To share with some of the viewers the quotes that you keep very dear to your heart in latin and greek, the sayings that are part of you may be these with a couple of those and why they inform your life. There are all of these things that float in and out of my life that i will choose just a few. So, one of the poems that i first learned with ancient greek which begins with [inaudible] and its a marvelous poem about a person imagined running away so there are very lessons that can be learned. One is to cut the losses were what do they mean to posture even though you are doing so hotly communicating with listeners that you have found something according to the cultural code, so how do you nonetheless maneuver around and help shape others. The latin text that i think about is one that you either did it to [inaudible] why am i doing this, i dont know. I feel its being done and i am tortured. At this plaintiff is a sort of ambivalence, the sort of constant maneuver back and forth in export ways which my wife tells me jokingly is something she feels. But it also speaks to how they develop this incredibly complicated in motion and how that complexity of emotion is something that we should be trained to appreciate and reflect. So to have these lingering in ones mind is a sign of how enriching education can be and how. Host you are a humanist of all. You are so many things as the right in this book and give you do not want to be labeled as one even though undocumented is the one that you bring out. But i think what the readers of the book and viewers can take away is the humanistic education is relevant for all of us in everything that we do and i think you thank you for sharing your views and experiences with us today. Thank you so much. This is delightful. That was after words, booktv Signature Program in which authors of the latest nonfiction books are interviewed by journalists, public policymakers and others familiar with their material. After words airs every weekend on the tv 10 p. M. On saturday, 12 and 9 p. M. On sunday and 12 a. M. On monday. You can also watch online. Go to booktv. Org and click on the after words in the series and topics list on the upper right side of the page. The professor Susan Peterson is next on booktv and recalls the peace conference after world war i and the creation of the league of nations. The great war has been a war of empire is to be allied powers that seem as if the militaristic and aggressive empires had been defeated while the impressive empire that had been the ally had fallen by the wayside in the throes of revolt. It seemed as if the great empires that thought of themselves as having reluctantly acquired possessions and who had administered the use for the good of the people have triumphed. Now its up to the victors to clean up the mess that was left so to speak. What was to happen to the broken imperial leases [collapse of the central powers. President wilson had stressed the selfdetermination as one of the 14point. But this idea came up against the man despite the allies to have the outlying provinces of the former enemies to spoil the war and also against the idea that the populations of the former colonies were sometimes seen rather paternalistically has not yet ready to govern themselves. How would the countries of that the victorious nations and oversight deal with these problems, how would they decide the socalled mandated plans among themselves . How would they be administered with the territories would they be granted independent or are they thought to lead a pure code tutelage before they could join join as the members of the family of nations and perhaps most important of all how would the people that lived in these states react to the newfound status . What the league of nations tried to do to solve these problems is the subject of the lecture tonight. One of a sort of semiseries that commemorates the anniversary of the fourth world war and its aftermath. Susan petersons new book the guardian the league of nations and the crisis of empire tells the story in the light of new research, new scholarship and modern ideas about the First World War. Susan peterson is the james shankman professor of the core curriculum at columbia university. She teaches comparative industry competition and International History. Shes written several books including a recent one about early 20th century member of parliament and the suffering change of our. Please welcome Susan Peterson. [applause] thank you for coming today. Its a pleasure to come to the New York Public Library because half of the book was written at the center for writers and scholars across the street at the schwartz building. So i have an incredible debt of gratitude to the new york public and im a loyal member here. It is now a century as you know in the First World War and europe we have seen a lot of commemorations but those were mostly about the war in europe but this is also the world war. The story im going to tell you today starts from the fact. So let me start by taking you back 100 years and reminding you of some of the less remembered theaters of the war. Germany had an empire in 1914 and actually was not a small one. New zealand started to scramble to see the colonies by sending the ship to kathy a in western somehow a and deposing the German Administration in late august. You can see Western Samoa right over there. Then the australians and the germans out of the bismarck northwesterly at. Of. The australians than planned to head north to the pacific island, but they found the japanese got their first. Those are the ones in that little marked area. Then there were the african possessions. British and french troops moved into cameroon. These are the shaded areas. Dividing the territories between themselves. South african troops moved around the orange river into southwest africa. The belgians with a lot of the homeland of the German Occupation must have enjoyed seizing her wanda then part of germany used africa but there were demands for the famine and the german general kept it a guerrilla war against british and south African Forces devastating the local populations. Lets remember the middle east campaigns. Britains army fought a Brick Campaign and the sabatini and now iraq. In 1916, britain made a secret deal with france defining the postwar skiers in the middle east that looked for local allies, too. They found one in whose son seen here brought his troops to the side and by the late 1970s british troops were in jerusalem and at the end of 19 18 p. M. At him pretty timid to damascus. When the conquest began every occupying empire was built on annexation. So, why werent werent they in werent today and asked . There were two reasons. One is that what were wilson brought the u. S. Into the war promising no annexation. The second is when they saw a great Anticolonial Movement with petitions from korea claiming the right to govern themselves. By 1918, britain made a lot of promises. Promising the state taking hussein support for the Jewish National home, and even the right to choose the governors to the african cup of nations. By 1918 the british officers were with the design organizations in palestine to assess the possibilities of jewish immigration to britain that britain was also subsidizing the new government in serious with wilson at the sight of it and decided to, quote, place the selfdetermination for all it was worth as the secretary put it be annexation slid off the table. Instead of the paris peace conference, a compromise was agreed. The german and ottoman territories wouldnt be granted selfgovernment because of the covenants. There were people that were not quite ready to stand in the modern world territories could be annexed. Instead, they would be given to jurors, socalled advanced nations who would ever than under the mandate from the league of nations. Three classes of mandate were defined. The middle east territories were supposed to be given advice and counsel by britain and france as theyve learned to govern themselves. The african territories occupied by britain, france and belgium were supposed to be understood and economic requirements such certain economic requirements such as the repression of the slave trade and free trade. Finally, the territories and southwest africa and the pacific occupied by japan and the dominions were handed over without many stipulations that all that all powers have to report to the league which were set up a commission to evaluate the council which is like the Security Council to any concerns. Now its important to realize neither governors or the governor and really welcomed us. At the peace conference only the british and americans were enthusiastic and when the u. S. Rejected the peace treaty, most of the occupied powers hoped the whole thing would go away. The British Colonial secretary who was supposed to get the mandate drafted, gave up. The french are determined just to be squatters he concluded and like most, they will by lapse of time become voters. The middle east populations thought they had been promised that they had been promised independence and not that which. There was a rising in iraq in the spring of 1920. And in damascus the nationalists proclaimed independence and even acted is looking. The allies alarm attached up and came to the terms. In april, 1920, britain and france met and confirmed the carve up agreed in 1916. Britain was the high commissioner still claiming International Authority for the mandate could have written. But france had given up on the idea of the arab states and once it could shift the troops from north africa attacked the army and forced them out. The british officials who had fought through the war felt a bit bad about that. And in 1921, the engineered the coronation is the king of iraq. They were not consulted much and just what would have been in the system wasnt clear. But the interesting thing is the oversight system setup anyway. Why . Because the assembly and all the people who have the league insisted on it. After the officials bowed out, the bureaucrat says the system themselves today by the fall of 1921 the reports were arriving in geneva and the mandates commission was meeting. The book i had just written is a the history of the system of the oversight. Its the efforts efforts of the imperialism of for the international supervision. It asks a simple question. What difference does that make . It doesnt change how people were governed because the empires ran true to type. The british governed much like they did in uganda. They apply to the racebased rule into southwest africa wikipedia. Com and the rule under the mandate was kind and gentle. Australia ran the regime and mandated new guinea than they did in the colony right next door. But the rule under the mandate in the public and the late here, thats the main point. What was truly knew about the mandate system was the level of international scrutiny, debate and publicity it generated. The imperial powers had to report annually and sent reporters to answer the questions of this body. The Permanent Mandates Commission of the league of nations as you can tell from this picture this is a group of the radicals with the exception of the women put on to represent women and represented from the International Labor organization most of the members were former colonial governors. But most were serious minded men accustomed to the command. They served without term and they proved much more outspoken and troublesome than anyone expected. The commission in turn was supported by this group now five, soon ten. The staff are the people that do the research and write reports that the commissioners are too lazy to write and answer the mail. The director was the man on the far right, william, a swiss american political scientist and a really, really good choice. The professor in geneva the former instructor in government at harvard was effortlessly trilingual had friends all over the world and was determined to uphold every letter of the covenant. He wasnt above working behind the scenes to find allies. It is coding with british internationalists but they came to include the most surprising part a petition process. People under mandate or even interested outsiders could petition if they thought that the rules were broken. Me for example the members of the Palestinian Congress gathered in 19,212,000 how angry they were about the expulsion of serious. The secretary would set up an office and become a petitioner. Acting as a magnet for the complaint covered by the press the mandate system became the arena where the arguments over the imperial rule were fought out. Thats why the system after it. The book investigates the 20 year conflict. If we pause to share with you the worry that scuttles across the brain as she gets to work on this project. This is simply how on earth am i going to manage something so huge . I can draw the experts on the territory but i have to track the working of the system myself and if i want to get the whole picture, i need to look at it from all sides. That is from the standpoint and through the archives of the imperial powers of the local movements and the league. If i really want to figure out what difference the system makes, i have to look at all three. But wait a minute. There were seven mandatory powers and 14 mandated territories. So how can i research this . The answer is into question in the question what difference does International Oversight make . If that is the question you have to start by figuring out for the overseers see so i had a selection principle that one might put it this way if a tree falls in the mandated territory and geneva hears it this meant wireline needed to Pay Attention to every territory, i didnt have to pay them equal tension were to everything that happened in them. I could and should concentrate on things that attracted the attention of geneva. So, one of the first things i did discount how much time the commission spent on each territory. You can see from this light essentially that they worried most about palestine, syria and so on. The other side they dont care about it. So once i had my my focusing my issues, i did then examine them not just from geneva but on every level of the Imperial Committee international and the local. This took me ten years and the research took me everywhere, not just geneva, london and paris to berlin and brussels and jerusalem. But for better or worse i think that archival track worked enabling me to write an International History of a significant experiment. What conclusions came out of that . Briefly that the mandate system wasnt a Halfway House between the imperial rule and independence. It was different. And the attempt to construct the International Order that really was an imperial order. The league of empires. That is the subject to the International Norms but based on the assumption that most would be under the imperial rule for a long, long time. The british lead led this effort convinced that the practices were generalized and best. But against expectation coming and this is the second point process of the internationalization far from stabilizing imperial rule made it controversial and vulnerable. Almost any scandal that erupted in the mandatory territory made its way to geneva. In imperial rule is the subject of the relentless talk. Nationalists came but also with the imperial powers to consider other arrangements. Empire might not be a burden. But International Oversight would be a burden. Economic ties and client states begin to look like all attractive alternatives to the imperial rule. So, the book tells the story in four parts. First it just looks at the construction of the regime covers personalities who made it, the petitioners who took it on to the next three parts are about how it worked from 1920 until the collapse in 1939. And for the rest of my time, i will give you a hint of that story. So, lets go back to the early 1920s. And eavesdrop on the commission as it got to work on his first crisis. We shouldnt be surprised that this would involve south africa for all the powers south africa was a boost to become a spent on annexation. During the war, south africa documented german atrocities to the case for its own rules. But once the mandate was to secure the policy changed. German sellers were urged to stay and offered South African citizenship and additional native lands were handed over. Africans were confined to shrinking reserves into the weapons were taken away. Then attacks were posed to prevent them from leading off the living off the land and forced into labor on white farms. By 1922, the policies have driven to a group of about 1500 they are the orange river. You can see it listed right there at the south of the country. Into despair. It also brought one to the administrations attention. He was a famous guy locally that fought against the germans in the war and acted as a scout for the South Africans during the invasion. He was in south africa and when he crossed the river into the mandated territory in 1922 with companions and if you rifles, the new administrator of the territory grew worried. When they refused to surrender, he gathered some 200 after the forced compliance. Two airplanes then bombed the encampment telling women and children. About 100 with rifles and headed for the orange river that were tracked down by his men postworkout. There was a remote land of settlements but when they dropped the bomb the scandal exploded. Of course bombing had been used before in the colonial campaigns but it was different. It was under mandate. Supposedly governed to the sacred trust. Liberal South African papers picked up the story and then the International Press of the Antislavery Society sent a petition then one of the delegates denounced south africa to the 1922 assembly and the mandates commission was asked to investigate. The commission spent 1923 growing the South Africans. The debates were published and we can see how the system worked both to discipline and rehabilitate the rule. Virtually the whole commission agreed the South Africans have used unnecessary brutal force. Only the portuguese member insisted the violence was justified. And when the colleagues disagreed that he wouldnt have used the South Africans view to stay home. But nor did the commission back the battalion members of such mandatory rules has to be a complete break with imperial practice. And when his colleagues objected he pleaded and went home. It was left to the british member of the famous colonial governor who persuaded the tradition that while south africa last from him. A best practices, there was a model for what the practice should be. He provided strong paternalistic administration that would keep the settlers and the Concessionary Companies in check, prevent forced labor and uphold traditional authority. His views dominated the mandates commission in the 1920s and won the accommodation of the league assembly. That consensus delegitimized South African regime but found itself under constant criticism. Thats the mandates Commission Meeting in 1924. Its important to remember though that this vision wasnt particularly aggressive. The predecessor of the commission had wanted to bring all mandates to the independent as soon as possible. But he disagreed the danger of going too fast with much greater than the danger of not going fast enough, he thought. Racial assumptions undergirded for thought. Africans would require them for a long time to come. But what should they do with the populations under the mandate rejected paternalism and demanded selfgovernment . In the midatlantic 22nd mission confronted the question. First in 1925, a local revolt against the rule became a national rising. France was put down by the use of human shields and that the bombardment including damascus. Second, the passive Resistance Movement against new zealand by virtually the entire population of Western Samoa was made by new met by new zealand with incomprehension and then regression. This was in the demonstration. This movement proved impossible to repress when the men were banished and took to the hills the women took over and this is the leadership and kennedy. In both cases the rebellion at a persian internationalized spurring massive drive into the end the end of that before the mandates commission. In both cases, too for the representatives came to rome or geneva where the commission was meeting to make the case. But in both cases the commission defended the mandatory power. Why . Because the movements called into question the foundational assumptions that is syrian santa samoans said that they can govern themselves, but the covenant said they couldnt and when they said they could those appeals violated the covenant. The mandate commission wouldnt entertain such arguments. They refused to receive all of nelson even though she traveled halfway around the world to talk to them. They dismissed the petitioners as unscrupulous agitators. Privately, he admitted he believed the french troops if he thought as long as they cooperated and sent reports and applied to the petitions had pledged their devotion to the sacred trust the mandates commission should support them. The publicity apparatus and those perceptions around the world. In the period of the early 20s, the mandate system worked to stabilize the imperial settlement. So, how did it come instead to undermine the Imperial Authority . The third part of the book the simple answer is germany joined the league. Why was this this is a good . Well, germany had owned most of territories. In 1919 boucher and he dot germany had been required to surrender its colonial empire and it became in other words the first postcolonial great power. It didnt want that distinction. All parties in germany except the communists considered the seizures im just presented the allied argument that german rule has been particularly brutal and all were committed to recovering the territory. Led by the former colonial governors and generals seen here writing in triumph through the gate in 1919, the Colonial Movement took off. In 1924 when the pragmatic decided to bring germany into the league, the colonial associations argued that he should get the colonies back. The ministry disagreed but it wasnt because they didnt have the colonial strategy. The colonial lobby wanted to the territory back the Foreign Ministry gold was to rebuild germany power. In the past the colonies had been essential to that effort. But if the program of trade liberalization and economic integration proceeded maybe they could do it differently. That is germany could use the economic quality regime to rebuild its position in africa. To carry out the plan, germany needed a seat on the mandates commission to the complete disgust of all of the other powers, germany germany ~ britain would cause less trouble inside and out. In 1927 after the intense diplomacy, the director of the industry joined the commission as the german member. The appointment wasnt in the lobby they wanted one of those governors in the post at the end to the ministry found them rightly so. His presence strengthened the block of the commission that the correct manner, good english and otherwise conventional views shielded him from attack. Although intensely busy they prepared scrupulously for every session pulling the Commission Towards the assertion of the authority. The first part of that was economic. The mandates were supposed to operate under the open door that is to give equal economic rights to all the states. These were policies britain favored in west africa and even before germany joined the league, they have sold the plantations expert of cameroon right to the owners. Now they went back and rebuild their dominant position in the african carrying trade. But the commission went further than that. It became much more aggressive about combating annexation. The mandatory power made three such moves between 1925 and 1933 and in every case germany tried to block them. First in 1925, belgium passed a law turning rwanda and provinces of the congo to be forced by the commission to back down. In the second case, south africa tried to incorporate the railways and harbors into its own system but the commission forced the revision of that law. Finally, germany and the league mobilization helped to destroy the plans to inaugurate. This was impossible, the commission said, for they were not sovereign and could not bring it into its empire. If necessary the government added that it would take the case to the international court. Germany took the case for the officers said privately they might when. In 1929 in the most important decision related to the mandates the council ruled ruled that the mandatory powers were not sovereign in territories under the oversight. So the period of the membership proved the systems most innovative period in the Foreign Ministry determination to use the system to reassert the german power but to do so in the economic liberalization can we see for shot of the International Order that would emerge after 1945 the policy was driven by the determination not to reclaim the colonies that make them matter less or even disappear. When they announced they planned to move to independent germany was the only one supportive of that policy while at the same time disputing that treaties and trade concessions that gave them control over the airfield at oil fields. This efforts to limit power was over by the mid30s into the system turned out to be an exception. Why was this the case . The last part of the book is how it came apart. Again the simplest explanation is the session paper to germany out of the league. All of the members of the bodies including the success of the mandates commission resigned immediately. But theres more there is more to it than that. Even before germany that agenda of economic integration and liberalization have been compromised. Britain and france both responded to this slump by throwing protection around the empires. Although the mandates remain free trade zones the begindoublequote anomalies. Trades flowed into the lions by 1935 half of the British Trade was within the empire up from the third four years earlier. Liberal economists worried protection would threaten peace and the socalled havenots and made the demand for territory. This was the context for the two land grants that broke the league. What they noticed there was the attack in 1931 and the attack on ethiopia in 1935 different just to destroy the security arrangements, the undermined the mandate system. When japan and italy sought to justify the actions they did so in terms reminiscent of the covenant. When they found japan the aggressor, japan replied that he was building the state in the lawless territory just like britain in iraq. Italy subjected ethiopia with bombs and poison gas but this didnt keep mussolini from claiming that he was bringing the civilization to the slave trade backward region. Both states exited insisting they were no different than britain and france. Those arguments didnt work. They were appealing to the league to save the country from the italian barbarism at the Public Opinion is not military might on his side. He didnt just attack the claims and promote his own, he denounced the idea that there is a hierarchy of people anyway. Apart from the kingdom kingdom of the lord there is not on this earth any nations. Or to any other, he said. The mandate system system link which is backward and advanced civilized had always slid into the language of superior and inferior. Now the language was irredeemably painted. Western cartoonists pointed that out over and over. Further damage was done by the british and french interest in the Colonial Claims the project known as colonial appeasement. We know now that this was a nonstarter. Hitler was determined and didnt care about the colonies. But many in his entourage did including his economics minister who laid out the case in the influential article in foreign affairs. It suited her to get the Colonial Movement ahead. The mid30s saw this enormous outpouring of colonial propaganda in germany. Brightly colored posters and train stations reminded how surprised the other colonies could provide raw material and striking charts compared to the huge expanse of territory joined by other colonial powers to germany. Rallies were held determining the colonial rights. And the movements flourished among the germans and former colonies. This is the rally taken in 1936. So, southwest africa. Although this may not have persuaded hitler but they persuaded plenty of people in britain and france. That is what they wanted for the french intelligence reported the colonial propaganda was always directed at london. The British Press published article after article about how to bring germany into the interior imperial club. They ran 160 articles in 19361. Some tried to get the ball rolling. The historian now director of research at the Royal Institute for International Affairs devised a plan to redistribute colonies under an expanded system of international control. In 1936 he took this to germany. Leading with foreignpolicy experts and winning a 90 minute audience with hitler his account of the meeting made its way to the foreign secretary. Did the cabinet pick up the colonial revision because of this intense public debate . Timing suggests yes. They told the cabinet that he traded for european peace. And march 8, 1936 a day after the troops reoccupied the rhineland, he told the minister that the time had come to continue consider transferring colonies. One day later he he said that the secret subcommittee of the committee of Imperial Defense to do that. Chapter 11. Fullstop story of the british and inch consideration to give germany african territory. As the account shows both sides were diluted, no deal is possible. But it took the british much too long to understand that. In fact the last proposal was one devised by Neville Chamberlain now the Prime Minister and presented it to hitler heidi ambassador on ambassador on march 3, 1938. All effort in territories below the parallel in the chunk of real estate that included all of the gin and portuguese africa as well as british and french would be put into the common path and redistributed with germany getting sound. In exchange they needed the cooperation to result. Hitler responded and promised a written response. Instead they marched into vienna to the response where most germans including these ones in cameroon. Hitler, chamberlain learned the hard way wouldnt be deflected from the eastern plant. Yet the response signaled by the later refusal to trade for the african colonies but it was also the rejection of the International Order that britain had been trying to reconstruct from 1936 until 1938 for british politicians have tried to use the colonial issue to her germany back into the international fold. But the whole purpose of the colonies as far as the nazis were concerned, was to limit the german dependence on angloamerican International Economic and political order. So, this episode ended in failure, but it destroyed what little credibility the project of international controls still had. Have. Ive broken had. Ive broken even if they found it unthinkable to turn 5 million africans over as he put it capital to the country that has shown such ruthless cruelty to those with consider them an inferior race, it seemed plenty of other people were willing to turn the africans over to solve the european problems. The thing discredited the mandate system more than the proposal to bring not germany if not the germany into it. And the mandate system had by that time lost its main imperial battle as well. During the late 30s when britain found itself under attack in geneva for its inability to manage the worsening crisis in palestine, it lost its hard. I cant detailed the complex story here but suffice it to say that it pleased the one between 1936 and 1939, britain found itself entirely on the defense and in indonesia and palestine for its unwillingness to limit the jewish integration and concede selfgovernment was attacked and was attacked by the mandates commission and the council for not cracking down hard enough on that revolt. Although we did ship in the troops and the posts at its best to restore order. Then proposed a petition plan only to find the plan attacked in geneva both by european liberals on the mandates commission desperately seeking refuge for jews and by the advice of the Eastern European government on the council who were trying to get rid of their jewish positions. When its finally proposed, this is the special session when it finally proposed to end the state within ten years, that caused consternation. Especially among palestine sizable population which felt betrayed. At this point, britain gave up on the mandate system. If they said the policy in palestine was in violation, the british officials told the geneva that it would insist the mandate be rewritten. This was an admission of failure to be the british officials have officials had written article 22 of the covenant. They have written most of the mandates text. Now they blame to the they blame to the league of the news were proven unworkable. After 1945, reagan, written with tried to hang onto some parts of its financially shattered empire. But its enthusiasm for International Oversight was over. The talks with the overcoat too. Ive gone on for too long long celebrity wrapup. But ive tried to do is recover the history of the forgotten effort which is this effort to subject the imperial rule to the international control. We can see it worked in different ways and different periods depending on who lived in the room. It started out under the guard working to generalize the British Imperial ideas. Then and in what we might call the german period it was to limit the authority and by the demand of the revisionist states first territory of their own. The mandate system didnt really go away though. The middle east territory became independent. But the other ones became trust territories. Except in southwest africa. I dont want to stress continuity too much because the trustees regime of the un was different. Moving states to independence was an explicit part of its charter. And its figure wasnt a British Colonial governor who felt that the empire would last a long time. But in africanamerican political scientist who became director of the Trustees Division in the un. Its sort of fitting that he became the successor because he wrote his dissertation on the mandate system. Hed been a graduate assistant at harvard in 1932. When he decided to conduct a comparative study of the mandate and the colonial rule. So just just provided he went off to geneva to go through the records and then he headed into the mandate and to a colony to compare the French Administration into places. The dissertation won the top enterprise for the best dissertation in the comparative politics at harvard in 1934. It was a meticulous and empirical accounts but it was also a sharp criticism of the mandates regime. A bunch found that mandatory use margin better governed than colonies. But he concluded that wasnt enough. The problem is that they were governed too much the colonies. The economic systems were to exploit as the political regimes were too oppressive, especially the whole culture worked by the racial ideas. Who on earth, he asked, could think that they spoke french with english and german as well as the native languages were in the rulers. Africa might be week that its people were identical to the aspirations to western peoples with time and aid africa was as capable of selfgovernment has anyone else. He didnt think i would have been many things in. The 1930s were the doubles the data. The european empires were strong and fascists and revisionist state demanding territory everywhere. He couldnt know that a mere ten years later he would be writing his own tertiary in the charter were a few years after that he would be running the office charged with comparing those results are from it. But he already concluded that the empire was to be superseded and not internationalized. Every International Order was to succeed the league would have to be on the built on the principles of state equalities and racial equality alike. He was waiting in the wings and he wasnt kind to change his mind. But his is another story. Thank you very much. Vazquez thank you for your talk. One of the principles that came out of those i was self determination. And the parties didnt give a nation may 30 Million People in the middle east a state. This problem is still causing trouble today in southeast turkey, Northern Iraq and syria. Why didnt they consider them for the state . Thats one of the most interesting questions. Part of what youre asking is why for all the territories of the middle east not given selfdetermination . It is a complex subject. But when the americans pulled out basically the british and french pretty much info as to the mandate system on the middle east. The hope had been that the americans would actually accept the mandates and particularly in the middle east. And once the british realized that there would be no american presence in the middle east as an administering power, theyre only part or could be the french. And so, the french british settlement it was was imposed on the middle east and that ended up with armenians and kurdish not receiving the territories as well as the territories that were created were not granted selfgovernance. It also had something to do with the big british ideas about what kind of state they were building. The british tried to build a unitary state in iraq and we have seen ever since become of the effort. Take those three provinces and craft them together into a single state. And that created difficulties because of the divide and also because of the Kurdish North and we are still living with the. This . Thank you for the excellent presentation. I think that the lack of questions is a reflection of how well you covered the material. Let me put the United States back into the equation. Do you think that the United States participated in the league it would have made any impact on the mandate system and its eventual downfall in the second is that worth contrasting with what the United States is doing in the territories that it administered such as the philippines to the way that the mandate system was administered . Thank you. Thats an interesting question. I would have to bag on the second part of the philippines because frankly i felt this was such an overwhelming project if i had brought more territory into it i would have it would have been unmanageable. The question about the americans though is very comparing interesting. I think it isnt quite right to say that the americans were not present in geneva. The americans had a privileged position because they could choose to be in on member and then to be in whenever they wanted to be in. So they have a lot to do with obviously writing the covenant and they have a lot to do with the mandate system looked like. And they contracted individual treaties with every mandated mandatory power to grant themselves equal rights in every mandated territory even though they were not a weak member. America also is incredibly important to the peak because it funded a lot of the work for instance through the carnegie and the endowment. All of these foundations were led by people that actually believed fervently. And worked through the one brought back and kind of voluntary organizations and think tanks to try to keep the american presence alive. I mean the library wasnt out by carnegie and other were members of the secretariat in fact the first british secretary a point of hiring americans and keeping them there so that he could keep the channels of communication open to the u. S. And at the beginning that didnt work very well because the administration was just unwilling to even talk to geneva. But over time there was quite a lot of collaboration. Some kind of a behindthescenes. But some more explicit. There was a console in geneva who was brought in and got a lot of private information whenever it was discussing these tricky issues. So i think that if there would have been quite a different story of the americans have stayed in because american and british aims were closer to a. Of a operated quite differently as these imperial powers and with the americans gone, it has to be a anglofrench system. Iraq got its independence in the 30s. Would it be fair to say that the mandated territories got their independence before most other colonial areas . That is a good question. You probably cant see that as a rule. Its more territory left you see territory. The writing. The middle east territories move to independence kind of in lockstep and that independence was brought about essentially not iraq which is a different case but the rest of them by the categories in the war and in africa but mandated territories became independent basically on the same timeframe as the other colonial territories in africa. Western samoa is a bit of an exception. Its a very interesting little place. If one were to say, you know, what should have been the state in 1990 minute with the Western Samoa as well as the universal literacy. It is the First Pacific territory to the independence and that makes a lot of sense. They said why are we being given these New Zealanders when we can just do this ourselves . I have had some occasion to take a look at the mandate system as operated in the bismarck. Especially because ill Peninsula Area on new britain. And ive had an occasion to speak to the descendents of several australians who operated the coconut plantations in the area. And theyve told me that relations between the coca growers and their native workers were usually pretty good and pretty productive. As thats not an accurate perception or the macbook, i dont have a personal experience of the obviously. I can tell you that the record into the archive would lead one to conclude a. They operated in new guinea for the workers were under usually the two threeyear contract. Whether the personal relations under that kind of the system are good or not, that will depend very much in the personality on the personality of the people that they are working for. The concern of the mandates commission was always the free labor concerned that the end injured servitude and endangered labor was kind of skating on the edge of what we are supposed to be the free labor practices of the regime. I have to say australia looked at the kind of centrist South Africans that came under and did try to avoid that so if you look at him and i did look at a bit of this if you look for instance at how whether the local administration would crack down on things that came to their attention, the australians tended to try to do that which was interesting. End the mandate commission refuse to look closely to the japanese mandated guidelines it is hard to get into them almost no affirmation sewn on fortification was a problem. Now that trustee system did not work that way territories, it be fortified because of that experience but it makes you understand and of course, it was set up to make it possible so they will not say it is completely fine to buyback fortification as they tried to you demilitarize them as the french bring their troops out of west africa so that non fortification was a real requirement. Given the middle east the last few years with a state out of engagement over there . Great question. I am not the kind of historian who does contemporary affairs. That is way beyond me. But i have to say i always felt that looking at this, it is a global system. You cannot participate if you live with of consequences. To not be involved in things. But i cannot say there are clear and buses the you can apply. Is this supposed to be howard . It is. He was a graduate student at harvard but also on the faculty at howard. I cannot go on and on about that here is in the book but a very brilliant political scientist in the 30s with a very interesting batch of people and it made sense he would end up writing his dissertation to foresee independence. What lessons do you think what they took away from these experiences . For that mandated system thr the revision ship for