Eisenhower and policy

Eisenhower, Dulles and Brinkmanship

Eisenhower:

Striking resemblance 

·     He saw the USSR as a “implacable enemy” seeking “world domination”

·     The US needed to “learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemy by more clever, more sophisticated, and more effective methods than those used against us”

·     “we can never rest” was his slogan during his 1952 campaign

·     He used his speeches to bow to both sides of the political system 

"I am on the brink of smiling"

John Foster Dulles:

·     He was blunt and referred to containment as a treadmill policy 

·     It cost too much in taxes, Republicans saw it as “negative, futile and immoral”

·     He described the American view of communism extremely well, he believed that all of the world wanted to be like America and that communism was the evil that challenged freedom 

·     He was a devoted Christian and highly successful corporate lawyer 

woof woof 

How did Eisenhower get top dog?

·     Corruption in the Truman campaign 

·     McCarthy charges 

·     Promise to end the war in Korea

·     He came at a time of high tension but little resolution, his forceful approach brought a breath of life into the administration 

·     His leadership wouldn’t retreat to isolationism or settle for containerisation, they were going to be internationalist

·     They promised to liberate the enslaved (however liberation may come at the cost of the world and the lives of the enslaved)

·     As a result, Eisenhower gained a Landslide victory in 1952

Opposition to being internationalist:

The Republican version of
Destinies Child 

·     The Republicans were tied to conservative views and focused on balancing the budget and cutting taxes 

·     All of Eisenhower’s cabinet were businessmen, bar Dulles, who believed that an unbalanced federal budget was immoral 

·     All the cuts would reduce the amount of spending on the Defence Department 

·     Cuts made liberation more difficult 

Second thoughts?

Make up your god damn mind 

·     Eisenhower was critical of containment, but settled for an armistice in Korea July 1953

·     This enraged: General MacArthur, President Rhee and many Republicans. As they wanted to liberate North Korea 

·     Eisenhower’s contradiction was justified through claiming that the price of victory was too high 

·     In practise his administration would continue containment but during speeches rally up the public, speeches provided emotional satisfaction 

·     Speeches were used to hide the fact that the Republicans did nothing about the promise of liberation

Where’s the liberation at???

·     They shut down the Korean war, cut corporate taxes and reduced the size of the armed forces. NOT LIBERATION

·     They did their best at containment but unlike Truman they wouldn’t use troops to ensure it

·     The New Look policy rejected NSC 68, spending on defence could no longer be up to 20% of the GNP 

·     But was liberation necessary? Tensions were lessening, the Korean war had reached peace and Stalin had died in March 1953

·     The World was less dangerous so was containment actually the right policy and the Republican’s contradiction worth it?

Was Eisenhower a weakling?

Dulles vs Eisenhower

·     He slated containment, then adopted it 

·     Between 1953 and 1955 the US could have easily destroyed the Soviet Union 

·     The Eisenhower administration retrained 

·     During the 8 years in power the administration experienced many war scares 

·     The Soviet Union developed long-range bombers, ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons but the defence budget still remained at $35-$40bn

·     They had the power to destroy the USSR, and yes, they could retaliate but they couldn’t defend themselves 

Bodging the budget

"Can we have some more please sir?"

·     The greatest opposition Eisenhower faced with the budget was the army 

·     His refusal to increase the budget resulted in the resignation of three army Chief of Staff, Maxwell Taylor being one of them

·     The army wanted the budget to be larger to allow for flexibility to meet communist threats 

·     The budget locked the army in the US

·     The army argued that they needed a large standing army, with specialised divisions, elite groups, a wide variety of weapons, an enormous transportation capacity 

Eisenhower- we need a “balance between minimum requirements in the costly implements of war and the health of our economy”

Bombs, bombs, bombs:

Kablam! Maybe I should make this a
Doctor Who blog... 

·     Eisenhower believed that a WWIII would be based around the use of tactical nuclear weapons and strategic air power 

·     His plan was to use the technology to mediate conflicting political goals 

·     The US also developed smaller atomic weapons that could be used tactically on battlegrounds 

·     If there was a major military confrontation “those weapons would come into use”, massive retaliation as defined by Dulles

·     Massive retaliation was to act as the chief instrument of containment: introducing Brinkmanship 

"See you in Vietnam mes amis"

Bonjour Brinkmanship:

·     It was a tactic to support containment if the situation was right 

·     “you have to take chances for peace” it is about “the ability to get to the verge without getting into the war is the necessary art”

·     During the Life article Dulles cited three instances of going to the brink, all being in Asia. 

"Take the picture. I have some
weak countries to intimidate
with my big bombs'

Is Dulles dumb?

·     His policy views the world as bipolar 

·     It sees all major decisions as a matter of the free world vs communism 

·     The policy is oblivious to the diversity of the world and believes that every issue is related to or part of the Cold War

·     If there can be such thing as a vain policy this is it 

·     Dulles was dubbed as immoral and impatient to those who criticised the policy 

And Brinkmanship takes the lead

Round 1: Korea

·     The dispute was over the Chinese wanting the prisoners of war to be returned home and the US wanting to offer voluntary repartition

·     Eisenhower warned that if the war wasn’t ended quickly then it would end “under circumstances of our own choosing”

·     The US removed the 7^th fleet allowing Chiang to launch bombing raids on mainland China

·     Eisenhower’s threat of the wider war involving nuclear weapons and Chiang’s attack the Chinese agreed to voluntary repartition

Round 2: Vietnam

This is jaw dropping stuff people,
it's anyones game 

·     French fighting against the revolutionary aggressor, who were seen as communist agents of Peking and Moscow 

·     French vs Ho Chi Minch 

·     Eisenhower urged the French to commit to giving Vietnam independence so that Ho would be exposed as a communist and British + American forces could enter the war 

·     The French didn’t agree as they didn’t want to give up Vietnam 

·     However, the war didn’t go well for the French, they were on the brink of defeat 

·     Dulles and Eisenhower didn’t want to see another loss to communism 

·     Dulles asked congress if they could enter the war but congress opposed 

·     April 7^thEisenhower said that southeast Asia was like a row of dominoes 

·     He sought alliances and even wrote to Churchill comparing the threat to Hitler 

·     Geneva conference April 26^th, set up to discuss peace 

·     The US opposed negotiations as they were funding 75% of the war and didn’t want to compromise 

·     The Air Force Chief of Staff, Nathan Twining, wanted to use three tactical small atomic bombs to assist the French

·     But Eisenhower disapproved as it would be the second time against Asians in a decade 

·     Brinkmanship failed, Americans walked out of the conference (Dulles refused to return)

·     Eventually a truce was reached to temporarily part Vietnam at the seventeenth parallel. But Eisenhower and Dulles were bystanders

"I promise coach I will try harder
next match"

Better luck next time:

·     As preparation for another event like Vietnam the US needed more allies 

·     SEATO was formed, to help protect Cambodia, Laos and South Vietnam

·     But it wasn’t successful as it didn’t contain India, Burman or Indonesia 

·     It was embarrassingly white and was an effort for the West to regulate affaires in Asia 

·     Dulles had to assure the Senate that the New Look policy was succeeding and that bombs not men was the way forward 

·     He said that if SEATO couldn’t agree then the US was prepared to act alone 

They have gone and done it!
Brinkmanship takes the win, I bet they are
going to be celebrating tonight 

Round 3: Formosa Straits

·     After Chiang’s attack in 1953 China was ready to retaliate in 1955

·     They launched bombing raids on the Tachen islands 230 miles north of Formosa 

·     They mounted cannons opposite Quemoy and Matsu 

·     Eisenhower said that if China won then all of Asia was in danger

·     He asked congress for authority to use necessary force, the House passed the resolution

·     He got a blank check which was a major war scare

·     The administration considered dropping bombs 

·     March 20^thDulles threatened to use “new and powerful weapons of precision”

·     War would leave China devasted

·     Chinese pressure on the islands lessened and the crisis ended 

·     Brinkmanship had held the line  

"Don't ask me, I am just Kanye"

The Next move:

·     Vietnam’s struggle showed how loyalty would be the next battleground of the Cold War 

·     This would be easier for Russia as they weren’t seen as white explorers and colonists 

Get your act together America,
first the Wall Street Crash now this!
What are you playing at!

Brinkmansh*t

·     It has scared people, even those in the administration

·     The nuclear weapons in 1955 were a thousand times more powerful than those dropped on Japan

·     One bomb had more power than all of the explosives in history put together 

·     New fission bombs were developed 

·     Churchill was worried so tried to form a summit between the US and the USSR to resolve their differences for the safety of the world 

·     But that’s for another time…