League of Nations

From IBWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

The League of Nations is an international body created in the wake of the First Great War to provide a forum and mechanism with which different polities could solve pressing international issues. In practice it has grown to become a "court of last resort."

The Headquarters of the League is in The Hague of the Batavian Kingdom.


Flag of the League of Nations

The chief aims of the League of Nations are to provide forums for the nations and peoples of the world to peacefully resolve their international issues and disagreements. According to the organization's Covenant, this "peaceful community of nations" intends to provide every nation the means to "...provide for the collective security of nations and regions; settle disputes that arise between nations through peaceful negotiation and diplomacy; improve global welfare; and provide a last defense of liberty." In its infancy, the League was an "...association of nations formed under specific and mutual covenants and treaties for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence, national liberty and territorial integrity to great and small states alike."


The symbol of the League is a black and white six-pointed star on a blue background.


There are no "official languages" of the League. While it is true that some languages, such as English and Scandinavian, are heard more frequently than some others, like Xliponian or Laurentian, it has long been the opinion of the League's Commission on Language and Culture (CLC) that all nations' languages should be respected to the greatest degree possible. When a motion to name seven official languages came before the League in 1959, French minister Marc Pasquin (and CLC Commissioner) spoke most eloquently against the proposal: "I also think that more languages then the ones given should be included. The nations represented in this multinational body are themselves multilingual; consider the Scandinavian Realm or the NAL or even France. Each of them is home to many languages and dialects. It might seem like there are too many languages, but this richness should be celebrated and supported within the League rather than stifled or forced through one of seven channels of communication. To my way of thinking, and with the support of the CLC, we hold that it would make greater sense to allow many more languages within this 'world conference' rather than limit them." Since that time, the Pasquin Doctrine has become firmly entrenched in the daily running of League offices and official operations. Everywhere in evidence are found teams of translators and interpreters who are trained in the subtle arts of assisting the ministers of the world's countries, both large and small, to communicate effectively with each other. The principal concession M. Pasquin allowed was in regards to the text found on League signage, stamps, letterhead and other League generated ephemera. Such things are allowed to be made up in a limited number of common languages.

Of the world's many languages, a good dozen or so are used more commonly than others and do indeed serve as unoffical interlanguages: Arabic, Castilian, Dalmatian, English, French (Francien), Scots, German (Low), Japanese, Mandarin Chinese, Russian, Scandinavian, and Brithenig. Less common are Swahili, Hindi, Sanskrit and Ðaij which round out the list.

Some moderately successful discussion has revolved around adopting an artificial auxiliary language as the chief mode of communications within the League. The most viable such language is Volapük, a well known and fairly popular auxiliary language. To date, no concensus has ever been reached regarding the establishment of an official auxiliary language; but to its inventor's credit, Volapük was adopted as an official League language.


  • Top Level (Secretariat?)
  • Council of the World
  • World Court -- international justice / war crimes / crimes against humanity
  • Regional Assemblies -- the true work-a-day portion of the League! (described below)
  • Commissions -- special League subcommittees charged with studying varying aspects of world governance and policy, from health care to slavery to fair working conditions to civil strife. The commissions may report to a Regional Assembly or the Council, either of which may initiate further investigation and seek collaborative effort to solve the issue at hand. One of the more curious League commissions is the Commission on Very Small States.


Each member nation sends representative(s) to the Council and its own regional Assemblies. Nations work mostly within these Assemblies, as it is the express will of the League that nations peacefully work out their differences locally rather than press their issues on the Council as a whole.

This article is source material

     It is comprised of accepted IB material, but has not been written up in article form for the Ill Bethisad     
wiki. Anyone feel free to edit it. QSS and QAA apply inasmuch as this is already accepted material.

The principle behind the LoN is that it is a court of absolute LAST resort. Kind of like nuclear weapons - they're there if you really need them. You just never seem to need them. The League itself is composed of several layers. It is best known as a sort of meeting-place for ministers from different regions and interest blocs to meet on a reasonably informal basis away from the influences of their governments. As a total entity, it's a forum for airing legitimate concerns - and individual non-member nations are always invited to send ministers to speak before the World (they just can't vote on actions); though it's everyday functioning is done by small regional committees and working groups. As an international force, it has teeth, in that the membership has pledged its military forces to the League when and as necessary.

These working groups may be made up of two or three ministers working on a problem. To take Canton for example, the working group might be made up of one regional minister - say the Commonwealth of Australasia and two ministers from elsewhere - say the OECA (OCAS, Organization of Central American States) and SATO. Solutions are arrived at and offered to the disputants. If such solutions are rejected, then petitions for full League intervention will be entertained. Mind you, full intervention will probably be denied.

It is the usual philosophy of the LoN to urge local regions to work out their own problems before calling on the world community. Like in Canton, Oregon has called on the League to intervene. The Official Response would be for SE Asian, East Asian and Australasian leagues to come together to sort out what needs doing - with the assistance of a League working group if they so desire. [That is, Oregon's petition for full intervention has been effectively denied. This doesn't mean that the LoN is blind to the plight of Canton, just that the full power of the League is not deemed necessary at this time.]

Mind you, the LoN requires a price of its membership. When your bloc is invited to join, it signs on to the underlying philosophy of the League. Also, it is an all for one, one for all sort of deal. When the League condenms a nation, the world condemns that nation. When a nation requires help, the world brings bounteous assistance. When a bloc doesn't tow the line, it is uninvited from the League. I suspect that League condemnation of a nation or action against a nation come about via a large majority of ministers. Abstainers and dissenters are nevertheless expected to support the decision, even if they disagree with that decision.

If this seems strange to us who are used to a strangely functional UN, IB's LoN is very much like any of the lesser leagues and federations in the world. I suspect that there are times when England will disagree with an FK action agreed to by Kemr and Scotland; that the SR must also have its points of tension. Nevertheless, the member states have agreed to continue within the framework of those organizations, and they will see through whatever actions the greater league has enacted. Same with the LoN, but on a worldwide scale.

For a bit of perspective, full League condemnation has only been handed down twice since the GW2 (once against China during the Oriental War, once during the Balkan War, against Sanjak, I suspect). Look at it like this: what country in its right mind would willingly stand up in the face of sure economic ostracism and probable destruction (especially a small country)?

For a good up and coming candidate for such actions, look no further than Tejas. They gassed Moab on Friday; and the news this morning tells of gas attacks in San Diego and in several cities along the border with Mejico. Even though the war with AC may in fact be legitimate, such underhanded tactics are considered inhumane and worthy of the strongest countermeasures.

The LoN is not an aggressive watchdog organization. It's not really their business to pursue investigations against a region. Even in the blatant case of Tejas (which is crowing over any little advance in California today), a member group or the afflicted nation would have to bring up a formal complaint to the League. Such would go through the usual channels of discussion and arbitration before being brought to the full League. California has yet to make such a complaint, and none of the North American ministers (Pacific Rim Organization, the Arctic Rim, the Mississippi Trade Alliance, the Organization of American States, NATO, etc.) have made public comment. This is probably because, in the end, California and Mejico will eventually trounce Tejas and divvy up whatever is left; so they don't all that put out by Tejas's brutal tactics.

Besides, the Balkans are seen currently as a 'special project'. It's a zone that could in the fullness of time blossom into quite the going region. Just look at the strides Dalmatia has taken, and there's no good reason why the whole region can't do similar. It would be in the League's bast interest to foster such progress in the Balkans, rather than ostracize it and ruin it economically over what are presumably past events.

Remember, if the League voted to strike the Balkans with its strongest measures, all the trade and exchange they enjoy with the SR, FK, Australasia, the Pacific Rim Organization, and all the rest would dry up! We don't want that, and that's why such power has only been used twice: the need has to be profound, any danger imminent and there can be no other way to effect a change.

That Tejas is seen as a possible candidate means that the Bush regime is _quite_ off its rocker. Florida is probably no better, but they have been smart enough to keep a lid on their lunacy. And besides, they're going to have their clocks cleaned free of charge sometime in the near future anyway. (After this was written, they most certainly did, thanks mostly to the Scandinavian Realm.)

This article is a proposal

It has not been ratified and therefore the information on this page is not protected by QSS.
You are welcome to correct errors and/or express your opinion at the Discussion Page.

2008 marked the first annual League of Nations Essay Contest.
Open to all citizens of a nation that is a member of the organization.
Restrictions: 1000 to 1500 words.
Topic: discuss the purpose of the League of Nations in the new millennium.
Explanation: the League of Nations was founded after the First Great War to prevent the occurrence of further such conflicts. Unfortunately, the Second Great War took place regardless of the League's noble intentions. In the years since, the League of Nations has gone about its business, issuing condemnations when absolutely necessary but not always managing to successfully halt conflicts. Should the League take more steps to ensure the success of its efforts to prevent warfare around the world? In the new millennium, which promises to be more peaceful than the last, has the League fulfilled its purpose? Should it disband?"