Foreign Policy Notes.doc

7/28/2019 Foreign Policy Notes.doc

1/45

Foreign policy, General objectives that guide the activities andrelationships of one state in its interactions with other states. Thedevelopment of foreign policy is influenced by domesticconsiderations, the policies or behaviour of other states, or plans toadvance specific geopolitical designs. Leopold von Ranke emphasized

the primacy of geography and external threats in shaping foreignpolicy, but later writers emphasized domestic factors. Diplomacy is thetool of foreign policy, and war, alliances, and international trade mayall be manifestations of it.

History of American Foreign Policy

http://amforeignpolicyii.bravepages.com/index.html

American Foreign Policy II: A Brief Survey of American Foreign Policy History

Gordon Neal Diem

American foreign policy during the years of the Confederation and the early years of thenew federal republic faces a variety of challenges. Three challenges are the mostserious.First, Great Britain continues to challenge the independence of the new republic andmaintains constant pressure on the new government.Second, America faces a variety of challenges to its right to freedom of the seas and tocommerce.Finally, the Native American "nations" provide a constant threat to American citizens andto westward expansion.In addition to the three challenges, America faces one great opportunity, the opportunityto expand national territory into Spanish and French lands of Florida and Louisiana.

The British Challenge

American independence is granted unwillingly by Great Britain, so it is understandablethe British have no interest in either nurturing the new republic or being too far removedfrom the scene if the new republic is to fail. If the American experiment in liberaldemocracy is to fail, the British could possibly regain control of the territory, unless otherEuropean powers get there first.Most European continental nations are also reluctant to nurture the new republic.

America's experiment in liberal democracy, if successful, might encourage otherEuropean colonies, and the European motherlands, to revolt against monarchy and

initiate their own experiment in liberal republicanism. The French monarch helps in theAmerican war of revolution, but that help is intended to harm the French enemy, GreatBritain, more than encourage liberalism or republicanism. American victory in its warfor independence seriously undermines the French monarch and fuels republicanism inFrance. It also encourages the Haitians to rebel against French colonial rule in Haiti, aFrench Caribbean possession. American failure to repay France for loans and expensesincurred when assisting the American revolution also encourages schism between Franceand the United States. Indeed, the expenses incurred by the French government in the
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/491217/Leopold-von-Rankehttp://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/164602/diplomacyhttp://amforeignpolicyii.bravepages.com/index.htmlhttp://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/491217/Leopold-von-Rankehttp://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/164602/diplomacyhttp://amforeignpolicyii.bravepages.com/index.html


2/45

American Revolution create a financial crisis in France, help undermine the Frenchmonarchy, and require the French monarch to call a meeting of the French Assembly inorder to raise taxes to relieve the crisis. Once the Assembly is called, the French liberalrepublican revolution is underway; the French monarch soon falls and Frenchrepublicans, successful at home, begin to export their revolution to the other nations of

Europe. Beginning in 1789, the European continent falls into nearly two decades ofrevolution, counter-revolution, Napoleonic Empire, collapse of the Napoleonic Empire,and restoration of the pre-revolutionary regimes under the Holy Alliance. Europeanattention is directed inward and America becomes a secondary, but still important,consideration. This "neglect" allows the American republic to consolidate itself andstrengthen itself.Britain continues to occupy frontier military installations even after the Revolutionary

War ends. Britain has several reasons for failure to withdraw forces. First, Britain wantsto maintain forward positions from which to reclaim the colonies and prevent rivalEuropean nations, especially France and Spain, from initiating their own colonizingefforts should the confederation between the newly independent United States collapse.

Indeed, there is serious political and economic instability within the confederation andserious cultural disunity that fuels British speculation the United States will not survive.Once the Articles of Confederation is replaced by the Constitution, the United Statesbecomes more politically stable, economically solvent, and culturally united and Britishhopes start to dim.Second, Britain maintains a military presence in the frontier in order to not desert their

Native American allies. The Indians side with the British against the Americanrevolutionaries and now need protection from American retribution and from the floodof frontiersmen and settlers moving west, into and throughf the Appalachian Mountains.Third, Britain wants to continue to exploit the fur trade in the northwestern frontier;

exploitation of natural resources is key to the British mercantilist economic system.Fourth, Britain wants to provide a constant threat of intervention to insure that British

loyalists remaining in the United States after the revolution are not persecuted by thevictorious revolutionaries. Large numbers of British "Loyalists" or "Tories" flee toCanada or return to British soil during the American Revolution and immediately afterthe final British defeat, but many still remain in the newly free United States.Finally, Britain wants to hold some American frontier territory hostage to insure the

Americans pay the war reparations promised in the treaty ending the Americanrevolutionary war.During the 1780s, American diplomats gradually negotiate the withdrawal of British

forces and make some agreements with England to pay the war reparations. At the sametime, France increases pressures on the United States to repay French loans and expensesincurred in support of the war. Relations between the U.S. and both nations becomeincreasingly strained. When the French Revolution begins in 1789, the United Statesseeks to remain neutral in both the revolutionary and counter-revolutionary efforts thatswiftly embroil France and all the nations of Europe; Congress approves legislationdeclaring neutrality.As the French Revolution and the warfare on the European Continent that follows

revolution spreads, both Britain and France declare blockades on each other, ban shippingto either nation by neutral nations, ban international commerce in goods and raw


3/45

materials from or to each other's national territory and overseas colonies by any nation,including neutral nations, and begin seizing ships from neutral nations violating theblockades and bans.

American merchants have no intention of respecting either the blockades or the bans.U.S. flagged ships become fair game for seizure by both the British and the French.

Several naval engagements between American and British or French war ships are foughtin both European waters and in the Western hemisphere. The most provocative Britishaction is an order permitting seizure of neutral ships either sending food and supplies toFrance or trading in goods produced in French colonies, particularly the West Indies.When Britain blockades French ships in the French harbors early in the FrenchRevolution, American merchants move quickly to take over commerce in the WestIndies. Now, these American merchant ships are subject to seizure. The British Navyseizes about 300 American ships and impresses thousands of captured American sailorsinto service on British ships. American attempts to negotiate with Britain infuriateFrance. France also begins seizing American ships. Attempts to negotiate with Franceare fruitless. The French begin to believe they can defeat the British and want to be in a

position to continue their assault on the Americans after Britain is defeated.The United States Congress becomes outraged over French minister Talleyrand's attemptto extract a "gift" from the United States in exchange for more sincere negotiations on theshipping issues. "No! No! Not a sixpence!" is the American negotiator's reply. Thereply from the U. S. Congress is even more forceful: "Millions for defense but not onecent for tribute!" Before Talleyrand's bribery attempt, the U.S. Congress is divided onhow to deal with British and French affronts to American neutrality and seizure ofAmerican shipping. Some want negotiations while others want war. Talleyrand's actionsconsolidate congressional opinion in favor of war. The question is, war with France orwar with England?When United States relations with England are at their worst, France makes overtures to

the U.S. When relations with France are at their worst, England makes overtures to theU.S. American neutrality becomes increasingly difficult to maintain. Deterioratingrelations with one or the other European nation usually leads to further congressionalactions increasing America's preparedness for war. American shippers continue to plycommerce, incurring both great profit and great risk.Surprisingly, in the midst of these undulating relations, America purchases the Louisiana

Territory from France. The French need funds for their war effort and the United Statesis able to exploit both a temporary French weakness and a temporary period of bi-lateralgood will.When Great Britain attempts to blockade the American coastline, prohibit Americanshipping to the Indies or anywhere on the European continent, impress increasingnumbers of captured American sailors into the British Navy, and incite the AmericanIndians in the western frontier into hostile attacks on American settlers, Congress finallydeclares war on Britain. The War of 1812 sees the British and their Native American andCanadian allies victorious in most early military engagements and sees the British marchacross much of the American national territory effectively unopposed. The British evenburn the American national capital. In the long run, however, Britain is unable to wagewar on both the European and the North American continents at the same time. TheEuropean war against Napoleon consumes most of England's manpower and logistical


4/45

resources. The American campaign becomes a war of attrition which the British come tobelieve they can not win. The Treaty of Ghent is signed in December 24, 1814, buthostile actions continue until March 1815 because poor communications make itimpossible to demobilize the armies in the field. The great American victory at the Battleof New Orleans is actually fought after the Treaty of Ghent is signed and is an

unnecessary loss of British life; many of the soldiers who die at New Orleans are recentsurvivors of the carnage in Europe battling Napoleon.With the conclusion of the War of 1812, the United States enters a period of importantforeign policy successes. First, America's standing and reputation in the worldcommunity increases considerably and threats to American national security and nationalintegrity stop. Indeed, when the United States institutes the Monroe Doctrine after theWar of 1812 to discourage the European Holy Alliance from initiating efforts to re-establish control of the newly independent former Spanish colonies in Central and LatinAmerica, the Europeans are respectfully discouraged. Second, American rights to tradeand commerce are recognized. Commerce is reestablished with both England andFrance. American shipping continues to dominate trade in the West Indies. Third,

America sends a naval and marine force to North Africa to put a final end to the tributeextraction efforts of the Barbary pirates. Finally, the United States government extractsmajor concessions of territory from the Native American tribes, especially those thatsided with the British in the War of 1812. The Sioux and the Ohio Indians cede vastareas from the Appalachians to the Great Lakes. The Chickasaw cede areas between theTennessee and Mississippi Rivers. The Creeks cede territory in the American South.The Seminoles, the lone resisting tribe among the frontier Indians, find themselves thesubject of a Florida invasion. Having withstood an invasion by one of the most powerfulnations of Europe, the United States earns a position of respect in both Europe and theWestern Hemisphere.

United States/Canada Relations

During the first half of the Nineteenth Century, United States-Canadian relations arestrained on several fronts.In 1837 and again in 1840, Canada and the U.S. nearly come to war over Americancitizens' aid to Canadian independence rebellions.In 1839, both the American Maine and the Canadian New Brunswick militias aremobilized when Canadians began logging operations in disputed Maine territory; a truceis declared before warfare begins.In the 1840s Canada makes claim to much of Americas Oregon Territory. TheAmerican presidential campaign of 1844 features not only a debate on Texas annexation,but a debate on a "54-40 or fight!" demand that America establish a claim to all territory

to the 54-40 parallel and go to war with Canada, and possibly with Great Britain, tosupport that claim. The issue is resolved diplomatically by the more moderate winningpoliticians with the U.S. agreeing to an established boundary line at the 49th. parallel.Canada eventually becomes an independent nation within the British commonwealth ofnations and becomes an ally and best friend of the United States.

Civil War and Reconstruction


5/45

When internal domestic political and economic differences between the northern andsouthern states brings on an attempt to dissolve the union and to create two separateindependent American states, both the federal and the confederate governments adopt ahighly isolationist, even insular, view toward foreign policy. Both fear outsiders mightexploit the internal division to foreign advantage. But, both also become so preoccupied

with domestic war that foreign matters are largely neglected and ignored.The Confederate government attempts to secure some recognition of its independentstatus from major European powers and attempts to use the cotton trade as leverage. Thiseffort is unsuccessful for several reasons. First, President Abraham Lincoln is successfulin defining the war as a "civil war," of insurrection rather than a war between twoindependent nations. Second, the southern states' cotton crop becomes insignificant asthe war progresses and the cultivation and harvesting of cotton declines. Most cottonproduced is used by the Confederate States' war effort, leaving little for export. Third,the British and the French quickly find new replacement sources for cotton cultivation intheir Asian and African colonies. Great Britain is the confederacy's best hope fordiplomatic recognition but the British decide to remain neutral in the conflict.

The Union government is afraid the Canadians and British will exploit the Civil War andmake aggressive moves against America's northern borders; some Union troops aresparsely deployed along the northern border to discourage any threat.France uses American preoccupation with civil war as an opportunity to intervene inMexico, under the excuse that Mexico owes France a huge, unpaid financial debt. Francesends troops in 1863 and places a European aristocrat on a Mexican throne. After the endof the Civil War, the U.S. demands the French withdraw; they withdraw in 1867 and themonarch is executed by Mexican patriots days later. There is some degree of anarchy inMexico during the French occupation. Some defeated Confederate States commandersseek to use that anarchy as an opportunity to retreat, regroup and return to the U.S. soilto attempt a second war for succession. Once in Mexico, the rebels largely begin newlives instead of returning to war.Following the Civil War, the reunited and renewed United States purchases Alaska fromRussia in one of the few successful foreign policy initiatives of the immediate post-warera. The purchase is ridiculed in politics and the press. In spite of presidentialencouragement, the Congress refuses to purchase the Virgin Islands (1867) or annex theDominican Republic (1870) or, ironically, recognize a Cuban revolution in 1868. For thedecade after the Civil War, America focuses its interests internally to reconstruction andre-admission of the Southern states, expansion into the vast territories of the AmericanWest, and domestic economic development. The United States builds a nationalinfrastructure and establishes personal standards of living of envy to many foreignnations. When U. S. interests again turn to international interests, the United States isable to promote its interests from a position of economic superiority and assumed moralsuperiority.

Manifest Destiny

In post-Civil War America, foreign policy issues take a back seat to domestic economicand political issues. Infastructure destroyed by war is rebuilt. New industries, createdout of the necessities of war, expand in a growing domestic economy. The political


6/45

union, shattered by war, is rebuilt. The west, already partlly opened before the war, seesa flood of immigrants, escaping both the destruction left by the American Civil War andthe continuing economic and political hardships in Europe. The early American colonistsand the leaders of United States during its formative years envision a United States whichincorporates all the territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific. For the most part, they

appear satisfied pursuing continental domination and they express little interest inimperialistic expansion beyond the North American continent. The European nations, onthe other hand, actively pursue the construction of around-the-world empires. TheEuropeans carve up Asia into colonies, occupied territories, and zones of influence. TheEuropeans carve up Africa into colonies. The United States soon joins them in thatpursuit.Foreign policy issues, neglected as America pursues its domestic development, return tothe forefront in the1890s. The U.S. becomes more aggressive in asserting itsinternational position, establishing a navy base in Hawaii, establishing a protectorate inSamoa, defending its fishing and sealing rights against the Canadians, meddling in thedomestic politics of Chile, and arbitrating a boundary dispute between Venezuela and

British Guiana. In a frenzy of manifest destiny, the U.S. even makes an early abortivemove to annex Hawaii.Cuba becomes the preoccupying issue of late Nineteenth Century American foreignpolicy. Spanish human rights violations, publicized in the American press, angerhumanitarians and enflame passions for war. President Grover Cleveland refrains fromintervening in Cuba even though both the U.S. House and Senate pass resolutionsfavoring intervention in 1896. By 1898, however, humanitarian and imperialist cries forintervention intensify to the point that war is inevitable. A widely publicized Spanishinsult of new President McKinley and the suspicious sinking of the American battleshipMaine, leads to a one-sided war in which the U.S. takes possession of Cuba, Puerto Rico,Guam, and the Philippines, the latter accomplished in the face of resistance from nativeFilipino guerrilla fighters. The United States now has overseas territorial "possessions."American imperialism is fanned by the popular press, including Josiah Strong's book OurCountry (1885) proclaiming Western superiority, and Capt. Alfred Mahan's book TheInfluence of Sea Power Upon History (1890), which leads to the construction of the"Great White Fleet." Imperialism is also fanned through widely publicized speeches bynotable congressional imperialists. They believe the U.S. should expand overseas tobuild American prestige, spread Christianity, spread the benefits of Western civilization,and protect American strategic interests.Flushed with victory over Spain, America flexes its muscle internationally, demanding aworld "open door" trade policy granting equal trading opportunities for all countries,especially in Asia (1899), constructing the Panama Canal (1904), semi-assertivelyopposing Japanese expansionism in Asia (1905, 1915), and sending the "Great WhiteFleet" around the world to strengthen the American reputation, especially in Asia (1907).The U.S. reissues the Monroe Doctrine to warn European nations to stop meddling inLatin American nations in order to collect debts owed by those Latin nations (1904). TheU.S. temporarily takes control of the Dominican Republic (1905) and Haiti (1915) toprevent European takeovers and to guarantee Dominican Republic and Haitian territorialintegrity while these countries struggle out of debt. The U.S. actively governs its newpossessions taken from Spain, intervenes in a Nicaraguan revolution to protect American


7/45

citizens and interests (1910), intervenes diplomatically in a Mexican revolution (1913)and intervenes militarily in a number of other revolutions in a number of other Latinnations, including the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Mexico.The U.S. purchases the Virgin Islands in order to keep Germany out of the Western

Hemisphere and finally annexes Hawaii as a United States Territory following the

overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy by American missionaries and businessmen and thetemporary establishment of a Hawaiian Republic.Then, the United States finds itself drawn into World War I, largely against the will of theAmerican public.

World War I

At the start of the war in Europe in 1914, the American government attempts to remainneutral in thought as well as action. America attempts to maintain its commercial andtrading relationships inall countries of Europe. In political campaigns, presidentialaspirants promote peaceful negotiations as a solution to the European conflict rather than

calling outright for entry into the war. But the American people are gradually taking sidesand the politicians are gradually loosing faith in non-military solutions. There isconsiderable sympathy for Germany, especially among the sizable German-Americanpopulation. It is possible to see Germany as a victim of Russian and French aggressionand Austrian stubbornness. But, American ties to Great Britain are hard to overcome.America and Britain share culture and language, share significant commercial interests,and share three centuries of a love-hate relationship.Americans are eventually swayed to support Britain and the allies by (1) Britishpropaganda falsely claiming German human rights violations and war atrocities andclaiming secret German motives for starting the war, (2) the German violation ofAmerican freedom of the seas through German submarine activities, (3) the British-provoked German sinking of a British passenger liner, now known to be carryingsmuggled war munitions, and (4) the Pro-British biases and British ancestrial links ofseveral important American leaders, including President Woodrow Wilson. The eventualdeclaration of war in April 1917 is not unanimous; the vote is 82-6 in the Senate and 373-50 in the House.The U.S. helps define the previously undefined allied objectives in the war with PresidentWoodrow Wilson's "Fourteen Points". The Germans surrender in November 1918, basedon those 14 points. Wilson takes a very personal role in both the declaration of warbringing the United States into the war and in the peace conference following the war.This helps politicize the war domestically. Wilson's Democratic Party suffers losses inthe November 1918 congressional elections and Wilson fails to get congressionalapproval of the final peace treaty or congressional support for a proposed League ofNations to prevent future wars. Congress terminates war with Germany by resolution inOctober 1920.By its entry into World War I, the United States militarily intervenes in a major Europeanwar on the European continent for the first time in U. S. history. American militarypower proves decisive in altering the balance of power among European states.Americans return triumphantly to the homelands of their ancestors and, hopefully, helppromote liberalism and democracy on the continent. But, the adventure is not satisfying;


8/45

the U. S. soon becomes distressed and disenchanted by the squabbling among theEuropean nations concerning war reparations and the territorial claims of the victors. TheUnited States soon washes it hands of Europe and of European entanglements and,following the advise of the nation's first president, George Washington, returns toisolation and non-involvement in European affairs. American negotiators dabble in the

various peace and disarmament initiatives of the 1920s and 1930s but largely remaindistant from the European scene. American leaders become increasingly focused ondomestic economic and social problems caused, first, by the boom of the 1920s and,second, by the bust of the 1930s. American intellectuals are enamoured by Italian fascismand Soviet communism and only slightly alarmed by German fascism. Japaneseaggression in Asia is outside the scope of most American leader's attention.

Isolationism

During the 1920s and 1930s, America again becomes insular and isolationist, althoughAmerican diplomats are actively at work around the world. Americans believe existentiallogic and diplomacy will prevent future wars. They believe America can return itsattentions to domestic affairs. U.S. diplomats are active in disarmament conferences(1921, 1922), war debt commissions (1922), war reparations commissions (1923), aninternational quarantine of Japan for its Asian aggression, and a Peace Pact "outlawing"war (1928). But, all this activity amounts to little more than dabbling and does not haveany long term significance. Much of the effort is largely symbolic and of intellectualinterest rather than of any practical interest. There is even a largely ignored move toadopt a new American "peace" flag as the American national flag to show America'scommitment to peace.The failure of America to be more active in the post-World War I peace process and toprovide a rational voice and outsider logic to the post-war European guilt assessment,damage assessment, and reparations collection process directly contributes to the

European economic and currency crisis following the war. That crisis has world-wideimplications and leads to a world-wide economic depression that eventually hits theUnited States in 1929-1933. Rather than seeking a world-wide solution to the economiccrisis and seeking international cooperation, each nation tends to turn inward, developingdomestic policies to deal with the effects of the crisis, encouraging national economicdevelopment, and isolating itself from other nations with tariffs and trade restrictions.This turn inward is the course taken by the United States.The three solutions to the economic crisis are communism (U.S.S.R.), fascism (Germany,Italy, Spain) and socialism (Britain, U.S.); many developing nations use more than onesolution or combine and modify several solutions to create their own unique nationalsolution. In Germany, the development of a rearmament industry is seen as a way to

stimulate industrial and labor activity.The economic crisis causes many nations to assess their strengths and weaknesses. TheBritish, French, German, and Soviet study of geopolitics, with its emphasis on self-sufficiency, "natural" national boundaries, and "living space," coupled with nationalselfishness and national self-interest, and with fascist and communist ideology, lays thefoundation for a second world war. Germany becomes obsessed with assuring itsgeopolitical health; that obsession should have been seen as a signal of the war tocome,


9/45

but most American intellectuals and diplomats were either unfamiliar with geopoliticalconcepts or were unwilling to see the threat building before them.In 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt attempts to establish a "good neighbor policy"

toward Latin American nations and agrees to cease intervention in Latin nationaldomestic affairs. The Neutrality Acts (1935, 1936) seek to also withdraw the U.S. from

intervention in European domestic and international affairs. Meanwhile, Italy invadesEthiopia (1935) and Albania (1939). Germany invades the French Rhineland (1936),Austria (1938), Czechoslovakia (1938, 1939) and Poland (1939). Russia invades Poland(1939) and Finland (1939). The Neutrality Act of 1939 allows American citizens andbusiness to export arms and munitions on a cash and carry basis. The United States isneutral, but at the same time, involved.American neutrality is finally broken when the U.S. transfers 50 over-age destroyers to

Britain in September 1940, three months after Paris falls to the Germans. The destroyershelp Britain maintain control of its territorial waters and maintain its shipping in the faceof German submarine attacks. In return for the destroyers, the U.S. receives rights to usevarious British-controlled ports. In his state-of-the-union address, January 1941,

President Roosevelt recommends a lend-lease bill to support the allies; it takes twomonths of heated debate to get the bill through Congress. Americans are reluctant to getinto another European war. The U.S. begins convoy escorts in the Atlantic in support of"freedom of the seas" and promises aid to Russia, invaded by Germany in June 1941.But , the United States remains reluctant to become a primary belligerent in a Europeanwar, in spite of pleas from Britain.On December 7, 1941, Japan attacks Pearl Harbor in an effort to deny the U.S. the ability

to intervene in the Pacific to stop on-going Japanese imperialist expansion throughoutAsia, should the U.S. eventually decide to do so. The U.S. retaliates by declaring waron Japan on December 8. Germany and Italy, both Japanese allies, declare war on theU.S. on December 11 and the U.S. reciprocates. America suddenly finds itself in themiddle of a world-wide war in which the armies of fascism have the upper hand.American industrial, military and manpower resources lead the successful world-widecounter-attack on fascist aggression.

Communism

Following the defeat of Japan and Germany, the U.S. finds itself (1) rebuilding its alliesdevastated by war, (2) providing humanitarian relief to the conquered Japanese, Italiansand Germans, and (3) opposing a new threat-- expansionist Soviet and Chinesecommunism. The Soviet Union seeks to construct a geopolitical empire with a bufferzone around itself and to export communist revolution around the world. PresidentTruman eventually draws the line on communist expansion in Berlin, Greece, Turkey,Iran and Korea. The Western and non-communist world quickly allies itself to defendagainst communist advancement and to rebuild its economic and military strength.Communism lowers an "iron curtain" to isolate itself from the West and proceeds with itsown economic and military development.The European nations,all former colonial powers, are too weakened from World War I,the world-wide depression, and World War II to continue their colonial empires. Duringthe 1940s, 1950, 1960s, and 1970s, former colonies are either given independence by


10/45

their former masters or the colonies wrest their independence away from their formercolonial masters through force. In time, many of these new nations turn to the U.S. foreconomic and military assistance, adding to America's burden, or turn to the communistbloc, compelling the U.S. to attempt to outbid the Soviets for the allegiance of thesedeveloping nations.

The U.S. leads the defense against communist expansion, both diplomatically andmilitarily throughout the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s with international anti-communist alliances, military action, and support of anti-communist regimes in Greece,Korea, the Middle East, Central America, Vietnam and scores of other hot-and cold-warbattle zones. American diplomats often have difficulty distinguishing between nationalistrevolutions, ethnic self-determination movements, and communist aggression and oftenengage in short-term foreign policy initiatives that work to the long-term detriment ofAmerican interests.The policy of "containment" of communism, begun by President Harry Truman in the

late 1940s and practiced by Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John Kennedy, ismodified by Presidents Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter

to include some effort to understand and cooperate with the communists. Some trade andcultural exchange is encouraged. But, communisms aggressive nature remainsunchanged. The Soviets, Chinese, and Cubans continue support for communistrevolution throughout the developing world, most recently in Afghanistan and Nicaragua.In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan decides to break the back of communist expansionby bankrupting the Soviet industrial system. Military and economic foreign aid is used tooutbid the Soviets and Chinese for allies; world-wide free trade breaks Soviet monopolytrade relationships, the "star wars" strategic defense initiative overtaxes the Soviettechnological capability, a massive arms race overwhelms the Soviet and Chineseindustrial capacity, and the exportation of Western materialism into the Soviet andChinese bloc nations through video, mass media, cinema, and popular cultureoverwhelms the consumer industries in the communist economies. Communism simplycan not match capitalism in material, war, and technological production. Sovietcommunism collapses from popular withdrawal of support by the citizens of the SovietUnion, The Union disintegrates into its constituent republics, each adopting morewestern-style democratic and capitalist-- or semi-capitalist-- economic systems. Aroundthe world, communism declines in popularity and, one by one, communist orcommunist-leaning regimes around the world fall before a world-wide pro-democracymovement. Only mainland China and Cuba remain as isolated bastions of communism.With the collapse of communism and the Soviet Union, the U.S. emerges as the singularmost powerful nation on the planet. In the 1990s, the nation struggles to define its role inworld affairs. The U.S. appears to be reluctant to become singularly dominant in worldaffairs but appears to prefer a role of "first among equals" in shaping the policies for theplanet.The attempt to be seen as an equal rather than as the world's singular superpower is seenin America's approach to the Gulf War confrontation with Iraq, civil war in the formerYugoslavia, and domestic and international crisis throughout Africa. In all cases, theU.S. has the power to act unilaterally, but prefers, instead, to act in concert with othernations and through resolutions of the United Nations. The U.S. takes the lead in formingthe international force to oppose Iraq's aggression, but allows the Europeans to take the


11/45

lead in forming the peace-keeping team to deal with the crisis in Bosnia. In Africa, theU.S. stands aside as Europeans and Africans, most notably the Nigerians, attempt tointervene to stop civil war, genocide, or international aggression in Angola, Liberia,Saharan Africa, and West Africa. America's largely unilateral efforts in Somalia fail andreinforce the desire to act in league with other nations rather than to act alone.

As the Twentyfirst Century arrives, new foreign policy issues emerge, includingsignificant environmental concerns, state-sponsored terrorism, group-sponsoredterrorism, disintegration of large states into nationalist fragments, global economicinterdependence, free trade, continued famine and poverty in the underdeveloped world,and the movement of large populations in and out of states around the globe. Socialissues like slavery, sexism, drug abuse, unsafe factories, reproductive control,technological piracy, cloning, untested medical advances, agricultural chemicals,invasions by pest species, and species depletion pose specific challenges for foreignpolicy.Only one thing appears certain. In the aftermath of the terrorist attack on American soil inSeptember 2001, and in light of the massive intelligence failures surrounding that attack,

it seems unlikely the United States will ever again feel safe in a return to its isolation andinsularity. With the nation constantly exposed to attack from the outside world, the nationmust forever remain an active player on the world scene.

Dec 2, 1823:

Monroe introduces bold new foreign policy

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/monroe-introduces-bold-new-foreign-policy

On this day in 1823, President James Monroe delivers his annual message to Congress

and calls for a bold new approach to American foreign policy that eventually becameknown as the "Monroe Doctrine." Monroe told Congress, and the world's empires, that"the American continents are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for furthercolonization by any European powers." This policy was invoked and adapted bysubsequent presidents to advance American economic and political interests in theWestern Hemisphere.

Monroe's declaration, which was drafted by Secretary of State John Quincy Adams--whowould succeed Monroe as president in 1824--was aimed at preventing attempts by othernations to colonize territory on the North and South American continents that had not yetbeen claimed by Europeans. Although the U.S. population was at the time concentratedeast of the Mississippi River, expansion into the western half of the continent was

foremost in the minds of many American politicians, including Monroe and hispredecessorThomas Jefferson. Monroe and Adams were also concerned that the British,French and Russians would attempt to annex regions once held by the Spanish (such asthe Southwest, Central and South America and the Northern Pacific)--places over whichthe U.S. itself hoped to extend control.

Monroe did not actively seek to add territory to the United States, but some of hissuccessors, including James Polkand Theodore Roosevelt, used the Monroe Doctrine to
http://www.history.com/topics/james-monroehttp://www.history.com/topics/john-quincy-adamshttp://www.history.com/topics/mississippihttp://www.history.com/topics/thomas-jeffersonhttp://www.history.com/topics/stateshttp://www.history.com/topics/james-polkhttp://www.history.com/topics/james-monroehttp://www.history.com/topics/john-quincy-adamshttp://www.history.com/topics/mississippihttp://www.history.com/topics/thomas-jeffersonhttp://www.history.com/topics/stateshttp://www.history.com/topics/james-polk


12/45

justify the annexation of new lands into the Union. Under its auspices, President JamesPolk took the land (via the Mexican-American Warin 1846-48) that now makes upTexas. Later, Theodore Roosevelt tailored Monroe's philosophy to establish a strong American presence in Central America, the Philippines and the Caribbean

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELTS FOREIGN POLICIES

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1978/3/78.03.05.x.html

When Franklin D. Roosevelt became President his attention was diverted from theinternational problems England and France had with Germany because domesticproblems were more immediate and important to him.Former President Hoovers call for an International Economic Conference to be held inLondon in 1933 was wrecked by Franklin D. Roosevelts refusal to agree to peg the valueof the U.S. dollar to any other currency because he felt it would hurt his efforts to raiseAmerican farm prices.

I. The Good Neighbor Policy and Pan-Americanism

Franklin D. Roosevelt advocated a new direction on foreign affairs by his Good NeighborPolicy. Actually, it was not a new direction since Hoover had started a policy ofcooperation with the Latin American countries. So far as the Latin American countrieswere concerned, their governments were pleased by his abandonment of TheodoreRoosevelts interventionism. Secretary Cordell Hull agreed to the idea of cooperationwhen he visited the Pan American Conference in Montevido in Uruguay in 1933. Thispolicy of nonintervention was carried out by:

(a) the American withdrawal of marines from Haiti,

(b) a new treaty signed with Cuba whereby the Platt Amendment was nullified,

(c) the U.S. giving up the right to police the Panama government in 1939,

(d) the U.S. giving up control of finances of the Dominican Republic,

(e)and only making mild protests to the Mexican government when it took over oil andfarmlands owned by American citizens, thereby repudiating dollar diplomacy.

The students should become aware that the Good Neighbor Policy was a continuouspolicy and not a campaign slogan. In 1936, when F.D. Roosevelt attended the PanAmerican Conference in Buenos Aires, Argentina, he showed that the United States waswilling to stop dominating weaker nations by its adherence to the Declaration ofPrinciples of Inter-American Solidarity and Cooperation, and that the Latin Americancountries would be treated as equals.

Sometimes students feel that treaties are just pieces of paper signed by dignitaries, andthen forgotten. A way of showing the students that this is not so all the time is to pointout that the above treaty brought about concrete results:

(a)A government cultural exchange program was instituted, supplemented by local andprivate agencies.

(b) Hollywood film makers agreed to change the image of Latins in their films.

(c) Time Magazine started publishing in Spanish and Portuguese.
http://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-warhttp://www.history.com/topics/texashttp://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1978/3/78.03.05.x.htmlhttp://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-warhttp://www.history.com/topics/texashttp://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1978/3/78.03.05.x.html


13/45

Following Hoovers example, F.D. Roosevelt supplanted economic nationalism witheconomic cooperation:

(a) Reciprocity treaties were made with 15 different Latin American countries.

(b)U.S. government capital gradually replaced private investments through the Export-Import Bank and the U.S. Treasury Department.

(c) F.D. Roosevelt increased, nearly by double, the annual payments to Panama for canalrights.

After war broke out in Europe in 1939, the earlier Declaration of Lima was strengthenedat a conference in Panama to secure the sovereignty, political independence of theAmerican states and set up the machinery to make the declaration effective, with LatinAmerican countries as coequal partners. This made the Monroe Doctrine more forcefulby changing it from a unilateral U.S. doctrine to a multilateral Pan-American doctrine.

II. The stalemate between an internationalist President and an isolationist Congress

Franklin D. Roosevelts recognition of the U.S.S.R. was a new departure from previousadministrations. The Roosevelt-Litvinov pact did not bring about a great increase in trade

with the U.S.S.R. though Franklin D. Roosevelt had hoped to alleviate the Depressionthrough increased foreign trade. This pact did not work out well for the U.S. because theRussians never offered a debt settlement satisfactory to American negotiators, nor didthey buy much American goods. Nor did the Russians refrain from continuing theirsupport of subversive agents in our country.The earlier Neutrality Acts dealt with war among nations and did not deal with civil wars.The new Neutrality Act of 1937 hurt the Loyalist government in Spain. According toRobert A. Divine, this Neutrality Act of 1937 made U.S. a silent accomplice of Hitlersince Germany was not hampered in sending supplies to General Francos rebel forces,while the United States was hampered in sending supplies to the Loyalist government. Tothe Germans, this evidence of American isolation simply reinforced the Anglo-French

appeasement policies. This Act also did not help the Chinese who were fighting againstthe Japanese invasion.

However, Roosevelt tried to arouse the American public with his Quarantine speech inChicago in 1937. He proposed to quarantine aggressors by joining other powers in suchan effort. Isolationist feelings were still too strong among the American people and hewas, therefore, unsuccessful.

The German persecution of German-Jews during 1934-1936 brought loud protestationsby different Jewish-American organizations, including a mock trial at Madison SquareGarden in March, 1934. The German ambassador protested, but Secretary of StateCordell Hull could not stop the rally. There was no enthusiasm for the idea to bring

German-Jews to America because the economics of the Depression governed officialmentality in 1933. With high unemployment Roosevelts government upheld Hooversexecutive order not to admit to the United States persons who were likely to becomepublic charges. Franklin D. Roosevelts government refused to give even a token amountof contributions to the League of Nations High Commission for Refugees (Jewish andothers) coming from Germany until other countries made contributions first. The schemeof Hjalmar Schacht, president of the German Reichsbank, to use one-quarter of theGerman-Jewish assets to finance purchases of German machinery after the Jews settled in


14/45

the U.S., fell through. According to Arnold Offner, conceivably Germanys Jews mighthave been spared future destruction had this plan been implemented. Later in 1938 theGerman foreign minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop, said that the question of German-Jews was an internal German problem and was not subject to discussion at the EvianConference.

The deliberate Japanese attack upon the American gunboatPanay in China leftAmericans unmoved. The majority of Americans thought that the United States shouldget out of China completely. The Japanese were willing to pay for the damages. In 1939,Roosevelt supplied Nationalist China with some supplies because Japan had not declaredwar on China even though it was fighting a war. This lack of declaration of war of thepart of Japan provided a loophole in the Neutrality Act so Roosevelt was able to send aidto China. This technicality in the Neutrality Act made it possible for Japan to fulfill 90%of its needs for copper and metal scrap by buying it from the United States. The cash-and-carry provision that Bernard Baruch had earlier proposed for the Neutrality Act of1937 helped Japan but not China. Japan had a great merchant fleet and the necessary cashfor American resources.

III. Americas gradual involvement in the global conflict

Finally, the realization came to Roosevelt that the expansionist policies of Japan in Asiaand Hitlers Anschluss of Austria in March 1938 required stronger armed forces for theU.S. Congress passed a naval expansion bill for the building of a two-ocean Navy in May1938.The effect of Germanys attack on Poland in 1939 brought about a declaration byPresident Roosevelt to be neutral in deed if not in thought. It became evident that theNeutrality Acts favored Germany since Germany had no need to buy armaments, whileBritain and France had great needs. He urged Congress to repeal the arms embargo. Hisappeal was finally answered by Congress with the provision that England and France

supply the ships and cash for armaments. Title to all exports were to be transferred beforethe goods left the U.S. With such provisions in the revision of the Neutrality Act,Americans felt there was no risk of getting involved in the European war. Franklin D.Roosevelt never hinted that his proposals for the revision of the Neutrality Act would linkthe United States with England and France against Germany.

*Even while observing the provisions of the Neutrality Acts, Roosevelt began in 1939 toprepare for eventual participation in the war on the side of the western powers.

*After the Neutrality Act of 1939 was signed by President Roosevelt, he proclaimed theNorth Atlantic a combat zone. In the first few months of war between the Allies (Englandand France) and Germany (September 1939), Franklin D. Roosevelt made every possible

effort to insulate the United States from the European conflict.

To the French Premier Reynauds request for American aid, Roosevelt could only answerthat the U.S. could not give any aid. He stated that Congress could only declare war.

Soon afterwards Franklin D. Roosevelt asked Congress for a five-fold increase of theNavy. In May 1940, Churchill asked for 40 or 50 overage destroyers. By September 1940a destroyers-for-bases agreement was made; thereby the U.S. openly declared its supportof England in the war against Germany. This act marked the end of American neutrality.


15/45

In June 1940 Japan entered the fourth year of war against China. Japan sealed ChiangKai-sheks forces by having the British close the Burma Road, and forced the French(through the Vichy government) to ban military shipments via trains through Indo-China.

Only the United States stood between Japan and its dominance of all Asia. PresidentRoosevelt ordered the Pacific fleet to have maneuvers off Hawaii and ordered the fleet to

remain indefinitely nearby. He also transferred the fleets base from California to Hawaii.

The National Defense Act of 1940 gave the President the right to place embargoes on anymaterials deemed essential to national defense. When Morgenthay and Stimsonpersuaded Franklin D. Roosevelt to place oil and scrap iron on the list of materialsessential for national security, Sumner Welles protested. The President then limited theembargo to aviation gasoline and only the highest grade of scrap iron. This made for amajor departure in American foreign policy.

The embargo of materials for Japan came too late since Japan decided to carry out itsplan for the New Order in Asia, i.e., conquest of Southeast Asia. A Tripartite Pact wasmade between Germany, Italy and Japan. Germany wanted to prevent American entry

into the war, while Japan wanted to frighten the U.S. with the prospect of a possible two-ocean war.

The 1940 election campaign in the U.S. was on. Roosevelt made a statement, Your boysare not going to be sent into any foreign war. However, the following comment was notpart of his speech: Of course, well fight if were attacked. If someone attacks us, then itisnt a foreign war.

In December 1940 Roosevelt asserted that England was Americas first line of defense.Since Britain needed supplies to help protect American security, the simplest solutionwas to lease the materials. According to Robert A. Divine, the passage of the Lend-LeaseBill in March 1941 was a major turning point in American foreign policy. The U.S. was

firmly committed to the goal of defeating Germany. President Roosevelt gave permissionto British and American military staff members to meet during January through March1941 in order to coordinate military strategy in the event the U.S. entered war againstGermany. They determined that Germany was to be first defeated, while the U.S. wouldstand on the defensive toward Japan in the Pacific.

The Hemisphere Neutrality Belt (300 miles out into the Atlantic), which was establishedin October 1939, was extended by April 1941 to the 25 Meridian, approximately the half-point line in the Atlantic between Europe and America. Even though the agreement wassecret, this line cut into Germanys announced submarine warfare zone (March 1941).

The Danish government-in-exile placed Greenland under U.S. protection and authorized

the construction of air and naval bases there.

Roosevelts policy was that American warships were not to shoot at German submarines,and therefore no convoy duty for American warships would be allowed.

To help China, Colonel Claire L. Chennaults Flying Tigers were organized with 50American airplanes, and de-commissioned American aviators-officers were sent toChina.


16/45

From December 1940 on, additional materials were placed weekly on the embargo list forJapan, and thereby an economic sanction policy was in force, except for oil. Denying oilto Japan would have brought about dire consequences.

IV. The final plunge into the war.

After Russia was attacked by Germany in June 1941, President Roosevelt stated, We aregoing to give all the aid we possibly can to Russia. He added that the U.S. would giveforty million dollars worth of goods and the use of American ships. (The 40 milliondollars were Russian assets that were frozen.) Roosevelt did not intend to invoke theNeutrality Act for the Russo-German war. He did not launch any immediate program toassist Russia in spite of his earlier remarks.On July 1, 1941, the U.S. and Iceland reached an agreement to allow 4,000 marines to besent to Iceland to forestall a German invasion.

By August 1941, the U.S. gave Russia its first formal commitment of assistance.

Even though the U.S. was neutral, Roosevelt met Churchill off the coast of

Newfoundland on a British warship. He resisted Churchills efforts to make him declare awarning to Japan that their continued aggression in Asia would bring war with the U.S.A.

The Atlantic Charter was drawn up by Churchill and Roosevelt with the followingstatement of principles, among them:

1. a pledge against aggression.

2. a promise of self-determination in territorial changes.

3. respect for the right of self-government and freedom of speech.

4. a creation of an effective international organization. (Roosevelt rejected it.)

On July 26, 1941, the United States declared a full-scale embargo ending all trade withJapan. Great Britain and her Dominions and the Dutch authorities did the same. It was

disastrous for Japan.In September 1941 the Japanese asked for a summit meeting between the Prime MinisterPrice Konoye and Roosevelt. Konoye hoped to get American approval of Japanesedominance in the Far East. The United States insisted that Japan give up the New Orderin Asia and to withdraw troops from China and Indochina. This insistence of Americaended the last chance for diplomatic accommodation between Japan and the U.S. in 1941.Konoyes government fell from power on October 16, 1941. General Hideki Tojo formeda new cabinet. He pledged to fulfill Japans destiny in Asia.

The Japanese attack upon the American gunboat Greerin China brought aboutRoosevelts reply that American warships would escort merchant marine ships and wouldget orders to shoot-on-sight.

By November 7, 1941, Roosevelt got the Senate to vote for arming merchant ships.

According to Robert Divine, Roosevelt surrendered the decision for war to Tojo andHitler.

On November 1, 1941, Tojo decided to have one more month of negotiations with theAmerican government. If these failed, preparations for wars with America, England, andthe Netherlands were to be completed by early December.


17/45

Roosevelts position was that Japan could continue its war with China, but could not movesouthward toward Thailand and the 100 Meridian, for such a move would result in a warwith the United States. The American breaking of the Japanese secret code madeSecretary of State Cordell Hull aware that if no agreement was reached by November 29,1941, things are automatically going to happen.

American response to Japan was a 10-point reply, giving the same demands which Japancould not accept. Tojo and his cabinet met with the Emperor on December 1, 1941. Japandecided on war.

After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Congress passed a Declarationof War on Japan. Later, on December 11, 1941, Germany declared war on the U.S.A. Sodid Italy. On the same day, Congress adopted a resolution recognizing a state of war withthem.

A teacher could bring to the attention of the students a controversy that arose during theearly part of World War II. Was the concentration of our Navy (more than 70 ships) atPearl Harbor a deliberate act to draw the Japanese to attack it? The Americans had

broken the Japanese secret code and were aware that the Japanese were preparing to go towar against the U.S.A. With all the knowledge of the Japanese diplomatic moves, couldthere not have been a way found to keep the U.S. out of war?

The Foreign Policies of Harry S. Truman

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1979/2/79.02.01.x.html

Everyones Wild About Harry was the title of an article in Newsweek (March 24, 1975),which indicated a resurgence of interest in Harry S. Truman. Why this new interest?Could it be a post-Watergate reaction? Even the rock group called Chicago cane up witha hit tune, Harry Truman, Which had these lyrics:

America needs you, Harry Truman,Harry, could you please come home?Things are lookin bad.I know you would be madTo see what kind of menPrevail upon the land you love.(Laminations Music, Big Elk Music and CBS, Inc., 1975)

It appears that Trumans current appeal is more a matter of style than of substance. Whatsticks in the mind is Trumans bluntness and utter lack of pretension. Its been reported thatAll across America, in fact, people are hailing the 33rd president as one of the lastAmerican heroes. How this image squares with the historical record is the underlyingquestion of this curriculum unit.

This unit is for the high school U. S. History course. It could cover one or two weeks ofclassroom work, depending upon how much detail a teacher would like to stress. The unitwill look into the problem of decision-making: how foreign policy is made and whomakes the decisions.

From Trumans point of view, it was never a question that the president was the decision-maker. He kept a plaque on his desk which proclaimed The buck stops here. He wouldlisten to the recommendations of his advisers and then make his decision. Truman had toface many crises and make quick decisions. This was especially true after he took over
http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1979/2/79.02.01.x.htmlhttp://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1979/2/79.02.01.x.html


18/45

the presidency upon the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt when urgent situations in theconcluding months of World War II demanded immediate action.

Truman epitomized the American democratic ideal: that anybody could become presidentof the United States. He was an average American without a college degree. However,many of his advisers were Ivy League graduates and professional diplomats.

In the early days of Trumans presidency the war in Europe was coming to an end. Fromthe beginning Truman acted differently. While Franklin D. Roosevelt was a patrician andtook time to make decisions, Truman was plain and folksy and seemed to make quickdecisions, which delighted the military and civilian high-ranking officials.

This unit will examine some of the problems Truman faced and will look into the role thepresident and his advisers had in the decision-making process.

The Decision to Drop the Atom Bomb

Some students might wonder: Why did we build the atom bomb? Why did we use thebomb? Could it have been possible to win the war without using the atom bomb? How

did this all come about?The main motive of American scientists to urge the development of nuclear power for usein the war was their conviction that the German scientists were working on an atomicbomb and that the Germans would have no scruples in using it. They were proven rightwhen Hitler started using new secret weapons in June 1944: the V1 and the V2, pilotlessjet-propelled rockets that bombarded England. Hitler warned the Allies of more secretweapons being developed. This was not the first time that he boasted about secretweapons. The Allies knew of the German attempts to build the atom bomb. A factory inNorway where the heavy water was produced for the manufacture of nuclear materialswas bombed.

Truman also had to take into consideration what the Joint Chiefs had told him about theirplans to invade Japan and end the war. They informed him that a landing attack onKyushu Island, one of the Home Islands of Japan, would probably cost about 31,000American lives during the first 30 days of the invasion. General George C. Marshallreported that American air and sea power had reduced Japanese shipping south of Koreaand would eventually stop it altogether. We were committed to a strategy of strangulationof their war economy by bombardment and a naval and air blockade. General Marshallsbelief was that the Japanese might capitulate if the situation became hopeless with:

1. the destruction wrought by the bombardment and the blockade

2. an invasion of the Japanese Home Islands

3. the entry of Russia into war against Japan

The Joint Chiefs planned an invasion of Kyushu Island for November 1, 1945.For the Interim Committee on the Use of the Bomb, composed of scientists, it was aforegone conclusion that the bomb would be used. The Secretary of War, Henry L.Stimson claimed that this committee recommended that the bomb be used as soon aspossible on a Japanese military installation or war plant surrounded by houses mostsusceptible to damage, and that it should be used without a prior warning.


19/45

A wartime poll, by secret ballot, on July 12, 1945, of 150 scientists at the University ofChicagos Metallurgical Laboratory showed the following results:

15% favored full military use of the atomic bomb 46% favored limited use26% wanted an experimental demonstration before military use13% preferred to avoid any military use.

Unfortunately, the results of the poll never reached the men in power because it wasburied among other documents.John J. McCloy, Assistant Secretary of War, recorded that the suggestion to warn theJapanese that the United States had an atom bomb was opposed by Stimson and the JointChiefs because they feared that the bomb might be unsuccessful. We only had two atombombs. If one of the bombs were used as a demonstration on an uninhabited island for thebenefit of a Japanese delegation and it turned out to be a dud, it would have been apsychological setback for the United States. The Japanese would have concluded that wehad no new weapon. The Japanese militarists would have prevailed over the pacifistJapanese officials to continue fighting, thus prolonging the war and raising our number ofcasualties.

Ralph Bard, Under Secretary of the Navy, believed that we should give a warning two orthree days in advance of using the atom bomb. He felt that the Japanese should becontacted for unconditional surrender.

The general impression is that Truman made the decision to drop the bomb. In reality hisdecision was not Whether to drop the bomb but ratherwhen to drop it. Truman never lostany sleep over his decision. He believed that the bomb ended the war, and that aninvasion of Japan would have resulted in a half-million soldiers on both sides killed and amillion more maimed for life.

Also, James F. Byrnes, Secretary of State in 1945, advocated the use of the bomb forother reasons. He felt that the completion and the testing of it prior to the PotsdamConference and the Foreign Ministers Conference in Paris would give him leverage innegotiations with the Russians. Byrnes believed that the Russians were going to declarewar on Japan in early August of 1945, and he wanted to keep Russia out of Manchuriaand Northern China. This would be averted by the dropping of the bomb on Japan,forcing an immediate surrender of Japan to the United States only. In any event, Russiaentered the war against Japan and seized control of Manchuria, North Korea and parts ofNorthern China. Stimson also advised Truman in April of 1945 to use the bomb for itsimpact on relations with Russia. Byrnes attitude was antiRussian and it contributedtoward a state of tension in our relations with Russia, which later developed into the ColdWar.

It is interesting to note that the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders showed thatJapan would have surrendered in all probability prior to November 1, 1945, and certainlyprior to December 31, 1945, even if the atomic bomb had not been dropped, even if noinvasion had been planned, or even if Russia had not entered the war.

Trumans Decision on Korea

When teaching about the U. S. Constitution the question comes up as to who has thepower to declare war. Article 1, Section 8 states that Congress has the power to declare


20/45

war. This power has been given to Congress in order to make the presidential powersweaker. In order for a president to make the right decision it is absolutely essential forhim to have adequate information and advice. It is the presidents responsibility alone togive directions. Once a president makes his decision in an emergency situation, he thengoes to Congress asking for a declaration of war.

When North Korea attacked South Korea on June 24, 1950, the State Departmentofficials advised Secretary of State Dean Acheson to call for a meeting of the SecurityCouncil of the United Nations. Acheson telephoned Truman telling him about the newsand the suggestion and Truman agreed to it. Truman had to base his decision onrecommendations of the State and Defense Departments.

A meeting was called at the Blair House and Truman asked each person to state whetherhe agreed or disagreed with the following three recommendations:

1. to evacuate Americans from the Seoul area

2. to order General MacArthur to air-drop supplies to the South Korean forces.

3.to order the 7th Pacific fleet to move north from the Philippines to the Formosa Straits

at once.All present at the meeting agreed to the recommendations. Truman wanted the newsabout the 7th fleets movement withheld from the public until the fleet was in position.Later, Truman gave all the credit for making the decision to stop the North Koreaninvasion to Dean Acheson.

Avoiding World War III in Korea

Students sometimes question: Why didnt the United States have a full-scale war withChina, since we were fighting the Chinese in Korea. For what reason did Truman limitthe war to the Korean peninsula? Why did Truman send the 7th Pacific fleet into theFormosa Straits when the war was being fought in Korea?

Truman placed constraint on all his actions in Korea because he wanted to avoid war withCommunist China. It was necessary to send the 7th Pacific fleet into the Formosa Strait toprevent Chiang Kai-shek from sending his troops to the Chinese mainland and to preventthe Communist Chinese from attacking Formosa. Truman also rejected Chiang Kai-sheksoffer of 30,000 Nationalist soldiers for Korean duty. Why did Truman reject this offer ofhelp? He was convinced that it would drag the United States into a major war on theAsiatic mainland, and would draw the Soviet Union into the war to help CommunistChina against the U.S. Truman agreed with General Omar Bradley that expanding theKorean War would involve us in the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time,and with the wrong enemy.

Truman believed that the Soviet Union trained and equipped the North Koreans foraggression. Dean Acheson and everyone else around Truman were convinced that theNorth Korean decision to move troops across the 38th parallel into South Korea hadcome from the Kremlin, and that Stalin was testing American resolution and nerve. Howdid the military commanders in the field feel about this decision?

General MacArthur had different ideas. He believed that all available military power ofthe Chinese nation, with logistic support from the Soviet Union, was committed to amaximum effort against our forces. He felt he was operating under restrictions of not


21/45

fully utilizing U. S. naval and air potential and not being allowed to cross the Yalu Riverinto China. He also declared that it was a mistake to prevent Chiang Kai-sheksNationalist troops from attacking the Chinese mainland.

General MacArthur voiced these views publicly, a move that generated a lot ofcontroversy. Truman felt that if the United States followed MacArthurs ideas, it would

lead to a general war. A war with China would please the Soviet Union since it wouldentangle us in a vast conflict and would surely weaken out influence all over the world,especially in Europe. Therefore, Truman decided to fire General MacArthur. With thisaction, he reasserted the powers of a civilian president over the military. Truman was theCommander-in-Chief. Truman defended his firing of General MacArthur by saying thatthe cause of world peace was more important than any individual. He disregarded all theattacks made upon him for this decision because he felt that he was doing what was bestfor America.

Carter Foreign Affairs

http://millercenter.org/president/carter/essays/biography/5

Before assuming the presidency, Jimmy Carter had been a one-term governor of asouthern state with no national or international experience. He did, however, have hisown foreign policy goals. Carter believed in the rule of law in international affairs and inthe principle of self-determination for all people. Moreover, he wanted the United Statesto take the lead in promoting universal human rights. Carter believed that Americanpower should be exercised sparingly and that the United States should avoid militaryinterventions as much as possible. Finally, he hoped that American relations with theSoviet Union would continue to improve and that the two nations could come toeconomic and arms control agreements that would relax Cold War tensions.

During his campaign, Carter's aides claimed he would govern in a different way,specifically, that he would not appoint Washington insiders to top foreign policypositions. Once elected, however, Carter recognized that he needed experts around him toconduct his foreign policy. He named Columbia University professor ZbigniewBrzezinski as his national security adviser and former Defense Department official andJohnson administration diplomatic troubleshooter Cyrus Vance as secretary of state.While Brzezinski and Vance both were experienced foreign policy hands, they haddifferent strengths and worldviews. Brzezinski, a vigoursly anti-communist Polish migrwho consistently advised a tough line towards the Soviet Union, served as theadministration's foreign policy "idea man." Vance, on the other hand, had strongmanagerial skills and was known for his cautious and patient diplomacy. Brzezinksi and

Vance clashed throughout the Carter presidency over the tactics, strategies, and goals ofthe administration's foreign policy.

Human Rights

Carter came to the White House determined to make human rights considerations integralto U.S. foreign policy. In part, this desire stemmed from practical politics: Carter'spromises during the 1976 campaign that his administration would highlight human rightsproved popular with the voting public. Just as important, Carter's emphasis on human
http://millercenter.org/president/carter/essays/biography/5http://millercenter.org/president/carter/essays/biography/5


22/45

rights was consistent with his own beliefs on the necessity of living one's life in a moralway.

What did Carter mean when he claimed that he would make human rights a key part ofAmerican foreign policy? Early in his presidency, Carter explained that U.S. support forhuman rights involved promoting "human freedom" worldwide and protecting "the

individual from the arbitrary power of the state." These principles grew out of the UnitedNation's 1948 "Universal Declaration of Human Rights," which established thefoundation of the modern human rights movement. Carter believed in holdingaccountable America's allies as well as its adversaries for their human rights failings, anapproach that risked straining relations with friends and widening existing rifts with foes.These were risks Carter was willing to take.

The Carter administration's human rights record was mixed. The President and hisadvisers denounced human rights violations by the Soviet Union and its East Europeanallies. In addition, American allies like South Korea also came under tough criticism forrepressing democratic dissent. Moreover, the United States took tangible actions

including the suspension of military or economic aidto protest the human rightspractices of the governments of Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Uganda. On the otherhand, the Carter administration toned down its human-rights based criticisms of theSoviet Union after the Brezhnev government threatened to end arms control talks.Moreover, Carter refused to halt the sale of military supplies to Iran, whose governmentviolently repressed its opponents, even though some of his advisers urged him to do so.

The legacies of Carter's human rights gambits were just as mixed as their practice. Carter,more than any previous President, injected human rights considerations into Americanforeign policy, legitimizing these concerns in the process. But conservative Republicanslike Jeanne Kirkpatrick, who would become U.S. representative to the United Nations inthe Reagan administration, skillfully and successfully attacked Carter for supposedly

undercutting American allies by criticizing their human rights' shortcomings. Theseattacks proved harmful to Carter during the 1980 election.

The Panama Canal

One of Carter's first challenges involved the U.S. role in Panama. A 1904 treatynegotiated by President Theodore Roosevelt permitted the U.S. to use and occupy thePanama Canal Zone, a strip of land adjacent to the Panama Canal, which opened in 1914.In 1936 President Franklin Roosevelt, as part of the "good neighbor policy" had droppedthe U.S. claim to have the right to protect American lives and property in Panamaniancities. In 1964, after anti-American riots by Panamanian students, the U.S. and Panamaagreed to negotiate on the future status of the zone. These negotiations were based on

"eight principles" agreed to by Henry Kissinger in 1974, providing for Panamanianoperation of the canal by 1999, and an end to U.S. occupation of the zone, therebyestablishing Panamanian sovereignty. Carter did not prove an adept negotiator. Hisdelegation did not include any U.S. senators, and he did not keep them well informeduntil August 1977 when an "Agreement in Principle" was signed with Panama.

Conservatives organized grassroots opposition to the treaty, which Carter tried to counterby enlisting support from former presidents and giving a "fireside chat" to the American


23/45

people. In Senate hearings Secretary of State Vance claimed that the U.S. couldunilaterally defend the canal, but Panama's chief treaty negotiator, Romulo Escobar,denied that the U.S. would have any right to intervene after the treaty was ratified.Senators Robert Byrd and Howard Baker then sponsored a bipartisan "leadershipamendment" defining U.S. rights to defend the canal. Eventually the agreement passed

the Senate, but only after amendments granting the U.S. the right to intervene had beenintroduced by Senator Dennis DeConcini and accepted reluctantly by Panamanianpresident Omar Torrijos. It was a humiliating moment for Carter and Vance, even thoughthey had won treaty approval.

Thereafter Republicans would attack Carter for being "weak" and for "giving away" thePanama Canal, a theme that would play particularly well in the southern states in themidterm elections in 1978 and the presidential elections in 1980. Carter had demonstratedgreat courage in concluding the negotiations: public opinion polls showed three-quartersof the American people were opposed to it.

Camp David Accords

The greatest foreign policy success of the Carter presidency involved the Middle East.After the Yom Kippur War of 1973 between Israel and its Arab enemies, Egypt andSyria, the Israelis had gradually disengaged their forces and moved a distance back in theSinai Peninsula. They were still occupying Egyptian territory, however, and there was nopeace between these adversaries. In the fall of 1978, Carter invited Israel's Prime MinisterMenachem Begin and Egypt's President Anwar Sadat to sit down with Carter at CampDavid, a rural presidential retreat outside Washington. Between September 5 andSeptember 17, 1978, Carter shuttled between Israeli and Egyptian delegations,hammering out the terms of peace. Consequently, Begin and Sadat reached a historicagreement: Israel would withdraw from the entire Sinai Peninsula; the U.S. wouldestablish monitoring posts to ensure that neither side attacked the other; Israel and Egypt

would recognize each other's governments and sign a peace treaty; and Israel pledged tonegotiate with the Palestinians for peace.

Not since Theodore Roosevelt's efforts to end the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 had apresident so effectively mediated a dispute between two other nations. Begin madeseveral concessions to Carter, including agreeing to the principle of Egyptian sovereigntyover the entire Sinai, and complete Israeli withdrawal from all military facilities andsettlements. In return, Carter agreed to provide Israel with funds to rebuild Israeli militarybases in the Negev Desert. Because Sadat and Carter had positions that were quite close,the two men became good friends as the conference progressed. Sadat also made someconcessions to Carter, which alienated some of his own delegation. His prime minister

resigned at the end, believing that Sadat had been outmaneuvered by the Americans andIsraelis.

The Camp David Accords, initialed on September 17, 1978 and formally signed inWashington on March 26, 1979, were the most significant foreign policy achievement ofthe Carter administration, and supporters hoped it would revive his struggling presidency.Although Begin and Sadat received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 for this action, Carterreceived no significant political benefit from this achievement.


24/45

Relations with the Soviet Union

Carter hoped to continue the policy of dtente with the Soviet Union, but his appointmentto the National Security Council (NSC) post of Brzezinski gave him an adviser who wasprofoundly suspicious of Soviet motives, and led Carter into several major confrontationswith the Russians. Carter ordered a massive five-year defense buildup that the Soviets

found provocative. In turn, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to quash a Muslim-basedrebellion outraged the United States. The guerrilla war that ensued put a crimp in armscontrol talks between Moscow and Washington. The two sides had signed SALT II, atreaty limiting the deployment of nuclear missiles, and the treaty had been sent to theSenate. After the invasion it was clear that the Senate would take no action. Carterwithdrew the treaty, but Moscow and Washington agreed to abide by its terms, eventhough neither side ratified it.

In retaliation for the USSR invading Afghanistan, Carter cut off grain sales to the SovietUnion and ordered a boycott of the 1980 Moscow Summer Olympic Games by U.S.athletes. Because much of the public considered this to be more punitive towardsAmerican swimmers and runners than Soviet leaders, Carter's response only reinforcedhis weak image.

Recognition of China

Carter continued to expand American contacts with communist China, granting thecommunist regime formal diplomatic recognition on January 1, 1979. To do so requiredthe severing of diplomatic ties and withdrawal of recognition of non-communist Taiwan(also known as the Republic of China). Moreover, Carter unilaterally revoked the 1955Mutual Defense Treaty with the Republic of China, effective January 1, 1980. Carter'streaty abrogation was challenged in the federal courts by conservative Republicans. In thefederal district court his opponent's won. However, in an appeals court the government's

position that Carter had the power to abrogate the treaty without Senate consentprevailed. The Supreme Court then threw the entire case out without rendering anydecision (on a technicality involving the standing to sue of Republican Senator BarryGoldwater), thus leaving the constitutional victory with the president by default. Carter'srecognition of China significantly reduced tensions in East Asia. Hard-liners in Chinawere replaced by communists who were more interested in economic growth than inmilitary confrontations. Beneficial trade relations were established between China andthe U.S., leading to huge imports of finished consumer goods from China, in return forU.S. lumber and foodstuffs.

To substitute for diplomatic relations with Taiwan, Congress passed the Taiwan RelationsAct. It provided for the creation of an American Institute on Taiwan, which bought the

old American embassy. Institute staffers consisted of newly retired American foreignservice officers experienced in Far Eastern Affairs. Taiwan established a correspondinginstitute in Washington, D.C., staffed with its retired diplomats. Thus each side continuedwith quasi-diplomatic relations, even though the pretense was that they had cut off therelationship. The U.S. continued to supply arms to Taiwan to defend itself from themainland, a step that kept some friction in U.S.-Chinese relations.


25/45

The Iran Hostage Crisis

Iran had become important to the 20th century chessboard for two reasons. Oil had beendiscovered there in 1909, and it was considered the geographic cork that kept Russia inthe Asian bottle and out of the Middle East. The British, through Anglo-Dutch Shell Oil,had reaped Iranian oil for almost nothing through mid-century, but in 1951 a volatile new

prime minister, Mohammad Mossadeq, threw them out. The American governmentbecame concerned that Iran was now ripe for a Soviet takeover. The Central IntelligenceAgency staged a coup that toppled the prime minister and restored power to the Pahlaviruling dynasty, whose monarch at the time had been reduced to a figurehead underMossadeq. This leader, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlava, ("Shah" meaning "ruler") wasallowed to govern once rights to 80 percent of the oil were ceded (transferred) toAmerican and British interests. This made the Shah a Western puppet in the eyes of manyIranians.

But the Shah, emboldened by American support over the years, became increasinglytyrannical towards his people. He outlawed rival political factions and deployed one ofthe world's most feared secret police agencies. This resulted in countless human rightsviolations. By the time of the Carter presidency, discontent with the Shah was widespreadin Iran, and so was civil disorder. The Shah's most virulent opposition was led by aradical Islamic group that wanted to create a government adhering more strictly to theirfaith's teachings. Their supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, had been in exilein Paris for fifteen years. But by early 1979 the conservative Islamic movement hadbecome so strong that the Shah was forced to flee Iran and turn over power to a newgroup of Western oriented technocrats. The Ayatollah returned to his homeland soonafterward and was instantly installed by a million Iranians marching on the capital as thenation's undisputed leader.

The Shah was now in exile in Mexico, dying from cancer, and President Carter allowed

him to come to the United States for refuge and medical treatment. This enraged Muslimfundamentalists in Iran. In November 1979, Islamic student militants loyal to theAyatollah overran the American embassy in Teheran, Iran's capital. They seized sixty-sixAmericans and held them hostage, demanding the Shah's return to stand trial. In additionthey demanded money and property that the Shah had stashed outside Iran, and anapology from America, who they considered "The Great Satan."

Carter took immediate action. He froze billions of dollars of Iranian assets in the UnitedStates, then began secret negotiations, but nothing worked. The manner in whichtelevision network news reported on the crisis served to build up America's frustration.Mobs burned the American flag and shouted "Marg bar Amerika" ("Death to America")on nightly television news broadcasts in Iran. These film clips were rebroadcast in the

United States, creating feelings of apprehension for the hostages and anger at Iran. Bycounting the number of days that the hostages had been held in capacity, nightlyannouncements such as "America Held Hostage, Day Eighty-nine" focused on theprolonged aspect of the situation. Americans grew impatient with the seeminglyineffective president who could not win the hostages' release. The Iranians heightenedthis political tension by making bright promises and then going back on them almostdaily.


26/45

Finally, Carter approved a secret military mission to attempt to free the hostages.Unfortunately, three of the eight helicopters carrying the assault force developedmechanical problems. One crashed into a transport aircraft in a remote desert in Iran,killing eight soldiers. After the failure, Iran dispersed the hostages to hideouts throughoutthe country, making rescue impossible. The failure of the rescue mission doomed Carter

politically. It seemed to reinforce the widespread notion that he could not get things done,and that America had lost its edge. His approval rating dropped badly and he was up forreelection within a year, when Republicans would make a major issue of his performancein the crisis. Near the end of his administration Carter concluded an agreement that led tothe release of the hostages. His executive agreement with Iran specified that the U.S.would unblock all Iranian funds, and the U.S. and Iran would utilize a tribunal at theHague, Netherlands, to settle their financial claims. The U.S. also promised not tointerfere in the internal affairs of Iran. In return, Iran agreed to release the hostages. TheU.S. embassy subsequently became a training camp for the Revolutionary Guards, themost militant and most anti-American wing of the groups backing the Islamic regime.

Reagan Foreign Affairs

http://millercenter.org/president/reagan/essays/biography/5

In his last debate with President Jimmy Carter in 1980, Ronald Reagan asked theAmerican public: "Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feelthat . . . we're as strong as we were four years ago?" Throughout the campaign, Reaganmade clear his belief that America's international prestige and power had declinedprecipitously over, not just the last four years, but the entire preceding decade.

Reagan particularly wanted to redefine national policy toward the Soviet Union. Along

with most other national leaders, he had supported the fundamental policy of containingthe Soviet Union that President Harry Truman adopted in 1947 and was subsequentlyfollowed by all Presidents of both parties. But Reagan believed that the Soviets had takenadvantage of dtente, as practiced by Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter. As an example,Reagan contended that the SALT II nuclear treaty, negotiated by Carter but never ratifiedby the Senate, imposed greater limits on the United States than on the Soviet Union. Atthe same time, Reagan was convinced that the Soviets were weaker economically thanthe intelligence community believed. As early as June 18, 1980, Reagan told reportersand editors at The Washington Post, that "it would be of great benefit to the United Statesif we started a buildup" because the Soviets would be unable to compete and would cometo the bargaining table.

In the decades before his presidency, Reagan had read and thought deeply aboutAmerican foreign policy and brought with him to the White House a number of strongconvictions. He regarded Communism as an immoral and destructive ideology andbelieved that the Soviet Union was bent on world domination. In a famous speech onMarch 8, 1983, the on

Documents

Foreign Policy Notes.doc