Session Abstract

To commemorate the 150^th anniversary of the world’s preeminent publication of foreign affairs documentation, the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series, the Department of State’s Office of the Historian is currently completing a very substantial scholarly research project on the development and impact of the series. The research reveals a much more expansive story than we anticipated, tracing back to the origins of the republic and touching upon topics that reach beyond traditional definitions of  “diplomatic history” (for examples, see http://history.state.gov/frus150). The most fundamental tensions center on the struggle to balance accountability and responsibility in the conduct of foreign affairs. Put in twenty-first century terms, as early as 1793 it became evident that the requirements of national security clashed with the desire for transparency of governmental operations necessary for informed oversight of decision-making. Both Congress and the executive recognized that the legislative branch, and by extension the public they represented, had the right to inquire into the basis upon which foreign policy decisions are made. At the same time, both branches also acknowledged certain legitimate limitations on documentary releases, based on what we would now call “national security” and “privacy” exemptions.

The values that the series represented became more contentious as the U.S. rose to world prominence. The dilemmas of global involvement posed fundamental questions about the conduct of U.S. foreign and domestic policy. What responsibility does the government have to divulge its policy-making process? What secrets can the U.S. government legitimately keep from its own people? To what extent must the U.S. Government protect the interests (and secrets) of foreign partners? To what extent should covert operations be officially acknowledged, even in retrospect? Ultimately, can a democracy function in an information-restricted environment? In this context, FRUS became a key battlefield between those championing the public’s right to know and those defending the necessity of secrecy.

Ultimately, the series functions as a vehicle for contesting and defining American identity. FRUS tells Americans important things about who they are, as a people, by acknowledging, formally and officially, what the United States government has done in their name. At the same time, contentious official debates about the series and steadily mounting delays in releasing volumes illustrate how attitudes toward transparency evolved, both inside and outside the U.S. Government, during the 20^th century. These longstanding disputes about the relative value of openness remain salient today.

The FRUS history manuscript will be ready for review by roundtable participants no later than October 1, 2011 and the Office of the Historian website will make some portions of it available before the AHA meeting. Participants have agreed to read the manuscript and comment upon the ways in which the research illuminates broader themes in American history. We have selected scholars who do not represent the usual FRUS constituencies (primarily historians of foreign policy and international history) in hopes of drawing a diverse audience to engender a wide-ranging discussion.