The Fable of the Fourteen Points: Woodrow Wilson and National Self-Determination

Abstract

For decades, scholars have turned to Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points address of January 8, 1918, to explain his vision for a new international order after World War I. And for decades, one particular phrase has been closely linked to that vision: “self‐determination.” The phrase, however, appears nowhere in Wilson's address. Moreover, it is often shorthand for “national self‐determination,” connoting an ethno‐nationalist political ideal Wilson never held. Rather, Wilson idealized self‐government: the right of all to help direct their society's public affairs. By 1918, Wilson sought to promote both national and international self‐government through a deliberative League of Nations, equipped to accommodate changes in an increasingly interdependent global society. Prejudiced though he was, Wilson envisioned an egalitarian League, with adequate sovereign powers to advance justice within and among nations. Though Wilson poorly communicated this radical yet pragmatic ideal, it was his late abandonment of pragmatic compromise that prevented U.S. League membership. That outcome, despite its contingency, has limited American views of the nation's global role ever since.

Strategies for the development of international sport diplomacy in the volleyball federation of the Islamic Republic of Iran

“…These principles are the principles that were essential to the success of international relations everywhere; mutual respect, realism and the principle of sovereignty, three principles that were identified. These principles appear to be emphasized in most international treaties, for example in Wilson's Fourteen Principles emphasizing the openness and integrity of international relations and diplomacy and their impartiality (Throntveit, 2011) or in the Treaty of Versailles, Reciprocity has been mentioned (Lu, 2002). The issue of mutual respect with international relations cooperation theories can also be debated, one of which is the theory of interdependence (Pevehouse, 2004) It must be admitted that although the above principles are obvious and necessary for the success of diplomatic relations (even in general), unfortunately the historical mentality of Iranians has made it difficult to accept and observe the above principles.…”

Reconceiving the struggle between non-state armed organizations, the state and ‘the international’ in the Middle East

“…Aspiration to national sovereignty was, indeed, the by-product of the principle of self-determination, championed by two leaders of that time, Soviet revolutionary Vladimir Lenin and US President Woodrow Wilson, although with different intentions: Lenin intended a radical redistribution of global power;Wilson, much more respectful of the existing empires-especially the American empire in the Caribbean, Puerto Rico, Central America and the Philippines-referred to the right of the people to self-government (Cassese 2005, p. 18). In fact,Wilson never pronounced the term 'self-determination' in his famous speech at the Versailles Conference in 1919 (Throntveit 2011). His fourteen points were explicitly intended as part of the enterprise of spreading American values in the world to better serve the American national interest (Smith 1994).…”

Nationalism, nations and the crisis of world order

“…62 Nor did he appear to change his mind thereafter even after having been appointed to a Chair named after an American President whose name came to be associated with the principle of national selfdetermination. 63 Like most liberals of course Zimmern admired Wilson. But he did not think there was very much to be gained from applying a principle with which even Wilson himself had made no reference to in his 14 points.…”