Embers of War: The Fall of an Empire and the Making of America's Vietnam

by Fredrik Logevall

“The American people, born of an anticolonial revolution, are hostile to colonies by tradition,” read one typical Foreign Ministry report, noting that the hostility cut across party lines and class lines. As such, it was that rare issue “on which American opinion is not divided.” Moreover, the study continued, Roosevelt’s policy played into the American public’s “penchant for crusades”—his Wilsonian rhetoric allowed Americans to endow the sacrifices on the battlefield with ennobling purpose, in this case bringing self-determination to oppressed peoples. Then too, less lofty principles were involved. The report charged that American businessmen favored decolonization mostly in order to gain access to raw materials and markets, so as to maximize profits and to maintain production after the war. The basic aim seemed to be “an open door for merchandise as well as capital,” the authors claimed, and there could be no doubt who would emerge on top: “The open door would favor powerful Americans over European competitors.”