OCR Specification focus:
‘Empire shaped relations with the League, the UN and the USA.’
The British Empire’s influence on international relations evolved significantly between 1919 and the 1960s, shaping global institutions, diplomacy, and power balances through the League of Nations, the United Nations, and relations with the USA.
Britain, the League of Nations and the Empire
Origins and Aims of the League of Nations
After the First World War, the League of Nations was founded in 1919 under the Treaty of Versailles to prevent future conflicts and promote collective security.
League of Nations: An international organisation established after World War I to maintain peace, promote cooperation, and resolve disputes through collective security.
Britain, as a global imperial power, played a crucial role in shaping the League’s creation and aims:
Promoted principles of collective security and peaceful dispute resolution.
Supported mandates as a way to manage former enemy colonies, particularly in Africa and the Middle East.
Sought to preserve imperial interests while appearing to support internationalism.
Mandates and Imperial Control
One of the League’s central functions was the mandate system, which redistributed former German and Ottoman territories to victorious powers, ostensibly to prepare them for self-rule.
World map of League of Nations mandates showing territories assigned to mandatory powers and their classes. It helps contextualise Britain’s A- and B-class responsibilities in the Middle East and Africa. The map includes non-British mandates for comparison; this extra detail aids understanding of the wider system. Source
Britain gained control over territories such as Palestine, Iraq, and Tanganyika.
Mandates were classified as A, B, or C based on their readiness for independence.
Although framed as trusteeship, the system often extended British imperial influence under a new guise.
This system reflected Britain’s dual goals: maintaining imperial control while adapting to new norms of international oversight. It also helped Britain consolidate strategic territories in the Middle East and Africa.
Limitations and Challenges
The League struggled to enforce decisions or prevent aggression, highlighting Britain’s reluctance to commit fully:
British governments prioritised imperial defence and appeasement over League action in the 1930s.
The League’s failures, such as in Manchuria (1931) and Abyssinia (1935–36), exposed its weakness and Britain’s unwillingness to act decisively when imperial interests were at stake.
These failures undermined Britain’s reputation as a guarantor of collective security and contributed to the erosion of confidence in the League as a global authority.
The United Nations and the Post-War Empire
Founding and British Role
The United Nations (UN) was established in 1945, replacing the League after the Second World War. Britain was a founding member and one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, reflecting its continued global influence despite imperial decline.
United Nations: An international organisation formed in 1945 to promote peace, security, human rights, and development through collective action by member states.
Britain used its status to protect imperial interests and shape global governance, but faced new challenges:
Anti-colonial sentiment was rising within the UN, particularly from newly independent states.
The UN Charter’s emphasis on self-determination conflicted with Britain’s continued colonial rule.
Trusteeship and Decolonisation Pressure
The UN replaced the League’s mandate system with the Trusteeship Council, overseeing territories transitioning towards independence.
British trust territories such as Tanganyika and Cameroons were placed under UN supervision.
UN scrutiny intensified calls for self-government and independence, accelerating decolonisation.
Britain increasingly found itself defending imperial policies in the face of criticism from both member states and UN bodies. This was particularly evident in debates over colonial conflicts such as the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya and anti-British sentiment in Palestine and Cyprus.
Impact on Policy and Global Standing
The UN shaped British imperial strategy by:
Encouraging managed decolonisation to maintain influence through the Commonwealth.
Pressuring Britain to align colonial policy with global norms of self-determination and human rights.
Providing a platform for Britain to act as a mediator in Cold War conflicts and maintain diplomatic prestige.
However, Britain’s diminishing economic power and reliance on US support meant that its role within the UN increasingly depended on alliances rather than imperial strength.
The USA and the Transformation of Empire
Wartime Cooperation and Post-War Influence
The First World War saw limited Anglo-American cooperation, but the Second World War transformed the relationship. The USA emerged as a global superpower, while Britain became increasingly dependent on American economic and military support.
Lend-Lease (1941) and subsequent US aid underlined Britain’s wartime reliance.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Atlantic Charter (1941) promoted self-determination, pressuring Britain to rethink imperial policy.
Winston Churchill meets Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Atlantic Charter talks, August 1941. The Charter’s principles of self-determination and freer trade shaped subsequent Anglo-American pressure for managed decolonisation. The photo is a U.S. Navy image (public domain). Source
The USA’s growing influence forced Britain to balance imperial priorities with the need for a “special relationship” with Washington.
American Anti-Colonialism and Pressure for Change
Post-war US policy was often critical of colonial empires, which it viewed as inconsistent with liberal democratic values.
The USA supported the UN’s emphasis on decolonisation, pushing Britain towards independence for its colonies.
American leaders pressured Britain to withdraw from colonies where nationalist movements risked instability, such as in India (1947) and Palestine (1948).
This ideological shift reflected the USA’s desire for a world order based on free trade and self-determination, both of which challenged Britain’s imperial system.
Cold War Context and Anglo-American Cooperation
The onset of the Cold War redefined Britain–US relations. Despite ideological differences over empire, both nations shared strategic interests in containing Soviet communism.
The USA tolerated British control in key regions (e.g., Malaya) as a bulwark against communism.
Britain adapted imperial policy to align with American strategic goals, emphasising development and gradual independence.
This pragmatic partnership ensured Britain’s global relevance even as its empire declined. The Marshall Plan (1948) and NATO (1949) further bound Britain to the US-led Western alliance, reshaping its foreign policy priorities.
Legacy and Long-Term Impact on Empire
Britain’s relationship with the League of Nations, the United Nations, and the USA illustrates how international pressures transformed imperial governance from the early twentieth century to the post-war period. The League legitimised imperial control through mandates, while the UN accelerated decolonisation through principles of self-determination. Meanwhile, the USA’s rise as a superpower reoriented Britain’s foreign policy, compelling it to reshape empire within a new global order centred on collective security, free trade, and international cooperation. The result was a gradual shift from direct imperial rule to influence through the Commonwealth and international institutions.
FAQ
The mandate system was presented as a form of international oversight rather than outright conquest. Territories formerly belonging to Germany and the Ottoman Empire were allocated to victorious powers to administer “on behalf of the League” until they were ready for self-rule.
However, in practice, Britain and other powers often treated mandates much like colonies, integrating them into imperial defence and trade networks. The main difference lay in the language of trusteeship and international responsibility, which provided a moral justification for continued control and helped Britain defend its empire in a changing global climate.
Britain faced growing criticism from newly independent states and the Soviet Union, who condemned colonial rule as incompatible with self-determination.
Key challenges included:
Defending counter-insurgency tactics in places like Kenya and Malaya before UN committees.
Addressing petitions from nationalist groups seeking UN intervention.
Balancing its Security Council role with accusations of hypocrisy over empire.
This scrutiny weakened Britain’s ability to act unilaterally in colonial matters and forced a more cautious, gradual approach to decolonisation.
The Atlantic Charter (1941), issued by Roosevelt and Churchill, outlined shared goals for the post-war world, including national self-determination and free trade.
Although Britain initially interpreted these principles as applying only to territories occupied during the war, the Charter was embraced by anti-colonial movements as a moral justification for independence.
It also signalled a shift in American attitudes: Washington expected Britain and other imperial powers to dismantle their empires in favour of a more open, cooperative global system, influencing international opinion and post-war policy debates.
American attitudes often shaped Britain’s responses to uprisings and nationalist movements. Washington disapproved of heavy-handed repression and urged Britain to pursue political solutions.
For example:
In India, US pressure hastened independence in 1947.
In Palestine, American sympathy for Zionism influenced Britain’s decision to refer the issue to the UN and eventually withdraw in 1948.
During the Cold War, the USA prioritised anti-communist stability, so it sometimes supported British military action, such as in Malaya, where colonial control aligned with broader Western strategic aims.
The Trusteeship Council monitored former mandate and trust territories, assessing progress toward self-government and independence. It received reports from administering powers and allowed petitions from local populations, increasing international awareness of colonial conditions.
This scrutiny created pressure on Britain and other powers to justify their policies and demonstrate progress towards independence.
Although it had limited enforcement powers, the Council’s activities empowered nationalist leaders, influenced global opinion, and normalised the expectation that colonial territories would eventually become sovereign states.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Identify two ways in which the United Nations influenced British imperial policy after 1945.
Mark scheme:
Award 1 mark for each valid point identified, up to a maximum of 2 marks.
It promoted the principle of self-determination, increasing pressure on Britain to grant independence to colonies. (1)
The Trusteeship Council supervised former mandate territories, accelerating moves towards self-government. (1)
It provided a forum where Britain faced criticism of colonial practices from other member states. (1)
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain how Britain’s relationship with the USA influenced its approach to the empire between 1941 and 1965.
Mark scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Simple or general statements with limited explanation.
Mentions that the USA encouraged Britain to decolonise but without detail.
Identifies the Atlantic Charter but does not explain its impact.
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Some explanation with relevant knowledge, but lacking depth or balance.
Explains that the Atlantic Charter (1941), agreed by Roosevelt and Churchill, promoted self-determination, which pressured Britain to reconsider colonial rule.
Notes that the USA criticised colonialism as inconsistent with democratic values, influencing British withdrawal from India and Palestine.
Level 3 (5–6 marks): Developed explanation with clear understanding and specific examples.
Explains that wartime dependence on the USA, including Lend-Lease and post-war economic support, gave Washington leverage over British policy.
Shows how the USA’s anti-colonial stance and support for UN decolonisation efforts pushed Britain towards granting independence across its empire.
Notes that Cold War cooperation meant the USA sometimes tolerated British control (e.g., Malaya), influencing Britain to pursue gradual, managed decolonisation aligned with American strategic aims.
