GRASSROOTS DIPLOMACY: AMERICAN COLD WAR TRAVELERS and the MAKING of a POPULAR DÉTENTE, 1958-1972 by MICHAEL METSNER Submitted
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GRASSROOTS DIPLOMACY: AMERICAN COLD WAR TRAVELERS AND THE MAKING OF A POPULAR DÉTENTE, 1958-1972 by MICHAEL METSNER Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY May 2018 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES We hereby approve the dissertation of Michael Metsner candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy*. Committee Chair Peter A. Shulman Committee Member Kenneth F. Ledford Committee Member David C. Hammack Committee Member Tatiana Zilotina Date of Defense February 26, 2018 *We also certify that written approval has been obtained for any proprietary material contained therein. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii Introduction 1 Chapter 1: “An adventure into the unknown” 27 Chapter 2: “Smiling faces” 89 Chapter 3: “An Underdeveloped Country” 142 Chapter 4: A New Sparta 201 Conclusion 261 Bibliography 275 i Acknowledgments First and foremost, I wish to thank the members of my dissertation committee for their support and feedback in the process of completing my dissertation. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Dr. Peter Shulman for helping me to refine my main argument and guiding me to the successful completion of this project. A special thanks to Dr. Kenneth Ledford for coining the evocative phrase “popular détente.” Many thanks to my fellow graduate students, past and present, in the History Department for their friendship and camaraderie. I have been fortunate to receive financial support for dissertation research from the History Associates at Case Western Reserve University, the Baker-Nord Center for the Humanities, and the CWRU Department of History. Last but certainly not least, I thank my parents, Nina and Efim, for their faith in me and their abiding love and support. ii Grassroots Diplomacy: American Cold War Travelers and the Making of a Popular Détente, 1958-1972 Abstract by MICHAEL METSNER This dissertation focuses on the experiences of American men and women who traveled to the Soviet Union for leisure, work, or study during the long sixties (1958- 1972). It draws on mass-published travelogues, private correspondence, government records, and newspaper articles to analyze the observations that Americans made about everyday life in the USSR, the opinions they expressed about the socialist system, and the conversations they had with ordinary Soviet citizens. On the one hand, Americans met friendly and warm people who were curious about the United States, infatuated with American culture and technology, and yearned for peace and mutual understanding. On the other hand, personal contact with Soviets, coupled with unfavorable firsthand impressions, left no doubt in Americans’ minds concerning the superiority of their way of life. This descriptive duality allowed American Cold War travelers to simultaneously humanize and individualize the faceless Soviet masses and criticize what they considered to be deficiencies inherent (and detrimental) to the Soviet system. Nuclear confrontation between the two superpowers was not inevitable, they concluded, given the longing for iii peaceful coexistence expressed by Soviet men and women, but the triumph of the United States in the Cold War was, given the alleged inferiority of the Soviet way of life. I argue that that their personal experiences on the other shore convinced Americans of the necessity of finding a peaceful modus vivendi with the Soviet foe, given the dim chances for the long-term success of the socialist experiment in the absence of a nuclear confrontation. Their physical presence behind the “Iron Curtain” laid the groundwork for a popular détente. There was a shared desire on the part of American guests and Soviet hosts to place the competition for global supremacy between the capitalist and socialist systems on a peaceful footing and avoid suicidal conflict at all costs. Therefore, détente was not simply imposed on docile and indifferent subjects from above; it was also made at the grassroots by American men and women who traversed geographical and ideological boundaries and observed how the other half lived with their own eyes. iv Introduction “Where do you buy these clothes?” Debbie Sherwood asked a Soviet woman after watching a surprisingly impressive, if somewhat eclectic, fashion show at Leningrad’s House of Fashion (Dom modelei).1 The twenty-nine-year-old magazine writer from New York City was spending a few weeks in the state of Soviets in the summer of 1968. “Oh, you don’t buy them already made,” the woman replied with an air of astonishment.2 Sensing that the naïve American standing in front of her desperately needed assistance in navigating the unfamiliar terrain of Soviet consumerism, she led Sherwood to a long counter located in the House of Fashion’s foyer and asked her which outfit from the fashion show she had liked. Sherwood’s description of a green miniskirt prompted the woman to give her “an I-should-have-known look” but she held her tongue and only asked Sherwood for seven kopecks before making her way to the busy counter. As she waited expectantly for the woman to return, Sherwood congratulated herself for finding a real bargain: “A pattern for only seven cents!” Elation gave way to confusion, however, when the woman handed her “a small piece of paper on which was sketched the green mini skirt.”3 Sherwood’s protestations that she needed a pattern—rather than a sketch—to give a friend back home did not garner much sympathy. “If she can sew, she will be able to make the skirt from this [sketch],” the woman stated decisively. Sewing clothes from sketches was exactly what Soviet women did on a regular basis, she informed her perplexed American acquaintance, and proudly brandished the sketches of “a three-piece 1 Debbie Sherwood, A Redhead in Red Square (New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1969), 159. 2 Ibid., 159-160. 3 Ibid., 160. 1 suit with a pleated skirt and fitted jacket,” “a frothy cocktail dress with a scooped neck and heavily embroidered bodice,” and a “pants suit” she was planning to make. Scrutinizing the attire of Soviet women around her, Sherwood noticed that some of them did indeed wear dresses that had “a unique and unusual look about them,” which she attributed to the fact that “somewhere between the sketches and the sewing machines the fashionable lines had got lost, the result being that the wearers looked as if they hadn’t been able to decide whether to go mod or not and had settled for a ‘half and half’ look.”4 Instead of relying on the free market to provide them with affordable, fashionable, and durable ready-made clothes, these women had to rely on home production, with all its inherent shortcomings. Sherwood’s anecdote exemplifies the dichotomous depiction of everyday life in the post-Stalinist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in the published accounts and official correspondence produced by Americans, regardless of the purpose or duration of their stay behind the “Iron Curtain.” On the one hand, ordinary Soviet citizens revealed a friendliness toward, a curiosity about, and even an admiration for the United States and its people in casual conversations with American visitors. On the other hand, the very same conversations, coupled with unfavorable impressions of a hardscrabble existence eked out by ordinary Soviets, left no doubt in Americans’ minds concerning the superiority of their way of life. This descriptive duality allowed American visitors to simultaneously humanize and individualize the faceless Soviet masses and criticize what they considered to be deficiencies inherent (and detrimental) to the Soviet system. Nuclear conflict between the two superpowers was not inevitable, they concluded, given 4 Ibid., 161. 2 the longing for peaceful coexistence expressed by Soviet men and women, but the triumph of the United States in the Cold War was, given the alleged inferiority of the Soviet way of life. The fact that some 57,000 Americans visited the Soviet Union in 1971 alone underscores the inherent permeability of the so-called “Iron Curtain” in the post-Stalinist era.5 It certainly made sense for Winston Churchill to evoke the powerful image of “an iron curtain” bisecting the war-torn European continent “[f]rom Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic” in 1946.6 A decade later, however, such stark and foreboding symbolism was out of touch with reality. The sudden death of Joseph Stalin on March 5, 1953, fundamentally recast the Cold War’s rules of engagement. Stalin’s successors in the Kremlin publicly disavowed his paranoid policy of self-imposed isolation by opening the Soviet Union in “teaspoon-size doses” to foreign tourists, including Americans.7 The Soviet historian Michael David-Fox has described the impact of that decision as “nothing less than revelatory.”8 A historic transformation did not happen overnight, especially given the ongoing power struggle between Georgi Malenkov and Nikita Khrushchev, but by 1956 there could be no doubt in anyone’s mind that the dark days of Stalinist xenophobia were a thing of the past. Like Francoist Spain, another much maligned European dictatorship, the USSR desperately “needed both friendship and money” and 5 Martin J. Hillenbrand, “Visitors To and From the Soviet Union,” February 10, 1972, p. 2, RG 59, Bilateral Political Relations (hereafter BPR), American Visits to the USSR, 1971-1973, Box 19, TRV – American Visits, 1972, National Archives. 6 For a history of the Cold War’s most famous metaphor, see Patrick Wright, Iron Curtain: From Stage to Cold War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 7 Donald J. Raleigh, Soviet Baby Boomers: An Oral History of Russia’s Cold War Generation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 5. 8 Michael David-Fox, “The Iron Curtain as Semipermeable Membrane: Origins and Demise of the Stalinist Superiority Complex,” in Cold War Crossings: International Travel and Exchange across the Soviet Bloc, 1940s-1960s, ed.