American diplomatic historian’s consideration of the role of ideology in the formation of American foreign policy has only recently begun to receive more attention. Traditional focuses on economics and relations among great nation-states have predominated the historical literature. This work examines the powerful effect that ideology, particularly race and anti-communism, played in developing the U.S.’s relationship with a small power nation-state, Australia, between 1933 and 1953. This work is comparative in nature, relying on archival research in both American and Australian archives and examines the attitudes of both elite policymakers as well as common individuals in shaping the alliance between the two states. Theoretically, this work draws upon theories about whiteness that historians such as Theodore Allen and Matthew Frye Jacobson have formulated over the past twenty years. This dissertation concludes that a commitment to an ideology of race and anticommunism played a central role in the development of the American – Australian alliance contrary to standard historical interpretations that have placed economics or pragmatic national security interests at the center of the bond between the two states. The outcomes of this study offer new insights into the nature of alliance building by the U.S. in the twentieth century as well as a how ideology effects coalition warfare.

The “twice-looted” archives refer to a vast body of documents that were looted by Nazi agencies during, and again by Soviet Army units immediately following World War II. The archives were taken in the context of the two most intensive programs of cultural heritage looting in modern history. Their fate remained unknown until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Since then, many efforts have been made to return the documents to their original owners. However, significant obstacles have hindered restitution, leaving a large body of foreign archives in Russia. By connecting the history and current status of the “twice-looted” archives to archival theory and ethical principles on cultural heritage property, this thesis provides a foundation from which to approach archival restitution. The analysis of recent additions to archival theory provides new understandings of archival meaning that may facilitate the restitution of archives displaced by war. Reviewing the details of the archives’ successive seizures leading to their extended residency in the secret “Special Archive” (TsGOA) and discussing restitution developments on national and international levels reveals how exploitation of archives during war violates archival principles. Concluding with specific case studies further illustrates the complex nature of archives and archival meaning and its significance for archival restitution. These discussions reveal the damages that result when archives become targets of war. This in turn, encourages respect for archives and brings attention to the necessity of safeguarding archival heritage.

This thesis will reassess the traditional doctrine of diplomatic protection in light of two significant and related developments in modern international law: (i) the proliferation of international human rights law and its granting of rights to individuals as subjects of international law; and (ii) the evolving conception of State sovereignty as including responsibility pursuant to the U.N.’s “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. It will argue that the traditional doctrine – which holds that States have a discretionary right to espouse claims on behalf of their own nationals for wrongs committed against them by other States, but that the individuals harmed have no right to protection – is outdated and that these developments should lead to the recognition of a limited individual right and concomitant State obligation to provide diplomatic protection in certain circumstances. Responsibility to protect thus confirms a duty to protect using diplomatic means.

This thesis will reassess the traditional doctrine of diplomatic protection in light of two significant and related developments in modern international law: (i) the proliferation of international human rights law and its granting of rights to individuals as subjects of international law; and (ii) the evolving conception of State sovereignty as including responsibility pursuant to the U.N.’s “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. It will argue that the traditional doctrine – which holds that States have a discretionary right to espouse claims on behalf of their own nationals for wrongs committed against them by other States, but that the individuals harmed have no right to protection – is outdated and that these developments should lead to the recognition of a limited individual right and concomitant State obligation to provide diplomatic protection in certain circumstances. Responsibility to protect thus confirms a duty to protect using diplomatic means.

The paper attempts to analyze the greater influences of the Greek War for Independence through an assessment of the greater forces of the. Enlightenment, Romanticism, and Great Power politics

Situated within the fields of diplomatic history and comparative genocide studies, this thesis examines the German colonial period from the standpoint of German-British relations before, during and after the Second Boer War in British South Africa (1899-1902) and the Herero and Nama War in German South West Africa (present-day Namibia, 1904-1908). I contend that German and British diplomatic efforts at cordiality functioned as a means of tacitly condoning each power’s humanitarian abuses—or at least “letting them slide”—for the sake of stability both on the European Continent and within the colonies. Despite activism against reported maltreatment and violence—even among citizens of “the perpetrating power” and among those of “the observing power”­—neither the German nor the British government was willing to chastise the other openly, for fear of alienating a key ally. Only with the advent of the First World War, when the former allies became enemies, did an explosion of criticism of each other’s maltreatment of their colonial subjects erupt. In the wake of German defeat, the British victors reaped the spoils of war—including the ability to shape perceptions of what had happened nearly two decades before in the African colonies—and succeeded in expropriating the German overseas territories in the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. From this narrative the following conclusion emerges: German and British official responses to humanitarian concerns in the colonies were dictated not by morality or compassion but rather by realpolitik expediency. And, as often in history, the one-sided narrative that emerged from this rather hypocritical series of events continues to skew perceptions of both British and German colonialism today. Thus, as a whole, this thesis poses broad theoretical questions regarding the politicization of morality and the social construction of genocide classifications, as well as the extent to which changing perceptions of violent conflicts have played a role in how the international community has categorized these conflicts through legal means in the wake of the Holocaust.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2002. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 203-220). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2002. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 203-220). Also available on the Internet.

This paper tries to determine to what extent US diplomatic and military support for Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries influences these countries’ decisions to become more assertive in the region, thereby provoking Russia’s aggressive behavior. It employs Robert Jervis’s framework of ‘deterrence and perception’ which, among other things, suggests that a weaker state will or will not be deterred from initiating a conflict against its stronger adversary depending on whether this state receives strong signals of third-party support and whether this state receives strong signals of threat. The case studies explored are Georgia and Ukraine, with particular attention to both countries’ relations with the United States (as the source for third-party support) and Russia (as the source for threat). The main finding is that Georgia’s perception of the US support was not sufficient to motivate Georgia to invade South Ossetia and thereby initiate a five-day war with Russia in August 2008. Georgia’s perception of Russia’s threat to carry out the policy of “creeping annexation” of South Ossetia and Abkhazia was the primary motivator behind Georgia’s behavior. / text

This dissertation explores the cultural and intellectual factors in the remaking of US-Japan relations which transformed as the two countries transitioned from enemies to allies after 1945. Diverging from the traditional approaches of diplomatic and political history that, focusing on state actors, describe policymaking processes, I comparatively study public discourses in 1940s-early 1950s America and Japan where various groups and actors - politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, scholars, and intellectuals - participated and created. Both peoples shared a similar discourse concerning modernization and, indeed, developed parallel ideas about modern Japanese history and the causes of Japanese militarism, the postwar democratization of Japan, and the making of a postwar Asian peace. They believed in the European progressive view of history, variously interpreted, and judged Japan to be "underdeveloped," compared with the "advanced West," having become an unlawful aggressor nation in the 1930s. Such views of a "failed" modernity and subsequent war rationalized Allied occupation and democratization reforms in post-surrender Japan. The more influenced by Marxian theories, the more critical they were of Japan's incomplete modernization, and the more enthusiastic for Allied - or American - intervention in postwar reforms. American and Japanese discourses on the reform of Japan's political organization, namely constitutional revision, show similar reformist plans from reconstruction of the constitutional monarchy to republican options. Those adopting Marxist analyses found the root cause of Japan's undemocratic and aggressive nature in the emperor system called for its elimination; those who did not believe that democratization required the overthrow of monarchy suggested reforming Japan's imperial institution to make democratic government function better. In addition, both Americans and Japanese shared the Wilsonian idea of internationalism, and they expected Japan to reenter the postwar Asia-Pacific as a totally demilitarized, democratic, and pacifist country that could contribute to peace and development of the region. With the Cold War, the US policies for Asia and Japan altered. So did the internationalist visions, causing political debates in the United States and Japan. My work ultimately shows such parallel and intersecting cultures where US-Japan relations were rehabilitated in the immediate-postwar years.