No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2019
Twenty years ago the League of Nations met defeat in its only serious attempt to impose economic and financial sanctions against one of its members. At that time the USSR was a strong supporter of a system of collective security against the threats of Germany and Japan, and the chief Soviet delegate at Geneva, Maxim Litvinov, took a consistent stand for stronger measures against Italy. In numerous statements he warned his colleagues that sanctions must be made to work against Italy because more serious threats to world peace were on the horizon.
1 League of Nations, General, 1936, 1, Coordination Committee 113, Report of the Committee of Experts, p. 19.
2 Wartanoff, Boris, Le Pitrole Russe (Paris, 1945), pp. 123-24.Google Scholar
3 Potemkin, Istorija diplomatii, III, 551-52.
4 League of Nations Official Journal, Special Supplement 150, pp. 246, 297.
5 New York Times, December 19, 1935, p. 21.
6 From $447,000 in November, 1934, to $1,252,000 in November, 1935. Christian Science Monitor, December 21, 1935.
7 Coordination Committee 125, p. 43.
8 League of Nations, International Trade Statistics, 1936, p. 280.
9 Unless the imports were highly strategic materials. The writer was unable to find out exactly what these products were.
10 League of Nations Official Journal, Special Supplement 146, pp. 13, 19.
11 Coordination Committee 125, p. 10.
12 This represented no burden on the Soviet Union because she did not normally export draft animals.
13 Coordination Committee 125, p. 23.
14 Lisovskij, P., Abissinskaja avantjura Italianskovo fashizma (Moskva, 1936), pp. 188 ff.Google Scholar
15 Yakhontoff, Victor A., USSR Foreign Policy (New York, 1945), p. 146. 163Google Scholar
16 In 1933, 4.5 percent export, 4.9 percent import; in 1934, 4.6 percent export, 5.1 percent import. International Trade Statistics, 1936, p. 280.