How Did Woodrow Wilson Use Self Determination
The First World War’s (1914-18) devastation inspired US President Woodrow Wilson to undertake the ambitious project of designing a series of principles that would maintain everlasting international peace and stability. Amongst these principles was self-determination, the belief that all people have the right to choose their political destiny free from the interference of any external parties. Naturally, the announcement of self-determination was met with a wave of optimism amongst colonised nations like Vietnam, Poland, India, and Egypt. Yet this optimism was quickly stamped out by the Wilson administration’s inconsistent application of self-determination. As a result, this essay asserts that in Wilson’s mind, self-determination only applied
to European colonies and colonies that were willing to adopt democratic forms of government. First of all, Wilson’s treatment of nationalist movements within Europe betrays the role Eurocentrism played in helping him decide which colonies were worthy of self-determination. The fact that Wilson often ignored or even supported colonial rule in many non-European colonies also supports the notion that Eurocentrism played a significant role in the Wilson administration’s foreign policy towards the colonies. Moreover, the League of Nations’ mandate system was designed with the goal of encouraging colonies formerly owned by the defeated Central Powers to adopt democratic forms of government, which clearly conflicts with self-determination’s stipulation that people should be allowed to choose their political destiny without any external influence. Furthermore, in Wilson’s mind, self-determination did not apply to colonies that could be used to further advance the USA’s national interests globally. Ultimately, self-determination presented a spark of hope for the colonised nations of the world, yet the flawed leaders of international governance in the interwar period quickly extinguished this spark.
to European colonies and colonies that were willing to adopt democratic forms of government. First of all, Wilson’s treatment of nationalist movements within Europe betrays the role Eurocentrism played in helping him decide which colonies were worthy of self-determination. The fact that Wilson often ignored or even supported colonial rule in many non-European colonies also supports the notion that Eurocentrism played a significant role in the Wilson administration’s foreign policy towards the colonies. Moreover, the League of Nations’ mandate system was designed with the goal of encouraging colonies formerly owned by the defeated Central Powers to adopt democratic forms of government, which clearly conflicts with self-determination’s stipulation that people should be allowed to choose their political destiny without any external influence. Furthermore, in Wilson’s mind, self-determination did not apply to colonies that could be used to further advance the USA’s national interests globally. Ultimately, self-determination presented a spark of hope for the colonised nations of the world, yet the flawed leaders of international governance in the interwar period quickly extinguished this spark.