外交官大军:美国军队和法国,1944-1967年

IF 0.4 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Lori Maguire
{"title":"外交官大军:美国军队和法国,1944-1967年","authors":"Lori Maguire","doi":"10.1080/14682745.2022.2101975","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this book, François Doppler-Speranza has written a detailed and fascinating account of the situation in which the US military found itself after the Second World War because of the large number of troops it had stationed on the territory of its ally, France. Considered of vital strategic importance to the United States, Paris contained the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), increasing its value to Washington. However, political activists in France were far from content with the large-scale US presence in their country – especially, members of the French Communist Party with its determined anti-Americanism – but the Gaullists were similarly distressed. Meanwhile, many ordinary French people, with memories of the German occupation still fresh, also found the US military bases disturbing. Unsurprisingly, this situation led to tensions and cultural clashes between the Americans and the French at the local, national and international levels. Given the importance of France to the United States, the Pentagon sought to smooth relations between the French population and the US soldiers, and so the US military developed its own strategy of public diplomacy. This book studies the paradox the author describes on the very first page of the introduction: ‘soldiers make war but, at the same time, they represent America abroad’ (p. 1). Trained as a fighting force, the US military found itself exercising essentially diplomatic functions towards a major ally. This situation was further complicated by the fact that the United States already had a bureau charged with diplomacy, the US State Department, whose leadership resented seeing a number of their functions taken over by the Defence Department. This led to rivalries, conflicts and turf wars between the two offices over the conduct of US foreign policy, notably public diplomacy. François Doppler-Speranza does an excellent job describing this complicated tapestry of international and intragovernmental tensions and detailing the Pentagon’s response to them. The book begins in 1944 when the French population largely welcomed US troops during the Liberation and examines the countries’ – often rocky – relations over the following years, notably after the creation of NATO (whose headquarters were in Paris from 1952-67). During this postwar period, large numbers of GIs took up long-term residence in France, reminding many French people of the trauma of the German occupation during the Second World War. These US military bases were often established far from major cities and cultural centres, and thus from the traditional diplomatic apparatus. Realising the tensions with local French people and seeking to ease the way for the US soldiers, the US Defence Department embarked on a large programme of public diplomacy. The author studies the cultural image that Washington sought to project in France and examines how it was received by the French population during this short but key period in relations between the two nations. Most importantly (at least to the Pentagon), the Defence Department had to justify the soldiers’ presence to the French – as well as the domestic US public. Doppler-Speranza uses the term ‘parabellicist’, coined by Jacques Ayencourt in 1946, to describe the policy undertaken by the Pentagon to legitimise the US presence in France post-Liberation: for the US military leadership, both nations should be kept on a permanent war footing.","PeriodicalId":46099,"journal":{"name":"Cold War History","volume":"22 1","pages":"545 - 546"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Une armée de diplomates: Les militaires américains et la France, 1944–1967\",\"authors\":\"Lori Maguire\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14682745.2022.2101975\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this book, François Doppler-Speranza has written a detailed and fascinating account of the situation in which the US military found itself after the Second World War because of the large number of troops it had stationed on the territory of its ally, France. Considered of vital strategic importance to the United States, Paris contained the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), increasing its value to Washington. However, political activists in France were far from content with the large-scale US presence in their country – especially, members of the French Communist Party with its determined anti-Americanism – but the Gaullists were similarly distressed. Meanwhile, many ordinary French people, with memories of the German occupation still fresh, also found the US military bases disturbing. Unsurprisingly, this situation led to tensions and cultural clashes between the Americans and the French at the local, national and international levels. Given the importance of France to the United States, the Pentagon sought to smooth relations between the French population and the US soldiers, and so the US military developed its own strategy of public diplomacy. This book studies the paradox the author describes on the very first page of the introduction: ‘soldiers make war but, at the same time, they represent America abroad’ (p. 1). Trained as a fighting force, the US military found itself exercising essentially diplomatic functions towards a major ally. This situation was further complicated by the fact that the United States already had a bureau charged with diplomacy, the US State Department, whose leadership resented seeing a number of their functions taken over by the Defence Department. This led to rivalries, conflicts and turf wars between the two offices over the conduct of US foreign policy, notably public diplomacy. François Doppler-Speranza does an excellent job describing this complicated tapestry of international and intragovernmental tensions and detailing the Pentagon’s response to them. The book begins in 1944 when the French population largely welcomed US troops during the Liberation and examines the countries’ – often rocky – relations over the following years, notably after the creation of NATO (whose headquarters were in Paris from 1952-67). During this postwar period, large numbers of GIs took up long-term residence in France, reminding many French people of the trauma of the German occupation during the Second World War. These US military bases were often established far from major cities and cultural centres, and thus from the traditional diplomatic apparatus. Realising the tensions with local French people and seeking to ease the way for the US soldiers, the US Defence Department embarked on a large programme of public diplomacy. The author studies the cultural image that Washington sought to project in France and examines how it was received by the French population during this short but key period in relations between the two nations. Most importantly (at least to the Pentagon), the Defence Department had to justify the soldiers’ presence to the French – as well as the domestic US public. Doppler-Speranza uses the term ‘parabellicist’, coined by Jacques Ayencourt in 1946, to describe the policy undertaken by the Pentagon to legitimise the US presence in France post-Liberation: for the US military leadership, both nations should be kept on a permanent war footing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cold War History\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"545 - 546\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cold War History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2022.2101975\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cold War History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2022.2101975","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这本书中,François Doppler Speranza详细而引人入胜地描述了第二次世界大战后,美国军队由于在其盟友法国领土上驻扎了大量军队而陷入的困境。巴黎被认为对美国具有至关重要的战略重要性,它包含了北大西洋公约组织(北约)的总部,增加了它对华盛顿的价值。然而,法国的政治活动家远不满足于美国在他们国家的大规模存在——尤其是坚决反美的法国共产党成员——但戴高乐主义者也同样感到痛苦。与此同时,许多对德国占领记忆犹新的普通法国人也对美军基地感到不安。不出所料,这种情况导致了美国和法国在地方、国家和国际层面的紧张关系和文化冲突。鉴于法国对美国的重要性,五角大楼试图缓和法国民众与美国士兵之间的关系,因此美国军方制定了自己的公共外交战略。这本书研究了作者在引言的第一页描述的悖论:“士兵制造战争,但同时,他们在国外代表美国”(第1页)。作为一支战斗部队,美国军队发现自己基本上对一个主要盟友行使外交职能。美国已经有了一个负责外交的局,即美国国务院,这一事实使这种情况更加复杂。美国国务院的领导层对国防部接管他们的一些职能感到不满。这导致了两个办公室在美国外交政策,尤其是公共外交方面的竞争、冲突和地盘之争。François Doppler Speranza出色地描述了这一复杂的国际和政府内部紧张局势,并详细描述了五角大楼对此的反应。这本书始于1944年,当时法国人民在解放期间基本上欢迎美国军队,并考察了两国在随后几年的关系——通常是不稳定的——尤其是在北约成立后(1952-67年,北约总部设在巴黎)。在战后时期,大量的美国大兵长期居住在法国,这让许多法国人想起了第二次世界大战期间德国占领的创伤。这些美国军事基地往往建立在远离主要城市和文化中心的地方,因此也远离传统的外交机构。意识到与当地法国人的紧张关系,并寻求为美国士兵让路,美国国防部开始了一项大型公共外交计划。作者研究了华盛顿试图在法国塑造的文化形象,并考察了在这段短暂但关键的两国关系时期,法国民众是如何接受这种形象的。最重要的是(至少对五角大楼来说),国防部必须向法国人以及美国国内公众证明这些士兵的存在。Doppler Speranza使用Jacques Ayencourt于1946年创造的“抛物面主义者”一词来描述五角大楼在解放后为使美国在法国的存在合法化而采取的政策:对于美国军事领导层来说,两国都应该保持永久的战争地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Une armée de diplomates: Les militaires américains et la France, 1944–1967
In this book, François Doppler-Speranza has written a detailed and fascinating account of the situation in which the US military found itself after the Second World War because of the large number of troops it had stationed on the territory of its ally, France. Considered of vital strategic importance to the United States, Paris contained the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), increasing its value to Washington. However, political activists in France were far from content with the large-scale US presence in their country – especially, members of the French Communist Party with its determined anti-Americanism – but the Gaullists were similarly distressed. Meanwhile, many ordinary French people, with memories of the German occupation still fresh, also found the US military bases disturbing. Unsurprisingly, this situation led to tensions and cultural clashes between the Americans and the French at the local, national and international levels. Given the importance of France to the United States, the Pentagon sought to smooth relations between the French population and the US soldiers, and so the US military developed its own strategy of public diplomacy. This book studies the paradox the author describes on the very first page of the introduction: ‘soldiers make war but, at the same time, they represent America abroad’ (p. 1). Trained as a fighting force, the US military found itself exercising essentially diplomatic functions towards a major ally. This situation was further complicated by the fact that the United States already had a bureau charged with diplomacy, the US State Department, whose leadership resented seeing a number of their functions taken over by the Defence Department. This led to rivalries, conflicts and turf wars between the two offices over the conduct of US foreign policy, notably public diplomacy. François Doppler-Speranza does an excellent job describing this complicated tapestry of international and intragovernmental tensions and detailing the Pentagon’s response to them. The book begins in 1944 when the French population largely welcomed US troops during the Liberation and examines the countries’ – often rocky – relations over the following years, notably after the creation of NATO (whose headquarters were in Paris from 1952-67). During this postwar period, large numbers of GIs took up long-term residence in France, reminding many French people of the trauma of the German occupation during the Second World War. These US military bases were often established far from major cities and cultural centres, and thus from the traditional diplomatic apparatus. Realising the tensions with local French people and seeking to ease the way for the US soldiers, the US Defence Department embarked on a large programme of public diplomacy. The author studies the cultural image that Washington sought to project in France and examines how it was received by the French population during this short but key period in relations between the two nations. Most importantly (at least to the Pentagon), the Defence Department had to justify the soldiers’ presence to the French – as well as the domestic US public. Doppler-Speranza uses the term ‘parabellicist’, coined by Jacques Ayencourt in 1946, to describe the policy undertaken by the Pentagon to legitimise the US presence in France post-Liberation: for the US military leadership, both nations should be kept on a permanent war footing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cold War History
Cold War History Multiple-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信