In 1939, the USSR was expelled from the OGE. What is the League of Nations and what did this organization do? — The League of Nations failed in its task

On January 10, 1920, the first meeting of the League of Nations took place - international organization, created after the end of the First World War to avoid armed conflicts on the planet.

— The League of Nations failed in its task

Imperfections of the Versailles-Washington system ***, which formed the basis of the League of Nations, did not contribute to the establishment of world stability. The victorious countries of the First World War (Great Britain, France, the USA and Japan) tried to extract maximum benefits for themselves, ignoring the interests of the defeated and newly formed countries.

All this led to a decline in the prestige and influence of the organization. From League to different years withdrew or were excluded: Brazil, Hungary, Haiti, Guatemala, Germany, Honduras, Costa Rica, Italy, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Romania, El Salvador, USSR, Japan.

The methods of influence of the League of Nations on aggressor countries turned out to be insufficient to prevent the Second World War. Throughout the war, the organization continued to exist only on paper. In April 1946, the League of Nations was dissolved, its functions and powers transferred to the (UN).

Council of the League of Nations - executive agency, included four permanent members (Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan) and four non-permanent members, who were elected by the Assembly over a three-year period.

The Treaty of Versailles was a treaty signed on June 28, 1919 at the Palace of Versailles in France, officially ending the First World War of 1914-1918.

Versailles-Washington system international relations- the world order, the foundations of which were laid at the end of the First World War by the Treaty of Versailles of 1919, treaties with Germany’s allies, as well as agreements concluded at the Washington Conference of 1921-1922.

Russian history 20 century is rich in various events. Some of them were tragic, some were dramatic, and some were triumphant.

Let us consider one of the episodes of our history as the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations.

Expulsion of the USSR from the League of Nations: how and when did it happen?

This event happened in 1939 year. The formal reason is the war of the USSR against Finland for disputed territories.

Let us recall that the League of Nations was an analogue of the UN, its goal was to restore world order after the bloody world war of the beginning of the century. The Soviet Union was treated with suspicion in this organization, especially this suspicion intensified after the powerful industrialization of the country, which was carried out by Stalin and his team, and also after Soviet army began to grow in numbers and in military-technical development.

IN 1934 The Soviet Union joined the League of Nations at the invitation of France. However, our country was unable to maintain membership in this organization for long.

TO 1939 year in this international organization (that is, the League of Nations) consisted 40 states True, there were no such major players on the world stage as the USA, Japan, Germany, Italy and others. However, the League of Nations had a certain significant authority, so exclusion from it and subsequent sanctions could not but affect the economy and political life of the USSR.

Let us examine in detail the reasons for this exception.

The reason for the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations

The reasons for exclusion vary. There is an official and formal reason - this is the war with Finland, there are also more hidden reasons that can be discussed separately.

Regarding the first cause, action Soviet leadership can be justified by the fact that the borders with the Finnish state are model 1939 year were dangerously close to the border with Leningrad. In the event of an attack by Germany, whose ally was Finland, Leningrad and all its main communications would have been captured within a few days. Stalin and his team could not allow this to happen, so they started this war.

The expulsion of the USSR was also preceded by an active information campaign to denigrate the image of our country, which was launched in the Western media. The fact is that soviet planes They dropped bombs on Finnish military targets, but often the bombs also hit civilian targets. The glow of fires and the death of people were filmed on cameras, videotaped, and then the entire European press began to accuse our country of the exceptional cruelty of waging war.

Thus, mass consciousness residents Western countries and their colonies perceived the USSR solely as an aggressor country that needed to be punished for its actions.

Other reasons for the exclusion of the USSR were competition, which is not uncommon between various states. Governments European countries They feared that a successful war could increase the influence of the Soviet country on Europe, so they wanted to disarm our country by introducing additional sanctions and aggravating relations, which was inevitable after the exclusion procedure.

How did the exclusion of the USSR happen?

At the initiative of Argentina 14 December The twentieth assembly of the League was convened. At it, all speakers protested against the actions of the USSR, supporting their speeches with excerpts from the media. The issue was put to a vote, as a result of which 40 countries 28 voted to exclude our country from this organization.

16 December employees of the Soviet diplomatic consulate disseminated the USSR's response. Representatives of our country noticed that the voting was carried out according to a fraudulent scheme; in addition, it was adopted Active participation representatives of France and Great Britain, who, instead of responding to Hitler to his military invasion of their countries, were engaged in weakening the USSR. Moreover, representatives of Soviet diplomacy noted that if 127 million people who lived in the remaining 39 states that are members of the League of Nations do not want to have anything to do with 183 millions of people living in the USSR, then, strictly speaking, the country of the Soviets has nothing to regret about them.

Consequences of the exclusion of the USSR

For the USSR, the consequences of exclusion affected primarily the fact that during Hitler’s attack on our country it was more difficult to come to an agreement with Western world about creating a coalition against Germany and its leader. Although, perhaps, even if the USSR had not been excluded, the second front would still have been opened precisely at the time when the situation between the USSR and Germany turned in favor of the Soviet troops. This exception also brought some sanctions in the economic sphere, which the USSR endured quite easily.

The League of Nations itself was dissolved shortly after the end of the war.

Thus, the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations was one of the pages of the difficult relations between our country and the Western European world.

The League of Nations was founded in 1919-1920 to avoid a repeat of the devastating war. The Versailles Agreement created by this organization included 58 states. The goals of the League were to maintain universal peace within the framework of fundamental principles Pact adopted by its members: to develop cooperation between peoples and guarantee them peace and security.

During the first years of the League of Nations, great successes were noted. In accordance with the provisions of the Pact, several international disputes - between Sweden and Finland, as well as between Greece and Bulgaria - were resolved peacefully. The agreement signed at Locarno in October 1925, which marked the beginning of Franco-German reconciliation, was assigned to the League.

Who was not included in the League of Nations

Countries that are not included in the League: USA, Saudi Arabia. Later, due to non-compliance with the Treaty of Versailles, countries such as Germany, Italy, Japan withdrew, and the USSR was also excluded from the League of Nations.

At the beginning of the formation of the League, the USSR was not part of the countries, although it supported this organization in every possible way, taking an active part in summits and negotiations. In September 1934, the USSR joined the League as a permanent member. The reason for the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations lay in the armed attack on Finland.

Political events in Moscow leading to hostilities

Stalin was worried that the border with Finland was very close to Leningrad, which, in his opinion, threatened national security. The Soviet leader at first did not want to start a military campaign and negotiated for peace and military assistance. Stalin was ready to cede a significant part of Karelia to the Finns; in return, they were required to move the border from Leningrad deep into their territory and provide the USSR with several islands on Finnish territory for military bases.

How the USSR was excluded from the League of Nations

Moscow's proposal caused a split in the Finnish leadership, and those who did not want any compromises with the Bolsheviks took over. On November 26, 1939, at about 16:00, shelling was allegedly launched on the territory of the Soviet border post in the area of ​​the Korean village of Mainila from Finnish territory; according to official sources, 4 people were killed and 8 were wounded.

Finnish border guards claimed that the shells came from the Soviet rear. An hour later, a commission consisting of the ICIA was held in Maynila, which quickly determined the guilt of the Finnish side. Such shelling gave Moscow a formal reason to attack Finnish territory, under the guise of defending its land. That is why the USSR was excluded from the League of Nations (1939).

On November 28, Moscow withdraws from the non-aggression treaty, the next day there is a statement about November 30, 1939, troops Soviet Union crossed Finnish border with a large superiority of manpower and equipment. This confrontation went down in history under the name “War with the White Finns.” Its beginning was not announced, and even the obvious shelling of Finnish territory Soviet troops Moscow leaders denied.

The League of Nations has run out of patience

Moscow created information propaganda that the Finnish government is the enemy of its population. The Union declared itself not an aggressor, but a liberator. But few people believed Moscow. On December 14, the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations was supported by 7 members of the Council out of 15. Despite the minority of supporters, the decision came into force. At the meeting, the main lever of influence against the aggressor was ignored - the use economic sanctions. Delegates from countries such as Greece, China and Yugoslavia abstained from voting, and representatives of Iran and Peru were not present at the meeting where the USSR was expelled from the League of Nations.

World War II was approaching

This was the largest bloody conflict in the history of mankind using nuclear weapons, which involved 62 states in fighting, which is 80% globe. Second World War began shortly after everyone observed the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations. Do not forget the bloody war in Finland, where the city of Helsinki was completely wiped off the face of the country.

After the outbreak of World War II, the insolvency of the League became obvious, and the last thing that could be considered was the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations. The date of this event was December 14, 1939, and by January 1940 the League had stopped all activities regarding the settlement of political issues.

What failures has the organization suffered?

Despite a good start, the League of Nations failed to prevent either the invasion of Manchuria by Japan or the annexation of Ethiopia by Italy in 1936, and Hitler's capture of Austria in 1938 left the League of Nations powerless to prevent further world conflict. The League of Nations ceased to operate in 1940.

Such failures only prove the inconsistency of agreements between political forces. Peace agreements are adhered to as long as it is beneficial to both countries or until there is no possibility of conducting military conflicts. Therefore, the participating countries observed the exclusion of the USSR from the League of Nations (1939).

Successes of the Treaty of Versailles

The failure of the collective security of the League of Nations does not lose sight of the successes of what was achieved from the very beginning. Under its auspices, a significant number of summits and intergovernmental expert meetings were held in Geneva in such areas as financial issues, health care, social affairs, transport and communications, etc. This fruitful work was confirmed by the ratification of more than a hundred conventions by member states. The unprecedented work in the interests of refugees carried out by the Norwegian figure F. Nansen since 1920 should also be emphasized.

Almost 100 years ago, the USSR was excluded from the League of Nations; the date of this event, as mentioned above, fell on December 14, 1939. Today, the successor to the League is the UN.

TASS is authorized to convey the following assessment from authoritative Soviet circles of the resolution of the Council of the League of Nations of December 14 on the “exclusion” of the USSR from the League of Nations.
On December 14, the Council of the League of Nations adopted a resolution on the “exclusion” of the USSR from the League of Nations, condemning “the actions of the USSR directed against the Finnish state.”
In the opinion of Soviet circles, this absurd decision of the League of Nations evokes an ironic smile and it can only disgrace its hapless authors.

It should, first of all, be emphasized that the ruling circles of England and France, under whose dictation the resolution of the Council of the League of Nations was adopted, have neither the moral nor the formal right to talk about the “aggression” of the USSR and to condemn this “aggression”. England and France keep under their control the vast territories they have long captured in Asia and Africa. They had just recently decisively rejected Germany’s peace proposals, which tended to end the war as quickly as possible. They base their policy on continuing the war “until the victorious end.” Already these circumstances, exposing the aggressive policy of the ruling circles of England and France, should have forced them to be more modest in defining aggression and finally understand that the ruling circles of England and France have deprived themselves of the moral and formal right to talk about someone else’s “aggression” and, even more so, about “aggression” on the part of the USSR.
It should further be noted that relations between the Soviet Union and Finland are regulated by the Treaty of Mutual Assistance and Friendship, concluded on December 2 of this year. between the People's Government of Finland Democratic Republic and the government of the USSR. These agreements fully ensured peaceful relations between the USSR and Finland and resolved in a friendly manner to the satisfaction of both parties, both the issues of ensuring the independence of Finland and the security of Leningrad, and the issues of expanding the territory of Finland at the expense of the territory of the USSR through the reunification of the Karelian regions with Finland. As is known, the USSR transfers 70 thousand to Finland under this agreement. square kilometers with a population of more than 100 thousand people in exchange for a territory of Finland of less than 4 thousand kilometers with a population of about 25 thousand people. If the seizure of foreign territory and the forcible subordination of the population of this territory to a foreign state is the main element of the concept of aggression, then one cannot but admit that the agreement between the USSR and the Republic of Finland does not indicate aggression, but, on the contrary, the peaceful and friendly policy of the USSR towards Finland, which has as its goal ensuring the independence of Finland and strengthening its power by expanding its territory.
There can be no doubt that present-day England and France would have acted differently in this case, that is, they would simply have taken and captured the territory of Finland, as they captured the territories of India, Indochina, Morocco in their time, or as they captured in 1918 -1919 the territory of the Soviet Union.
Finally, it should be noted that the Treaty of Mutual Assistance and Friendship between the USSR and the Republic of Finland fully ensures peace between these countries. And precisely because this treaty ensures peace and friendship between both countries, the USSR is not and is not interested in waging war with Finland. Only the former, already bankrupt Finnish rulers from the Mannerheim clique do not want the implementation of this agreement and, under the dictation of third powers, are imposing a war on Finland against the USSR, contrary to the actual will of the Finnish people. The real meaning of the decision of the Council of the League of Nations is not to strive for peace and not to support the Finnish people, but to support the bankrupt Mannerheim clique against the Finnish people and, thereby, to ignite a war in which the Finnish people are involved against their will and force provocations of the Mannerheim clique.
Thus, instead of helping to end the war between Germany and the Anglo-French bloc, which, in fact, should be the mission of the League of Nations if it continued to be an “instrument of peace,” the current composition of the Council of the League of Nations, having proclaimed a policy of support provocateurs of the war in Finland - the cliques of Mannerheim and Tanner, took the path of inciting war also in the north-east of Europe.
Thus, the League of Nations, by the grace of its current directors, turned from some kind of “instrument of peace”, which it could be, into a real instrument of the Anglo-French military bloc to support and incite war in Europe.
With such an inglorious evolution of the League of Nations, its decision to “exclude” the USSR becomes quite understandable. The gentlemen imperialists, intent on turning the League of Nations into an instrument of their military interests, decided to find fault with the first excuse that came their way in order to get rid of the USSR as the only force capable of resisting their imperialist machinations and exposing their aggressive policy.
Well, so much the worse for the League of Nations and its undermined authority.
Ultimately, the USSR may be the winner here. Firstly, he is now freed from the obligation to bear moral responsibility for the inglorious deeds of the League of Nations, and the responsibility for “leaving the USSR outside the League of Nations” falls entirely on the League of Nations and its Anglo-French directors. Secondly, the USSR is no longer associated with the League of Nations pact and will henceforth have free hands.
It goes without saying that the very situation in which the League of Nations resolution directed against the USSR was prepared and passed exposes the scandalous machinations resorted to by the Anglo-French representatives in the League of Nations to achieve this goal. As you know, the Council of the League of Nations consists of 15 members, but only 7 votes out of these 15 were cast for the resolution on the “exclusion” of the USSR, that is, the resolution was adopted by a minority of members of the League Council. The remaining 8 Council members were either abstained or absent. The composition of the representatives of the 7 states that voted for the “exclusion” of the USSR speaks for itself: these seven include England, France, Belgium, Bolivia, Egypt, the Union of South Africa, and the Dominican Republic.
Thus, England and France, with a population of only 89 million, supported by Belgium, Bolivia, Egypt, the Union of South Africa and Dominican Republic, with a total population of only 38 million, decided to “exclude” the Soviet Union, which has a population of 183 million. Randomly selected “representatives” of 127 million population “excluded” the USSR with its 183 million population.
But in order to obtain these votes, the Anglo-French representatives had to resort to special machinations on the eve of voting day to change the composition of the members of the League Council. On the eve of the Council meetings, through the Assembly of the League of Nations, members of the Council were held, in non-permanent seats - representatives of the Union of South Africa and Bolivia (the latter was elected for the second time) and in the so-called temporary seats - a representative of Egypt. Consequently, from among the seven representatives who voted in the League Council for the “exclusion” of the USSR, three representatives were selected in a special way. With these scandalous machinations, the representatives of England and France in the League of Nations completely undermined any political and moral weight of their vote on December 14th.
There is no doubt that such scandalous machinations could only be dictated by the atmosphere of political reaction and moral decline that now reigns in the “spheres” of the League of Nations.
It is not difficult to understand what the decisions of the League of Nations, taken in such an atmosphere, are worth.

The League of Nations, formed as a result of the First World War, was supposed to serve a good purpose - to maintain peace throughout the world. But formulated strongmen of the world This task turned out to be essentially impossible. And there are many reasons for this: some name among the main ones the imperfection of the Versailles-Washington system, ambitions in some states and revanchist sentiments in others, and so on.

One of the fundamental instruments of influence on the alleged aggressor should have been economic sanctions.

It was assumed that states that were members of the League of Nations would break all financial relations with the aggressor. Certain parallels with this old concept can be traced even now if desired. However, very quickly the members of the League of Nations, and especially its founders, began to act exclusively in their own interests, ignoring previous guidelines and agreements. Thus, the United States was not a member of the League of Nations, since the Senate refused to ratify the organization’s charter.

Over time, the prestige of the League of Nations only continued to decline. As well as her influence. This was due to the fact that the organization was unable to solve the pressing problems of many states, turning into an arena of struggle for dominance between Great Britain and France.

“...Podkolesin tragically asked:
- Why are you silent, like the League of Nations?
“I was very scared of Chamberlain,” answered Stepan...”

- wrote in the immortal “Twelve Chairs” and.

The satirical novel was written in 1927. The Soviet Union joined the League of Nations only seven years later, in 1934. But long before this, in many countries, including the Soviet Union, there was a perception of the League of Nations as a purely symbolic and useless institution.

Vladimir Lenin especially disliked the League of Nations. Ilyich believed that it “bears all the features of its origins from the world war” and is “imbued through and through with the absence of anything resembling real chances for peaceful coexistence” of states. Joseph Stalin was not afraid of the League of Nations either, in early December 1939 he went to war with Finland.

Very little time passed - already on December 14, the League of Nations decided to expel the USSR from its ranks. The corresponding decision was made by the Council of the League of Nations on the basis of a resolution adopted by the organization's assembly. At the same time, the delegates of Greece, China and Yugoslavia abstained from voting, and the delegates of Iran and Peru were not present at the meeting at all. The League of Nations violated its own rules - only 7 out of 15 members of the Council voted to expel the USSR, which, however, did not prevent the decision from being carried out.

The reaction of the Soviet Union was not long in coming.

“In the opinion of Soviet circles, this ridiculous decision of the League of Nations evokes an ironic smile, and it can only disgrace its hapless authors,” - it was said in a message published the same day.

There was also a place for external enemies: “The ruling circles of England and France, under whose dictation the resolution of the Council of the League of Nations was adopted, have neither the moral nor the formal right to talk about the “aggression” of the USSR and the condemnation of this “aggression.”

“Thus, the League of Nations, by the grace of its current directors, has turned from some kind of “instrument of peace,” which it could have been, into a real instrument of the Anglo-French military bloc for supporting and fomenting war in Europe,” the document also said.

The League of Nations was dissolved only on April 20, 1946, although it ceased to mean anything much earlier.