My tri-partisan (Two Democrats! Two Republicans! One Democratic-Republican!) top five Secretaries of State of all time.
5. William Henry SEWARD (1861-1869) [Republican]
Seward, a close second to Lincoln for the Republican nomination in 1860, was made Secretary of State as a gesture to his supporters. He had little experience in foreign affairs and it showed: as the US prepared for a civil war, Seward publicly threatened war with Britain, France, Spain, and Russia, on the grounds that a war would unite the country. Lincoln told him to back off: “Ëœone war at a time…’
But in the end, Seward’s quixotic understanding of power politics had a tremendous impact on the United States today. He purchased Alaska from Russia for $7,200,000 (approximately 2 cents per acre, or US$86.7 million 2002 dollars). At the time it was ridiculed as “Seward’s Icebox,” but even without the resources ultimately found there, Seward said that Alaska “put the room on the American house.” Indeed—imagine if the USSR had a large chunk North America during the Cold War!
4. General George C. MARSHALL (1947-1949) [Democrat]
The author of the Marshall Plan, which gave funds to Europe to rebuild in the aftermath of World War II. Marshall can also be credited for being the number one advocate of engagement after the war. Whereas most Americans wanted the country to return to its introspective ways, Marshall spoke out against the growing danger of communism. He left after just two years to become our third Secretary of Defense (which replaced the Secretary of War).
3. Dean ACHESON (1949-1953) [Democrat]
To quote the Wikipedia entry: “It has often been said that Acheson was more responsible for the Truman Doctrine than Harry Truman and the Marshall Plan than George Marshall.” As Under Secretary of State from 1945-1949, he implemented many of the policies that Marshall and Truman proposed after World War II.
When Marshall resigned in 1949, Acheson was the obvious choice, but his belief in a Christian destiny to rid the world of communism didn’t ingratiate him with the right wing. In fact, Acheson was excoriated by McCarthy and Nixon after he took Truman’s side in the row with General Douglas MacArthur over the Korean War, which MacArthur wanted to extend to communist China. He wrote four books after leaving politics, most notably Power and Diplomacy Present at the Creation (1970)—thank you Saru.
2. John Quincy ADAMS (1817-1825) [Democrat Republican]
The unrecognized boy genius of 19th century American diplomacy, Adams’ outstanding tenure as Secretary of State is overshadowed by his lackluster presidency. After serving as Minister to Russia (1809 to 1814), negotiating the Treaty of Ghent in 1814, and Minister to Great Britain from 1815 to 1817,
President James Monroe appointed Adams to head the State Department in 1817.
Adams authored the Monroe Doctrine, which stated that America would oppose European intervention in the Western hemisphere (although the credit goes to the president). His legacy wasn’t just doctrinal. On the practical level, he negotiated the Adams-Onis Treaty with Spain. Not only did he purchase the peninsula of Florida for the bargain price of US$5 million, but America also agreed to renounce any claims on Texas—which we quickly forgot as soon as Mexico became independent.
1. Henry KISSINGER (1973-1977) [Republican]
Everyone hates Kissinger. From the peacenik liberals to anti-Communist hawks to pro-democracy neoconservatives, the man is reviled everywhere. I think his critics overlook one stunning achievement: the US was losing a war against guerillas when he began as National Security Advisor in 1969. Our credibility with our allies and neutral nations was in tatters. Yet Kissinger managed to negotiate from a position of strength, turning America’s “defeat” in Vietnam to victories in the Middle East and East Asia.
To achieve this goal, he was ruthless in his methods. He approved covert CIA intervention and opened relations with Communist China (infuriating many future neoconservatives). Yet he was a devotee of realpolitik, pioneered the policy of détente with the USSR, and tops my list of Secretaries of State for bring the US from the depths of despair and political defeat in the late 1960s to a near check mate in the Cold War.
NOTE #1: Notice a trend? All of these figures were criticized by both the “left” and the “right” of their day. But they all thought hard about national, strategic interests. That’s a hard thing to achieve in a democratic environment because numerous groups have interests at stake with interests only relevant to them, not the nation as a whole. Sage advice for all you up and coming policymakers out there.
NOTE #2: Marshall and Kissinger both recieved the Nobel Peace Prize. The two other Secretaries of State to recieve the prize were Elihu Root (1905-1909) and Frank Kellog (1925-1929).
NOTE #3: US history and foreign policy buffs! Would you agree, reorder my list, or suggest other candidates? Specifically I’m asking the boys over at Liberals Against Terror, Hisologion, Daily Demarche, and any other interested bloggers or freelance netizens. Make your own list and tell us about it in the comments section.
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « Endangered Visas
- » Wouldn’t it be fascinating…
COMMENTS / 14 COMMENTS
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Who’s Victory? added these pithy words on Jul 18 06 at 9:26 pm[...] Then there’s Richard Nixon, who took over the presidency when US worldwide presige was at an all-time low. America was losing (or at least percieved to be losing) a war against Communist guerillas in Southeast Asia, our credibility with allies and neutral nations alike was in tatters, and yet Nixon (and Kissinger) transformed these geopolitical handicaps into victories. While opposing Soviet advances in the Middle East, Nixon opened up relations with China and put the Soviets on the defensive, one of the most awesome political jujitsu moves in the 20th century. He may be hated, but Nixon’s administration saw the turning point in the Cold War. [...]
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » McCain? Obama? VOTE NIXON! added these pithy words on Oct 12 08 at 7:39 am[...] Just as important as a president with the right judgment will be selecting the right people to run the foreign policy administration. Who would be Secretary of State and Defense, and National Security advisor, in an Obama or McCain administration? I would encourage readers to vote on those grounds—we geneuinely need a modern-day Henry Kissinger. [...]
Joe added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 8:01 amI rather like this list, actually, and your reasoning behind it. All this partisan bollocks is bad for policymaking, whether it’s foreign or domestic. The good bureaucrat has to look beyond the haze generated by the kingmakers and decide what’s best for the fiefdom.
These days, of course, State don’t count for nuttin’, so my thinking is that this list will remain unchanged until some SoS has the balls/ovarian fortitude to get out there with some good old fashioned diplomacy capable of outweighing guns/bombs/trade quotas.
Gabriel Mihalache added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 8:31 am[With a french accent] Not only is your system so un-democratic that you only have 2 parties, which is one party away from a single-party system, but then when you have to have a 3rd, is a mixture of the 2! That is not ze liberte, that is not ze fraternite! [/With a french accent]
All joking aside, out of the 5 I only know Kissinger and I wholeheartedly agree with your choice. To all the nay-sayers, there’s only one thing I’d say, as an amateur, which is that weltpolitik, much like idealism, makes for good demagogy but for little else.
Curzon added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 10:17 amJoe: You’re a Democrat… agreeing that Kissinger is the best SOS of all time? If this gets out the Republic is DOOMED.
GM: I had no idea what weltpolitik was until I just looked it up. Thanks for expanding my horizons.
As for our party system, it should be noted that Adams was a Democratic Republican, later a National Republican and Whig and would probably be a moderate Republican today (even McCain-esque? Certainly no fan of the Southern Republicans, but no Democrat either…). At the turn of the 19th century, the two parties were Federalists and Democratic Republicans… when the former died out in the 1820s, the later split into Democrats and National Republicans. National Republicans were replaced Whigs by 1836, which were in turn replaced by the Republican Party in 1856.
Saru added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 1:31 pmLike the list. But don’t you think that Present at the Creation is Acheson’s most notable book? (I’m speak from experience – As I think you know I shared an apartment for a year with a guy who’s e-mail address included Acheson’s name, who wrote his MA thesis on Acheson, and who had a growing collection of Acheson autograhps, including a framed, wall-hanging copy of Life magazine with Acheson on the cover.)
Gabriel Mihalache added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 3:27 pmI need to brush up on my American history! I never knew there ever were more than 2 parties in its history! ... well, after I’m done with my exams… as always :-(
Nathan added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 3:44 pmGabriel, be sure not to miss all of them! There’s a good list here.
Anyone know what the Nullifiers were all about? Nullifying something I guess…
talos added these pithy words on 06 Jun 05 at 4:31 pmI wouln’t presume to construct any such list, despite your kind invitation, because:
a. I’m not good at top-lists.
b.I don’t consider myself by any stretch of imagination an expert on US diplomatic history (and I’m certain that there were quite a few excellent SoS about whose achievements I have absolutely no idea). And
c. I’m not sure what the criteria of achievement should be – especially since you don’t include Cordell Hull (yet another Nobel Laureate SoS BTW ) on your top-5. And Jefferson. Shouldn’t he be pretty high up on any such list?About Kissinger: Wait – “near check mate”? In 1977? and his ruthlessness counts as an asset? I assume that there might some disagreement from his victims… But that’s just me and my utter distaste for “end justifies the means” morality. HK was a 20th century super-Metternich – and I don’t mean it as a compliment.
praktike added these pithy words on 07 Jun 05 at 12:33 amAcheson is definitely numero uno. I like Seward and Marshall as well. Elihu Root probably needs to be there. There’s also Baker and Shultz, who managed to be effective without being as Machiavellian and egomanical as Kissenger. And what about Cordell Hull?
And pop quiz: who was the only SecState ever to become President? (he was actually a pretty terrible Prez, though)
praktike added these pithy words on 07 Jun 05 at 12:34 amJohn Hay was pretty accomplished, too.
Curzon added these pithy words on 07 Jun 05 at 12:57 amHay is a great candidate; Baker and Root are in my top ten; I’m not so sure about Schultz; and I’ve heard conflicting reports about Hull, who many say had precious little influence in the FDR administration and basically did the president’s bidding. As for Jefferson, he was a great president but a lousy Secretary of State, with an infatual romantic attachment with France that damaged the national interest… interesting that it’s the opposite with Quincy Adams, but both are remembered for their presidential tenures.
What I alluded to, and didn’t really clarify, was the real root of the reason these five get my respect: courage. Hay was a great negotiatior who had a major impact on American destiny, but it all fell in his lap. My top five were controversial, opposed by both sides, and had to fight to achieve their accomplishments that we only recognize in retrospect.
And several Secretaries of State became president:
T. Jefferson
J. Madison
J. Monroe
J. Q. Adams
J. Buchanan
Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace added these pithy words on 07 Jun 05 at 1:21 amFor those of us who love Alaska, Seward is at least a sentimental favorite.. and as Curzon said “Can you imagine if the USSR had owned it during the Cold War????
Kissinger is an interesting eminence grise even today…. has anyone read Hitchins’ indictment? Is it worth the read?
I read SideShow by Shawcross some years ago, and would recommend it ….
Dan added these pithy words on 07 Jun 05 at 2:44 amThe Department of Defense replaced both the Department of War and the Department of the Navy. In Barnettian terms, DOW was the System Administrator (Reconstruction, Indian Wars, etc) while the DON was the Leviathan (with Marines doing double duty, as always).
The Marshall Plan may be overvalued. Britain was the largest recipient of aid, but saw its economy decline despite lowered costs (less Empire) and rising neighbors. Nations which faced incoherent regimes of both aid and silent reperations (like Germany) or aid and post-war mass murder (like Japan) did very well. Spain is often cited by Marshallists as a nation with no MP aid that did poorly, but that was more likely because of Franco’s statist policies. After informal Opus Dei intervention, which led him to free market reforms, Spain’s economy began steady growing.
The Nullifiers believed that States had the right to nullify federal laws within their borders. In Computer Science terms, Federal methods could be overloaded by the States. They go their start in the “Kentucky and Virginia” resolutions, anonymously penned laws which tried to establish that doctrine in those states. James Madison (author of the Constitution) and Thomas Jefferson (author of the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights) were the authors, implying that Nullifiers had “original intent” on their side.
Saying “the US was losing a war against guerillas when he began as National Security Advisor in 1969” is only possible if one uses very broad definitions of “losing” and “guerillas.” Nixon’s strategy of phased abandonment did Saigon little harm, as a mere four years later ARVN successfully repelled Communist aggression. Likewise, the year before Kissinger became NSA the Tet Offensive resulted in the military destruction of the Viet Cong. True, from a 4GW perspective the Communist’s “political” victory was more important, but under Kissinger Saigon’s political position only deterioriated (while the Republic inherited its strong military position from Johnson).
-Dan tdaxp
