History 6393 – Empire, War & Revolution

Third Book Review: February 9, 2000

The Transformation of American Foreign Relations 1865-1900: By Charles S. Campbell. (New York, Harper & Row, Publishers, c. 1976 Pp. 393.)

Christos Frentzos

In The Transformation of American Foreign Relations, Charles Campbell discusses the huge changes in United States foreign policy during the second half of the nineteenth century. The author shows how deeply rooted the anti-colonial tradition was in the United States by detailing the early difficulties and failures the expansionists had trying to get Congress to approve legislation annexing Hawaii, establishing a Caribbean naval base and constructing a canal through Central America. He explains how America gradually evolved from an agricultural to an industrial nation and eventually turned toward imperialism. Throughout the book, Campbell discusses some of the political, social and cultural influences that worked to change U.S. attitudes toward territorial expansion and began the birth of the American empire. The author also discusses the improvement in U.S.-British relations, which he views as a second major theme of this period.

Campbell begins by focusing on two important men who served as Secretary of State during the late nineteenth century, William Seward and Hamilton Fish. As head of the State Department, Seward was interested in American territorial expansion, but he was also deeply concerned with ensuring America’s commercial expansion as well. To accomplish these goals, Seward envisioned the creation of a large navy supported by several strategic bases around the world. Although he advocated territorial expansion, as his purchase of Alaska clearly demonstrates, Seward favored economic imperialism designed to promote trade and investment in foreign areas without assuming political or economic responsibility for them.

Campbell also discusses the policies of President Grant’s Secretary of State Hamilton Fish. Fish played an important role in improving relations with Great Britain by working with England to settle the Alabama claims which had been a thorn in the side of British – American relations since the Civil War. The Treaty of Washington, signed in 1871, was an indispensable step toward the Anglo-American rapprochement that came at the end of the century. Fish also tried to acquire the rights to build an isthmian canal in Central America, and to establish one or more Caribbean naval bases, but anti-colonial sentiment was too strong in Congress during this period to see any of these become a reality.

During the second half of the nineteenth century, the resistance in the United States to territorial expansion began to weaken. One factor influencing this reassessment of territorial acquisition was the belief among some that foreign markets were needed to absorb the growing number of goods produced by American manufacturers. The nation was producing far more goods that it consumed, and after the panic of 1893, many in the business community began to view overproduction as the root cause of economic downturns.

But Campbell does not see this as the only, or even the prime motivator in America’s drive toward colonialism at the close of the nineteenth century. In addition to this factor he lists several others. First, the new ideas of Social Darwinism as espoused by men like Herbert Spencer, contributed greatly to the belief that those nations that possessed superior intellect and resources were destined to succeed over lesser people and spread their social and political institutions. Second, the book entitled The Influence of Sea Power on History 1660 – 1783 by Captain Alfred T. Mahan theorized that throughout history, sea power furnished the key to national supremacy. He believed that an expanding economy, markets and navy go hand in hand and argued for colonial acquisitions. In addition, he stated that both military and economic considerations pointed to the need for an isthmian canal to increase mobility and foster exports. His book was very popular and influenced many politicians including Theodore Roosevelt.

Two other writers also had a profound impact on the popularization of expansionist ideas. In 1895 Brooks Adams, the grandson of John Quincy Adams, published The Law of Civilization and Decay: An Essay in History. Adams stated that “nothing under the sun is stationary: not to advance is to recede” (154). He argued that the nation must expand in order to find markets for its surplus product or it would not continued to grow and prosper as a nation. Finally, Frederick J. Turner’s essay, “The Significance of the Frontier in American History” stated that throughout its history, Americans had cherished the comforting belief that if things became too difficult at home, they could begin life anew on the frontier out west. This ability of the United States to rejuvenate itself was an important factor in the success and prosperity of the nation. Now that the western frontier had been conquered, many Americans advocated expansion abroad to continue the tradition.

In analyzing the development of Anglo-American friendship during this period, Campbell places great emphasis on America’s role in compelling Great Britain to submit to arbitration the boundary dispute between its colony of Guiana and Venezuela. Great Britain agreed to arbitration by an international tribunal that decided the question largely in Britain’s favor. The United States’ involvement in the dispute was important for several reasons. First, Britain’s implicit acceptance of America’s right to intervene strengthened the Monroe Doctrine. Second, the settlement ended an era of U.S.-British diplomatic conflict and began an era of good feelings and close relations. Finally, it led to the Anglo-American agreement abrogating the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty allowing the U.S. to construct her own isthmian canal.

Although the Spanish-American War led to the realization of the expansionist’s dreams of acquiring Caribbean bases, annexing Hawaii, and constructing an isthmian canal, Campbell views the development of an American empire in an entirely different light from Walter LaFeber. Campbell justifies America’s intervention in the Cuban–Spanish conflict by arguing that the United States could not allow the violence to continue so close to its shore. He states that the Spanish-American War, like the Mexican War, was a consequence of the disintegration of the Spanish empire. Campbell does not believe that U.S. businessmen welcomed the conflict as a way to create new foreign markets. He instead notes that businessmen in general opposed the war strongly. The nation was just beginning to recover from a recent depression, and the last thing business leaders wanted was the uncertainty of war.

In addition, Campbell also justified the U.S. annexation of the Philippines. Shortly after the defeat of the Spanish fleet in Manila, German, British, French and Japanese warships arrived in the Philippines, hoping to acquire all or part of the islands. According to the author, these dangerous circumstances made a U.S. withdrawal unthinkable since it could have lead to a scramble among the powers to grab the spoils of the Spanish empire and might have touched off a world war.

Campbell does not argue for the Open Door policy. In analyzing the Open Door notes of 1899, Campbell believes that only in a carefully restricted sense can they be considered imperialistic. He argues that the McKinley administration had very little regard for the notes and feels that many historians have over emphasized their importance as the foundation of U.S. imperialism. Campbell believes that the push in the United States for increased exports in the late 1900s was initiated by thousands of individual producers searching for markets for their unsold goods. He does not see the federal government as playing an active role in this process.

In contrast to Campbell who sees a variety of social and political factors influencing American imperialism, LaFeber argues that economic issues were the most important forces driving the U.S. toward world power. He believes that American business and political leaders felt that by expanding foreign markets, recurring depressions could be eliminated or at least curtailed. As a result, government policy makers worked hard to institutionalize this philosophy. The goal of federal officials during the period was to work closely with business leaders and lead the drive to open foreign markets in order to ensure the economic and political stability of the nation. The Open Door policy represented the culmination of that effort.

In conclusion, Campbell does a very good job detailing the various forces that influenced America’s drive toward acquiring territory overseas and creating a new empire outside the confines of the continental United States. Although I disagree with his assumption that a world war would have broken out among the great powers had the U.S. not sized the Philippines, his overall analysis is rather balanced and provides an informative account of the political, social and economic forces at work in the late nineteenth century. Through the successful settlement of the Alabama claims and U.S. participation in the Venezuelan boundary dispute, America took great steps in laying the foundation of the Anglo-American international relationship which would be one of the hallmarks of U.S. foreign policy in the twentieth century.