The Wise Men of Foreign Affairs: The History of the Council on Foreign Relations

358 Pages·1984·4.824 MB·English

by  Robert D. Schulzinger

THE WISE MEN OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The History of the Council on Foreign Relations

THE WISE MEN
OF
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The History of
the Council on Foreign Relations
ROBERT D. SCHULZINGER
New York Columbia University Press 1984
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Schulzinger, Robert D., 1945-
The wise men of foreign affairs.
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
1. Council on Foreign Relations—History. 2. United
States—Foreign relations—20th century. I. Title.
E744.S3995 1984 327.73 83-27321
ISBN 0-231-05528-5 (alk. paper)
Columbia University Press
New York Guildford, Surrey
Copyright © 1984 Columbia University Press
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
Clothbound editions of Columbia University Press books are
Smyth-sewn and printed on permanent and durable acid-free paper
For Marie
Whose Enthusiasm Has Been an Inspiration

Contents
Preface ix
CHAPTER ONE Hopes and Realities in the Twenties 1
CHAPTER TWO The Council Confronts Depression,
1930-1938 31
CHAPTER THREE Preparing for War, 1938—1941 59
CHAPTER FOUR Planning for Peace, 1942—1945 81
CHAPTER FIVE The Experts’ Cold War, 1944—1952 113
CHAPTER SIX Massive Retaliation and Its Critics
1953-1960 145
CHAPTER SEVEN Southeast Asia, China, and a Strained
Alliance, 1953-1968 165
CHAPTER EIGHT The Establishment at Bay,
1968-1980 209
CONCLUSION The Limits of Expertise 243
APPENDIX Directors and Officers of the Council
on Foreign Relations 255
Abbreviations Used in Notes
and Bibliography 261
Notes 263
Bibliography 293
Index 327

Preface
“THE CFR [Council on Foreign Relations] OWNS YOU, COM­
MUNISM WILL TRIUMPH,” shouts a slogan scrawled on a
bathroom wall. A spokesman for the rightwing John Birch Soci­
ety adds that “America as a Republic has been under attack for
generations. . . . The Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilder-
burgers and the Trilateral Commission [sic] organizations have
participated directly and indirectly [in these] external and inter­
nal assaults on our republic.” Two radical scholars, Lawrence
Shoup and William Minter, use more temperate language to stress
what they consider to be the baleful results of the work of the
meetings, study groups, dinners, and publications of the Council:
“We believe that the process itself is not only undemocratic, but
that the results have been and are against both the interests of the
American people and of the people of the world.” Other critics
see less sinister forces at work at the Harold Pratt House, the
handsome, five-story mansion on the Southwest corner of Man­
hattan’s 68th Street and Park Avenue, which has housed the
Council since 1945. Liberal Harvard economist John Kenneth
Galbraith, who resigned his membership in the midst of a furious
row over the impact of the Vietnam war on the Council’s activi­
ties, mocked both the pretensions of Pratt House and the fanta­
sies of its detractors. He labeled the Council “the seat of bore­
dom. . . . It’s serviceable in one respect. If you want to know
what the current cliché is, there’s no better place to find out.”1
Of course the Council has had important, influential, and
thoughtful supporters of its work over the past sixty years. Col­
umnist Joseph Kraft probably put the case most clearly in 1958
X Preface
when he lauded Pratt House as “the school for statesmen.” He
noted its “special part in helping to bridge the gap between the
two parties, affording unofficially a measure of continuity when
the guard changes in Washington.” Kraft’s views find support in
the words of Council officials, one of whom, Zygmunt Nagorski
spoke directly to the organization’s critics in the conservative Na­
tional Review in 1977. Responding to the charges of secret, un­
democratic manipulation of the levers of foreign policy, he notes
that “far from being a conspiracy it is a community of intellec­
tual freedom. . . . The Council is a privately sponsored, pri­
vately financed, privately managed post-graduate academy of po­
litical science, functioning in the true spirit of public service.”2
Who’s view is correct? What is the Council on Foreign Rela­
tions? What has it done since its founding in the wake of the First
World War? What impact has it had, for good or ill, on public
perceptions of international relations? What difference have its
studies, publications, social gatherings, and discreet telephone calls
to officials made to the conduct of American foreign relations?
How have its works been judged by its critics? How have impor­
tant Council figures behaved in the face of public questions of their
behavior? How have Council leaders promoted the reputation of
their organization?
I address these questions in The Wise Men of Foreign Affairs.
This is the first scholarly history of the Council on Foreign Re­
lations to make use of the extensive holdings in its archives. The
story is interesting in its own right, because in tracing the con­
cerns of officers, members, and staff of the Council, I also have
highlighted the contours of centrist opinion on United States for­
eign policy from the First World War to the present. But this his­
tory also illuminates three broader themes in the current study of
United States foreign policy: (1) the role of nongovernmental fig­
ures in determining government behavior, (2) the complicated, often
touchy relations between professional elites and less informed cit­
izens in a democracy, (3) and the role of such an elite in setting
the boundaries of “acceptable” discourse on foreign affairs.