Why Study the Presidents?

A Comparative Approach: Presidents and
"To Provide for the Common Defence"

1. Gain insight into what constitutes defense of the nation and how this has changed over time;
2. Learn how Presidents have interpreted and acted upon this idea in different ways and gain an understanding of possible reasons for these differences;
3. Use what they learn from the first two objectives as a basis for comparing Presidential decisions; and
4. Develop a historical context from which to assess how political leaders today interpret and seek "to provide for the common defence."

Part I: At the beginning of the course, Mr. Hood's students explored possible meanings of "to provide for the common defence" and how Presidents might act to ensure the nation's defense.

Part II: Several times throughout the year, students explored situations that a President confronted that caused him to act to ensure the "common defence." During this part, Mr. Hood followed a four step instructional model as outlined in Figure 1. Mr. Hood first placed the historical situations related to the "common defence" and the President in historical context, such as the international diplomacy between England, France, and the United States in the late 1700s and the election of 1800. Next, the students explored the events leading up to a policy decision, such as how the Barbary States preyed upon shipping along the North African coast. Students then investigated the options available to a President and decided what they thought was the best policy option, given the situation. Finally, students then stepped back and learned how each President actually responded and assessed his decision.

Part III: Toward the end of the year, students (re)defined "to provide for the common defence" and decided what was actions to this end were appropriate for a President.

Figure 1: Instructional Model

Presidents and "To Provide for the Common Defence"

1. Establish Historical Context
2. Investigate President and Policy Decision
   1. Explain situation and how it developed
   2. Discuss effects of the situation
   3. Introduce policy options
3. Make Policy Decision
   1. Study each option and discuss consequences
   2. Decide on an option and provide justification
4. Reestablish Historical Context
   1. Discuss the decision made by the President
   2. Consider short and long-term effects of decision
   3. Consider the quality of President's decision

Putting the Idea to the Test:
Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates

Figure 2: Excerpt Readings

President Jefferson, the War Powers, and the Barbary States

     In 1800, a frigate, the George Washington, sailed into Algiers to pay the annual tribute. The dey forced Captain Bainbridge to lower the U.S. flag and hoist the Algerian flag. The George Washington then was forced to deliver a shipment to the Sultan of Turkey in Istanbul. By the time that Jefferson entered office in 1801, the U.S. had paid over $2,000,000 in tribute and ransom to the Barbary States since the mid-1780s. In May 1801, the pasha of Tripoli, Yusuf Karamanli, canceled the treaty and declared war on the U.S. The pasha's conditions for a new treaty included an immediate payment of $225,000 and annual tribute of $25,000. In his first annual message to Congress, Jefferson reported:

To this state of general peace with which we have been blessed, one only exception exists. Tripoli, the least considerable of the Barbary States, had come forward with demands unfounded either in right or in compact, and had permitted itself to denounce war, on our failure to comply before a given day. The style of the demand admitted but one answer.

      In his address, Jefferson recommended a course of action to address the crisis created by the pasha of Tripoli.

Figure 3: Student Activity Prompt

Policy Options

Directions: Secretary of State James Madison needs your advice. President Jefferson has asked him to consider the policy options below in preparation for his administration's first full cabinet meeting on May 15. These options are ways to respond to Yusuf Karamanli's demand for an immediate payment of $225,000 and annual tribute of $25,000. You may choose to recommend one or several options. Place an "X" by each option that you are recommending to Secretary Madison. Please make sure to offer reasons for each recommendation (refer to the Questions to Consider for some information about each option). If you choose more than one option, make sure to support each option, as well as all your options as a whole.

— Option 1: Meet the pasha's demands and negotiate a new treaty.
— Option 2: Send a naval squadron to the Mediterranean Sea to protect U.S. shipping.
— Option 3: Impose a blockade against Tripoli.
— Option 4: Bombard the port of Tripoli.
— Option 5: Plot to overthrow the pasha of Tripoli.
— Option 6: Request Congress to declare war on Tripoli.
— Option 7: Seek support of other trading nations to fight Barbary pirates.

Figure 4: Student Activity Information Sheet

Questions to Consider as You Review the Policy Options

• If you choose to meet the pasha's demands, can the U.S. afford the payments?
  The U.S. annual revenue was about $8 million. The immediate payment and annual tribute for the first year was over 3% of the U.S. budget. In the past, when the other Barbary States learned of an increase in annual tribute, they also requested an increase. While the annual tribute was about $30,000 to $40,000, the immediate payment was ten or more times higher. The pasha had canceled a treaty made five years before. The loss of ships, however, would hurt New England merchants. Since much of a ship's cargo were goods like wheat and dried fish, Southern and Western farmers and New England fishers also would suffer.
  
  

• If you choose a military option, how will the other Barbary States respond?
  Tripoli was allied with Algiers and Tunis. In taking military action against Tripoli, the U.S. runs the risk of going to war with both states. Since the Barbary States lived off the annual tribute, they were unlikely to allow a young nation to stop paying tribute without a fight. On the other hand, nations like England and France have not resisted the pirates, since paying the tribute was less expensive than fighting them.
  
  

• If you decide to protect U.S. shipping, can the U.S. supply the needed war vessels?
  There were over 1,200 miles of coastline in the Barbary States and the U.S. was capable of only sending four to six naval vessels to the Mediterranean Sea. The total navy consisted of 13 frigates and 6 ships under construction. England and France signed the Peace of Amiens in late 1801. This decreased European demand for American exports. A decrease in American exports meant a decrease in the number of ships to protect. On the other hand, Congress was reluctant to fund the building of new war vessels.
  
  

• If you decide to blockade one or more Barbary States' ports, can the U.S. back up a blockade?
  Several naval vessels might be able to blockade the port of Tripoli. As indicated above, the U.S. could supply four to six ships. Since the U.S. largely had adopted a domestic defensive strategy toward its military, supplying more ships would require taking them away from U.S. waters. By removing almost all seaworthy ships from the U.S., the President might provide another 20 ships.
  
  

• If you choose a military option, can the President act without a declaration of war by Congress?
  Does the Constitution permit the President to send naval ships to the Mediterranean Sea for a military purpose without the consent of Congress? If you answer "yes," then you need to ask what orders the President is authorized to give to the warships. Can the warships defend U.S. commercial ships? Can they attack pirate ships before the pirates attack U.S. ships? Can the U.S. warships attack ships owned by the pasha of Tripoli? Can U.S. warships bombard the port of Tripoli? Cabinet members were divided on these questions. This was the first occasion that a U.S. President had to answer many of them. At the time of the cabinet meeting, Congress is not in session. Congress will not meet again for several months.
  
  

• If you consider the plot to overthrow the pasha, who would support the U.S. in a revolution?
  In seizing power in Tripoli, Yusuf Karamanli, the pasha, had killed his older brother and exiled another brother, Hamet. While Hamet might have been interested in taking power from his brother, he lacked any military forces. Congress either would need to authorize the use of troops to support Hamet or the money to buy the services of mercenaries.
  
  

• If you decide to request a declaration of war, would Congress vote in support of it?
  The Republican Party now controlled Congress. Most Republicans only desired to use the military to defend the territory of the U.S. Typically, they did not support using the military to protect commercial shipping. Building warships and conducting a war were very costly. While not the best option, paying the tribute was better than the risk of a central government with a powerful navy.

The Truman Doctrine and Today

Figure 5: Student Activity Prompt

The Main Drama Activity: A Time of Uncertainty, A Time to Act?

      Since becoming President on April 12, 1945, Harry S. Truman had faced numerous foreign policy threats and challenges, such as the decision to drop an atomic bomb on two Japanese cities and the growing division between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., particularly in Europe. In early 1947, Europe was economically and physically devastated from World War II, and growing dissatisfaction led to the rise to power of Communist Parties in Eastern European nations such as Hungary and Poland.

Advising President Truman

Directions: As indicated by the primary sources and readings, President Truman faced a critical juncture in early 1947. He realized that he needed to respond to the worsening situation in Greece and Turkey. While several policy options were available to him, he was unsure which one would best serve the U.S., the two countries, and the larger context. He has called upon you for advice as he prepares to deliver a speech to Congress to present his decision.

Option 1: Provide economic aid only to Greece and Turkey.
Option 2: Provide military aid to Greece and Turkey
Option 3: Provide economic and military aid to both countries.
Option 4: Provide aid either to Greece or Turkey.
Option 5: Request the United Nations to assist Greece and Turkey.
Option 6: Determine Greece and Turkey are not within U.S. sphere of influence.

Figure 6: Student Activity Prompt

Judging the Truman Doctrine

      President Truman requested Congress to provide Greece and Turkey with economic and military aid. His request met with opposition from members of his own party, the Democrats, and from the Soviet Union. You are a member of Congress and need to decide whether to vote for or against President Truman's request. Below is a summary of the arguments made by three men. Please indicate which one is the most persuasive and how you would vote as a result. Explain how you think Truman's request would benefit or hinder the U.S.


President Truman's Position: Greece and Turkey have requested financial and military assistance from the U.S. The official U.S. position is "to help free peoples to maintain their free institutions and national integrity." As illustrated by how the Soviets established puppet governments in Poland, Romania, and other nations, the Soviet Union holds the opposite position. The Soviets' actions went against what Stalin agreed to in Yalta. If the Soviet Union was willing to break that agreement, why should we believe that it will feel bound to honor the United Nations Charter? The United Nations also does not yet possess the resources necessary to undertake the relief effort required in Greece and Turkey. The freedom and integrity of Greece and Turkey is at stake. Time is of the essence. If we fail to act with economic and military aid, not only are Greece and Turkey in danger, but the entire Middle East.


Senator Pepper's Position: Economic aid to Greece and Turkey is fine. I oppose providing either nation with military aid. As the principal founder of the United Nations, the U.S. had agreed to work through this organization to eliminate military threats and to ensure regional and global peace. In bypassing the United Nations, the U.S. was informing the world that the organization was a failure. If the U.S. as the world's strongest power was not willing to recognize the legitimacy of the United Nations, why should other nations of the world do so?


Soviet Foreign Minister Vyshinsky's Position: The United States is using economic aid as a political weapon. The U.S. wants Greece and Turkey to oppose the U.S.S.R. I am sure that the Greek government is aware that the aid is not free. How likely is the U.S. to continue providing the aid, for example, if the Greek people elect Communists in the upcoming election? Given how important the aid is to the recovery of the Greek economy, the people surely will want to do whatever is necessary to ensure they continue to receive assistance. In turn, the U.S. is seeking to divide Europe in two and is laying the seed for a future armed conflict by arming these two nations, which lie near the southern borders of the Soviet Union. Imagine how the U.S. would respond if the Soviet Union attempted to provide similar economic and military aid to nations in the Western Hemisphere.

Student 1: "I believe it was important at the time because we were trying to contain communism. Greece is the home of democracy and Turkey is in a very good strategic position."


Student 2: "I disagree because I think that we should have let the United Nations help. One, so they don't think we are trying to be better than them. Two, America already had people living on the streets that need help and if we can't help our own people, we shouldn't try to save others."


Student 3: "I agree with his decision, but only partly. I think it was right to give them economic aid, but not military aid. With a better economy they could make their own military or the U.N. could."


Student 4: "He was saving a country from communism. If he did not help, the Soviet Union would have taken over. They would have started with all the smaller countries. Then they would get the big ones. We weren't only thinking of Greece and Turkey, but also all of the other people in the world."


Student 5: "Yes, because they could help us in the long run if we ever needed something."


Student 6: "I agree. Going to the U.N. wouldn't help since the Soviet Union is part of it, so the U.S. had to take matters in its own hands."

Bringing Closure to the Students' Thinking About
"To Provide for the Common Defence"

Student A: "Our decisions in the Middle East in an attempt to eliminate the threat of terror seem similar. They have also been difficult decisions and often unpopular."


Student B: "In a way the situation in Iraq is similar. Although we weren't fighting Greece & Turkey, we still had to make decisions on what kind of aid to give to each country."


Student C: "Right now with Bush and Iraq. We are providing Iraq with military aid, but it is not helping them at all whereas in Truman's case it helped them a lot."


Student D: "The events that happened in Somalia were similar because in both cases there were questions of whether we should provide aid or not."


Student E: "On September 11 when the twin towers were invaded by some terrorists. People got together to help clean up and comfort those who had lost something or someone close. What is America if we don't help others?"


Student F: "It is kind of like Israel and Palestine fighting over land. We don't know who to help and what to let it go. Today in the Middle East we have to keep people like Saddam Hussein from taking control of smaller countries."


Student G: "The U.S. helping Afghanistan after they got rid of the Taliban. The U.S. aided them."

Conclusion

Notes

^1.  J. Onosko, "Barriers to the Promotion of Higher-Order Thinking in Social Studies," Theory and Research in Social Education 19 (Fall 1991): 341–366.