Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T04:42:32.734Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The special relationship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Michael G. Fry
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The 'special relationship', wrapped in politically relevant fact and myth, in nostalgia and irritation, can still raise emotions. Books and essays about it bring on their trans-Atlantic and domestic controversies; it remains a case of reviewer beware.

Type
Review Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , July 1988 , pp. 237 - 245
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Richard Little, ‘History and the Analysis of International Relations: Three Ways to Beat Time’, (paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the British International Studies Association, December 1978); Watt, D. C., Succeeding John Bull. America in Britain's Place, 1900–1975 (Cambridge, 1984), pp. 1–23, 158–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Fry, Michael G., ‘History and International Studies’ (Washington, DC, 1987), pp. 1–16.Google Scholar

2. Hankey to Balfour, 29 June and 11 November 1927, Balfour papers (British Museum), 49704. The idea that successive American governments ‘jollied you along’ and then let you down became common place in British official circles.

3. Macmillan to Eden, 25 and 26 September 1956, PREM, 11/1102 (Prime Minister files, Public Record Office). At least one former colleague of Dulles has difficulty in believing Macmillan's report.

4. Larson, Deborah Welch, Origins of Containment. A Psychological Explanation (Princeton, 1985).Google Scholar