approaches to the study of international relations, international law, sociology, anthropology and so on. These new ideas and approaches have in turn enriched our understanding of the nature of relations between states and societies, as well as ways of preventing and resolving international conflicts. Despite the challenges and tensions created by the rise of nationalism, these efforts at intellectual cooperation have left a lasting legacy that continues to inform debate and reflection on international relations and conflict. Even in times of tension and disagreement, intellectual cooperation initiatives have maintained a dialogue and an exchange of knowledge, contributing to the search for peaceful and collaborative solutions to international problems. As a result, the impact of intellectual cooperation extends well beyond its time, with important repercussions for the way international relations are understood and managed today. This underlines the importance of continuing these efforts to promote international understanding and cooperation through the exchange of ideas and knowledge.

Social and labour policies

The mission of the International Labour Organisation

The main aim of the League of Nations, which existed from 1920 to 1946, was to maintain international peace and security after the First World War. However, it also took an interest in social and economic issues, notably by creating the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in 1919.

The creation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) illustrates the fact that the League of Nations (League) was well aware of the importance of social and economic issues in maintaining international peace and security. The ILO is the first specialised agency of the United Nations and was founded as part of the Treaty of Versailles which ended the First World War. The ILO was established with a clear mission: to improve working conditions and promote social justice. The founders of the ILO believed that peace cannot be sustainable without social justice, and that poor working conditions in one country can create tensions and conflicts that can have international consequences. This is why the ILO focuses on setting international labour standards to ensure that workers everywhere are treated with dignity and respect. These standards cover a wide range of subjects, including hours of work, occupational safety and health, freedom of association, the right to strike, child and forced labour, discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, and many others. While the League of Nations ultimately failed to prevent another world war, the ILO continues to exist today as a specialised agency of the United Nations, pursuing its mission to promote rights at work, encourage decent employment opportunities, improve social protection and strengthen dialogue on labour issues.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the International Labour Office (ILO) play a central role in the development and implementation of international labour standards. The ILO, as the executive body of the ILO, is responsible for preparing international labour conferences, implementing the decisions taken at these conferences, supervising the application of international labour conventions and recommendations, and providing technical assistance to Member States. It is also responsible for publishing reports and statistics on labour issues worldwide. The ILO's mission is to promote decent work for all by developing and implementing international standards that protect workers' rights and ensure fair and safe working conditions. These standards cover issues such as wages, working hours, occupational safety and health, gender equality, the abolition of child labour and forced labour, among others.

The creation of the International Labour Organisation

The creation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in 1919 was strongly influenced by the social and political context of the time. The Russian Revolution of 1917 had highlighted workers' deep dissatisfaction with their living and working conditions. It also demonstrated the destabilising potential of social conflict, not only on a national scale, but also on an international one. Against this backdrop, the leaders of Western countries became aware of the need to improve working conditions and promote social justice, in order to prevent further revolutions and maintain international peace. It was in this spirit that the ILO was created, with the mission of promoting workers' rights, improving working conditions and fostering employment throughout the world. In this way, the ILO was conceived from the outset as an instrument for promoting social and international peace, responding to workers' demands and promoting greater equity in the world of work. This mandate remains at the heart of the ILO's work today, as it continues to fight for decent work and social justice for all.

The creation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) was not solely a reaction to the Russian Revolution of 1917, although this event certainly reinforced the urgency of addressing issues related to work and workers' living conditions. In the decades preceding the Revolution, the labour movement, particularly in Europe and North America, had already begun to demand better wages, working conditions, shorter working hours and other social and economic protections for workers. These movements led to a growing awareness of the social and economic problems associated with rapid industrialisation and urbanisation. The First World War further exacerbated these problems, leading to increased social unrest and demands for change. In this context, the creation of the ILO and the adoption of international labour standards were seen as ways of responding to these challenges and improving workers' living and working conditions. Consequently, although the Russian Revolution added a degree of urgency to these efforts, they were already well underway before 1917.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) was founded on the conviction that social justice is essential to achieving universal and lasting peace. By establishing international labour standards and encouraging their adoption throughout the world, the ILO aimed to improve working conditions, promote workers' rights, encourage social dialogue, create quality jobs and guarantee adequate social protection. In doing so, the ILO sought to prevent the social tensions and conflicts that can result from the exploitation of workers and economic inequalities. This mission is still relevant today, and the ILO continues to play a crucial role in promoting social justice and workers' rights around the world. The ILO was therefore conceived from the outset as an organisation designed to promote both social justice and international peace. The international labour standards developed by the ILO aim to ensure that workers enjoy decent working conditions and social and economic rights, which the ILO believes help to prevent social conflict and promote political stability and international peace.

The international conventions

When it was founded in 1919, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) set itself the goal of creating a system of international labour standards covering a wide range of issues relating to workers' living and working conditions.

Albert Thomas, as the first Director of the ILO, played a key role in the establishment of these conventions. These minimum standards established by the ILO formed the basis of an international framework for the protection of workers' rights. The ILO Conventions, which are legally binding international treaties once ratified by the Member States, have covered a wide range of subjects relating to working conditions and employment. For example, the Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919, which was the first ILO Convention, set the working day at eight hours and the working week at a maximum of 48 hours. Other conventions dealt with subjects such as the right to organise trade unions, collective bargaining, the abolition of forced labour, equal pay, maternity protection and the prohibition of child labour. By creating these conventions, the ILO has worked to improve working conditions throughout the world and has contributed to the development of labour standards as we know them today.

ILO Conventions are intended to be ratified by Member States. Once ratified, these conventions are legally binding and Member States undertake to apply them through national legislation and policies. The ILO also provides technical advice and assistance to Member States to help them implement the Conventions. In addition, Member States are required to submit regular and detailed reports on the application of these standards. These reports are examined by independent ILO experts, and the experts' comments and recommendations are then shared with the government concerned and the social partners. The ILO uses this system to monitor Member States' compliance with the labour standards they have ratified, and to encourage the effective application of the Conventions. The aim is to ensure that workers' rights are respected and to promote social justice on a global scale.

The Hours of Work (Industries) Convention N°1 is a milestone in the history of workers' rights. Prior to the adoption of this Convention, workers were often subjected to very difficult working conditions, with long working days, little or no rest and no guarantee of paid holidays. The Convention establishes for the first time an international standard for working hours, setting the length of the working day at eight hours and the working week at 48 hours. It also provides for the right to breaks and rest days, as well as provisions for overtime work. It was the first in a series of conventions adopted by the ILO to improve working conditions and protect workers' rights. Since then, the ILO has adopted numerous other conventions covering a variety of subjects related to workers' rights, including working conditions, health and safety at work, discrimination at work, the right to organise and bargain collectively, the elimination of forced labour and child labour, and many others.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) has adopted a series of conventions over the course of the 20th century aimed at improving working conditions and protecting workers' rights. These conventions, notably those on weekly rest, maternity protection, prevention of occupational diseases and labour inspection, are among the many international labour standards that the ILO has put in place. The Weekly Rest (Industries) Convention No. 14, for example, is an important convention that guarantees workers the right to at least one full day of rest each week. It was adopted in 1921 and has helped to establish a work-life balance for many workers around the world. The Maternity Protection Convention (No. 3) of 1919 is another key standard that protects the rights of pregnant women and mothers. It guarantees women the right to paid maternity leave and special protection during pregnancy and after childbirth. The Occupational Diseases Convention, 1934 (No. 42) and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) aim to ensure a safe and healthy working environment for all workers. They oblige employers to take measures to prevent occupational accidents and diseases and to provide adequate training in occupational safety and health. The Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), is also a key part of the international system for protecting workers. Together, these conventions and other ILO standards have helped to establish an international framework for the protection of workers' rights and the improvement of working conditions. However, their effective implementation depends largely on the commitment and capacity of national governments to respect and enforce them.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) has a series of conventions that set international standards for various aspects of working conditions and workers' rights. However, although ILO Conventions are legally binding, they must be ratified by each Member State to have the force of law in that country. Ratification means that a Member State formally agrees to apply a convention, usually by incorporating it into its own national legislation. However, Member States have a certain amount of freedom as to how they implement conventions, as long as they respect the minimum standards they establish. Once a Member State has ratified an ILO Convention, it is obliged to submit regular reports to the ILO on the implementation of that Convention. The ILO has mechanisms to examine these reports and to help Member States resolve compliance problems, if necessary. The ratification process is voluntary and not all Member States ratify all Conventions. As a result, labour standards vary from country to country, although many ILO Conventions are widely accepted and ratified by a large number of countries.

The real impact of ILO Conventions depends largely on the willingness and ability of Member States to implement them effectively. Factors that can influence implementation include political stability, governance, institutional capacity, commitment to workers' rights, public pressure and economic conditions. For example, a country with a stable government committed to improving working conditions, strong and effective institutions, and an active and informed civil society is more likely to be able to implement ILO Conventions effectively. Conversely, a country with a government that is unstable or indifferent to workers' rights, institutions that are weak or corrupt, and a population that is largely indifferent to or ill-informed about labour issues may find it difficult to implement ILO conventions. That said, while implementation may be imperfect, the existence of these conventions establishes a set of international standards that countries can aspire to achieve. They can serve as a reference point for labour reforms, inspire legislative and social change, and provide a framework for advocacy in favour of workers' rights. In addition, the ILO provides technical assistance and advice to Member States to help them ratify and implement the Conventions.

The harmonisation of labour standards is a major concern in an increasingly globalised world, where workers, goods and services easily cross borders. ILO Conventions play a key role in this process by establishing minimum standards for working rights and conditions. Implementing these standards can help prevent a "race to the bottom" in which countries compete by offering lower labour standards to attract investment. Instead, harmonisation of standards can help ensure that competition between countries takes place on a level playing field, where workers' rights are respected. However, harmonising labour standards does not necessarily mean that all standards must be identical in all countries. Economic, social and cultural conditions vary from country to country, and these differences must be taken into account. The ILO Conventions establish minimum standards, but they also allow a degree of flexibility in their implementation to take account of these differences. Finally, it should be noted that the ILO does not have the power to enforce compliance with the conventions. Rather, its role is to promote social dialogue, provide technical advice and put pressure on Member States to honour their commitments.

The ultimate goal of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) is to improve living and working conditions throughout the world. However, the ILO recognises that each country has its own unique challenges and socio-economic realities. Therefore, while the ILO sets minimum standards for working conditions, these standards are designed to be flexible enough to adapt to different national circumstances. In practice, this means that ILO conventions provide a general framework to which Member States can refer when drawing up or amending their own labour legislation. Member States are encouraged to ratify and implement ILO Conventions, but they also have the opportunity to determine how these Conventions can be most effectively applied to their own specific circumstances. The ILO does more than just set standards. It also provides technical assistance to Member States to help them implement the Conventions. This can include advice on how to incorporate ILO standards into national legislation, training programmes for workers and employers, and advice on best practices for improving working conditions.

The development of international standards

The international labour conventions drawn up by the ILO act as a set of standards and references on which countries can base themselves to improve their own labour and social protection standards. They serve as a guide for governments, employers and workers in developing labour policies and legislation that are fair, equitable and adapted to local realities. This can include issues such as minimum wages, hours of work, occupational safety and health, protection of workers against unfair dismissal, non-discrimination, gender equality, workers' rights to organise and bargain collectively, and many others. By ratifying an ILO convention, a country undertakes to incorporate it into its national legislation and to apply it in practice. Countries are also required to submit regular reports to the ILO on the implementation of these standards, which enables the organisation to monitor progress and identify areas requiring improvement or further assistance.

International labour standards established by the ILO are often used as a reference in negotiations between employers and trade unions, and play a crucial role in establishing fair working conditions and respectful labour practices. They also help to guide national labour policies and establish minimum standards that all workers should be able to expect. In the field of corporate social responsibility (CSR), ILO conventions are used as a tool to evaluate and improve labour practices. Companies seeking to meet the highest ethical standards often seek to comply with the ILO Conventions, and may be required to demonstrate compliance through CSR certification or third-party auditing. Similarly, in the context of globalisation and international supply chains, ILO standards are increasingly used to assess labour practices in different countries and industries. This can help ensure that workers throughout the supply chain are treated fairly, and can help prevent abuses such as child labour, forced labour and exploitation. Finally, ILO standards can serve as a guide for states when revising or drafting their own labour legislation, ensuring that their legislation complies with accepted international standards and contributing to a gradual convergence towards decent working conditions worldwide.

The ILO plays a pioneering role in the development of international labour standards. Sometimes, the ILO anticipates problems even before they become major issues at national level. For example, it was one of the first organisations to recognise child labour as a major problem, and drew up conventions to deal with it long before many countries began legislating on the subject. The ILO has also been at the forefront of recognising and regulating new issues in working conditions that have emerged with globalisation, such as decent work standards for migrant workers or labour standards in global supply chains. In addition, the ILO has played a major role in promoting gender equality in the workplace and adopted conventions on equal pay and discrimination at work long before these issues were widely recognised and regulated at national level. The ILO's international labour standards provide a frame of reference that guides countries in developing their own labour legislation and policies. Thus, even if ILO standards are not directly applicable, they can influence national legislation by establishing internationally accepted standards on various aspects of labour law.

ILO Conventions are proposed to Member States for ratification, but they are not obliged to ratify them. However, once a convention is ratified, it becomes legally binding and the state must put in place laws and regulations to implement it. That said, even non-ratified ILO conventions have an impact, as they serve as an international reference for the development of labour legislation and social practices. In addition, the ILO provides technical assistance and advice to Member States to help them bring their national legislation into line with international labour standards, including through capacity building, institutional strengthening, training and the sharing of good practices. The process of implementing ILO conventions involves social dialogue between governments and the social partners (employers' and workers' organisations) in the country. This process helps to strengthen social consensus and ensure that labour standards are adapted to local realities and meet the needs and priorities of workers and employers.

The ILO's international labour standards are the product of cooperation and dialogue between governments, employers and workers in many countries, with the aim of resolving common labour and social protection problems. This is generally done through tripartite discussions at the International Labour Conference, which is the ILO's legislative body. These international standards are not simply an extension of national legislation, but constitute a collective response to the challenges in the world of work that affect all countries, regardless of their level of economic development or their social traditions. As far as the influence of national legislation on international standards is concerned, it is true that national practices can often serve as a model for the development of international standards. However, the process also works the other way round: international standards can influence and guide the development of national legislation, by establishing principles and minimum standards that all countries are encouraged to respect. The ILO's international labour standards are the product of a dynamic and interactive process that incorporates both national experiences and transnational challenges, with the aim of promoting decent work and social justice for all workers, everywhere in the world.

Review of the International Labour Organization

With its 187 member states, the ILO is a key player in promoting rights at work, providing decent work for all and improving working conditions worldwide. The ILO's activities are based on the principle of tripartism, which is the interaction between governments, employers and workers. This social dialogue between the three stakeholders is a unique feature of the ILO, enabling it to develop labour standards that are widely accepted by all stakeholders and therefore more likely to be effectively implemented. The ILO has developed a wide range of international Conventions and Recommendations covering various aspects of the world of work, including, but not limited to, working conditions, trade union rights, occupational safety and health and gender equality at work. It should be noted that although the ILO actively encourages its member states to ratify and implement its conventions, it does not have coercive powers to force states to do so. However, it does have supervision and regular reporting mechanisms to monitor the progress of states in implementing the conventions they have ratified. The ILO also plays an important role in providing technical assistance, advice and training to Member States to help them implement labour standards. It also conducts research and publishes data and analyses on various aspects of the world of work, helping to inform and guide labour policies worldwide.

The ILO, through the International Labour Office (ILO), plays a vital role in providing accurate and reliable statistical data on various aspects of the world of work. These data help governments, employers, workers and other stakeholders to understand the challenges and opportunities in the world of work. Labour market information and statistics provided by the ILO cover a wide range of areas, including employment and unemployment, wages, social protection, occupational safety and health, working conditions, industrial relations, vocational training, labour migration and child labour. These data are often collected from national governments through national statistical offices, but the ILO also collects information from other sources such as household, enterprise and trade union surveys. The data collected is then analysed and used to produce reports, studies and recommendations on labour and employment issues. They help to inform policy decisions and promote effective labour policies that respect workers' rights and promote decent work.

Although the League of Nations was widely criticised for its inability to prevent the Second World War, it nevertheless played an important role in the development of international institutions and standards in a number of areas. The creation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the International Commission on Intellectual Cooperation marked a turning point in the recognition of the role of international institutions in promoting decent work and intellectual cooperation around the world. In the field of health, the League of Nations played a pioneering role in establishing the League of Nations Hygiene Organisation, which contributed to the fight against epidemics and set international public health standards. These efforts laid the foundations for the World Health Organisation (WHO), which today is the global authority on public health. Finally, in terms of diplomacy and conflict resolution, the League of Nations attempted, albeit imperfectly, to promote the peaceful resolution of conflicts and the reduction of armaments. These efforts influenced the creation of the United Nations Organisation (UNO) and the establishment of its collective security system. Although the League of Nations had its limitations and failures, it played a pioneering role in establishing international institutions and norms that continue to influence global governance today.

Annexes

• Foreign Policy,. (2015). Forget Sykes-Picot. It’s the Treaty of Sèvres That Explains the Modern Middle East.. Retrieved 11 August 2015, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/10/sykes-picot-treaty-of-sevres-modern-turkey-middle-east-borders-turkey/
• “The League of Nations.” International Organization, vol. 1, no. 1, 1947, pp. 141–142. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2703534.
• Goodrich, Leland M. “From League of Nations to United Nations.” International Organization, vol. 1, no. 1, 1947, pp. 3–21. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2703515.