Studying Harry Truman's Foreign Policy Record

---

Harry Truman: Served as President from 1945-1953

Personal Characteristics: Simple, A Dreamer, Decisive

The American Dream Personified: Compared to his predecessor, and boss for a time, Harry Truman was much more of a “prototypical American” than Franklin Roosevelt. David McCullough said, “Truman, with his Monday night poker games, his Masonic ring and snappy bow ties, the Main Street pals, the dry Missouri voice, was entirely, undeniably middle American. He had only to open his mouth and his origins were plain. It wasn’t just that he came from a particular part of the country, geographically, but from a specific part of the American experience, an authentic pioneer background, and a specific place in the American imagination.” While FDR grew up surrounded by luxury, Truman had little to his name, except determination and a knack for success.  

The Simplest of Simple Men: Furthering the sentiment of Truman’s easy-going midwestern attitude, McCullough said, “Truman, with his rural Missouri background, and partly, too, because of the limits of his education, was inclined to see things in far simpler terms, right or wrong, wise or foolish. He dealt little in abstractions. His answers to questions, even complicated questions, were nearly always direct and assured, plainly said, and followed often by a conclusive ‘And that’s all there is to it.’”  

A Decisive President: Even though Truman was thrust into office within a hectic setting following the death of FDR, it would be hard to see Truman as anything but a seasoned veteran based on his quick, decisive decision-making, especially considering how quickly he made up his mind regarding the nuclear bombings of Japan. Ralph Levering and Verena Botzenhart-Viehe discussed this quality of Truman, stating, “Truman’s view of himself as a man who kept his word had major implications for U.S.-Soviet relations. ‘When I say that I’m going to do something, I do it…” 

The International Context: 

The Chinese Civil War: Although the United States was heavily involved in this crisis, especially with George Marshall attempting to mediate the conflict, this is still an international issue more so than one that can be solely attached to Truman’s record. According to Isaacson and Thomas, “Despite Marshall’s best efforts, the mission was a failure, doomed by mutual mistrust between the warring Chinese factions.” Mao’s communist forces would eventually oust the government led by Chiang Kai-shek, who would flee to Taiwan.

Soviet Expansionism: A major reason for the onset of the Cold War had to do with Soviet expansion into Eastern Europe and beyond as they attempted to consolidate their resources following World War II. Most notably, the Soviets installed a puppet regime in Poland, and attempted to do the same in places like Bulgaria or Romania. Furthermore, Soviet aggression and intervention in places like Iran also raised the ire of the international community, a community which was tired of conflict. Finally, Stalin’s Bolshoi Theater speech also set the stage for further tension with the West, as he proclaimed that Russia would rail against Western aggression and maintain Russian security.

Greek Civil War: Another issue which enlarged the scope of the Cold War had to do with the civil war in Greece. This conflict, which saw communist rebels attempt to overthrow the monarchical regime in Greece, ultimately failed. However, the contest was extremely close, as the British could not solely prevent the communist takeover, which eventually led to an American intervention in order to stabilize the issue. The undemocratic regime in Greece was upheld by the democratic West. 

Russia Relations with Turkey: Another example of Russian aggression was realized in its relations with Turkey. Turkey felt threatened by the newfound superpower, for good reason. Russia demanded from Turkey land that it had lost during World War I, along with control of the Black and Mediterranean Seas. This event, along with other moves by Russia that reeked of major power politics, sparked the creation of the Truman Doctrine. 

Key Foreign Policies: 

Firmness Toward Russia: While this policy appeared in many different instances surrounding multiple states, the policy was successful, for the most part. “From Germany on the west of the Soviet empire to Turkey on the south and Japan on the east, the United States took stands that limited Soviet influence.” This resulted in America effectively strong-arming the Soviets out of Turkey and Iran. The major exception to this policy being the Korean War.  

The Truman Doctrine: The inspiration behind the Truman Doctrine was Greece and Turkey, which faced much Soviet aggression. The intention of the Doctrine “was to underwrite the defense of free states against ‘totalitarian regimes’ was widely hailed as a sharp new turn in American foreign policy, a world-wide equivalent of the Monroe Doctrine.” While it came across as a threat to Soviet expansion in the Kremlin, it was necessary for containment of communist influence. 

A Jewish Homeland: The issue of Jewish settlement was one of the most contentious issues of Truman’s presidency. There was much discourse in the federal government on whether or not the U.S. should support the creation of a sovereign independent state for the Jewish people. Alexander De Conde stated that “President Truman favored a homeland for the Jews, and in November, 1947, supported a United Nations plan for the partition of Palestine between Arabs and Jews, a policy that committed the United States to the principle of an independent Jewish state.” 

Continuity of FDR Organization Policy: FDR’s decision for a new and improved version of the League of Nations, which would be in the form of the United Nations, was a policy honored by the Truman Administration. This policy ensured a continued American presence in Europe, forever changing the power dynamic of the United States, making it a truly global superpower. Organizations like the United Nations and NATO would also help implement Truman’s Doctrine by indirectly thwarting Soviet aggression. 

Europe First Mentality: Truman undoubtedly held a European first mentality in terms of foreign policy. This is mainly shown through his implementation of the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and bring West Germany back into the fold as an economic power. However, it came with some downsides, especially in Vietnam, as Truman attempted to preserve relations with its key ally in France, rather than keep itself out of the basically hopeless situation for French imperialism. 

Positive Achievements: 

Listening to George Marshall: This may be the most subtle accomplishment of Truman’s career, but his trust in George Marshall was notable. Furthermore, Truman’s implementation of the Marshall plan, which rebuilt Europe and Germany, more specifically, showed Truman’s humility to implement a grandiose policy that he himself did not formulate or boast as exclusively his. While Marshall’s initiatives were not entirely successful, as they failed in China, he had generally sound plans for reform, which Truman dutifully followed, exemplifying his humility.

The Atomic Bombs: This will be in both the positive and negative categories, as I see this as the most debatable issue in American foreign policy history. Some historians argued that this move, which ended the war in the Pacific, was a necessary act by the Truman Administration. The move ended the war as swiftly as possible, while also preserving thousands of American lives Furthermore, a positive externality of the bombings was to indirectly intimidate and deter Russia, which was partially successful 

The Truman Doctrine: This Doctrine, revolving around the containment of the Soviet Union, was a somewhat triumphant endeavor by the Truman Administration. Moreover, it set the stage for American foreign policy in later administrations, in both good and bad ways. The policy of containment that spawned from this policy not only kept America competitive with the USSR, but allowed for the U.S. to overwhelmingly surpass them as time went on. While there are obvious downsides to the policy, such as increasing unnecessary foreign interventions and enhancing what would be known as the military industrial complex, Truman’s Doctrine was effective. 

The Berlin Airlift: Possibly my favorite accomplishment of the Truman Administration, as it showed possibly its most savvy legal intellect in order to avoid World War III. The increasingly aggressive Soviets created a blockade around Berlin, along with cutting off Western Berlin electricity in order to catch the West metaphorically sleeping. After much discussion on how to mediate the issue, ranging from sending troops in tanks to Berlin, to imposing a counter-blockade, the Americans decided on an airlift to supply West Berlin. The logic behind this came from language from an agreement between the West and the Soviets, in which the USSR allowed for access to West Berlin by way of air, making the airlift a possibility from the jump. The operation was a complete success, and Stalin was embarrassed on an international scale. 

Negative Drawbacks: 

Flaws in Containment: As stated before, the policy of containment was generally a smart strategy implemented by the Truman Administration. It allowed for them to eventually surpass the Soviets, creating a unipolar international scene in which the Americans were on top. However, the plan was not without its flaws. As Henry Kissinger noted, the plan caused “American leaders to act on the basis of two erroneous premises: that their challenges would continue to be of as unambiguous a variety as they had been during the Second World War; and, second, that the communists would wait passively for the disintegration of their own rule, as postulated by the containment theory.” Basically what Kissinger was arguing here was that the supposedly subtle acts by the Americans to undermine the Soviets would not go on for long. The Soviets would catch on and create a counter to America’s containment strategy. Moreover, arguing that the Truman Administration incorrectly theorized that the Soviets would falter under U.S. aggression, was also incorrect, and led to greater Cold War tension. 

The Atomic Bombs: While the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki did help end the war in a decisive manner that saved many American lives, it was also one of the most horrific acts of killings in American history. Regardless of the logic behind the decision, it was undeniably an immoral way to conclude the war, especially when some historians argue that the Americans knew that the Japanese were on the verge of surrender prior to the bombings. While this theory is unfounded, it does make sense that the U.S. would conduct this to deter future Russian aggression, as historian Gar Alperowitz also argued. 

The Korean War: The American perspective behind North Korea's attack on the South was a complete miscalculation by Truman and his Administration. According to Willard Matthias, Truman never doubted that the Soviet Union was the key contributor to the attack. “So, without consultation with any Soviet specialist or intelligence officer, Secretary Acheson and President Truman concluded almost immediately that the North Korean actions were a Soviet-instigated and Soviet-directed operation. Finally, the CIA even had intelligence leading them to believe that it was Soviet policy to avoid war, making this a blatant misallocation by Truman based on fear and insecurity from his withdrawal of troops from South Korea in 1949. 

Europe First Mentality: While this did serve Truman well during his presidency, I believe the hindsight of his Europe first mentality ends up becoming a negative drawback. As was stated before, Truman heeded calls by the French to help them stabilize the situation in Vietnam, along with its other colonies in places like Laos and Cambodia. The issue here is that Truman recognized the states as under the sovereignty of the French, who were increasingly incapable of maintaining a vice grip on its colonies, which was especially exemplified in the Vietnamese rebellion against the French. 

Furthermore, Truman was effectively duped by the French, as he made an agreement with them that as long as they would eventually remove themselves from the colonies, they would have the backing of the United States. In a rookie mistake, Truman failed to establish a date for decolonization to occur, leading to a continued French presence in the colonies, which created even more chaos and violence. The argument that Truman had to side with the French in order to contain communism in this area, while understandable, was not worth the risk the U.S. ended up running, leaving them bogged down in the region for multiple decades.  

Final Grade: B+/ While I think Truman had an overall successful foreign policy career, especially considering the circumstances in which he was thrust into the presidency, he, as most other foreign policymakers, had some highly questionable decisions. I feel as if a B+ is an appropriate grade to give him because of his steadfastness in decision-making, his ability to use his political advisors as crutches in situations where he lacked proper knowledge, the profound impact of the Truman Doctrine on future foreign policy, the strategy of containment that would guide the U.S. through the Cold War, and victorious endeavors against the Soviet Union, such as the Berlin airlift. His shortcomings regarding the implementation of containment, while notable, paled in comparison to the debatably negative consequences of the atomic bombings and his failure to understand the context surrounding the North Korean invasion of the South. In short, Truman deserves a B+ for being a more than serviceable follow-up to FDR, and a capable leader during a contemptuous period. 

References:

1. “Contrasting Sketches of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman,” in David McCullough, Truman, 324-25.
2. “The Truman Doctrine, Mar. 12, 1947,” in Commager and Cantor, eds., Documents of American History, vol. II, (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall), 525-28.
3. Alexander DeConde, “George Catlett Marshall, 1947-49,” in Graebner, ed., Uncertain Tradition, (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company), 245-66.
4. Ralph Levering, Vladimir Pechatnov, Verena Botzenhart-Viehe, and Earl Edmondson, “The American Perspective,” “The Russian Perspective,” Debating the Origins of the Cold War (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002), 28-48, 85-105.
5. Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas, “Architects of the American Century,” “Containment,” “Order From Chaos,” “Crisis,” Wise Men, (New York, NY: Simon & Schuster), excerpts from 19-26, 351-56, 381-85, 390-91, 404-8, 413-16, and 451-53.
6. Henry Kissinger, “The Dilemma of Containment: The Korean War,” Diplomacy (New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1994), 473-492.
7. Willard Matthias, “The Korean War: A Pivotal Event,” America’s Strategic Blunders, (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press), 71-95.