What arguments were made for and against the League of Nations?
Use these source documents to cite specific evidence in your thesis.
1. Wilson's Joint Address to Congress Leading to the Declaration of War Against Germany
2. Henry Cabot Lodge: Reservations with Regard to the Treaty
3. An expert from the Senate Debate of the League of Nations
4. Wilson's Final Address in Support of the League of Nations
PLEASE ANSWER
Supporters of the League of Nations, like Woodrow Wilson, argued that the organization would be an effective way to maintain peace and prevent future world wars. In Wilson's Joint Address to Congress Leading to the Declaration of War Against Germany, Wilson called for the establishment of "a general association of nations...formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike" (Wilson 1). This idea would later evolve into the League of Nations.
Wilson believed that the League would serve as a forum for open diplomacy and collective security, allowing nations to peacefully resolve disputes and protect each other from aggression. In his final address in support of the League of Nations, Wilson argued that the League could "end secret diplomacy, remove economic barriers, reduce armaments, and establish the rule of law over the international use of force" (Wilson 4). He believed that through these measures, the League could help create a more just and stable world order.
Opponents of the League of Nations, such as Henry Cabot Lodge, expressed concerns about the potential infringement on national sovereignty and the possibility that the League would entangle the United States in conflicts they wished to stay out of. In his reservations with regard to the Treaty, Lodge argued that the League's covenant would unnecessarily limit America's freedom of action, particularly in regard to the Monroe Doctrine. Lodge feared the League would pressure the United States to become involved in international disputes that were not in their interest, creating more conflicts rather than reducing them (Lodge 2).
During the Senate Debate on the League of Nations, opponents also expressed concern that the League would weaken the power of the United States by diluting its influence in international affairs. They argued that "the United States would not receive equal representation with other countries, particularly in the League's executive council" (Senate Debate 3), potentially leading to decisions that were not in the best interest of the United States.
In summary, supporters of the League of Nations believed the organization would help maintain global peace, prevent future wars, and promote open diplomacy, while opponents argued that joining the League would infringe on national sovereignty, entangle the United States in conflicts, and dilute its influence in international affairs.