1. Why did "everyone regretted acting against Italy"? (166)
The nations most powerful in the league had no direct reason to act against Italy. The imperialism of Africa did not damage them in any way and action against Italy would only negatively impact them. For example, Britain believed that a conflict in the Mediterranean would weaken their imperial defenses at a time when Japan was beginning to expand again. In addition the French had established good relations with Italy, which allowed for the possibility of removing forces along their northeast frontier. A new conflict would ruin this possibility and not allow franc to transfer forces towards protection from Germany. Finally, there was the fear that Mussolini would turn towards Hitler. A war with Italy could result in the collapse of the fascist regime, causing social upheaval and, possibly, the rise of the Bolsheviks. 2. Explain the role of propaganda in understanding the Italian-Ethiopian War. (168)
Italian propaganda attempted to describe Ethiopians as “vicious uncivilized barbarians”. However, this view never really managed to overpower the popular romanticized sentiment in which people saw Ethiopians as free and noble people. The Time magazine naming Haile Selassie the Man of the Year demonstrates this view. As a result of this perspective the league imposed sanctions against Italy. The public’s want to aid Ethiopians forced the league to implement the policy of collective security and to test the power of the league. 3. Explain why other nations within the League did not get involved in stopping the Italian invasion of Ethiopia. (169-171)
France was dealing with many domestic issues. There was a threat of civil conflict between pro-fascist leagues and the common front. France was also suffering from an economic crisis. The left demanded that France help the league, but few supported war. While the right wanted to maintain relations with Italy. The conflicts heightened tensions and bred uncertainties. In addition France did not fully trust Britain policies. They could not be completely sure that British enthusiasm for the league would last and had no guarantee of protection from them. France’s first priority was to maintain a good relationship with Britain because they needed security from them.
In turn the British also had reasons to not advocate an enforcement of the collective security policy. They had no assurance that support from France would come and therefore could not rely on any help. In addition a war would be costly and there was a possibility of losing ships. This war could impact Britain’s ability to maintain their widely dispersed strategic responsibility.
Mussolini was aware of the fears that Britain and France had. He used this situation to his advantage and never denied that he would go to war. In addition he often hinted that he was open to conciliation. With this strategy Mussolini managed to keep the French and British off balance, stopping them from fully implementing a policy. 4. Summarize in 8-10 sentences Baer's conclusion. (177-179)
Baer concluded that for a time the policy of collective security was implemented and was successful. Public opinion was positive and for almost half a year many states came together to adhere to the covenant. However, the desire to avoid any war weakened the strength of this policy. Once it became clear to the European countries that their own status quo could not be maintained if this policy was fully implemented any hope was lost. Collective security was aborted in Europe, however conciliation remained very popular. The failure of this policy was often blamed on unexpected events rather than on the incompatibility of it with pro-league opinion and Italian nationalism. The sanctions used against Italy were ineffective in their desired result and instead built up Mussolini to a great power in Italy. Italians rallied and the Ethiopian war only became more popular. However, after the sanctions Italian society suffered.