From Colony to Superpower: U.S. Foreign Relations since 1776 (Oxford History of the United States)

This is a monumental synthesis and assessment of U. S. foreign relation from 1776 to the early 21st century. It is an unprecedented American historical decathlon, exploring long forgotten corners of the evolution of U. S. foreign relations and melding these into a cohesive account that is invaluable both for the generalist and the specialist. Professor Herring relies on hundreds of books, both familiar and less known, and an equally broad array of professional journal articles to illustrate long-term continuities in U. S. relations with Latin America, Asia, and elsewhere. Half of this tour de force covers the period from 1776 to 1931, with nearly 500 pages devoted to 1931 up to the present.For this writer, steeped in early editions of Thomas A. Bailey's A DIPOMATIC HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE,I was surprised by the new insights and interpretations presented by Herring. I call his book an American history decathlon because it, with admirable success, interweaves domestic and international considerations into his flowing narrative of U. S. foreign relations. As such, he will distress American history diplomatic and domestic period specialists because of his expansive scope and, at times, outspoken opinions.I am reminded of a World History Association conference nearly twenty years ago, when a member of a panel on 12th century Spain sought to provide an overview assessment of the period. Several 12th century Spain social and religious panelists ignored the validity of this broad overview and focused on their own parochial nitpicking. The same has already occurred with FROM COLONY TO SUPER POWER: U.S. FOREIGN RELATIONS SINCE 1776. I prefer first to applaud the boldness of this delectable historical bouillabaisse before zeroing in on the appropriateness of some of the ingredients.Professor Herring, one of our generation's most distinguished historians, as well David Kennedy, the current general editor of the Oxford History of the United States series, are fully familiar with the ground rules of traditional historians. They chose a bold approach intended to complement the period volumes in this series. The result is a highly readable, well-conceived narrative that provides remarkable insight into both the complexity and consistency of U. S. foreign relations from early days to the present.Herring shines light into many long-forgotten corners that, in Latin America, in regarding American exceptionalism and racism, and in the myth of U. S. isolationism, contribute to a keen appreciation of how the past often is reflected in the present.I doubt that anyone is qualified to assess all of the components of Professor Herring's invaluable compendium. He seems equally topical in his assessments of long-past situations asin his modern-day syntheses. Personally, I have been a student of American history for over two generations and an American history professor for the past 18 years. As a Foreign Service Officer, I enjoyed an insider's view of foreign affairs. As the creator of Moody's Investor Services' international bond and commercial paper credit ratings, I developed a global view of finance and politics. The great bulk of Herring's unique magnus opus rings true. Some, to my mind, do not.I believe that his description of the Mexican-American War would have benefitted from John Eisenhower's SO FAR FROM GOD: THE U. S. WAR WITH MEXICO 1846-1848. Eisenhower's INTERVENTION: THE UNITED STATES' INVOLVEMENT IN THE MEXICAN REVOLUTON: 1913-1917 resents Woodrow Wilson in a less noble light that does Herring. The section of the American empire in the late 19th and early 20th century does not reflect the importance of five key individuals that were so brilliantly described in Warren Zimmermann's FIRST GREAT TRIUMPH: HOW FIVE AMERICANS MADE THEIR COUNTRY A WORLD POWER. Also David McCullough's THE PATH BETWEN THE SEAS, is the definitive account of the Panama Canal saga.I thought that Herring do not give full measure to FDR's difficult domestic situation as he sought to lead America into becoming the arsenal for democracy. I also considered his treatment of Truman overly harsh. While Alonzo L. Hamby's MAN OF THE PEOPLE: A LIFE OF HARRY S. TRUMAN is more judicious than David McCullough's Pulitzer-winning TRUMAN, the latter provides a more favorable account of Truman's actions during a tumultuous time.In a book with hundreds of bold opinions and judgments, every historian would find reason to cavil. However, overall I consider Herring's book a remarkable accomplishment. In less than 1,000 pages he has provided a cohesive, comprehensive account of U. S. foreign relations over more than two centuries. His themes have a credible timbre. They result in an overall appreciation of how U. S. foreign relations have evolved and how this relates to present-day situations from which the generalist and the specialist can richly benefit. I doubt that anyone will again have the guts and competence to undertake such a monumental overview of our global foreign relations as they evolved within a fast-changing domestic America.In my opinion, economics is the primary driving force behind the growth and power of the United States. Initially, a volume, The American Economy by Stuart Bruchey, was included in the projected outline for the Oxford History of the United States. Evidently this did not work out and Professor Bruchey, in 1991, published independently Enterprise: The Dynamic Economy of a Free People. While Professor Herring constantly refers to economics in his history, he includes some stunning economic statistical errors. For example:* On page 127 he states that the War of 1812 cost $158 billion. Does he mean million?* On page 374 he states that the U. S. government gave Nicaragua $3 billion for a naval base and canal rights. The figure was $3 million.* On page 597 he states that the U. S. GNP rocketed from $886 million in 1939 to $135 billion in 1945 (an astonishing increase). While I don't have my library at my Long Island summer home, the GDP for this period rose from $92.2 billion to $223 billion.On balance I believe that Professor Herring has made a remarkable contribution to appreciating the nature of U. S. foreign relations from 1776 to the present. Personally, I will find it invaluable when I teach each of the periods. His overall scope, as well as his many priceless nuggets, renders this an imperative resource for all American historians. Hopefully, some students will discover that the nitty-gritty of American foreign relations is both fascinating and essential to understanding where we came from. Indeed, modern-day policy makers would benefit before they stumble into another Iraq or Afghanistan situation. As Professor Herring wisely concludes "The United States cannot dictate the shape of a new world order, but the way it responds to future foreign policy challenges can help ensure its security and well-being and exert a powerful influence for good or ill."

This is an interesting book that gives the history of US foreign policy from colonial days through 2007. It was a huge undertaking for this author. It flows well from era to era, giving a good sense of continuity. History often is taught as chunks of time with no transition from one generation to the next. This book avoids that pitfall. The author does a good job of explaining how the US was expanding territorially and commercially even during times in which the country had on the surface turned inward. I particularly liked learning how the US acquired our overseas possessions. For example, islands in the Pacific that we learn about when studying World War II were acquired much earlier, and this book explains how they came to be US possessions.The US expanded in many different ways. Early on it was treaties with European nations. There were treaties with or expulsion of native American tribes. We bought some land (Louisiana Purchase, Alaska, Gadsden Purchase), went to war to acquire others (the American Southwest from Mexico; and Florida, Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Phillipines and Guam from Spain), and annexed others when enough Americans had moved there to influence those decisions (Texas, Hawaii). We helped create new countries when it was in our interest to do so (Panama broke away from Colombia and secured its independence by allowing the US to build a canal across the isthmus, earning the protection of the US). In more modern times, we established military bases in many countries around the world.We also have intervened much more than I realized in Central America and the Caribbean. The filibusters of the 1850's were very interesting. These were small groups of private people in the US, not affiliated with the government, who banded together to try to take over small, weak countries. They were usually from Southern States trying to find new areas to expand slavery.The author is fairly even handed with his criticisms of US presidents, and there are many criticisms. He gives credit where credit is due, but these are much fewer than the criticisms. He is overall pretty critical of US foreign policy as a whole, and seems to only reluctantly recognize good works and humanitarian missions by the US in foreign affairs. He is quick to label almost all foreign activities as "imperial" even if it is simply trying to establish trade relations with another country. I understand the perspective that the US often had superior bargaining power and that once a country became a trading partner, they became dependent on the US. I bristle at the idea that expanding our trade creates an empire. Compared to other empires, most of which were intent on dominating people, the US must be viewed as almost benevolent. In this book, there is sometimes a sense that the US could do no right no matter what it chose to do. He is critical when the US intervenes to help a country and when the US chooses not to intervene. The author is far too fond of labeling people and policies as 'foolish.' He also repeatedly states that the fear of a Soviet threat was exaggerated or imagined without providing any details or rationale. The Soviets were very aggressive and imperialistic, and this book tends to downplay that.Despite my criticisms of the author's criticisms, I enjoyed the book. It is interesting how we as a nation can accept our past actions and presidents more easily once they are securely in our past. The author does a good job of showing how some like Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson and Truman were heavily criticized at the time, but are considered model presidents today. Will history be as forgiving to our most recent presidents, Clinton, Bush and Obama? When the book transitions from past history to recent history, it reads more like how I remember watching these things unfold on the evening news. It reminds me that today's current events are tomorrow's history, and that the way the story is told is how we will remember it forever.

I bought this book because I was doing a History module on American foreign relations at university and this was one of the recommended core texts. I was a little apprehensive about purchasing it as it's not cheap and I wasn't sure how helpful it would actually be, but it turned out to be incredibly useful and I read it throughout my course. It stretches from the American Independence to almost present day and gives a detailed account of the foreign policy of each president and the courses of action that the administration took and the reasons behind it. It's a huge book and sometimes difficult to navigate, but the style of writing is fairly easy to follow. It seems to be one of the most looked-to books from the recent historiography on this topic, so I would definitely recommend. It's a lovely quality book and has a few pages of interesting pictures as well. I also found Robert Schulzinger's US Diplomacy Since 1900 extremely helpful and fairly simple to read.

A good overview of the entire history of U.S. foreign policy. Very readable for such a broad subject. I was a bit suspicious of the author's tendency to give the various participants the benefit of the doubt on a whole raft of dubious and in hindsight misguided policies. However, his unequivocal condemnation of "Dubya" and Rumsfeld eased my mind on that score.

Had to buy for a course on America and war at uni. It isn’t the most exciting book to readBut it had all the relevant information in it for me to get a 2:1 in that module so I’m very happy. Lots of good information.

Enormous and somewhat intimidating volume, however, as a student who can normally only afford one or two books off the reading list this was the best choice because it covers a vast range of topics with useful stats and references. The references come in handy because Herring does not go into too much depth. Easy to understand, though not such an easy read because of its size. Worth the money

excellent book, great well of knowledge