The Japanese Oil Embargo - History and Ambiguity of Sources

It is always a bit of a thrill to read an article that covers a facet of the 1930s or 1940s which I'm not aware of, which made this Salon article on the 1941 United States oil embargo against Japan fascinating.  To summarize for those unfamiliar with it, in 1941 before the Pearl Harbor attack United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt imposed a freeze on Japanese assets within the United States, which would require permits to be issued prior to any sale of goods taking place to Japan.  As Japan relied heavily upon United States oil exports to meet its fuel needs, particularly for its military, this action represented a significant risk to Japan's ability to continue its on-going war in China at the time.

The ambiguity comes in regarding how the oil embargo was imposed and the role of Dean Acheson, pictured above, in creating that oil embargo.  As Assistant Secretary of State at the time Acheson had an unusual opportunity to shape United States policy, while the President was in Newfoundland having a secret conference with Winston Churchill, British Prime Minister, Acheson had near total authority to decide if any licenses would be issued to Japan to allow the purchase of oil.  He chose to not issue any such licenses, imposing an effective oil embargo on Japan and starting the chain of concerns that led to the Pearl Harbor attack on the United States in December 1941.

The question that needs to be asked though is this - did FDR know that Acheson was going to take this action and allowed it or was he surprised by the action and left it in place to avoid appearing weak?

This is not an easy question to answer, several sources claim that Acheson acted on his own and FDR was not involved in the choice, he wanted to avoid war.  However one source I checked claimed that FDR did know and, more critically, a close friend of FDR's was in the State Department and had access to warn FDR if Acheson had been acting without approval.

My research into FDR has shown when it came to foreign policy he seemed to like having a distance between himself and certain actions, but was very willing to engage when needed in quite aggressive action.  The theory that seems most likely to me is FDR was aware of the oil embargo being implemented by this indirect means and supported it, to see what impact it would have on Japan.  If it turned out to be far too dangerous he'd be able to then retract what Acheson did and state Acheson had gone "too far" with his authority.

But we won't ever know - this was one of the items that there simply aren't clean records or sources to document.  Considering this policy can be directly linked to Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, it has relevance.

Sources:  Salon article on this topic, Wikipedia on Dean Acheson, State Department page on Acheson, Google Books scan of "An Introduction to the Causes of War" by Greg Cashman & Leonard C. Robinson, Google Books scan of "The History of American Foreign Policy from 1895" by Jerald A. Combs

Read More

Do you think Truman handled well the entrance of the United States into the Cold War? Or do you think Roosevelt would have made different/better decisions?

It is doubted that Roosevelt could have preserved the Grand Alliance any better than Truman. Although Truman was less experienced in foreign policy than Roosevelt, the failure to handle this situation did not come from the American president, but from Stalin’s determination to follow up his plans no matter what. Roosevelt was already very ill at Yalta and could not keep up with Stalin even in theory. The problem of democratic elections in Eastern Europe remained unresolved. Roosevelt hoped to satisfy Stalin’s demands through the UN, but even if Roosevelt had lived, the UN was established too late to do anything. When the Yalta Conference occurred, Poland was already occupied and Stalin was speeding up the “Sovietization” of the Eastern European countries. During the so-called free elections held in Eastern Europe, the observers sent by the Western nations witnessed powerlessly what was happening. The Allies had no resources anymore to start a new war with a Russia that occupied half of Europe and arrived in Berlin before them. Europe was crushed by four years of war, while America was devastated by a war on two fronts and did not have anymore the resources to pursue a new conflict with more than uncertain outcomes. With the Bolsheviks’ clear ideological objective to world widely export the socialist revolution, neither Roosevelt nor anyone else would have been able to stop Stalin, hence the development of the Cold War.

Henretta, James A, and David Brody. “America: A Concise History, Volume II: Since 1877.” 4th ed., Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2010, 769

Read More

Why was the United States unable to avoid entering a Cold War with the Soviet Union?

The Cold War was mainly a conflict for world supremacy. After the World War II, only two world superpowers stood up, each with its own political and economical ideology, and strategic interest, and a conflict between them was unavoidable. This competition was the fuel of the Cold War and since none of the parts was willing to give up and take defeat, the conflict lasted as long as the two superpowers existed. As the Soviet Union began to assert its control in Eastern Europe, the expansion of communism became the main concern of the United States. The US Government feared that, as the Soviet power was growing, this could generate revolution in the Western European countries and the movement would eventually reach the American soil. The danger seemed even higher as communist parties already existed in the Western hemisphere. In the same time, to keep total control, the communist states were isolated from the rest of the world (from where the term of Iron Curtain). This isolation increased the worry of the US government.

The Cold War was rooted in the fear of communism. To avoid this possibility, the United States took measures to block the expansion of the communist ideology. This odd sort of war was opened not by a cannon shot, but by a well known discourse. The speech delivered by Winston Churchill in 1946 in the town of Fulton, Missouri, drew attention to the danger that Western democracies were on the verge of being swallowed up by communism, and suggested a close Anglo-American alliance to defend their interests. The blackmail of the atomic bomb could not serve anymore at that time especially since the Soviets already had this weapon. And since the offensive was not recommended, the chosen alternative was the defensive. In 1947 President Truman, concerned about the security of Greece and Turkey, announced the Truman Doctrine. The U.S. agreed to support the free nations’ fight against the attempts of subjugation. This meant that the U.S. would act to restrain the expansion of communism.

Constantiniu, Florin. From the hot to the cold war. Bucharest, Romania: Corint, 1998, 111-120

Henretta, James A, and David Brody. “America: A Concise History, Volume II: Since 1877.” 4th ed., Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2010, 766-775

Read More