Greg Russell

Machiavelli’s Science of Statecraft: The Diplomacy and Politics of Disorder

This paper calls into question the extent to which ethical dualism, broadly conceived as raison d’ état, does justice to Machiavelli’s understanding and practice of the diplomatic arts. Arguments are advanced herein that Machiavelli did not so much abandon morality as he sought, through the examples of Rome and antiquity, to find a different remedy for the disorder and violence rampant in the Italy of his day. Machiavelli’s reports in the diplomatic service of Florence illustrate qualities and skills of the diplomat often at odds with the caricature of the immoral statesman.

Alfred Thayer Mahan and American Geopolitics: The Conservatism and Realism of an Imperialist

Debate about the goals of American foreign policy at the end of the twentieth century, especially that thread differentiating “conservative” from “neoconservative” perspectives, might profit by revisiting the debate over American expansion at the end of the nineteenth century. “I am an imperialist,” Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan once remarked, “simply because I am not isolationist.” This paper explores the connection between Mahans defense of imperialism-often couched in terms of national interest and balance of power- and the norms of American power in world politics. The will-to-power behind American expansion and involvement, a formidable pillar in Mahans realism, coexisted (often uneasily) with the affirmation of national purpose, a less formidable but still important part of Mahans idealism. Mahans strong conservative inclinations in politics were matched by a willingness to employ the tools of realism-particularly traditional diplomatic methods-as a way to uphold historic national goals and moral vision in American foreign policy. Far from seeing an irremediable conflict between the counsels of realism and limited moral gains in foreign policy, Mahan understood that governments are not immune from certain overall constraints. Seldom if ever could American actions abroad be defended by arguing solely for the maintenance or increase of national power.

Theodore Roosevelt, geopolitics, and cosmopolitan ideals

The central argument of this article is that Theodore Roosevelt’s worldview was formed at the intersection of geopolitics and cosmopolitan morality. The intellectual roots of his political and foreign policy convictions contributed to a diplomatic style for which the conventional labels of realism or idealism are both inadequate and misleading. Contrary to the stereotypical caricature of Roosevelt as an American architect of realpolitik , or ruthless man on horseback, he held a complex set of beliefs about international relations that transcends familiar academic theorising about either power politics or universal principles of morality. Neither the vision of international anarchy, nor the calculation of state capabilities, do justice to Roosevelt’s sense of the interplay between values and power in foreign policy conduct. Moral principles, Roosevelt claimed, help make clear the inescapable tension between ideals and reality. The moral problem persists, he thought, because foreign policy involves political choices obscured by faulty perception, controlled by national interests, and complicated by multiple purposes and goals. Roosevelt’s more nuanced worldview underscores the need for a revised historiography of international relations, one that builds upon the recognition that realists and idealists were never divided into clearly-identifiable camps either before or after the First World War.

Morgenthau in America: The Legacy

In the decades before and after World War II, the leading spokesmen of the American realist tradition exhibited a persistent philosophical and historical interest in the relation between power and moral purpose. Among this group, Hans J. Morgenthau was the leader and in important senses the guide. This chapter takes up Morgenthau’s legacy and his influence upon leading scholars and public figures of his day, in addition to some contemporary international thinkers. That influence registered differently, not only according to time and issue but also according to Morgenthau’s personality and interests. Attention is devoted to the philosophical Morgenthau, the academic and public person at different periods, and in different environments.

Elihu Root, International Law, and the World Court

Studies of the progressive movement in American history, particularly during the interwar years, have given far too little attention to the various strands of progressive international thought. This chapter analyzes Elihu Root’s campaign for the creation of a World Court, and defense of international law, as an important effort in the reform-minded movement to restrain international conflict and minimize the prospects for war through law. Root joined other progressives in emphasizing the moral and rational components of human nature and stressed an important connection between societal values and the projection of power. But he rejected balance-of-power thinking and looked to legal processes and institutions that would harmonize competing interests in the management of interstate rivalries. Another progressive dimension of Root’s work was a long-standing belief in an obligation of democratic nations to expand education curricula and university institutes in the field of international law.

Defending Democracy in Wartime: Thomas P. Gore's Liberal Dissent in World War One

The global war on terror, in conjunction with Americas invasion of Iraq, has prompted liberals to reconsider the relationship between democracy and security both at home and abroad. Upholding the civil liberties of Americans, while enhancing government power to interdict terrorists and protect borders, cannot be understood apart from the nations interests and moral aspirations in a conflict-prone world. Far too little attention has been devoted to how America at war in a global setting reopens an old foreign policy debate that divided liberal and progressive groups at the time of Americas entry into the First World War. Historians have devoted considerable attention to the alignment of progressive groups that supported Woodrow Wilsons defense of American foreign policy leadership at the time of the war. Yet there were other liberal-minded politicians who shared Wilsons assumptions about Americas greatness without endorsing Wilsonian methods of statecraft. Senator Thomas P. Gore, a former Democratically of Wilson, was unsurpassed in his fierce opposition to Wilsons wartime policies, Wilsons moral defense of those policies, and the illiberal trappings of the League of Nations. This paper examines Senator Gores populist background and liberal dissent from the tenets of Wilsonian internationalism. Gore provides a timely reminder that the way security is purchased abroad has an important bearing on the freedom and lives of Americans at home.

The Ethics of American Statecraft

Foreign Policy in the Early Republic: The Law of Nations and the Balance of Power. By Daniel G. Lang. (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1985. Pp. ix, 175.

Hans J. Morgenthau and the ethics of American statecraft

20.00) Realist Thoughtfrom Weber to Kissinger. By Michael Joseph Smith. (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1986. Pp. xi, 256.

John Quincy Adams and the Public Virtues of Diplomacy

30.00) Bureaucracy and Statesmanship: Henry Kissinger and the Making of American Foreign Policy. By Robert J. Strong. (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1986. Pp. xiv, 109.

Theodore Roosevelt's Diplomacy and the Quest for Great Power Equilibrium in Asia

8.25) American Approaches to World Affairs. By Inis L. Claude. (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1986. Pp. xi, 67.