Resurgent Academic Interest in the Council on Foreign Relations

Parmar, Inderjeet

doi:10.1111/1467-9256.00132

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the liberal-intellectual front, it appears that the Council on Foreign Relations, historically at the heart of the east-coast liberal © Government and Opposition Ltd 2005 93 Madeleine K. Albright, 'Bridges, Bombs, and Bluster', Foreign Affairs, 82: 5 internationalist establishment, 98 has shifted to the right. Its new president is Richard Haass, until recently director of the State Department's Policy Planning Staff and a leading theorist and supporter of new conceptions of sovereignty, pre-emption and endurance.…”

Section: Is There a New Us Foreign Policy Establishment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalysing Events, Think Tanks and American Foreign Policy Shifts: A Comparative Analysis of the Impacts of Pearl Harbor 1941 and 11 September 2001

Parmar¹

2005

Gov. & oppos.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The American aggression in Iraq and the campaign in Afghanistan resulted from the 11 September 2001 attacks in the US. 9/11 has had a massive, catalysing effect on the American public, press, main political parties and official foreign policy makers. This article assesses the impact of 9/11 in changing US foreign policy and especially in creating a new foreign policy establishment by comparing it to the consequences of an historical military attack on the United States – Pearl Harbor, 7 December 1941. It concludes that there is adequate evidence to suggest that a new bipartisan foreign policy consensus/ establishment has emerged.

show abstract

Section: Is There a New Us Foreign Policy Establishment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalysing Events, Think Tanks and American Foreign Policy Shifts: A Comparative Analysis of the Impacts of Pearl Harbor 1941 and 11 September 2001

Parmar¹

2005

Gov. & oppos.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both the Carnegie Corporation and the Rockefeller Foundation gave generous funds to the organization that became the core component of the American foreign policy establishment -the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) -and to other influential liberal internationalist bodies such as the Foreign Policy Association and the Institute of Pacific Relations. These intellectual bodies played key roles in both American official foreign policy formation and in mobilizing public opinion behind a policy of globalism (Parmar 1995(Parmar , 1999a(Parmar , 1999b(Parmar , 2001Shoup and Minter 1977;Wala 1994).…”

Section: The Domestic Experience Of Us Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

American foundations and the development of international knowledge networks

Parmar

2002

Global Networks

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the role and influence of three American foundations -Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford -in developing international knowledge networks that significantly impacted upon the Third World, helping to consolidate US hegemony after 1945, fostering pro-US values, methods and research institutions. The international networks were modelled on prior domestic initiatives resulting in the effective intellectual hegemony of 'liberal internationalism', of empirical scientific research methods, and of policy-oriented studies. Such domestic hegemony constructed a key basis of America's rise to globalism, which after 1945 required a continuing and enhanced foundation role, especially with the onset of the Cold War. The article, which examines the role of the US foundations in relation to intellectual hegemony construction in Latin America, Indonesia, and Africa, concludes that the evidence is best explained by Gramscian theory, and calls for further empirical research in this vital area.This article is concerned with the role of American philanthropic foundations in the development of international knowledge networks.1 By an international knowledge network is meant a system of coordinated research, disseminated and published results, study and often graduate-level teaching, intellectual exchange, and financing, across national boundaries. The international networks may also include official policymakers and international aid and other agencies. Landrum Bolling (1982) shows that, despite the lack of a 'grand design', American foundations (and other agencies) have constructed a remarkable foreign aid (educational and other) network that, he suggests, has had a significant impact on the Third World. It is clear that American foundations consciously helped to construct US international hegemony after 1945 through international knowledge networks that aimed to foster a pro-US environment of values, methods and research institutions across a range of fields and academic disciplines. Such international networks were modelled on previous foundation initiatives within the United States itself, from the 1920s to the 1940s, resulting in the effective intellectual hegemony of 'liberal internationalism', of empirical scientific research methods, and of policy-oriented studies (mostly under the banner of 'realism' or 'realistic' research, designed to be of practical utility to policymakers). Such domestic hegemony constructed a key basis of America's rise to globalism, 2 which after 1945, required a continuing and enhanced foundation role, especially with the onset of the Cold War.The international knowledge networks of interest here were constructed and

show abstract

Forging Foreign Policy: Organizational Identity and Knowledge Production

Shepherd

2020

Soc. sci. hist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ideas and knowledge central to foreign policy are often produced within the context of organizations. How do organizations vet people and ideas for knowledge production? I use original data drawn from archives of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), an organization that brought together elites with an interest in foreign policy, to examine the production of post–World War II US foreign policy knowledge. Drawing on literature about how organizations evaluate people and ideas, I assess how the CFR staff selected different foreign policy topics for their Program on Studies from 1955 to 1972. Case studies and multinomial logistic regression provide two forms of evidence: The justifications used by the CFR Program on Studies staff to select ideas and the relationship between recommendations of proposers and idea selection. I compare the effect of positive recommendations from different sources to distinguish between prioritizing quality and prestige and organizational identity on the other. Staff used the identity of the organization as a group of elites with particular expertise as a basis for making everyday decisions regarding which foreign policy knowledge would be codified in the program. In this way, the organization occupied a central position in the production of knowledge. This suggests that scholars of evaluation should attend to organization-level features in addition to individual-level characteristics. I discuss the implications for organizations and intellectual production.

show abstract

Resurgent Academic Interest in the Council on Foreign Relations

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Catalysing Events, Think Tanks and American Foreign Policy Shifts: A Comparative Analysis of the Impacts of Pearl Harbor 1941 and 11 September 2001

Catalysing Events, Think Tanks and American Foreign Policy Shifts: A Comparative Analysis of the Impacts of Pearl Harbor 1941 and 11 September 2001

American foundations and the development of international knowledge networks

Forging Foreign Policy: Organizational Identity and Knowledge Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About