Why do I suspect that we're about to embark on yet another round of exorbitant revisionism? Through History With JMA, or What the Americans Should Have Done If They Only Had a Ball.
Given that FDR was dead before decolonization was more than an abstract fantasy, it's hard to see how he got any balls rolling. Certainly nothing FDR said in the last days of his Presidency would have had much influence on what the Europeans actually did as it became clear that they were not going to be able to hold onto their "possessions".
Jumping from FDR to JFK would skip rather a lot, no?
I can fault the US for meekly allowing the restoration of empire in SE Asia, where they had dominant force and influence... especially with the French in Indochina and the Dutch in Indonesia. That would be hindsight speaking though, and it would be silly to think things were as clear at that time. In Africa the US had virtually no knowledge, experience, or exposure; difficult to see what FDR or Truman could have done to change the future.
I why wouldn't "the lions share of responsibility for the shambolic manner in which decolonization, certainly in Africa, was carried out" rest with the colonial powere who were carrying it out... unless of course we start with the assumption that America is necessarily responsible for everything, everywhere, all the time?
Just for the sake of amusement, what do you think the leaders of post-WW2 America could or should have done, and how exactly would that have assured orderly decolonization?
Bookmarks