Early United States Foreign Policy Historiography Scott Abel The formation of a new republic in North America during

the late 18th century resulted from and created great turmoil. During the period from 1755 to 1815, North America was politically unstable with wars, trade disputes, and political upheaval. Historians generally look at this period as constantly in flux with various powers vying for power and even domination. Therefore, the early foreign policy of the United States revolved primarily around Europe and Native American tribes to help secure independence and economic prosperity. In The War that Made America: A Short History of the French and Indian War, Fred Anderson focused on the French and Indian War, otherwise known as the Seven Years War in the context of its impact on North America through military and diplomatic historical methods. Given that the United States had not yet formed as an independent republic, Great Britain handled the colonies diplomacy with the major European powers such a France. However, Anderson also focused on the diplomacy with Native American tribes and larger polities such as the Iroquois Confederacy, which had its own political dominance system. For example, the Iroquois developed an empire based on their client states fear of military retribution that destabilized the region, while the expansion of British traders into the Ohio River valley persuaded French colonial authorities to become more aggressive in their policies.1 Anderson investigated the overall causes of the breaking out of warfare on the North American continent halfway through the 18th century.

Fred Anderson, The War that Made America: A Short History of the French and Indian War , (New York: Penguin, 2006), 17, 19, 23-4, 27.

The competing French and British strategies for dominance in North Americas east brought European conflict on a large scale with professional armies led by aristocratic generals in lands that usually fought with raiding tactics and negotiated diplomacy on a local scale. De Vandreuil of Frances strategy for the conflict was to persuade Native Americans to raid the British colonies frontier and create panic.2 However, this strategy became untenable with the commencement of the European war; General Montcalm much preferred the conventional European-style conflict to the raids for plunder practiced by Indians.3 The British colonies usually negotiated with Native Americans without orders from the central government in London. The negotiations with the Iroquois, smaller Indian factions, Government of Pennsylvania, Government of New Jersey, and Quakers in the 1750s helped form a new peace treaty at Easton between the factions ordering the Penn family to return land to various Indian tribes.4 Diplomacy with Native Americans helped British forces drive the French out of mainland North America by pacifying the frontier, which allowed British forces to go on the offensive. Ultimately, the war contributed greatly to the emergence of an independence movement in British North America according to Anderson. The stabilization of relations with Indians became a reality through the affirmation of Easton Treaty by the King of England in 1765.5 Discontent simmered in the colonies because of taxes related to the aftereffects of the war and the fear that the central government would impose its authority on them further.6 The success of the war for Britons made imperial forces less necessary without the French and yet prevented expansion westward by colonists, while
2 3

Anderson, The War that Made America, 88. Ibid., 95, 112. 4 Ibid., 167-170. 5 Ibid., The War that Made America, 240. 6 Ibid., 243-244.

prices increased through duties to help pay for the war. British Americans became resentful of these restrictions and taxes and eventually revolted. The Diplomacy of the American Revolution: The Foundations of American Diplomacy, 1775-1823 by Samuel Flagg Bemis examined how the United States successfully enlisted the assistance of France in its war for independence. The French monarchy realized the potential for an independent United States as a means for it to return to a first-rate power after their humiliating defeat in the Seven Years War. The Count de Vergennes, the Foreign Minister for King Louis XVI, led the effort to defeat Great Britain.7 Shortly after conflict broke out in British America, the French government decided to support secretly the rebels before Americans arrived in the French court.8 France officially joined the war against Great Britain; in large part, because its government believed that such was its last chance to defeat Great Britain with its alliance with the United States in 1778 before it became too powerful.9 Spain also entered the war against Great Britain in June 1779 with the main goal of receiving Gibraltar among other concessions from Great Britain.10 Vergennes geopolitical strategy sought the weakening of Great Britain through an American alliance as a means to improve the balance of power in Frances favor. Bemis established the importance of France in the development of an independent United States. The American Revolution brought additional diplomatic difficulties for Great Britain with its relationship with neutral powers. The traditionally strong relationship between the Netherlands and Great Britain dating from 1674 fell apart in 1780, which
7

Samuel Flagg Bemis, The Diplomacy of the American Revolution , (New York: Appleton Century Co., 1935), 16-17, 20. 8 Ibid., 27. 9 Ibid., 60-63. 10 Ibid., 84-87.

meant it became like other neutrals and vulnerable to British privateers.11 European states established an Armed Neutrality Conference that advocated respect for neutral rights, which eventually left Great Britain completely isolated in Europe.12 Vergennes suggested France effectively manage Americas diplomacy with Europe between 1778 and 1779, while the United States concentrated on fighting the war.13 However, by the end of the war France and the United States interests drifted apart and a treaty ended the war with Britain in September 1783, while the Dutch ended their war with Britain at the cost allowing the establishment of a port that was the partial origin modern-day Malaysia.14 Diplomacy in Europe with Frances assistance helped pressure Great Britain into making peace with the new nation and its allies by isolating it from all other major and significant European states. Frederick Marks examined the transition from the Articles of Confederacy to the Federal Constitution through the prism of foreign relations.15 The reason for the Confederation for the United States was to protect itself from foreign powers, but the Congress lacked the necessary powers to ensure Americas survival by lacking the ability to enforce treaties and an effective judiciary enforcement mechanism. Congress failed even to compensate loyalists, which resulted in British forces remaining in their North American forts.16 Congress problems stemmed from two main issues, it needed its own revenue source and to be the sole arbiter of foreign relations for the United States.17 Congress lacked the means to create a uniform commercial policy necessary for a
11 12

Ibid., 147-149. Ibid., 154-155, 162. 13 Ibid., 176. 14 Ibid., 234, 251-252. 15 Frederick W. Marks III, Independence of Trial: Foreign Affairs and the Making of the Constitution , (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana UP, 1973), ix. 16 Ibid., 3, 6. 17 Ibid., 47.

thriving economy and retaliate against foreign restrictions.18 In the South, people wanted a means to deal with British traders who had monopolies and cheated them economically, while manufacturers in the United States requested Congress have the ability to regulate commerce and ultimately establish a tariff for trade protection.19 The lack of tax uniformity in the various states led to trade wars and threatened foreign dominance of the United States.20 The weakness of centralized authority led to possibility that the United States may fall back under British domination through the guise of informal empire. The new constitutional framework helped bridge these problems of trade, security, and prestige. The United States needed revenue to enhance its prestige amongst other nations and support American seafarers who received immense disrespect abroad. The new Constitution gave the Federal government the power to tax, raise an army, control the militia, and regulate commerce.21 With a stronger centralized government, the United States had more power to deter and resist invasion from another country.22 Fear of foreign encroachments on American sovereignty and the belief that a more centralized government would bring increase wealth to the country led to the development of the U.S. Constitution according to Marks argument. Bradford Perkins broke down his analysis of early U.S. relations with Great Britain into three works that examined its rise, fall, and resurrection from 1795 to 1823. In The First Rapproachment, Perkins starts with the Jay Treaty by showing that through its concessions such as the evacuation of British frontier forts, along with the expansion of American trade in the East and West Indies, the United States was important to Great
18 19

Ibid., 67-75. Ibid., 75-79. 20 Ibid., 82, 98. 21 Ibid., 134-166. 22 Ibid., 180.

Britain.23 Perkins argues that the relations between the United States and Great Britain from 1795 to 1805 were generally strong because of a combination of strong economic, cultural, and personal ties. Economic factors included American exports to Britain, chiefly were raw materials, while the United States became Great Britains biggest purchaser of goods.24 Rufus King, the U.S. representative to Great Britain, formed strong relationships with members of the British government and Parliament such as Lord Grenville and William Wilberforce.25 Furthermore, the conflict against their mutual enemy of the two nations, France, brought the United States closer together in military collaboration.26 However, after the British victory at Trafalgar and the publication of War in Disguise in 1805, Britons generally lost respect for neutrals such as the United States and a change in governments made a closer relationship more difficult.27 Perkins established how a strong relationship between the two countries formed before relations went sour. In Prologue to War, Perkins established the reasons for the United States declaring war on Great Britain in 1812. In Britains war against Napoleon, the Royal Navy required sufficient labor, which resulted in the impressment of American seamen to maintain a blockade of French ports called Orders in Council.28 The war was avoidable if Great Britain considered its long-term interests concerning the United States, while the fall of the Federalists in the United States to the Republicans eventually damaged the

23

Bradford Perkins, The First Rapproachment: England and the United States, 1795-1805, (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967), 5. 24 Ibid., 10-13. 25 Ibid., 46. 26 Ibid., 92. 27 Ibid., 180, 182. 28 Bradford Perkins, Prologue to War: England and the United States, 1805-1812, Los Angeles: U. California Press, 1968, 2.

relationship with Jeffersons support of damaging trade to gain concessions.29 The Republicans made a huge miscalculation with their failure to understand the dependence of the U.S. economy on British trade when they implemented the embargo on exports to Great Britain. The failure of the embargo became obvious to all by autumn 1808 and the prestige of the nation suffered.30 Such events destroyed the rapproachment led by the Federalists and pushed the countries closer to war. Perkins argues the War of 1812 was the product of economics and national honor. Great Britains policy of blockade had a severe cost to American neutrality, along with humiliating the United States by impressing its seamen into the Royal Navy and sailing off the U.S. coast for inspection of contraband.31 Castlereagh and the Cabinet mismanaged the relationship by failing to react quickly enough to American demands, even though they eventually caved with the repeal of Order in Council but too late to prevent the war.32 The United States ultimately declared war because of the loss of labor, cargoes, and vessels to the British blockade and not because of a desire to absorb Canada.33 The War of 1812 was completely avoidable from a diplomatic standpoint with Great Britain and the United States failing to understand each others motives and interests in the run up to the conflict. The United States and Great Britain went from enemies at war to partners in a new hemispheric order in a period of ten years. With the fall of Napoleon and the opening of negotiations in Ghent, Great Britain no longer needed a large army in Europe and therefore applied more pressure on the United States, which placed the latter on the
29 30

Ibid., 31, 33, 45. Ibid., 151, 156, 170, 182. 31 Ibid., 405. 32 Ibid., 401, 421. 33 Ibid., 426, 428.

defensive. Some people in Great Britain wanted to cripple the United States to prevent it from becoming a major economic competitor.34 However, the United States and Great Britain made peace in December 1814 at Ghent with the United States retaining its position.35 Foreign Minister Castlereagh realized that the United States was important to his foreign policy because of economic and political reasons.36 For example, the cotton trade was important to both nations with British manufacturing and American shipping dependent on it.37 The United States and Great Britain realized their mutual interest to act in concert with Latin Americas independence movement against the European monarchists. Great Britain allowed the United States to adopt an isolationist policy while stating an intention to work against any European state attempting to intervene in the Americas.38 The result was that British and American relations achieved new heights from 1824 to1825.39 Common interests and visionary governance in Great Britain helped mend the relationship between the United States and Great Britain after the latters involvement in decades of warfare. The desire to prevent European powers from returning to the Americas and their economic interdependence unified the two nations. The United States saw a period of great distress in its preceding and early years with economic, military, and political challenges, which required an inventive foreign policy that focused primarily on European states and Native American groups. Historians focused on this period as important for the formation of the United States and its policies toward other nations.
34

Bradford Perkins, Castlereagh and Adams: England and the United States 1812-1823, (Los Angeles: U. California Press, 1964), 25, 57, 63 35 Ibid., 128-129. 36 Ibid., 197-198. 37 Ibid., 228. 38 Ibid., 325-335. 39 Ibid., 344-345.