The Tragedy of American Diplomacy

by William Appleman Williams

Book Overview

One of the first modern historians to integrate economic realities into the study of American foreign policy, William Appleman Williams has been a diplomatic historian of major influence since the... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: B00DEOHKQG
• Release Date: January 1962
• Publisher: Delta
• Length: 309 Pages
• Weight: 0.75 lbs.

Customer Reviews

Economics and Foreign Policy

William Appleman Williams is arguably the first modern historian to combine economic considerations with American foreign policy. In The Tragedy of American Diplomacy Williams looks at the incongruity between America's espoused ideals and the "tragic" uses it mobilizes its immense power. Williams argues that other states must kowtow to America's mental image of democracy or face the wrath of America's military capacity. Arguably, if some attention is put into policy such a scenario might be avoided and prevented. Moreover, if citizens are willing to give Williams a serious reading American foreign policy might in due course mirror a broader American vision rather than the interests of a select few. William's canvas is large - he begins with the Open Door Notes of 1898 then closes out with Vietnam. In The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, William Appleman Williams shows how America fails to live up to its high ideals and principles when it relates to foreign policy. Americans, Williams argues, espouse some notion of self-determination and the sovereignty to evolve its unique variety of democracy. Sadly, no other country is allowed to aspire and develop the same. This hegemonic practice is, according to Williams, is at the heart of the tragedy. Cuba is William's loci and a case that he likes to (re)visit. America's elite required Cuba to conform to its vision, which meant prosperity for the sugar planters and their American patrons. Unfortunately, when Cuba threw off its despotic regime, America reacted. The fissure between the two nations has been around ever since the overthrow and no American administration will ever recognize Cuba so long as Castro is in power. Williams then methodically tracks the years from 1898 through 1961 and reasons along the same lines and It will become apparent rather quickly that American policy follows along the same economic considerations no matter which country. Williams makes a compelling case for the centrality of economic considerations. Juxtaposing this book with Daniel Yergin's The Prize suggests that a Saudi Arabian revolution would disturb oil markets and render world economies vulnerable.

Created An "Open Door" To Exploring The True Nature Of Pax Americana

William Appleman Williams critique of Pax America was a brave intellectual opening on the heals of McCarthyism. One only needs to read the soft & measured tones of his sentences in Tragedy Of American Diplomacy to feel the anxieties he must have had...not knowing of the future consequences of his personal well being. As a student, I became aware of William Appleman Williams through Sidney Bell. Bell recieved his PHD from the University of Wisconsin. So many WAW proteges such as Gabriel Kolko which have refined WAW's work. As a student of History and seeker of truth, kudos to William Appleman Williams and the intellectual foundation he built.

The Tragedy of American Diplomacy

In the Tragedy of American Diplomacy, William Appleman Williams illustrates how America fails to honor its own principles when it approaches foreign policy. America believes in self-determination and the right to develop its own brand of democracy. Unfortunately, no other nation is afforded the luxury of self discovery. Other nations must conform to America's vision of democracy or face the terror of America?s military might. This, to Williams, is the tragedy.Cuba is his first case. America wanted Cuba to adhere to American visions which meant wealth for the sugar planters and their American backers. When Cuba sought its own course and threw off a repressive regime, America objected. The rift has existed ever since as no American administration will ever acknowledge Cuba's right to govern its own affairs so long as Castro is in power.Williams then systematically follows the years from 1898 through 1961 and paints a similar picture. It does not take the reader long to get the idea and carry the argument beyond Williams' parameters and show that everything from Grenada to Lebanon to Afghanistan to Iraq can be shown in the same light. American puppet governments are not granting freedom and democracy to their constituents as much as they are part of a ruling class dominated by the business interests that exploit their workforce and deny requests for reform until the entire population is ripe for rebellion (remember the Shah of Iran). One wonders if the Saudi government is the next great western ally to fall victim to a popular revolt of Muslim fundamentalists.Williams is a master of detail and works his arguments creatively in an entertaining fashion. Neoconservatives of today will have the same objections as their predecessors from the 1950s in acknowledging Williams as a valid author. But Williams makes a strong case and if more people were exposed to his writing, our country might even find a way to avoid the same pitfalls. A Saudi revolution would disrupt oil markets and jeopardize world economies. Perhaps if some thought is put into policy such a scenario is avoidable and preventable. If people are willing to give Williams a chance American foreign policy might eventually reflect a broader American vision rather than the interests of a few.

A revisionist manifesto on U.S. foreign policy

The Tragedy of American Diplomacy holds a unique place in the annals of foreign policy and diplomatic history. As the veritable grand-daddy of revisionism in this field, its influence has been pervasive. As proponents worked to produce revisionist studies in the same vein and opponents set out to debunk those new arguments, a postrevisionist synthesis of sorts has emerged. Williams' focus on economics in the determination of American diplomacy has compelled other historians to take better take economic factors into account and in so doing to gain more understanding of the subject. While the field of study has benefited from the influence of this book, the arguments of the book itself are often questionable.I found this book to be fascinating, sometimes insightful and sometimes propagandistic. As Bradford Perkins says in his essay on the book's influence, this is a manifesto rather than a monograph. The politics of the author appear clearly on the very first page, as he condemns the American invasion of Cuba and holds the policy behind that move up as a shining example of the tragedy of American diplomacy in his eyes. Williams' acknowledged radical views are spread liberally throughout the book, and they often serve to disrupt my own interest in some of his arguments. Basically, he says the drive for economic expansion, as espoused in the Open Door Doctrine of the late 1890s, determined American foreign policy from that time on, that it became a veritable axiom of American political thought. In Williams' eyes, the intensive desire to expand America's market and sell her surplus products throughout the world led to a problematic form of economic imperialism and inevitably did much to start the Cold War. His discussion of economic policy as foreign policy in the wake of the depression of the 1890s and up until the end of World War II struck me as very insightful and even compelling. While he says that America's intentions were indeed humanitarian, the policy caused other nations to resent America's dominating influence in their societies and further fueled the revolutions of the first half of the twentieth century. Williams' argument diminishes in impact, however, when he comes to discuss the origins of the Cold War. His portrait of the U.S. is one of an economically aggressive, imperial power seeking to remake the world in America's image. He contends that America was in fact the opposite of isolationist in its policies and that its steps forced the Soviet Union into a corner and brought on the Cold War.William's intense radicalism thwarts his own efforts. He goes out of his way to defend the Soviet Union and its policies. He describes Stalin as a man who had no intention of spreading communism, only wanting to secure his own borders after World War II. America is the bully that "forces" Stalin to take over Eastern Europe and install the iron curtain there. His U.S.S.R. is one always looking to compromise and to live in peace with

Revisionist Trailblazer

The term "revisionist historian" has come lately to describe one who conforms to an ideology of "politically correctness". William Appleman Williams, however, embodies the true definition of a revisionist: one who examines the evidence from a new angle and breaks with the traditional interpretations. "The Tragedy of American Diplomacy" is such a text. Beginning with the Spanish-American War of 1898, Williams presents the United States as a tough and, at times, ruthless aggrandizer of its economic power and expansion. The traditional teaching of US history involves emphasis on American isolationist tendencies and stress on the nonexistence of an "American Empire." Williams challenges that presentation. While acknowledging that the US has never really had an empire on the model of the British or French empires, Williams argues that the US empire has always been economical. The Open Door Policy, generally associated with US-Chinese relations, actually formed a larger US economic philosophy adhered to in US relations everywhere. The American opposition and responses to Fidel Castro's revolution in Cuba (the culminating event in the book) stemmed largely from the loss of economic privileges, rather than the nebulous ideology of anti-Communism. Williams provocative analysis goes a long way toward altering traditional portrayals of US foreign policy and its goals, and inspired the careers of a whole generation of truly revisionist historians.