Precursor of the United Nations

For United Nations member states , one might look to the future, but here we delve into the past.

This article is part of a series about the United Nations Charter UN System

Principal organs

General Assembly   · Security Council   · Economic and Social Council   · International Court of Justice   · Secretariat   · Trusteeship Council

Secretariat

Secretary-General   · Deputy Secretary-General   · Under-Secretary-General   · Secretariat structure

Funds, programmes, and other bodies

UN development programmes

UNDP   · UNICEF   · WFP   · UNFPA   · UNEP   · UN Women   · UN Habitat

Humanitarian agencies

OCHA   · UNHCR   · IOM   · UNRWA   · UNDRR

Specialized agencies

Development & social agencies

FAO   · IFAD   · ILO   · UNIDO   · UNESCO   · WHO   · WMO   · UN Tourism

Technical & regulatory agencies

ICAO   · IMO   · ITU   · IAEA   · UPU   · WIPO

Finance & trade

IMF   · World Bank Group   · WTO

Peace & security

DPO   · DPPA   · PBC   · PBF   · UNODA   · UNOOSA   · UNODC   · UNMAS   · UNOCT   · CTC   · OPCW   · CTBTO Preparatory Commission

Research & training

UNITAR   · UNRISD   · UNIDIR   · UNU   · UNSSC   · UNICRI

Human rights

UNHRC   · OHCHR   · UPR   · Human Rights Committee   · CESCR   · ICERD   · CEDAW   · CAT   · CRC   · Special rapporteurs   · WGAD

Membership

Members and observers

Founding members   · Full members   · Security Council Permanent members   · Permanent representatives to the UN (list )  · General Assembly Observers (European Union )

History

Preceding years

International Telecommunication Union   · Universal Postal Union   · Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907   · Permanent Court of Arbitration   · International Office of Public Hygiene   · League of Nations

Preparatory years

Declaration of St James’s Palace   · Atlantic Charter   · Declaration by United Nations   · Moscow Conference (1943)   · Tehran Conference   · Bretton Woods Conference   · Dumbarton Oaks Conference   · Yalta Conference   · UNCIO   · Genocide Convention

Activities

Sustainable Development Goals   · United Nations peacekeeping (missions )  · (governed territories )  · UNPOL   · Universal Declaration of Human Rights   · World Heritage Convention   · Convention on the Rights of the Child   · UNDRIP   · Declaration on the Rights of Peasants

Resolutions •

• v • t • e

Between 1920 and 1946, a grand total of 63 distinct countries, each with its own fleeting ambitions and inevitable disappointments, became member states of the League of Nations . An organization that, in hindsight, was less a steadfast bulwark against global conflict and more a rather ambitious, if ultimately ill-fated, experiment in international cooperation.

When the Assembly , the primary deliberative body of the League of Nations , convened for its inaugural session, it initially comprised 42 founding members . These were the nations that, fresh from the devastation of World War I , dared to believe in a new era of collective security. Over the subsequent years, between its formal establishment and its eventual dissolution, an additional 21 countries decided to throw their hats into the ring, swelling the ranks of this nascent global forum.

However, the League’s membership was a revolving door, a testament to the turbulent interwar period. Nations joined, expressed their aspirations, and then, with varying degrees of decorum and justification, exited. Consequently, the full complement of 63 countries was never simultaneously united under the League’s banner. The period of the League’s broadest reach, its zenith in terms of sheer numbers, spanned from 28 September 1934, when Ecuador belatedly joined, until February 1935, when Paraguay decided it had seen enough. During this brief, shining moment, 58 countries were concurrent members. By this juncture, a few notable departures had already occurred: Costa Rica (December 1924), Brazil (June 1926), Japan (March 1933), and Germany (October 1933) had all, for their own reasons, severed ties. Only Egypt would join later, on 26 May 1937, a rather late entry into an institution whose fate was already, arguably, sealed.

Founding members

The foundational document of the entire enterprise, the Covenant of the League of Nations , was not a standalone agreement, but rather an integral section of the much larger and more contentious Treaty of Versailles . This treaty, a peace settlement of dubious longevity, was formally inked on 28 June 1919 between the victorious Allies of World War I and the vanquished Germany . For this monumental treaty, and by extension the League, to officially come into effect, it needed to be formally deposited in Paris. This deposition, in turn, hinged upon its ratification by Germany itself, along with a minimum of three out of the five designated Principal Powers, a rather exclusive club consisting of the United States of America, the British Empire, France, Italy, and the Empire of Japan. Any Allied signatory nation that ratified the treaty found itself automatically enrolled as a member of the League, a rather efficient, if somewhat compulsory, onboarding process.

Germany , under considerable duress, was compelled to ratify the treaty first, which it duly did on 10 July 1919. A few months later, Italy followed suit on 7 October 1919. The vast expanse of the British Empire , along with its various colonies, collectively ratified on 10 October 1919. France completed the necessary trio of Principal Powers by ratifying on 12 October 1919. These crucial ratifications, alongside those of ten other countries, were formally deposited on 10 January 1920, marking the official birth of the League. By the time the Assembly gathered for its very first session on 15 November 1920, all but three of the remaining original signatories—the United States, Ecuador, and the short-lived Kingdom of Hejaz —had completed their ratification processes. The League was off to a start, albeit one already missing a key player.

Beyond the initial signatories, the Covenant extended an invitation to 13 neutral nations, offering them a chance to participate in this grand experiment. To accept this invitation and become a member, an invitee was required to formally agree (“accede without reservation”) to the Covenant within a strict two-month timeframe from the League’s official founding date. Remarkably, all 13 of these invited nations accepted their invitations within the stipulated period, with four of them demonstrating an almost eager anticipation by accepting even before the League was formally established.

The United States, despite being one of the architects of the League’s concept, famously failed to join. The United States Senate ultimately voted 49–35 in favor of ratification, a clear majority, but tragically short of the constitutionally mandated two-thirds majority required for treaty approval. A nation that championed the idea, yet couldn’t bring itself to participate. The Kingdom of Hejaz , another original signatory, also declined membership, largely in protest over the League’s decision to grant control of Palestine —a territory carved from the remnants of the Ottoman Empire —to the British Empire as a mandate . Ecuador proved to be an anomaly, not ratifying the treaty until much later, in 1934. As an original Allied signatory, it retained the right to join through this mechanism without facing any deadline or requiring an Assembly vote. The League, ever keen to inflate its numbers, graciously considered Ecuador to still be a founding member, despite its protracted delay.

In a unique twist, China , then represented by the Beiyang government , secured its membership in the League not by ratifying the Treaty of Versailles (which was with Germany ), but by ratifying the Treaty of St. Germain (which was with Austria ). Both treaties, conveniently, incorporated the Covenant of the League of Nations . China had pointedly refused to sign the Treaty of Versailles due to its deeply unpopular provision that transferred the formerly German-controlled Shandong colony in China to the Empire of Japan , a move that ignited widespread nationalist protests. This demonstrated early on that international agreements were often less about universal principles and more about shifting geopolitical chess pieces.

For any additional nations wishing to join the League after its initial formation, the path was clear, if somewhat less automatic: a two-thirds vote of approval from the Assembly was required.

List

Founding members are listed below in the order they were presented in the Covenant (signatories first, then invitees), with the notable exception of Ecuador , which always seemed to march to its own drum. The various colonies and dominions of the British Empire were grouped directly after the main entity and, for reasons lost to the annals of bureaucratic efficiency, did not adhere to alphabetical order. Czechoslovakia and El Salvador were, perhaps confusingly for some, alphabetized under ‘S’.

Any country was theoretically permitted to submit a notice of withdrawal at any time. However, this withdrawal was not instantaneous; it was designed to take a rather leisurely two years to formally come into effect after the League officially received the notice. During this interim period, the withdrawing country was expected to retain both its obligations and its membership status, a concept that often proved more theoretical than practical. In reality, a nation declaring its intent to withdraw usually ceased active participation immediately, conspicuously absenting itself from all sessions and votes for the remainder of its formal, if largely symbolic, membership. The “Date of withdrawal” column, therefore, indicates when the withdrawal notice was initially dispatched, not when the severance was finalized.

   Original Allied signatory   •    Original invitee

List of members

Expulsion of the Soviet Union

On 14 December 1939, in one of its final, truly significant, and arguably desperate acts, the Soviet Union was formally expelled from the League of Nations . The reason was abundantly clear and undeniable: its brazen invasion of Finland during what became known as the Winter War , a clear and egregious violation of the fundamental principles enshrined in the Covenant of the League of Nations . The vote within the Council was recorded as 7–0–4–3, translating to 7 votes in favor of expulsion, 0 against, 4 abstentions, and 3 members absent. The nations that voted in favor of this historic expulsion were the United Kingdom , France , Belgium , Bolivia , the Dominican Republic , South Africa , and Egypt . Those abstaining were the Republic of China , Finland itself (perhaps out of a sense of decorum, or strategic ambiguity), Greece , and Yugoslavia . Notably, Iran , Peru , and the Soviet Union itself were conspicuously absent from the proceedings. It is also worth observing the rather convenient timing: three of the votes in favor came from nations (South Africa , Bolivia , and Egypt ) that had only been elevated to Council membership the day prior to the vote. This expulsion stands as one of the League’s ultimate, if ultimately symbolic, actions before it effectively succumbed to the overwhelming tide of World War II and ceased to function meaningfully.

The legal validity of this expulsion has been a subject of some debate among international law scholars, a rather academic exercise given the circumstances. Article 16, paragraph 4, of the Covenant stipulated that the Council possessed the authority to expel a member, provided that all members of the Council , excluding the member slated for expulsion, concurred. However, the Covenant remained ambiguously silent on whether abstentions or absences were permissible in such expulsion votes, even though it was generally understood and undisputed that they were allowed for all other unanimous decisions of the Council . Furthermore, even if one concedes the point on abstentions and absences, there is still contention regarding whether the expulsion could be legally sound without a simple majority (8 out of the 14 Council members) explicitly voting in favor. Such meticulous legal squabbles often feel rather beside the point when tanks are rolling.

Regardless of these fine points of international jurisprudence, both the expulsion itself and any subsequent disputes regarding its legality had remarkably little practical impact. The Soviet Union had, in a gesture of contempt or perhaps resignation, already declared nine days prior to the vote that it would be absent from the League until further notice. It acknowledged its expulsion with a shrug and made no discernible effort to challenge it on any grounds, legal or otherwise. No other member state was ever subjected to expulsion from the League, thus preventing the establishment of any further precedent. With the full eruption of the Second World War , the League, having expelled a major aggressor, took no further significant actions, fading into irrelevance.

Non-members

During the tumultuous period between November and December 1920, several nascent nations, grappling with the chaotic aftermath of the dissolution of the Russian Empire and the brutal Russian Civil War , sought entry into the League. These included the First Republic of Armenia , the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic , the Democratic Republic of Georgia , and the Ukrainian People’s Republic . Their applications, however, were summarily denied on the rather clinical grounds that they did “not appear to have a stable government whose authority extends over the whole of its territory.” A harsh but perhaps understandable assessment given the volatile political landscape. Some additional, though ultimately insufficient, consideration was given to Armenia due to its status as a signatory of the Treaty of Sèvres , a treaty that would have granted Armenia certain territories from the dismembered Ottoman Empire , but which ultimately failed to be ratified. Estonia , Latvia , and Lithuania also applied in 1920 and faced similar initial rejection because they “had not achieved a definite international status” at that time. Fortunately for them, this denial was temporary, and all three Baltic states were admitted the following year.

A peculiar category of non-members comprised some of Europe’s microstates. Liechtenstein , Monaco , and San Marino all applied for membership but were explicitly denied, “by reason of their small size.” One can almost hear the bureaucratic sigh of exasperation. The fact that Liechtenstein possessed no embassies, a rather fundamental requirement for diplomatic engagement, was also cited as a practical impediment. Meanwhile, Andorra and Vatican City never even bothered to seek membership, perhaps wisely opting out of the whole affair.

Iceland , a nation often preferring its own company, was presented with the opportunity to join the League of Nations in 1920 but ultimately chose to decline. The primary stated reason was a pragmatic one: limited administrative resources, a rather charmingly understated excuse for avoiding the impending global drama.

Further afield, some relatively isolated sovereign states in Asia also remained outside the League’s fold. These included Bhutan , the Kingdom of Nepal , and the Kingdom of Yemen . Their non-participation was, at least in part, attributed to their lack of established diplomatic relations with the major global powers of the time. Additionally, Mongolia (from 1921) and Tibet were de facto independent, but their independence remained officially unrecognized by the very powers that constituted the League’s core, creating a Catch-22 situation.

The Kingdom of Hejaz , as noted earlier, declined to join in 1920. It was subsequently conquered by the Sultanate of Nejd in 1925, leading to the formation of the Kingdom of Hejaz and Nejd . This dual monarchy was later consolidated to become Saudi Arabia in 1932. Saudi Arabia never sought membership in the League.

In a curious footnote, at the IX Congress of European Nationalities, an organization affiliated with the League of Nations and held in Bern , the first three autonomous jurisdictions of Spain —the Basque Country , Galicia , and Catalonia —were formally recognized as nations. However, due to their lack of constitutional independence, they were represented by the Spanish government, a testament to the complexities of national identity within sovereign states.

World War II and aftermath

The outbreak of World War II plunged the world into an even deeper abyss than its predecessor, effectively paralyzing the already struggling League of Nations . During this cataclysmic period, the League, a body designed to prevent such conflicts, found itself largely irrelevant, holding no meaningful sessions or votes. With the singular exception of the Anschluss —the annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany —the League steadfastly refused to recognize any of the numerous occupations or annexations that occurred during the war. Consequently, the occupied states technically remained members of the League, at least on paper, a symbolic gesture in the face of brute force. Similarly, with the specific and notable exception of Vichy France (whose withdrawal was later rescinded by Free France ), the League consistently refused to acknowledge any notices of withdrawal that were issued by puppet regimes installed by aggressor nations. Such withdrawals were rightly deemed to have been made under duress and therefore invalid. It is worth noting, however, that not all puppet regimes even bothered with the formality of attempting to withdraw.

The membership table provided above selectively highlights occupations that commenced before the official start of World War II in Europe, those unfortunate situations that persisted beyond the war’s conclusion, and instances where puppet states made a futile attempt to withdraw. For the sake of brevity and to avoid an exhaustive, depressing list, the multitude of other occupations that do not fit these specific criteria (such as the occupation of Luxembourg ) are not individually detailed.

The 20th annual session of the Assembly was held in 1939, a final, somber gathering before the storm truly broke. The 21st, and ultimately final, session did not reconvene until April 1946, a full year after the war in Europe had ended, and just before the League officially ceased to exist. During this last, almost post-mortem, session, 35 out of the 44 remaining League members managed to attend, a rather thin representation. Notably absent were Albania , Bulgaria , Ethiopia , Iraq , Liberia , Thailand , and, significantly, the Baltic states . Colombia was present, but only in the capacity of a non-voting observer, its government having apparently failed to provide its representative with the necessary authorization to vote either for or against the League’s dissolution. Even Allied-occupied Austria was permitted to send an observer, with the requisite approvals from its occupiers and the rest of the League, a peculiar gesture of inclusion at the very end.

The League, in its dying days, maintained a partial non-recognition of the Soviet occupation of the Baltic states —Estonia , Latvia , and Lithuania —which were the only member states of the League to remain occupied after the formal conclusion of World War II . In its very last session, these three nations were conspicuously retained on the official list of League members, a final, defiant nod to their lost sovereignty. However, a mere two months prior to this session, the League’s leadership—specifically, the Secretary-General with the agreement of the President of the Assembly and the President of the Council —had declared that it would no longer consider any 1939 documents from representatives as valid. Instead, it demanded that the governments of all League members furnish new, updated documents explicitly naming their representatives for the final session. When representatives from the Latvian government-in-exile and the Lithuanian government-in-exile attempted to attend the session, a Secretariat staff member, following these new instructions, denied their 1939 credentials. The staff member explicitly stated that, in the League’s view, there no longer existed any legitimate government that could provide them with the necessary, current credentials. The internal letter documenting this rather awkward incident still referred to these individuals with their formal titles: “permanent delegate of Latvia ” and “permanent delegate of Lithuania ,” a poignant bureaucratic inconsistency. (The letter, for reasons unstated, makes no mention of the presence of a delegate from Estonia .) The staff member, with a touch of diplomatic coldness, offered the representatives, along with their family members and assistants, entry into the League’s diplomatic gallery to merely spectate the session. The representatives, understanding the implied slight, refused the offer for themselves, though they accepted it for their family members and assistants. Adding insult to injury, the offered entry card, and even the envelope containing it, conspicuously omitted any country name or title, further underscoring their unrecognized status.

The League of Nations was formally, and rather unceremoniously, dissolved on 18 April 1946. Its remaining assets, along with the weighty, if somewhat tarnished, mantle of its responsibilities, were transferred to its successor, the newly formed United Nations . A new organization, built on the ashes of the old, hoping to succeed where its predecessor had, by and large, failed.

Map

A map of the world in the years 1920–1945, which shows the League of Nations members during its history. •   Members

•   Colonies of members

•   Mandates

•   Non-members

•   Colonies of non-members

See also

• Politics portal

• Latin America and the League of Nations

• Member states of the United Nations

Notes

• ^ Panama ’s official ratification document experienced a slight bureaucratic delay, not reaching the League until ten days after the Assembly’s inaugural session. However, it had, with modern efficiency, communicated its ratification via telegram beforehand, ensuring its place.

• ^ Sources: [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28]

• ^ The League, ever adaptable in its nomenclature, transitioned from using the broader “British Empire” to the more specific “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” subsequent to the passage of the Statute of Westminster 1931 . Both the abbreviated forms “Great Britain” and “United Kingdom” were frequently employed, sometimes even within the same official document, a testament to evolving identities and administrative flexibility. The United Kingdom , however, stubbornly continued to be alphabetized under “British” or “Britain,” resisting complete reclassification.

• ^ Despite the English language’s typical alphabetical order, South Africa was, for some inexplicable reason, consistently alphabetized under ‘A’. A small, persistent anomaly in the League’s records.

• ^ On 15 April 1943, General Henri Giraud dispatched a message concerning France’s status to the League’s Supervisory Commission. The very next day, 16 April 1943, General Charles de Gaulle , the undeniable leader of Free France , sent a similar message directly to the Secretary-General of the League , ensuring that the message was received from all legitimate French authorities.

• ^ Specifically, this declaration and requirement regarding new documents came from the Secretary-General of the League , acting in concert with the President of the Assembly and the President of the Council . A consensus, at least, on the administrative details of its own demise.

Citations

•

• ^ Buell, Raymond Leslie (1929). International Relations . H. Holt. p. 647.

• ^ O’Brien, Terrence, “Milner”, London: Constable, 1979. pg. 338.

• ^ Yntema, Hessel E. “The Treaties with Germany and Compensation for War Damage.” Columbia Law Review, vol. 23, no. 6, 1923, pp. 511–27. JSTOR , https://doi.org/10.2307/1111344 . Accessed 14 July 2024.

• ^ • Hewes, James E. (1970). “Henry Cabot Lodge and the League of Nations”. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society . 114 (4): 245–255. JSTOR  985951.

• ^ • “Ecuador and the League of Nations - Telegram from the Government of Ecuador dated 28 September 1934, in which the government announces the decision to become a Member of the League of Nations”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “The Green Papers Worldwide - Roster of LEAGUE OF NATIONS [1920 thru 1946]”.

• ^ • “World Statesmen.org”.

• ^ a b • “Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, Volume XIII > The Covenant of the League of Nations (Art. 1 to 26)”. Office of the Historian - United States Department of State .

• ^ a b c d e Hudson, Manley O. “Membership in the League of Nations.” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 18, no. 3, 1924, pp. 436–58. JSTOR , https://doi.org/10.2307/2188357 . Accessed 12 July 2024.

• ^ • “League of Nations Treaty Series”. United Nations Treaty Collection .

• ^ • “Chronology” (PDF). The United Nations Office at Geneva .

• ^ • “Brazil and the League of Nations - Minister for Foreign Affairs, Rio de Janeiro (Telegram) - Announces the Resolution of the Brazilian Government to withdraw from the League of Nations”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Guatemala from the League - Telegram of May 14th 1936 from the Government of Guatemala”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Haiti from the League - Letter of 16th February, 1942 from the Government of Haiti”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Resignation of Honduras”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Italy from the League - Telegram from the Italian Government 11th December 1937”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Japan from the league - Telegram of 25th March 1933. Announcing the intention of the Japanese Government to withdraw from the league”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Nicaragua from the League - Telegram of June 26, 1936 from the Government of Nicaragua”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Peru from the League of Nations - Telegram of 4th April 1939 from Peruvian Government”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Roumania from the League of Nations - Telegram of 10 July 1940 from the government of Romania”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Chile - Letter of 31st May 1938 from the government of Chile”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Paraguay from the League of Nations - Telegram of 23 rd February 1935 from the Government of Paraguay”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Salvador from the League - Letter of 26 July 1937 from the Government of Salvador”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Spain from the League of Nations - Telegram of 8th May1939 from Spanish Government”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Venezuela from the League - Telegram of 11th July 1938 from Government of Venezuela”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of the Republic of Costa Rica from the League of Nations - The Minister of Costa Rica in Paris - Notifies, on the Orders of his Government, that the Republic of Costa Rica intends to withdraw from the League of Nations from 1 January 1927”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Hungary from the League of Nations - Telegram of 11th April 1939 from Hungarian Government”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of Germany from the League - Letter of 19th October 1933 from the German government”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ Myers, Denys P. “Representation in League of Nations Council.” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 20, no. 4, 1926, pp. 689–713. JSTOR , https://doi.org/10.2307/2188690 . Accessed 19 July 2024.

• ^ • “12th Ordinary session of the Assembly 1931 - List of Delegates”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ a b • “13th Ordinary Session of the Assembly, September 1932 - List of Delegates”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Withdrawal of France from the League of Nations - Telegram of 19th April, 1941 from the French Government”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “Situation resulting from the retreat of France from the League of Nations”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ a b • “Withdrawal of France from the League of Nations - Correspondence with Free French Authorities (and French Provisional Government)”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, Macmillan International Higher Education, 1985, Aspects Of The Third Reich , p. 297

• ^ • Hell, Stephan (8 January 2020). “A seat at the table”. Bangkok Post . Retrieved 8 January 2020.

• ^ South America Archived 10 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine , Encyclopedia of World History

• ^ League of Nations chronology, United Nations

• ^ LLOYD, LORNA. “The League of Nations and the Settlement of Disputes.” World Affairs, vol. 157, no. 4, 1995, pp. 160–74. JSTOR , http://www.jstor.org/stable/20672432 . Accessed 3 Sept. 2024.

• ^ a b List of States Members of the League of Nations on 31.XII.1944 from the League of Nations Statistical Yearbook (1942-44) Archived 1 September 2016 at Archive-It

• ^ • “15th Ordinary Session of the Assembly - September 1934 - List of Delegates”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “16th Ordinary Session of the Assembly, September 1935 - Lists of Delegates”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ Toledo-García, Itzel; University of Essex, UK: ‘’“La cuestión de la dignidad nacional en el ingreso de México a la Sociedad de Naciones, 1919-1931”’’ Retrieved 4 September 2016. (Translated from Spanish: " On September 7th, 1931, the British Empire, Germany, Northern Ireland, Spain, France, Italy and Japan began the initiative; next day the proposal was adopted unanimously by the assembly, and the invitation was sent to the government of Mexico. The 10th of September the acceptance was communicated in Geneva… Two days later, Mexico was declared member of the League of Nations. “)

• ^ • “15th Ordinary Session of the Assembly, September 1934 - Journal”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ Scott 1973, pp. 312, 398.

• ^ a b c Gross, Leo. “Was the Soviet Union Expelled From the League of Nations?” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 39, no. 1, 1945, pp. 35–44. JSTOR , https://doi.org/10.2307/2192308 . Accessed 19 Feb. 2024.

• ^ a b Magliveras 1999, p. 31.

• ^ Magliveras 1999, p. 26.

• ^ • Biland, Susanna (31 December 2011). “Völkerbund”. Historisches Lexikon des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (in German). Retrieved 25 October 2023.

• ^ • Jóhannesson, Guðni Th. (2016). Fyrstu forsetarnir .

• ^ • Perez Pena, Marcos (13 September 2013). “80 años desde que Galicia es oficialmente nación”. Eldiario.es . Retrieved 20 February 2020.

• ^ • “20th Ordinary Session, September 1939 - General”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ a b • “20th Session, December 1939 - General”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “21st Session, April 1946 - General”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ a b Myers, Denys P. “Liquidation of League of Nations Functions.” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 42, no. 2, 1948, pp. 320–54. JSTOR , https://doi.org/10.2307/2193676 . Accessed 19 July 2024.

• ^ • “21st Assembly, Geneva, April 1946 - List of Delegates”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ a b • “21st Session of the Assembly, Geneva, April 1946 - Admission of former representatives of Baltic States to meetings of”. UN Archives Geneva .

• ^ • “21st Session of the Assembly, Geneva, April 1946 - Convocation”. UN Archives Geneva .