After Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931, both Japan and China sought the support of America. There has been a historical assumption that, starting with the hostilities in 1931, the Japanese were maligned in American public opinion. Consequently, the assumption has been made that Americans supported the Chinese without reserve during their conflict with Japan in the 1930s. The aim of this study is to question the accuracy of that assumption in the case of Portland, Oregon. An analysis of newspapers and print material specifically focusing on Japan and China from before the conflict reveal that the general American opinion of Japan by 1931 had shifted from admiration to suspicion and fear. The American view of China, meanwhile, had shifted from contempt to pity. When Japan invaded China, both countries lobbied for support via books, articles, and public speakers. By analyzing the speeches and publications available, this study finds that the Japanese argued for security and economic benefit, while the Chinese argued for liberty and justice. In Portland, the public opinion was strongly supportive of Japan before the 1930s, and Japan's hostilities toward China did not immediately change the opinion. Instead, an analysis of The Oregonian, the Portland City Club, and a student summit at Reed college reveal that the opinion in Portland was far more forgiving of Japan than the general American outlook. Portlanders focused on how to ease the tensions between Japan and America, even supporting Japanese calls for an Asian League of Nations headed by Japan. Further complicating the discourse in Portland was the issue of communism. Portland -- and the Pacific Northwest in general -- had been very involved with socialism in the period before the First World War. After the war, support for socialism had diverged into support for communism, for those who remained radicals, and vehement distrust of communism, for those who did not. The tension between these two groups led to outbursts of violence that left a mark on the memories of the people of the Northwest. Those who supported communism remembered the slights, which would lead them to support the Bolsheviks in the 1930s. Those who distrusted communism remembered the real threat that communism represented. When the Japanese began their propaganda against China, one of their strongest claims was that the Chinese could not hold back the tide of communism, and that only Japan was properly prepared to do so in East Asia. This claim brought up old fears in the Portland populace, most of whom did not support communism. Thus, Japanese claims of working to prevent the communist threat, coupled with the assertion of an economic boon, helped maintain a more favorable view of Japan in Portland. Following the 1937 attack on Nanking, however, Japanese action was deemed reprehensible and Portland began to turn against Japan. By profiling the public opinion of Portland toward Japan in the 1930s, this study adds to the growing body of research on the complexities of the relationship between America and Japan during the twentieth century.

This study covers not only the cause of Korea’s entry into the world affairs with the United States in 1882, but also it is a study of modern power politics in the Far East, in which Korea played a significant role. The importance of the Korea position in international affairs has been dimly treated by the Western World - yet, she is a nation populated by approximately thirty millions; the thirteenth largest nation in the world, and Koreans are the most homogenous people in the world; the nation, which is thrust down off the coast of Asia between the thirty-fifth and forty-fifth parallels and separating the Sea of Japan form the Yellow Sea, greatly contributed her civilization to mankind at a time when the great Roman Empire was busy conquering the world at an excessive speed

This study of political decision-making stressing the process of decision-making in a group setting is, in part, a reaction against traditional approaches of political analysis. The study of international relations is overburdened with historical studies of the interaction between states. The classic approach to the study of a given decision by one government affecting another might be called the “rational actor model”. This model treats the state as the entity reaching the decision. The decision itself is seen as behavior that reflects a rational purpose or intent. The central concepts of the model center around the calculated weighing of goals, alternatives, consequences, and choices. The “rational actor model” is the dominant method of current political analysis. I will implicitly contend in this paper that the concept of foreign policy as a rational process of gathering information, setting alternatives, and making decisions is not an adequate tool of understanding. In fact, the “rational actor model” does not make sense out of much political phenomenon. I will directly contend in this paper that a process model of political decision-making provides an adequate and helpful tool for the understanding of political decisions.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles began trying to make military matériel available to Latin America during the latter 1930s. Little progress was made until passage of the Lend-Lease Act in 1941 enabled Washington to furnish eighteen Latin American nations with about $493,000,000 worth of military assistance during World War II. This study, based primarily on State Department lend-lease decimal files in the National Archives and documents published in Foreign Relations volumes, views the policy's background, development, and implementation in each recipient nation. The conclusion is that the policy produced mixed results for the United States and Latin America.

Between 1784 and I8l6, all four Barbary nations had captured and enslaved Americans. Generally the pirates treated the imprisoned Americans harshly, but the aid the United States forwarded to them alleviated much of their suffering. During this period the prisoner issue played an important role in formulating American foreign policy in the Mediterranean because of America's keen commercial interest in that region and its benevolent attitude toward its own citizens. In return, those captive Americans in North Africa supplied their government with valuable intelligence, and, after liberation, some continued to serve their country in the Mediterranean area.