“Isolationism”? Debating America’S Place in the Global Arena, C.1965-1974

Specters of “Isolationism”? Debating America’s Place in the Global Arena, c.1965-1974 by Erin Black A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of History University of Toronto © Copyright by Erin Black, 2009 Library and Archives Bibliothèque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l’édition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-59049-2 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-59049-2 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non- L’auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l’Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L’auteur conserve la propriété du droit d’auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author’s permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privée, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont été enlevés de thesis. cette thèse. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n’y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Specters of “Isolationism”? Debating America’s Place in the Global Arena, c.1965-1974 Erin Black Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Toronto 2009 ABSTRACT The United States emerged from the Second World War determined to play a leading role in the maintenance of international order. Increasing levels of tension between the United States and the forces of communism after 1945, however, slowly forced a redefinition of what might be more distinctly termed America’s “global” responsibilities, such that by 1961 John F. Kennedy declared that the United States would “pay any price. .in order to assure the survival and success of liberty.” An identifiable Cold War consensus took shape based on the assumption that it was America’s responsibility to lead, protect, and defend, the “free-world.” Since America was effectively waging a battle to ensure the successful spread of its own values, the Cold War consensus also served to severely limit debate—dissent essentially implied disloyalty. By the mid-1960s, however, the Cold War consensus began to crack and a debate over American foreign policy began to emerge. That debate is the focus of this dissertation, which looks at the opposition to Cold War policies which emerged in the Senate, most notably among the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee—many of whom had once played a role in developing the very foreign policies they now protested. The war in Vietnam provided the focal point for much of the dissent, but the foreign aid program also became heavily criticized, as did America’s ii iii NATO policy, particularly the size of the American military presence in Europe. More important, however, Senate dissenters came to question the United States’ very position as the principle defender of the free world. They did not dispute the idea that America had a significant role to play in the global arena, but they did not believe that role should consist of being the world’s policeman, the self-appointed arbiter of other’s affairs, and the keeper of the status quo. Because of their views, the so-called dissenters were labelled as “neo- isolationists.” They saw themselves the true “internationalists,” however, believing that the Cold War had led to confusion between internationalism and indiscriminate global involvement. Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been possible without the aid and support of a number of different people and agencies. The University of Toronto and the Ontario Graduate Scholarship program funded much of my graduate education, though the majority of the research for this project was funded by the (Canada - U.S.) Fulbright Exchange Program, which also afforded me a wonderful year living in the United States. For offering me a welcoming home during that time, I wish to thank James Goldgeier, the George Washington Cold War Group at IERES, and the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University. I am also indebted to the staff at a number of research facilities, in particular: Rodney Ross, an extremely helpful Congressional Archivist at the National Archives of the United States, Washington DC (Archives I); Vera Ekechukwu, the care-taker of the J. William Fulbright Papers at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville; Donna McCrae, who assisted me in my research in the Mike Mansfield Papers at the K. Ross Toole Archives in the Mike and Maureen Mansfield Library, University of Montana, Missoula; and the general staff at the National Archives in College Park, MD (Archives II). Much closer to home, I would like to extend my gratitude to Ronald Pruessen, my supervisor. His unflagging support, encouragement, wisdom, and guidance have seen me through this project in ways that I can never repay (and that he probably is not even aware of). Similar thanks are also owed to Margaret MacMillan and Robert Bothwell, both of whom served on my dissertation committee. I would also like to acknowledge Carol Chin. She has been an incredible mentor to me and her support, both intellectual and moral, carried me through a number of frustrating times. In particular, when faced with the sheer volume of my iv v research, Carol helped get me writing in the first place (and she helped keep me writing by offering sage advice on balancing teaching responsibilities with completing the dissertation). Last, though he is not so close to home, I would like to thank Thomas Zeiler of the University of Colorado at Boulder. Dr. Zeiler served as my external appraisal and I could not have asked for a more detailed, thoughtful, and helpful review of my dissertation. I am also fortunate to have had a great group of people in the graduate history program sharing this journey with me. The cohort I entered the program with went out of its way to create a network amongst itself both inside and outside of graduate life. Others, who were either already in the program or came later, also became key sources of support, and life-long friends. Though hesitant to single out people (for fear of offending others), I do wish to extend a special thanks to Mairi MacDonald. She has graciously served as my principal sounding board, both for matters pertaining to this project and matters of life in general. Her support on both fronts will be forever appreciated. Outside of “PhD’dom” I would like to recognize Liviya Mendelsohn. Liv, quite frankly, helped keep me sane on several occasions. Last and certainly not least, this would not have been possible without the encouragement and support of my family—especially my sister, Rose, who has also been my roommate for the vast majority of this journey. She deserves recognition not only for consistently supporting me, but for having also managed to put up with me in the many moments when I was undoubtedly unbearable to live with! It is to Rose, and to my mother, that I dedicate this thesis. Also to the Boys (who shall remain unidentified beyond this simple description). Table of Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgements iv Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Cracks in the Cold War Consensus 21 Chapter 2: Foreign Aid: “One of the Most Vexing 65 Problems of American Foreign Policy” Chapter 3: Vietnam, Part I: 101 “All Choices Open to Us Are Bad Choices” Chapter 4: Vietnam, Part II: 150 “The Most Troublesome Question Before Our Country” Chapter 5: NATO: The Call for 197 “A Long Over Due Adjustment” Chapter 6: “The Time has Come for Congress to Draw the Line”: 231 Debating Foreign Aid, Vietnam, and NATO in the Nixon Administration Chapter 7: Debating America’s Place in the Global Arena: 275 Specters of “Isolationism”? Bibliography 325 vi Introduction The question of what constitutes an appropriate role for the United States in the global arena is of central importance to understanding American foreign relations. This dissertation examines a period, c.1965-1974, when the struggle to answer that question was particularly pronounced. More specifically, it focuses on a debate emerging between the Johnson and Nixon administrations and members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The former subscribed to the Cold War consensus, which operated on the assumption that because of everything the United States stood for, America’s immense power obligated it to assume the role of protector and defender of the “free world.” The latter, while not disputing the idea that the United States had significant responsibilities in the global arena, nonetheless came to reject the idea, originally inspired by the Cold War, that the United States should function as the world’s policeman—the self-appointed arbiter of others’ affairs, and the keeper of the status quo.

Load more