US Foreign Policy History Since 1945 PDF

**HISTORY OF US FOREIGN POLICY SINCE 1945** Lecture 1 The origins of American foreign policy can be traced back to the 1700s, at the continental congress of 1774-5, when colonies were discussing the separation from Britain and the formation of an army, and started to think about the role they coul...

**HISTORY OF US FOREIGN POLICY SINCE 1945** Lecture 1 The origins of American foreign policy can be traced back to the 1700s, at the continental congress of 1774-5, when colonies were discussing the separation from Britain and the formation of an army, and started to think about the role they could play in the international system. During this congress one point was made clear: since the American goods traded with Great Britain were important for Europe, stopping the flows would have hurt European economy. Victory could be achieved without any political alliance with old European states; therefore they would have gained independence either way The first document of US foreign Policy was a pamphlet in 1776, while the continental congress was still debating on independence, which expressed the revolutionary view of many Americans and where the major leitmotivs were formulated by Thomas Paine. This is called Common Sense, the relationship among the 13 colonies and GB was not convenient economically and politically since this relationship was not assuring the security of the 13 colonies. → there's something absurd in supposing A continent to be perpetually governed by an island. → the cause of America is in great measure the cause of all mankind. →the power to begin the world over again. US was supposed to use trade as a diplomatic leaver against GB and according to Paine the link to GB was dangerous because the colonies were related to European conflicts, and this could threat American security. In that moment it was possible to advocate for American independence and Paine defined the US's role in the international system and which kind of foreign policy it should adopt. Paine's idea was based on three pillars: 1. Role of trade, GB would react to the declaration of independence but in the long run it would have accepted it in order to save its economy. 2. Universal mission of US, the US had the mission to change the world and expand the republican idea because the new nation was exceptional, the result of European colonization but was different because it was born as a republic. 3. Trade exchanges was supposed to make the new state stronger and stronger and stabilize the American state and possibly transform the international system showing that trade could be used as a foreign policy measure instead of war. The new state would have the power to rebuild the world because it had a better system than the European one. **Model treaty and war diplomacy** Paine was an exceptionalist and internationalist because stressed the importance of trade over war in international relations. these ideas met in the first American diplomatic act: The Model Treaty → the only formal model of the US diplomacy, was written by John Adams and described the typology of relationship that us was supposed to have internationally. In order to have a real independence the Us should avoid any war, and the best way to do so was to avoid alliances especially with Europe. The best practice was neutrality and promote access to European markets even when they were at war. This treaty was overcome during the discussing of the Congress, which promoted a Treaty with France, it was about the embodiment of a proper alliance, other than trade. US SIGNED A PERPETUAL MILITARY ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE IN CONTRAST WITH THE MODEL TRAETY. **The declaration of independence** It is a foreign policy act, it was the tool through which the colonies because the united states of America, but was also an imperial project because it envisioned the expansion of the American state abroad. This declaration is a global document because it is the document is characterized by the overlapping of domestic and foreign policy, the audience to which is directed is multiple (King George III, people of colonies, international system) through this document US is presenting itself to the world. There's a list of rights, but it's also the embodiment of the American revolution, a new state is born and the colonies became a new state, the rebels became legitimate and changed the relationship of the former colonies with the world. **The American Federal Constitution** Foreign policy and federal power are exercised by the President and the Congress together. However the American foreign policy can be considered plural because it comprehends also other actors, such as bureaucracy and public opinion. Lecture 2 - Wilsonianism: making the world safe for democracy  [The Splendid Little War]  1898: the US entered a war against Spain which lasted 9 months for the island of Cuba. The US had important economic interests in Cuba due to its strategic value. They wished Cuba to be part of the US one day. In 1898 Spain tried to repress Cuban revolution for independence and many Americans thought that Madrid should have accepted Cuban independence, and that Washington had a responsibility in the suffering of the Cuban people.→ with great power came great responsibility. The US could exploit humanitarian grounds for intervention, combining national ideals and self-interest. For the first time in American history in 1898 US congress declared war, firstly, they planned to attack the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay and the fight against Spain resulted in an overwhelming victory for Washington. 1903 → mutual trade agreement that tied the Cuban economy to the American one. However, in Manila, after defeating Spain, the US replaced the Spanish colonizers, but Filipinos were eager to fight for their freedom. In 1900 a full-scale war erupted for 3 years in which both sides committed atrocities. Imperialism was supposed to be the critical issue during the elections, but McKinley easily won → America was now an empire and prosperity returned. They had Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Hawaii. These wars were very important because this was the first time American federal states were fighting against a common enemy as a united nation. The development of the American empire in the Western hemisphere allowed the US to compete as an equal with Europe, which was struggling to regain its power after the American industrial revolution.  The new president was able to control the Congress even though the Congress had a say in the control of foreign policy. However, the president here was able to keep the power in his control and he extended the power gave in the constitution: the president became the chief of power without the congress and the chief of military forces.  THE ROOTS OF THE EMPIRE 1. Strategic thinking of the time A. T. Mahan, *The Influence of Naval Power on History*, 1890 → the control of the navy was essential to transform a simple nation into a global power. H. J. Mackinder, *The Geographical Pivot of History*, in "Royal Geographical Society", 1904 → a geopolitical analysis which established the importance of taking military and political control over certain geographic areas in order to be able to control entire continents. Economic and commercial interests American Interests in Cuba began long before the Cuban desire for independence from the Spanish empire. America wanted to seize Cuba and transform into a world power. Before the civil war the island was an important port for slaves and therefore represented an important economic interest, moreover it had a strategic position in the ocean for commerce with all south America. US wanted to trade with Cuba and the islands nearby, but being under Spanish empire Cuba had no access to American market. From 1880s to 1890s US experienced a huge economic crisis where low wages and lower purchasing power led to under-consumption and weakening of domestic market. Another wave of economic crisis spread at the beginning of the 1890s and the main explanation was the excess of production which intensified the obsession for expanding exports. Investors (Carnegie, Dole, Morgan and Rockefeller) promoted the construction of more civilian ships therefore missionaries and tourists travelled to China and Japan and in South and Central America. A cultural contamination of American way of life in different countries was carried out, they were trying to influence other countries to adopt American practices in order to be seen as acceptable by other major powers. The US had a "divine job" to expand its territory, it was "the right" provided by God, "the white man's burden" for all non-American territories because these territories were given to the US to expand to civilize. The American self-representation and self-expectation as a nation derived from the fact that it was able to gain independence from the motherland, and to create institutional democratic infrastructures, to expand itself into a nation that occupied an entire continent. The US wanted to present itself as a power that the European had to come to terms with it. According to the US whatever nation would control this island would control international politics (Mackinder). US began to develop a lager military force and verged on being the world's leading industrial power. Its population was second only to Russia's. Cuba could become crucial to the US and Washington knew the island could serve as a base for the protection of the national space. It could serve as a port for the navy and the protection of the Panama Canal that the US was about to build. Therefore, US used tariffs and costume duties to exacerbate Cuba's population living conditions and "helping" a revolution. When the insurrection in Cuba broke out against Spain, the foreign policy plank called for the US to work peacefully for the island's independence. After McKinley election, the foreign policy became **expansionist.** However, the war seemed inevitable when Cuba underwent a serious economic crisis which led to a revolution against Spanish. Before the war, Spain tried to take control over the island confining the majority of population in strict urban areas where hygienic conditions were terrible and led to many deaths. When the revolution broke out Spain was no longer able to manage it and tension with the US reached its peak. Public opinion influenced the government actions and was itself influenced by the "Yellow press". It was a form of popular press developed during the 19th century that was cheap and accessible from the cultural point of view. Editors were selling a lot of "Yellow newspapers", which delivered sensational news. Yellow press was responsible for a harsh campaign against Spain enriching news with lots of caricatures. The spread idea was that US could easily win over Spain in Cuba and the public opinion pressed the government to go to war against Spain. However, there was a jurisdictional barrier to overcome: the Congress appalled to the 5th amendment according to which the US was not to enter a war to conquer a territory. The US did not want to present itself as a colonial power a, they just wanted to "save" Cuba from Spain, the mission of US was to expand abroad the great mission of liberty and democracy. (*by the right of our manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole continent which providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federal self-government entrusted to us).* An incident preceded the declaration of war: the sinking of the USS Maine while docked in Havana, which draw the attention of American public opinion on the island. McKinley was able to display the USS MAINE ship to oversee the Cuban port, but in February 1988 it sank due to an explosion, immediately blamed on the Spanish army. Mckinley knew that he had to negotiate with Spain while maintaining an iron hand. He asked Madrid for repair costs for the Uss Maine, to close the concentration camps in Cuban cities, and to stabilize the Cuban situation declaring its withdrawal from the island. Spain did not want to lose Cuba as part of its empire, so Madrid decided to engage in this war while Washington wanted to protect American property in Cuba. The US president wanted to deal the third sector: Yellow press. *"We need Hawaii just as much and a good deal more than we did California. It Is manifest destiny" (McKinley) * *"Mission of benevolent assimilation" (McKinley) *  Both areas were not included in the American federation but were under the political and/or military influence of the US. Asia, namely, would represent a crucial market to sell American products in order to dilute excess of productivity.   INEVITABILITY To justify American expansion, the question of inevitability was presented → the inevitability for US to be a great power, but completely different from Europe.  DOMESTIC POLITICS   In the domestic environment an identity crisis was spreading in all federal states, both northern and southern. The social crisis was due to overlapping factors: economic crisis and massive immigration from Europe. Citizens of Anglo-Saxon origins were afraid that so many immigrants would compromise the purity of their nation. The foreign policy wanted to solidify American identity which was undermined by the factors mentioned before. **Teddy Roosevelt and the American** **empire ** China was defeated in the war with Japan, therefore American economic connections and interests in the country were at risk. In 1899 John Hay, secretary of state, sent an "open Door" note to the powers active in China, asking them not to discriminate against American business and not to interfere with the operations of the Imperial Maritime Customs Service. Since US had stayed neutral up to that moment in the war it should have the same trade condition as European powers such as France, Russia and Great Britain. Trade and professional exchanges must be permitted according to neutral laws and trade laws. Also, during the war between Japan and Russia, the "Open Door Note" became the symbol of the US building an empire. Namely, in order to survive and manage their empire the US had to maintain trade relations with other countries. In 1901 McKinley was assassinated and this brought Theodore Roosevelt in the White House. He was a romantic nationalist, and was eager to see the US play an assertive role in international affairs. He was an advocate for progressivism, based on racial and social Darwinism (unabashed racist), and was interested in social planning. He believed that there was an international competition between nations. He was suspicious of businessmen and was sure that civilized nations were supposed to be treated in a good way. Uncivilized nations, instead, had to be treated in a rough way, and had to be influenced in order to develop. The US considered themselves as a good father able to teach other less developed nations to overcome backwardness and poverty. US considered themselves as superior to Japan and China. Roosevelt wanted the US to act as a great power, able to set an example for other nations, even though Britain was still the great power on seas. He wanted to be equal to the European states in many ways.  AMERICAN HEMISPHERE  Roosevelt inherited the Philippines war which he ended brutally; he perceived the archipelagos as indefensible in case of a war against Japan. Then, came the Puerto Rican cause. The supreme court decided that Washington could rule its newly acquired possessions even without the citizens consent, so Puerto Rico became a US possession. He did not care about either Puerto Ricans, Filipinos, or native Americans, since he perceived them as uncivilized people, requiring tutelage. - The Big Stick Diplomacy and US Interventions: In 1903 he moved onto the Panama issue. John Hay had won in 1901 the right to build, operate and fortify the isthmian and its canal, previously owned by the British. However, in 1906 the Colombia authorized the US to act as necessary to keep the peace in Panama, but by the time Roosevelt became President, Panamanians had begun frequent revolts against the Colombian rule. Roosevelt saw an opportunity to further the interests of Washington by compensating Panamanians and eradicating malaria and the yellow fever in exchange for the complete and independent control of the isthmus. However, Roosevelt's sense of America's place in the world was far wider. He claimed for Washington's position of police power in the Western hemisphere → Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe doctrine. He initially accepted the European intervention in different South American countries in order to sedate disorders, but when these interventions started threatening American interests in the region he appalled to the Monrow Doctrine, which by the time had acquired the purpose of protecting the states of the Western hemisphere from foreign interventions → justification for Washington intervention in the Caribbean and central America and getting rid of Spain's control over south American states. In return, US should stay out of European tensions. Moreover, to some of Roosevelt's friends Asia appeared the ideal area to exploit American expansionist and economic opportunities. During the Russo-Japanese war in 1904, Roosevelt was irritated by Russian- imposed obstacles to American opportunities in Manchuria. As the war went on Russia experienced a huge defeat, and a Japanese victory would pose a threat to American interests. Therefore, he acted as a mediator in the Treaty of Portsmouth in 1905, where US accepted Japan's possession of Korea, and Japan accepted the American control over Philippines and Hawaii. Another issue regarding east Asia, was the amount of Chinese and Japanese immigrants in America, which were subjected to segregation and humiliations. China organized a boycott of American goods and Japan posed a threat to US for the same reason. - Gentlemen's agreement was signed with Japan, according to which Japan slowed the flow of immigrants to the US and Roosevelt acted for better conditions for them. Roosevelt recognized only Japan, since Japan possessed power, China did not.  [Taft and Dollar Diplomacy]  When Roosevelt successor at the White House, William Taft (1909), challenged Japan's role in Manchuria, and Roosevelt warned him about the dangers and American vulnerability in the Pacific. Taft was more focused on acquiring economic opportunities, foreign markets, investments and was more moralistic. Taft and his secretary Knox formulate the so called "dollar diplomacy"→ use American economic power rather than military power to serve the national interests. Their instrument was the banker. First they tempted to work with natives elites in central America, but their efforts met minimal success. In Asia Taft was determined to use American investment bankers to promote opportunities for American businesses in China in contrast with Japanese interests in dominating China. His effort resulted in a failure, since without the support of European bankers no investments could be carried out. He tried to establish a global interdependence in favor of US interests through consortiums and arbitration strategies. Taft tried to appeal to China's moral right of sovereignty over its own territory but everything was in vain. He also tried to present US as an international judge, which was supposed to mediate among countries that were involved in territorial disputes. Contradictions The dollar diplomacy created forms of economic dependency, created resistance among the local subjects that were denouncing this diplomacy as economic imperialism. The attempt Taft made using the consortium instrument and interdependence argument clashed against the limited interest of the powers in this approach → China had no interest in giving away the position they acquired on these territories to cooperate with the US. The US tried to convince to other countries to sign an international treaty (no using force), but these treaties were criticized at the domestic level because they were understood as a limitation of American sovereignty (the US was supposed to dominate the Western hemisphere and reaffirm the "Monroe Doctrine"). **Seminar -- NON-INTERVENTION IN THE I WORLD** **WAR** At the beginning of WWI US refused to enter the war, because the American diplomacy had a moral quality lacking in the European one, as a result the war erupted in Europe. A crisis in the Balkans within the Austro-Hungarian empire, which was allied with Germany against the Entente. The non-intervention became the US strategy also because of Wilson's thinking. The role of domestic consideration and the role of American public opinion in deciding to enter the war. During the war Wilson decided to exploit the situation in order to be able to later settle a new world order. 1. Strategic geopolitical considerations - Europe is far - European suicide Europe was far away so it was difficult to send troops there, moreover the mainland would be safe. According to him this war was suicidal, since it was the final consequence of the European politics that had been in force for 2 centuries. So US wanted to maintain peaceful relationships with all the belligerent powers. 2. Exceptionalism and the American difference US and Europe were very different but were brought together by the trade, and there was a situation of interdependence due to commerce and economic dependence of American markets of Europe, especially with Britain. In fact, Wilson hoped for UK winning, but he chose not to intervene for the ethical, moral and political superiority of US. America exceptionalism made America stay away from Europe affairs. 3. Public opinion and domestic considerations - Peace - Isolationism - Ethnic communities Public opinion had an impact on the foreign policy of the country. There was a pacifist general sentiment in the country, the congress voted for an isolationist policy, and many people in the US were immigrants from Europe still very attached to their home country. Some segments of political establishment affirmed that to assure prosperity and security it was better to stay away from Europe, militarily and politically. 4. Neutral rights The war was understood an instrument of diplomacy which must be overcome by other tools. Neutrality allowed to keep the country together since it was made by all immigrants and every one was rooting for their home country. This war could also cause a civil war in the American society. The US according to the principle of neutral rights could trade with all countries involved in the war, the combat would respect the right of America to trade. Wilson, exploiting this right, was put against German and Britain at the same time. Also citizens could travel to Europe without being harmed, but Wilson was well aware that this war was a new kind of conflict. His secretary of state did not approve this strategy and after the Lusitania tragedy he left. 5. Promoting Wilson's Grand Design for I.R. - Rejection of power politics - Comprehensive conception of security - Democratization and International Law Wilson began to think the war, which was supposed to be short, could provide the possibility to promote his design of new international system, with a new diplomacy, in which the US could play a central role since only they had the ability to rebuild the new order on new foundations. He rejected power politics, from which scattered the conflict, and he rejected the imperialistic competition. The successor of power politics was a comprehensive concept of security in which states had to build collective international institutions, based on a covenant, and deciding on their disputes using international law. According to Wilson this system could work only if the countries were all democracies, he was really disgusted by Germany, the evil of politics. BUT WHY WILSON CHANGED THE APPROACH. In 1916 Germany sunk a passenger ship Lusitania, carrying also US weapons, causing the death of hundreds of citizens. US asked Germany to stop submarine warfare against passenger ships. This opened a series of diplomatic protests against submarine warfare, and he threatened to stop diplomatic relations with Germany. The political landscape of US was changing from neutrality, because critics on right and left were criticizing Wilson, like Roosevelt saying that the war demanded the US to intervene in order to have a role in the following peace. Wilson asked the congress for funds to build ships and weaponry to send to Europe, but preparing for war meant that at some point the war would come. He decided to move toward UK, making the "last chance for peace" among US, central empire, France, UK and Russia. He tried to convince European states to end the war by sending his secretary there, but Germany was not inclined to accept this peace agreement, also because it did not accept us as a mediator. Nov 1916, Wilson was elected again and by the winter of that year the conflict became a total war, because on both side, military took total control over the society, and in Jan 1917 Germany said that UK was under naval blockade, so all ships that wanted to travel to Britain ran the risk to be sunk. This was the first reason that brought America into the war. The second one was the Zimmerman Telegram, by which Germany was inviting Mexico to join the conflict against the US in hope for gaining time to defeat Britain. Arthur Zimmermann sent this telegraph to the German ambassador in Mexico city inviting it in the war with the promise of regaining the lost land of southern US. This telegram was intercepted, and the public opinion erupted. At this point Wilson was convinced that the Germans were really immoral, and they were a threat for the physical and economic security of US. But the third reason was the revolution in Russia, which allowed him to present the war as a conflict between democracies and empires. WAR To Wilson it was possible to win the war in order to realize Wilson project for international relations, which wanted to create a new system, of collective security. US was very close to UK, and British victory was necessary also from an economic point of view. The Geopolitical nightmare: the idea that just one power was able to control an entire continent, Germany threatened to control the entire Europe they could also move on to the rest of the world, also US could have not traded with European countries anymore. Economic interest → the war was an occasion to make the world safe for capitalism. Preventing German victory would mean protecting US economy and economic interests in Europe. April 3^rd^, 1917, he asked the Congress to declare war since US was fighting for democracy because European people had the right to decide their government by themselves. The aim is to bring peace and safety to all nations and make the world free. The American were about to fight as an associate country, because this distinction form ally and associated was useful to define the difference from Entente and US. Us was fighting for more noble aims than the other and this was a way to reject secret diplomacy which was one of the causes of the war. This was the first time the US took part into a European war and was seen as an opportunity to rebuild the world society. The us in the two years not entering the world had invested in the navy and added a good potential, but the army was limited so Wilson wanted to avoid sanding American army in Europe, but it was forced to introduced conscription and in that way he created the American expeditionary force. Conscription implied the militarization of domestic society and the total mobilization of society which went hand-in-hand with a propaganda campaign which was developed against not only Germany but war in general. The committee of public information was created with the aim of banning any German propaganda. In June 1917 the Congress approved the sedition act, making a crime encouraging any kind of opposition against the government or conscription. (same for Japan in WWII). The third effect on the domestic front was the borrowing money from wealthy bankers and creating the liberty bonds, which citizens were encouraged to buy, and the Congress wanted to develop a staff inside the US, so they created the war industry board, which set prices and wages and forbid strikes. The ideological front: the necessity to intervene in the world war was stressed by the fact that the world was interdependent, and only the US could create a new system. Wilson started to stress on this point (14 points) publicly as a response to Russian revolution because the Bolsheviks were offering a new understanding of Russian society but also of a new international system. They were a progressive movement as Wilson was. He committed himself the US to support the right of Russian nation in order to defeat the imperial remnants in the country. At the end on the 14 points a league of nations was proposed in order to be in charge of the new assessment of colonies, assure security, and set the disputes among nations. - Frank Ninkovich, *The Wilsonian century: US foreign policy since 1900,* ch.2. What features of past foreign policy can you detect in Wilson's wartime diplomacy? - Exceptionalism of US democracy and diplomacy, Trade was a pillar of American foreign policy, Isolationism, anti-imperialism: he didn't trust non-white people in being able to govern themselves, so he proposed mandates to disrupt colonial empires, neutral rights: Wilson adheres to this strictly. Where is exceptionalism in Wilson's approach? - Wilson advocated for the US role, not much for one country rather than another, US was morally superior to Europe, US did not want to enter the war to conquer territories but to solve the conflict. The US represents itself as an exceptional country because they had the ability to transform the world according to their ideas, however other countries did not perceive them this way. Was Wilson's wartime diplomacy successful? - From some point is was a precursor, since he proposed new approaches being a scholar of political sciences. We can speak about the failure of Wilsonianism, because he confronted himself with *sacro egoismo* of European powers, there were supportive of purity measures and against self-determination because they were fearing the disruption of their colonial possessions. Wilson was sure public opinion was on his side, but in the end the public support was not well spread and enough in US, where there was huge opposition against the 14 points. He was criticized by the moderate (Roosevelt), his thinking was being too soft in relation to Germany and peace without victory was not possible. The radicals (rep. Borah) they were isolationists and asking Wilson to go back to it. Disappointed wilsonianists (democrat), they were disappointed with him because he was too punitive regarding Germany and for art.10 league of nations. - US did not join the LON because of domestic opposition. - SUCCESS: he was able to define one of the basis of IR of XX century: democracy, no secret diplomacy, which survived after the LON failure. - Democratic states are better than other kind of state and it's necessary to spread democracy if wanting a collective security system. CONTRADICTIONS AND LIMITS - Interdependence and self-determination vs nationalism - Exceptionalism vs multilateralism Realist critics: balance of power, self-determination, palingenesis of the world → radical transformation from the moral point of view. Unrealistic, utopian. Other critics: making the world safe for capitalism and from communism. He was accused of just caring only about US economy (LEFT), and he was criticized because he was trying to oppose itself to Russia. **Lecture 4 - Conservative** **internationalism** After Wilson there were three different Republican presidents, and foreign policy was characterized by ambivalence of wanting to prevent war and did not want to assume any obligation to maintain the war out of the country. → PERIOD OF CONSERVATIVE INTERNATIONALISM. The definition was conceived by... in which US were avoiding any kind of collaboration with foreign powers but wanted to keep trading freely. This is the isolationist phase of US history, but it was the roaring 20s. 1921 Warren Harding → he cared about domestic politics and together with his secretary of state Mellon they developed a foreign policy which was supposed to allow the US the participation of economic and political life but they were not implied in signing any kind of treaty or agreement. They were aware that US could not escape an active role in IR, in fact it would join the competition for natural resources, but instead on relying on LON they wanted to be free of any bargain. → PURSUE AMERICAN INTEREST AT ANY COST. Coolidge (1923-1929) and Hoover (1929-1931) followed the same approach. This internationalism was inspired by the Massachusetts senator Lodge, who was interested in international relations and according to him the WWI was nothing new in European history since the alliance system was the natural way in which countries protected their interests and security. The LON was just another alliance. This new approach has wilsonianism elements and elements borrowing from dollar diplomacy developed by William Taft. US was interested in being part of an international trade system, because this would allow Washington to replace London as a global economic power. They wanted to exploit economic interdependence to gain trade superiority → acting on the economic point of view without any political commitment, the spreading of democracy was not important for the international system. 1922- The Washington conference established a disarmament process, but this approach was not ideological as Wilson's was. In this effort there was the movement to reduce armament (Wilson influence) also because they were aware of the expenditure necessary to maintain a big army. Also, many European country agreed with this principle, so naval power became of international interest. Therefore, they established a treaty between Japan, US, UK and France and Italy agreeing to limit their number of war ships. The second treaty was between Japan, US UK and France, they agree to respect one another in the pacific ocean promising not to overcome each other sovereignty. The third one was the Nine power Treaty, establishing the integrity of China's territory. Anyway, the US had become an indispensable power, however, they were only interested in a stable enough system that would allow the US to trade without barriers. The republican administrations had a unilateral approach within a multilateral framework. It was impossible to play the role of economic leader without being the political leader. - The Briand -Kellog Pact (1928): initially a US-French alliance to protect Paris' territory against Germany. US then proposed to invite other countries declaring the denial of the use of force to resolve disputes. It was important from the moral and political point of view but a failure in the end with the rise of dictatures. **Economy and culture** Economic and financial internationalism: They agreed on the increase of money lending to Europe but avoiding a US intervention, but it was not possible to loan money with unofficial government in force, and to loan to countries which had high trade barriers against US products. The issue of reparation of European countries. Germany was a great issue since it had to pay 5 billion debt but was able to keep up only two years and refused to impose more taxes and finally stopped the payment. France responded with the invasion of Ruhr region, and US was worried because if Germany was not able to repay France it was not able to repay US either. So, the Dawes plan was approved to help Berlin, Germany was supposed to pay its debt but in 50 years, which gave a boost to Germany industry and allowed the American penetration in Berlin's market and economy and France left the Ruhr Cultural internationalism A first wave of Americanization happened during 20s, which was the result of the application fo the Ford system of production which improved the industrial production and a huge European fascination about US music and movies. There was also an increase in transatlantic tourism, especially of Americans going to Europe. On the contrary an anti-American sentiment began to spread against US homologation. **Contradictions and problems.** The international system had not a clear structure, there was no hegemon in the system, because UK was declining, US wanted a central economic role in Western world without a political commitment → inconsistent role. US had invested great resources in economic interdependence but at the end of 20s protectionism was growing in Europe affecting American economy. **Frankin Delano Roosevelt** Became president in 1932 and was obliged to confront a social-economic domestic crises and a foreign scenario that was changing due to the rise of authoritarianisms in Europe. He was more concerned about domestic situation: he refused to jeopardize his domestic political agenda against the foreign policy. In the congress there was a huge group of isolationists that threatened Roosevelt to approve a new deal plan. There was a structural problem, at the beginning he lacked the capacity to have a clear leadership, on the contrary when he became president the New Deal could go hand-in-hand with a new deal in foreign relations, since Roosevelt shared with Wilson the same IR convictions but in the end for political opportunities, he focused more on the domestic agenda and tried to set a position that would protect the US from European future conflicts. Why the fear of future conflicts? In this period there was a revisionist tendency that produced a reflection on the American involvement in the war according to which when the US joined the WWI made a mistake caused by the pressure of the military industry on the Wilson's government. → Merchants of Death (book). **Isolationism** Senators Johnson, Borah and LaFollette Jr. played a huge role in forcing Roosevelt to develop an isolationist policy. The international scenario that influenced this decision was the rise of the Japanese threat allied with Germany, in Europe US was not able to understand the fact that Mussolini and Hitler's aim was to redefine the Europe map. Roosevelt focused on the neighborhood policy developed by Hoover in order to keep control on the Western hemisphere and avoid the use of force in foreign disputes, but just economic or political pressure. In the US there was a revulsion against the memory if the WWI which took the form of NEUTRALITY ACTS\*. Why isolationism so strong? failure of wilsonianism, great depression spreading all over the world, tendency by American historians to provide a revisionist account on the WWI. This ideological isolationism took to: 1934 Johnson act → forbidding American citizens to lend money to other countries that had not paid their past debt to Washington. The subject was the American banking system. 1934 NYE committee→ a senate selected committee guided by Nye, who had the job to investigate the allegations mentioned in the previous mentioned book. Was US pushed to join the war by banks and military pressure? The result of the investigation was that the committee found out the banking and the army industry landed a lot of money to government but was not able to prove that Wilson was actually convinced by them. the most interesting find was that officially the US was neutral, but this was not totally true because the US was already leaning toward UK. - 1935 1° neutrality act: prohibition to sell armies to belligerents, affecting the army industry and was an attempt to avoid what happened in WWI, it established the prohibition for American citizens to travel to war zones. \>\< Wilson neutrality. - 1936 2° neutrality act: prohibition was applied to loans. - 1937 3° neutrality act: this forbid the transport to belligerent countries of weapons, loans, travelers and ports. But there was a huge concession to UK → CASH AND CARRY provision: the nations involved in the war were allowed at the discretion of American president to acquire any item they needed form the US so long as they could pay in cash immediately and being able to carry the stuff on non-American ships. Useful to UK and France because they were the only capable of doing both. In this way he was already trying to help the two countries. These acts were a compromise between isolationists and the situation in Europe, which starting from 1934 became very tense. However, they became useless after Pearl Harbor. **Neutrality 1937-1941 December** Roosevelt started to change his mind on the war in Europe long before it started officially. He started to talk about an international exchange, which was realized through some passages. He started to support China against the Japanese invasion, increased the military budget of 50%, and started to pressure the Congress in order to support concretely France and UK. Once the war broke out, Roosevelt was forced to declare neutrality in a way was different from Wilson, since it was necessary to avoid any kind of trade with countries involved in the war, but using the cash and carry provisions the US was still afloat economically. Roosevelt tried to deal with US public opinion. Dec. 1940 → policy that enabled us to lend military supplies to UK and the payment for these would be postponed to the end of the war. This was codified by the LAND LEASE act. This was possible because the Congress mood was changing since many were starting to think providing weapons to UK was going to be useful to the US. Before P.H. sept 1940 → approved the selective training and service Act, a law that required all men between 31 and 45 to register for the army. First time that conscription was introduced during a peace time. Men were supposed to serve for 1 year, but after entering the conflict they served until the end of the war. [Four Freedoms speech →] Roosevelt was presenting reasons why US should be involved in the war. He affirmed "We look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms" - Freedom of expression and speech - Freedom from want - Freedom to worship god - Freedom from fear. **Atlantic Charter** A joint declaration presented in 1941 Aug. between US AND UK, a statement of common way, since they were already thinking about the configuration of the international system after the war. - Neither were interested in expanding their territory - Sustained self-determination and self-government - Equal Access to trade raw materials - Committed to improve labor standards and promote socio-economic progress - Affirmed again freedom from fear. Dec. 7,1941 → Pearl Habor attack, first ever attack on American land. The US was at formal peace with Japan but leaning to UK and France. Lecture 03/10 FDR's post war planning - Interdependence of the economy and between states - Power - Limited resources - Democracy and international relations Solution of the 4 policemen and united nations: UK US RU CH. A post-wilsoniam idea, FDR tried to punt into practice the Wilsonian ideals. Since at the basis of the UN there was the trust and desire for a democratic world, for the respect of international law and the international organization. The WWII added also antifascism as a means of collaboration, especially since the German attack against USSR, which transformed the war into fascism vs antifascism governments. diplomacy by conferences FDR tried to build a process that would allow US to win the war in the first place, and to govern the post war new order. -1944 Dumbarton oaks conference was at the beginning of an international financial system (IMF) which would be linked to the dollar, but in the long term would have had a negative impact on the American financial status. → economic commitment. The other player on the field was Stalin. The reason why US and Stalin were able to get along after the death of Roosevelt. Truman wanted to get along with Stalin but he had not the same political and diplomatic ability of Roosevelt. In Potsdam Truman wanted to show off the atomic bomb to Stalin, of which he already knew. In Yalta the 3 decided the geographical changes in Europe. They wanted to apply punitive military and political measures to Germany, promoted and asked by France. US and URSS agreed, UK was in the middle. The Ussr was assured the control on the eastern part of Europe. - *Quarantine speech (1937)* - *Four policemen speech (1941)* - What features of past foreign policy traditions can you detect in FDR's wartime diplomacy? The concept of "evil" enemy to defeat is a constant in foreign policy and gives a moral duty to the US in both speeches, in this case fascism. The evil will be found in different times along the US history, by Reagan when taking about the USSR, and by Bush when talking about al-Qaeda. FDR can be considered a cautious Wilsonian → he wanted to support the UN formation but was primarily concerned in getting a sit at the table for Great Powers. He was aware of real politic, he though that international peace could be achieved only with the cooperation between great powers, not involving every little state in the world, otherwise regional or internal issue could become again dangerous for the rest of the world. - Where is the exceptionalism in the two speeches? Fdr understood that US had to play power politics in order to be part of the great powers group and also to maintain its economy and morality. He was aware that America had to be actively engaged in military actions and in the post war settlements. American exceptionalism can be noticed in the spreading of American music, culture, lifestyle and cinema, which started in the 1920s and was feared by the right-wing European dictatorships. In both speeches America role was frequently underlined in order to create a climax. It criticizes all regimes describing them as immoral, comparing them with American history which has been experiencing a "continuous peaceful evolution". FDR structed these speeches affirming that America had the right method and strategy for making a new world order work. → putting great responsibility on America's shoulders. There was the need to build public consensus in the US in order to engage the country in a war and later as a world leader. - Was FDR's wartime diplomacy successful? Partly yes, because he was able to make different great powers sit at the table to decide the future of Europe and of the world order, on the other hand, his hopes were partially dismissed because soon after treaty were signed some principles were violated, such as free democratic elections in eastern Europe, which was instead authoritatively controlled by Moscow. In shot-term the FDR diplomacy was successful because he was able to win the war and coordinate Churchill and Stalin. But in the long-run Roosevelt was not abel to fully grasp what his real intents were and maybe it was not the priority at that point. Europe was pacified until 1990s. the cold war gave stability to Europe but in constant fear of either one of the two powers. A lot of people supported the Cold war against USSR, but this implied the militarization of the society, a huge amount of money in keeping this system in place, and the confrontation with a authoritarian regime, under which people could not exercise the civil rights or enjoy an open economy. - How is it configured the relationship with the USSR during this period? FDR lied the precondition of the strategy used also by Truman, which had a really difficult relationship with Stalin, since they could not get along, but we must consider the difficult situation in Europe, and the configuration of the international system since the European powers can no longer play a great power role. The military and economic situation and these two countries were the embodiment of two opposite ideologies. They both develop radical understanding of international security. For many scholars Roosevelt could have handled the conferences better, since especially in Yalta, Churchill and Roosevelt were accused of having sold eastern Europe to Stalin. Lecture 10.10.2024 The Cold War came about as something unexpected. During 1945 the relationship between the USSR and US began to suffer from tensions. The Cold War is a metaphor, since the word "War" indicates a confrontation encompassing all aspects of political and social life, but the term "Cold" implies that there was never a direct conflict but more subtle tactics, a surrogate war. The term was used for the first time in 1947 by the journalist Lipmann in his book "the cold war". The term had already been used during the 30s for describing the growing tension between nazi Germany and France. Lipmann was a realist and used the expression since to him the cold war immediately appear as a total war and that the US and USSR weren't going to confront directly. The main aspect of the war was ideology and propaganda on both sides, the military expenditure was increased, and the major worry was the atomic bomb. The confrontations happened during the proxy war. Periodization → turning points in the cold war. It began between 1945-1947 and was over with the fall of the Berlin wall. Between these dates historians tried to identify turning points. - 1956: Suez Crisis → end of eurocentrism and the definitive affirmation of the bipolar system. Also, the Stalinization was over since Stalin died in 1953 and the foreign policy strategy radically changed. - 1962/3 Cuba missiles crisis → after the crisis they signed the Limited Test Ban Treaty for limiting atomic weapons. - 1970s Europe wanted a more prominent role in the war, but these years are also the decade of nuclear parity because the USSR reached the US in the nuclear standpoint. The détente decade → legitimization of the Soviet Union as an actor of the international system. - 1980s Began with the second Cold War, Reagan term, the second half was characterized by the effort to end the cold war and the rise to power of Gorbachev. Other than these, other scholars propose different turning points: - Stephanson, Di Nolfo, Harper defined the end of the Cold war in 1963 when the Cuba crisis was solved. - Alperovitz wrote "Atomic diplomacy" according to which political advisors in the US believed that the atomic weapon in Japan was necessary to win the war and Truman authorized the usage to end the war quickly before the USSR could decline war against Japan. This was the beginning of the nuclear arm race. - Flemming W.A. William want the US responsible for the beginning of the Cold war, since they see the beginning of the conflict during the first world war in 1917 right after the Bolshevik coup in Moscow. The 14 points of Wilson were a reply to the Russian revolution paradigms. THE DEBATE ON THE ORIGINS - Traditional or orthodox interpretation. It places the responsibility of the beginning of the cold war on the USSR's shoulders. It's a western interpretation developed in the US, inside the American political establishment. It's necessary to put the responsibility on the USSR. The interpretation was officially adopted by the government emphasizing that the USSR regime was expansionist and America simply reacted to this. The Soviet expansionism was understood as a combination of ideology, expansionist tendency rooted in the tsarist Russia and in Stalin personal character. The most famous historian is Arthur Schlesinger. - Revisionist school (end 1960s-70s) Rejection of the idea that the USSR was the only country responsible for the beginning of the cold war. The development of the conflict emerged from American voices. Some historians affirm that it's impossible to blame the USSR entirely for the Cold War (moderate view). Other scholars put the blame on US. Lefether said that the US intentionally formed international organizations (UN, IMF, WB, NATO, Marshall plan) to exclude the USSR and assure the American control on this bodies. The process had started with Wilson and the similarities between US and Russia were relevant: both were large empires, which had a calling for expansionism, represented themselves as empires. America was the only true victor of WWII, it was the strongest economic power, the only country able to develop the atomic bomb before the end of the war. The US was aware of its strategic advantages and exploited them to favor American economy. Stalin suspicions about the US were justified. To prove his theory he proposed two examples. - 1918-20: US and European powers tried to push the tzar back on the throne in order to defeat the Bolsheviks. - The delate of the US to open a military front in Europe to slow the USSR advance in Europe. - Also the atomic bomb was considered a mean to make Japan surrender but also to end the war against it quickly and to save American lives. The hidden political ambition was to avoid the soviet involvement in Japan and to show USSR the American military power. The end of the 1960s was the beginning of critics towards American imperial objectives and objections to the Vietnam war. - Post-revisionist synthesis John Luis Gaddis' understanding of the cold war stands in between the two previous theories. The war emerged from the different perception of security between the two actors and the different strategy intended to assure the security. The theme of security is crucial: it was a necessity but their perception and the way to achieve it were different. This made the confrontation a result of opposite approaches. For Roosevelt the security had to be achieved in a pragmatic way, but Stalin's policy was more unilateral because we have two different political systems. For Stalin international security mean also personal security (paranoia) and was prepared to do anything to assure soviet national security. According to gaddis the two approaches were bound to crash at some point. OTHER DEBATES The end of CW → according to some it was over in 1989, others say 1991 when USSR collapse, others 1963 with the end of Cuba crisis The geography → was it a global or a European issue? ASYMMETRICAL BIPOLARISM There's a change in the configuration of the international system from multipolar to bipolar. Two superpowers in two different economic conditions with respect to the other states, the system was asymmetrical, because the US were superior form the economic and military point of view, while the USSR always fought against economic crisis and shutdowns, this will become clear during the 1970s. we can see the same thing in the military point of view, they were both engaged in the military race but US was the prominent one. The US was the only country which did not experience a long war on its territory and lost relatively few men and no infrastructures were damaged. It had overcome the 1929 crisis thanks to the WWII which gave a huge help to American industrial facilities. At the very beginning of the cold war we have areas of cooperation, where the two powers tried to develop agreement and try to overcome issues, such as the international commission of atomic energy. It was an American proposal in order to prevent the spread of American technology. The atomic bomb project was developed by German scientists, which agreed with the US government to develop the weapon in change for abandoning German. At the end of the war however, Germany was not the evil anymore, Soviet Union was the new target. When US tried to convince to limit the production and spread of atomic military weapons the USSR refused since it perceived this proposal as an effort to maintain the atomic technology a domain of Washington. In 1945 the tensions grew due to geographical issue, which were the result of the position of the two armies on the European territory at the end of the war. The tensions grew also from the opposite political positions. The two powers were called superpowers because they had a continental dimension, and the military might and powern since in both countries the military expenditure were used, and they were the only two atomic powers and they were supported by two alliances, they had a predominant economic role. The matter of security became the leitmotiv for the men that had to plan a foreign policy strategy in the US. American leaders recognized that in order to protect US peace and prosperity and the whole American system it was necessary to react against any potential threats even in areas which were geographically far away. The American democratic mission was another big objective to achieve and the security assurance was the only way to reach it. The American social and economic system was to be protected from a material threat, since there was the international competition between the two systems also for the provision of materials and public support. National security is not about territorial protection, is more about ideology spreading. IDEOLOGY Stalin: "this war is not like those of the past: whoever occupies a territory also imposes a social system. Everyone imposes their system as far as his army can advance. It cannot be otherwise". The two ideologies are opposite, but they are symmetric since they are both messianic ideologies. Both believed that their system was the best and therefore all states must look at them as a model. STRATEGIC ANTAGONISM This antagonism was the byproduct of different factors. The bipolar configuration of the system was basically originated in the destruction of the common enemy during the war, Germany. National security → they had to gain security in a unilateral way. Seminar 11/10 There was a struggle inside Truman's administration in understanding how to act in Asia. The situation in China was complex, since the Communist movement had won the civil war and Mao came to power. Meanwhile the Soviet Union developed its own nuclear bomb, breaking US' nuclear monopoly and in 1950 the Korean war broke out. These events led to divisions in US foreign policy opinions and gave the impression that the US was losing ground. → the Truman doctrine: he asked the congress to technically support free peoples around the world trying to resist to URSS occupying their land and imposing communism, for example Greece, Iran. The URSS had to leave these countries formally, but it still had an influence there and access to the Mediterranean Sea. → Marshall Plan was issued for the EU recovery program for economic and political aid to European states trying to restore their economies and civil societies after the war. Communist ideas were deemed to find friendly ground in countries experiencing economic distress, so US was trying to help these countries so that communism doesn't gain consent. US wanted to continue integrating in EU politics and societies so that they could have access to the EU market. We can describe American involvement in Europe as "empire by imitation" → European countries accepted American hegemony consensually due to the necessity of preventing USSR penetration. The empire by imitation strategy was focused on the role played by culture and propaganda. One of the fist measures adopted was the establishment of "Atlantic Alliance" in 1949, which set the beginning of perpetual alliance, which went against the traditional American foreign policy of previous years. The aim was to protect and secure national security against the Soviet menace, the basic principle was collective security: if one of the members was attacked that would have been understood as an attack against the US. → there was a huge shift in American commitment towards European affairs. **Summing up:** - Bipolar internal system: a win for one superpower was a defeat for the other → need to maximize natural security. - Concrete problems: - Communism in Asia - Korean war - Atomic bomb - American clear economic interests in Europe - Ideology → cold war was somehow an American \[Stephenson\] project which can be summed up with the phrase "better dead than red". It was conceived as a battle to protect freedom and democracy → "give me liberty or give me death" - Kennan proposed not to intervene in countries linked to the Soviet Union. He was focused on long term patience, but Truman didn't have the same intellectual grasp. He was more concerned with being attacked by the Republicans in the Congress since he had a short-term vision of politics, mainly centered on internal affairs. Kennan, instead, was syre that the USSR would internally collapse due to economic, political and social reasons but Truman opted for a more direct and military approach → he was influenced by external pressure of opting for a string containment strategy. - **Containment:** it was a strategy made to prevent the spreading of URSS ideology and policies in Europe and Asia. It was conceived as a defensive strategy to protect the status quo and prevent any further expansion. It evolved into an offensive strategy after NSC 68, where containment became a military strategy because of fear of a unified Korea under communist influence. Korean was a turning point both internationally and internally → investigation within society and institutions to find Soviet spies. → Col War consensus spiked up. Lecture 7 -- conservative cold-warriors EISENHOWER AND JOHN FORSTER DULLES Both Eisenhower and Kennedy started from the same basis: fear of the Soviet Union, in particular their ability to develop a powerful military power and the ideological appeal on peoples, these aspects constituted a danger for US. Also, China becoming a conflictual state after the settling of the communist regime. They supported the containment strategy, but they had a different tactical approach to national security policies and a different opinion on which was the best solution for the situation, Eisenhower was a formal general and the head of NATO, so he was concerned with security. National security was more than the protection of homeland, but more about protecting American basic values, economic system and domestic institutions. For him it was necessary to strike a balance between protecting national security and government spending for the defense against USSR. → new element in the US foreign policy. He was eager to express these views in public even before entering the White House. In 1952 he wrote in his diary: it is necessary to recognize that the purpose of America is to defend a way of life, which is different form just defending just property and lives, as a consequence we must take into consideration the long-term internal effect of this strategy (peril of bankrupting the state). the need to contain USSR and the need to protect the state was called the "great equation". He made this idea public during his presidential campaign criticizing Truman's policies since they were too expensive for the government. However, he accepted some of Truman's ideas. In order to protect America, the American power in Europe and asia was to be protected and the American stake in Europe was still vital as well as a western defense. But he dissented the idea of escalation of America military build up up to "the time of maximum danger". This hypothesis was formulated in a policy framework by the government which identified the year 1954 as the worst possible year for US since USSR would have reached the same military power as the US. Eisenhower disagreed strongly because he thought the cold war as a long term conflict and was sure that the aim of the soviet union to preserve their regime would have slowed their military expenditure and strategy of expansion. THE NEW LOOK STRATEGY So, Eisenhower based his strategy on the military and economic efficiency at the same time. This strategy was based on nuclear weapons, since they were much less expensive than maintaining troops in Asia and Europe. In 1952 he translated this idea into a concrete security strategy and appointed J. F. Dulles as Secretary of State, whose brother was appointed head of CIA. Humphry was appointed head of the Treasure to control the expenditures of the state. → fiscal conservatism. The great problem of the security council was to identify an appropriate security strategy without bankrupting the nation and his approach was very different from both FDR and NSC-68. Eisenhower ordered a complete reexamination of the soviet threat and a review of the affordability of the programs developed by the Truman's administration. He had an optimistic view about the American system prevailing on the USSR in the long run. On the other hand, he had a clear cut understanding of the fact that a nuclear war would imply a complete disruption of the international system. National security council report 162/2 → outline of Eisenhower's administration: - Indispensability of nuclear weapons, which were the most efficient deterrent against soviet expansion and a critical instrument of power that in case of hostilities could be available, and an essential substitute to large expending on other military weapons. - Massive retaliation, not just the possession of the weapons but the credible inclination to use them. Nuclear weapons according to him were the key to win the Cold War, so in 1954 Dulles gave a speech speaking about the retaliation scenario → if a conflict broke out between USSR and US, Washington would have used the atomic weapons against Moscow. This approach was the result of Eisenhower effort to find a compromise between military efficiency and public expenditure. The US were working on the development of new atomic arms such as missiles, lighter bombs and smaller atomic weapons to improve efficiency and adaptability. The limited nuclear war was not possible according to Eisenhower, since a nuclear war could not be limited to just the two superpowers but would have involved all countries sooner or later. This implied also the moderation of both parts when waging war directly against each other. According to Eisenhower USSR would have never used the atomic weapons since there was too much to lose, therefore the actual usage of atomic bombs was a very remote hypothesis. Us started to consider atomic weapons as normal weapons. In 1953 a new event influenced the international scene, Stalin's death. According to America the aim of Stalin was to assure the survival and the stabilization of the soviet system. At his death his successor, Khrushchev proposed the destalinization process in USSR and the Lenin's manifesto resurfaced. So, the US could not define and understand the real aim of USSR government. THE ROLE OF CIA The role of CIA will become crucial in managing internal and external affairs. The CIA is supposed to refer to the NSC, but having as head of the organization the brother of the secretary of state, gave a private and personal access to CIA in government affairs and decisions. The CIA was created by NSC through a NSC act in 1947, but also during the WWII the government had another intelligence organization within for war purposes, but was then dismantled since it was considered dangerous to maintain such an organization. In 1953 Dulles was appointed head of CIA until 1961. The agency was not supposed to have police subpoena, law-enforcement powers nor internal security functions. It was supposed to act only abroad not within America's borders. The aim was to collect information abroad from both open sources (news, media, public speeches), but also from closed sources (informators, spies) in order to help NSC to identify the best policies to follow. BUT the Cia was supposed also to perform other functions and duties related to intelligence that have an impact on NS as the NSC may from time to time. This decision allowed the intelligence agency to perform covered operations abroad. These operations were in place already in the 1950s (operation removing left government in Iran and Guatemala). This created a situation for which the president and the government to deny the actual involvement of US in other private state affairs abroad. This point was made only to this purpose. The CIA developed an overconfidence about the capability of manipulating situations abroad, but sometimes CIA operations resulted as a big problem (bay of the Pigs to defeat Castro's government). The CIA was used to exploit American interests abroad. THE ROLE OF THE ALLIES The unites states could not meet their defense needs without the support of allies. This was basically a critique towards European states that were not willing to put money in the US military expenditure leaving the military protection of Europe entirely in Washington's hands and pockets. To Eisenhower alliances were crucial in order to compensate the force reduction in Europe motivated by the fiscal constraint. The logic consequence was the pacto-mania, the huge effort of Dulles of travelling around the world in search for alliances. To his vision this would have allowed US to isolate USSR and prevent soviet aggressions against states that were formally linked to the US. - Seato -- South East Asia treaty organization (United States, France, Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and Pakistan) - Cento -- Cntral Treaty organization ([Pakistan](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan), [Iran](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran), [Iraq](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq), Turkey and UK) - European integration defense community The most relevant issue in this matter was Europe. Eisenhower wanted to withdraw American personnel form Europe, and was thinking about an equal division of responsibilities between partners. The US was inclined to protect Europe with nuclear weapons but at the same time US asked Europe to expand its military expenditure to form a united defense community. This was a step in the EU integration process after the CECA, which implied the creation of an European army formed by men coming from the six members. This project was a failure because France refused, the American reaction was the inclusion of Western Germany in NATO, because they were counting on a German military build up to have an army in the center of Europe. This resulted in the biggest failure of Eisenhower administration since in the end American troops were not withdrawn from Europe. Eisenhower was aware of the importance of diplomacy action and propaganda. He emphasized the need to engage in a psychological war, that was devoted to show to the international public opinion the superiority of the American system over the Soviet one. The New Look was in NSC-162/2. He was really sure that nuclear weapons had transformed the nature of soviet American rivalry and he feared the confrontation between superpowers due to the new technology of hydrogen bomb. But at the same time an equal military power between them would have meant deterrence. → nuclear parity. Also, it was not possible to win a nuclear war, since the destruction was not repairable. Already in 1956 in the NSC it said that it was important to keep in mind that nobody would have won such conflict. → contradiction with the idea of attacking the USSR with all the available weapons. HE PUSHED FOR TOTAL WAR AND MASSIVE RETALIATION IN ORDER TO AVOID THE WAR ITSELF. → UPGRADE OF AMERICAN STRATEGY. Roll-back strategy → change in the policy of other states usually by replacing the ruling regime or influencing its policies. it was a more aggressive posture than the Truman's containment. It was a political non-military point of view, which resulted in a great expenditure in intelligence and propaganda. - Problems and contradictions: - Withdraw of Us troops from Europe - Change in the Soviet Union leadership, form Stalin to Khrushchev - European stabilization made the roll back slogan empty and useless - Decolonization -- the cold war goes global, reached climax in 1960s, and there is debate about the global cold war (westad's book), move to Asia and Africa. The USSR began to be effective inside third world countries offering general aid and trade offers and was engaged in an economic offensive trying to win more states. Eisenhower being concerned with constraint could not offer the same advantages. He tried three times to get the money for a third world program of aids. - Arms/ space race, the Kremlin was improving its nuclear and special capability. The Sputnik program proved it with the launch of an intercontinental missile and in 1954 they were able to send a space ship. → missile gap. - Ex of midterm question: describe the reasons of US non-intervention during the WWI. - Who is the author of common sense? - A John Hamm - B Thomas Paine - C Benjamin Franklin - John Lock Lecture 8 -- JFK → liberal cold-warriors The fear of Eisenhower fiscal policy, the US was lying behind the Soviet Union in the arm race. However, this was untrue and the commission confirmed that. Notwithstanding, the public opinion started to worry about the missile gap, which became a political matter during the political campaign between Nixon and Kennedy. Kennedy used this accusation against Eisenhower and Nixon. Kennedy's strategy was based on the flexible response (opposite to massive retaliation), and military Keynesianism (the state had to spend public money for arms to prevent the spillover effect). Eisenhower started to worry about third world later in his administration, instead the Third World will become one of the top priority for Kennedy. JFK in 1961 speech focused on the conflict with the USSR and was concerned about military and nuclear capability, like Eisenhower he was aware of horrific consequences of a nuclear war, but in a way he was sure that expanding non-nuclear capability would reduce the threat of USSR. The expansion of non-nuclear capability to reply in a appropriate way against Moscow. He developed the flexible response was made possible by the increasing in public expenditure influenced by the KEYNESIAN policies. He was convinces that the primary scene of struggle had shifted from Europe to less developed areas. In the speech he underlined it. MODERNIZATION THEORY Khrushchev was promising to support different war of national liberations across the third world, in particular the Castro revolution in Cuba in 1959 and the relations between Moscow and Cuba and all the post colonial turmoil proved that Khrushchev was actually able to boost communist ideology around the World. Kennedy started recognizing China as a new opponent. He thought that it was necessary to counter the appeal of communism in the world and was feeling that the balance of global power could shift from US if they were not more active in understanding the socio-economic conditions that influenced the Communist appeal. Kennedy was inclined to accept the implication of the modernization theory, which became the structure according to which the US would have acted in Latin America. → Messianic rhetoric: the US could help these countries to transition to an open economy and democracy. This was also a technocratic approach since American experts were supposed to help and support these countries tp achieve better conditions. All these efforts were the result of the recognition that the Cold War became global. US and USSR started to act to win hearts and minds of third world peoples. The link between the economic aid to third world countries and the expectance of democracy. The idea was that democratic systems are more stable in the internal and external point of view and tend not to fight each other. Are the best guaranty for a possible communist takeover since it is supposed to be stable economically. Then they expected that these countries would become free market states that could be engaged in the free market systems. → security, economic and political interests intertwined. \[W. W. Rostow "the stage of economic growth. A non-communist manifesto"\] Communist countries had to be helped only in the stage of overcoming communist economic system. The US were supposed to help these state in the take-off stage, since later these would be able to further develop by themselves. The concrete application was the ALLIACNE FOR PROGRESS. ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESS IN LATIN AMERICA. The most ambitious third world aid program in order to help modernization, address educational, health and economic needs and undermine the appeal of communism. Kennedy was becoming obsessed with the Cuban situation and decided to address to all LA. The strategy involved agricultural reforms to increase productivity and efficiency (Ford System), this would lead to better salaries and a bigger access to consumption. Applying the same productive model applied to the US at the end of 19^th^ century. Also tax and fiscal reforms were supposed to be implement to efficiently cut excessive expenditure and help the welfare, and were eager to create a middle class. The middle-class provides the economic and political stability since it creates a consumer society. This alliance was a way to assure that these countries could became stable and prevent a possible revolution inspired by the Cuban one. But what went wrong? - The political assumptions were wrong since the idea to translate a political model from a country to another proved to be impossible and wrong. It was not possible to identify moderate political party, far right or far left. - The military establishment usually played an important role, so American officials struggled to find a way to collaborate with them - Change of priority inside JFK administration. - They were not able to identify the prevailing social structure and so deal with it. - The congress was not giving Kennedy the necessary money to implement this program, therefore we can say it was a failure. - JFK administration was either supporting or not supporting guerrillas movements in order to suppress left wing governments in these countries. The administration acted in other countries domestic policies in a direct way through the CIA. - The most idealistic and popular point of the Kennedy program was the peace corps program. Sending idealistic and pacifist people to third world countries was considered a great idea to fight the negative image of US spread by USSR and China (Argentina, society derived from the colonial model and few people were in control of the land, also the army was crucial in managing society; Argentina received money for the reforms, but they were not enough). RELATIONS WITH EUROPEAN ALLIES Equally problematic was the application of the flexible response. It is related with the relations between Europe and US. The strategy calls for the improvement of the options of war implying the increase of NATO capabilities. European states were supposed to implement an European army but make a greater contribution to NATO. Europeans were not inclined to support an additional fee to nato and started to criticizes Kennedy administration's strategy because they feared that Europe could be the only battlefield between USSR and US, since they were worried about decoupling. Kennedy was asking a greater European contribution since he was trying to increase military capability of Nato and US. Europe interpreted this as a separation between European security interests over Europe and American security interest in US. The flexible response identified three possible war scenarios and steps in the evolution of a confrontation among NATO and USSR. A possible scenario would happen over Berlin and the first military scenario was the conventional war. If the USSR attacked west Germany using conventional war the reply of NATO forces would be conventional as well. Conventional war could evolve into a limited nuclear war in Europe, since at some point USSR could use tactical nuclear weapons (short-range missiles). The third step is an all-out nuclear war, both US and USSR started to combat using long range nuclear missiles. If the US invested more in conventional resources, they would have been able to better address the USSR menace. The European countries feared that conventional war was destined to become a nuclear war but they are also worried that the US would limit the nuclear war to just Europe, since an all-out nuclear war would lead to a global destruction. From Kennedy point of view the response was due to the strategy of massive retaliation was too dangerous so having different steps was a way to stabilize the situation. BERLIN CRISIS The different crisis during the Kennedy administration highlighted that the alliance with Europe were not so strong. Khrushchev in 1961 wanted to sign a peace treaty with German democratic republic, but from the German perspective the final aim was reunification (Western German constitution art. About absorbing eastern Germany). → problematic The other problem was related to West Berlin since it was physically inside eastern Germany, so US was worried about the possibility that USSR would close again access to West Berlin as in 1949. Kennedy affirmed that US would not allow USSR into West Germany and was worried bout nuclear war happening by accident or misunderstanding. Khrushchev wanted to sign this because the border between West and East berlin was opened so many people fled to West Berlin, so this was a problem since people escaping were experts in their sector and was a huge drain on the social and economic capacity of Eastern Germany. The solution of the crisis was the building of the Berlin Wall, the aim was to close the border and limit the spreading to West Berlin. The US didn't intervene, it was a non-reaction. CUBAN MISSILES CRISIS The US found out that the Soviet were building installation in Cuba for nuclear missiles. The island is located just 90 miles from Miami, so the missiles could target US territory easily. The US reaction is muscular, they addressed the issue taking into consideration different options, like bombing of Cuba, diplomacy. The American message to Moscow was a threat of violent reaction. After discussions in the administration, they decided for a middle ground reaction: a naval blockade, American ships were supposed to intercept the USSR ships carrying nuclear missiles. Khrushchev decided not to go against the American naval blockade. From the European perspective it was the prove that they were right about the priorities of US due to the reaction in Cuba. Also the threat posed in Cuba was far major since nuclear missiles were about to be put at the borders of US territory. Cuba's crisis had a long repercussion on transatlantic relations which will become more clear at the end of the 60s, but for Europe this was the prove that they could not rely on American protection as they had done after the WWII. Consequences for superpowers: - Limited test ban treaty signed in 1963, which was the first attempt between US and USSR to try to have restrain on the nuclear race. The treaty prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere in order to prevent an horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons, since atmospheric tests could involve other states. Also underwater and underground tests were banned. After the scare of Cuban missiles crisis they started to talk together about nuclear proliferation. - The recognition by both that the relationship were characterized by the MAD, mutual assurance destruction. There was a mutual recognition that both states had enough nuclear systems and weapons to destroy each other and the world system. Before the 60s this was only an hypothesis. The way presidents overcome the crisis highlighted their diplomatic ability and their priority which was national security, both were aware that a nuclear confrontation was a never comeback. → MAD = stabilization of the system. Lecture 24/10 -- Liberal cold warriors: JFK Johnson's view on the Cold War was very similar to JFK's: both were activists in the struggle although having different styles. Ideology was playing a huge part in Cold War struggle at the time were JFK was elected, therefore there was the need for international relations studies and scholars to conceived every event in international politics within the Cold War context. The Cold War struggle was considered to be long lasting and inevitable. There was a struggle between decolonization movement and the status quo. Decolonization would happen even without the Cold War struggle but both Johnson and JFK saw it as a result of Cold War. The decolonization tendency in third world countries was seen as a threat to internal order, mainly because new nations would have become malleable objects of Cold War competition between US and USSR. China was gaining the status of great power after the civil war and was seen as a disaster for JFK, since it had brough to the international scenario a new strong communist nation. The rise of communism in those third world states undergoing economic and social distress worried the White House. One of the main examples was Vietnam, which JFK was already interested in during the 50s, since during his mandate international affairs dominated American interests much more than domestic tensions. Vietnam was believed to be a cornerstone of the Free world in East Asia → if communism overflowed in Vietnam security in the whole region would be at risk. Vietnam was a proving ground for democracy in Asia and represented a test for US responsibility and determination in that area and its loss would undermine US prestige in the region. In his speech of 1956 Kennedy stated that Vietnam's independence was crucial to military and economic interests. Vietnam's political liberty can serve as inspiration for those neighboring countries that want to obtain or preserve their own liberty. → Vietnam as an alternative to Communist dictatorships in Asia. With this speech JFK linked national security to the Vietnam issue, applying Eisenhower's domino theory: - Being Indo-China and therefore Vietnam a raw materials-rich area Kennedy was fearing that loosing the struggle against communism in Asia and lending Vietnam politics to communist dictatorships would undermine the economy of US and important US allies in the region, such as Japan. JFK felt that Washington had to win in a Cold War theatre in Asia in order to remedy to the Bay of Pigs' disaster. VIETNAM WAR **Wrong Evaluations**: Vice president Johnson took a trip with Rostow (adviser security) to Vietnam to evaluate the situation, In the report about the trip, they exaggerated the threat that Communist was posing in the country. Johnson framed the intervention as a fundamental decision to address the challenge of Communism in Asia. **Domestic roots**: General Taylor asked for more troops to prepare the army to confront the communist guerrilla in the Asian country. JFK overrated the ability of the US to achieve their aims in a totally different foreign environment to the one of Western hemisphere. **Ideological assumptions**: When the intervention in Vietnam began, Johnson started using Wilsonian ideology focusing on the need of spreading democracy and international law to those countries that were fighting against communism. **Credibility**: The Great society reform program was developed and fostered the expansion of the war, sentencing that US could pursue economic growth and human rights domestically only if they could expand this aims abroad. → US communist repression. The main tracks followed before, during and after the intervention in Vietnam were: - Isolate communist China, to minimize disputes with the Soviet Union - Crush Hanoi's will to fight to unify Vietnam These tracks collide because in February 1965 Johnson ordered bombing of North Vietnam when the Soviet premier was there conducting an official visit in order to impress Soviets of American capability and commitment in Vietnam. Johnson wanted to convince Kosygin (new Soviet head of state 1963- 1980), to press Hanoi to renounce to unification but the response was negative and counterproductive for the US. These actions had a negative impact on the détente strategy. TOWARDS DÉTENTE After 1963 Kennedy's murder, Johnson became president and inherited from JFK this difficult situation and he refused to be the first American president to lose a war. In August 1964 the naval battle in the Gulf of Tonkin waged and implemented to fight both Vietnamese communists and domestic critics which accused Johnson of being too soft against the Vietcong. The battle was used as a legal basis for the resolution of Congress for the military escalation of the conflict. In February 1965 the operation Rolling Thunder: a bombing on North Vietnam was ordered when Kosygin was there. Johnson hoped to solve the issue without sending grand troops but in July 1965 he had to increase the number of US troops in Vietnam since it had provoked the Soviets reaction. The battle moved towards the jungle; US troops weren't ready to fight guerrilla in the forest, but Johson kept sending troops to avoid US surrender. In February 1968 the Tet Offensive was launched against South Vietnam: the situation seemed disastrous, but Washington had to win the war for credibility on the domestic ground. Domestic impact → the left movement in the US started criticizing American society and imperialism. Mass media started showing pictures of the war and killings in Vietnam into American houses. - Body bags: US casualties started to create a negative reaction towards the conflict, this phenomenon teared US society apart and US couldn't avoid reunification of vietnam under a communist regime. - Public memory of this war is still present today and generates a sentiment of disgust and regret in the public opinion. Lecture 25/10 -- Nixon and Kissinger In Nixon inaugural address in 1969 there was a new era of negotiations between US and USSR. This thought was surprising at the time, since before becoming president between 1947-1952 in Congress he played an important role in shaping a confrontational American approach toward Soviets and communism. As a president he chose to put aside this huge criticism of the communist system and focusing on expanding the area of common interest between the two powers → structure of peace. He developed personal relations with soviets leaders and able to reach agreements on arms control and trade and political cooperation in order to foster the peace process. According to him it was necessary to recognize the declining of American power, brought about the growth in economic and political power of EU and Japan. Moreover, the US and USSR had a common interest: it was necessary to manage their relationships to prevent war. A central role in this understanding was played by Kissinger, a former Harvard professor who became NS adviser and then secretary of state. Kissinger thought that the international situation was different from the previous decades and was able to grasp the preconditions of the new system. 1. Europe and Japan had fully recovered from WWII, China was strong power challenging both US and USSR challenging Moscow for a leading in communist movement. The system was becoming multipolar. US tried to address European to improve the economic relations with Moscow. There was a change in the EU attitude towards the Soviets, already at the end of 1960s there was a new approach which was a mix of political, military and economic opening since the West German government launched the Ostpolitik policy → a policy towards East. Western German government opened to Eastern German government and recognized the borders between East German and Poland. Kissinger was worried this could imply the detachment of West Germany form the NATO. 2. Also, across Europe governments and citizens were responding positively to DE Gaulle asking for usage of force to overcome political differences in Europe. Eu economic system was going towards an increase in trade with Soviets and in this atmosphere the American business community was pressuring Nixon to improve relations with the Western bloc in order not to be left out of new economic opportunities. 3. The US started considering USSR as an ordinary state, with rational and legitimate interests, the US was not supposed to criticize communism as a social or political system and Nixon changed the confrontational rhetoric regarding Moscow. 4. US and USSR reached the same gunpower in nuclear arms. KISSINGER He belonged to the realist school of foreign policy analysis and he had the idea that power was the most important factor in IR. In 1968 he criticized the idealism of young Americans that were criticizing US in Vietnam and considered the management of power as irrelevant. Kissinger was skeptical about the arms control agreement efficiency to ease tensions between the nuclear power. To him only improving political relations would lead to efficient agreements. However he was aware of the public support of these agreements. The only possible approach was Linkage → reach US soviets agreements of arms control in a larger web of mutual interests. But the most ambitious idea was they were expecting progress of bilateral relations with USSR would be effective in encouraging Kremlin to apply pressure on North Vietnam government to sign a peace agreement. This hope was in vain, because Soviets were not able to convince NV leader, since it was independence of Soviet Union, and it was getting help form China as well. → Nixon wanted to exploit this intra-communist competition, so they developed the Triangular diplomacy involving Moscow and Beijing. This diplomacy played a role in expanding the area of US USSR detente. This diplomacy helped Washington to open dialogue with China, in 1971 Kissinger went to China paving the way for Nixon to get there in 1972, this rapprochement between US and China was welcomed with fear by the soviets. This played a role in encouraging the USSR to reach agreements with US. DÉTENTE Kissinger and Nixon were trying to warn public about the cost and danger of continuing the confrontation with Soviets, but the way in which they tried to reach the aim of détente resulted problematic. Both were inclined to use the back channel, a direct approach to the soviet leadership excluding all department of state stages. This process was characterized by a huge degree of secrecy because they wanted to assess complete control on bilateral relations. → antagonism between professional advisers and the two men, which in the end abandoned the latter. Secrecy and distrust of professional advice would undermine the détente process. Areas of cooperation: - Arms control: the arm race to deploy more and more missiles was provoking generalized anxiety. Nixon addressed this fear saying that the aim of the US was to have a sufficient number of nuclear weapons to address a potential threat → sufficiency over superiority. This change is linked to the fact that nuclear parity was already in place, from Nixon's perspective it was not useful to keep up with the aim of surpassing the Soviets fighting capability. → ABM system development, decided to switch to a smaller ABM system intended to be deployed also towards a possible threat to China. ABM antiballistic missile system, they are defensive systems that are supposed to intercept missiles coming into US and destroy them. the US was trying to develop this system because they were investing in the defensive system to cut the ability of the enemy to destroy the country with a single strike. This system was a problem for MAD because according to military analysis this system could increase the tendence of launching a first strike knowing that their country was able to actually defend themselves. Kissinger was working with soviet ambassador in the US and the soviet foreign minister and had the idea to keep two different discussions negotiations on ABM systems and discussions about the number of nuclear missiles they were supposed to have. This was due to the fact that was easier to reach an agreement on long range missiles than on ABM. Nixon decided to avoid any criticism about soviet domestic affairs, this implied the need to avoid any criticism of violation of human rights inside USSR borders. SALT I Nixon attended a summit in Moscow in 1972 and signed with Brezhnev an **Interim Agreement On Limitation Of Strategic Arms** supposed to last for four years and then negotiate a new one. → Each side accepted to froze the number of missiles they had at the time of the signing. - USSR 1.618 Intercontinental missiles (ICBM) and 950 submarine launched nucleal missiles (SLBM). - US 1.054 ICBM and 656 SLBM. There is not a real parity between nuclear weapons, but while the soviets were allowed to keep more missiles than the US since Washington had the MIRV technology (multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles). The US was able to add to each missile with more nuclear warheads (2-5). So US was actually superior to USSR. However, Nixon will be criticized because many thought that he had signed an unfair treaty even if evidence proves the contrary. They signed also an **Anti-ballistic missile treaty**: no more than 2 ABM sites, one for the capital and one for the missile base. With these agreements they worked on vertical proliferation putting a cap on nuclear arm race between themselves. US and USSR understood that they needed more agreements in order to control nuclear arm proliferation, so they signed other agreements: - Conference security and cooperation in Europe the soviets were asking for the conference since the end of 1950s because they wanted an official acknowledgement of the post-WWII borders in Europe. This conference eroded public support for US-soviet relations. - The two leaders issued a 12 points statement Basic Principles of relations: with this document they established the way in which they should address each other. This committed each power to stay away from the other's domestic situation. The other relevant point was the principle of equality since they committed to relate in an equal way to each other. - Agreement on cooperating together in space exploration - United states- Soviets trade agreement (1972) Nixon administration and public opinion started to accuse Nixon of having given the USSR nuclear superiority. The US had made a commitment to limit its missiles, but the USSR did not give the same guarantee. This was exploited by the opponents to make an amendment when the treaty was about to be ratified by the Senate saying that the US would not have sign