What do you think?
Rate this book
Biographies in American Foreign Policy
John Foster Dulles: Piety, Pragmatism, and Power in U.S. Foreign Policy
John Foster Dulles was one of the most influential and controversial figures in the history of twentieth-century U.S. foreign relations. Active in the field for decades, Dulles reflected and was a reflection of the tension that pervaded U.S. international conduct from its evolution as a global power in the early twentieth century through its emergence as the "leader of the Free World" during the Cold War. His life and career embody the best and most troubling aspects of American foreign policy as it progressed toward international supremacy while swaying between altruism and self-interest.
Dulles remains an enigma because he was both a crusading idealist and a calculating practitioner of realpolitik. In this biography, Richard Immerman traces Dulles's path from his early days growing up as the son of a Presbyterian minister in Watertown, New York, through his years of amassing influence and power as an international business lawyer and adviser, to his service as President Eisenhower's secretary of state.
In examining the life of Dulles, this volume illuminates not only the history of modern U.S. foreign policy, but its search for a twentieth-century identity. Sophisticated yet accessible, John Foster Dulles: Piety, Pragmatism, and Power in U.S. Foreign Policy is an important resource for graduate and undergraduate courses in U.S. history and U.S. foreign relations.
Dulles remains an enigma because he was both a crusading idealist and a calculating practitioner of realpolitik. In this biography, Richard Immerman traces Dulles's path from his early days growing up as the son of a Presbyterian minister in Watertown, New York, through his years of amassing influence and power as an international business lawyer and adviser, to his service as President Eisenhower's secretary of state.
In examining the life of Dulles, this volume illuminates not only the history of modern U.S. foreign policy, but its search for a twentieth-century identity. Sophisticated yet accessible, John Foster Dulles: Piety, Pragmatism, and Power in U.S. Foreign Policy is an important resource for graduate and undergraduate courses in U.S. history and U.S. foreign relations.
248 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 1998
2 people are currently reading
50 people want to read
About the author
Richard H. Immerman
22 books7 followersRichard H. Immerman is Marvin Wachman Director Emeritus at the Center for the Study of Force and Diplomacy at Temple University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
November 22, 2025
Of the handful of men who determined American foreign policy at the opening stages of the Cold War, few were as controversial as John Foster Dulles. As Secretary of State from 1953 until 1959, he played a prominent role in shaping the Eisenhower administration’s approach towards the Soviet Union. His strident anti-communism, which was framed in language that reflected his religious convictions, both set the tone for the country’s public response to the Soviet challenge and defined his image in the popular imagination. While regarded by many as a sagacious defender of American interests, others feared that his uncompromising and confrontational tone reflected a rigid zealotry that unnecessarily risked conflict with the world’s other superpower.
These contrasting images of Dulles not only reflected the polarizing nature of his public persona, but continued to shape interpretations of him long after his death. One of Richard Immerman’s goals in this balanced and fair-minded biography of the man is to move beyond these binary interpretations and offer instead a nuanced understanding of Dulles and the motivations that drove his approach to policy. As Immerman demonstrates, these views were not oppositional, but reflected different aspects of a man whose upbringing was shaped by a blend of religious and secular influences. Much of the latter can be traced back to his maternal grandfather and namesake, John W. Foster, a lawyer and a diplomat who served as Secretary of State under Benjamin Harrison. Foster served as a mentor to his grandson throughout much of his childhood, complimenting the religious and moral instruction young Dulles received from his father Avery, a Presbyterian minister.
While Dulles’s Presbyterianism led many to regard him in later years as an inflexible Calvinist, Immerman notes that Dulles was a theological liberal whose study of philosophy at Princeton and the Sorbonne led him to regard religion in practical terms. After returning from Paris, Dulles studied law at George Washington University, which gave him the opportunity to live with his grandparents and work part-time for Foster’s international law practice. Foster subsequently used his connections to get his grandson hired for the prestigious New York firm of Sullivan and Cromwell. This proved the beginning of a highly remunerative career in corporate law, which placed Dulles at the forefront of the legal profession.
Despite the press of business, Dulles found ways to engage with the development of America’s foreign policies. His friendship with the financier Bernard Baruch led to Dulles’s selection as a member of the U.S. delegation to the Paris Peace Conference, where he worked to soften the harsh terms sought by France and Britain. As a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, he was a regular participant at its meetings and a frequent contributor to its journal Foreign Affairs. This was one of many publications for which he wrote numerous articles advocating for an internationalist approach to world affairs. With the approach of the Second World War this was expressed in a religious tone, one that Immerman sees as reflecting his subject’s growing belief in the contribution Christian values could make in resolving global problems.
By the mid-1940s, Dulles was involved increasingly in partisan politics. Establishing a close relationship with Thomas Dewey, the Republican Party’s nominee in the 1944 and 1948 presidential elections, Dulles anticipated being appointed Secretary of State in the event of a Dewey victory. Denied that opportunity by Dewey’s successive defeats, Dulles became more openly critical of the Truman administration’s foreign policy, proposing instead a more aggressive program of promoting independence among nations dominated by the Soviet Union. This contributed to the tone the Eisenhower campaign adopted in the 1952 presidential election, one in which Dulles was an avid participant in fighting for what, for him, was likely his last opportunity to gain the office he so eagerly sought.
And with Dwight Eisenhower’s victory Dulles was indeed rewarded with the office once held by his grandfather. Immerman’s examination of Dulles’s relationship with Eisenhower is among the most interesting aspects of the book, one that is central to understanding Dulles’s contribution to American foreign policy. Unlike Dewey, Eisenhower was no novice when it came to foreign affairs, and had clearly defined ideas as to what policies he sought to pursue as president. While these were not incompatible with Dulles’s own vision, the latter’s more extreme rhetoric not only aided the administration’s appeal to the party’s “old guard,” but it helped make Dulles a useful lightning rod as it pursued its goals internationally using more covert means.
Dulles embraced his role as his administration’s anticommunist crusader. In doing so, however, Immerman notes his subject’s disappointing (and uncharacteristic) underestimation of the power of nationalism in driving events. This contributed to his exaggeration of the communist threat, one that precluded the possibility early in Dulles’s tenure of taking advantage of any opportunity to thaw the Cold War created by Joseph Stalin’s death. While Dulles proved inflexible in this regard, he demonstrated far more adaptability when it came to dealing with West European leaders in strengthening the North Atlantic alliance, as he set aside decades of personal prejudice in doing so. Immerman also credits Dulles with willing to revisit his judgments regarding the question of how best to exploit America’s nuclear superiority, with his inability to come up with effective solutions in that area one shared by both his predecessors and his successors.
By the end of the book, Immerman succeeds in replacing the caricature of Dulles the Calvinist ideologue with a more nuanced understanding of how his beliefs affected international affairs. Even more usefully, he gives Dulles due credit for his contributions to American foreign policy without exaggerating his subject’s role in forming them. As he makes clear, in the end Dulles’s influence was always dependent on his ability to persuade others, either through his prolific writings or his ability to convince Eisenhower. This may run counter somewhat the image of Dulles held by many of his contemporaries, but it also points to the considerable skills he possessed and how they proved every bit as important in his role as the views he brought to the job.
These contrasting images of Dulles not only reflected the polarizing nature of his public persona, but continued to shape interpretations of him long after his death. One of Richard Immerman’s goals in this balanced and fair-minded biography of the man is to move beyond these binary interpretations and offer instead a nuanced understanding of Dulles and the motivations that drove his approach to policy. As Immerman demonstrates, these views were not oppositional, but reflected different aspects of a man whose upbringing was shaped by a blend of religious and secular influences. Much of the latter can be traced back to his maternal grandfather and namesake, John W. Foster, a lawyer and a diplomat who served as Secretary of State under Benjamin Harrison. Foster served as a mentor to his grandson throughout much of his childhood, complimenting the religious and moral instruction young Dulles received from his father Avery, a Presbyterian minister.
While Dulles’s Presbyterianism led many to regard him in later years as an inflexible Calvinist, Immerman notes that Dulles was a theological liberal whose study of philosophy at Princeton and the Sorbonne led him to regard religion in practical terms. After returning from Paris, Dulles studied law at George Washington University, which gave him the opportunity to live with his grandparents and work part-time for Foster’s international law practice. Foster subsequently used his connections to get his grandson hired for the prestigious New York firm of Sullivan and Cromwell. This proved the beginning of a highly remunerative career in corporate law, which placed Dulles at the forefront of the legal profession.
Despite the press of business, Dulles found ways to engage with the development of America’s foreign policies. His friendship with the financier Bernard Baruch led to Dulles’s selection as a member of the U.S. delegation to the Paris Peace Conference, where he worked to soften the harsh terms sought by France and Britain. As a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, he was a regular participant at its meetings and a frequent contributor to its journal Foreign Affairs. This was one of many publications for which he wrote numerous articles advocating for an internationalist approach to world affairs. With the approach of the Second World War this was expressed in a religious tone, one that Immerman sees as reflecting his subject’s growing belief in the contribution Christian values could make in resolving global problems.
By the mid-1940s, Dulles was involved increasingly in partisan politics. Establishing a close relationship with Thomas Dewey, the Republican Party’s nominee in the 1944 and 1948 presidential elections, Dulles anticipated being appointed Secretary of State in the event of a Dewey victory. Denied that opportunity by Dewey’s successive defeats, Dulles became more openly critical of the Truman administration’s foreign policy, proposing instead a more aggressive program of promoting independence among nations dominated by the Soviet Union. This contributed to the tone the Eisenhower campaign adopted in the 1952 presidential election, one in which Dulles was an avid participant in fighting for what, for him, was likely his last opportunity to gain the office he so eagerly sought.
And with Dwight Eisenhower’s victory Dulles was indeed rewarded with the office once held by his grandfather. Immerman’s examination of Dulles’s relationship with Eisenhower is among the most interesting aspects of the book, one that is central to understanding Dulles’s contribution to American foreign policy. Unlike Dewey, Eisenhower was no novice when it came to foreign affairs, and had clearly defined ideas as to what policies he sought to pursue as president. While these were not incompatible with Dulles’s own vision, the latter’s more extreme rhetoric not only aided the administration’s appeal to the party’s “old guard,” but it helped make Dulles a useful lightning rod as it pursued its goals internationally using more covert means.
Dulles embraced his role as his administration’s anticommunist crusader. In doing so, however, Immerman notes his subject’s disappointing (and uncharacteristic) underestimation of the power of nationalism in driving events. This contributed to his exaggeration of the communist threat, one that precluded the possibility early in Dulles’s tenure of taking advantage of any opportunity to thaw the Cold War created by Joseph Stalin’s death. While Dulles proved inflexible in this regard, he demonstrated far more adaptability when it came to dealing with West European leaders in strengthening the North Atlantic alliance, as he set aside decades of personal prejudice in doing so. Immerman also credits Dulles with willing to revisit his judgments regarding the question of how best to exploit America’s nuclear superiority, with his inability to come up with effective solutions in that area one shared by both his predecessors and his successors.
By the end of the book, Immerman succeeds in replacing the caricature of Dulles the Calvinist ideologue with a more nuanced understanding of how his beliefs affected international affairs. Even more usefully, he gives Dulles due credit for his contributions to American foreign policy without exaggerating his subject’s role in forming them. As he makes clear, in the end Dulles’s influence was always dependent on his ability to persuade others, either through his prolific writings or his ability to convince Eisenhower. This may run counter somewhat the image of Dulles held by many of his contemporaries, but it also points to the considerable skills he possessed and how they proved every bit as important in his role as the views he brought to the job.
February 8, 2008
God, this was boring as hell.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews