july08nnn05

Main Photo

Back to the Table of Contents

Networks of Empire: The U.S. Department of State's Foreign Leader Program in the Netherlands, France, and Britain 1950 - 1970

A Book Review

by Frank Kaszar, NCIV Intern

It is difficult to imagine a more comprehensive study of the context, purpose, and results of the International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP) than Giles Scott-Smith’s recent book Networks of Empire: The US State Department’s Foreign Leader Program in the Netherlands, France and Britain 1950-70. Mr. Scott-Smith’s work aims to place exchanges in a meaningful context and examine the practical outcomes through the use of specific examples in three European countries.

It may surprise the reader to learn that an 1888 six-week U.S. Department of State-sponsored cross country excursion of seventeen Latin American delegates to the first Inter-American Conference is the first real example of international exchange sponsored by the U.S. government. Though government interest in international exchange was “intermittent” between 1888 and the end of World War II, private organizations participated abundantly in cultural exchanges, thus paving the way for the unique American partnership between the government and private organizations to facilitate the Foreign Leader Program (FLP), the precursor to the IVLP.

One of the strengths of the book is its careful, detailed analysis of the overarching purpose and management of the FLP. Mr. Scott-Smith meticulously outlines the philosophical disputes between exchange purists who wished to “foster ‘mutual understanding’ between nations and cultures to achieve a borderless global community and peaceful international relations” and more pragmatic theorists who believed that exchanges ought to be a component of U.S. foreign policy -- designed with the national interest in mind. Throughout the book, Mr. Scott-Smith demonstrates the ways this dispute manifested itself in practice, particularly in the fine line the government had to walk between unilateral messaging and facilitating a two-way conduit of information sharing. In order to mediate between the two sides in an effort to resolve this issue, they took a two-pronged approach. On one hand, the embassies had the task of selecting rising leaders who, after gaining an in-depth knowledge and fair-minded view of the United States, would advance U.S. interests in their home countries. This meant that the exchanges were more or less unilateral; foreign citizens could learn our way of life to take back home, but we did not really learn much from them. On the other hand, however, Mr. Scott-Smith points out that worries of American proselytizing were rarely voiced for three primary reasons: the facilitation of the programs by private organizations instead of the government, the willingness of the government to show the uglier sides of our society as well as the good sides (i.e. 1950s and 60s racism), and the freedom of the participants to essentially plan their own itinerary. This approach was in stark contrast to the Soviet approach to exchanges that eschewed this kind of freedom and retained a more traditional aura of propaganda.

The bulk of the text consists of a case study of the FLP in the Netherlands from 1950 to 1970. Through a number of specific examples, Mr. Scott-Smith demonstrates the effectiveness of the FLP in accomplishing the aforementioned goals of advancing US interests by means of honest and open exchanges. The Netherlands is, and continues to be, an important and strategic ally in Western Europe. As the United States took the lead in reconstruction efforts following World War II, it became clear that some of our focus needed to be concentrated on the Netherlands. The Dutch were generally thankful for the American role in European liberation and subsequent financial help in rebuilding. There was, nonetheless, a growing presence of communist sympathizers in Dutch trade unions, a number of official policies that supported the Netherlands as a neutral state in the Cold War, and an increase in anti-Americanism due to our disagreement with the Dutch over Indonesian independence and our insistence upon implementing a multi-lateral force against the USSR. Consequently, the majority of Leader grant recipients (those who received FLP grants) from the Netherlands were politicians and journalists. These grantees would, with varying levels of success, become purveyors of knowledge to their peers, offering a distinct understanding of American values that allowed the United States to affect Dutch policies and views indirectly.

One particularly successful FLP grantee worth noting is Hendrik Reinink, the chairman of the Holland Festival. This festival was the premiere Dutch cultural event, showcasing dance, music, and cultural heritage. Mr. Reinink had previously been viewed by the U.S. government as an “obstructionist” for his resistance to signing a Fulbright agreement. But as Dutch interest in American culture grew so did his willingness to cooperate. He was offered a Leader grant in 1951, and the results were almost instantaneous. He called the trip a “turning point” in his life, and by 1952, the New York City Ballet was headlining the Holland Festival. Interest in American culture gained huge momentum in the Netherlands from this starting point, and Reinink himself went on to become a special consultant to NATO “to examine how to improve cultural contacts between the member states,” promoting international exchange as the best means of improving this cultural cooperation. FLP grantees like this are excellent examples of the potential that government sponsored exchanges can have for opening minds.

The latter portion of the book delves into the role the FLP played in France and Britain in the 1950s and 60s, but with considerably less analysis than the section on the Netherlands. In France, the majority of the successes in international exchange came in the realm of education and journalism, not in politics. It was determined that the best reaction to French anti-Americanism was to put America up as a subject for “intellectual dissection.” American Studies departments became extremely common in France. The British, on the other hand, were more than willing to bridge the Atlantic with politicians to reestablish their footing in the world and solidify their relationship with the United States.

Overall, Giles Scott-Smith’s book offers the reader a holistic understanding of the U.S. government’s participation in international exchange. By framing the Foreign Leader Program in its historical and philosophical context, Mr. Scott-Smith is able to present the practical results of the Foreign Leader Program for the reader to evaluate. The program worked well for grantees of many ideologies, and the results, though difficult to quantify, seem to be overwhelmingly positive. This book is extremely valuable to anybody interested in a comprehensive understanding of the role and results of the FLP in its earliest years.