以下內容乃K.W.Ho之補習教材，於課堂教授，內容乃配合K.W.Ho之答題方法及風格所製作，同時內容可能有錯誤之處以供在課堂上糾正。非補習學生在未有得到課堂教學的情況下錯誤使用，恕不負責，同學請敬請留意。
【Free】6000頁筆記及60份5**考卷免費使用：按此
Youtube教學：按此
_________________________________________________________________________
「兩次大戰期間的集體安全體系從一開始已經注定失敗。」評論此說能否成立。
定義 集體安全體系指列強為維持和平所建立的集體合作機制，於兩次大戰期間，其包括成立國際聯盟(國聯)、簽署國際公約及舉行一系列裁軍會議。 // 架構 然而，基於參與國數目過少、過度依賴英、法兩國、缺乏有效罰則、自身存有漏洞及合作範疇過於狹隘，使集體安全體系從一開始已注定失敗。 // 立場 因此，題目所言確能成立。
主旨句 其一，兩次大戰期間集體安全體系的參與國數目過少，使其注定失敗。 // 段落內文 集體安全體系的成效取決於參與國的數目及參與程度，雖然此機制於一次大戰後得以確立，但卻未能形成高代表性及緊密合作，如國聯只有42個創始會員國，即使後來有更多國家加入，但高峰時亦只有58國。更甚，多個大國並未能同時成為會員，甚或沒有參與在內，倡議國美國便是顯例，結果使國聯未有足夠的權威及能力處理國際衝突。此外，華盛頓會議(1921-22年)及倫敦海軍會議(1930年)中參與裁軍的國家更少，前者只有5國參與，後者則更只有3國，結果未能有效消除國際間的擴軍氣氛，注定裁軍無法取得重大成效。 // 小結 可見，參與國的數目局限兩次大戰期間集體安全體系的效用，使之由一開始已注定失敗。
其二，兩次大戰期間的集體安全體系過於依賴英、法兩國維持，也使之注定失敗。一次大戰後，隨着德國遭《凡爾賽條約》重罰國力大減、奧匈帝國瓦解、美國重回孤立及蘇聯被西方國家孤立，維護和平重任落於英、法兩國身上，例如國聯的重要事務由英、法主理；《羅加諾公約》(1925年)中英國作為保證國的角色，承擔援助被侵略國的義務。然而，英、法在一次大戰中亦元氣大傷，令集體安全體系由一開始已搖搖欲墜，至經濟大衰退(1929年)爆發，英、法國力進一步受創，需要專注解決國內經濟危機，結果使集體安全體系效力大減，例如德國由1935年違反《凡爾賽條約》的規定重新擴軍，至1939年3月吞併捷克全境的過程中，英、法均以綏靖政策應對，使集體安全體系形同虛設。可見，集體安全體系由一開始便過度依賴國力今非昔比的英、法，致使其注定失敗。
其三，缺乏有效罰則注定集體安全體系注定失敗。兩次大戰期間的集體安全體系缺乏有效的懲罰方法應對違規國家，例如儘管國聯能夠通過譴責、經濟制裁及集體軍事行動制約侵略國，但譴責方式並無實質效用，國聯亦缺乏強制成員國執行經濟制裁措施的權力，至於國聯沒有獨立軍隊，更令集體軍事行動猶如天方夜譚。在欠缺有效制裁方法下，國聯注定不能發揮強而有力的制裁角色。此外，兩次大戰期間的裁軍會議及和平條約也欠缺罰則，例如華盛頓會議(1921-22年)未有列明締約國違反條約的處分；《凱格—白里安公約》(1928年)也只是呼籲各國放棄以戰爭解決糾紛，並未成立機制懲罰違約國，致使條約猶如一紙空文，以上均注定了各種嘗試的失敗。可見，缺乏有效罰則使集體安全體系形同虛設，注定以失敗告終。
其四，兩次大戰期間集體安全體系自身存有漏洞，使之一開始已注定失敗。國聯方面，由於採取「一致同意」的投票方式，若有任何一個成員國反對，議案亦無法通過，結果為侵略國反對國聯的決議及行動製造機會，局限了國聯的維和成效。例如九一八事變(1931年)後，國聯議案的投票結果雖是13票贊成，1票(日本)反對，但日本聲稱決議因未能一致通過而並無效力，最終拒絕撤軍。此外，和平條約及裁軍會議亦然，如《羅加諾公約》(1925年)只針對德國西邊的邊界問題，為日後德國東擴埋下伏線；《凱格—白里安條約》(1928年)中的「合法防衛權」更成為德國日後以保護日耳曼人為由，吞併蘇台德區(1938年)的藉口。再者，由於倫敦海軍會議(1930年)的裁軍條約只有美、英、日簽訂，三國為防他國擴軍時會使己國處於劣勢，在條約中加上「任何簽署國以外一國擴軍，簽署國亦可之」的條款，結果使成效大減。可見，集體安全體系自身的缺陷使之注定失敗。
其五，集體安全體系的合作範疇過狹，也使之注定失敗。調停會員國之間的衝突是國聯的宗旨之一，但國聯卻過於側重處理衝突方面的努力，未能有效促進國際間在社會、文化及經濟上的協作。結果，成員國難以建立緊密的合作及互惠互利的關係，令國聯始終是一個組織鬆散的機構，注定難以取得重大成效。此外，裁軍會議的裁軍範疇亦過於狹隘，如華盛頓會議(1921-22年)及倫敦會議(1930年)均只針對海軍的裁撤，對陸、空軍隻字不提，無疑局限了裁軍的成效。雖然及後的日內瓦會議(1932-34年)是一次普遍性的裁軍會議，但各國卻力圖保護自己的利益，德國更在各國一致裁軍的要求遭拒後退席，令會議最終失敗。結果，兩次大戰期間的裁軍會議只限制了軍艦的噸位，裁軍進程實際上欠缺重大進展。可見，合作範疇過於狹窄使兩次大戰期間的集體安全體系注定失敗。
總括而言，兩次大戰期間確立的集體安全體系從一開始已經存有多個弱點，而這些弱點正正削弱了集體安全體系的效力，令其逐漸變得形同虛設，最終無力阻止1930年代極權國家的侵略，世界大戰的重臨難以避免。
‘The collective security system during the inter-war period was doomed to fail from the very beginning.’ Comment on the validity of this statement.
Collective security refers to the security system established to maintain international peace by powers during the Second World War, including the establishment of the League of Nations, signing of international treaties and a series of disarmament conferences. However, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure because of the limited participating nations, over-reliance on France and Britain, lack of effective punishment, own loopholes and narrow scope of cooperation. Therefore, the statement is valid.
Firstly, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure because there were limited nations participating in it during the two world wars. The effectiveness of the collective security system depended on the number of nations participating in it and their level of participation. Although the system was established since the First World War, there was absence of high representativeness and close cooperation among countries. For example, the League國聯had only 42 founding members. The peak of its membership was only 58 countries. Worse still, many big powers did not become its member at the same period, or even did not join it. One obvious example was the US, who was the initiator of the League, refused to be a member of the League. The League was then lack of adequate power, authority and capability to deal with the international crises. Plus, the number of nations joining the Washington Conference華盛頓會議(1921-22) and the London Naval Conference倫敦海軍會議(1930) was even fewer, the former had 5 while the latter one had only 3 participating countries. They could not help to solve the armament problems and relieve international arms expansion. Disarmament was destined to have limited effectiveness. Hence, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure during the two world wars because the limited participating countries confined its effectiveness.
Secondly, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure due to the over-reliance on Britain and France during the two world wars. Along with Germany being weakened much by the Treaty of Versailles, the disintegration of Austria-Hungary, the isolationist policy introduced by the US again and the USSR being isolated by the western countries, the responsibility of keeping world peace was fallen to France and Britain. For instance, the important affairs of the League國聯 were mainly managed by Britain and France. Added to this point, the volunteering work which aimed to assist the nations being invaded was also borne by Britain since Britain was the guarantee nation保證國 in the Locarno Treaties羅加諾公約(1925). Yet, Britain and France were also battered in the First World War, making the collective security tottered at the initial stage. Britain and France were further weakened because of the outbreak of the Great Depression (1929) and they needed to concentrate on solving the national economic crises first, which weakened the collective security system a lot. For instance, during Germany’s aggression, like when Germany violated the Treaty of Versailles and rearmed in 1935 to the annexation of the Czechoslovakia捷克 in March 1939, Britain and France adopted the appeasement policy to deal with the issue, making the collective security useless. As we can see, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure due to its over-reliance on Britain and France with shrinking national power at the initial stage.
Thirdly, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure due to the lack of effective punishment. During the two world wars, the collective security system did not have a set of useful punishment measures to cope with countries violating the treaties. For example, the League國聯 could restrict the aggressor by moral condemnation, economic sanctions and collective military operation. However, first, the moral condemnation had no actual effectiveness. Second, the League lacked power to enforce members in imposing economic sanctions. Third, the League did not have an independent army, making collective military operation impossible. Without the effective punishment measures, the League could not be a powerful punisher. Also, the disarmament conferences and peace treaties proposed during the two world wars also lacked punishment measures. For example, the Washington Conference華盛頓會議(1921-1922) did not list the punishment for signatory powers violating the treaty. The Kellogg-Briand Pact凱格—白里安公約(1928) just called on every country to abandon war in order to solve disputes but not setting a system to punish the signatory violating the treaty, making the treaty useless. The aforementioned doomed the failure of different attempts. Thus, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure due to the lack of effective punishment.
Fourthly, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure because of its own loopholes. For the League國聯, because of the adoption of unanimous vote一致同意, if any of the member states opposed the motion, it could not be passed. This loophole produced chance for aggressor to oppose the decision and action of the League, limiting the effectiveness of its peace-keeping force. For instance, after the September 18th Incident九一八事變(1931), the voting result of the League was 13(for):1(against) (Japan), but Japan claimed that the motion could not be passed unanimously and she refused to withdraw her army. Moreover, the peace treaties and the disarmament conferences had their own loopholes as well. For example, the Locarno Treaties羅加諾公約(1925) only stopped Germany from expanding west but failed to affirm her eastern boundaries, this enabled Germany to expand to the east afterwards. The ‘legitimate self-defense’ clause in the Kellogg-Briand Pact凱格—白里安條約(1928) was a pretext used by Germany to annex the Sudetenland蘇台德區(1938), in the name of protecting the Germanic people. Also, the London Naval Conference倫敦海軍會議(1930) had only three signatories, which were the US, Britain and Japan. In order to avoid inferiority when other country expanded the army, it stated ‘‘if any country other than the signatories started to expand its navy, the signatories could follow suit.’’, weakening the effectiveness. Therefore, the collective security system was doomed to be a failure because of its own loopholes.
Fifthly, the narrow scope of cooperation made the League of Nations doomed to fail. The main objective of the League國聯 was to arbitrate conflicts among members, yet it put too much emphasis on dealing with international conflicts and failed to facilitate the international cooperation in social, cultural and economic aspects. Ultimately, it was difficult for members to build up tight cooperation and relationships with mutual benefit, making the League with loose organization. It was doomed to have limited effectiveness. Plus, the scope of disarmament aspects was too narrow in the disarmament conferences. For instance, there was only naval disarmament in Washington Conference華盛頓會議(1921-22) and the London Naval Conference倫敦會議(1930), without dealing with the army and air force, undoubtedly weakening the effectiveness of disarmament. Although the Geneva Conference日內瓦會議(1932-34) was a general disarmament conference, every country just protected their own interest. Germany even withdrew after the request of unanimous disarmament for every country was rejected, making the disarmament conference failed. Ultimately, the two disarmament conferences held during the two world wars only limited the tonnage of warship. Disarmament did not progress significantly. Thus, the narrow scope of cooperation made the League of Nations doomed to fail.
All in all, the collective security system which was established during the two world wars had several obvious weaknesses at the very beginning. These weaknesses indeed impaired the effectiveness of collective security system, making it became useless gradually. Finally, it failed to stop the totalitarian countries from invading others in the 1930s, the world war hence became inevitable.
Comments