We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s historical legacy in foreign policy is most often associated with the disastrous American military intervention and escalation in Southeast Asia. While the passage of time has not diminished criticism of LBJ’s decision-making in Vietnam, scholars have come to recognize that his administration faced other, often complex international challenges. Some of these issues, like the emergence of a new set of European leaders pursing state interests that often clashed with Johnson’s grand strategic priorities, were of the traditional sort. Other global forces were novel and could not be understood only through a Cold War lens. These new challenges included tense dynamics within the Western alliance, the dilemmas of détente, the aftermath decolonization and the rise of new states, global public health, international monetary relations, and nuclear nonproliferation. This chapter explores how President Johnson navigated some of these complicated, cross-cutting international forces.
Between July 1972 and February 1974, the British Conservative government focused on creating a power-sharing settlement with the constitutional parties. In the meantime, the security and intelligence services would try to reduce IRA activity to a level at which it could not obstruct the power-sharing government. But once the power-sharing executive collapsed in May 1974, the British government's political policy radically shifted. Between May 1974 and December 1975, the British Labour government under Harold Wilson and Merlyn Rees envisaged an agreement on Northern Irish independence between Irish republicans, Ulster loyalists and others as being possible. This idea was not irrational. Various leading IRA and UDA members had demonstrated a willingness to contemplate an independent six-county Northern Ireland. Nonetheless, the Labour government refused to give the public or private declaration of intent to withdraw that the IRA wanted. The British feared that any declaration would provoke a loyalist uprising and civil war. The ceasefire collapsed as the IRA was not willing to forgo a British declaration of intent to withdraw. Nevertheless, the British Labour government under Harold Wilson had been willing to explore withdrawal from Northern Ireland, if republicans and loyalists could agree to independence.
A majority of IRA leaders agreed to a ceasefire in late December 1974 because the British government suggested privately that they were contemplating political withdrawal. This chapter also suggests that the ceasefire collapsed because the British government would not announce their withdrawal before a political settlement had been agreed. The British government feared that a declaration of intent to withdraw would provoke a loyalist uprising. Republicans did not trust that the British government would withdraw without a public or private declaration. Many grass-roots republicans felt tricked by the British government into a ceasefire that they began to believe had been designed to degrade the IRA’s armed capacity. However, evidence suggests that, in 1975, the British government wanted gradual political withdrawal from Northern Ireland. Many leading republicans were willing to politically compromise during that year and potentially accept an independent Northern Ireland. But pressure from grass-roots republicans meant that the leadership had to demand a British declaration of intent to withdraw.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.