Search

Study Guide: League disputes in the 1920s

1. Aaland Islands Dispute (1921)

  • Context: The Aaland Islands, located between Sweden and Finland, were inhabited mostly by Swedish speakers. After Finland gained independence from Russia in 1917, the Swedish-speaking inhabitants wanted to join Sweden. Sweden supported this claim, while Finland wanted to keep the islands.
  • League Action: The League set up a commission to investigate and recommended that the islands remain part of Finland but with guarantees for the protection of the Swedish-speaking population’s language and culture.
  • Outcome: Both Sweden and Finland accepted the League’s ruling peacefully.
  • Evaluation: Success — showed the League could effectively mediate territorial disputes and protect minority rights without violence.

2.Vilna Dispute
  • Context: After World War I, borders in Eastern Europe were unclear due to the collapse of empires (especially the Russian and Austro-Hungarian).
  • In 1920, Polish troops took control of Vilna / Lithuania appealed to the League of Nations to intervene.
  • The League ordered Poland to withdraw and offered to organise a plebiscite (a vote by the people).
  • Poland refused to withdraw and justified its occupation on ethnic grounds (most of Vilna’s population was Polish).
  • The League was reluctant to act firmly – France supported Poland, hoping to have Poland as an ally against Germany.
  • Outcome: Poland kept control of Vilna / The League did nothing effective to force Poland to leave.
  • Evaluation: Failure -  It was an early failure of the League – showed that: Powerful members (like France) could undermine it. The League had no army, so couldn’t enforce decisions. Small nations like Lithuania couldn’t rely on the League for protection. Undermined the League’s authority and credibility.

2. Upper Silesia Dispute (1921)

  • Context: Upper Silesia was an industrially rich area disputed by Germany and Poland after WWI. The Treaty of Versailles left the decision open to a plebiscite, but tensions led to violence between ethnic Germans and Poles.
  • League Action: The League supervised a plebiscite and proposed dividing the region based on voting results, giving Poland the more industrial parts and Germany the rest.
  • Outcome: Both countries reluctantly accepted the division, reducing the violence.
  • Evaluation: Success — the League’s intervention prevented a larger conflict and demonstrated its capacity to oversee fair plebiscites.

3. Corfu Incident (1923)

  • Context: An Italian general and his staff were assassinated on Greek soil near the border with Albania. Italy, led by Mussolini, blamed Greece and invaded the Greek island of Corfu in retaliation, occupying it by force.
  • League Action: The League condemned the invasion but was unable to act decisively due to Mussolini’s defiance and lack of support from major powers. The issue was eventually settled by the Conference of Ambassadors, which sided with Italy.
  • Outcome: Greece was forced to pay compensation and Italy withdrew after diplomatic pressure.
  • Evaluation: Failure — exposed the League’s weakness in enforcing peace against aggressive major powers and reliance on diplomatic pressure rather than force.

4.Bulgaria-Greece Border Dispute (1925)

  • Context: Greek troops invaded Bulgaria after a Greek soldier was killed near the border, escalating tensions between the two countries.
  • League Action: The League condemned Greece’s aggression, ordered an immediate withdrawal, and demanded compensation be paid to Bulgaria.
  • Outcome: Greece complied and withdrew its forces, paying reparations.
  • Evaluation: Success — demonstrated the League’s ability to enforce decisions quickly and maintain peace in smaller conflicts.

Overall Evaluation of the League in the 1920s:

  • The League was effective in mediating smaller, regional conflicts and preventing escalation through diplomacy and legal mechanisms.
  • Its success depended heavily on the cooperation and interests of the great powers, and it struggled with conflicts involving aggressive or powerful states.
  • The League lacked military power to enforce its rulings, limiting its effectiveness in crises like Corfu.
  • It laid important groundwork for international cooperation and conflict resolution despite these limitations.​

Revise