Assess the reasons why there were no major international conflicts in the 1920s.
The 1920’s was not without conflict but there were no major international conflicts that erupted into war. The
reason for this was overwhelmingly the of legacy of the war and the desire of most of the victorious nations
never to repeat the horrors of the Great War coupled with a genuine conviction that there was a better way to
resolve international conflict rather than resorting to war. The defeated nations, however, had additional reasons
for why they were not engaged in international conflict with the most significant being the economic impact of
the war and the military consequences of the peace settlements.
The legacy of the Great War. Undoubtedly the psychological and emotional impact of the war on all countries,
not to mention the physical and economic consequences, meant that the prospect of another war was wholly
unacceptable and political leaders on all sides would have found very little support for another conflict. You
should elaborate further on things like desire for peace, war exhaustion, priority of domestic economic and
social problems e.g. unemployment caused by disjointed markets, war debt.
Peace Settlements The victorious allies had also ensured that the defeated powers, notably Germany, was so
weakened by the terms of the treaties signed that they simply were unable to resist by force any conflict with
another nation or nations e.g. as seen in the Ruhr in 1923 after the French and Belgian invasion. The
Disarmament of Germany, including the military restrictions on the size of the armed forces, meant it was
impossible to wage war even if Germany wanted to. This and the economic circumstances coupled with the
social and political internal problems Germany’s fledgling democracy was facing, meant they had far more
pressing priorities than avenging defeat in the Great war. You should elaborate further with examples of how
weak Germany actually was as a result of the peace settlements and the internal priorities they faced. However
it is also worth pointing out that it was not just the lack of resources to wage war that prevented conflict but
much more importantly the lack of conviction on all sides ever to wage war again. There was too much to lose
and little to gain from fighting another war and therefore international conflicts needed peaceful resolutions.
The objectives and policies of the major powers. GB and France were keen to build on the advantages they
had secured after winning the war (give e.g. of some of the benefits Gb and France got from the war) Another
major conflict would set back and jeopardise their economic and imperial ambitions. They no longer had the
guaranteed support of the USA who had withdrawn into an isolationist position on foreign matters once again
i.e. not joining the League of Nations, which in turn meant GB and France did not have the resources to wage
war. Germany also, under Stresemann and the ‘fulfilment policy’, sort diplomatic solutions (explain this further)
Coupled with this, was the hopes and expectations for the role of the new League of Nations. You should
elaborate here with reference to some of the successes the League had dealing with conflicts between 2
countries e.g. Aaland Islands, Greece and Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Albania.
The ‘Locarno honeymoon’ and Kellogg-Briand Pact. The overwhelming desire for the Great War to be the
‘war to end all wars’ is most amply demonstrated by the Locarno treaty 1925 and Kellogg Briand Pact 1928
because they illustrate the ambition to resolve conflict by diplomatic means. You should elaborate what both
these events did that evidences the desire for international harmony. Before October 1929, it was patently clear
that the vast majority of countries and governments in Europe were committed to peace.
A note of caution must, however, be made at this point. The 1920’s was, comparatively, a much more stable
decade to the ones immediately before and after. This does not mean there was not the potential for major
conflict. The League of Nations had not had to deal with a major conflict between two major powers but it did
arbitrate between a major and a minor power on occasions, notably Italy with Greece and France with Germany.
Explain this further. Both these incidents exposed how vulnerable the League of Nations was. Should a country
or countries, particularly major powers not cooperate with the league then the prospect of a major conflict is
inevitable. This became clear in the 1930’s during the Manchuria and Abyssinia crises. Explain further
Conclusion
The 1920’s lacked major international conflicts because there simply was no desire to resolve disputes in the pre
1914 way. Few countries had the resources to wage war but fewer still had the desire to wage war. The legacy of
the Great War was so deeply rooted that it was incomprehensible to most, that the pursuit of war was an
appropriate vehicle to resolve international conflict especially as so much hope and expectation had been placed
on the shoulders of the League of Nations