|
|
|
Woodrow Wilson, Alliances, and the League of Nations1
by Lloyd E. Ambrosius, University of Nebraska—Lincoln
|
People in the United States and other countries, if they know anything about Woodrow Wilson, identify this American president with the League of Nations. They regard his role in its creation as his major contribution to world history. Beyond this general consensus, however, there is considerable disagreement. |
1
|
|
Wilson's vision of the League and its place in a new international order after World War I evoked both praise and criticism at that time. It still does in the twenty-first century. He has remained a contested figure among historians, political scientists, and others. Looking back on his leadership during the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, scholars have variously lauded or condemned his statecraft, including his role in drafting the League Covenant. His responsibility for the U.S. Senate's rejection of the Versailles Treaty, which contained the Covenant as an integral part of the peace settlement with Germany, has likewise remained a subject of scholarly debate. Even among those who have affirmed Wilson's legacy, there are substantial differences over what it means. It has continued to stir controversy.2 |
2
|
|
These are not just academic disputes. They deal with vital issues because the president's legacy, known as Wilsonianism, still significantly defines the choices and shapes the behavior of the United States in world affairs. Ongoing debates among Americans over nation-building in the midst of war and revolution, peacemaking after either civil or international war, and peacekeeping within or among states, have all given the treaty fight in 1919-20 a continuing relevance. U.S. presidents—or those who might like to offer alternative policies or perspectives—must still deal with the crucial questions that Wilson confronted, concerning whether, when, and how the United States should join other nation-states in alliances or leagues. Americans are still struggling with these questions and still searching for ways to fulfill the Wilsonian promise of a better and more peaceful world. |
3
|
|
What was Wilson's own understanding of the postwar League of Nations? Why did he make its creation his top priority at the Paris Peace Conference? How did he conceive of the League and its potential role in a new era of international relations? Which responsibilities did Wilson want the United States to assume in this international organization? What limits did he place on the new League's functions and thus on American obligations under the Covenant? Answers to these questions can help clarify the ongoing debates among scholars and in public discourse over Wilson's historical record and over his legacy for future generations after World War I. |
. . . |
There are about 9798 more words in this article.
Please log in (or, if you are not yet an
authorized user, please go to the
User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
|
