What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collective security concept? Essay
After the First World War, people feel to want to have more peace and to live as same as before - What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collective security concept? Essay introduction. And I think this is one of the biggest strength of the collective security concept – the power of inhabitants. To have collective security concept is really very good for peace, we can make sure that there will be more peace than before, that another war won’t be able to be set up so easily. People will feel more safety and our world will be more stable, because if anything is going to happen, there’ll be at least a support, which will try to make the bar (our world) stable, so it won’t fall in neither its side.
In the class we’ve got teacher who’ll look after the students and the headmasters will look after the teachers, but the headmaster depends on the students, because other ways he can’t exists (without their support), so we have a closed circuit of debenture. Everything in our world is relates on another thing or depends on another thing. There’s the strong side and the weak side. If everything in our world is equal, our world won’t be stable and there’ll be many problems and disasters.
More Essay Examples on History Rubric
The relationships between countries also follow this principle. So as the league of nation is set up, it could pin the conflict between the countries. As written in the 10th Article of the League of Nations: ‘The members of the league undertake to preserve against external aggression the territory and existing independence of all members of the League. In case of threat of danger the Council (of the League) shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled. We can see how important here is the role of the League of Nation. It can help the side, which he thinks is right. BUT… this is perhaps also a very big reason why the members of the league will try to buy over other members, so when they have to decide something, the member with more sides (more hands or votes) will gain. So even from outside it seems like very clear, that it’s fair and people can rely on it, but in fact the backside can be very dark. Everything needs money, power and strength.
The USA couldn’t join the League and even there are many countries in the League, it’s still very weak. The most powerful countries in the League were Britain and France, but they couldn’t make the League work, they couldn’t recruit the need of the League, because they had been weakened by the First World War. So the League couldn’t be successful, because it couldn’t even deal with the chaos in the world. And also another weakness is that, not all of the countries signed the treaty, because there weren’t many profit for many countries.
As the treaty said – all nations who join the treaty has to disarm and when the country leaves the treaty or doesn’t listen the treaty, they won’t trade with that country and will send armies to deal with it. So if there are not many benefits for the countries, why will they join the League? And as less countries are joining the League, it couldn’t provide international security. There’s limited area of influence. So from upon points we can see, there’s many strengths and also weaknesses. But even collective security is a very good thing, it wasn’t possible to be successful.