This thesis seeks to establish William H. Taft’s influence over the U.S. experiment with empire in the Philippines. It shows how a politician who is often characterised as a loyal servant of Theodore Roosevelt, at least before 1909, was in fact a key driver of policy decisions. Taft’s views of empire may have been built on the ideas of others, but his own synthesis of these ideas and the career path he followed during this period single him out as one of the most influential figures in U.S.-Philippine relations. Taft saw the Philippine relationship as a long-term prospect and foresaw a future where the islands would eventually become a dominion of a United States, like the relationship between Great Britain and Canada. This, it is argued here, was Taft’s distinct “imperial vision.” This thesis reassesses the role of Taft in the American imperial experiment in the Philippines between the years 1900 and 1921. During this period Taft was the highest-profile figure arguing consistently for a permanent imperial relationship with the Philippine Islands. Various historians have covered Philippine affairs during this period, but none has made such a detailed analysis of Taft as a leader in guiding Philippine policy toward retention. Taft held a number of high-level roles during the period 1900-1913 – when the Republican Party continuously controlled Philippine policy – which allowed him to maintain a permanent influence over the nature of U.S.-Philippine relations. After this period Taft had less direct influence, but utilised his experience, reputation and contacts to speak out against the Democratic Party’s policy for the islands and became the figurehead of a campaign to retain the Philippines.

No description available.

<p>Antiwar activists and Congressional doves condemned the Nixon administration for supporting South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu, whom they accused of corruption, cruelty, authoritarianism, and inefficacy. To date, there has been no comprehensive analysis of Nixon’s decision to prop up a client dictator with seemingly so few virtues. Joshua Lovell’s dissertation addresses this gap in the literature, and argues that racism lay at the root of this policy. While American policymakers were generally contemptuous of the Vietnamese, they believed that Thieu partially transcended the alleged limitations of his race. The White House was relieved to find Thieu, who ushered South Vietnam into an era of comparative stability after a long cycle of coups. To US officials, Thieu appeared to be the only leader capable of planning and implementing crucial political, social, and economic policies, while opposition groups in Saigon’s National Assembly squabbled to promote their own narrow self-interests. Thieu also promoted American-inspired initiatives, such as Nixon’s controversial Vietnamization program, even though many of them weakened his government. Thieu’s performance as a national leader and administrator was dubious, at best, but the Nixon administration trumpeted his minor achievements and excused his gravest flaws. Senior policymakers doubted they would find a better leader than Thieu, and they ridiculed the rest of the South Vietnamese as fractious, venal, and uncivilized. While the alliance ultimately chilled over disagreements regarding the Paris peace negotiations, Washington’s perception of Thieu as a South Vietnamese superman facilitated a cordial relationship for most of Nixon’s first term in office.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

This study analyzes recent developments in U. S.- Iranian relations during the Nixon administration and attempts to portray the principal objectives of the United States and Iran vis-a-vis each other. Complex Interdependence is the model for development of the arguments. Due to the circumstances, however, the study substantially draws on Realism as well. Chapter I discusses methodology. Chapter II focuses on the Nixon Doctrine and its impact on U. S.-Iranian relations. Chapter III discusses the evolution of mutual interests between the two nations in the Gulf area. Chapter IV drawing on the previous chapters, concludes that an interdependent relation between the two nations has developed to the extent that in some areas policy of one nation would have an impact on the other, i.e., increase in the price of oil.

No description available.

This study examines the coalescence of American expatriate communities in Britain between 1815 and 1914. Blending transnational and post-colonial approaches to US history, this dissertation explores the nuanced roles of Americans in Britain as intermediaries in the consolidation of US independence, the formation of American nationalism, and the emergence of American empire. Transatlantic economic and cultural connections converged in American communities in Britain. The American communities of London and Liverpool evolved and dissolved around these rapidly transforming interconnections. These communities are recaptured in this study from scattered archives on both side of the Atlantic. The Antebellum American community acted as a conduit between British capital and American nation-building projects and promoted transatlantic rapprochement as the route to effective US independence. The importation of American innovation and manufactured goods into Britain and the Empire, however, followed late nineteenth-century expatriates. As US power surged, Americans in London created a self-identifying American “colony,” which acted as the interface between US economic and cultural expansion and British imperialism. Throughout the century, Britain’s American communities acted as crucibles in which sectional, national, and racial identifications were contested and reconstructed. Expatriate newspapers, celebrations, and social institutions, provided the venues for Americans in Britain to articulate and reformulate American nationalism. In the context of British power, the contestations and reformulations of these identities were bled through with post- and anti-colonial anxieties. Expatriates therefore acted as avatars for sharpening distinctions between the US and Britain in debates over the form of American national character, culture, and empire – and Britain’s role in all three. This study reframes these themes around the previously overlooked communities of Americans in Britain. From these communities, which stand at the intersection of US and British Imperial history, a new perspective emerges on the reciprocal dynamics of nationhood and empire in nineteenth century Anglo-American relations.

The focus of this thesis is Greece after the 1967 Colonels' Coup. After an analysis of American responses to military coups among allies since 1949, the Greek situation is explored in depth. Emphasis is given to Congressional and Executive infighting and bureaucratic interpretations of policy. The two presidents who dealt with the Colonels are studied for personal reaction. Sources include the New York Times and its Index, the Department of State Bulletins, current Greek history books, Congressional Hearings and other documents relating to Greece. Major conclusions are that Congressional- Executive infighting produced a meandering non-policy toward Greece, and there was a difference in Johnson's and Nixon's reaction with the latter being more pragmatic verbally but less effective factually.

No description available.

No description available.

This study examines the efforts of the Union and Confederate diplomatic agents to influence the events along the Rio Grande during the Civil War. The paper compares the successful accomplishments of Confederate agent Jose Quintero to the hindered maneuverings of the Union representatives, Leonard Pierce and M. M. Kimuey. Utilizing microfilmed sources from State Department records and Confederate despatches, the paper relates the steps Quintero took to secure the Confederate-Mexico border trade, obtain favorable responses from the various ruling parties in northern Mexico, and hamper the Union agents' attempts to quell the border trade.