International Sanctions and World Peace

THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO QUARTERLY INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS AND WORLD PEACE* ESCOTT REID In 1919 President Wilson explained to his countrymen the terms of the Covenant of the League of Nations: Suppose somebody does not abide by these engagements)' then what happens? An absolute isolation, a boycott! The boycott is automatic. There is no ','if' or "but" about that in the Covenant..•• The borcott will mean ... [that] there shall be no communication of any kind between the people of the other nations and the people of [the aggressor] nation.•.• It is the most complete boycott ever conceived in a public document; and I want to say' with confident prediction that there will be no more fighting after that. There is not a nation that can stand that for six months. Reading the speech in 1935 one would certainly be justified in thinking that it must have been made in' the heat of an election campaign. It has an the characteristics of an election speechmis -statements, exaggerations; unfounded predictions. "Ifs" and "buts" are rampant in the Covenant. The economic boycott is not automatic. Even if it were it would probably not stop war. It is possible, however, 'to argue that most of what Woodrow Wilson said of the Covenant of the 'League of Na,tions in 1919 was true in 1919, though it is untrue to-day. Certainly the wording of the reievant articles of the Covenant seems to support his interpretation. Thus Article 10 binds the members of the League to "preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League." Article 16 declares that a member of the League which resorts ((to war in disregard of its covenant under Articles 12} 13, or 15 ... *Boycotts and Peace, edited by Evans Clark, Harper and Brothers. Sanctions and Treaty Enforcement, by P. S. Wild, Harvard University Press. Force in Peace, by A. E. Hindmarsh, Harvard University Press. Economic Sanctions, by O. S. Franks and others, Queen's College, Oxford. Economic Sanctions (League of Nations Union, pamphlet no. 371, August, 1934). , A Policy of Peace, by the Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King (Speech be'fore the annual meeting of the National Liberal Federation, December 12, 1934). "The Place of Peaceful Pressure," by A. S. Millward (New Commonwealth, August, 1934, pp. 158-9). "The Fallacy of Economic Sanctions," by Francis Delalsi (New Commonwealth , November, 1934, pp. 208-9). "Canada and a Foreign Polic'y," by H. F. Angus (Dalhousie Review, October, 1934, pp. 265.75). 408 REVIEWS shall ipso facto b~ deemed to have committed an act of war against all other Members of the League, which hereby undertake immediately to ... [prevent] all financial, commercial, or personal intercourse between the nationals of the Covenant-breaking State and the nationals of any other State, whether a Member of the League or not." , These articles, as part of the Covenant, were declared by Lloyd George, Clemenceau, and- Wilson not to be llsubject to a narrow or technical construction." What they have received, however, is the most narrow, the most technical construction possible. The monkey-wrench which the United States Senate threw into the machinery of the League by its refusal to ratify the Covenant, was not so destructive in its effects as the sabotage indulged in by those states which were supposed to be the guardians of the machinery~ . They declare, of course, that their sabotage was necessary, once the United States had refused to join the League. A lurid reflection all the good faith of this declaration is, however, cast by the refusal of France and Great Britain to make any serious attempt to secure the co-operation of the United States in the enforcement of sanctions against Japan in -1931 and 1932. Instead, therefore, of League sanctions being definite, certain, and automatic, as President Wilson apparently thought they would be, they became, as early as 1921, indefinite, uncertain, and voluntary . In that year the internatIonal committee of jurists, reporting to the second assembly of the League, declared: "There can be no doubt that the Coundl, under the terms of Article 10, can only advise as to the means to be employed; it cannot impose them...