Advertisement

Journal of Transatlantic Studies

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 41–60 | Cite as

Diasporas and American debates on German unification

  • Lukas SchemperEmail author
Article

Abstract

The present article discusses how diasporas in the United States reacted to and were involved in the process of German unification. For reasons linked to Germany’s aggressive past, the Jewish-American and Polish-American communities - whose members (or family members) had suffered immensely from German fascism and expansionism - were among those who expressed the most concerns. However, the largely positive public opinion towards German unification in the United States generally corresponded to the sentiments of the German-American community.

Keywords

German unification American foreign policy German-American community Jewish-American community Polish-American community 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Stephen F. Szabo, The Diplomacy of German Unification (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992), 112Google Scholar
  2. 1a.
    Mary E. Sarotte, 1989: The Struggle to Create Post-Cold War Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009), 193.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    Elsbeth M. Seewald, Co-Chairman of the German American Joint Action Committee to John P. Schmitz, 24 September 1990, Bush Presidential Library WHORM CO054 Germany, 181683CU.Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    Speech for German-American Day Celebration, 1 October 1990, Bush Presidential Library WHORM CO054 Germany, 181683CU.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    An overview of the literature can be found here: David G. Haglund, ‘Ethnic Diasporas and US Foreign Policy’, Oxford Bibliographies, http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199756223/obo-9780199756223–0069.xml (accessed April 21, 2015).Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Urbain N’Sonde, Les réactions à la réunification allemande: En France, en Grande-Bretagne et aux États-Unis (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2006.); andGoogle Scholar
  7. 5a.
    Ines Lehmann, Die deutsche Vereinigung von außen gesehen. Angst, Bedenken und Erwartungen in der ausländischen Presse. Band I: Die Presse der Vereinigten Staaten, Großbritanniens und Frankreichs (Frankfurt am Main; New York: P. Lang, 1996).Google Scholar
  8. 6.
    For example, Cox and Hurst call President George H.W. Bush’s involvement in the unification process ‘His Finest Hour’ and attribute the success of German unification to his diplomatic skills. Michael Cox and Steven Hurst, ‘“His Finest Hour?” George Bush and the Diplomacy of German Unification’, Diplomacy & Statecraft 13, no. 4 (2002): 123–50. Other accounts also focus on traditional forms of diplomacy and the American executive, most notably, Sarotte, Struggle; andCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 6a.
    Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge MA; London: Harvard Univ. Press, 1995).Google Scholar
  10. 7.
    James M. Scott and A. Lanes Crothers, ‘Out of the Cold: The Post-Cold War Context of U.S. Foreign Policy’, in After the End: Making U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War World, ed. James M. Scott (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 8.
    House, 101st Cong., 1stsess., 1989, vol. 135,29629; and House, 101st Cong., 1stsess., 1989, vol. 135, 30672.Google Scholar
  12. 9.
    Michael R. Gordon and Stephen Engelberg, ‘Military to Draft Plan for a 6% Cut in 1992–94 Spending’, Congressional Quarterly Weekly, November 19, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. 10.
    CRS, Report for House Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East (Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 1989), 42.Google Scholar
  14. 11.
    Yossi Shain, Marketing the American Creed Abroad: Diasporas in the U.S. and Their Homelands (Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999), xi.Google Scholar
  15. 12.
    See several public opinion polls in The Gallup Report between December 1989 and October 1990, no. 289 and following.Google Scholar
  16. 13.
    In 1990, the states with between 46.2% and 53.9% of German ancestry included Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin. ‘Percent of Persons of German Ancestry: 1990’, U.S. Census Bureau Fact Finder, http://factfinder.census.gov (accessed March 15, 2011).
  17. 14.
    ‘Persons of German Ancestry’.Google Scholar
  18. 15.
    Stephan Thernstrom, Ann Orlov, and Stephan Handlin, ed., Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1980), 406.Google Scholar
  19. 16.
    N’Sonde, Réactions, 74.Google Scholar
  20. 17.
    Jim Leach, e-mail message to author, February 16, 2011.Google Scholar
  21. 18.
    Thernstrom et al., Harvard Encyclopedia, 405–25; Shain, Marketing, 10. For ‘dormant diasporas’ see Gabriel Sheffer, Diaspora Politics: At Home Abroad (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 19.
    Information on these organisations may be found on their respective webpages, accessed April 17, 2014: http://www.dank.org, http://www.germanheritagesociety.org, and http://www.acgusa.org.
  23. 20.
    Sam Attlesey ‘Political Geography to Color Redisricting’, The Dallas Morning News, March 3, 1991.Google Scholar
  24. 21.
    Dieter Dettke, Representative and Executive Director of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation in Washington DC from 1985 to 2006, telephone interview with author, April 17, 2011; Larry Peterson, ‘John P. Schmitz Finds His Own Political Niche//Ex-lawmaker’s Son Works in White House’, The Orange County Register, April 10, 1989.Google Scholar
  25. 22.
    House Subcommittee on Economic Stabilization, Eastern Europe: Exchange Opportunities, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990.Google Scholar
  26. 23.
    Dettke, telephone interview with author.Google Scholar
  27. 24.
    This Commission (CSCE or U.S. Helsinki Commission), an independent U.S. government agency created in 1976 and responsible for ‘monitoring compliance with the Helsinki accords and CSCE (later OSCE) commitments’, consisted of nine senators, nine congressional representatives and one representative each from the State Defense and Commerce Departments. Naturally, the question of NATO touched upon the future of military structures in Europe and was of great concern for the commission. ‘CSCE’, http://www.csce.gov/ (accessed March 19, 2011).
  28. 25.
    Hearing before the CSCE, German Unification and the CSCE Process, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990.Google Scholar
  29. 26.
    John J. Parisi, former congressional staffer, interview with author, Washington, D.C, March 16, 2011; The Congressional Study Group on Germany, The Congressional Study Group on Germany 1987–1994 (Washington, DC: The Congressional Study Group on Germany, 1994).Google Scholar
  30. 27.
    Parisi, interview with author; The Congressional Study Group on Germany, Germany 1987–1994.Google Scholar
  31. 28.
    ‘Gespräch des Bundeskanzlers Kohl mit Vertretern der Studiengruppe über Deutschland des amerikanischen Kongresses. Bonn, May 29, 1990’, in Deutsche Einheit: Sonderedition aus den Akten des Bundeskanzleramtes 1989/90, ed. Hanns Jürgen Küsters et al. (München: R. Oldenbourg, 1998), 1155–9.Google Scholar
  32. 29.
    Édouard Husson, ‘Le ‘néo-atlantisme’ de la République Fédérale de l’Allemagne et la réaffirmation du leadership américain (1979–1989)’, in Les Etats-Unis et la fin de la guerre froide, ed. Pierre Melandri and Serge Ricard (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2005), 173. For German-American bilateral relations during the Cold War seeGoogle Scholar
  33. 29a.
    Wolfram F. Hanrieder, Germany America, Europe: Forty Years of German Foreign Policy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 30.
    Andrew Baker, Washington Area Director of the American Jewish Committee in 1989–90, telephone interview with author, March 2, 2011.Google Scholar
  35. 31.
    See reflections on this issue by Frank Stern and Bill Templer, ‘The “Jewish Question” in the “German Question,” 1945–1990: Reflections in Light of November 9th, 1989’, New German Critique, no. 52 (1991): 155–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 32.
    Ines Lehmann, Die deutsche Vereinigung von außen gesehen: Angst, Bedenken und Erwartungen in der ausländischen Presse. Band II. Die Presse Dänemarks, der Niederlande, Belgiens, Luxemburgs, Österreichs, der Schweiz, Italiens, Portugals und Spaniens und jüdische Reaktionen (Frankfurt am Main; New York: P. Lang, 1996), 389, 396, 414.Google Scholar
  37. 33.
    Lily Gardner Feldman, The Special Relationship between West Germany and Israel (Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1984), 1–9.Google Scholar
  38. 34.
    Baker, telephone interview with author; Ines Lehmann, Jüdische Reaktionen, 389.Google Scholar
  39. 35.
    David Shribman, ‘Americans, While Voicing Some Deep Concerns, Widely Favor German Reunification, Poll Shows’, The Wall Street Journal, March 16, 1990.Google Scholar
  40. 36.
    Shlomo Shafir and Jacob Rader Marcus Center, Ambiguous Relations: The American Jewish Community and Germany since 1945 (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1999), 341–3.Google Scholar
  41. 37.
    Pauline Peretz, ‘Les batailles non israéliennes du lobby juif aux Etats-Unis’, in La politique extérieure des États-Unis au XXe siècle: le poids des déterminants intérieurs, ed. Pierre Melandri and Serge Ricard (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2007), 276–83.Google Scholar
  42. 38.
    Vladimir N. Pregelj, The Jackson-Vanik Amendment: A Survey (Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, 2005), 10.Google Scholar
  43. 39.
    Congressional Record, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990, vol. 136, no. 85.Google Scholar
  44. 40.
    Hearing of the House FAC, Fiscal Year 11 Foreign Aid, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990.Google Scholar
  45. 41.
    Marilyn Henry, Confronting the Perpetrators: A History of the Claims Conference (London; Portland, OR: Vallentine Mitchell, 2007), 75–6.Google Scholar
  46. 42.
    Baker, telephone interview with author.Google Scholar
  47. 43.
    Hearing of House Europe and Middle East Subcom., Developments in Europe, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990; andGoogle Scholar
  48. 43a.
    Hearing before the Senate CFR, Legal Issues Relating to the Future Status of Germany, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990.Google Scholar
  49. 44.
    Henry, Perpetrators, 76.Google Scholar
  50. 45.
    Lehmann, Jüdische Reaktionen, 403.Google Scholar
  51. 46.
    Chancellor Helmut Kohl to President of B’nai B’rith, 8 March 1990 (Archives B’nai B’rith International Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  52. 47.
    Chancellor Helmut Kohl to President of B’nai B’rith, 26 April 1990 (Archives B’nai B’rith International Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  53. 48.
    Bernd Debusman, ‘U.S. Public, Intellectuals Differ On German Reunification’, Reuters News, May 16, 1990; Lehmann, Jüdische Reaktionen, 404.Google Scholar
  54. 49.
    Lehmann, Jüdische Reaktionen, 405–6.Google Scholar
  55. 50.
    Michael H. Van Dusen, staff director for the House Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East from 1971 until 1992, interview with author, Washington, DC, March 17, 2011.Google Scholar
  56. 51.
    Sarotte, Struggle, 103–7; Michael Ludwig, ‘Die deutsche Frage in der Außenpolitik der neuen polnischen Regierung’, Beiträge zur Konfliktforschung 3 (1990): 99–116.Google Scholar
  57. 52.
    Ludwig, ‘Deutsche Frage’, 99–116; Mieczysław Tomala, Deutschland, von Polen gesehen: Zu den deutsch-polnischen Beziehungen 1945–1990 (Marburg: Schüren, 2000), 552Google Scholar
  58. 52a.
    Ines Lehmann, Die deutsche Vereinigung von außen gesehen. Angst, Bedenken und Erwartungen. Band IV: Polen und die Tschechoslowakei (Frankfurt am Main; New York: P. Lang, 2004), 36Google Scholar
  59. 52b.
    Stanislaw Lisiecki, ‘Polish Public Opinion and the Unification of Germany’, Polish Western Affairs 321 (1991): 165–81.Google Scholar
  60. 53.
    Lehmann, Polen, 46, 97, 115.Google Scholar
  61. 54.
    Heinrich August Winkler, Deutsche Geschichte vom ‘“Dritten Reich” bis zur Wiedervereinigung, Der lange Weg nach Westen, Heinrich August Winkler; Bd. 2 (München: Beck, 2010), 552.Google Scholar
  62. 55.
    Ludwig, ‘Deutsche Frage’, 99–116; U.S. Census Bureau, ‘Percent of Persons of Polish Ancestry 1990’, http://factfinder.census.gov (accessed March 15, 2011).
  63. 56.
    Zelikow and Rice, Germany Unified, 217–22; Sarotte, Struggle, 120–9.Google Scholar
  64. 57.
    Margaret Thatcher, The Downing Street Years (New York: Harper Collins, 1993), 799.Google Scholar
  65. 58.
    François Mitterrand, De l’Allemagne, de la France (Paris: O. Jacob, 2001), 145–54.Google Scholar
  66. 59.
    Sarotte, Struggle, 120–9; Lehmann, Polen, 174.Google Scholar
  67. 60.
    Sheffer, Diaspora Politics, 93.Google Scholar
  68. 61.
    Shain, Marketing, 56.Google Scholar
  69. 62.
    Senate, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990, vol. 136 no. 59, 6064.Google Scholar
  70. 63.
    Edward J. Moskal to President Bush, 26 February 1990, Bush Presidential Library WHORM General CO054 Germany 119068.Google Scholar
  71. 64.
    All letters to be found under the above category in the archives of the George Bush Presidential Library.Google Scholar
  72. 65.
    John M. Goshko and Ann Devroy, ‘Congressional Leaders Criticize Kohl’s Stance on Polish Border’, The Washington Post, February 28, 1990Google Scholar
  73. 65a.
    William Scally, ‘Amid U.S. Senate Concern, Baker says Polish Border Inviolable’, Reuters News, February 28, 1990Google Scholar
  74. 65b.
    Thomas L. Friedman, ‘Upheaval in the East: The Germanys’, The New York Times Late Edition, February 28, 1990.Google Scholar
  75. 66.
    Robert L. Koenig, ‘Germans Pressed on Border Issue Senators Prepared Cable for Modrow and Kohl’, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, March 1, 1990; Senate, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990, vol. 136, no. 30, 2714.Google Scholar
  76. 67.
    U.S. Helsinki Commission, Elections in Central and Eastern Europe. A Compendium of Reports on the Elections Held from March through June 1990 (Washington, DC: CSCE, 1990), 22.Google Scholar
  77. 68.
    Senate, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990, vol. 136, no. 20, 2123. Senate resolution 257- Relative to United States participation in German unification negotiations, ‘Call in Senate to link U.S. Rights in Germany, Border Pledge’, Reuters News, March 4, 1990.Google Scholar
  78. 69.
    ‘Entwurf eines Entschließungsantrages der Fraktionen der CDU/CSU und der FDP, March 6, 1990’, Deutsche Einheit, 913.Google Scholar
  79. 70.
    Sarotte, Struggle, 189.Google Scholar
  80. 71.
    Joan Mower, ‘Senate Panel Shelves Resolutions on German Border, Unification’, The Associated Press, March 6, 1990.Google Scholar
  81. 72.
    ‘Gespräch des Bundeskanzlers Kohl mit Mitgliedern der Rüstungskontroll-Beobachtergruppe des amerikanischen Senats Bonn. March 12, 1990’, Deutsche Einheit, 927–31.Google Scholar
  82. 73.
    ‘Congresswoman Barbara B. Kennelly Reports’, February 28, 1990, Bush Presidential Library WHORM CO054 Germany 123802; House, Introduction of Resolution of Support for Reestablishment of Polish-German Border, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990, vol. 136, no. 18, 520.Google Scholar
  83. 74.
    Dan Rostenkowski to President George H. Bush, March 1990, Bush Presidential Library WHORM CO054 Germany 124857.Google Scholar
  84. 75.
    Stephen J. Solarz to President George H. Bush, expressing concern regarding the process of German reunification, March 13, 1990, Bush Presidential Library WHORM CO054 Germany 122480.Google Scholar
  85. 76.
    Zelikow and Rice, Germany Unified, 222.Google Scholar
  86. 77.
    Senate, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 1990, vol. 136, no. 59, 6064.Google Scholar
  87. 78.
    In Illinois, 8.4% of the population indicated that they were of Polish ancestry in 1990. U.S. Census Bureau, ‘Percent Persons of Polish Ancestry: 1990’, http://factfinder.census.gov (accessed March 15, 2011).
  88. 79.
    Sarotte, Struggle, 142–5.Google Scholar
  89. 80.
    Michael D. Scanlan, East European Developments: A Summary of Major Issues and Chronology May — August 1990 (Washington, DC: CRS, 1990).Google Scholar
  90. 81.
    Fritz Stern, for instance, described his position towards unification as largely positive. Fritz Richard Stern, Five Germanys I Have Known, 1st ed. (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2006), 454–75.Google Scholar
  91. 82.
    Dettke, telephone interview with author.Google Scholar
  92. 83.
    Van Dusen, interview with author.Google Scholar
  93. 84.
    Dettke, telephone interview with author.Google Scholar
  94. 85.
    Lehmann, Vereinigte Staaten, 38.Google Scholar
  95. 86.
    Feldman, Special Relationship, 1–9.Google Scholar
  96. 87.
    Tony Smith, Foreign Attachments: The Power of Ethnic Groups in the Making of American Foreign Policy (Cambridge, Mass.; London, England: Harvard University Press, 2000), 47Google Scholar
  97. 87a.
    David M. Paul and Rachel Anderson Paul, Ethnic Lobbies and US Foreign Policy (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2009), 9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Board of Transatlantic Studies 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of International HistoryGraduate Institute of International and Development StudiesGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations