Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:19:53.192Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Issue of State Power: The Council on Foreign Relations as a Case Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

Inderjeet Parmar
Inderjeet Parmar
Affiliation:
Inderjeet Parmar is Lecturer in American Studies at the University of Manchester, M13 9PL, England. He acknowledges the financial assistance provided by the University and by West London I.H.E. in preparing this paper.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has long been recognised as one of the most influential of modern American institutions. Indeed, for some scholars at least, the relationship between the Council and the federal government has been a troubling one. A private group that is exclusive and unrepresentative in membership, funded by large corporations and foundations, highly secretive about its operations, and ensconced in the centres of state power, raises serious issues of principle for a democracy. At its crudest, the question is who “controls” whom, the state or the unofficial group? Allowing for a more complex relationship between an official policy elite and outside advisors, just what are the points of convergence or divergence between these “internal” and “external” bureaucrats, as Chadwick F. Alger has called them? Such issues draw attention to the nature of the state itself, and, whatever the proper role of the CFR in the American system of government, its existence provides an opportunity to examine a number of major ideas about power and the state.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of American Studies , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , April 1995 , pp. 73 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Alger, , “The External Bureaucracy in United States Foreign Affairs,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 7, (06 1962), 50–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 For a very useful discussion of these issues, see Mann, Michael, States, War and Capitalism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988)Google Scholar.

3 Hogan, Michael J., “Corporatism: A Positive Appraisal,” Diplomatic History 10 (1984)Google Scholar; Walker, Jack L., Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and Social Movements (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Thompson, John A., “Another Look at the Downfall of ‘Fortress America,’” Journal of American Studies, 26, (12 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Shoup, and Minter, , Imperial Brain Trust (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1977)Google Scholar; Schulzinger, , The Wise Men of Foreign Affairs: History of the Council on Foreign Relations (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

6 Domhoff, G. William, The Power Elite and the State (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990)Google Scholar.

7 Shoup and Minter, 161.

8 A thorough statement of the statist position may be found in Mann, cited above, and in Skocpol, Theda, States and Social Revolutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and in Skocpol, et al. , Bringing the State Back In (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985)Google Scholar. These analyses, however, tend to under-emphasise the importance of domestic interests in foreign policy formulation.

9 Krasner, , Defending the National Interest (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1978), 11Google Scholar.

10 For evidence, see Dobson, Alan, US Wartime Aid to Britain (London: Croom Helm, 1986)Google Scholar; Gardner, Richard, Sterling-Dollar Diplomacy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956)Google Scholar; Reynolds, David, The Creation of the Anglo-American Alliance 1937–1941 (London: Europa Publications, 1981)Google Scholar; evidence of official support for multilateralism, international institutions, and a global role for the American state, may be found in the files of the Treasury, State Department, Department of Commerce, the papers of Roosevelt, and the Presidential Diaries of Henry Morgenthau, jr. In particular, see FDR's correspondence with the Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies, 1940–41, in OF 4230, and with the FBI on surveillance of the America First Committee, 1938–43, in OF 4330; and in OF 4351, for evidence of the interest in promoting internationalism taken by the Office of War Information (available at Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park, New York). The papers of Leo Pasvolsky, in RG 59, are also revealing; as are the files of the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce in the Commerce Department, in RG 151, especially section 400 — Trade Promotion; see also papers of the National Resources Planning Board, especially Box 3, Nov. 1942, in RG 187 (all at the National Archives, Washington, DC).

11 Schulzinger, 75–76.

12 For more on the RIIA, see Parmar, Inderjeet, “Chatham House and the Anglo-American Alliance,” Diplomacy and Statecraft, 3, (03 1992), 23–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Shepardson was a lawyer by profession, adviser to the Army Department in Paris; later closely linked with the State Department, and Director of CFR 1921–66; Thomas W. Lamont was a partner in JP Morgan and Co., and leading Anglophile; Isaiah Bowman was a geographer and later President of Johns Hopkins University.

14 Schulzinger, 3. Root was a conservative internationalist and a former Secretary of State under Theodore Roosevelt.

15 Schulzinger, 6.

16 Shepardson, Whitney Hart, Early History of the Council on Foreign Relations (Stamford, CT.: The Overbrook Press, 1960), 6Google Scholar.

17 The Council on Foreign Relations: A Record of Twenty Five Years 1925–46 (New York: CFR, 1947), 7Google Scholar.

18 Dockrill, Michael, “Historical Note,” International Affairs, 54, (Autumn 1980), 665CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 The Council …, 62.

20 The Council …, 25.

21 Handbook of the Council on Foreign Relations (New York: CFR, 1920), 4–6Google Scholar.

22 The Council …, 11–12.

23 The Council …, 37.

24 Foreword by Bundy, , in Palmer, Robert J., Foreign Affairs 50-Year Index (New York: Bowker and Co., 1973), vGoogle Scholar. The journal was founded in 1922.

25 Annual Report of the CFR. Report of the Executive Director 1931–35 (New York: CFR, 1935), 5Google Scholar.

26 See for example, Fisher, Donald, “The Role of Philanthropic Foundations in the Reproduction and Production of Hegemony: Rockefeller Foundations and the Social Sciences,” Sociology, 17, (05 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fisher, , “Amercan Philanthropy and the Social Sciences in Britain 1919–1939: the Reproduction of Conservative Ideology,” Sociological Review, 28, (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and also, Berman, Edward H., The Influence of the Carnegie, Ford, and Rockefeller Foundations on American Foreign Policy: The Ideology of Philanthropy (Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1983)Google Scholar.

27 Memorandum, “Postwar Policy in Support of International Relations,” by Joseph H. Willits, RF Director for the Social Sciences, 14 May 1945, Rockefeller Archives Center, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, RG 3 Administration, Program and Policy, Series 910, Box 8, Folder 67; North Tarrytown, New York, USA.

28 The figures are derived from CC Annual Reports.

29 Annual Report of CFR, 1937–38, 8.

30 Dye, Thomas R., Who's Running America? The Carter Years (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1979), 166–167Google Scholar.

31 Schulzinger, , The Wise Men of Foreign Affairs, 13Google Scholar.

32 RG, Group C — Anglo-American Relations, Vol. 7, 1936, 4.

33 Memorandum, E-B34, “Methods of Economic Collaboration: Introductory. The Role of the Grand Area in American Economic Policy,” by Arthur R. Upgren and William Diebold, jr., 24 July, 1941; in War-Peace Studies files, CFR.

34 Memorandum, P-B23, “Basic American Interests,” by Walter R. Sharp, 10 July 1941; War-Peace Studies files.

35 Memorandum, P-B31, “Considerations Affecting a Lend-Lease Settlement With Great Britain,” 22 Nov. 1941.

36 Digest of Discussion, “The United States and the United Nations in War and Peace,” Study Group, first meeting, 4 Dec. 1942; RG, D, Vol. XII, 1942.

37 Schulzinger, 18.

38 Krenn, Michael, US Policy Toward Economic Nationalism in Latin America, 1917–1929 (Washington, D.C.: Scholarly Resources, 1990), 62Google Scholar. Root, Elihu quoted from Schmitz, David F., The United States and Fascist Italy 1922–1940 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988), 84Google Scholar.

39 Memorandum, “The division between internal and external concerns of a state, and the traditions and recent practice of American diplomacy in this regard”; see also Annex B to this memo, “Reasons for continuous voluntary association by the United States with Great Britain in matters, involving other countries, in which both have a political interest” ; all in RG, C, Vol. 1, 1922. Report, “Anglo-American Naval Question,” 1 June 1929; RG, I, “Anglo-American Study Group,” Vol. 2, 1928, 3.

40 Memorandum, P-B19, “The Island of Great Britain as a Factor in the Strategy of American Defense,” 16 May 1941, War-Peace Studies files.

41 Memorandum, P-B20, “The Political Conditions of American British Partnership,” 4 June 1941; P-B23, “Basic American Interests,” 10 July 1941; and P-B28, “Institutional Arrangements for Postwar American-British Cooperation,” 17 Sept. 1941; Memorandum, A-B105, “Military Aspects of an Anglo-American Agreement,” 1 May 1944, all in War-Peace Studies files.

42 Memorandum, A-B123, “The Changing Strategic Position of Britain,” 31 July 1945, War-Peace Studies files.

43 Memorandum and discussion, “Economic Aspects of American Foreign Policy,” 2 March 1946; RG, Vol. XIX, “Economic Aspects of American Foreign Policy,” 1945. Will Clayton was Assistant Secretary of State.

44 Shoup, and Minter, , Imperial Brain Trust, 161Google Scholar.

45 Schulzinger.

46 Dahl, Robert A., Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961)Google Scholar; Polsby, Nelson, Community Power and Political Theory (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963)Google Scholar.

47 See for example, Bachrach, Peter and Baratz, Morton S., “Two Faces of Power,” American Political Science Review, 56, (12 1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Isaac, Jeffrey C., Power and Marxist Theory (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987)Google Scholar.

48 The War and Peace Studies of the Council on Foreign Relations 1939–1945 (New York: CFR, 1946), 2–6Google Scholar.

49 Ibid. 2–3.

50 Resolution to fund CFR, 5/6 Dec. 1939, in RG I, Series 100, Box 99, Folder 893, Rockefeller Foundation Archives.

51 The War and Peace Studies …, 13.

52 “Report of the Secretary, War and Peace Studies Project”, 15 Dec. 1939 to 1 Sept. 1940, “Meeting of Research Committee, CFR, 10 Sept. 1940”; in State Department files, RG 59, Decimal File 811.43, Council on Foreign Relations; at the National Archives, Washington, DC, USA.

53 Memorandum of Conversation, George S. Messersmith, 12 Sept. 1939, ibid. Messersmith was also a member of the CFR.

54 The War and Peace Studies …, 19–24.

55 Record of interview with Mallory at Carnegie Corporation, 8 Feb. 1941; Grant Files: Council on Foreign Relations (through 1945), Carnegie Corporation Archives, Butler Library, The Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Columbia University, New York, USA.

56 The War and Peace Studies …, 14–17.

57 Policy Summaries — Document H67: “Colonial Problems: Future Status of Greenland,” 13 Oct. 1943; in Records of Harley A. Notter, Miscellaneous Subject Files — Box 14; National Archives.

58 Schulzinger, 70–73; Shoup and Minter, 123–124. For more on this decision, see Reynolds, David, “Lord Lothian and Anglo-American Relations, 1939–40,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 73, pt. 2 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Reynolds, , The Creation of the Anglo-American Alliance, 1937–41 (London: Europa Publications, 1981)Google Scholar.

59 See FDR Papers — OF 4230: Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies, 1940; FDR Library, Hyde Park, New York, USA.

60 Shoup and Minter, 162–163; Schulzinger, 74; and Wilson, Theodore A., The First Summit: Roosevelt and Churchill at Placentia Bay 1941 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1961)Google Scholar.

61 Shoup and Minter, 140 and 168–169.

62 Letter, Hull to Norman Davis, 1 Oct. 1942; letter, Pasvolsky to Stettinius, 20 Nov. 1943; both in RG 59, Leo Pasvolsky Office File, 1942, Box 3, and 1943–44, Box 5; National Archives.

63 Letter, A-L to European Affairs Division, 5 April 1940; RG 59, Decimal File 811.43, CFR.

64 Letter, Long to Wilson, 20 July 1940; Wilson to Long, 13 July 1940; in RG 59, Decimal File 811.43.

65 Letter, Burke to Long, 7 Nov. 1940, ibid.

66 Letter, Wilson to Long, 13 July 1940.

67 Memorandum by Charles W. Yost, Division of Special Research, to Pasvolsky, 14 April 1942, 1.

68 Armstrong to Pasvolsky, 19 June 1944; Mallory to Pasvolsky, 25 Oct. 1944; Mallory to Pasvolsky, 21 Nov. 1944; RG 59, Leo Pasvolsky File, Box 5, 1943–44.