Around the World in Three Terms

A Review of Robert Dallek’s Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945

Robert Dallek is a recently retired professor of history at Boston University. He has also taught at Columbia, UCLA, and Oxford. He was won numerous awards for scholarship and teachings, including the Bancroft Prize. He has written more than 15 books on U.S. history-related subjects and has appeared on CNN and public TV and radio shows as well.

BY SAMEER KAPADIA

Robert Dallek, a well-known history professor who taught at multiple universities, including the University of California at Los Angeles, detailed American foreign policy during Franklin D. Roosevelt’s terms as president in his book, Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945. This book is essentially one large research paper. From the very beginning, Dallek begins citing sources and quoting facts. According to Dallek himself this book was written “to meet the need for a comprehensive one-volume study of FDR’s foreign policy, and to wrestle anew with the many intriguing questions about that subject.”1 Foreign policy is a long and complicated subject, yielding many different critical opinions and ideas. Some critics of Roosevelt’s foreign policy believe that Roosevelt “made his share of errors in response to foreign affairs.”2 According to these critics, Roosevelt mishandles a great many things, such as his acceptance of British leadership in dealing with the Spanish Civil War, his sanction of wiretaps and mail openings, and so on. In spite of these mishandlings, Dallek asserts that Roosevelt earns high marks for his handling of foreign affairs. This book is his proof.

The prologue of this book is essentially Dallek’s conjecture as to why Franklin Roosevelt saw foreign policy the way he did. Aside from Teddy Roosevelt (TR), Franklin was “the most cosmopolitan American to enter the White House since John Quincy Adams in 1825.”3 Roosevelt’s family consistently traveled abroad, allowing Roosevelt to see the world. He was also constantly reminded of the outside world at home, learning German and French from European governesses. He focused on his personal life - going to college, getting married – and worked on his career. He always had a large “fund of self-confidence,” due to the fact that he was the only child of “an exceptionally happy marriage.”4 He worshipped his cousin Teddy Roosevelt, and vowed to emulate Teddy Roosevelt’s political career to the best of his ability. He was almost painfully immature in his impulse to parallel his cousin Teddy Roosevelt’s career, attempting to mold every aspect of his own career to TR’s. His first political success came when he ran for a Senate seat in New York and won. He responded to international affairs in a military fashion reminiscent of TR. Roosevelt believed his cousin to be a special hero, and his admiration knew no bounds after he became president. Roosevelt remained a voice for stronger action while President Wilson prepared the nation for war. This time in U.S. history marked an important era in foreign policy, and Roosevelt unequivocally put his faith in an internationalist foreign policy. He insisted that Wilson maintain an internationalist attitude, and since America was the most powerful nation in the world at the time, it should lead geopolitics. In the midst of this, Roosevelt’s re-election was fast approaching, and he needed to make sure he had the vote in order to be able to continue to make a difference in world affairs. For the 1924 election, Roosevelt backed a Democrat. However, the 1924 campaign was a disaster, as the Democrats had split into factions and bickered constantly. They failed to agree on anything. Roosevelt made an effort to “unify the Democrats under progressive ideas.”5 He ultimately failed, however, and instead began to focus on criticizing the Republicans. One of his main complaints was that the Republicans had undermined the principles of peace by refusing to join the League of Nations and the World Court. Roosevelt became governor of New York in 1929, just as Theodore Roosevelt became a governor after serving in the Senate. For a while, he focused on state affairs, and stayed silent about foreign affairs. This was a bold move, angering many Wilsonians. However, people began to see Roosevelt’s superior political know-how and helped him garner support for his presidential campaign. Moving to Part One of the book, Dallek begins discussing Roosevelt’s presidency. In the beginning of Roosevelt’s presidency, Hoover offered to be Roosevelt’s consultant, so to speak, offering to help Roosevelt and advise him on how to run the government. However, Roosevelt refused, wishing to eradicate the mistakes of those before him and to make the country prosper again. One of Roosevelt’s main objections to Hoover was in fact Hoover’s mishandling of the Depression—mainly, Hoover’s international approach. He preferred keeping international economic reform in the background until domestic legislation could help solve the problems at home. However, he wanted to prioritize rather than completely ignore certain issues. He still worked on foreign policy more or less, advancing British-American disarmament talks. Dallek then dedicates a chapter to Roosevelt’s handling of the Depression, emphasizing quick and decisive action. FDR began to back away from decisive action in foreign affairs, since domestic issues withheld him from the geopolitical arena and instead forced him to pursue a more nationalistic course. Dallek mentions how economic problems continued to grow, forcing Roosevelt to focus on domestic affairs.

Part Two describes fears abroad and the escalation of the war itself. An overwhelming pacifism spread throughout the country, and the concept of neutrality was once again brought to its limits. People believed that World War I had been a mistake and that war should be avoided by any means necessary.6 He also believed that increased presidential power to control exports would help prevent the prolongation of foreign wars. Roosevelt was beginning to lose face. He was losing hope and felt helpless against the worldwide drift toward war. He attempted to unite the Americas against any threat, no matter what and no matter how big or small. Crisis after crisis occurred, making dealing with foreign policy more and more difficult.

Part Three begins by discussing Roosevelt’s valiant last-ditch efforts for peace. However, diplomacy was failing, and Roosevelt was running out of options. He decided to maintain neutrality, but help the Allies economically and supply-wise. The war was considered “the end of the world, the end of everything.”7 Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor was the event that motivated the U.S. to go to war. Roosevelt countless times attempted to appease, then subdue Japan, including placing embargoes and using the FBI. An undeclared war in the Pacific ensued. When America officially joined the war, Roosevelt made sure to take decisive action to end the war quickly and effectively.

Part Four discusses the end of the war. Roosevelt believed that “nothing short of complete victory is essential in this war.”8 However, it was difficult to achieve unconditional surrender. After the war finally ended, Roosevelt maintained that the cardinal sin was “selfish politics.”9 Allied politics were going so badly that Winston Churchill said, “The only thing worse than having allies is not having them.” The main trouble was trying to appease Stalin. Roosevelt also tried to keep long-term goals in mind, rather than any one nation’s special interests. The epilogue is Dallek’s interpretation of his own work. He critiques Roosevelt, and admits that Roosevelt has had his fair share of mistakes. However, he maintains that Roosevelt was much more perceptive that people commonly believe, and that Roosevelt did everything in his power to make this world a better place.

In the introduction to this book, Dallek clearly defines his thesis. Dallek wrote this book in order to be a cumulative source for information on Roosevelt’s foreign policy, and to “wrestle anew with the many intriguing questions about that subject.”10 Franklin Roosevelt holds the honor of being the president who served the most terms in the history of the United States, as well as serving through some of America’s most difficult times, such as The Great Depression and World War II. Thirteen years of presidency yields a great deal of information, information which is scattered across multiple sources and often difficult to find. By writing this book, Dallek compiled this scattered information into one book, and gave readers the full story of Roosevelt’s foreign policy without even having to turn to other sources. The second, and far more significant part, of the author’s thesis has to do with the subsequent complexity of such a compilation.

Throughout this book, it is apparent that Dallek admires Roosevelt. He provides consistent examples of Roosevelt’s trials and triumphs, and places a heavy emphasis on Roosevelt’s intellect and ingenuity when solving these problems. This book’s epilogue implicitly defines Dallek’s opinions on Roosevelt, as well as counterarguments for those who believe that Roosevelt was not as great as people say he was, “com[ing] under sharp attack for his handling of foreign affairs.”11 He anticipates, if not assume, that readers yearned for a more objective analysis of foreign policy, and therefore devotes an entire section of the book in order to state his interpretation of Roosevelt’s foreign policy. Because this book is so packed with information on every little thing that went on in Roosevelt’s foreign policy, Dallek assumes that readers are knowledgeable about history, and leaves many details out; when describing de Gaulle’s visit to Washington in 1944, for example, Dallek concludes “Nevertheless, the visit temporarily eased problems with de Gaulle.”12 This passage’s lack of detail, in contrast to the general structure of the book, illustrates Dallek’s assumption that his readers have a rudimentary knowledge of the subject itself. In addition, the book as a whole contains knowledge in general of concurrent events in the domestic sphere, particularly the Great Depression.

As for his point of view, Dallek is “an admirer of Roosevelt, albeit a critical one.”13 Throughout the book, Dallek pays particular attention to Roosevelt’s aptitude at government and his shrewd political mind. The prologue sets the stage, telling the tale of Roosevelt’s upbringing and describing the experiences he had leading up to his presidency. As any good book shows, Dallek offers criticism of Roosevelt in various places of the book. As mentioned many times before, this was a critical time in United States history, and anyone who leads the country through such difficult times cannot always succeed in all of his endeavors. Ultimately, Dallek utilizes his extensive research and builds an educated opinion toward Roosevelt’s foreign policy, and believes that Roosevelt was a shrewd political mind that was successful overall in leading his country through the most difficult of times.

Analyzing this book’s historiography, Dallek seems to believe in Toynbee’s view of historiography.14 Toynbee’s thesis states that history is a challenge and response. All civilizations are faced with various crises, such as technology, religion, and ideals. How they respond to crises will determine their survival. Roosevelt was faced with the two greatest calamities in this country’s history- the Great Depression and World War II. Dallek writes according to Toynbee’s views, representing World War II as a conflict. The conflict was finally overcome by Roosevelt’s, and America’s, capacity to succeed, and therefore survive.

A.E. Campbell provides a critical analysis of the book. In his analysis, Campbell believes that the book is “informative, admirably carried out, and a good starting point for any research.”15 He adds that the book is “a direct approach and [has] workmanlike prose.”16 He states that Dallek is an admirer of Roosevelt, albeit a critical one. The book is a balanced overview of both sides of the story instead of an opinionated or a narrow-minded book. The reader is told about what Roosevelt did, and why he did it. One of Campbell’s complaints is Dallek yields too much to modern critics. Campbell does not fully elaborate why. Campbell concludes that even though readers can find faults with the book, it is still a very good read, and Dallek “has recaptured this province for history.”17

Fredrick C. Adams’ review of this book is slightly more extensive. It opens by stating that Dallek presents “a detailed defense of FDR’s foreign policy.”18 Adams praises the book for using a wide range of course material. In addition, Dallek states his interpretations and view directly, as opposed to other works in which readers are expected to infer on their own. However, Adams disagrees with some of Dallek’s interpretations, such as Roosevelt’s secret activities. Also, he criticizes Dallek’s analysis of Roosevelt’s Soviet policy. However, his primary concern is that Dallek fails to put forth the impact of internal affairs on foreign policy. Although he does make reference to it, Dallek does not actually analyze this rather important part of foreign policy. Adams concludes by recommending it to those who wish to learn more about Roosevelt and states that the book is a good representation of a traditional diplomatic history.

The book itself seemed like a large research paper, providing facts and figures for almost every major diplomatic development of Roosevelt’s presidency. The author clearly states his views on the subject, allowing readers to better understand Dallek’s views and see the history though his eyes. However, this seemed strictly limited to the prologue and epilogue. The book seemed to be more a prose timeline than an analysis of foreign policy. However, the text offered theories here and there of why something happened the way it did, how it happened, and so on. The epilogue, however, seemed to make up for it, placing all of Dallek’s interpretations of Roosevelt and his foreign policy. The prologue provided an extensive background, and offers insight as to what made Roosevelt who he was. Overall, the book is extensive and spares few details, leaving the reader well-informed about the subject, as well as providing information for the span of Roosevelt’s presidency rather than focusing on only a couple of years.

Dallek does not clearly differentiate between the 1930s and the war years. However, he does comment on how Roosevelt put domestic policy first during those Depression years and made sure that the domestic situation was satisfactory before turning his gaze to world affairs.

Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of American history has at least acquired information on the Depression. The Depression destroyed the prosperity of the 1920s and left a permanent mark on the future. Because the economy had taken such a fall, the government stepped in and tried to help with the economic problems, an unprecedented move. Also, the government began regulating business and employment in an attempt to prevent a future disaster such as this from occurring. Economically, people started spending way less, and instead concentrated on building capital to be used in the future. Compared to the 1930s, today isn’t so much different. However, one of the causes of today’s situations is deregulation, or the act of removing the controls that have existed since the Depression era. Just as in the Depression, unemployment is increasing, fewer and fewer jobs are available, and people are even being removed from their homes. People are tightening their spending, thus putting even less money in the economy. What solved the Depression was government intervention, and regulation of the economy must happen again in order for us to succeed and conquer the modern Depression.

Virtually all New Deal reforms had remained in place until the George W. Bush administration. The economy was soaring, until the recent downturn. Institutions, such as social security and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) arose from the Depression era to help combat money shortage and to encourage people to invest in banks. What America needs to learn from the Depression is how problems were solved, what the government, and even what the people did, in order to help the country recover, and America needs to at least consider the same methods today.

Endnotes

Student Bio

Sameer Kapadia was born in Newport Beach. He is an avid reader, plays tennis regularly, and loves bicycling. He has a strong academic background, and is currently taking many rigorous courses. He is very interested in science, and intends to major in a science field.