The Failure of Collective Security in the Far East——Take the Japanese Invasion of Northeast as an Example
Abstract
Collective security was originally based on a reflection on the cruel reality of centuries of European international relations. 17th-century William Penn, 18th-century Saint Pierre, Rousseau, Kant, Bentham, 19th-century Saint-Simon, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson at the beginning of the 20th century and others have designed different blueprints for peace. Their peaceful ideals of "idealists" and "utopians" were adopted in the collective security theory of the 20th century. The first attempt at collective security was the establishment of the "International League" after the end of the First World War. However, because the balance of power system of the international community is declining and flourishing, and the organization has no coercive force and no clear obligations for member states to participate in military disarmament, the concept and practice of the international alliance ended in failure. Japan occupied Northeast China in 1932, and the Chinese government subsequently appealed to the League of Nations and sought help, but the League of Nations did nothing but send a delegation. Subsequently, Japan withdrew from the League of Nations in 1933, which accelerated the disintegration of the League of Nations and had to say that collective security failed in the Far East.References
[1] Ni Shixiong. Erudition ·International Politics and International Relations Series Contemporary Western Theory of International Relations 2nd Edition [M]. Shanghai: Fudan University Press.2018.
[2] “Collective Security.†Crossroads Of Decision: The State Department and Foreign Policy, 1933-1937, by Howard Jablon, 1st ed., University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, 1983, pp. 66–79. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j. ctt130jb3z.8. Accessed 23 Jan. 2020.
[3] Xu Lan. World War, Collective Security and Progress of Human Civilization[J]. “World Historyâ€,2015(04):4-7.
[4] Marshall, Charles Burton, et al. “COLLECTIVE SECURITY AND INSECURITY.†Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at Its Annual Meeting (1921-1969), vol. 63, 1969, pp. 66–81. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25657777. Accessed 23 Jan. 2020.
[5] Jia Lieying. International System, International Alliance and Collective Security[J]. Journal of the Party School of the CPC Central Committee,2010,14(05):101-105.
[6] Bian Zhifu, Wang Ju. “International League†and “September 18th†Incident[J]. Journal of Social Sciences,1992(04):100-108.
[7] Xu Lan. International League and International Order after the First World War[J]. Chinese Social Sciences,2015(07):186-204+209.
[8] (US) Stavianos . L.. Global General History [M]. Beijing: Peking University Press.2004.
[9] Ma Jianbiao. “Crucifixion Momentâ€: Paris Peace Conference Shandong Issue Ruling and Wilson's Identity Crisis[J]. Research on Modern History,2018(03):23-38+160.
[10] Xu Kangming. Japan's withdrawal from the League of Nations [J]. Japan Studies,1994(02):120-135.
[11] Chen Haiyi, Guo Zhaozhao. Internationality and Subjectivity: The Sino-Japanese Conflict and the Formation of the International League Investigation Team[J]. Research on the Anti-Japanese War,2017(03):58-74+159-160.
[12] (US) Stavianos .L.. Global General History [M]. Beijing: Peking University Press.2004.
[13] Yu Xuanfeng. Lytton Investigation Team[J]. History Teaching,1994(07):42.
[14] Dou Aizhi. The Lytton investigation team came to China to investigate the truth[J]. History Teaching,1998(12):11-14.
[15] Xu Kangming. The beginning and end of Japan’s withdrawal from the League of Nations[J]. Japan Studies,1994(02):120-135.
1.jpg)
