The Geneva Protocol, by David Hunter Miller

CHAPTER XII. 51
Now what Article 11 of the Protocol does in its first paragraph is to say that the obligations of all States in
regard to the sanctions mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 16 of the Covenant will, when the call for
the application of the sanctions is made by the Council, immediately become operative, in order that such
sanctions may forthwith be employed against the aggressor.
So far as the first paragraph of Article 16 of the Covenant is concerned--the economic and financial
blockade--I do not see that this first paragraph of Article 11 of the Protocol adds anything to that first
paragraph of Article 16 of the Covenant, even when the former is read in connection with the second
paragraph of Article 11 of the Protocol.
It is true that in the resolutions about the economic weapon in the Assembly of 1921, it was recognized that
from practical points of view the application of the economic pressure cannot be made equally by all
countries. But undoubtedly, subject to the practical difficulties mentioned, a definite obligation exists in
Article 16 of the Covenant to impose economic sanctions against the aggressor, and, as I said, in my judgment
this obligation is not changed by the Protocol; but it can now become an operative obligation only if and when
the Council says so.
The vital question regarding sanctions under the Protocol arises under the second paragraph of Article 16 of
the Covenant in connection with the first and second paragraphs of Article 11 of the Protocol. Indeed, it is
because of this second paragraph of Article 11 of the Protocol that the question regarding the use of the
British Fleet has been raised in England.
Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Covenant reads as follows:
"It shall be the duty of the Council in such case to recommend to the several Governments concerned what
effective naval, military or air force the Members of the League shall severally {77} contribute to the armed
forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League."
Article 11, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Protocol read as follows:
"As soon as the Council has called upon the signatory States to apply sanctions, as provided in the last
paragraph of Article 10 of the present Protocol, the obligations of the said States, in regard to the sanctions of
all kinds mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 16 of the Covenant, will immediately become operative
in order that such sanctions may forthwith be employed against the aggressor.
"Those obligations shall be interpreted as obliging each of the signatory States to co-operate loyally and
effectively in support of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and in resistance to any act of aggression, in
the degree which its geographical position and its particular situation as regards armaments allow."
On its face, paragraph 2 of Article 11 of the Protocol merely interprets paragraph 2 of Article 16 of the
Covenant; but unquestionably it greatly changes it. Under the provisions mentioned of the Covenant, the
Council had merely the duty of recommendation as to forces to be contributed by Members of the League.
Undoubtedly under Article 16 of the Covenant, paragraph 1, any Member of the League had the right, if it
chose, to consider itself at war with an aggressor, but equally under that paragraph any Member of the League
had the right, if it chose, not to consider itself at war with an aggressor. Consequently there was no duty
whatever under that Article 16, not even a moral duty, in my judgment, on the part of any Member of the
League to contribute any armed forces whatever. The Council had the duty (under Article 16, Paragraph 2, of
the Covenant) of making a recommendation; but it was merely a recommendation, and there was no
obligation of the Member of the League to which the recommendation applied; there was merely a possible
privilege to the Member of the League to which the recommendation applied--and that is a very different
thing.