Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Unofficial
Ambassadors
American Military Families Overseas
and the Cold War, 19461965
Donna Alvah
a
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY PRESS
New York and London
Contents
Acknowledgments
ix
Introduction
Going Overseas
14
Unofficial Ambassadors
38
81
131
167
Young Ambassadors
198
Conclusion
226
Notes
Bibliography
Index
About the Author
235
261
273
291
vii
Acknowledgments
I first discussed the idea for this study with Professor Roland
Marchand many years ago. From the start, Roland liked the prospect of a
project that analyzed the contributions of women and families to foreign
relations. He served as my dissertation supervisor until he passed away in
November 1997. I remain grateful for his encouragement and advice.
I must thank many other people who, in reading all or parts of the
manuscript at different stages of its creation, have offered scholarly scrutiny, practical advice, reassurance, generosity of time and energy, and a
good sense of humor. I have benefited from Andy Rotters thinking on
gender and Cold War foreign relations, and also on writing and chapter
organization, and last but not least from his and Padma Kaimals kindness
and friendship. From my first meeting with Karen Halttunen in 1993, I
admired her insight and sharp thinking, and knew that working with her
would be a privilege. Her contributions as a dissertation supervisor
straightforward critiques of the strengths and weaknesses of all the chapters at various stages, from the first to the last drafts; readings of conference papers; discussions of my concerns; keeping me on track to meet
deadlines; suggestions for consulting with other professors outside her
own field of expertise; and steady encouragementwere exactly what I
needed to get through. I also appreciate Jay Mechlings suggestions on
children and American culture; Cynthia Enloes feedback on women, gender, race, class, the military, and international relations; Judith DeGroats
thoughtful suggestions on a later version of the manuscript; and Steve
Rabsons close reading of and advice for parts of the manuscript. The
comments of two anonymous readers were quite helpful.
At conferences, several scholars assisted my thinking on this project,
including Robert Dean, Catherine Forslund, Petra Goedde, Walter Hixson, Maria Hhn, Christina Klein, Andy Rotter, Alex Epstein, and Molly
Wood. The Cross-Cultural Womens History group in the University of
California Davis Department of History, the Committee on Lesbian and
Gay History, and the Cold War History Group at the University of California at Santa Barbara sponsored presentations of my research. I thank
ix
them for giving me the incentive to write papers that became parts of
chapters, and for the opportunity to share my work and make contacts
with other scholars.
Numerous people who aided my research deserve thanks and recognition. I am especially grateful to Dr. John Slonaker, formerly at the US
Army Military History Institute, for introducing me to the institutes collection of U.S. Lady magazine and for pointing me toward other useful
documents. Angie Stockwell of the Margaret Chase Smith Library was
one of the most energetic, generous, and helpful people I encountered in
my research travels. I appreciate Ellen Swan Mazzers and Clifton Hyatts
help with obtaining images. Dennis Bilger at the Truman Library located
numerous documents. The gracious and able assistance from the staffs at
the Eisenhower Library in summer 2000 and the LBJ Library in summer
2004 made my visits to those sweltering sites worthwhile as well as more
pleasant. Morten Ender shared information on military families abroad
and sent informative articles. I also would like to thank the staff at the
Owen D. Young Library at St. Lawrence University for obtaining documents and information. Indispensable assistance from St. Lawrence University students Katherine Gay and Alicia Dewey also helped to create this
book.
Thanks also to editor Deborah Gershenowitz, editorial assistant Salwa
Jabado, and managing editor Despina Papazoglou Gimbel at New York
University Press for answering my many questions and guiding me
through this process. And many thanks to the copy editor, Marie Milton,
for catching errors in typing and notes.
I am indebted to Thomas Drysdale and the American Overseas Schools
Historical Society for support of this project, and for crucial assistance
with the questionnaire project. The historical society publicized my study
in its newsletters and solicited questionnaire respondents. Tom personally
recruited respondents and distributed questionnaires. The AOSHS members and others who participated in the study or gave me their memoirs
former service personnel, educators, and service childrengenerously invested their time and energy in providing detailed, thoughtful responses
for my study. They, and the many others who told me that they had lived
overseas in a military family or served in the military abroad, frequently
reminded me of the significance of this population and motivated me to
carry on with my work.
I am thankful for funding from the following sources: The St. Lawrence University Academic Deans Office, for small and large grants;
SLUs Department of History, for Vilas research funds; the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library Foundation, for a research grant; and the Ada E.
Leeke Research Fellowship, for research at the Margaret Chase Smith Lix Acknowledgments
Introduction
This book is an effort to understand why the United States sent military families to overseas bases after World War II, and the significance of
their presence in the Cold War. Although World War II ended in 1945, the
United States continued to maintain bases around the world. In 1946, the
government arranged for family members to join military personnel (the
vast majority of them men) stationed abroad. Although military families
had lived in U.S. overseas territories since the early twentieth century,
their numbers were few in contrast to the hundreds of thousands of
spouses and children who traveled to foreign stations after the end of
World War II. In 1960, over 600,000 armed forces personnel and 462,000
members of military families resided abroad.
This is a history of how military family members living overseas during the first two decades of the Cold War considered themselves representatives of the American way of life and participants in Cold War objectives. In the years following World War II, military families came to be
considered significant players in relationships between the United States
and the countries that housed its overseas bases, first in the occupations
of Germany and Japan, then during the Cold War. During the 1930s,
most Americans and their government leaders had wanted to avoid military involvement in international conflicts. But during World War II, a
majority of Americans became convinced that stabilizing the world and
preventing foreign aggression in the future necessitated a strong U.S. military presence abroad and far more prominent U.S. leadership in international affairs than before the war. Yet although the United States emerged
from the war a military superpower, American policymakers knew that it
would take more than the potential for force to succeed in foreign relations. Displays of American benevolence and willingness to cooperate
with other nations could help to persuade allies as well as former enemies
to go along with U.S. foreign policy goals. Military officials and members
of military families articulated an ideal of families as unofficial ambassadors, who in projecting American good will would help reform occupied Germany and Japan and aid Cold War military and foreign relations
goals. To those who viewed service wives and children as representatives
of the United States, opposition to communist expansion required not
only masculine displays of military mightoverseas bases, uniformed
personnel, and weaponsbut also feminine demonstrations of American sensitivity toward and cooperation with the residents of countries
that housed U.S. bases. While servicemen in their official capacity represented U.S. military power, service wives and children, and to a lesser extent men as husbands and fathers, could be more convincing representatives of American good will and cooperation abroad. In endeavoring to
cultivate friendly relations with local peoples, however, family members
2 Introduction
4 Introduction
Introduction 5
soldiers and West Germans, especially women and children, shows how
Americans in occupied Germany came to see their former adversaries as a
feminized, victimized people instead of despicable proponents of the Nazi
regime. Interpersonal interactions, which in many cases led to marriages
between American men and German women, contributed to the softening
of U.S. occupation policy in the months and years immediately following
the war and helped to transform the United States and West Germany
from enemies to allies. Maria Hhns analysis of postwar German-American relations focuses on the influence of the U.S. military in Rhineland-Palatinate in the 1950s, and German responses to this ranging from welcoming to hostile. Like Goedde, Hhn discusses informal social relations between Americans and Germans. She shows that while Germans generally
tolerated relationships between German women and white U.S. soldiers,
they objected to German womens relationships with black soldiers. German critics of the American presence in this period employed racist arguments to oppose housing the foreign military.10 Whereas Goedde and
Hhn focus more than I do on military personnel, and solely on Germany,
American military families in several countries are at the center of Unofficial Ambassadors. Also, both Goedde and Hhn give extensive attention
to German responses to the U.S. military presence and use many German
source materials, while this book emphasizes American experiences and
perspectives in various locales.
A landmark in the historiography of early Cold War American families
is Elaine Tyler Mays study of how the postWorld War II nuclear family
ideal and expectations that Americans assume traditional gender roles
and produce numerous children represented stability and security to
Americans in a world where people feared communist encroachment and
nuclear warfare.11 Whereas Homeward Bound focuses on families in the
United States and how the nuclear family ideal reinforced anti-communism domestically, Unofficial Ambassadors scrutinizes the idea that military families in foreign locations considered strategically crucial in the
Cold War represented the American commitment to anti-communism internationally, as well as the alleged superiority of the American way of life
believed to be characterized by freedom, democracy, and prosperity
to life under adversarial regimes. In other words, this book analyzes the
significance, in Americans minds, of Cold War American families in the
wider world rather than only within the United States.
Primary sources used here include military reports, memoranda, official announcements, and guidebooks; statistical data from the Bureau of
the Census and the Department of Defense; writings by service wives, children, servicemen, and educators; newspaper, magazine, and journal articles; images; memoirs; and fiction. Articles and other items from U.S.
6 Introduction
Lady, a magazine chiefly for military wives published between 1955 and
1968, provide valuable insights into these womens roles abroad. The
magazine is cited throughout the book; I discuss it at length in chapter 3.
Other important accounts of life overseas come from a questionnaire project conducted between 1999 and 2000. In this project I gathered accounts from forty-eight former service children, educators, and servicemen (out of approximately ninety questionnaires distributed) that described their experiences in occupied and host nations between 1946 and
1965. Many of the questionnaire respondents permitted the inclusion of
their names in citations, though several requested confidentiality.
Although some attention is given to high-level foreign policymakers
and military leaders, Unofficial Ambassadors focuses on ordinary women,
children, and men as significant actors in foreign relations. American
power in the Cold War was derived not only from the capacity for military might and displays of toughness but also from friendly and feminine influence. The Cold War was a fierce ideological battle as well as a
military contest. Military family memberswives, children, and servicemen as husbands and fatherswere expected to contribute to the ideological rivalry with communism by representing what Americans considered the best aspects of their way of life. Their deportment, homes, and
family relations were to embody the freedom and prosperity believed to
flow from American political and economic institutions. Military documents and accounts from family members reveal that many service wives
and children, and some servicemen in their family roles, indeed considered
themselves advocates of their nations military and foreign relations goals.
I do not claim that all or even most military family members took on
the unofficial ambassador role in the period under investigation or mixed
extensively with residents of occupied and host nations. I am, however,
attempting to refine the widespread notion of Americans in military families abroad living rigidly separated from local peoples, and the unquestioned assumption that most contacts that did occur were trifling and
therefore undeserving of closer scrutiny. A statement from a recent book
on the history of the global U.S. military presence might perpetuate these
notions: The Little Americas [compounds where Americans affiliated
with the military lived] made life easier for personnel and their families.
On the other hand, they isolated Americans from their host communities,
and as a result most members of the military community were exposed to
foreign cultures only in small and superficial ways, such as tourism, eating in restaurants, and occasional shopping in local stores. The authors
discussion of American military families abroad is brief yet is more extensive than what one will find in the vast majority of histories of the
U.S. military. Furthermore, her observation that most Americans lived in
Introduction 7
self-sustained communities is not untrue, and she does go on to briefly discuss some ways in which Americans and local peoples interacted in the
1950s and 1960s (mainly in events sponsored by the U.S. military).12
Nonetheless, I worry that most readers would come away from this portrayal with their presuppositions intact: that Americans in military families had little or nothing to do with local peoples, and therefore their overseas presence made little impact and held little import. I want to demonstrate that in order to understand the cultural, social, and political
influences and significance of the U.S. military overseas (a subject that has
received too little scholarly attention, considering that millions of Americans affiliated with the military resided abroad in the last century), a
closer look at military family members interactions with local residents is
warranted. Yes, many military families lived in Little Americas, but
these were more permeable than many civilian Americans assume. Also,
as a person who fervently values cultural history and is fascinated by the
meaning of seemingly small and insignificant human statements and actions, I wish to challenge the notion that superficial contacts between
Americans and local peoples meant little. The gestures which we sometimes call empty are perhaps in fact the fullest things of all, wrote sociologist Erving Goffman.13 What did it mean when, in the context of occupation and Cold War, an American military wife tried to say a few polite
words in Japanese to a shop owner? Or when American youngsters
played pranks on Germans? These may have been small acts, but they
were not insignificant.
The first chapter of this book investigates why and how families joined
military personnel stationed abroad starting in 1946. After World War II,
the military maintained overseas bases to police, rehabilitate, and rebuild occupied countries, and protect U.S. and allied interests. But in the
months after the Allied victory, American servicemen and servicewomen
around the world clamored to return to the United States. Military leaders
worried that servicemens crime, fraternization with German and Japanese women, venereal disease, and general low morale would undermine
military operations and occupation goals. In the meantime, women in the
United States complained that servicemens absence from families caused
emotional and financial hardship, and demanded the return of their husbands. But U.S. government and military leaders believed that their nations international responsibilities required maintaining forces abroad indefinitely. Military planners decided that sending families to foreign bases
would help to solve military and family problems, thus responding to social demands and the beginning of the postwar cultural idealization of the
nuclear family. In the fall of 1945, they began formulating plans to transport, house, and sustain spouses and children who would arrive in Ger8 Introduction
many in April 1946 and Japan in June 1946. Families also joined military
personnel in allied nations, usually staying overseas for two- or three-year
tours of duty.
Chapter 2 analyzes the emergence of the idea that Cold War foreign relations required not only a formidable military posture toward adversaries but also friendly guidance and understanding of peoples of occupied and allied nations, which military family members were to project.
Even before the arrival of families, military personnel abroad engaged in
self-initiated as well as officially organized efforts to demonstrate generosity and good will to allies and former enemies, especially children, in wardevastated countries. American popular culture explored such relations in
literary and visual depictions. As family members joined military personnel in Germany and Japan in 1946, the armed forces sought to make use
of them in occupation aims, and later in the Cold War. The military came
to conceive of family members, especially wives, as unofficial ambassadors in their relations with residents of occupied and host nations.
Through advertisements, prescriptive literature, and statements from military officials, the armed forces encouraged wives and their families to aid
military goals by extending good will to non-Americans. Informal friendly
contacts, military officials believed, would strengthen relations between
the United States and host and occupied nations and help win support for
maintaining U.S. bases.
The third chapter explores military wives perceptions of themselves as
unofficial ambassadors worldwide, and their efforts to define and enact
this role. In a time when according to stereotypes, reinforced in popular
culture, women were relegated primarily to domestic roles, American military wives abroad were engaging in foreign relations, albeit usually informally rather than officially. Many wives not only accepted but also expanded the ambassadorial responsibilities that the armed forces asked
them to shoulder. The most prominent women were officers wives who
took it upon themselves to guide military families in their relations with
local residents in a multitude of settings, including homes, charitable activities, schools for children of host and occupied nations, excursions to
historical and cultural sites, and international womens clubs. Their accounts of informal relations with local inhabitants reveal that they encountered an ideological contradiction: they were asked to demonstrate
appreciation of non-American cultures and customs, yet they also were to
advance U.S. Cold War goals by conveying to residents of occupied and
host nations the presumed superiority of the American way of life.
The subsequent two chapters focus on American accounts of relations
with West Germans and Okinawans, respectively, and examine how family members, especially wives, attempted to advance military and foreign
Introduction 9
relations aims in each context. The United States occupied Germany between 1944 and 1955, and Japan between 1945 and 1952, and continued
to maintain a large military presence in each nation long after the end of
occupation. Occupation goals in both countries included the establishment of democracy and the rebuilding of the economies. Both also were
considered strategically crucial sites in the war against the expansion of
communism.
Although West Germany (chapter 4) depended on the United States for
military and economic assistance after the end of occupation, military
wives and their husbands downplayed inequalities of power between the
two nations and promulgated the idea of an egalitarian AmericanWest
German anti-communist, anti-Soviet alliance that served both American
and West German interests. U.S. strategists wanted to maintain bases in
West Germany and West Berlin, depicted as bastions of freedom and prosperity on the Cold War battlefront between the Western powers and the
Soviet Union. Not wishing to appear as an imperialistic, militaristic aggressor that dominated weaker nations (which was how Americans perceived the Soviet Union), Americans helped to generate an image of AmericanWest German reciprocity and cultural commonality, and promoted
the U.S.West German alliance in the war to defend liberty and capitalism in Western Europe. West Germans accepted U.S. bases because they
wanted American military and economic aid and believed that they would
gain greater autonomy through alliance with the United States rather than
the Soviet Union. Though ambivalent about their status as a bulwark
in the Cold War, West Germans perceived the U.S. military presence as
largely conducive to their own goals. The affinities between white Americans and West Germans, however, were largely based on a shared sense of
whiteness, which perpetuated racism in U.S. military communities and in
German society.
While West Germany presents a scenario in which many residents of
that nation viewed the U.S. military presence as advantageous, Okinawa
(a prefecture of Japan and the largest and most populated of the Ryukyu
Islands) offers a contrasting scenario in which a majority of the people did
not regard the foreign armed forces as beneficial. Chapter 5 shows how
military wives attempted to demonstrate friendliness, generosity, and understanding to Okinawans, and to mitigate the negative effects of the military presence on Okinawan communities. Yet in positioning themselves
as maternal figures to Okinawans, American women ultimately reinforced
cultural and racial stereotypes of Okinawans as a backward and childlike people who needed guidance and protection from the United States.
They thus bolstered U.S. military control of the island despite Okinawans
strong preference for Japanese governance.
10 Introduction
1960
1970
327,446
81,540
15,581
12,718
5,284
19,935
462,504
204,049
98,129
4,359
2,903
6,022
2,537
317,999
Sources: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, US Census of Population: 1960, Selected Area Reports, Americans Overseas, pp. 5257, Table 9;
and US Department of Commerce, 1970 Census of Population: Subject Reports:
Americans Living Abroad, pp. 12, Table 1.
military life overseas that I wish to focus on, though some observations on
the U.S. military presence abroad from American civilian employees and
their family members do appear herefor example, from teachers at U.S.
Department of Defense Dependents Schools. In addition, although I examine responses of residents of occupied and host nations to the U.S. military presence and, when possible, Americans in military families, these
perspectives are relatively fewer in this book. To hear the Americans tell
it, they were effective in establishing friendships and making positive impressions of how Americans lived. What did local people really think of
American military families? Most of the evidence of local views of American families is anecdotal. There were polls that attempted to assess local
views of the U.S. military generally, or of Americans generally (in occupied or host nations or in the United States), but I have not located polls
that asked for opinions on the presence of U.S. military families specifically. Individual interviews conducted by researchers reveal a variety of
local experiences with and views of American military families. This study
uses personal accounts collected by other scholars, and literature, to try
to answer the question of what residents of occupied and host nations
thought of Americans in military families.
Before continuing, a few words on terminology. Although military documents often refer to the spouses, children, and other relatives of personnel as dependents (and I occasionally will use this term), I prefer the
terms most used by military family members themselves, for example,
service wives, Army wives, or service children. I also employ a variety of designations for the residents of countries that housed U.S. bases.
I avoid the term foreigners, sometimes found in the American primary
sources, because of course Americans would have been the ones considered foreigners to the local peoples. Other terms used here include residents of occupied and host nations, local residents, local inhabitants, host nationals, local nationals, host citizens, local citizens, and non-Americans.
In scrutinizing American attitudes and accounts of experiences abroad,
I do not claim that actual relations lived up to the ideals expressed in the
official and unofficial prescriptive literature. Nor do I dispute that friendship, good will, and respect between Americans and residents of occupied
and host nations existed. Many Americans and local residents enjoyed
their acquaintanceships; some maintained friendships that endured for
decades after Americans left for new stations. Sometimes, however, actual
relations fell short of the ideals articulated in the military prescriptive literature and by Americans who took the ambassadorial role seriously.
Some Americans offended local peoples with their rudeness and arrogance. Racism among Americans poisoned relations between Americans
12 Introduction
Introduction 13
1
Going Overseas
from the home front about the hardships of family separation were making plans to send families to join servicemen at overseas bases wherever
possible. Although the U.S. military allowed families to go overseas in
1946 chiefly to bolster servicemens morale, the military need to maintain
a large overseas presence coincided with Americans social demands and
cultural attitudes about the family. Thus, the establishment of American
family life abroad in the early postwar era served military goals, as well as
the needs of families and cultural ideals.
Yet the end of the war did not release the United States from international conflict. Although the Soviet Union had proved a crucial ally whose
enormous sacrifices helped secure victory, tensions between the U.S. and
Soviet governments had undermined the wartime cooperation between
the two nations. In February 1945, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
met in Yalta with Britains Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and Soviet
leader Joseph Stalin, to discuss plans for the postwar world, including the
structure of the United Nations, the occupation of Germany, and the matter of free elections in the Eastern European countries taken by the Soviets
from the Germans. The question of democratic elections in Poland and
other Eastern European nations, which Roosevelt and Churchill urged
Stalin to allow, remained unresolved through the end of the war and became a raw nerve in international relations that contributed to the onset
of the Cold War.9
Nor did the cessation of hostilities free the United States from international responsibilities. Since 1942, the United States had planned for the
occupation of enemy nations.10 Upon achieving victory in Europe, the
United States, Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union divided Germany into occupation zones. At the Potsdam conference in July 1945,
leaders of the four Allied powers discussed initial occupation goals: demilitarization, which included the removal of Germanys industrial capacity
to wage war; denazification, which entailed the eradication of Nazi ideology and the purging of Nazis and Nazi sympathizers from positions of
authority; the establishment of democratic government; the trial of war
criminals; and reparations to the occupying powers. Whereas the United
States shared the occupation of Germany and Austria with its allies, it
dominated the occupation of Japan, with nominal input from two international advisory boards. The demilitarization and democratization of
Japan composed the core of occupation policy there.11 Early in the occupations American policymakers did not focus as much as they would later
on the economic reconstruction of Germany and Japan. In the meantime,
because these countries were not economically or materially self-sufficient, the United States imported food and other necessities to alleviate
hunger and prevent disease.12
The United States took on other international responsibilities besides
the occupations of the leading Axis powers. The U.S. and Soviet militaries also occupied Korea, which Japan had controlled for four decades.
Soviet forces occupied northern Korea, while American armies occupied
the south. The Allies intended the occupation to restore Korean government and rebuild the nations economy.13 U.S. military personnel also
participated in the monumental task of sheltering and transporting mil-
16 Going Overseas
lions of prisoners of war, displaced persons, refugees, and expellees in Europe and Asia.14
Americans who remained in the armed forces or were drafted after the
wars end worried about the prospect of several more months, perhaps
even years, of staying overseas. In fact, no one could be sure exactly how
long the occupations in Europe and Asia would last. At the Yalta meeting
in February 1945, President Roosevelt said he believed that the American
people would tolerate only a brief occupation of Germany, and estimated
that public support for maintaining U.S. troops in Europe would last
about two years after the defeat of Germany. Other occupation planners
forecasted a longer stay in Germany, ranging from ten, fifteen, twentyfive, to even fifty years.15 In November 1945, a captain stationed in Germany wrote to Stars and Stripes to bemoan the lack of information about
the length of the occupation: We have nothing to look forward to except
a continuance for an indefinite period of this daily, drudging and uninteresting existence. We are all becoming mentally troubled by the uncertainty.16 This captain and other Americans serving abroad could not
have known in late 1945 that the occupation of Germany would last several more years.17
As in the case of Germany, U.S. government and military leaders found
it difficult to predict how long the occupation of Japan would last, or how
many service personnel would be needed there. News reports on General
Douglas MacArthurs statements about reducing personnel in Japan in
September 1945, and President Trumans public and private reactions to
MacArthurs announcements, reveal the uncertainty of occupation planning so soon after the war. MacArthur, the Supreme Commander for the
Allied Powers in Asia, announced to the press on September 17 that the
occupation of Japan might require only 200,000 troops, rather than the
500,000 initially believed crucial.18 Truman later wrote in his memoir that
MacArthurs pronouncement, of which he first learned when questioned
about it by reporters, caught him off guard. In his public response to
MacArthurs declaration, Truman assured Americans that there would be
no padding in our armed forces and that personnel deemed unnecessary
would be released as fast as the services can get them out. But the President also stated that no one now can accurately forecast what our occupation needs are going to be, and suggested that the size and composition of overseas forces would remain unsettled until the spring of 1946.
Privately, MacArthurs maverick declaration had upset Truman. The President considered it embarrassing as well as destabilizing of his administrations attempt to balance demands for demobilization with military necessity. On September 18, Acting Secretary of State Dean Acheson tried to
Going Overseas 17
shared one shower and two sinks.24 Joining husbands on posts often
proved impractical in the United States, and was impossible when the men
departed for service in most foreign countries. Before 1941, the United
States had established military sites (mostly naval bases) in Alaska, Hawaii, Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the Philippines, and
Panama. During the war, the United States vastly bolstered its military
presence around the globe, especially fortifying armed forces installations
in Europe and the Pacific.25 Approximately three out of four military personnel served overseas during the war for an average period of sixteen
months, many leaving spouses to manage households without them.26 The
formation of so many new families during the war, employment opportunities in cities, and the War Production Boards ban on nondefense construction precipitated a scarcity of affordable housing that prevented families from enjoying the domestic ideal of single-family dwellings. Some
women and their children lived with relatives while husbands were away
or shared houses with other families.27
The need to support themselves and their children placed many women
in the role of primary breadwinner and financial manager for their families.28 Wives, children, and others classified as dependents of enlisted
men were eligible to receive monetary allowances from the federal government, but these allowances did not cover all household expenses, especially in industrial cities where costs of living were high.29 Economic necessity, the desire to aid the war effort, and opportunities for personally
satisfying work prompted womens entry into the labor force, which increased sixty percent during the war years. Of the new women workers,
three out of four were married, and one out of three were mothers of children under fourteen years of age.30 In 1944, nearly 2.7 million mothers
held jobs in defense industries.31
Women not only supported families financially but also shouldered all
the other responsibilities of single parenthood in the absence of fathers.
Catherine Redmond, author of Handbook for Army Wives and Mothers,
told her readers that From the moment your husband goes into the Army
until his return you alone are responsible for the family, for the home and
the pattern of life your marriage has created. What has been a shared burden, or joy, now becomes a single one. Redmond advised women to assess their financial situation and budget living expenses, be honest with
their children about the need for careful spending, encourage children to
assist the war effort through collecting scrap metal and conserving resources, and not to try to compensate for the absence of fathers by being
either too strict or too lenient with children.32 Many military wives had
given birth to children who had yet to meet their fathers; other children
were too young to remember Daddy. Women who worked and raised
Going Overseas 19
formed the Office of Dependency Benefits that she would prefer the homecoming of her husband to her monthly dependents allotment check.
Think of the money you could save, she urged the administrators.38
Other women united to make their demands known. Three hundred service wives in Toledo, Ohio founded a Bring Back My Daddy club, declaring that all cases where fathers have been taken from their homes are
extreme hardship cases no matter how little service they have had. They
should all be sent home to their families. A club representative complained that the government allowances for service families were inadequate because of the high cost of living, voicing the widely held conviction
that families could not thrive without income-earning men in the home.
Group members entreated Congress to return husbands and fathers to
their families and Send the idle single men abroad.39 Women in a
Bring Back Daddy club in Wisconsin sent baby shoes and booties to
senators, including the chairman of the Senate Military Committee, accompanied by requests to Please send my daddy home.40 In response to
a news report about womens demands to return fathers to their families,
Captain R. Hope (probably a fictitious name), stationed in Germany,
wrote a letter to Stars and Stripes claiming that he and his Army colleagues who did not want to be left overseas had created an I Wanta Be a
Daddy Club that welcomed childless husbands, fiancs or the thousands of men who have yet to meet the right girl back home.41
This Life magazine Picture of the Week from February 1946 captured General
Eisenhowers impromptu meeting with military wives. The meeting reportedly
left him emotionally upset. Photo Credit: AP/Wide World Photos.
into the office of the chairman of the House Military Affairs Committee
and spent half an hour listening to their demands for the immediate release of GI fathers, then of childless married men who, the women argued, should be allowed to start the families they have been prevented
from founding. Eisenhower informed the women that the immediate discharge of married men would deplete the manpower of the armed forces
and harm international objectives.45 Shortly after this meeting, Stars and
Stripes reported that the Senate subcommittee investigating demobilization recommended the release of all fathers by July 1, 1946, despite Eisenhowers assertion that the Army realistically could not release more than
500,000 of 700,000 fathers by that date.46
General Eisenhower had been thinking about the problem of family
separation well before the confrontation with service wives in Washington, D.C. On May 12, 1945, a few days after Germanys surrender, he had
told his wife, Mamie, his thoughts on sending American families abroad.
[O]ne thing I hope for is to work out some policy by which families can
come over here, he wrote in a letter to Mamie from his headquarters in
22 Going Overseas
public would disapprove if Mamie were allowed to join him, even if the
War Department would not yet approve his proposal to send military
wives abroad. I should like very much to have your frank reaction,
Eisenhower wrote, because while I am perfectly willing to carry on in
this assignment as long as the War Department may decide I should do so,
I really would like to make it a bit easier on myself from the personal
viewpoint.50 A few days later, General Marshall replied that for the time
being, it would not be possible for Eisenhower or anyone else to bring his
spouse to the European Theater. The time has not yet come for such procedure, wrote Marshall, and I am rather dubious about ever restricting
it to a select group if authorized. Marshall was correct in anticipating
that basing the travel of spouses abroad on rank would pose a concern in
later months to policymakers.51 To create some semblance of being with
family, Eisenhower asked his son to join him in Frankfurt rather than
move on to the Pacific theater.52
Though military leaders wished to postpone dealing with the matter of
sending wives abroad until the end of the Pacific war, the issue arose in
other venues. In May 1945, Representative Margaret Chase Smith of
Maine asked Secretary of War Henry Stimson to allow wives and fiances
to join servicemen in Europe on tours of duty lasting a minimum of one
year. In her letter to Stimson, Smith argued that the presence of wives and
fiances in occupied countries would boost servicemens morale and efficiency. Smith asserted that besides aiding military goals, sending spouses
and future wives abroad would arrest the disintegration of American
homes and families and preserve domestic ideals. In radio broadcasts,
Smith offered additional reasons for sending wives and fiances overseas. Since military transports were bringing foreign-born war brides to
the United States, she reasoned, then these same ships should be used to
bring American women to their partners abroad. She suggested that these
women could work for government agencies in occupied areas, serving as
stable and efficient employees. Smith also expressed the fear, shared by
many American women, that servicemens fraternization with German
women would spread Nazi ideas and harm American families. In response to Representative Smiths letter, a War Department official stated
that transportation problems, food and housing shortages, unrest in occupied zones, and the continuation of the Pacific war necessitated a ban on
travel to Europe by civiliansservice wives and fiances included.53
Army Air Force chaplain Clarence Comfort, Jr., like Congresswoman
Smith and many other American women, shared the fear that servicemen
abroad were succumbing to immorality, but believed that a return to family life could rescue them. On August 1, Comfort wrote to Trumans military aide Colonel Harry Vaughan that occupation forces in Europe, from
24 Going Overseas
the rank of Major General to Private, who were suffering from the extreme ravages of loneliness were going absolutely to rot and ruin, implying that they were engaging in sexual liaisons with local women to
lessen their misery. Even Chaplains have not escaped this same downhill
dive, claimed Comfort. The solution, he declared, was to let some of
the enemy starve and die in order to bring to these men the only ones who
can save them, namely, their families.54
A few weeks before the war ended in the Pacific, Navy officers in the
United Kingdom asked whether their families could join them. Vice Admiral R. L. Ghormley, commander of United States Naval Forces in Europe,
inquired about the policy of the armed forces in the European theater regarding the travel of families to the United Kingdom, and proposed that
the wives of Navy officers expecting to serve there for at least another six
months be allowed to join their husbands. European Theater of Operations officials refused Ghormleys request, citing numerous factors to support their policy: that it would be unfair for officers but not enlisted personnel, and for Navy personnel but not Army personnel, to enjoy the
privilege of having family members with them; that military planners anticipated abandoning the United Kingdom base within six months, thus
making it impractical to send family members there for such a short time;
that the area lacked accommodations for American family members; and
finally, that bringing American families to the region would exacerbate the
shortage of food and fuel in the area and harm the British economy.55
Though the families of most eligible personnel would not arrive abroad
until the late spring and early summer of 1946, exceptions were made for
families of military attachs in Latin America, and later in numerous
nonoccupied countries. The Navy justified its policy of allowing spouses
to join attachs on the grounds that wives of naval personnel in diplomatic status could afford valuable assistance in performance of official
duties, continuing the militarys long-standing reliance on the unpaid
work of officers wives, as well as foreshadowing postwar expectations
that family members would aid occupation goals.56
In August, shortly after V-J day, President Truman told military planners that he preferred to focus on bringing soldiers home rather than sending families overseas. He did, however, indicate a willingness to consider
the possibility of eventually allowing the families of military government
personnelwho would be expected to stay abroad for longer periods of
timeto join husbands and fathers.57 Also that summer, service wives
wrote letters to the War Department asking that their families be allowed
to join servicemen abroad. In their letters, they expressed concerns about
raising children without the guidance of fathers, and also about promiscuous German women whom they feared would seduce servicemen.58
Going Overseas 25
attack of an Itoman girl snatched into the back of a moving truck, criminally assaulted by twenty soldiers, and cast out without the trucks ever
stopping. Undoubtedly, more sexual assaults occurred than were reported.72
Fraternization between American servicemen and local women created
another source of friction in occupied communities.73 Military intelligence
reports from 1945 described Germans angry responses to liaisons between German women and American servicemen. One report told of
open letters directed at the fraternizing frauleins and their misconduct.74 In some cases, Germans cut off the hair of girls who associated
with American men.75 Another military report reprinted a condemnatory
poem (translated from German to English for the report) inscribed on
four posters that appeared in the town of Muehldorf one Sunday morning
in November 1945. The anonymous author(s) of the poem included a list
of the names of German girls allegedly in relationships with American
soldiers. The poem denounced the girls as whores in love with the
murderers of the German youth.76
The concentration of American servicemen in occupied lands attracted
girls and women who worked as prostitutes. In Germany, Some women
resorted to prostitution to save themselves and their families from starvation, writes historian Petra Goedde. For others it became an additional
source of income.77 An Army report attributed part of the blame for
American servicemens relations with European prostitutes to the mens
drinking, promiscuity, immaturity, and boundless faith . . . in the curative powers of penicillin. The account also listed hunger, economic hardship, and Nazism (to which German womens alleged moral laxity was
attributed) as causes of prostitution and high rates of venereal disease.78
In Japan, a young prostitute interviewed on a radio broadcast said that
Of course its bad to be a hooker. But without relatives or jobs due to the
war disaster, how are we supposed to live? Soon after their nations surrender, Japanese government officials and police worked with entrepreneurs to arrange for Japanese women to sexually service occupation
forces in comfort facilities, beseeching them to give their bodies for
the country. Several months later, occupation officials outlawed prostitution, but not before many prostitutes and their clients contracted venereal infections.79 In Okinawa, brothels, bars, and nightclubs transformed
one town into what Morton Morris termed a neon-lit nirvana for Neanderthals. Morris described how Okinawans visiting a shrine in the midst
of this district were forced to pick their way through all kinds of American night clubs and whorehouses.80 Venereal disease rates soared among
troops in Okinawa, Japan and Germany.81
Sexual relations between servicemen and local women resulted in tens
28 Going Overseas
Going Abroad
The need to improve low morale and solve the many other problems associated with stationing hundreds of thousands of service personnel abroad
coincided with demands for the reunion of families. An Army account
cited the reestablishment of normal family life, said to constitute an
essential long-term morale measure, as the primary motivation for sending families overseas. General Lucius Clay, the deputy military governor
and then military governor of the American zone in Germany, believed
that whether or not families could come to Germany would influence the
recruitment and work performance of occupation personnel, stating that
Military Government would not obtain qualified personnel willing to
spend several years in Germany if it meant separation from their families.85 Officials also hoped that normal family ties would reduce fraternization in Germany, and alter contacts so that German-American interactions were not primarily between servicemen and German women.86 In
addition, it was expected that men whose families were present would be
more likely to stay out of trouble. Assessments of the occupation in Germany correlated the decline in servicemens criminal behavior with the arrival of families.87 Moreover, military planners assumed that the project of
reuniting families in foreign lands would reduce complaints from the
home front about family separation.88
Beginning in the fall of 1945, military planners discussed preliminary
preparations for transporting, receiving, and accommodating families
overseas. The European theaters Special Occupational Planning Board,
Going Overseas 29
formed in September to devise general plans for housing and various services, anticipated that the theater could begin to receive American families
in April 1946.89 Shortages of food, fuel, and housing made it impossible for families to go to Europe earlier.90 Families were authorized transportation to Pacific commands as of May 1.91
On February 1, 1946, Stars and Stripes reported the War Departments
January 31 announcement that, depending on the availability of housing,
subsistence, and medical services, families may soon join soldiers in all
overseas theaters.92 Shortly thereafter, service members received instructions for making arrangements for their families to join them abroad. Personnel were to initiate the process by submitting applications to station
commanders. The War Department based priority for the shipment of
families on service members willingness to remain at an overseas station
for at least one year, and on cumulative overseas duty since December
1941. Except in emergencies, family members were to remain overseas
with their service husbands or fathers (termed sponsors) until the sponsor received orders to leave the command. Initially, rank was not supposed to determine transportation priority. In later years, however, the
government did not provide transportation and housing for families of
enlisted men in the lowest grades (those who ranked below noncommissioned officers), reportedly out of concern that these personnel were unable to financially support their spouses and children abroad.93
The impending arrival of American families triggered extensive preparations at foreign bases. Occupation authorities requisitioned houses and
apartments from citizens of Germany and Japan. Where funding and
materials were available, the military constructed quarters for families.
In nonoccupied areas, such as France, severe shortages of housing and
construction resources prevented the entry of many families for several
months.94 A February 1946 article from U.S. News and World Report
warned families en route to overseas bases that housing will be poor
and largely improvised.95 Many of the residences requisitioned in occupied countries, however, were more spacious and elaborate than anything
some families had ever known. Designers of overseas communities made
plans for commissaries, post exchanges, recreational facilities, post offices, barber shops, beauty salons, soda fountains, auto repair shops, and
venues for religious ceremonies. They ordered refrigerators, toasters, and
baby food to help American families recreate home life in a foreign country.96 Overseas commands also helped to arrange for the schooling of children, although the War Department refused to fund this during the 1946
1947 academic year, and so parents paid for tuition and supplies.97
Upon receiving authorization to join service personnel abroad, wives
and children made their own preparations. Family members applied for
30 Going Overseas
Housing
Early in the occupation, there was no question that American families
would receive accommodations superior to those of their vanquished
foes. Most American families in Germany were assigned to private houses
or apartments requisitioned from Germans. Still, the Americans coped
with a dearth of furniture and refrigerators as well as heating and power
deficiencies during that first year. Before the large-scale construction of
the 1950s, an American military community often consisted of small
groups of buildingsliving quarters, schools, churches, and various service facilitiesscattered throughout a city, off-limits to unauthorized Germans. Yet restricted access to American communities did not mean that
service families never encountered non-Americans. Most families hired at
least one domestic worker from the local population; many Americans
employed Germans and displaced persons (many of them Eastern Europeans who had been prisoners of and forced laborers for the Nazis) as
maids, cooks, nannies, and gardeners. 104
Military wives described housing in mainland Japan during the early
postwar years as attractive and comfortable, though not without some
drawbacks. In the article published to allay the fears of military families,
32 Going Overseas
Bernadine Lee portrayed the living situation and the Japanese people as
welcoming. According to Lee, four servants cheerfully greeted her family
upon arrival. Lee credited them, and the friendly neighbors, for melting
her fears that the Japanese would be hostile to the American occupiers.
The Lees lived in a western-style, two-story house equipped with modern
appliances, surrounded by gracious old trees [and] a yard friendly in
shrubs and flowers. Lee stated that her family enjoyed such a house because of her husbands twenty-five years in the service, and because of the
needs of a three-child family. Ours is not the finest home in Tokyo, she
wrote, nor is it the most modest. Other Americans resided in villas,
Quonset huts, or apartments. The Vann family, like the Lees, lived in a
spacious and attractive house. Mary Jane Vann appreciated the welltended landscape and the flower arrangements created by their congenial
domestic employees. But to her dismay, infestations of cockroaches, centipedes, and rats offset the houses good points. Despite the efforts of
Army exterminators, the rats endured. In 1950, the Vanns moved out of
the house after an accidental fire set by a maid, into a pretentious residence designed by Frank Lloyd Wright before the war for an affluent Japanese family.105
World-famous architectural design, spacious rooms, and pleasant landscapes certainly did not characterize most military housing. Many families
in Okinawa resided in poorly constructed and unattractive housing into
the late 1940s. Homes consisted of Quonset huts and flimsy structures
that did not withstand typhoon weather well. A December 1949 U.S.
News & World Report article described military family quarters impaired
by leaky roofs, broken windows, defective plumbing, and poor ventilation, and reported that one sergeants family continued living in a Quonset hut that had been condemned as unfit for occupancy four months earlier. That same month, Life declared that The U.S. military men and their
dependents live in this depressing place with few amusements and a lot of
homesickness. A photograph that accompanied the article featured a
major, his wife, two daughters, and a pet dog standing before their typhoonized Quonset hut. The strange structure that resembled a halfcylinder enclosed in aluminum siding, with boarded windows, situated on
a lot with no lawn or garden, probably would have struck most Americans as an unsuitable dwelling for a family.106
Over the next decade, families altered the military landscape by adding a domestic dimension to U.S. overseas bases. They brought with them
characteristics of American life otherwise absent in military environments, where large numbers of service personnel, mostly men, lived and
worked. Servicemen without their families roomed in barracks, if they
were enlisted men, or quarters for bachelor officers. They ate in mess
Going Overseas 33
The Shelley family in front of their typhoonized quonset hut. Notice the Okinawans in the background on the right. Photo credit: Carl Mydans/Stinger/Time
& Life Pictures/Getty Images.
Drawing of a military base in Welcome to Itazuke: First Far East Home of the
F100s pamphlet, pp. 16 & 17. Source: Itazuke Air Base. Office of Information
Services. Fukuoka, Japan: Kaneko Printing Co., n.d. (circa 1957).
Going Overseas 35
Conclusion
The cessation of war did not free the United States from international responsibilities. Although the armed forces released millions of service personnel in the year following the wars end, U.S. policymakers considered it
crucial not only for the overseas occupations but also for global stability
and rebuilding to maintain a large international military presence. Even
President Truman and the highest-ranking military officials did not know
how long the occupations would last or how many U.S. forces would need
to remain abroad. Yet after nearly four years of war, most American military personnel who found themselves in foreign lands wanted to go home
to find jobs, further their educations, and return to or take up family life.
On the home front, demands for reuniting families became insistent, and
the desire to achieve the cultural ideal of the family loomed larger than the
36 Going Overseas
problems abroad that seemed so far away to many Americans. The low
morale and discipline problems of personnel who remained overseas or
were sent after the wars end were undermining the foreign relations goals
of aiding allied nations and reconstructing enemy nations at a time when
the United States was taking on greater international responsibility in
peacetime than ever before. Unwilling to send all the officers and troops
home, the U.S. government instead sought to bring some part of home
to servicemen stationed abroad. Sending military families overseas to bolster mens morale and retain and recruit capable personnel helped make it
possible for the United States to meet its expanded postwar international
responsibilities.
Going Overseas 37
2
Unofficial Ambassadors
Both the guide for families in Japan and the orientation for spouses and
children in Germany assumed that American families should help to advance the missions of the armed forces in those countries. In referring to
spouses and children as part of an army in the field and members of
an occupation force, the Kyoto pamphlet reveals that authorities of the
armed forces considered the families of personnel not as external to the
military, but integral to it. The orientation program attests to the assumption of occupation authorities that the attitudes and actions of American
family members, in their encounters with Europeans, could help or hinder
38
servicemen overseas in the late 1940s and throughout the 1950s, and as
the Cold War developed, official prescriptive literature encouraged wives
and children to act as unofficial ambassadors in their everyday activities among local people in foreign countries. American families abroad
embodied a nonmilitaristic dimension of American life and could help foster good relations with residents of foreign countries.
some Americans and politicians held fast to isolationism, this was not the
prevailing spirit.
In the postwar world, the increased willingness of Americans to work
with other nations to resolve conflicts and deal with humanitarian problems reflected a renewed commitment to internationalism. Daniela Rossini defines American internationalism as a doctrine and a policy which
stresses the global character of the United States welfare and security and
therefore tends to accept the involvement of the country in the solution of
international disputes and problems. In other words, in the internationalist approach foreign duties and responsibilities are unavoidable.6 After
World War I, the United States did not join the League of Nations proposed by President Woodrow Wilson. In 1945, the entry of the United
States into the United Nations along with forty-nine other countries signified a newfound willingness to form alliances with other nations to solve
various problems. The preamble to the charter of the United Nations declared that member nations would practice tolerance and live together
in peace with one another as good neighbors, unite our strength to
maintain international peace and security, and employ international
machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of
all peoples.7
In addition to joining the United Nations, U.S. aid to nations devastated by warincluding former enemiesdemonstrated acceptance of
foreign duties and responsibilities in the postwar world. Despite the recent enmity between the Allies and Germany, the United States provided
food for starving people there. American occupation military governor
General Lucius DuBignon Clay wrote that dealing with the problem of
hunger had taken top priority between 1945 and 1948, because it was
necessary to meet peoples basic needs in order to successfully reeducate
the Germans and rebuild their country. For three years the problem of
food was to color every administrative action, and to keep the German
people alive and able to work was our main concern, wrote General
Clay. From the first I begged and argued for food because I did not believe that the American people wanted starvation and misery to accompany occupation, and I was certain that we could not arouse political interest for a democratic government in a hungry, apathetic population.8
The United States also shipped food to alleviate hunger in Japan throughout the occupation and supplied approximately $2 billion in economic assistance.9 The Marshall Plan provided even more aid to Western Europe.
In his address at the Harvard commencement in June 1947, Secretary of
State and former Army general George Marshall articulated his vision of
how the United States, via the European Recovery Program (the official
name of the Marshall Plan), should do whatever it is able to do to assist
Unofficial Ambassadors 41
in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there
can be no political stability, and no assured peace.10 Supporters of the
plan expected that it would stimulate economic recovery in Europe as well
as prosperity in the United States. Marshall traveled the country to muster
support for the program, telling reporters that he considered it an offer of
peace and comfort to peoples in need.11
military, and economic alliance among the United States and its North Atlantic allies against the Soviet Union.17
While tensions rose between noncommunist Western nations and the
Soviet Union, events in Asia fueled American fears of communist expansion there. After several years of fighting, Mao Zedongs troops defeated
Nationalist leader Chiang Kai-sheks forces in 1949 and established a
communist government in China. Congressional Republicans blamed the
Truman administration for failing to prevent the so-called fall of China.18
In early 1950, the world learned of an alliance between Mao and Soviet
premier Joseph Stalin, a pact that reinforced American anxiety about the
possibility of a global red conquest.19
The Korean War, which broke out a few months later, confirmed in
many American minds that the Soviets and their allies were determined to
further communist domination. In 1948, Korea had split into a Sovietbacked communist government in the north and a U.S.-supported anticommunist government in the south. When North Korean armies invaded
South Korea in June 1950, Americans assumed that Stalin had ordered
the invasion, although it is now known that Stalins support of North Korean leader Kim Il-sungs reunification attempt was more cautious. U.S.led United Nations forces intervened initially to repel the offensive and
then continued fighting northward to liberate North Korea from communism until an influx of Chinese forces joined the North Koreans to drive
back the invaders. Despite the wars heavy casualties, the 1953 armistice
maintained essentially the same geographical division between North
Korea and South Korea that had existed at the start of the hostilities in
1950. Although communist North Korea survived, the United States with
the United Nations had succeeded in containing the attempted expansion
of communism into South Korea. But fear that communism would not
only overrun other countries but also take root at home fed into an antiCommunist frenzy in the United States.20
Remilitarization
Although the Korean War helped to justify the immense military build-up
of the early 1950s, the remilitarization of the United States had already
commenced. In April 1948, Congress reinstated the draft (which had expired in 1947) and President Truman, at the urging of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, requested a $3 billion supplement to the defense bill for the augmentation of ground forces and aircraft. The 1949 budget for the Air
Force, at double the amount of the 1948 budget, initiated an aircraft industry war boom that would continue for several decades.21
44 Unofficial Ambassadors
The Soviet Unions explosion of its first atomic bomb in the summer of
1949 heightened military competition between the superpowers. Shortly
after learning of the Soviets atomic test, President Truman approved development of the even more powerful hydrogen bomb. In early 1950, at
the request of the president, National Security Council officials assessed
U.S. defense and foreign policies in a report known as NSC-68. The authors of NSC-68 warned that the Soviet Union is animated by a new
fanatic faith, antithetical to our own, and seeks to impose its absolute
authority over the rest of the world. The NSC advisers asserted that a
substantial and rapid building up of strength in the free world is necessary
to support a firm policy intended to check and roll back the Kremlins
drive for world domination. The council recommended that no cost be
spared in the defense of the United States: Budgetary considerations will
need to be subordinated to the stark fact that our very independence as a
nation may be at stake.22 In the words of historian Daniel Yergin, NSC68 expressed the fully formed Cold War World [mindset] of American
leaders, and provided the rationalization not only for the hydrogen bomb
but also for a much expanded military establishment. The Korean War
also prompted huge funding increases for national security. Over the
course of the war, expenditures for the conflict and for the broader development of military strength more than doubled from $22.3 billion in fiscal year 1951 to $50.4 billion in fiscal year 1953.23
The military build-up vastly increased the number of active duty service personnel between 1950 and 1960. In 1939, there were a total of
334,473 active duty personnel in the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. At
the end of World War II, military personnel numbered a historic high of
over twelve million. The demobilization that followed the war brought
this number down to just over three million in 1946, and then down to
approximately 1.5 million personnel in 1947. In 1950, the first year of the
Korean War, about 1.46 million men and women served in the military.
By 1953, the last year of the Korean War, this number had grown to over
three and a half million. In 1960, the number of armed forces personnel
stood at almost 2.5 million, an increase of nearly sixty percent since
1950.24
It was in this context of internationalism, anti-communism, remilitarization, and war that U.S. overseas bases attained a new significance after
World War II. The United States had established bases in the Pacific and
Caribbean in the late nineteenth century, largely as a consequence of the
Spanish-American War in 1898. Until the 1940s, however, U.S. overseas
bases were few in comparison to the foreign bases held by Great Britain,
France, Japan, and even several smaller nations such as Denmark, the
Netherlands, and Italy. The number of American bases overseas expanded
Unofficial Ambassadors 45
rapidly during World War II. Between 1941 even before the United
States officially entered the warand 1945, American military bases proliferated around the globe. By the end of the war, the more than 2,000
U.S. overseas bases exceeded the number of foreign bases established by
any other power in history. Although military demobilization resulted in
the closure of hundreds of bases between 1945 and 1949, the advent of
containment policy reversed this decline. The vast majority of bases were
in Europe and the Pacific because the United States deemed these areas the
most crucial for containment, whereas Latin America, Africa, the Middle
East, and South Asia were considered less significant in terms of anti-communist military strategy. There were 258 U.S. bases in Europe in 1949,
446 bases in 1953, 566 bases in 1957, and 673 bases in 1967. West Germany housed the most bases: ninety-nine in 1947, increasing to 278 by
1967. In the Pacific, there were 235 bases in 1949, 291 bases in 1953, 256
bases in 1957, and 271 bases in 1967. The number of bases abroad decreased after the Korean War, but increased in the 1960s because of the
Vietnam War.25 Armed forces personnel stationed at overseas bases more
than doubled between 1950 and 1960, from 301,595 to 610,174.26
Governments official spokesman in thousands of daily, seemingly unimportant contacts with foreign nationals.28
Transformations in official responses to relations between American
personnel and Germans illustrate views of how interpersonal interactions
could further military and foreign relations goals in the early years of occupation. When American troops entered Germany in September 1944,
U.S. military policy took a hard stance in outlawing fraternization with
Germans.29 The nonfraternization laws remained in place after the Germans surrendered to the Allies in May 1945. The prescriptive literature
produced for American military personnel in the early months of occupation depicted Germans as malicious and underhanded. One Army pamphlet cautioned readers to remember always that Germany, although
conquered, is still a dangerous enemy nation whose peopleindividually or collectivelywere never to be trusted. Soldiers were told that
We must bring home to the Germans that their support of Nazi leaders,
their tolerance of racial hatreds and persecutions, and their unquestioning
acceptance of the wanton aggressions on other nations have earned for
them the contempt and distrust of the civilized world. To convey American condemnation of the German people, military personnel were forbidden from engaging in any unofficial interactions with them: Specifically,
it is not permissible to shake hands with them, to visit their homes, to exchange gifts with them, to engage in games or sports with them, to attend
their dances or social events, or to accompany them on the street or elsewhere. Particularly, avoid all discussion or argument with them.30 Military leaders also worried that intimate relations with German women
could lure American soldiers into dangerous situations. A pamphlet titled
Dont Be a Sucker in Germany! warned service personnel that Youll see
a lot of good-looking babes on the make there. German women have been
trained to seduce you. Is it worth a knife in the back?31 Military officials
advocated this cautious and stern approach to ensure that the Germans
understood their status as a defeated people and deferred to the Allied
conquerors.
Despite these early expressions of distrust and disapproval of the German people, U.S. military policy toward them softened within months of
the Allied victory in Europe. Military leaders allowed a friendlier stance
because of the difficulty in enforcing the fraternization ban, especially between American soldiers and German women and children, and because
they came to believe that informal relations between servicemen and Germans could aid occupation goals. In June 1945, General Eisenhower
stated that the ban on fraternization did not include very small children. The following month, Eisenhower allowed American personnel to
converse with adult Germans in public. On October 1, 1945, the Allied
Unofficial Ambassadors 47
Control Council officially removed limits on fraternization except for restrictions on the billeting of U.S. soldiers with Germans and marriage
with Germans.32 Eisenhower announced that the relaxation of bans on
fraternization would assist the forces in carrying out their occupation
duties. He also informed personnel that they were to represent the American way of life.33 In December 1946, the military government permitted
marriages between Germans and Americans.34
The permission of casual contacts between American service personnel
and Germans reflected a growing sense among military leaders of the usefulness of interpersonal contacts in tackling the monumental projects of
reeducating citizens of occupied nations and reconstructing their societies.
Because so many servicemen were in intimate relationships with German
women, occupation leaders saw such contacts as a means to teach American democracy to the Germans. A 1946 Army Information Digest article
by Major T. P. Headen urged servicemen who dated German women to
educate the girlfriends and their families about democratic political participation. According to Headen, [The life of the German girlfriend] has
been as different from that of her American boy friend as night is from
day. She is not only ignorant of his background, but extremely curious.
He is like a man from another worlda better worldand he is in a position to tell her about it. Major Headen illustrated his points using a fictive couple, Joe and Hilda. He urged Joe, and the thousands like
him who could serve as a powerful means . . . for re-educating the German people, to prepare for discussions with Hilda and her relativesin
particular, her fatherto explain most effectively the superiority of the
American political system.35
Friendly relations between servicemen and local children also were
considered important for teaching democracy as well as demonstrating
American good will in occupied Germany. General Lucius Clay advocated
the spontaneous expression of American good will and the American
way of life in soldiers interactions with children through the militarys
German Youth Activities organization. In General Clays view, Christmas
parties given for German children in 1947, Full of spontaneity and good
will . . . did more than anything else can do to demonstrate democracy in
action. They were better than all the dull lectures and training on democracy.36 In Frankfurt, servicemen spent off-duty hours working with children in the German Youth Program sponsored by US Forces, European
Theater. Activities included playing American games, teaching democratic methods, and throwing parties.37 At Christmastime in 1948,
nearly 1,700,000 German boys and girls engaged in recreational activities
in the German Youth Activities program organized by American service
48 Unofficial Ambassadors
Unofficial Ambassadors 49
policies, and in the way it handles its relations with others.46 After World
War II, the U.S. militarys attempts to sensitize personnel to how they
might be perceived by residents of the countries in which they were stationed reflected the assumption that military goals and foreign relations
required not only the capacity for hard power, gendered masculine, but
also soft power, gendered feminine. Soldiers stationed abroad, trained to
display toughness when called upon, actually spent much of their time in
peaceful situations among occupied and host nation residents. Although
the potential for military force was there, most situations did not call for
this. Therefore, soldiers engaging in everyday activities with or in view of
local peoples could advance U.S. aims by exercising soft power, influencing what non-Americans thought of themand, by extension, the U.S.
military presence, and even American values and U.S. international goals
by comporting themselves in ways that non-American observers would
find appealing. By showing sensitivity toward and an understanding of
local peoples, military personnel were drawing upon a feminine dimension of power in interpersonal international relations.
Military guidebooks produced by the Department of Defense in the
1950s for personnel stationed in Europe and the Pacific gave detailed advice for exercising soft power in interpersonal contacts. These pocket
guides assumed that the success of military goals abroad and the acceptance of U.S. bases in foreign countries required service personnel to
convey to local residents a spirit of cooperation and understanding. The
pamphlets discouraged any offensive behavior, particularly rudeness, arrogance, drunkenness, and cultural insensitivity.47 The 1951 guide for
Germany warned that Europeans judge us [Americans] by the ill-mannered, trouble-making, boastful minority, and discouraged incivility toward any German man, woman, or child, as well as disregard for German
customs.48 A Pocket Guide to France (1951) advised against boasting
about ones pay or being better off than the French or other Allied soldiers.49 European nations had suffered far more destruction and loss of
life than had the United States during World War II, and were still recovering economically from the war into the 1950s. Americans abroad were
expected to demonstrate sensitivity to the people who had withstood
greater hardship than they.
Servicemens heavy drinking, a common problem that undermined military discipline, led to fights and accidents and made local people resentful. The advice literature tried to discourage servicemens drunkenness
by asking readers to consider non-Americans reactions to those who
drank excessively. A Pocket Guide to the Philippines (1955) declared that
Filipinos are moderate in drinking and look with considerable contempt
on a drunken foreigner. The guide for France stated that the French
Unofficial Ambassadors 51
book, Hersey wrote that the immigrant heritage of Americans, as embodied by Italian-American Major Joppolo, was an asset in forging strong
postwar relations between the United States military representatives and
Europeans.59 The popular book, which won the Pulitzer Prize, reflected
how the American people wanted to see the role of their nation in the
world.
Another Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, Vern Sneiders The Teahouse of
the August Moon (1951), is a rich cultural example that explores how to
best enact U.S. postwar goals through international cooperation. Teahouse tells a story of Army officials and their relations with the residents
54 Unofficial Ambassadors
The popular representations of military men in occupied and host nations as selflessly helpful reflected Americans ambivalence about their nations militarization. The postwar deployment of military power abroad
and the dominance of other nations, even when those nations were former
enemies, made Americans uneasy, even though many nevertheless considered it necessary for U.S. interests as well as global stability. Americans
did not want to see their nation as a militaristic, imperial power.64 Popular
cultural depictions of servicemen, as well as the armed forces portrayals
of military families, reassured Americans that their nations military
power was a force for good.
as represented by modern appliances. Additionally the servicemens donation of washing machines to the orphanage for girls symbolized the promise of the benefits that would accompany alliance with the United States.
Stories of marriages between American servicemen and women of host
and occupied countries served as yet another vehicle for representing ideal
international relations that transcended national and racial differences
through actual family relationships. Ebony and U.S. Lady published generally positive stories about marriages between American servicemen and
European and Asian women in a period when many American states still
enforced racial segregation laws and prohibited marriages between whites
and people classified as nonwhite.68 Marriages between servicemen and
the women they met abroad had taken place well before the 1950s and
1960s, when the Ebony and U.S. Lady stories appeared. During and soon
after World War II, tens of thousands of servicemen had married European women, most of them British, German, Italian, and French. By the
spring of 1947, 60,000 European war brides and children had come
to the United States to be with their American husbands.69 Significantly
fewer Japanese brides came to the United Statesonly 758 by 1950but
enough to attract attention.70 The March 1952 issue of Ebony featured on
its cover a full-page photograph of an African-American soldier and his
Japanese wife. The accompanying article discussed marriage between African-American servicemen and Japanese women and focused on the stories of several couples who resided in Japan and the United States. Overall
it deemed the unions successful, despite disapproval from some AfricanAmerican women in Japan, and some Japanese.71
U.S. Ladys accounts of marriages between military men and local
women appeared sporadically during the years of the magazines publication (1955 to 1968), and unlike the black press spotlighted white servicemen married to European or Asian women. The stories reported that
these unions were warmly received by the womens families, and implied
that they benefited United States-host nation relations. One featured several marriages between American Romeos and Italian Juliets in Verona,
the location of the Headquarters of the Southern European Task Force.
Several of the servicemens last namesBaiocco, Lipani, Cappadoccia
suggest an Italian heritage that helped them to establish connections in
Italy and reminded American readers that most citizens of the United
States, or their ancestors, had originated from other lands.72 Another article that posed the question What are the chances for happiness in interracial marriages? focused on three stories of marriages between Japanese
women and white American men. The article ultimately judged the unions
successful, despite some difficulties not insurmountable stemming
from racial and cultural differences. One of the husbands, Staff Sergeant
Unofficial Ambassadors 59
Kenneth Rigel, had met his wife, Kureha, at an American air base where
she worked. Kurehas parents initially strongly opposed the relationship, but accepted it several months after Kureha and Rigel married. Rigel
happily reported that Im always welcomed whenever I visit my wifes
folks. They show me around places as if theyre proud to have an American son-in-law. According to the article, Kenneth Rigels family in Kansas also accepted their sons marriage to a Japanese woman. Kureha Rigel
said that her husbands family treated her well, and described her motherin-law as wonderful.73 But U.S. Ladys attention to interracial marriages was limited to white American servicemen and Asian women. In
its thirteen years of publication, it never portrayed relationships between
African-American servicemen and nonblack women, reflecting military
officials and most of white Americas disapproval of such marriages.74
family, comprising a breadwinner father, a stay-at-home mother, and several children. Historian Elaine Tyler May connects what she terms the
postwar eras domestic revival to the nations anti-communism. According to May, the ideal of the nuclear family, as well as actual experiences of husbands and wives between the late 1940s and the early 1960s,
are best understood in the context of Cold War politics, not as existing in
a separate private realm. Americans wanted secure jobs, secure homes,
and secure marriages in a secure country. Nuclear families represented
security against encroaching communism. Domestic anticommunism
was another manifestation of containment, writes May. If presumably
subversive individuals could be contained and prevented from spreading
their poisonous influence through the body politic, then the society could
feel secure. Cold War Americans believed that families strengthened the
moral fiber necessary for resisting the insidious spread of communism.
Moreover, nuclear families offered comfort and shelter in a world where
the potential for nuclear war loomed over everyday life.75
The revival of domesticity does not mean that everyone wanted
womens influence limited to their homes and families. Betty Friedans The
Feminine Mystique, published in 1963, resonated for many middle- and
upper-middle-class educated white women, who felt stifled by postwar expectations that women pour their energies into homemaking, childrearing, and pleasing their husbands, and be content with these domestic
activities. Yet historian Joanne Meyerowitz argues that Friedans book,
while important, does not convey a complete picture of American cultural
attitudes about womens roles in the postwar era. Meyerowitz demonstrates that although the Cold War mentality indeed promoted domesticity, articles published in popular magazines such as Ebony and Ladies
Home Journal between 1945 and 1958 also lauded women for their public achievements and service and political participation. Articles in Ladies
Home Journal in particular justified and encouraged womens political
participation as important in the Cold War ideological battle because it
served as a means to prove the strength of democracy to the rest of the
world, including those oppressed by the Soviet government.76
1950s, the recruitment and retention of service personnel increasingly entailed the admission into the armed forces of married applicants or reenlistees, many of whom also had children. Until 1942, disapproval, and at
best, ambivalence, characterized Army policy on families. Married men
and men with minor children were in general not allowed to enlist or
reenlist during peacetime, though exceptions were made. The Army provided limited transportation, housing, and medical care for wives and
children, but primarily to families of officers (including senior noncommissioned officers).78 The maxim If the Army wanted you to have a wife,
they would have issued you one captured the preWorld War II assumption that families burdened rather than assisted service members and military operations.79
The reinstatement of the draft in 1948 and the growing numbers of
married personnel during the 1950s, combined with the Cold War maintenance of hundreds of thousands of personnel worldwide, forced the military leadership to reevaluate this assumption. In July 1955, nearly fortytwo percent of active-duty military personnel were married (seventy-eight
percent of officers and almost thirty-seven percent of enlisted members).80
In 1956, Secretary of the Navy (and former Assistant Secretary of Defense) Charles Thomas acknowledged the centrality of families in the lives
of Navy personnel when he pronounced in a speech to service families
that todays Navy is a married mans Navy.81 By September 1961, the
percentage of married personnel had climbed to almost fifty percent (just
over eighty-two percent of officers and forty-five percent of enlisted members were married). According to Department of Defense Statistics, the
2.54 million officers and enlisted men and women stationed around the
world that year had approximately 1.24 million wives and 2.23 million
children, as well as more than 161,000 other relatives designated as dependents.82 The number of family members considered dependents now
exceeded the number of service members by more than one million.83
The greater presence of wives and children in military life, combined
with the postwar celebration of the family in American culture and society, stimulated a reconceptualization of the stance of the armed forces vis-vis families. In this new vision, families joined soldiers, arms, and strategic bases as components of the Cold War defense arsenal. Military officials became more forthright in discussing how women, in their role as
wives, were potentially beneficial influences on the military readiness of
men, and also on the decisions of husbands to reenlist or make careers in
the armed forces. In this view, attracting and retaining competent personnel meant recruiting not only men but also their wives. In a study of
women and militaries, political scientist Cynthia Enloe states that Military commanders and their civilian political superiors . . . try to make use
62 Unofficial Ambassadors
of those women who have married soldiers. If those women can be socialised to become military wives, they can perhaps further some of the
militarys own goals.84 Militaries historically have relied heavily on
womens work, moral support, and self-sacrifice, but their ambivalence
about feminine assistance has diminished womens importance and visibility. Acknowledging womens contributions would undermine the image of
militaries as ultramasculine institutionsan image that military men as
well as those who studied them were reluctant to relinquish. Before the
feminist movement that emerged in the 1960s, scholars of militaries focused almost exclusively on mens roles in soldiering, thus reinforcing
womens invisibility.85 Since the American Revolution, the U.S. military
had used womens services as laundresses, cooks, nurses, foragers, water
carriers, and correspondence copiers, among other capacities (including
sexual), but diminished their importance by designating civilian women as
camp followers, which connotes a parasitic relationship that positions women as separate from and dependent on the armed forces rather
than essential contributors.86 Later, women officially employed in the
armed forces were assigned to a separate, and usually temporary, status
that distinguished them from male soldiers. After World War II, armed
forces officials became far more willing to acknowledge that wives and
families could be useful, even crucial, for accomplishing military aims.
Navy, Army, and Air Force officials statements to service wives and their
families, and magazine advertisements intended for Air Force wives, show
that military familieswives in particularwere considered fundamentally important to the defense of the United States through their support
of servicemen.
Military officials during the 1950s made numerous public statements
informing wives that they were expected to contribute to military goals. In
1955, U.S. Lady published a letter from Admiral Arleigh Burke to the
Navy Wives Club of America. Burke assumed that wives were to assist the
Navy by facilitating social relations among shipmates to strengthen their
sense of camaraderie, by conveying to the civilian community the importance of the Navy in national defense and assistance to allies, and by
lend[ing] inspiration and encouragement [to their husbands and the
Navy] when the going gets tough.87 In 1956, the Fleet Reserve Association sponsored a Mrs. United States Navy contest for which women
wrote essays on Why I Am Proud to Be a Navy Wife. The semifinalists
traveled with their families to Long Beach, California, for a week-long
gathering that included Navy officials. In a speech to the families, Secretary of the Navy Charles Thomas spoke of the typical Navy enlisted
mans wife as having served in the Navy as if her marital and domestic
duties were as official as her husbands military obligations. The U.S.
Unofficial Ambassadors 63
Lady editors wrote that the thirty-one families assembled in Long Beach
presented a picture of All-American friendliness, health, happiness and
family togetherness that made the top Navy brass assembled there as
proud as new fathers. Here was a vital element in the Navy hierarchy that
had never been placed in the spotlight before. We all sensed the wonder of
a major discovery.88 The major discovery was that families could be
an asset to the armed forces.
The top Navy brass were not alone in their assessment of families as
valuable to the military. Army leaders also conceived of wives as essential
to the effective functioning of their organization. Army Chief of Staff
General Maxwell D. Taylor expressed this view in a 1956 article for service wives. He recalled a debate among officers in Korea over the question
of whether or not bachelors performed their duties better than married
men. The contest was animated and when the voting time came, the
mess split exactly in half, so that when it reached me at the head of the
table, it was a tie, wrote General Taylor. It was not hard for me to
break it. I said, Gentlemen, regardless of the arguments pro and con, I
know it as a personal fact that if Mrs. Taylor had not taken me in hand
years ago, I would still be a second lieutenant. General Taylor credited
the ladies of the Army for backing men in their military careers and
said that he regarded the women as indispensable assets crucial to the
success of the Army in future battle. According to Taylor, military
might and mobility depended upon womens support of their husbands:
the man behind the gun must have behind him a loyal Army wife, capable of sustaining himwhen together or when separatedwith understanding, with affection, and with the fierce pride of the wife of a warrior. Indeed, here Taylor contended that a married serviceman would
prove a more effective soldier than an unmarried one. He also drew upon
historical ideals of womens sacrifices for the state when he likened Cold
War Army wives to the Roman matrons who told their sons to come
back from battle with their shields or on theman image of the ultimate
maternal sacrificeand to nineteenth-century Army wives who accompanied their husbands to the West in covered wagons, braving hardship and
danger.89
Like the Navy and Army top brass, Air Force Chief of Staff General
Nathan F. Twining encouraged women to bolster the armed forces, and
national security, through their support of servicemen. In a 1956 message of faith and courage for Air Force Wives, General Twining expressed appreciation for the perseverance of women and children during
the Cold War age of tension. Twining acknowledged that service to the
Air Force, which operat[ed] largely under wartime conditions, placed
stresses and strains on families. He lauded the women he called Twen64 Unofficial Ambassadors
tieth Century Pioneers for enduring such a hard life and for proudly
standing behind their husbands. The pioneer reference, also used by
General Taylor, evoked the romantic nationalistic image of the frontier
families of the previous century to portray the U.S. international presence
in the mid-twentieth century as a continuation of Americans historical
expansion and progress. Twinings message commingled praise for wives
with the assertion that the defense of the nationand more precisely, the
security of familiesdepended upon womens support of servicemen:
American security and safety require greater readiness not lessduring
an age of tension, not merely for a few months or years. If your children
and your childrens children grow up in a nation not ravaged by conflict,
it will be because we had enough skilled . . . experienced, and above all,
ready men, poised through those years to defend and retaliate against any
attacker. In a large measure, whether we have these men or not depends
on you.90
masculine image of the Air Force, but rather served as an alternative conceptualization, intended to appeal to women and maintain their support
for Air Force goals. These advertisements tried to sell to women a vision of families as the foundation of military success yet they also reflected
the relatively recent acceptance of the family as integral to the function
and purpose of the military, rather than primarily a hindrance to it. Each
full-page announcement began with the salutation Dear Lady, followed
by a succinct statement in cursive script, and a photograph of a middleclass, white family scene that took up most of the page. These Dear
Lady messages reveal the presumed connections among the following:
the service wife (who, one assumes, is the woman in each family scene);
the serviceman (the male figure who appears in nearly all of the photographs but never in uniform); the family; national security; and the
American ideals of freedom, prosperity, the home, religious faith (specifically, Christianity in the one advertisement on the faith of your choice),
and economic opportunity.
The first Dear Lady advertisement that appeared in U.S. Lady in
1956 brought together the elements considered fundamental to the wellbeing of Cold War Americans to convey the idea of the interconnectedness of the Air Force, the home and family, and security. It offered a large
photograph of a woman, man, and three children enacting a cozy family
scene above the message Dear Lady: The family is the real heart of the
U.S. Air Force, handwritten in a flowing script. A small image of the Air
Force seal, the imprimatur that reminds the reader that this message is official, appears discreetly in the bottom right-hand corner of the page. The
group is positioned before the living room fireplace, the proverbial hearth
that connotes home and family. The woman sits in an armchair reading
Pinocchio to two attentive children resting on either side of her, while the
man and a third child kneel together nearby on the floor, their attention
on the childs toy vehicle. The image and written text conflate the nuclear
family, the home, the Air Force, and personal as well as national security.
The announcement also in effect told its audience that the Air Force existed to protect the family ideal: families were the raison dtre of the military; national defense ultimately centered on defending them. The Pinocchio storya tale of a wooden puppet boy (created by a human father) who loses his way and encounters misadventures when he leaves
his fathers home in pursuit of pleasureserves as a subtle but dark reminder of the heartache and dangers that threaten to befall those who
underrate the security and happiness of home and family. And the story
about a human father who sought to give life to his artificial creation
paralleled, in a fashion, the Air Forces endeavor to remake itself into a
flesh-and-blood family organization.92
66 Unofficial Ambassadors
wedge, the boy preoccupied with a toy boat. The family appears happy
and secure. The announcement conveys multiple messages: that families,
rather than weapons and war and soldiers, represented the core of the Air
Force; that the Air Force intended to safeguard the abundance, family togetherness, and personal freedom that were assumed to characterize the
American way of life; and that womens work of sustaining the family
raising children, taking care of men, and fulfilling other domestic duties
was considered central to the accomplishment of military goals.93
A Dear Lady advertisement from December 1958 united Christianity, family, and the Air Force. Filling most of the page is a large photograph of a man, woman, and two children (older than the children fea68 Unofficial Ambassadors
to be considered more effective representatives of peaceful intention, humanitarianism, understanding, and international cooperation.
Conceptions of women and children as representatives of American
understanding and good will abroad surfaced in the early years of military occupation. At the orientation that spouses and older children attended upon arriving in Germany in 1946, their discussion leader advised
them not only to learn European languages, but also to try to understand and appreciate the thoughts and feelings, aims and aspirations that
are expressed by those languages.95 Wives and children, then, were to
do more than simply communicate with Europeans; they were also expected to empathize with them. Military leaders encouraged wives to engage in womens work that aided occupation goals. General Lucius
Clay praised women for their charitable work to aid the German people:
The good work which [womens] clubs accomplished was remarkable
and contributed much toward making the Germans understand the humane characteristics of the American people.96
The incorporation of families into armed forces and foreign relations
goals appeared in the early official prescriptive literature for families in
occupied countries. These pamphlets mostly contained accounts of local
history, culture, people, and climate, as well as information about services
and facilities available to American families. There did appear, however, a
few suggestions to guide families in their interactions with residents of
occupied countries. A Guide for Dependents in Kyoto (1946) informed
readers that a greater responsibility is placed upon members of [an overseas] Army than is generally found at installations within the continental
United States. Wives and children of Army personnel in Japan must aid, in
every way, the fulfillment of our primary missions in this occupation.
The guide advised women and children to exercise restraint and detachment in interactions with the Japanese. Yet the booklet also encouraged family members to demonstrate courtesy and a careful willingness to
socialize with the Japanese: Families of Occupation Forces will receive
many invitations to visit the homes of Japanese people. There is nothing
to prohibit such invitations being accepted, and the courtesies returned,
provided a degree of restraint is practiced.97 This advice captures the
complicated position of the American military in the early years of occupation. The Japanese had recently been at war with the United States, and
by definition, occupied nations were considered enemies.98 Historian John
Dower describes the occupation as schizophrenic, combining idealistic
democratic reforms with severe authoritarian rule.99 To help create an
atmosphere of good intention, a cautious but courteous demeanor would
not only maintain American authority but also demonstrate the occupiers
benevolence toward their former enemy.
Unofficial Ambassadors 71
States. Luszki wanted wives to receive more orientation, learn local languages, and engage in joint activities between United States nationals
and members of the host nations, such as Operation Kinderlifttaking German children from Berlin and giving them vacations in American
homes in West Germany.104
Between 1950 and 1960, as the number of U.S. military forces abroad
increased, so did the presence of American families. According to Bureau
of the Census statistics, 107,350 Americans described as dependents of
federal employees lived abroad in 1950. Because most federal employees
abroad that year were members of the armed forces (301,595, far more
than the 26,910 federal civilian employees), one may conservatively estimate that 90,000 of the dependents of federal employees were relatives of military personnel. The 1960 census, which unlike the 1950 census distinguished between dependents of federal civilian employees and
dependents of armed forces personnel, found that 462,504 relatives of
military personnel resided overseas. Thus, the number of spouses, children, and others designated as dependents of military personnel quintupled between 1950 and 1960. By 1960, approximately forty-nine percent
of armed forces personnel abroad were married. That year, the more than
one million Americans abroad associated with the armed forces constituted approximately seventy-eight percent of the entire American population residing in foreign countries.105 Thus, military personnel and their
families composed the vast majority of Americans abroad.
During the late 1940s and 1950s, alongside the evolution of the idea
that families in the United States could contain the internal communist
threat arose the concept that American families overseas could serve as
bulwarks against global communism. The military establishment came to
believe that the containment of international communism was a job not
just for the American soldier but also for the American family. Promoting
positive informal relations would generate non-Americans support for official U.S. aims. According to this assumption, families friendly contacts
with residents of occupied and host countries would help persuade them
to accept a long-term foreign military presence that claimed to defend the
free world against encroaching communism. Women in particular were
considered instrumental in demonstrating American good will and sensitivity toward non-Americans. Moreover, it was hoped that exemplary
families would counter foreign perceptions of Americans as materialistic, unsophisticated individualists concerned only about their own wellbeing, and of the United States as a culturally and territorially imperialistic nation. Thus, military leaders considered American military families
to be cultural and ideological weapons in the war against the spread of
communism.
Unofficial Ambassadors 73
Air Force and Army prescriptive literature for the spouses and children
of service members indicates that these organizations regarded the friendliness and consideration of family members interested in local peoples and
their ways of life as essential to good relations between the American military and residents of host countries. Pamphlets for dependents informed them that they were unofficial ambassadors responsible for establishing positive relations with residents of host nations. According to
Air Force and Army guides published in the 1950s for families in the
United Kingdom, France, the Philippines, and other nations, the job of
unofficial ambassador entailed the following duties: the demonstration of
courtesy and good will to local people, respect for the customs and obedience to the laws of host nations, the promotion of human understanding, and the countering of bad impressions made by other Americans. An
Army guide expressed the idea that families, unlike service personnel unaccompanied by spouses and children, add up to the real, hard-core
America in the eyes of foreigners. The pamphlets directed their messages
primarily to wives, who were expected to carry out their ambassadorial
duties through ladylike behavior, sensitivity, interest in other peoples and
cultures, and adaptability to foreign environments.106
The guides warned against behavior that reinforced stereotypes of
Americans as inconsiderate and arrogant and that would make the U.S.
military presence less tolerable. The Army advice literature articulated the
concept of the family as the quintessence of American society: Foreigners
will make allowances, to some extent . . . for the actions of single Americanspeople alone and away from home. But what foreign people see an
American family do becomes Americana and remains fixed in their minds
a long time.107 This statement asserts that American families, more than
servicemen unaccompanied by wives and children, embodied their nations character and therefore bore the most responsibility for representing
their country in a favorable light. The pamphlets for Great Britain and
France discouraged loud and boisterous conduct, the vulgar exhibition of superior wealth, and the American superiority complex.108
Readers also were cautioned not to appear overly friendly or intrusive.
Instead, the guides prescribed an attitude of consideration for local
peoples and respect for their cultures and ways. The Air Force booklet for
families in the United Kingdom asked readers to reject ethnocentrism and
instead adopt a cultural-relativist view of their British hosts: You may
not always understand British customs and practices. But, remember, your
habits and customs may be just as hard for the average Britisher to understand.109 The Army pamphlet offered similar advice: Americans must
understand . . . that they are the foreigners while abroad, and that their
hosts overseas do not always measure success by the same standards that
74 Unofficial Ambassadors
wealth. . . . Dont flash a roll of English pounds. The booklet also asked
readers to help offset the stereotype of the United States [as] a land of
millionaires. The Army pamphlet, which estimated that American
women managed eighty percent of their family budgets, told readers that
to protect the feelings of other people allied with us in a common defense, you need to be careful that your buying always represents actual
needs and is as inconspicuous as possible.111 The expectation that service
wives, in the ordinary activity of shopping, were to sympathize with the
plight of less economically privileged peoples underlay the idea that
women and families abroad could counter criticisms of American society
as materialistic and unconcerned about the hardships endured by other
nations. Sensitivity to the less fortunate was not the only reason for this
advice, however; the Eisenhower administration also worried that military families spending abroad contributed to the outflow of the United
States gold reserves.
Besides urging women to spend money sensitively, the guides asked
them and their families to smooth American-host national relations by exhibiting basic polite behavior. The pamphlets asked family members to exercise good taste by not indulging in complaining or gossipingadvice
that probably stemmed from sexist assumptions about women, as well as
the particular fear that American wives and family members would complain about the U.S. military or reveal information that military officials
preferred to keep from non-Americans. Additional advice was tailored to
specific countries. For example, the pamphlet for families in the United
Kingdom warned against use of the expression bloody (one of the
worst British swear words), and stated that ladies were not to make
unescorted visits to pubs, initiate dart games or buy drinks in pubs (rather
than waiting until asked), or request whiskey at private parties. Showing
respect for local gender mores, it was hoped, would not only keep American women in line, but also counteract impressions of Americans as crude
and reassure residents of host nations that the U.S. military presence did
not signify cultural imperialist intentions to overrun the values and practices of smaller societies.112
Recommendations for womens dress attest to assumptions that women
were especially capable of adapting to foreign cultures and thereby projecting understanding of host societies as well as the proclaimed intention
of the U.S. armed forces to coexist with, rather than dominate, the hosts
of their bases. Although the literature included brief suggestions for childrens clothing and mens uniforms and off-duty apparel, most of the advice on dress was intended for women. The booklet for the United Kingdom informed readers that ladies should not wear slacks in villages or
the countryside, although they could do so in urban areas. The guide also
76 Unofficial Ambassadors
Conclusion
In the postWorld War II climatemostly internationalist, decidedly anticommunistU.S. leaders wanted to project American ideals of democracy and freedom and counter impressions of their country and its military as power-hungry and intent only on self-serving domination of other
nations rather than international cooperation for the betterment of all
Unofficial Ambassadors 79
humanity. In the fierce combat of the Cold War, Americans believed that
winning the war against worldwide communism depended on a powerful
military, international involvement, and nuclear families. When families
joined servicemen overseas after World War II, the armed forces identified
uses for them in the occupations, and also constructed a vision of families as powerful weapons in the Cold War defense arsenal. Army, Air
Force, and Navy authorities expected them to bolster the morale of servicemen and thereby maximize military readiness. Abroad, they urged
families to make the U.S. military presence more tolerable to residents of
occupied and host nations and to promote successful international relations through informal social and cultural exchanges. Nevertheless, the
armed forces did not draw on the full potential of family members to aid
U.S. foreign relations goals. It would be military wives, often working on
their own, outside of military supervision, who envisioned and carried out
creative ways to make connections with local peoples and help further advance what they perceived as their countrys international objectives.
80 Unofficial Ambassadors
3
A U.S. Ladys World
tion, and assistance to peoples in need. Mrs. Pennington pointed out that
military wives possessed the necessary skills as well as the international
perspective required of Peace Corps volunteers: We have so many persons qualified to helpnurses, teachers, and wives who love our noble
country and are willing to fight in any way they can to keep it free, and to
show and help others to keep their freedom.6 While their husbands represented official military authority and power, many military wives took
the initiative to project and promote the compassion, friendliness, and
what one wife termed feminine good will they believed necessary to
build Cold War alliances and maintain world peace.7
As historian Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman astutely notes, it is not by accident that the creation of the Peace Corps coincided with the height of U.S.
Cold War military power. The exercise of power, she states, calls forth
a compensatory impulse. Even before the creation of the United States,
colonists saw the society they were creating in the New World as exceptional and exemplary. Americans vision of their nation as a model for the
rest of the world carried into the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and
served as a fundamental reason for their reluctance to become entangled
in foreign conflicts, unless they considered their self-interest to be directly
at stake: the United States was morally upright and prosperous because it
did not become embroiled in Old World-style rivalries and intrigues.8 Yet
in the twentieth century, the more the United States became involved in international turmoilthe Great War, World War II, the Cold Warthe
more powerful it became, and the more Americans vigorously advanced
the high-minded notion of their nation as the moral leader of the world.
Military wives efforts to help peoples of occupied and host nations, like
the Peace Corps, represented sincere efforts to do good for those who
were less privileged than Americans, while helping to ease Americans discomfort with and even morally justify their nations global dominance.
The most prominent of the unofficial ambassador wives were white
officers wives, many of whose husbands were making a career of military
service. Like many Americans of the early Cold War era, they envisioned
themselves as participants in the battle against communism. These women
personified the complexity of U.S. global leadership in the first two decades of the Cold War. Their efforts to assist and befriend peoples of other
nations meshed with U.S. military and foreign policy objectives to help rebuild nations wrecked by war, whether friend or foe, in ways that were in
line with the perceived self-interest of the United States. As wielders of
soft power, service wives attempted to represent American values and
ideals in ways that the hard-power U.S. military presence abroad could
not, yet all the while buttressing their nations global supremacy and military might. American women who performed charity work, adopted chil82 A U.S. Ladys World
dren, joined international womens clubs, and invited local people into
their homes considered themselves sincere conveyers of American warmth
and generosity, and simultaneously served U.S. international interests.
This chapter examines womens articulations of the ambassadorial role
for military wives, their accounts of encounters with residents of occupied
and host nations (mainly in Europe and Asia), and their perspectives on
their contributions to international relations. Their advice literature and
accounts of interactions with local residents illuminate womens agency in
cultivating international good will and promoting their visions of American values and ways abroad. Many wives who took to heart the unofficial
ambassador role urged upon them by the armed forces did not merely follow the instructions provided in the military advice manuals. Under their
own initiative, they imagined ways to reach out to local peoples, and enterprisingly enacted these. Although conditions varied by locale, women
engaged in similar activities at bases worldwide. Their accounts of their
interactions with residents of occupied and host nations both provide evidence of the scope and nature of these encounters and illuminate the conception of international relations that guided their activities. While endeavoring to befriend local peoples and show respect for their cultures
and customs, they attempted to demonstrate the alleged superiority of the
American way of life, including American family relations, gender roles,
and home lifea task that could pose challenges, given the shortcomings
in some housing for military families, the undemocratic treatment of fellow Americans in military communities, and the domestic problems that
some families faced.
To understand why it was white officers wives who took the lead in
advising and serving as role models for military wives in their encounters
with local peoples, it is first necessary to examine the gender roles, racial
composition of, and rank among families in military communities, and
military cultures expectations of officers wives.
Number
Percent
420,590
28,116
440
6,270
2,718
2,076
2,294
462,504
90.9
6.1
0.1
1.4
0.6
0.4
0.5
100.0
and housing for families of the lowest four grades of enlisted personnel,
regardless of race, meant that higher-ranking service members were far
more likely to have their families with them at foreign bases. In 1946, military planners had allowed most personnel willing to remain at an overseas station for at least one year after the arrival of their family members
to apply for overseas transportation and housing for their spouses and
children. An applicants commitment to remain at an overseas post for at
least one year, and the length of service abroad since 1941, determined
priority. By the late 1940s, however, the services placed restrictions on the
families of the lowest grades of enlisted personnel (e.g., privates, airmen,
seamen). These restrictions did not apply to the senior grades of enlisted
personnel (e.g., sergeants in the Army and Air Force). The services would
not transport the family members of the lowest grades of enlisted personnel to overseas commands or make military housing available to them, citing concerns that these men could not financially support their families in
foreign countries. Also, the serious shortage of quarters at many overseas
bases, as well as the expense to the U.S. government of sending and maintaining families abroad, compelled military planners to find ways to control the inflow of families, and so the privilege of being allowed to bring
ones family to an overseas station at government expense accrued to
those in the middle and higher ranks. In most cases, enlisted personnel
willing and able to finance overseas transportation for family members
and find nonmilitary housing for them were permitted to do so. Such
families resided off-base but were allowed to use military facilities such
as commissaries and post exchanges.16 In January 1961, an estimated
20,000 unauthorized military dependents, wives following their husbands resided abroad.17
upon new families; arrange luncheons, teas, coffees, and business meetings with other officers wives; and create a committee to aid the families
of squadron members in case of an emergency.21
Many officers wives contributed to activities that benefited military
communities because they enjoyed the camaraderie and believed that their
social contacts and public service would help their husbands careers.
Mary Jane Vann had initially worried about raising a family in Army life.
Her activities with the wives of high-ranking officers (headed by the commanding generals wife), older women who coached the younger wives,
helped alleviate her concerns. The womens group activities gave her a
sense of community and security. She relished the volunteer work, dinners, dances, and bridge parties organized by the wives, and appreciated
the kindly guidance of the wives of her husbands superiors. Vann also
prided herself that her activities assisted her husbands military career.22
Wives of men who did not plan to make a career of the military would
have been less invested in joining the social circle of those committed to
the armed forces for the long term.
Officers wives felt pressured to join in military community activities
whether or not they wanted to do so. Many did not hold paying jobs; military culture discouraged officers wives from such employment because
of the assumption that the military establishment required these womens
unpaid participation, and some wives who held jobs were pressured to
quit them.23 The commanding officers wife tried to ensure that all officers wives joined the wives club, attended meetings, and signed up for
volunteer work. Writing under a pen-name, an author introduced as the
wife of a Marine colonel offered a semihumorous account of how senior
wives kept women busy: There are committees for teas, luncheons, charities, dances, Gray Ladies, Nurses Aides, flower shows, canteens, thrift
shops, and committees to stir up committees. You are never ordered to
do any of these things. You are asked kindly and politely. . . . Youre
too busy? Perhaps you dont realize the importance of a wife to a mans
military career?24 Military leaders also demanded the attendance of
wives at clubs, dances, and cocktail parties, all of which upheld the social
structure of military communities. Even women bored by club meetings,
card games, and parties dutifully participated, sensing that not conforming to expectations could harm their husbands chances for promotions.
Wives who resisted the push to join the base groups risked reproach and
isolation.25
Higher-ups in the military indeed assessed wives when considering
prominent personnel assignments. A 1963 document that discussed updating the Navys fitness report to evaluate the suitability of the officer
and his family [specifically, his wife] for assignment to responsible posi88 A U.S. Ladys World
tions as representatives of the Service and the Nation stated that the
practice had existed since the very beginning of the Navy but was now
especially important due to more frequent international contacts. The
Navys intention in updating its fitness report for personnel was to obtain
more fair and objective evaluations in determining the suitability of a
married couple for social and diplomatic contact with the officials and
people of our own and foreign countries, rather than relying on rumors
to ascertain how successful the Officer-Wife Team would prove. In
making the case for amending the fitness report, the document claimed
that most wives have been strongly in favor of the joint assessment and
some even thought that the children of the family should be included as
well.26
In fulfilling the roles of unpaid employee for the military and leader of
women married to lower-ranking personnel, officers wives reinforced
rank and class hierarchies. For the most part, wives did not socialize extensively across ranks. Besides the physical separation of families by
grade, military culture shaped womens association with one another.
Nancy Shea professed that there is no rank among women unless they
are members of the Armed Forces. In reality, wives status in military
communities indeed corresponded to that of their husbands. Women in
the higher tiers of a military community were expected to guide and act
as exemplars for the women whose husbands served in lower ranks, without becoming too friendly with them. Officers wives checked their interactions with the wives of lower-ranking personnel. A commanding officers wife advised her peers not to behave like one of the girls or in a
cheap good-fellow manner. Other wives of commanding officers agreed
that dignity and avoidance of intimate entanglements among superior
and subordinate should characterize service wives relations across the
ranks. The fiction that wives have no rank can be interpreted as a message to wives that because they did not officially work for the armed
forces, they should not make demands on the military for themselves or
their families.27
Armed forces policy limiting government-funded travel and access to
housing to the families of personnel above the lowest ranks, and the structure of base housing areas, also encouraged the segregation of wives and
families by rank. Because those families in the lowest ranks of enlisted
personnel who could afford to come abroad had to obtain off-base housing, they were less likely to mix with families of higher ranking personnel
and receive encouragement from officers wives to engage in intercultural
interactions with local people. Residence in off-base neighborhoods, however, actually might have increased the likelihood of daily contacts between these families and non-Americans. On-base living arrangements
A U.S. Ladys World 89
that grouped families according to the status of service members also encouraged separation by rank. Although larger families received roomier
quarters than smaller families, grade and length of service also influenced
housing assignments. A colonels family was not likely to live next door to
a sergeants family.28
In addition, military culture did not pressure the wives of enlisted personnel to engage in the kinds of activities that involved encounters with
occupied and host nation residentsvolunteer work, teas, womens club
meetingsexpected of officers wives. For this reason, along with other
cultural and physical barriers, officers wives who shouldered the unofficial ambassador role tended to socialize with other officers wives more
than with enlisted mens wives, and to encourage wives in their own peer
groups to work on fostering friendly relations with local peoples.
short, on local social-cultural-political contexts, as well as Americans actions at home and in the larger world. And many people around the world
harbored mixed feelings toward the United States for instance, the
young people who admired American democracy and selectively enjoyed
American popular cultural products (e.g., wearing blue jeans and listening to rock n roll, but resisting Coca-Cola) while opposing certain U.S.
foreign policies. Many people liked individual Americans they encountered but despised what they perceived as U.S. militarism and economic
hegemony.34
In Japan and West Germany in the 1950s, where the U.S. military presence was largest, local people held mixed views of the United States. The
U.S. occupations of Japan and West Germany were considered by many
Americans as well as citizens of those countries to have been successful in
establishing democracy and aiding in the construction of thriving capitalist systems, and in cultivating Japan and West Germany as loyal allies of
the United States in the Cold War. Still, many Japanese and Germans were
ambivalent toward, if not severely critical, of U.S. power, and attitudes
could shift over short periods of time. A 1950 national survey asking Japanese whether their nation should be pro-American, pro-Soviet, or neutral reported that fifty-five percent of respondents favored the United
States, twenty-two percent favored neutrality, and less than one percent
were pro-Soviet. The same poll taken in 1953, a year after the end of the
occupation, reported that now only thirty-five percent of respondents
were pro-American, while neutralists rose to thirty-eight percent, although pro-Soviet attitudes remained low at one percent. Thus, while the
Japanese in 1953 remained far more pro-American than pro-Soviet, the
tendency to favor the U.S. alliance dropped significantly between 1950
and 1953. A 1957 poll that inquired into the Japanese peoples chief objections to U.S. policy compared responses in Osaka and Izumo to provide an extreme urban-rural contrast. This poll listed the top criticism as
the selfish, superior attitude of U.S. policy (twenty-three percent of responses in Osaka, fifteen percent in Izumo), with military bases in second place (ten percent for Osaka, nine percent for Izumo), and nuclear
weapons tests running third (five percent for Osaka and four percent for
Izumo).35 A variety of polls conducted between 1950 and 1958 found that
Japanese support of U.S. bases in Japan fell from thirty percent in 1950 to
eight percent in 1958. In other words, support of the bases was not overwhelming in 1950 (during the occupation), and drastically declined in the
years after the occupation ended. Socialists were the harshest critics of the
U.S. military presence (a fact that U.S. policymakers tended to exaggerate
when discussing their nations armed forces in Japan), although the ma-
helping them to better understand Americans. Most wives accounts depicted the U.S. military presence as more beneficial than harmful to local
peoples in that it protected them against communist forces and helped
them to improve their standards of living. In detailing their experiences
abroad, the authors not only portrayed interesting and vibrant other
worlds for their American audiences, but also presented model attitudes
and behaviors for their readers. These accounts also served as justifications for maintaining American military families abroad at a time when
taxpayers at home complained of the costs, and presidential administrations worried about the outflow of U.S. gold reserves to foreign countries.
The military wife-authors sought to show that families were abroad not
merely to improve servicemens morale, but perhaps even more important
to make friends for the United States and gain support for U.S. military
bases and policies.
U.S. Lady under the control of Rockwell and then the Adamses did not
preach racism or anti-Semitism (biographer William Schmaltz writes that
the magazine was an inadequate vehicle for [Rockwells] anti-Jewish beliefs).40 The publication, which reached thousands of subscribers and
which the Adamses described as global-circulating, took a culturalhumanitarian-internationalist outlook that was also definitely anti-communist and generally supportive of U.S. foreign policies, although mild
criticisms of U.S. military policies (particularly those considered detrimental to military families) did occasionally appear.41 Despite its oft-professed
respect for cultural diversity, however, U.S. Lady reinforced the assumption that the model ambassador of feminine good will, embodied by the
dozens of U.S. Ladies-of-the-Month lauded in the magazine between
1955 and 1968, was an officers wife, white, and U.S.-born. In 1956, the
U.S. Lady-of-the-Month Selection Board comprised the spouses of many
of the nations highest-ranking military and federal government officials:
the wives of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Army, Secretary
of the Navy, Secretary of the Air Force, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff of the US Army, Chief of Naval Operations, Commandant of the
Marine Corps, and Commandant of the Coast Guard. Wives of more ordinary servicemen rounded out the board: the wives of an Air Force Reserves captain, a Marine Corps Reserves staff sergeant, a chief petty officer (Navy), another chief petty officer (Naval Reserve), an Army master
sergeant, an Air Force master sergeant, and a widow of a Marine Corps
technical sergeant.42 Between June 1956 and April 1968 (the final issue of
U.S. Lady), members of the board changed, but the board continued to
include the wives of high-ranking military officials as well as spouses of
lower-ranking personnel.
Out of all of the U.S. Ladies-of-the-Month honored between 1955
and 1968, only one African-American woman received recognition. Mary
Lee Harvey, the wife of an Air Force major, volunteered in an Air Force
hospital in Ankara, Turkey, and in a variety of activities (especially for
children) in the military community. The 1963 U.S. Lady article that pronounced Harvey a U.S. Lady-of-the-Month did not mention whether
she engaged in social or cultural exchanges with Turks, though it did state
that she escorted her children and others on excursions into the Turkish countryside where they surely encountered host nationals.43 Perhaps
Harveys numerous responsibilities on the Air Force base limited the time
she could spend in host national communities; or perhaps the author of
the article did not conceive of her as an unofficial ambassador, although most descriptions of U.S. Lady-of-the-Month honorees who
lived abroad included some mention of the womens participation in offbase activities that put them in contact with local people. Despite the fact
A U.S. Ladys World 95
will should accompany large-scale economic assistance to foreign countries, and that women were ideal representatives in such encounters.47
Advice and examples for would-be ambassador-wives appeared in the
form of statements by the editors, readers letters to the editors, articles,
short fiction, and visual representations. Military wives authored most of
these items, though sometimes articles composed by servicemen or servicewomen appeared. A U.S. Ladys World, a full-page image of a military wife and a description of her multiple levels of responsibility that appeared in 1956, illustrates assumptions that military wives were part of
a bigger defense team and that their domestic, feminine activities were
not only important within their families and communities, but also integral to the success of national and international goals. Author Jean Andrew, an Army wife, presented a drawing of a woman smartly clad in a
skirt suit, hat, gloves, and pumpsproper public apparel denoting a wellbred middle-class womanholding hands with a young girl. The woman
a service wife and mother and a U.S. Ladyand the girl, who are
both turned away from the reader, stand before a globe ensphered by arrows pointing to regions worldwide. This type of portrayal of Americans
in relation to the rest of the world, signifying U.S. global supremacy, appeared frequently after World War II. In the U.S. Lady illustration, the
leadership in this sphere of influence is feminine: the womans and girls
perusal of the globe, with the United States at its center, depicts the world
as their domain; there is even an air of window-shopping in their demeanor, suggesting that the globe is theirs for the taking, although they
might also be cautiously pondering the consequences of such an acquisition. To the right of this image is a column of written text that delineates
the numerous realms in which service wives were considered important
participants, spanning a spectrum that ranged from The World Itself, to
the United States, to the armed forces, down to their communities and
families. In this vision, women were simultaneously domestic, public, and
international figures; their activities as wives and mothers served as the
foundation for the local community, the military community, and international relations, and all were interconnected.48 Jean Andrews fifteen years
as an Army wife and her experience as an officer in the Navy WAVES
(Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service) no doubt informed
her vision of women as actors in national and international affairs.49 The
document A U.S. Ladys World recognized and encouraged wives who
contributed to military and international aims while also reminding them
of their numerous areas of responsibility.
Illustrations, articles, books, and other items by and for military wives
defined realms where women were particularly responsible for advancing
friendly relations between Americans and local peoples. Americans worA U.S. Ladys World 97
A U.S. Ladys World, by Jean Andrew, an Army wife, appeared in U.S. Lady in 1956.
A recurring theme in the writings by and for military wives was that
one of their principal responsibilities was to counteract negative impressions of Americans by leading their own exemplary daily lives in
the presence of host-country spectators. Ann Saling described how as a
service wife in South America she attempted to interact with as many
Latin Americans as she could so that they would think that Perhaps all
norteamericanos are . . . friendly and interested in us. Military wives like
Ann Saling accepted the suggestions for positive American-host national
relations found in the official prescriptive literature, but then expanded
them into stories of personal interactions that readers would relate to
their own encounters with people abroad. For Saling, establishing friendly
relations between the United States and South American countries required fluency in Spanish and Portuguese, informal discussions on a variety of topics that ranged from regional recipes to international politics,
exploration of the countryside, and enjoyment of the wine offered by host
citizens. Although the U.S. military presence in Europe and Asia was
much larger, Ann Saling viewed the American presence in places like Brazil and Chile as nonetheless significant for foreign relations: [T]he military missions in South America are not large, so the behavior of each man
and his family is magnified far beyond what it would be if we were
counted by the hundreds.57
American women who tried to strengthen international relations
through personal encounters with residents of occupied and host countries viewed such interactions as weapons in the war against the spread of
communism. Ann Saling believed that her immersion in local communities
and her attentiveness to host cultures helped to counter Communist-inspired stereotypes of Americans as luxury-corrupted. She also strived
to discredit the idea that middle-class Americans were unsympathetic to
disparities between rich and poor in other countries. She related her own
approach to accomplishing this, describing how she socialized with people of various classes rather than only with other Americans or elite host
citizens. She recalled Two charcoal-makers in Brasilia [who] will remember that I stopped to ask about their work in their language. Saling also
believed that photographing farm work, speaking with locals about traditions, heroes and customs, and accepting the hospitality of host citizens without complaint or criticism negated impressions of Americans as
arrogant and self-centered. Showing respect for Chileans and Brazilians,
learning about them, and caring about their problems, she told readers,
won for the United States staunch Latin American friends who know we
care about themwho know our freedom is their freedom, worth defending in a cold or hot war.58
Charity
Charity stemmed from compassion, yet also reinforced Americans
sense of economic and social dominance and helped to uphold their nations military presence in foreign countries. Charitable works constituted
some of the earliest points of contact between military wives and peoples
of war-torn nations. When military wives arrived abroad shortly after
the end of World War II they joined efforts to aid war survivors and rebuild shattered regions. They established the first postwar American
womens organizations in Europe in 1946. Charitable efforts were extensions of womens conventional familial responsibilities. Military wives,
often working with wives of civilian government personnel, supplied orphanages, gathered food and clothing for victims of war, and gave comfort and aid to the infirm. These maternal gestures were expressions of national power as well as personal generosity and kindness. Americans on
the home front had not suffered the death tolls, starvation, and destruction that Asians and Europeans had, and were in a position to help the
less fortunate. War victims acceptance of American aid opened the door
for Americans to help reconstruct ravaged nations, strengthen international relations, and establish U.S. influence.
Inhabitants of Germany and Japan were among the first recipients of
American womens charitable efforts. Many American women could not
remain indifferent to the suffering they witnessed, even when the victims
were recent enemies. Marjorie Clay, the wife of General Lucius Clay,
founded the American Womens Club of Berlin upon her arrival in Germany in 1946. The clubs activities included community fund drives and
the publication during the Berlin Airlift of a cookbook titled Operation
Vittles. The women donated the proceeds to various charities, favoring
those that aided ill or impoverished children. American women were considered especially effective representatives of American sympathy and
mercy toward former enemies. The good work which [womens] clubs
accomplished was remarkable and contributed much toward making the
Germans understand the humane characteristics of the American people,
proclaimed General Clay in appreciation of service wives contributions
to military and foreign relations goals.59
Margery Finn Brown, the wife of an Army colonel stationed in occupied Japan, performed numerous charitable deeds. Compassion motivated
her actions, though she did not conceal her sense of the superiority of the
American attitude toward those in need. She pitied the impoverished, bedraggled people she encountered, yet also condemned the Japanese for
what she considered their heartless indifference to suffering strangers.
Brown claimed that she tried to understand the Japanese world view, but
A U.S. Ladys World 103
declared that The Japanese attitude [toward want and suffering . . .] constitutes a major obstacle in any attempt to understand or like the Japanese. As a columnist for a Japanese newspaper, Brown wrote an article
about her inability to comprehend the apparent callousness she witnessed
among Japanese bystanders when a boy died in the street after being
struck by a truck. She received a flood of responsestearful, shocked,
and explanatoryin which readers expressed their sadness at such indifference but also tried to explain that while Japanese people would do
anything to help a relative, assisting strangers was not the norm. Brown
considered it her responsibility as a compassionate person, and as an
American, to alleviate the hardship she encountered: she took a homeless
woman found lying in a ditch to a hospital and paid for her medical care
and food (later she learned that the woman was a prostitute), gave money
to a repatriated woman in Hokkaido who had lost her husband and son
when the Soviets invaded Manchuria in 1945, and donated food to a
Catholic church that aided the poor of Kyoto.60
The benefactor-recipient relationship between service wives and residents of occupied nations positioned Americans as strong and capable
benefactors, and the beneficiaries of their largesse as weaker people in
need of aid and protection from the powerful United States. Supplies and
volunteer aid possibly made the U.S. presence more tolerable to those
who otherwise considered it an intrusion. In American minds, non-Americans acceptance of humanitarian aid from the U.S. government and from
individual Americans living abroad served as a justification for maintaining overseas bases.
Local Children
American adults relations with children of occupied and host countries, like connections established through charity work, arose out of
kindness but also harbored an inherent hierarchy. Many American women
and men became parentsfiguratively and literallyto children of occupied and host nations. Americans encountered local children in and
around their homes, in classrooms, and on visits to orphanages and hospitals. Some Americans adopted orphaned children. The positioning of
Americans as mothers and fathers to non-American children created maternalistic and paternalistic relationships that Americans believed also
strengthened long-term international relations.
Americans who befriended, taught, adopted, and gave charitable assistance to local children endeavored to win allies for the indefinite duration
of the Cold War. Routh Trowbridge Wilby advised American women to
Work with the young people of the country. They are the future leaders
104 A U.S. Ladys World
and any good influence we may have on them will pay dividends for
America in the years to come.61 Wilby and others believed that although
adult host nationals might stubbornly cling to prejudices against the U.S.
government and its citizens, military wives could cultivate childrens appreciation of Americans and acceptance of the U.S. military presence and
diplomatic influence, thereby securing long-term international alliances
and accommodation of bases.
Military wives exhibited friendliness, maternalism, charity, and American prosperity in their relations with local children. Although the Germans and Japanese had been formidable enemies during the war, Americans pitied their children as innocent victims of the hostilities.62 In 1947,
Margery Finn Browns family threw a Christmas party for fifty Japanese
children in their Kyoto neighborhood. According to Brown, the familys
cook disapproved of allowing the poorer children to mix with the more
affluent children, but Brown disregarded the Japanese womans objections. The Brown family ordered red mittens from Sears Roebuck as gifts
for the children, filled bags with American candy and chewing gum (the
first candy many had seen since before the war), arranged for a magician
as entertainment, and erected a thirteen-foot Christmas tree decorated
with Japanese lights. Describing how the children lined up for their gifts,
Brown wrote that It was disturbing . . . to watch the orderly way they
took their places; no scrambling, no jockeying, no me-firsts. Silently they
waited, held their gifts eye-level in a formal gesture of thanks, bowed and
departed.63 Browns generosity and pity for the children mixed with her
implicit condemnation of the Japanese culture that enforced segregation
between rich and poor and, in her view, robbed children of the spontaneity and individuality considered characteristic of American children.
Working as teachers, often on a volunteer basis, enabled American
women to become acquainted with large numbers of non-American children whom they hoped would come to favorably view Americans and
their country. In explaining why she declined a request to teach American
children in Seoul, Dorothy House Vieman wrote that I didnt come to
Korea to teach squirming American kids. If I lend my time to anything I
will teach Koreans, for Ill be here only once, more than likely, and I want
to know the Korean people.64 Many military wives taught English without monetary compensation because schools could not afford to pay
salaries. Vieman taught sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds at Ewha Girls
High School. The education of Korean girls and women was of great importance to Vieman; when she died a few years later at the age of thirtynine, her mother established a scholarship in her name for Asian women
at colleges in Texas.65 Routh Trowbridge Wilby volunteered as an English
teacher at a Tokyo high school. She observed that the adults already
A U.S. Ladys World 105
have formed their opinion of us and our country. But these young, future
leaders of Japan are still in the formative stage, and if we as Americans
can have successful, individual relations with them, maybe they will always have a warm place in their hearts for us.66 Teaching English promoted communication with Japans future adults with whom Americans
one day would negotiate diplomatic alliances. Americans must have assumed, however, that English would be the language of such interactions,
unless their own children learned Japanese.
Through adoptions, Americans installed themselves as legal parents to
children of occupied and host nations. Military wives who had adopted
children received honorary recognition from U.S. Lady, garnering praise
for exhibiting the qualities valued in Cold War American womanhood
and serving as models for international relations. Aurelia Richards, U.S.
Ladys very first U.S. Lady-of-the-Month (October 1955) and U.S.
Lady-of-the-Year (1957), adopted several children, some born in foreign
countries. While living in Japan with her Army husband and six other
adopted children, Richards took in a Japanese toddler. A U.S. Lady article
described the Richards family as a Little United Nations, composed of
children of European, Native American, and Japanese descent. Alvadee
Adams and John Adams declared that the family constituted living proof
that persons of different nationalities can live together harmoniously like
those of the same flesh and blood.67 As an ideal Cold War military wife,
Aurelia Richards embodied motherliness, generosity, compassion, and
an internationalist perspective. Another lauded wife, Bea Besta U.S.
Lady-of-the-Month in 1961 and U.S. Lady-of-the-Year in 1962and
her Navy husband adopted a Japanese girl in the 1950s. Among the accomplishments that earned Best these honorary titles were her study of
Japanese adoption laws and her work to assist other Navy couples to become the legal parents of Japanese children. According to Alvadee and
John Adams, The Japanese authorities were so grateful [for Bea Bests arrangement of eighteen adoptions] that they gave her a little Japanese boy
as a surprise gift, which is somewhat unique in the awards department.68
American accounts portrayed adoptions as demonstrations of compassion
and generosity that also symbolized taking host nationals into the American fold and commitment to the long-term and intensive financial, psychological, and moral care of the people of other nations.
The short fiction story Au Revoir, Mike (1961) suggested that adoption represented the ideal American-host citizen relationship. The tale
casts aspersions on the limitations of womens club activities by portraying these as frivolous expenditures of wives time and energy, and
half-hearted efforts to forge international friendship and understanding.
Adopting a child, in contrast, demonstrated a whole-hearted American
106 A U.S. Ladys World
commitment to international relations. In the story, Liz and Bill, a childless American couple, invite a French boy from the local Catholic orphanage to visit their home. Liz spends her time playing bridge and enjoying
her husbands pampering. The boy brings out a maternal instinct in Liz
(early in the story more interested in appearing slim and beautiful in a
black chiffon copy of a Dior than in being motherly), and she and Bill
adopt Mike so they can bring him back to the United States. The boy is
excited by the prospect of moving to America and becoming a cowboy.
The moral of the story is that Liz and Bill do more for international relations by adopting Mike than Liz did in participating in her superficial
wives club activities such as playing bridge with a French woman with
whom she could not communicate.69
In actuality, bringing host national children into American homes did
not always result in the youngsters wholehearted gratitude for their
American caretakers. In 1955, the family of an Air Force major stationed
in Madrid took in two Spanish brothers, ages fourteen and nine. In a letter to Jacqueline Cochran (a California businesswoman, politician, and
aviator who was the legal guardian and financial supporter of the boys),
the major wrote that The boys seem very happy heremuy contento
and are becoming more and more a part of the family. The family took
the boys to their first dental appointments. They hired tutors to help them
learn English more quickly and tried to cope with language differences by
establishing a household rule that everyone would speak only English in
the mornings and only Spanish in the afternoon until dinner. They gave
the boys American-style birthday and Christmas celebrations. In December 1955, the majors wife reported to Cochran that the boys were really
becoming Americanized. In later letters, however, the couple expressed
disappointment that the brothers did poorly in school, were not self-disciplined, and exhibited indifference and a lack of appreciation for the
Americans care and attempts to give them educational opportunities that
their father/caretaker asserted they would not have enjoyed otherwise,
given their humble background. Overall, the correspondence regarding
the boys upbringing suggests that although the American couple was
fond of their charges and tried to raise them fairly alongside their other
children, the brothers did not smoothly integrate into the family and did
not, according to the adults of the family, unquestioningly view the Americans as benefactors.70
Domestic Employees
The employment of domestic workers served as another arena in which
Americans tried to project benevolence and even affection toward nonA U.S. Ladys World 107
Americans. Yet relationships between American employers and local domestic workers were inherently and explicitly hierarchical. Service wives
supervision of household workers reinforced the pecking order between
employer and servant, benefactor and beneficiary, American and nonAmerican. During the early years of occupation, the military housing office in Tokyo furnished white jackets for Japanese male domestics, presumably to emphasize their status as servants.71 Americans sometimes
characterized the employment of domestics as an act of charity, reasoning
that it provided income to the needy. They depicted servants as childlike
people who required the guidance of American parents. The poverty of
domestics, as well as their racial and cultural differences, brought out
American attitudes of condescension, classism, and racism. Routh Trowbridge Wilby worried that Americans limited their involvement with residents of host countries to the maids and seamstresses who came to American homes.72 The prevalence of American employerlocal servant relationships probably troubled her because it suggested American dominance
and exploitation of host nationals rather than the ideal of friendship between allies.
Wives accounts of relations with domestics conveyed the idea that
occupied and host nation residents, including those who had been enemies in World War II, accepted and even desired the U.S. military presence. Army wife Bernadine Lee described her apprehension that she and
her young daughters would encounter hostile Japanese when the family
joined her husband in Tokyo in 1946. She told readers that the courtesy
and friendliness of the four Japanese domestic workers who lived with the
Lee family, and their affection for the children, changed her attitude about
the people who so recently had been foes of the United States.73 The fictional short story May Day (1961) also reassured Americans that ordinary Japanese people liked Americans, wanted to live with them on
friendly terms, and accepted the foreign military presence. The story is set
well into the Cold War, amid the anti-American agitation of Japanese
communists. It depicts anti-Americanism as stemming from violent communist fanatics who did not represent the majority of Japanese. Kit and
her Marine husband, Bob, live among the Japanese in a village rather than
on a military base. On May Day, Kit is at home awaiting the return of her
husband from an assignment in Korea. A Marine captain comes to the
house to warn her to be on guard against an attack by communist protesters, and gives her a rifle for protection. The Marines are especially
concerned about the Americans safety because on May Day the year before, communists had thrown acid into the face of a military wife. Kit
grows apprehensive and fears that her gardener, Papa-san Cut Grass (a
name that pigeonholes him by the work he does for the Americans) is
108 A U.S. Ladys World
plotting against her. She imagines that she sees him leading a mob to her
house and nearly faints from fear, but then discovers that the Japanese
group is bringing flowers to her because they felt sorry that the communist activities might delay her husbands homecoming, which they knew
she eagerly anticipated. Kit invites the mob in for tea and in the end reclaims May Day as a celebration of spring and flowers rather than a communist holiday.74
American womens anecdotes suggested that domestic employees did
not necessarily assume the role of deferential servant in their relations
with their employers. Army wife Ruth Bryant, whose family lived in Manila, claimed that the Filipino cook-houseboy runs us and our house.75
Margery Finn Brown described a favorite domestic employee upon whom
the family heavily relied as an amazingly capable fellow who happily handled much of the cooking, child care, and repair work. Brown affectionately declared that Tanabe was our friend. We were his, thus casting the
employer-employee relationship as egalitarian and mutually enriching
rather than hierarchical. Brown described another domestic worker as an
unpleasant and intimidating presence, who hissed her orders [to the
other household workers] out of the side of her mouth like a lady gangster, thus undercutting assumptions about meek Asian servants.76 Characterizations of household workers as domineering, indispensable, beloved, or intimidating downplayed hierarchies that might have made
American women uncomfortable. One also may read such accounts as evidence of domestic employees power negotiations that challenged American authority.
American notions of racial, class, and cultural differences bolstered
views of Asian servantsand, by extension, Asians generallyas primitive and childlike. Margery Brown described her household employees as
pathologically sensitive, stubborn as Arkansas mules, and hysterical.77 When writing about Asian domestic workers, American women indulged in making fun of their mistakes. One service wife offered this assessment of Japanese and Korean maids: A few are excellent workers;
some are more trouble than they are worth. But they usually have one
thing in common. They are good for a lot of laughs.78
The view of Asian household workers as laughably backward reinforced assumptions that the U.S. military presence could serve to guide
and enlighten the locals. Dorothy Vieman saw her supervision of her three
Korean houseboys as a vehicle for changing the servants views of gender relations: Women in Korea are subservient to men, as a rule, and
houseboys are generally suspected of respecting the mans word around
the house. Doc [her husband] told them that they were to do as I said, and
I guess all American wives will soon change this idea of mans word ruling
A U.S. Ladys World 109
Religion
American women did not interact with residents of occupied and host
countries only as charitable ladies, maternal figures, teachers, and employers. Religion, Christianity, in particular, provided other venues for contacts between Americans and non-Americans. Americans believed that
attending religious services with local people demonstrated spiritual and
cultural fellowship. American families in Europe often worshiped in
Protestant or Catholic churches in communities near military bases rather
than on base. A service wife reported that Many chaplains encourage
families to [attend religious meetings in the civilian churches . . .] believing
that it is not only good for the family, but excellent public relations for the
military. Going to church benefited families, service wives believed, because it created a sense of continuity and stability that could help military
families (especially children) cope with the numerous moves they made
around the United States and across the ocean. And attending religious
gatherings in foreign churches could convey an image of Americans as devout and family-oriented. The French see us mingling with them in their
bars, admonished one military pamphlet. We should let them see us
worship with them in their churches. Americans hoped that church at110 A U.S. Ladys World
Excursions
Other excursions into local communities, such as shopping trips and
visits to points of historical and cultural interest, provided still more opportunities for service wives to show good will toward and interest in
local peoples and their ways of life. While servicemen symbolized military
power in a region, service wives who considered themselves unofficial ambassadors attempted to show that Americans were interested not in conquering a country but in learning about it and mixing with the local people as admiring guests and friends. Pat Donat, an Army wife, wrote that
she discovered through her interactions with shopkeepers that Japan is
not a group of islands on a map. Japan is peopled with men and women
who graciously allowed a foreigner to learn that sympathy and understanding have no nationality but belong to the world. Donat enjoyed
the respect shown to her by a Japanese couple when she brought her fiveyear-old son into their shop. In Donats view, the encounter showed that
Americans and Japanese were alike in their regard for motherhood and
family.86
Family excursions provided opportunities to demonstrate friendliness
and enthusiastic interest in a region, and also allowed local peoples to
A U.S. Ladys World 111
observe American family relations and the consumer goods they enjoyed.
Virginia Ferrell Alfonte, her Army husband, and their three children embarked on a ten-day Alpine camping trip from their post in Germany. On
their trip through Bavaria, Switzerland, and Austria, they encountered curious and friendly local residents and European vacationers who, according to Virginia Alfonte, were pleased to meet the American campers. A
Swiss man invited the Alfontes to camp in a scenic spot on his property,
and a Dutch family helped them quickly set up their tent in the rain. At a
campsite in Austria, curious children from a nearby village joined the family in toasting marshmallows. According to Virginia Alfonte, The gasoline stove fascinated them as did the big fancy American car. The local
adults, also curious about the American family, preferred to examine the
Alfontes from a distance. Virginia Alfonte considered the camping trip in
the European countryside a means to transcend national boundaries by
bringing various peoples together in a feeling of well-being and comradeship.87
American women stationed abroad with their husbands for two- to
three-year tours of duty enjoyed ample time to immerse themselves in
local history and culture and in so doing tried to project American appreciation of a region while countering stereotypes of Americans as unsophisticated and uninterested in culture. A group of women married to military
staff at NATO southern European headquarters and Navy staff in Naples,
Italy became known as the Culture Vultures. Groups of as many as 140
women visited regional sites, including the catacombs of Naples and the
nearby ruins of the ancient Greek city of Cuma, where Roman Sibyls had
delivered prophecies from their mountainside dwellings. Residents of Sorrento greeted the American women with shouts of Viva gli amici della
cultura (Long live the friends of our culture), and the town council
made the Culture Vultures honorary citizens. The American account of
the Culture Vultures depicted the good relations between military wives
and Italians as stemming from friendship and the Italians gratitude for
the American womens appreciation of their culture and history. The Italians also undoubtedly appreciated the revenue generated by the influx of
American women who dined and shopped in the towns they visited. The
military wives attempts to convey cultural interest and dispel stereotypes
of Americans as materialistic ironically involved spending money in host
communities.88
Friendships
Friendships constituted the most egalitarian relations between nonAmericans and military wives who wished to exhibit good will and transcend the superficiality and hierarchy that characterized many encounters
between service families and residents of occupied and host nations. People who accepted American charity or employment or allowed their children to receive American gifts did not necessarily consider Americans
their friends. Moreover, although some Americans interacted frequently
with domestic employees or shopkeepers, language and cultural barriers
often prevented such contacts from developing into anything more than
polite acquaintanceships. Residents of occupied and host nations attempted to negotiate friendships on terms that they were comfortable
with and that allowed them to retain their dignity and autonomy. Some
might have resented the foreign military presence in their region but came
to like individual Americans.
Margery Finn Browns friendship with a college student illustrates how
the wife of a colonel in the occupying forces and a citizen of an occupied
nation took great care to negotiate a relationship more egalitarian than
most Japanese-American affiliations, considering the military and cultural
contexts. Brown arrived in Japan intent on getting to know its people
well. She met a young college student, Horace (Brown did not give his last
name), who had lost a brother in the war. A mutual interest in literature
sparked Browns and Horaces friendship. Their association developed in
the context of two cultures: the Japanese culture, in which women were
expected to defer to men (more than in American culture); and the culture
of the U.S. military occupation, whose personnel viewed the Japanese as
inferior. Yet Margery Brown and Horace managed to forge a friendship
more balanced than most Japanese-American relationships. Brown was
older than Horace, the wife of a colonel, educated, and a working woman
(a journalist). Horace was a younger, poorer college student coping with
family and health problems. Brown was learning Japanese and Horace
knew English fairly well, so they communicated in both languages. Horace took Brown to Japanese theatrical productions and always paid for
her tickets and interpreters. She lent him books and gave him gifts from
the United States. Brown worried about Horaces poor health and family
problems but tried to express her concerns nonintrusively. Horace felt
comfortable enough with Brown to openly disagree with her about aesthetic and literary preferences. Their friendship shows that maintaining
any semblance of equality between Japanese and Americans required effort and high mutual regard.92
Often, cultural differences and lack of language training prevented mil114 A U.S. Ladys World
Womens Institute, where she spent many happy evenings learning how
to make a Yorkshire pudding and showing how to make barbecue.95
Moores account suggests that neighbors perception of her as vulnerable
pregnant, with her husband out of the countryfinally sparked the
friendship for which she had longed. The locals allowed the Moores into
their community on their own terms, in their own time. Once this connection finally occurred, Moore could enjoy the cultural and social exchange
that she and other American women sought abroad.
a house compared to the little quonset we lived in [in 1946]. The home
was so new that the sidewalk had not hardened by the time the Merritts
arrived; construction of the house had been completed only the night
before. Marian Merritt appreciated the tiled bathroom with a tub and
shower, and the absence of insect infestations. American families at other
overseas bases also enjoyed modern appliances, fixtures, and furnishings
provided by the military.97
Americans considered modern homes for military families important
not only for the comfort of the occupants and the morale of personnel,
but also for projecting an image of American life to local peoples. In the
early Cold War era, Americans believed that the home showcased the
finest qualities of their way of life: happy family relations, democracy,
freedom, and prosperity. In some areas, especially poor regions or countries still recovering from World War II, many local people did not possess
such amenities as washing machines, refrigerators, or indoor bathrooms.
When military families invited local people into their homes they gave
them opportunities to view American family relations and modern appliances, which were intended to proclaim the American way of life.
Yet the armed forces policies regarding housing at overseas stations,
especially for the families of enlisted personnel, undermined the attempt
to display ideal American homes. The unavailability of military housing
for the families of the lowest grades of enlisted personnel, or at stations
that did not provide quarters for any dependents (regardless of a service
members rank), compelled personnel in these situations who wanted their
families with them to rent residences off base. In some areas the only affordable rentals were cramped and dilapidated and lacked the modern appliances considered essential in American homes, such as hot water or indoor toilets. Senator Margaret Chase Smiths 1958 report on the retention
of Air Force personnel called attention to deplorable housing conditions
for enlisted members. In 1957, Smith, a Republican senator from Maine
and a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force Reserve, toured eighteen bases in
the United States and overseas to investigate the problem of retaining
skilled personnel. She interviewed more than three hundred junior officers
and airmen, and also spoke with wives. She found that whereas officers
seemed for the most part content with their quarters, twenty-four percent
of airmen gave poor living conditions as a reason for leaving the service
(this complaint ranked third, after job dissatisfaction [twenty-eight percent] and pay [twenty-five percent]). Personnel stationed overseas were
nearly three times as likely to complain about inadequate quarters as
those stationed in the United States. As examples of poor housing conditions in Europe, Smith reported that a sergeant and his wife and baby
stationed in France lived in a one-room apartment and shared with five
A U.S. Ladys World 117
families an outhouse near the sidewalk, and that the family of an air mechanic in Germany used a coal range for cooking.98
In addition to official reports of wretched housing for families abroad,
complaints from wives to White House officials reveal the limits of the
militarys ability to back the rhetoric of the superiority of the American
way of life with exemplary American homes. At Camp Zama, Japan, ten
to twelve families living in temporary quarters (consisting of one and a
half rooms per family) shared one stove, one washing machine, and one
dryer and experienced frequent loss of heating. Air Force families at a station in Turkey made their homes in trailers until asked to relinquish these
quarters to official personnel. Because the Air Force provided no family
housing in the region, families were expected to find quarters off base.
They faced living in hotels that one wife described as filthy and insectinfested, or leaving the country.99 Constructing and maintaining good
family housing was expensive. Policymakers decisions to curb costs by
limiting overseas housing primarily to officers families compromised
American proclamations of family togetherness and democracy for all citizens. Moreover, the sight of American families of lower-ranking personnel residing in run-down, antiquated residences off-base would have
called into question Americans claims that their superior economic and
political institutions resulted in prosperous living.
and wives reinforced the idea that they were more socially advanced than
people of occupied and host countries.
It might surprise those looking back on mid-twentieth-century families
from the vantage point of the early twenty-first century to learn that
Americans in the 1950s considered relations between men and women in
the United States to be vastly more democratic than gender relations in
other countries. But the idea that American women enjoyed equality with
or even dominance over their husbands became entangled in some minds
with the misogynistic idea that mothers and wives pathologically wielded
their power in familial relations.101 Implicit critiques of American women
were embedded in observations of their allegedly immense freedom and
undisputed equality. A U.S. Lady article on Americanhost citizen relations reported that according to a United States Information Agency survey, respondents in Great Britain, France, Italy, and West Germany viewed
American women as domineering.102 American declarations of American womens equality and liberty sometimes represented attempts to contain womens dissatisfaction with their lesser status relative to men and
defiance of the constraints they faced. Those who claimed that American
women enjoyed unparalleled high status in their own society sent the message that they should consider themselves fortunate for enjoying such a
privilege in contrast to women of other countries who were purportedly
far more oppressed than they.
Military families, like families in the general American population, experienced internal conflicts that challenged the nuclear family ideal that
Americans wanted to enjoy and project. Despite claims of egalitarian gender relations, wives possessed less legal and economic power in their marriages than their husbands. Some women believed that the military establishment sided with servicemen against wives in family conflicts, ignoring
wives complaints and protecting men who shirked their family duties.103
And though allowing families to join personnel in foreign countries was
intended to reduce family separations, mens temporary duty assignments
or other activities (such as maneuvers) away from their home bases meant
that women often ran households and raised children without help from
husbands.
Couples struggled with infidelity, real or suspected, believed to pose a
particular stress for military marriages because of mens frequent workrelated absences. Even when families were together overseas, some American husbands engaged in extramarital relations with non-American
women, although wives almost never alluded to these liaisons in contemporary published accounts.104 One Navy wife who did focused her article
on criticizing civilians poisoners, she called them who over the
years barraged her with questions about what her husband might be up to
A U.S. Ladys World 119
while he was away. She relayed to readers her Navy doctors assurances
that This business of men needing biological indulgence is an old wives
talenot a medical actuality, and his assertion that wives were just as
likely, and perhaps even more likely, to engage in extramarital sexual activities as their sailor husbands (thus turning fears about marital infidelity
around to cast doubt on wives). The author also told of a fellow Navy
wife who received a letter from her husbands commanding officer regarding an unknown squadron member who allegedly sent poison letters to
wives about their husbands frolics in the Philippines. The commanding
officer reassured the wives that The typical husband out here is not running around. He is working long, hard hours.105
Despite strict rules that families who joined military personnel overseas
were to remain with their sponsors until the end of a tour of duty, some
wives and children left early due to divorce, separation, or wives documented psychological illnesses.106 Yet the most sensitive problems within
military families did not receive widespread public attention in the 1950s
and 1960s. In its thirteen-year run, the magazine U.S. Lady rarely gave attention to topics such as alcoholism and depression and did not acknowledge domestic violence in service families.107 It focused instead on less
provocative subjects such as the difficulties of making frequent moves and
raising children in military life.
Despite military officials acclaim of wives and families in the 1950s,
few services for military families suffering serious personal problems existed before the 1970s. The increasing willingness of the armed forces to
acknowledge domestic violence, incest, and alcoholism in military families
paralleled changing attitudes in the general American society. The resurgence of feminism in the 1960s and 1970s pushed taboo family problems
such as alcoholism, incest, wife battering, and child abuse into public discourse. Furthermore, the rising proportion of married personnel between
the 1950s and 1970sfrom 38.3 percent in 1953 to 56.9 percent in
1974, declining only between 1965 and 1968 during the drastic increase
of U.S. troops in Vietnamcompelled government agencies to provide
greater assistance to military families.108 During the 1970s, psychologists,
psychiatrists, social workers, and sociologists also began to give greater
attention to military families though still not enough even into the
1990s, according to critics.109
state anti-miscegenation laws made this extremely difficult into the 1950s.
Cold War politics also shaped American attitudes toward dealing with
these children, expressed in concerns about international criticisms of
American racism, and competition with Soviet efforts to bring babies fathered by their forces in East Germany to the Soviet Unionand, reportedly, 467 German children fathered by African-American G.I.s, cast away
by both Americans and Germans. U.S. Representative Frances Bolton, for
example, urged Congress to facilitate the acceptance of such children into
the United States, for otherwise they could be appropriated by the Soviets
and transformed into communist agents.115 But in a 1954 Readers Digest
article by the popular novelist James Michener, the author claimed that
the issue of G.I. babies was a communist-promulgated exaggeration.116
Publications by and for military wives occasionally raised concerns
about racism, but for most who produced and consumed this literature it
did not become a major issue. In the late 1950s, U.S. Lady began to print
editorial comments, letters, articles, and short stories that addressed racial issues, including items about African Americans, Asian women, and
mixed-race couples and children.117 The adoption of nonwhite children by
white women such as Aurelia Richards and Bea Best made a bold statement against racism at a time when many white Americans still vehemently opposed interracial social relations of any sort.118 As for the issue
of race relations between Americans in mostly white U.S. military communities abroad and nonwhite host nationals, however, white unofficial
ambassador wives were more inclined to view Americans negative attitudes toward local peoples as a problem that could be rectified through
striving to understand and respect cultural differences; they rarely articulated the problem in terms of racism. To do so would have risked facing
the issue of racism within American military communities, including their
own complicity in reinforcing (whether passively or actively) hierarchies
of race and rank. Wives of career military men rarely publicly criticized
the armed forces for fear that it would endanger their husbands advancement, as well as their own status.
Leiser contrasted the image of tough and fit GIs with laughing and
chattering civilian women and children whose presence, he editorialized,
blunted the fighting spirit of servicemen and would pose a devastating distraction in the event of a Soviet attack in the region. As to the assertion
that the removal of American families would cause panic among Germans
who considered their presence a comforting safeguard against Soviet aggression, Leiser countered that the Germans would be more grateful than
sad to see them leave.124
Nearly seventeen years later, Howard L. Burris, an Air Force official
who had served as a military aide to then-Vice President Lyndon Johnson,
forwarded to President Johnsons chief of staff Marvin Watson a similar
(though somewhat less strident) story from Business Week. Published at
the height of the Vietnam War, the article examined the costs of sustaining
wives and children in Western Europe and painted a picture of a U.S. military whose sharpness had been dulled by families and consumerism. A
photograph of a row of women sitting under hair dryers at a post exchange beauty salon evidenced the alarming message that the wives and
families were draining the armed forces of its virility and taxpayers of
their dollars. In his letter to Watson, Burris expressed concern, as others
before him had done, that American women and children in West Germany might become hostages in a clash with communist forces and that
one of Americas great tragedies will have occurred, bespeaking the notion of family members as potential victims to be protected rather than
critical to military effectiveness. Burriss letter to Watson is dated February 2, just days after Vietnamese communists launched the Tet Offensive;
perhaps these surprise attacks intensified his anxiety about the safety of
American families in West Germany at this time.125
Even those who considered families important to servicemens morale
and did not anguish that they distracted and emasculated the overseas
armed forces did not necessarily view them as an asset to U.S. foreign
relations goals. Historian Walter Hixson has demonstrated that for the
most part, government officials and the American public accepted Cold
War militarization as the dominant paradigm of postwar foreign policy.
Although the Eisenhower administration proved more successful than
Trumans in implementing cultural exchange as a means to attract foreign
peoples to American ideas and values, many Americans remained convinced that superior military power far surpassed soft power as the means
for winning the Cold War.126 In the Kennedy administration, the emphasis
on masculine toughness in the anti-communist fight shaped even the Peace
Corps, Conceived by its proponents as the moral equivalent of war
that in its grassroots humanitarian projects would rely on male resource-
This cartoon portrays a military wifes response to a Noncombatant Evacuation Operation exercise in West Germany. Military
families practiced emergency evacuation procedures. According to
artists Walt Howard and Dick Wolf, The monthly alerts or readiness tests are frightening at first but rapidly become annoying.
After the first few, you become nonchalant about rising in the wee
hours of the morning and doing your part to protect the Free
World. Source: Walt Howard and Dick Wolf, Dependents Dilemmas in Deutschland (Germany, 1964), 31.
Conclusion
Although American women in the years following World War II tried to
adopt a cultural-relativist attitude in host countries, they concurrently endeavored to project the superiority of American homes, ideals, and institutions. In an article on good behavior abroad, Margaret Wayt DeBolt
used Tennessee Ernie Fords closing words from his Armed Forces Radio
Station program as advice to other military wives: When youre in a foreign countryyoure the foreigner.129 This reminder was a point that
emerged frequently in womens accounts: Americans should try to accept
other peoples and cultures on their own terms and not behave as if American ideas and ways were the universal norm. The military advice literature as well as womens unofficial writings urged Americans to try to
understand non-American ways of life. Yet for Cold War Americans, recognition of cultural diversity did not extend to acceptance of all ways of
life as equally valid. Americans understood that environment, culture,
and socialization influenced the worlds various peoples, and that multiple
societies could coexist. But tolerance of difference extended only so far.
During the early Cold War era, denunciation of communism and Soviet
society as politically, economically, and morally inferior to American institutions and life reemerged more powerfully than ever.130 The American
Cold War mindset that viewed the world in terms of communism and totalitarianism versus free enterprise and democracy allowed Americans to
tolerate and even appreciate non-American cultures and customs while
never relinquishing the conviction that converting foreigners to American
anti-communist values was the ultimate safeguard of freedom.
Cold War Americans considered their way of life superior to any other
in the world. By taking flower-arranging classes, learning tea ceremonies,
visiting castles, or dressing up in local peoples traditional apparel, American women tried to understand and show admiration for non-American
cultures. They believed that social and cultural exchanges with the peoples of countries housing U.S. bases benefited all parties concerned. Yet
military wives also considered themselves ambassadors of the American
way of lifeto them, the ultimate way of lifeeven when they proclaimed their admiration and respect for other cultures. They attempted
to exemplify American prosperity and freedom through demonstrations
of charity, modern appliances, and family relations. Social and cultural activities in occupied and host nations were intended to perpetuate a sense
of parity, of equal international exchange between friends and allies who
were innately curious about one another. Accounts from military wives
that tried to convey the basic attitude of we American women teach nonAmerican women about our ideas and way of life, and they teach us
128 A U.S. Ladys World
4
Shoulder to Shoulder with
West Germans
In 1946, Lelah Berry and her two young children left Louisville, Kentucky to accompany Army captain Elmer Berry on his tour of
duty in Berlin. Before Elmer Berry joined the armed forces in World War II
he had worked for the Louisville & Nashville railroad. Lelah Berry had
never ventured outside Kentucky. For the first two years of Elmer Berrys
service his family lived in military camps around the United States, setting
up house in cooped-up, ramshackle living quarters, and living on a
careful budget. But in Germany, declared Lelah Berry, The Berrys really never had it so good. The family resided in a spacious German
house, enjoying fresh meat daily, yet put a large portion of Elmer Berrys
salary into savings. Three domestic employees cooked and cleaned, and
cared for the children. When Elmer Berry received a short leave he took
his family on a ten-day dream-come-true holiday in Switzerland arranged by the Army Special Services Division for military personnel.
While the Berrys reveled in this new standard of living, the elderly German couple who owned the house made their home in a nearby garage.
Hundreds of thousands of Berliners suffered from hunger. Throughout the
winter, Lelah Berry witnessed Germans trudging through the cold, shattered city and standing in long lines for their fuel rations.
The stark contrast between American ease and German hardship during the early occupation was not lost on Lelah Berry. We enjoy this scale
of living, as anyone would, she admitted, but compared to the lives of
the Germans around us it is embarrassingly luxurious. Berry tried to
muster resentment of Germans to curb her pity: I dont want to coddle
or whitewash the Germans, and I tell myself over and over, After all, they
started it, they asked for it. Still, even fresh memories of German aggression could not eradicate Berrys compassion for the Berliners: I do not
believe the German people yet accept any responsibility for the war or
Nazi crimes. Just now, however, they are too hungry and too cold to think
much beyond tomorrows or next weeks rations.1
131
ern Europe entailed not only military strength but also the promulgation
of a sense of unity with peoples who shared American values and ideals,
and the commitment to safeguard the free world from communism.
Military wives and husbands portrayals of a firmly anti-communist,
anti-Soviet alliance with West Germans celebrated German-American interactions as warm and anchored in cultural commonalities, and overlooked the tensions that resulted from basing a large American population
in a foreign country. West Germans remained economically and militarily
dependent on the United States after the occupation ended, though U.S.
military and diplomatic objectivesfundamentally the prevention of Soviet dominance of Western Europerequired negotiations with West Germans, who hoped that cooperation with the United States would help
them achieve their own goals of greater autonomy and eventually the reunification of Germany.3 American military families attempts to generate
the impression of an equal alliance with West Germans served as a gloss
to deflect the undemocratic and imperialistic aspects of maintaining bases
and service personnel in Western Europe. The image of Americans and
Germans standing shoulder to shoulder also downplayed Germanys
dependence on the United States while advancing a conception of West
Germans as a rehabilitated people, now trustworthy allies, who deserved
to take their place among the peoples of the free world.
Early Occupation
U.S. military authorities decided to allow families to join service personnel
in 1946 in the belief that they would improve morale, present excellent
examples of American life to the German people, and foster an informal atmosphere for better German-American relations.4 Along with the
dismantling of Germanys war-making capability, the replacement of Nazi
ideology with democratic values topped the list of occupation goals. In
an orientation program for families, a discussion leader informed the
wives, daughters, and sons of personnel that the armed forces designated
them ambassadors of democracy.5 Model American families were to
represent a society that enjoyed prosperity and democracy without persecuting or exploiting other peoples, one that contradicted the Nazi argument that the German peoples needs could be fulfilled through the oppression of Jews and other vulnerable groups, and the acquisition of territories for German Lebensraum. Military leaders hoped that families
would make the occupation more stable and pleasant for troops, and in so
doing, would [impress] upon the peoples of occupied countries an example of democratic family and home life.6 Informal settings such as the
Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 133
American home, military leaders expected, would make American attempts to teach democracy to the Germans seem uncontrived rather than
forced, and would undercut German perceptions of Americans as cultural
imperialists.
Rather than leaving American family members to invent their own
ways to teach democracy in encounters with Germans, the United States
Information and Education Service developed an orientation program to
guide them. Children over fourteen and spouses of occupation personnel
met with a military representative for a total of four hours to discuss the
role of families in the occupation mission and their expected relations
with the German people, the Allies, and displaced persons. The facilitator
explained the occupation mission as a complete house-cleaning of not
only German war potentials but also German minds in order that Germany may one day again assume her role in the family of peaceful nations. The family of peaceful nations metaphor for ideal postwar international relations asked participants to envision a world whose nations
pulled together as a family and took care of one another. In 1946, Americans still viewed Germany as a nation (gendered female here) of wayward
children as yet unworthy of trust and incapable of self-discipline; the occupiers were prepared to assume the role of a stern parent-nation.7
Early in the occupation, U.S. military policy assumed that fundamental
ideological differences divided Americans and Germans. The Allied Control Council began to relax nonfraternization laws as early as October
1945, only five months after the cessation of hostilities between Germany
and the Allies, in the hope that informal contacts with Allied nationals
would help to teach democracy to the Germans.8 The discussion leader
for the dependents orientation informed participants of the likelihood
that they would meet a range of Germans, from servants to members of
the upper classes. Family members learned that they might encounter
friendly Germans who were outwardly very much like us, and who
share your tastes in sports, games, books, and music, mutual interests
that could serve as opportunities to show them the American and democratic way of living. But the women and children also were warned that
apparent cultural similarities between Germans and Americans could deceive well-meaning Americans into doubting the occupation mission and
sympathizing with unrepentant Nazis. The discussion facilitator cautioned them to be on guard against not only physical disease but also the
mental disease of Nazi-thinking, said to reveal itself in statements like
Hitler did some good, Nazism was a good idea badly worked out,
and Democracy is bad because you dont feed us; at least we had plenty
to eat under the Nazis. Each participant was admonished to Be a
teacher, not a pupil, to reinforce the status of Americans as conquerors
134 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
and Germans as a defeated people. Lest the American women and children remain unconvinced of the deep ideological differences between
them and the Germans, the last hour of the orientation was devoted to
viewing a documentary titled Here Is Germany, likened by the discussion
leader to horror films, that presented Nazi atrocities such as the bodies of concentration camp victims, and strips away the mask of good
temperament and docility which now hides Germanys crime [. . . and]
shows what the behavior of these kind and gentle people has cost the
world. The films gruesome reminders of Germanys recent brutality indicate the fear that, even so soon after the war, American and German cultural commonalities would lure Americans into a mistaken sense of sympathy for the Germans and endanger occupation goals.9
Despite admonitions to exercise caution and, when necessary, sternness in their informal contacts with Germans, occupation leaders did not
want Americans to be perceived as tyrants. Upon the Allied victory in Europe, General Dwight Eisenhower announced to the German people that
We come as conquerors, but not as oppressors. Because the Americans
wanted to teach the Germans that the whole concept of superiority,
glorification of military power, and intolerance of others is evil and leads
to war, a harsh and vindictive occupation would have contradicted
American goals of establishing democracy, equality, and freedom, declared the cornerstones of the American way of life. Spouses and children
were advised to carefully negotiate relations with Germans. They were to
show no rancor toward their former enemies, even while refusing to
brook Nazi attitudes: Hate will not solve the problem before us; it would
estrange those Germans with whom we can cooperate and it would distort or destroy the democratic objectives we seek.10 Occupation planners
believed that service families, especially women, could show Germans that
patient guidance and compassion, rather than animosity, would characterize the occupation.
Military wives, in accord with the official occupation stance toward
Germans, sought to demonstrate a humane dimension of occupation. Accounts about American women portrayed them as motivated by compassion for the people of Germany. A 1956 U.S. Lady article on the history of
American womens charitable efforts in Europe recounted how in the
desperate days of 1946, Margaret Thompson Biddle, the wife of a former major general and ambassador, invited American wives to her home
in Frankfurt to discuss the plight of Germans and the promotion of international understanding. Over tea, the women discussed their personal
encounters with victims of World War II. Biddle had been especially affected by a baby who had frozen to death in a wet diaper; one simple,
motherly act might have saved this war casualty. Biddle and the others
Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 135
cratic reform attempted to win support for the occupation from the skeptical general American public. Lelah Berry told the Saturday Evening Post
that one of her domestic employees simply cannot grasp the fact that we
didnt all have to vote for Roosevelt, and that many people voted freely
against him, and that She cant understand how every citizen at home
has an interest and plays a role in his Government, demands to know who
runs it and how.16 Berrys anecdote about her maid suggested that Germans were less evildoers than casualties of authoritarian government. In
this perspective, Nazism had deprived them of even comprehending the
concept of participatory democracy; the people could not be despised for
not enacting a political system that they did not understand. Thus, it
would be up to Lelah Berry and other ordinary Americans to teach democracy to the Germans through informal discussions and patient explanations. Berrys narrative provided a description of postwar Germany and
the occupation to Americans thousands of miles away from the occupation zone, and also tried to elicit acceptance for the maintenance of military forces abroad (and their families) from Americans who remained suspicious of Germans and doubted the efficacy of the occupation mission.
Early occupation objectivesto dismantle Germanys industrial capacity to wage war, and purge Nazis through a program executed by occupation officialsgave way surprisingly quickly to a less punitive and more
cooperative approach to rehabilitating Germany. In September 1946, Secretary of State James Byrnes announced that the recovery of the European
economy required the industrial reconstruction of Germany. In November
1947, Byrness successor George Marshall advocated the inclusion of Germany in the European Recovery Program (also known as the Marshall
Plan), arguing that a strong German economy would benefit not only Germans but also all of Europe. U.S. occupation officials also determined that
denazification would be accomplished more effectively by the Germans
themselves, a decision that signaled confidence in the peoples capacity to
shoulder greater responsibility for self-government, and in their willingness to cooperate with the occupying powers.17 The militarys stance regarding Americans interpersonal relations with Germans reflected this
shift to a more cooperative occupation policy. The orientation program
for spouses and children of personnel toned down the reminders of Nazi
atrocities and the warnings to avoid a soft attitude in encounters with
Germans, and schools for American children stressed German language as
part of the curriculum.18
The return of residences to German owners exemplified the policy shift
to a more democratic and nonpunitive occupation. Until 1947, occupation officials believed that the confiscation of property to house personnel
and families and for other military purposes was necessary and appropriShoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 137
ate. From the first, Germans challenged the seizure of their property. In
March 1946, several hundred German women and children in the Stuttgart area protested the requisitioning of homes. Another demonstration
occurred shortly before the arrival of the first military families in April.
Three hundred Germans, upset that a suburb of Stuttgart would be
claimed to house the incoming Americans, demonstrated in front of the
home of the citys burgomeister (mayor). The protestors displayed a sign
that read Dont Rob the Home of Our Children, and voiced fears about
the fate of their gardens, fruit harvests, and furnishings. The Military
Government director of Stuttgart informed the demonstrators that the
Americans would consider the Germans concerns and take only homes
vitally needed for service families, but that the Americans intended to
carry out the current requisitioning plan. Military Government officials
subsequently received instructions from European Theater Headquarters
to announce a prohibition on housing demonstrations.19
Most American families lived in requisitioned apartments and houses
until the late 1940s. Former Nazis were the first to lose their residences
and other buildings, but if these proved insufficient then the military took
property from non-Nazis. Giving up a residence meant relinquishing not
only ones home but also the furnishings and other belongings in it. Germans in the town of Marburg told the story of a Military Government officer who confiscated the family dog along with the home. Marburgers
considered the loss of property to be one of the worst conditions of occupation (second only to the denazification program). Despite the severe
housing shortage, Germans in Marburg were not allowed to live with
Americans in requisitioned residences, even in sections unused by the
Americans. Germans criticized this segregation as debasing and the requisitioning of property as undemocratic. In Air Force communities, security
measures such as barbed wire fences, and later, Polish and German guards
posted to reduce theft and vandalism, perpetuated Americans isolation
from and suspicion of non-Americans. In other communities, however, the
separation of Americans from Germans was less severe. Germans lived in
the basements and upper stories of their houses, while Americans lived in
the main sections of the homes. David Klinger, the son of an Army officer
whose family lived in Bad Nauheim between 1946 and 1947, said that his
father allowed the eighty-year-old widow who owned the home used by
the American family to live on the third floor along with a German couple
who cared for her and also did domestic work for the Klinger family.
Some Germans were allowed use of the gardens on their requisitioned
property. Others visited the American residents of their propertyaccording to an Air Force report, to lend the new tenants a helping hand,
showing the occasionally puzzled Americans little things about the opera138 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
evacuation as evidence of the U.S. militarys imminent flight from Europe.24 In another teleconference shortly thereafter, General Clay assured
Army officials that we could support the Americans in Berlin indefinitely
with a very small airlift . . . we should not evacuate our dependents.25
General Clay was so deeply committed to keeping American families in
Berlin that he announced his unwillingness to work alongside personnel
who wanted to send their families home. When occupation personnel in
Berlin sought permission for their families to return to the United States,
Clay informed his staff that he considered it unbecoming for an American to show any signs of nervousness, and that those whose families intended to leave Germany would be expected to join them. Clay anticipated a deluge of requests for permission to leave Berlin. To his surprise,
the applications to depart dwindled to a trickle, and most personnel who
had submitted these withdrew them after he made his position clear. According to Clay, most American families remained in Berlin during the
blockade.26 An Army history of the military in Europe pronounced American service members and their families a symbol of American intent to
remain in Berlin and to keep it safe.27
Army Colonel and later Brigadier General Frank Howleys account of
the June 1948 to May 1949 Berlin crisis illustrates how a high-ranking
serviceman conceived of his official decisions as interwoven with a sense
of parental responsibility. His own account of the blockade intertwined
the personal with events of international import. Howley served as deputy
and later commandant of the American sector of Berlin between 1945 and
1949, and as head of the Office of Military Government, Berlin Sector.
His wife, Edith, and their four children lived with him in Berlin. Howleys
1950 chronicle of the Soviet blockade, which he described as an atrocious crime plotted by the cold, inhuman minds of the Kremlin,
opened with an anecdote about a significant decision he made just before
the Soviets blocked access to the zones of the Western allies. Days before
the blockade began, Colonel Howley learned that the Soviets had reneged
on their agreement to exchange milk from Russian cows for American
flour. I am a family man, Howley later wrote, and I could share the
anguish of the German mothers and fathers who were faced with this
dreadful calamity. As commandant of the American sector of Berlin, I
could not let this happen. According to Howley, he saved the day by
bringing in plenty of milk just before Soviet forces blocked access to the
city: I had brought in 200 tons of condensed milk and 150 tons of powdered milk. When the Russians screamed to German mothers over the
radio that the Americans couldnt feed their babies, I fought back over the
air and in the newspapers with a special formula, using prepared milk as a
substitute for fresh milk. Howley proudly declared that thanks to his
140 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
West Germany and the United States also appealed to Germans sense of
dignity, helping to gain their acceptance of the expansion of U.S. forces in
West Germany in the early 1950s and the continuation of the U.S. military presence well after the end of occupation. In 1950, under 89,000 U.S.
forces personnel (military and civilian) were stationed in Germany. The
outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950 led to the Truman administrations decision to fortify Western Europe against possible Soviet aggression there (which strategists feared could occur if the Soviets perceived the
U.S. military and its allies as pinned down in Korea). U.S. military and
civilian personnel in West Germany swelled to 317,500 by 1952, then decreased to under 226,000 by the end of the decadestill more than double what they had been in 1950.31 Although many West Germans were
convinced that they needed the U.S. forces as a defense against Soviet
encroachment, the large foreign military presence and the concomitant
requisitioning of land for U.S. bases exacerbated the feeling of being an
occupied and subordinate nation.32 In his discussion of the psychological
effects of security dependency on West Germans, political scientist
Daniel Nelson observes that No person individually or no people collectively enjoys being dependent upon someone else for protection or security, and that frustration and resentment born of dependency can excessively strain the security relationship.33 U.S. military public relations officials sought to reduce West Germans sense of occupation by urging
commanders to help promote an image of unity among Western European
and U.S. forces.34
With the entrenchment of the Cold War, the Soviets supplanted the
Germans as enemies of the United States and its allies. Frank Howleys account of the Berlin blockade ranked the Soviets among the most infamous
villains in world history. The blockade, wrote Howley, was a wicked decision, the most barbarous in history since Genghis Khan reduced the conquered cities to pyramids of skulls. In order to retain their tottering control of Berlin, undermined by the development of democratic processes,
they decided to starve the Germans into revolt against the Western powers
and thus drive us out.35 This condemnation of the Soviets, whose actions
in Eastern Europe Howley likened to the bloody Mongol invasions of the
thirteenth century, not only reinvented the Soviets as barbaric Eastern
others, but it also blotted out Germanys still fresh crimes against humanity: the Holocaust; the imprisonment, torture, and murder of millions
of other victims of Nazism (including communists); and the incitement
of a world war in which millions died, including twenty million Soviets.
Within a few years after the wars end, Americans had reconceived of
Germans as their staunch ally against the Soviet Union and generally tried
late 1950s and 1960s showed that they continued to support the U.S. military presence and their nations foreign policy orientation toward the
United States.38
From Assistance . . .
Military families, especially wives, strived to demonstrate the American
commitment to assist Germans in the reconstruction and defense of their
country. Although economic conditions in West Germany improved remarkably during the 1950s, American women continued to engage in
charitable activities that aided some Germans as well as refugees from
Eastern Europe. Such activities contradicted communist critiques of the
United States: that the American democratic capitalist system fostered
greed, selfishness, and hedonism, and that the United States used its
power to exploit weaker peoples. Accounts of American charity also suggested that the U.S. presence in Western Europe provided not only military protection but also much-needed material help for those still recovering from World War II. As evidence of the engagement of American
personnel and their families in President Eisenhowers People-to-People
project, military officials pointed to the social and welfare efforts of
womens clubs in Germany. The clubs (300 in Germany, according to
Headquarters, European Command) gave food, clothing, and Christmas
gifts to orphans, families, villages, refugees, hospitals, and the elderly,
including Holocaust victims.39 In Berlin, members of the Non-Commissioned Officers and Enlisted Mens Wives Club worked at the OskarHelene-Heim (Home) for disabled children; a group of Air Force wives
stationed at Tempelhof Central Airport helped to support a small local orphanage.40 The Wiesbaden Officers Wives Club, whose 800 members included wives of American and allied officers, wives of government civilian
employees, teachers, and women officers stationed in Wiesbaden, donated
clothes and other necessities to an orphanage for boys and a home for
the elderly.41 American military personnel and their spouses who wanted
to make friends with German children and help those from broken
homes experience some of childhoods joys formed a group called The
Friendly Hand. The couples invited the children into their homes and
sponsored them in summer camps to [teach] the new German generation
about Americans.42 In other areas of Germany, American families and
soldiers who adopted children and orphanages visited the youngsters
and gave them food, clothing, and Christmas gifts.43 Donations of food
and clothing denoted American prosperity, signaling that here was a people who enjoyed an excess of the things they gave to the less affluent.
144 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
ciation for nature. The German, the orientation program facilitator had
warned them, . . . disarms us with his culture.48 The same cultural similarities that seemed potentially dangerous shortly after the war were invoked by the end of the decade as evidence of deep bonds between Germans and Americans. Declarations of German-American cultural alliance
were intended to ensure Germans and Americans support for the U.S.
military presence in West Germany and reinforce the nations anti-Soviet
alliance. Underscoring American and German cultural affinities contributed to a sense of moral unity in the Cold War struggle. Furthermore,
Americans and West Germans alike found it advantageous to imagine
Nazism as an aberration in German history. Americans, not wishing to
appear imperialistic and undemocratic, upheld West Germany not as a
U.S. military colony but as an ally that shared the same traditions and
ideals, while Germans wanted to distance themselves from the Nazi past
and establish a basis for their claim to national independence. After the
end of occupation, West Germany still depended on the United States for
help with military defense, but the idea of an equal alliance fostered by the
emphasis on cultural commonality deemphasized inequalities that neither
Americans nor West Germans wanted to advertise.
Americans, and Germans too, appealed to Christianity as fundamental
to the unity of democratic countries. A 1948 Army booklet on the goals
of the occupation expressed optimism that Germany was on the path to
democracy because of its cultural foundations in Judeo-Christianity.49
Through demonstrating Christian piety, Americans believed that Germans
might find forgiveness for their nations sins. By doing so, they could
prove their worthiness and their willingness to cooperate within the democratic family of nations. In 1958, three years after the attainment of full
sovereignty, Federal Republic of Germany president Theodor Heuss assumed an alliance grounded in Christianity among the United States, West
Germany, and other democratic nations in his address to the U.S. Congress: It is my firm conviction that the peoples of the free worlddeeply
rooted as they are in the Christian faithpossess the moral strength to
maintain their position and uphold their ideals.50
Christian worship became a milieu where Americans tried to demonstrate fellowship with Germans. Military officials at some commands
urged Americans to attend German churches. In the 1950s, Germans and
Americans came together in a Kaiserslautern church to hear Christmas
music performed by choirs from the U.S. military community. Germans
and Americans led church services, sang together in choirs, and sat together in church assemblages.51 An informational article describing life
for military families stationed in the Frankfurt-Wiesbaden area mentioned
the numerous beautiful German Churches that families could attend.52
Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 147
Another article for families in Heidelberg extolled the joint GermanAmerican Easter Sunrise service at a stone amphitheater on the Heiligenberg, built on a site used by Celts, Romans, and Germans for religious
worship.53
Of all Christian observances, Americans favored Christmas as the most
fruitful for substantiating German-American cultural and political commonality. Many American Christmas traditions, including caroling and
gift-giving, had originated in Europe. During the early- to mid-nineteenth
century, German immigrants had helped popularize the custom of decorating evergreens in American homes at Christmastime.54 Over a century later, members of the Adjutant Generals Wives Club in Heidelberg
sought to reinforce German-American unity against the Soviets in a
Christmas celebration for the wives of thirty-five German prisoners of
World War II still in the Soviet Union. The fate of the POWs plagued the
Germans until the Soviets finally released the last 9,626 captives in October 1955. To demonstrate her commitment to people-to-people friendship, Dorothy Easely, the wife of an Army general, hosted the party for
the prisoners wives in her home. Easely and the other American women
created a festive atmosphere with food, holiday decorations, and presents.
The party was a metaphor for the American conception of the United
States as defined against the Soviet Union: Americans offered gaiety, entertainment, and abundance as opposed to the hopelessness and dreariness
suffered by those imprisoned on the other side of the Iron Curtain, citizens of Soviet-controlled countries as well as prisoners of war. Easely pronounced her party a resounding success. Despite the language barrier,
the American and German wives suddenly found a common ground in
the singing of age-old Christmas carols and the party ended with tears of
pleasure in many eyes.55 The partys hosts hoped to convey generosity toward and sympathy for the women robbed of normal family life by the
Soviets who imprisoned their husbands, and to affirm the German-American ideological commitment against communism.
Germans also made friendly gestures to Americans at Christmastime,
and worked alongside them on holiday projects. Suzanne Shea, a military wife whose family lived in the town of Bad Kreuznach in 1952, said
that German women gave ornate gingerbread houses to American families as a gesture of welcome and neighborliness.56 Germans in the
state of Rhineland-Palatinate recalled that they made Christmas cookies
with their American housemates and neighbors.57 German and American
women also worked together on Christmas charity projects. In Heidelberg, the women of the German-American Club organized a Christmas
fair, the big club event of the year, to fund welfare activities.58
According to Suzanne Shea, her experience in Germany at Christmas148 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
time altered her perception of the season and reshaped her familys Christmas traditions. This assertion countered accusations that American cultural imperialism in such forms as jazz and Hollywood movies degraded
the cultures of non-American countries, and challenged assumptions that
cultural transfer occurred in one direction, from the more powerful to
the less powerful society.59 Shea and other Americans in Bad Kreuznach
learned about German traditions such as the December 5 visit of Saint
Nicholas and Schwartz Peter. The American families added Advent
Kraenze (evergreen wreaths topped with candles) and crches (wooden
representations of the Nativity)the loveliest, hand-carved, sensitively
wrought creations imaginablepurchased in Oberammergau. Shea described the German Christmas spirit as superior to the feverish activity
and frantic haste found in the United States: Among the German people
in the little town of Bad Kreuznach, there was more the feeling that we
were approaching a spiritual event; happy and exciting, yes, but not in the
material, commercialized way into which we have fallen, too much, in
America. The emphasis was on the Church and the Nativity; and everything was, somehow, simpler and more peaceful.60 Sheas depiction of
Christmas in the German town evokes an image of a society that had successfully resisted the taint of modernity, and undercut allegations that the
U.S. military presence brought with it the destruction of traditional cultures. In Sheas telling, the transcendent spirituality of the people of Bad
Kreuznach trumped American bustle and materialism.
In addition to spontaneous interactions, military wives believed that
womens club activities with Germans would solidify their international
alliance through cultural and social exchanges. German and American
women together engaged in flower arrangement, arts and crafts, a book
club, a theater group, bowling, a cooking club, language study clubs, theater clubs, and excursions. Hundreds of women from various nations became members of the Berlin-based Internationale Frauen Gruppe (International Womens Group), whose activities included attendance at concerts, art galleries, and exhibitions. The group proved so popular that
those applying for membership added their names to a long waiting list.
The German-American Club of Heidelberg brought together 130 American and 106 German women to make acquaintanceships and engage in
community and welfare activities and cultural exchange. Smaller groups
met in members homes to pursue more focused interests, such as language study (German, French, Italian, and English), bridge, excursions to
nearby sites, monthly discussions of stimulating topics of the day, and
cookingexperimenting with each others national recipes.61
Although American women tried to show appreciation of European
cultures, they also considered it their mission to display American ideals,
Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 149
exemplified by the American home. Dorothy Easely devised a plan to display a model American home to a wide audience of Germans. The organizers of the German Baden-Wuerttemberg State Homemakers Fair had
invited the American Womens Club of Heidelberg, where the fair would
be held in 1956, to create an exhibition. Easely considered this a means
to establish Direct and friendly contact . . . with the people of the community in which the American forces were living. She acquired two
booths to execute her vision of the ideal exhibit: a typical American
kitchen featuring housewives preparing American dishes, and also a living room where women made crafts, sewed outfits, and performed common household activities. Although the exhibit originally had been
Easelys brainchild, American officials quickly seized upon it as an important public relations event. The United States Information Service, an
agency that arranged for cultural exchange and information programs in
foreign countries, took an interest in the exhibit and provided a fully
equipped kitchen, which the Army Transportation Division and Engineer
Section transported and installed. The Quartermaster of the Area Headquarters Command pitched in an authentic furnished living room, complete with fireplace, mantle, and simulated windows that looked out to a
garden view.
The exhibition of the American home also served, in the military wives
minds, as an opportunity for the German and American women at the fair
to reinforce their sense of a shared domestic standardspecifically, a
clean house. The night before the fair opened, the American women impressed the German housewives in the adjacent booth by thoroughly
cleaning the display. According to Easely, the housecleaning proved a
fruitful point of cultural contact, spawning such a strong rapport between
the German and American women that we didnt have to speak the language.62 The assertion that the act of cleaning communicated the German and American womens mutual understanding on a level more fundamental than language reveals American approval of Germans as a clean,
home-oriented, and therefore civilized and respectable people.
Americans frequently invoked the idea that they shared with Germans
a common culture rooted in domestic ideals. A 1955 Air Force guides description of Germans as A religious, home-loving race whose family life
revolve[d] around the mother and wife closely resembled American
domestic ideals of the 1950s. A U.S. Lady short story about a GermanAmerican friendship used the theme of Christmas to illustrate the two
peoples mutual appreciation for family. In Christmas at Sea, a German
landlady, Frau Pretsel, cries over the departure of a newlywed American
service couple whom she considers her adopted children. She gives
Carol and Harry a present to open on Christmas day, while they are at
sea, en route to the United States. Carol wallows in self-pity because she is
stuck on a ship during the holidays, rather than home in the United States
with her relatives. But upon opening the gifta small decorated Christmas treethe American woman realizes that no matter where she is, the
most important thing is to be with her husband for their First Family
Christmas Together, in Frau Pretsels words. It is the gift from the German adoptive mother that lifts Carols spirits and replaces her self-pity
with appreciation for family togetherness through the shared GermanAmerican symbol of the Christmas tree.63
Just as the display of the American home promoted both commonality
and American superiority, so did the exhibition of the American family.
While Americans attempted to generate an impression of unity with Germans anchored in love of family, they also presented gender relations they
believed were more egalitarian than in German families. A Department of
Defense guide described Germany as more of a mans world than is the
United States. According to the guide, the father is generally boss in the
home.64 Servicemen stationed in Germany with their spouses engaged in
domestic tasks that allowed Germans to observe American men as family
men. In Rhineland-Palatinate, American men who assisted their wives
with meal preparations impressed German women.65 At the homemaker
fair that featured Dorothy Easelys American home exhibit, attendees considered one of the highlights a cooking contest among German and American men, with the American men preparing spaghetti and sukiyaki to
show their multicultural versatility.66
Military wives tried to counterbalance the showcasing of American superiority through gestures that emphasized reciprocity in German-American relations. Barbara Griffith did this in an account published in U.S.
Lady about her first meeting with her German maid, Ernestine Schmidt,
and the development of their relationship over the course of a few
months. When Schmidt first arrived at Griffiths home, neither of them
spoke the others language well. Griffith said that while her German improved over the subsequent weeksmy German vocabulary grew like
the national debtSchmidt did not seem to learn more English. Upon
finding Schmidt perusing a Sears cataloga symbol of American abundance and choicein amazement at all of the goods offered, Griffith decided to order some of the items as a birthday gift for Schmidt. Upon receiving the presents, Schmidt burst into English sentencesher surprise
gift to Griffith. Barbara Griffiths story conveyed the message that patience and sharing American access to consumer goods with the German
people would result in sincere efforts from Germans to reciprocate with
friendship and would provide a basis for more egalitarian West German
U.S. relations, rather than an association based primarily on American
generosity.67
In learning German, military family members conveyed a sense of reciprocity in German-American relations. The Army encouraged spouses
and children to learn local languages, and the armed forces offered classes
in German. To promote learning one anothers languages, the members of
the German-American Club of Wiesbaden contrived a plan whereby at
weekly meetings, the American women were to speak only German, and
the German women, only English. A 1952 survey of 215 spouses in Wiesbaden 115 officers wives, eighty-seven airmens wives, and thirteen
civilian wivesfound that upon arriving in Germany, 168 women could
not speak German at all, twenty-one knew very little German, and
three considered themselves fluent speakers. While in Germany, forty-five
of the women attended military-sponsored Information and Education
language classes, thirteen engaged private tutors for language lessons, and
110 said they had picked up German. Although most of the women did
not become fluent, a majority claimed to have learned to communicate in
the language, albeit to a limited extent: six said that they spoke German
almost as well as English; thirty-six considered themselves able to carry
on an ordinary conversation; one hundred and thirty-one said that their
knowledge of German was limited to greetings and asking questions; and
only twenty reported that they still could not speak any German. The
1960 census reported that 45,740 of the 327,446 dependents of service
personnel stationed in Europe and the USSR the majority of whom
would have lived in West Germanyclaimed to speak the local language.
Although according to these figures only fourteen percent of service family members spoke the local language, the majority of those who said they
did were adult females, most of whom would have been service wives
(though some probably were adult daughters). Just two percent (1,940) of
dependent males out of a population of 107,110 (most likely the sons of
service personnel) claimed to speak the local language, whereas twenty
percent of females (43,800 out of a total of 220,336) said that they did.
Only 2,138 of the female local-language speakers fell into the fourteen-toseventeen years age range, while the rest (41,662) were eighteen years of
age or older.68 The census data support the assertion that pressure to fulfill
domestic and international duties encouraged military wives to learn the
local language and show that the American presence relied on cultural
mutuality.
Some Americans claimed that they managed to convey friendliness well
enough without speaking German. Anne Lachaussee, an Army wife, lived
among Germans in a Berlin apartment building with her husband, Bob,
152 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
occupation. As evidence of this alleged segregation, Zink pointed to barracks and family homes cordoned off by barbed wire until 1947, the development of U.S. military communities, and what he perceived as Americans lack of interest in German-American clubs. Yet Zink also stated that
No one can question that Americans, being ubiquitous, were much in
the German eye, and that Americans, despite all their idiosyncrasies
and weaknesses, were regarded more as friends by the German people
than as soldiers or policemen of a foreign power.71 The apparent contradictions in Zinks accountthat Americans lived and socialized apart
from Germans, yet were ubiquitous and regarded as friendsmight
have stemmed from an underestimation of the impressions made in casual contacts between Americans and Germans, especially those involving
American women and children in settings other than military-sponsored
clubs. The purview of American families activities was much wider than
Zink might have imagined.
A later (1964) assessment of military relations with West Germans by
Army historian D. J. Hickman speculated that German-American encounters occurred more frequently in the first years of occupation than in
subsequent decades. Large-scale construction of apartment buildings for
Americans began in the late 1940s, in self-contained military communities
that included schools, shopping centers, recreational and athletic facilities, and chapels. Despite concerns that German-American contacts would
dwindle, military planners determined that it would be less expensive to
build separate American communities rather than units for Americans in
German neighborhoods. In Hickmans view, the rise of American military communities, though intended to remedy the housing shortage and
improve German-American relations through the return of requisitioned
residences, resulted in fewer contacts between Americans and Germans.
According to his report, Little Americas, such as Mark Twain Village
and Patrick Henry Village in Heidelberg, culturally and socially segregated Americans from Germans: Provided with practically everything he
needed to live comfortably, the American soldier and his family could
serve an entire tour in Germanyand in some cases in France and Italy
and face no real need to learn the local language or to become interested
in local customs.72
No doubt the establishment of military communities housing large
populations of Americans shaped opportunities for German-American relations. Yet that as of 1960 as many as thirty-five percent of adult female
armed forces dependents (most of whom would have been military
wives) in Europe and the USSR spoke local languages attests to sustained
intercultural contact.73 Military wives published accounts that set forth
ideals of German-American relations did not necessarily mirror actual re154 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
Falling Short
American contacts with Germans sometimes resulted in successful expressions of friendliness, other times in misunderstandings or resentment. In
some instances, American deportment offended Germans and risked alienating them. Even seemingly harmless actions could injure feelings or
deeply offend. A U.S. Lady article illustrated this by relating an anecdote
Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 155
about how an American couple had declined the cognac offered them by a
German couple whom they were visiting. Later, after the couples had developed a closer friendship, the American couple learned that the rejection
of the cognac had hurt their hosts feelings. The lesson underscored that
such informal interactions held international significance. The Americans
were not simply dinner guests; they were guests in the country. Other
differences between German and American mores caused consternation
among Germans. For example, Germans perceptions of Americans as immodest could fuel fears of uncontrolled sexuality. An American employee
at an Army hospital told of a German coworker who expressed her dismay at seeing her scantily clothed American neighbors, who in her eyes
were essentially naked, when they came home from an outing on a
lake. When the American attempted to explain that in the United States
men could wear t-shirts and women could wear shorts in public, his coworker rejected the notion as ill-mannered and disgraceful.74 Germanborn officers wife Elizabeth Dallmeier LaMantias criticisms of American
military wives allegedly unrefined behaviorpartying, drinking, wearing
immodest clothing, neglecting housekeeping and childrearingalso revealed fears about the breaching of class boundaries when American
women conducted themselves in a manner she considered to be below
their station.75 LaMantias perspective shows how Americans informal
behavior, rather than conveying to Germans what Americans considered
to be their freer way of life, could come across as debauched and might
even undermine U.S.West German cultural relations. Fears of the sexuality of American neighbors also beset Germans in Rhineland-Palatinate
who circulated a rumor that American housewives had seduced young
German handymen.76 Perceived sexual immodesty not only offended Germans because such behavior revealed insensitivity to German standards of
behavior, but also because it made manifest the power imbalance inherent
in the toleration of a large foreign population and its military bases out of
a sense of economic and military necessity.
One impression that American families made on observers abroad that
is corroborated by numerous accounts, American and non-American
alike, is that Americans with the military were quite well-off, which contributed to the image of Americans in general as a prosperous people. The
novel Out of the Shelter tells the story of a sixteen-year-old British boy
who in 1951 leaves his lower-middle-class family and the bleakness of
postwar London to visit his older sister, an employee of the American occupiers in Heidelberg. Author David Lodge described the book as probably the most autobiographical of my novels, in that he based much of the
story on actual visits to his aunt, who worked as a secretary for the U.S.
Germans racism by treating black GIs with contempt, harassing AfricanAmerican men in the company of German women, and threatening to
boycott German businesses that served blacks, despite Trumans desegregation order and the illegality of segregation in German law. Although
some Germans recall their surprise as they encountered the deeply troubled racial relations of the soldiers being played out in the streets of their
towns and villages, white Americans unabashed displays of racism justified in many Germans minds their own bigotry as a natural response to
blacks rather than a dangerous and shameful remnant of Nazi racial ideology. Thus, argues Hhn, Germans envisioned their alliance with America as foremost an alliance between two white nations.79
Germans anxiety toward single African-American soldiers was a response shared by German townspeople who encountered them, as well as
politicians who exploited fears of German women dating African-American GIs to decry the U.S. military presence in their country. African-American personnel accompanied on their tours of duty by their wives and children were more welcome by Rhineland-Palatinate Germans than were
unmarried black personnel. Whereas Germans felt threatened by single
African-American servicemen whom they stereotyped as sexual predators,
they more readily befriended African-American couples and children, and
shared houses and excursions with them. Hhn says that although friendships did develop between Germans and African-American families, in
general, Germans grudgingly accepted the black families who moved
into their towns, ate in their restaurants, or shopped in their stores.80
Although military planners who arranged for families to join servicemen overseas after World War II assumed that spouses and children
would establish normal family life and create an environment that discouraged American mens fraternization with local women, the presence
of families did not always achieve this goal. While stationed in Japan in
the late 1940s, Army officer John Paul Vann engaged in sexual relations
with his familys maids. Mary Jane Vann tried to prevent her husbands infidelities by replacing the maids, but to no avail. During his assignment in
Heidelberg in the mid-1950s, John Paul Vann used the time before his
family arrived for liaisons with German girlfriends. His extramarital activities with local women did not stop when his family joined him. In
other ways, Vann still behaved as an ideal husband and father. Vann, a father of five (Mary Jane Vann gave birth to the couples fifth child in Germany), took his family on bicycle trips in the countryside and car vacations to the Bavarian Alps and Holland, and furnished lavish Christmases
for the children. But one day a young German woman arrived at the Vann
household to ask Mary Jane Vann whether they were to be divorced, as
Captain Vann had told her. John Paul Vanns military colleagues, and
158 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
East Germany. The leaders of the Federal Republic of Germany, and their
allies, did not wish to relinquish West Berlin, which they considered a bastion of economic and political freedom deep in communist East Germany.
Over the next three years, approximately three and a half million people
fled East Germany via West Berlin. On August 13, 1961, German Democratic Republic leader Walter Ulbricht ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall to stanch the flow of refugees.86
Anne Lachaussee claimed that after the construction of the wall her
Berliner friends took their courage to remain in the city from the presence
of American families. The Germans are glad were here, Lachaussee declared. Many of them tell you so. Just the other night we had [a German
friend] and her husband over for dinner. She told me When you people
leave the city, well pack up too, because when you go itll be the end. She
was referring to the children and me.87 Placing those considered most
vulnerablewomen and childrenon the front lines of the war against
the spread of Soviet influence was intended not only to represent the U.S.
militarys confidence that it could defend Western Europe from the Soviets
and communism, but also the righteousness of Americans ideological
cause to uphold the democracy and freedom presumed embodied in their
families.
With the rise in tensions between the United States and the Soviet
Union in the summer of 1961, arguments reemerged that allowing families to join military personnel at hot spots abroad placed women and children in danger, detracted from the U.S. militarys Cold War mission, and
hurt the U.S. economy besides. In July, Representative Bob Sikes of
Florida wrote to President Kennedy that American dependents in Western
Europe during this tense time would, in the event of a Soviet attack, pose
a distraction to American servicemen, who would expend resources rescuing American women and children instead of confronting the Soviets.
Sikes recommended the evacuation of dependents to signal to the Soviet
leadership the United States willingness to fight to save Berlin: No doubt
Mr. Khrushchev is watching for administration rulings affecting dependents. He knows that Americans place great stock in security of their
women and children. This could be the weathervane which will tell him
we are in dead earnest about Berlin.88 In response, Lawrence OBrien,
Special Assistant to Kennedy, informed Sikes that Decisions with respect
to dependents in Europe are of diplomatic significance, to our allies as
well as to other powers, and any action taken by the Defense Department
will be coordinated with the State Department. I should like to emphasize,
however, that dependents overseas will not be used for any purposes of
diplomatic effect.89 OBriens message suggests that while the JFK administration recognized that American military families were implicitly of
Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 161
diplomatic significance, they were reluctant to wield them as explicit diplomatic signals in potentially dangerous situations (or to acknowledge
that they would do so).
Two weeks after the Berlin Wall went up, Senator A. Willis Robertson
of Virginia sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara about
his fears of the endangerment of military families in Western Europe. In
Senator Robertsons view, military wives and children living in and near
the contested territory risked annihilation should tensions between the
Western powers and the Soviet bloc erupt in war. Unwilling to wait for relations between the superpowers to deteriorate, Robertson protested the
continued shipment of military families to Western Europe. He also urged
the Department of Defense to inform American military dependents already in or en route to Western Europe that certainly we hope there will
not be [a war] but if such an eventuality should be forced upon us by a
ruthless dictator military dependents in Western Europe when the shooting starts will have to take their chances for survival along with other
civilians of that area of the world.90
In September, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara announced the
suspension of military families travel to Western Europe, except West
Berlin, beginning in October. According to McNamara, the augmentation
of U.S. forces in Europe due to the international discord necessitated making available all means of transportation for the shipment of troops.91
Other reasons given were that the armed forces in Europe simply could no
longer supply sufficient housing, schooling, and medical care to families;
the Defense Department did not indicate that the safety of American military families was a reason for the policy change. Although this policy temporarily halted the travel of an estimated 7,000 to 8,000 dependents
monthly to Europe, it did not call for the evacuation of spouses and children from Europe. McNamaras announcement did not explain why families traveling to West Berlin were exempt from the order. Presumably diplomatic and military officials intended the continued entry of families into
this city to represent their nations defense commitment to their allies.
That the shipment of families to Berlin received the same priority as the
transportation of soldiers suggests the extent to which the U.S. defense establishment regarded military families as troops themselves, to be deployed at the focal point of Cold War conflict.92
Although U.S. Ladys editors argued stoutly for lifting the ban on dependents travel to Europe, columnist Fred Lardner expressed more ambivalence. His vivid picture of the perils posed to American families in
Western Europe disclosed sexualized and racialized fears about the alleged
problems created by the feminized U.S. military presence. Claiming that
Europes NATO forces were weaker than Soviet forces, and suggesting
162 Shoulder to Shoulder with West Germans
assured the president that the group of wives sitting at my table resolved
to do all they can to make the next two and a half years here as beneficial
as possible and to be good ambassadors for their country.97
Conclusion
In 1967, Army wife Cabrini Lepis, a teacher and writer stationed with her
officer husband at Downs Barracks in Fulda, Germany, recounted German and American reactions to the assassination of President John Kennedy in 1963. Like other military wives before her, Lepis illustrated events
of international import in terms of personal encounters between Germans
and Americans. Her account captured the American interpersonal-international ideal of German-American relations, promulgated since the Berlin Airlift, and well ensconced by the mid-1960s.
Lepis heard the news of President Kennedys assassination while at
home celebrating her daughters first birthday with another American
couple and two German women. According to Lepis, the German guests
were as stunned and upset as the Americans; she speculated that she and
one of the German women became close friends because they shared this
bond of receiving the news together that night. German neighbors visited
the Lepis family in the days following the assassination: I was amazed at
their devotion to the United States and to our late President. It took a
tragedy to realize what good friends and allies the present-day Germans
are. It was a German neighbor who came over to tell the Lepis family of
Lee Harvey Oswalds death. Lepis worried that the murders would lead
Europeans to think of Americans as barbarians running through the
streets of America with guns, but said that her German friends knew
otherwise. Germans and Americans attended the memorial service for
President Kennedy at the military base. Although Lepis felt lonely so far
from home during this time, she said that being among the Germans created a remarkable opportunity to experience brotherhood firsthand
that would have pleased President Kennedy.98 The Lepis family also
mourned President Kennedys death with Germans at a Catholic church
off base: The mass was crowded and we stood to listen to the most impassioned sermon we had ever heard, Lepis recalled. It was about the
life and death of John F. Kennedy. . . . We couldnt understand all the sermon, but we gathered it was a plea for an end to the anger and violence in
peoples lives so that we could all live without fear and in peace. I saw several women weeping. Undoubtedly they had lived through the Nazi era
and remembered the price of evil.99
Cabrini Lepiss idealized recollection of West German-American relaShoulder to Shoulder with West Germans 165
5
Dear Little Okinawa
from a conquered battle zone to a twentieth-century version of an Oklahoma frontier community.9 The military constructed housing, schools,
commissaries, post exchanges, medical buildings, and recreational facilities for the growing American population. The House of Representatives
Armed Services Committee, which toured U.S. overseas bases in 1953, reported that 25,000 Air Force and Army personnel, and another 13,000
Americansincluding military families, civilian employees, and businessmenresided in Okinawa.10
By seizing farmland to build bases for military operations and facilities
for personnel and their families, the military did further damage to U.S.Okinawan relations. For many decades before World War II, the high
population of the islands and the scarcity of farmland had pushed Okinawans to emigrate. In 1940, the population density of Okinawa Prefecture
was 588 people per square mile in an area of 866 square miles (by contrast, the U.S. population density in 1940 was forty-four people per
square mile). By January 1953, the postwar repatriation of approximately
150,000 to 200,000 people who had left the island in previous decades
due to high population and insufficient land helped push the population density up to roughly 730 people per square mile. Between 1950
and 1955, Okinawas population grew from 700,000 to 800,000. By
1970, the islands inhabitants numbered about one million, approximately 60,000 of whom were U.S. military personnel and their families.11
Okinawans had lived in an agrarian society before the war, and many
wished to do so after 1945. But the establishment of bases during and
after the war exacerbated the land shortage. By 1955, the United States
had claimed almost one-quarter of the islands farmable land for military
use, displacing approximately 175,000 Okinawans. According to a Life
magazine article, in one particularly dramatic instance of displacement,
fifty families gave up the farmland on which they subsisted so that the military could build a golf course.12
The seizure of farmland and the criminal behavior of servicemen, as
well as other aspects of the military presence such as vehicular and military training accidents and the harsh noise of aircraft, fueled the Okinawan movement for the return of the Ryukyu Islands to Japanese governance. The Okinawan Youth Associations 1951 poll of 12,000 people
found that eighty-five percent wanted their island returned to Japanese
control. Later that same year, seventy-two percent of Okinawan voters
signed petitions for reversion to Japan.13 An estimated 50,000 Okinawan
families became landless between 1945 and the 1950s.14 By the early
1950s, Okinawan opposition to the U.S. military erupted in spontaneous
protests against the seizure of farmland for American use.15 In 1955,
when construction crews prepared to dismantle the village of Isahama to
170 Dear Little Okinawa
The short story Dark Flowers (1955) by Kishaba Jun, set during the
Korean War and published the same year as the Time article describing
the land seizures and military construction, depicted the U.S. military
presence as for the most part sordid and depressing. The story, told from
the perspective of a young Okinawan woman, refers to numerous aspects
of life under the occupation, including prostitution, the proliferation of
bars and clubs catering to American servicemen, venereal disease, the rape
and impregnation of an Okinawan maid who worked for an American
man, land seizures and the forced migration of farmers, the harsh noise
of military aircraft, and the lesser status of African-American soldiers in
relation to white Americans. The storys protagonist, Nobuko, is in a sexual relationship with an African-American serviceman named Joe. Joe
gives her money, but it is much less than what Nobukos friend Michiko
Dear Little Okinawa 171
security blanket for the Ryukyuan people. To support his argument for
continued U.S. control of the islands, Morris pointed to increases in the
height and weight of the generation of Okinawan children born after
World War II as evidence of the beneficial effects of the occupation.22 The
physical growth of the people served for Morris as a metaphor for the
maturation of the Okinawan children under American care.
The language and imagery that cast Okinawans as children harked
back to nineteenth-century metaphors used to articulate the paternal role
of American leaders and the childlike status of nonwhite groups whose
lands they sought, such as the father-children discourse frequently applied to Andrew Jacksons relationship with American Indians, and the
depiction of turn-of-the-century Americans as the caretakers of their
dark little brothers in the Caribbean and Pacific. Historian Emily
Rosenbergs description of turn-of-the-century ideas about natural hierarchies and dependence also informs an analysis of American-Okinawan relations after World War II: Women, nonwhite races, and tropical countries often received the same kinds of symbolic characterizations from
white male policy makers: emotional, irrational, irresponsible, unbusinesslike, unstable, and childlike.23 Like Puerto Ricans, Cubans, or Filipinos, Okinawans could, in American eyes, be good children or bad
children.24 A 1962 military report that praised Okinawans as quick-tolearn, friendly and cooperative painted an image of them as well-behaved, delightful children.25 But to the chagrin of military officials such as
Morton Morris, some bad children did not gratefully accept U.S. government of their islands. These included all who protested U.S. civil administration of the islands and inadequate reimbursement for the use of
privately owned land, as well as other fringe elements (as termed by
Morris) such as the Okinawa Womens Federation, which American military leaders accused of socialist and communist leanings.26 Although communist and socialist organizations did protest U.S. control of Okinawa,
Americans freely labeled as communist anyone who opposed the U.S.
military occupation and presence, or who advocated reversion of Okinawa to Japanese governance. Scholars who closely studied the islands
history and culture cautioned against attributing all criticisms of the military presence to the influence of these groups.27
The 1953 and 1954 editions of The Ryukyu Islands at a Glance, produced by the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands,
visually reinforced stereotypes of Okinawans as children. One illustration portrayed an American serviceman nearly twice the height of the
two Okinawans standing near him. The serviceman looks foolish, standing in the rain without an umbrella, compared with the more provident
Okinawans who have prepared for bad weather. By depicting the serviceDear Little Okinawa 173
man as sheepish and ill-prepared for the weather, the military attempted
to convey the impression of itself as an innocent and benign rather than a
harsh, intimidating presence. The 1954 edition of the pamphlet offered
an illustration of a tall Uncle Sam bending low to hand over a bag of
money to a small, tattered Okinawan child. The caption reads, Almost
$177,000,000 has been appropriated for Ryukyuan economics [sic] assistance. Behind Uncle Sam stand tall office buildings, while behind the
Okinawan are a Shinto shrine and what appears to be a thatched hut. The
contrast in the American and Okinawan structures stresses an extreme
disparity between the economic and urban developments of modern
America and rural, primitive Okinawa.28
Military officials defended the U.S. presence by arguing that the Okinawans depended on the base economy for their livelihood. In this view, the
military acted as a provider for a financially dependent people who would
sink further into poverty without aid from their benefactor. In the early
1950s, U.S. agencies employed over 50,000 Okinawan construction,
maintenance, and service workers.29 In addition, Okinawan businesses
bars, clubs, brothels, restaurants, tourist shops, and taxisprofited from
the leisure spending of American service personnel and their families.
General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers
in Japan between 1945 and 1950, predicted that Okinawans would pick
up a good deal of money and have a reasonably happy existence from an
American base development.30 Major General James E. Moore, the deputy governor of the Ryukyu Islands, suggested that Okinawans should relinquish farming and earn a living by servicing the military, as Hawaiians
did. American military personnel and families were told that they aided
Okinawans by employing them as domestic workers. Even GIs provided
jobs for Okinawans by pooling their money to hire cheap Okinawan laborers to relieve servicemen from mess hall work. In response to Okinawans complaints that the military took away land that farmers would use
to support their families, Time asserted that land is lying fallow all over
Okinawa because the owner makes better money working for the U.S.
Armyrunning laundry machines, driving trucks, working in construction gangs.31
During World War II and into the Cold War, the American mainstream
and military media often portrayed Okinawans as victims of Japan, and
the United States as their savior, thereby reinforcing the child-parent metaphor. The May 1945 issue of Life, published during the bloody Battle of
Okinawa, ran a story titled Okinawa: Except for Japs, It Is a Very Pleasant Place. The article described Okinawans as rural folk, friendly to
Americans, who as a race are only distantly related to the Japanese, and
who had been duped by the Japanese into believing that Japan would
win the war and Americans would grind them up for dog food.32 A 1947
Newsweek article referred to U.S. occupation personnel as the liberators of the Okinawan people.33 A military pamphlet explained that although Okinawans had enjoyed political and cultural benefits from Japanese annexation in the nineteenth century, their remoteness from Japan
and their status as the poorest prefecture had resulted in discrimination
by the Japanese and difficulty in attaining positions of authority.34 Time
claimed that under American governance, Okinawans have more selfgovernment than they ever did under the Japanese.35 All these documents
criticize the Japanese as unfit parents and champion Americans as more
suitable guardians for Okinawans. Miyazato Siegen, who denounced U.S.
rule of Okinawa, viewed American claims that Okinawans were a minority group languishing under maltreatment by Japan and were better served
by paternalistic U.S. governance as a justification for ignoring Okinawans
demands. The idea of the minority group and paternalism are still the
particular characteristics of the US administration, wrote Siegen in 1965,
vis--vis the Japanese, Okinawans would claim distinctiveness for themselves, but vis--vis Americans they would claim that whatever they felt
toward the Japanese was none of the business of the United States: i.e., it
was wrong for Americans to manipulate Japanese-Okinawan differences
in ways prejudicial to Okinawans. From this, then, the most convenient
weapon against American racism was to insist that Okinawans were Japanese.40
penalty but was sent back to the United States for imprisonment. If American military men sometimes failed as fathers, American women believed
that they could be good mothers to Okinawans. Military wives supported U.S. goals while trying to protect and aid Okinawan children.
They sought to counteract the negative effects of the military through
nurturing, intimate interactions with Okinawans while maintaining the
power differential. In charitable activities, as mistresses of maids, at
schools, and in other everyday relations with Okinawans, military wives
perpetuated assumptions about Okinawans dependency on Americans,
which for Americans legitimated the military presence and the allegedly
much-needed protection and guidance of the natives.
In 1947, American women established a thrift shop in Naha to sell second-hand goods to Americans and Okinawans and use the profits to aid
orphanages, leper colonies, and schools. A few years later, the women in
charge of the shop decided that it would be more profitable to sell gifts
such as vases, jewelry, scrolls, and woven handbags crafted by Okinawans. Vice President Richard Nixon and Secretary of Defense Charles
Wilson implicitly endorsed the enterprise by visiting the gift shop on a trip
to the island. Americans claimed that the shop aided the Okinawan people by creating business for local merchants and craftspeople and profits
for welfare projects. They also believed that personal contacts between
the gift shop committee members and Okinawan merchants, craftspeople,
and charity recipients expressed the friendliness of the U.S.A. better
than the large but impersonal sums of U.S. government aid to the Ryukyu
Islands.47
A group of American women and an Episcopalian priest embarked on
a similar enterprise to benefit the residents of the impoverished, tiny town
of Nago and to diminish the impression that the military presence harmed
Okinawans. The Americans, concerned that there were more young girls
than respectable places of employment, believed that profits from the
Nago Shop (which sold products made by Okinawans in a handicraft center also founded by the Americans) could help lift the townspeople out of
poverty and prevent young Okinawan women from drifting from home
and family into unsavory jobs down island. Whereas Army officer Morton Morris had advocated military-supervised prostitution of willing Okinawan women for the benefit of American men in an effort to minimize
sexual assaults and curb the spread of venereal disease, the Nago Shop
wives hoped to rescue Okinawan women from prostitution by offering
them alternative employment: the production of traditionally woven items
and crafts to be purchased by Americans in Okinawa and the United
States. The articles delicate and cursory allusion to prostitution is one of
the rare instances in which it is referred to in accounts published by and
178 Dear Little Okinawa
for military wives in the 1950s. The silence on the subject stemmed from
the taboo against publicly discussing illicit sexuality as well as from military wives reluctance to call negative attention to the armed forces or its
servicemen for fear that doing so would hurt the U.S. militarys image and
their husbands careers. The military establishments pressure on wives
not to criticize the armed forces constituted what Cynthia Enloe has
termed a maneuver that maintained American womens compliance
with military goals and encouraged them to view their interests as separate from those of local women, thus defusing the potential for womens
united protest. As for the wares sold in the Nago Shop, the selection of
handmade Okinawan items also promulgated the notion of a unique Okinawan culture, which helped to justify the military presence and to undercut Japans claim to be Okinawas rightful guardian. The women who
opened the shop decided that traditionally woven Okinawan goods would
ring the bell on the cash register. These American mothers attempted
to protect Okinawan children from the problems created by servicemens demands for sexual commerce and land. They intended that the
profits assist not only Okinawan women, but also young Okinawan men
who did not possess sufficient land to support their families. Americans
considered the Nago Shop project to be not just another American handout, but rather an endeavor that relied on the joint participation of
Americans and Okinawans (although Americans directed it), as well as
proof of American concern for the total welfare of Okinawans.48
The language used in Air Force wife Betty Holshousers article about
the Nago Shop project noted the smallness of the Okinawans and the relatively larger size of Americans and thus sustained the idea of a child-parent relationship between the two peoples. Describing the opening of the
retail outlet store, she wrote that Okinawans are little people in stature.
Most of the women are under five feet tall, but that day they were figuratively standing shoulder to shoulder with their tall American friends.49
Military wives accounts, like those by many other Americans, frequently
commented on Okinawans shortness and interpreted this metaphorically
as well as physically.
Besides offering financial assistance to Okinawans, the American
women of the Nago Shop hoped that their enterprise would counteract
negative media attention that centered on the bad behavior of servicemen.
Betty Holshousers article concluded that the Nago Shop will remain as
a powerful testimony to the kindness, understanding and helpfulness of
not-so-ugly American women, in implicit contrast to the ugly American military men whose undesirable behavior received international
news coverage and harmed U.S.-Okinawan relations.50 The phrase notso-ugly American women alludes to the 1958 best-selling novel The Ugly
Dear Little Okinawa 179
to her home. She treated the children, none of whom had ever been inside
an American home, to popcorn, Coca-Cola, lemonade, hot dogs, chocolate chip cookies, and candy. The girls admired the kitchen, especially
the electric stove, the mixer and the toaster, Buck reported. The boys
were fascinated with the electric lights, the flush toilet and the television.
American abundance, modern appliances, and a personal touch, Buck
hoped, would guide the children to the side of the United States in the
fight against communism.53 Americans who brought Okinawans into their
homes believed that the battle against communism could not be won only
with impersonal economic aid and military power, but required intimate
settings and relations to attract Okinawans to U.S. Cold War foreign policy goals. Francis Buck and other military wives did not appear to consider that Okinawans might resent the Americans displays of relative affluence and privilege.
Marian Merritt exemplified the compassionate, public-spirited outlook
of service wives who contributed to the promotion of U.S. military and
foreign policies. Merritt, described in a U.S. Lady article as a permanently crippled victim of [childhood] polio [who] learned to walk again,
gained local fame as an activist who cultivated American-Okinawan
friendship and worked to improve the harsh conditions in which Okinawans lived. She first arrived in Okinawa in 1946 to join her husband,
Robert Merritt, an Air Force officer. When the Air Force sent Major Merritt back to Okinawa in 1952, Mrs. Merritt joined him and became a
prominent figure among Americans as well as Okinawans. In April 1956,
after the Merritts returned to the United States, U.S. Lady named Marian
Merritt U.S. Lady-of-the-Month for her work to aid the Okinawan
people and promote Okinawan-American relations.
Marian Merritt embodied the ideal officers wife stationed at an overseas base. On her first visit to Okinawa in 1946, she heeded the militarys
call for service wives to staff schools for American children. She later said
that her classroom responsibilities had allowed little time for contact with
Okinawans. But during her husbands second tour of duty on the island,
she exceeded expectations that service wives should foster positive relations between Americans and local people and make the presence of the
armed forces more tolerable. In the twenty-eight months following the
Merritts return to Okinawa in 1952, Marian Merritt served as president
of the Kadena Chapel Guild, founded and directed the Okinawan Maid
School, acted as program chair of the Kadena Officers Wives Club and the
International Club, addressed an audience of 1,000 at a presentation for
the Okinawan Womens Federation, gave a speech to the Okinawa Leper
Colony, and taught English to Okinawans. She viewed all of these activities as a bridge between Americans and Okinawans, especially women.54
Dear Little Okinawa 181
maid] but was expected to have one to help the Okinawa economy and to
give these little girls something to do! Merritt proposed that providing
domestic service opportunities to Okinawan women would smooth over
sore points in local relations, which would in turn make the military presence more tolerable. She reasoned that the employment of servants helped
to compensate for the seizure of farmland: the maids appreciate what the
Americans are doing for them, and their parents and their whole villages
feel more kindly toward the country, which has taken over their land and
their rice paddies in the battle of the free world to remain free.58
In Marian Merritts perspective, the employment of maids and the
good works performed by her and other Americans on behalf of Okinawans helped make it possible for the military to maintain the anti-communist front in Asia. I understand there are some Communists hereone
Okinawan woman was arrested recently for collecting non-ferrous metal
to be sent to Russia, she reported, like many Americans in this period assuming that the Soviet Union directed allegedly pro-communist activities
everywhere in the world. Yet she reassured the recipient of her letter that,
taken as a whole, I doubt that many Okinawans would turn to Communism after the way Americans have helped.59 Even if stern American paternalism alienated some Okinawan childrendiscontented communist and socialist critics of the United Statesfrom their caretakers,
Merritt hoped that American generosity and maternalism could keep the
others within the fold.
The arena of domestic service offered an ideal environment for the
elaboration of American maternalism. Marian Merritt established the
Okinawan Maid School, where prospective domestic workers spent sixty
hours learning tasks such as making beds, defrosting refrigerators, and
cleaning bathrooms. In her view, the school would improve relations
between Okinawan maids and their American mistresses, as Merritt
termed military wives who employed Okinawan domestic workers. She
feared that dissatisfied, cross military housewives would give maids a
poor impression of Americans, and believed that proper instruction in
American household chores would prevent mishaps and bad feelings on
both sides.
In addition to trying to improve relations by teaching American housekeeping to Okinawan women, Merritt also advised employers on how to
behave toward domestic workers. She wanted Okinawan maids to see
American housewives as patient and generous. When American women
hired maids through the school, Merritt sent letters admonishing the
employers to behave in a manner that would reflect well on the United
States: All that these little girls and their families and their whole villages
know of America is what they are learning from you and your home. Are
Dear Little Okinawa 183
you making friends for our country? Like a mother concerned about the
well-being of her children, she also urged American employers to provide
their servants with plenty of Okinawan foodrice, canned fish, noodles,
soya saucewarning that they might dislike American food or be too shy
to ask for meals. Tell your maid that you want her to eat, advised Merritt. Urge her to eat. See that she does. . . . Be proud if you can add a few
pounds to your maid while she is with you.60
The employment of maids provided an economic opportunity to Okinawan women, and also served as a nonmilitaristic form of American influence. Maid school students received written instructions urging them to
Smile and be happy, Be on time for work, and [S]urprise [an ill mistress] by taking her a cup of tea.61 The maid-mistress relationship harbored an inherent social, cultural, and political hierarchy between employer and employee, benefactor and recipient, mother and child, military
victor and conquered subject.
While perhaps appreciative of the opportunity to earn money, some
Okinawan women who had worked as maids in the immediate postwar
years were less effusive than Mrs. Merritt about employment in American
homes. Junko Isa, who worked for an American family circa 1949 when
she was eighteen years old, described living with and working for the family as really hard: her day, which began at six a.m., included doing all
the housework with the American woman watching over her every move.
She did not eat with the family, and neither the Americans nor Isa spoke
the others language, so communication was extremely difficult. One enduring impression of the American home, shared by many local people in
various countries that housed U.S. bases, was that there was always
enough food . . . since the family could get American goods at the commissary on base.62 In an interview nearly five decades later, Isa confessed
to having mixed feelings about the U.S. military bases in Okinawa:
Im against the existence of the military bases here, but I have to admit
there were some advantages to having the U.S. presence on the island.
After all, we women got the right to vote under the American Occupation. That was a good thing. I think a lot of Okinawans feel the same
way I do.63
Another Okinawan woman, Mitsuko Inafuku, described a warmer relationship with the American woman for whom she worked as a maid (although she remembered the four-year-old son whom she took care of as
a terror). She took the job at the age of twenty. In an interview several
decades later, she reported being highly impressed by the familys collection of colorful bath towelsThey had it made, those Americans. She
184 Dear Little Okinawa
also appreciated that the family owned a washing machine, which she
said made me pretty happy since I was the one doing the laundry. I was
used to scrubbing clothes in the river. Inafuku seemed to simultaneously
admire and think it strange that the American woman, whom she called
a sweet person, tried to fit in with Okinawan society as much as possible, wearing shorts and geta (Japanese sandals) to shop at the market in
Naha. After a year and a half, she left the American family to look for a
more challenging job.64 At age sixty-seven, having lived through the
war, the U.S. occupation, and the continued U.S. military presence in
Okinawa, Inafuku said that she had a good impression of the Americans and enjoyed talking with them. She recognized, however, that some
Okinawans were afraid of the Americans, especially the ones who run
around in their fatigues and uniforms,65 suggesting that Okinawans
found Americans in their civilian roles (possibly including American wives
and children) less intimidating than those in military roles.
Marian Merritt (left, at the end of the table) with Okinawan acquaintances.
erator something beyond all dreams. Our little electric mixer was something they couldnt understand at all. Those of you who know what an
Okinawan benjo is, will realize what they thought of an American toilet.
by Mr. Suns revelation, the narrator insists that despiteor perhaps even
because ofthe history of Japanese aggression against the Chinese, Mr.
Sun must aid him in bringing charges against the American soldier, despite
the suffering it will cause his daughter. Later, in deciding to proceed with
the case against Robert Harris, the narrator tells Mr. Sun that the justice
I seek for my daughter is the same you would want for the victims of Japanese occupation in China.88
Coinciding with the narrators decision to pursue charges against Harris is the news that Mr. Morgan has decided to press charges against his
maid for taking his son to her village without permission. While Americans frequently touted informal visits to the homes of local people as symbolic of international friendship, in this story, an innocent gesture by a
naive young woman has become a crime. Again, the author wants to convey to the reader the tremendous imbalance of power between Americans
and Okinawans, despite Americans proclamations of strong friendship.
It isnt just the crime of one American that I want to indict, says the
narrator, but all the pretense of the cocktail partywhat he considers
to be a facade of friendliness and cooperation, masking the domination
and oppression of Okinawans by the U.S. military.89 His indictment encompasses American military families, whom he sees as accomplices in
maintaining the facade.
What do the American and Okinawan women and children represent
in this story? In contrast to the real-life Marian Merritt, who believed that
American wives could help improve the status of Okinawan women, the
shiros story expresses no gender solidarity with the
American wife in O
narrators daughter. The narrator finds Mrs. Miller friendly, in a superficial sort of way, and attractive. The Okinawan daughter and the American wife symbolize the unequal relationship between the U.S. occupiers
and the Okinawan subjects. After learning of his daughters rape, the narrator briefly imagines sexually assaulting the American wife, but is unable
to go very far in this vengeful fantasy. Other Okinawan women briefly appear in the story as maids and baby-sitters for American families, accentuating the unequal relationship between the Americans and the Okinawans
who serve them.90
The story also contrasts the treatment of the American and Okinawan
children to underscore the inequality of Okinawans in relation to Americans, and what the narrator sees as the hypocrisy of American rhetoric
about American-Okinawan friendship and cooperation. Whereas Mr.
Morgan is pressing charges against the maid who took his son to her village without permission, the narrators family does not have the equal
means to pursue his daughters assailant in court; indeed, his daughter has
been charged with a crime by the U.S. military. The daughter does not
Dear Little Okinawa 195
wish to press charges against Robert Harris, though her father continues
to seek a way to do so. Thus, for both the Okinawan family and the Morgan family, the children are pawns in an international conflict, not vehicles for international cooperation, as Americans often portrayed them.
Conclusion
Americans wished to consider themselves benefactors to Okinawans, but
any positive aspects of maintaining their nations armed forces on the
islandAmericans would have pointed to charity and employment as
among the most important benefitswere countered by the costs of bearing an enormous foreign military presence. Service wives attempted to
ameliorate the hardships faced by Okinawans, but the military bases
and their inhabitants inevitably altered local communities and used the
islands scarce resources. Although American women wanted to reduce
prostitution and poverty among Okinawans, these problems remained.91
Furthermore, although profits from ventures such as the Naha and Nago
shops were intended to aid poor Okinawan families, the reliance on charitable assistance and the base economy perpetuated the cycle of Okinawans dependence on the United Statesthrough restaurants, bars, tourist shops, domestic work, and prostitutionand not incidentally were
used to support the argument for maintaining U.S. bases on the island.
Besides the toll exacted by the military presence, the divergence of aims
and the contrast between cultures militated against Okinawans acceptance of U.S. bases. In West Germany, U.S. anti-communist military and
foreign relations goals frequently converged with the local populations
desire to stave off Soviet encroachment and promote capitalism. Thus,
West Germans were more inclined to tolerate U.S. bases than not. By contrast, the anti-communist foreign policy of the United States that claimed
to require control of Okinawa as a defensive strategy clashed with Okinawans aspirations for Japanese government and an end to the military
presence. Moreover, the American and West German cultures intersected
more frequently than did the American and Okinawan cultures and thus
strengthened the unity between the United States and West Germany. For
instance, many Americans and West Germans found a meeting ground in
Christianity and whiteness, whereas religious and other cultural as well as
racial differences between Americans and Okinawans upheld Americans
sense of Okinawans as a backward people and contributed to arguments
for U.S. military dominance of the Ryukyu Islands, which further alienated and angered Okinawans.
In their interactions with Okinawans, American military families, espe196 Dear Little Okinawa
cially wives, could reach beyond official relations to build cultural and social bridges. Service wives engaged in activities which they hoped would
improve perceptions of Americans and the difficult economic situation of
Okinawans. Some American women, most notably Marian Merritt, even
came to care for Okinawans and admire their values and ways. But ultimately, military wives activities rested on and perpetuated stereotypes of
Okinawans as vulnerable children and assumptions about their dependency. In so doing, military wives and their families helped the United
States maintain its bases in what military and government leaders considered to be a crucial Asian outpost in the war against communism, and to
justify U.S. control of Okinawa, despite the peoples strong desire to return to Japanese governance. American womens efforts evidently did not
turn the tide of the reversion movement, which grew stronger in the 1960s
and finally resulted in the return of the islands to Japan in 1972, although
many U.S. military bases remained.
6
Young Ambassadors
When the ship carrying the family of Ann and Robert Chase
docked in Genoa, Italy, in 1955, four-year-old Debby walked down the
gangplank and greeted an Italian policeman with Buon giorno. The delighted policeman responded warmly, Buon giorno, bambina Americana! According to Ann Chase, her daughters greeting sparked a beautiful friendship between Italy and my three children. During Robert
Chases three-year tour of duty with the Support Command, Southern European Task Force at Camp Darby, the family lived in an Italian neighborhood near the base. Nancy, Debby, and Robbie Chase befriended the Italians who came to their house: the fruit vendor, the garbage collector, the
landlord, and the donkey-ride man. Ann Chase described her childrens
encounters with Italians in their neighborhood as mak[ing] friends naturally . . . in the ordinary activities of day-to-day living.1
After World War II, service childrens friendship with people overseas
served as a resonant metaphor for ideal relations between the United
States and other nations. In an article on raising children in military life
abroad, service mother Marcia Matthews observed that childrens getting along with others was a basic tenet of American education. An
American teacher in Tokyo declared in 1948 that Army children, more
than their civilian peers, embodied world citizenship because of their
experience in adapting to ways of living radically different from [their]
own.2 Well-behaved, friendly children who because of their youth exercised less social power than adults were considered natural internationalists. As the least threatening group of Americans, they were believed to
easily befriend residents of occupied and host nations. Service mothers in
particular, and also American educators, promulgated an idea of children
as more capable than adults of transcending cultural differences between
Americans and other peoples, and of facilitating relations between their
parents and local adults. In the minds of Americans, childrens ready acquisition of local languages and their enthusiasm for learning about the
culture and history of the nations in which they lived modeled foreign relations in their ideal form.
198
199
America. Even children who did not consider themselves unofficial ambassadors overseas knew from their parents that any trouble they caused
could result in their familys return to the United States. Dale Drysdale,
the son of a school principal and superintendent of schools for service
children, lived among and attended school with service children between
1957 and 1964. He said that among his eleven- and twelve-year old peers,
it was common wisdom that children who received delinquency reports endangered their fathers chances for promotion and risked the return of their families to the United States.9
Many service children, especially older ones, were aware of the connections between the militarys expectations of good conduct and the overseas image of the United States. Hudson Bill Phillips, the son of an
Army chaplain, lived in Stuttgart, Germany between 1951 and 1953 and
attended Heidelberg American High School. He recalled receiving guidance on how to behave as a goodwill representative in Germany from
numerous sources. All family members departing for Europe from Fort
Hamilton, New York, attended an orientation at which a military representative informed them that they would be ambassadors of the United
States and distributed mimeographed instructions prescribing good behavior as well as behavior to avoid. The families were given more prescriptive materials aboard ship en route to Europe. In Germany, schools,
military memos, and Stars and Stripes reminded family members of their
ambassadorial duties. Children who participated in Scouting programs
and sports events were briefed whenever their activities brought them into
contact with the German community.10
Young Ambassadors
201
Germans and her children Jimmy (age eight) and Bonnie (age five) were
friendlier, presumably because young American children seemed less
threatening. The children frequently interacted with Germans in encounters Berry depicted as pleasant. Three young German women accompanied the children on the bus to and from the American school. Jimmy
took piano lessons from a German woman who came to the Berry home.
The familys German housekeeper, whose husband was killed in World
War II, spoke English well, cared for the children, and insisted on working
beyond her allotted sixty hours a week to help them with their homework.11
Ann Chase stated that her childrens natural associations with Italians in their neighborhood had allowed the Chase family to buil[d] up a
battery of good will to offset the occasional unfriendly encounter with a
local person. By natural associations, Chase meant everyday, informal
contacts with Italians in or around the homefor instance, between the
children and the neighborhood fruit vendoras opposed to official activities intended to bring together Americans and host nationals, such as military-sponsored club meetings. Chases characterization of the childrens
relations with Italians as natural underscores the idea that children
who were American but less powerful or intimidating than their servicemen fathers or even their motherswere inherently suited for befriending
people in foreign countries and could be more influential than propaganda or official military representatives in establishing friendship and
trust. Her use of the military term battery to describe her childrens accumulation of good will toward Italians emphasizes the perception of informal friendly relations as a component of Cold War military missions
abroad.12
Mothers depicted childrens friendships as the foundation for developing international friendships in peacetime. According to Lelah Berry, her
son Jimmy soon dropped his initial hostility toward Germans to befriend
local boys and play football with them. Bonnie Berry played with a German girl named Inge who every morning waited for the American girl to
return from school. Lelah Berry gave fruit or cake to the neighborhood
children who visited Jimmy and Bonnie. The German childrens relative
smallness (probably due to inadequate nutrition during the war years)
and their friendship with her children softened her attitude toward the
German people against whom she had harbored resentment for instigating the war.13
In some cases, service mothers turned over to their children the responsibility for initiating interactions between adults. According to a 1953 Air
Force report on families in Germany, From the very first days, dependent
children tended to serve as a link between German and American families. The report credited American children for learning German quickly,
acting as interpreters for their parents, befriending German children, and
initiating contacts between their parents and the parents of their German
friends. The mother of Inge, the German friend of Bonnie Berry, demonstrated friendliness toward the Berry family by sending gifts for Bonnie
hand-drawn picture books of fairy tales which she has laboriously
printed in English, or a knitted woolen scarf or some mittens. According
to Lelah Berry, The Germans seem to love American children, and would
spoil them rotten if given half a chance. In Japan, Jean Louise and Captain Lauren Elkin befriended neighbors through their children. The Elkin
family lived in a Japanese house in Kasahata because of the unavailability
of military housing. Lauren Junior (age three-and-a-half) befriended local
youngsters who frequently came to the house to play with him and ride in
the familys car. Lauren Juniors friends also taught Japanese words to
Jean Louise Elkin. The friendship between the American boy and his playmates prompted Japanese adults in the neighborhood to invite Lauren
Juniors parents to social events. Eventually, Jean Elkin became a volunteer teacher for Japanese children and recruited other American wives to
do the same, and also taught Japanese for Americans at Whiteman Air
Force Base.14 Adult Americans and residents of occupied and host nations
may have found it easier, especially in the early stages of acquaintanceships, to demonstrate friendliness through children, rather than risking
face-to-face encounters with former enemies who still might harbor prejudice and reject proffered kindness.
A fictional short story about a military family in Italy illustrated American ideas of how children could help parents overcome the fear of living
in a strange place and appreciate the experience of being abroad. In Domani, the narrator, Mrs. MacDonald, arrives in Italy expecting that her
family will live in a beautiful home, perhaps on the sea. She is severely disappointed when she arrives at her new residence, a modest, sparsely furnished house. Mrs. MacDonald resents that the Italians stare at her and
her son, Bobby, when they venture into town, and perceives animosity in
the children whom she describes as horrible street urchins and strange
little devils. She feels like an outsider who will never fit in among the
Catholic farmers of the village, and grows increasingly embittered, isolated, and depressed. Her husband, Frank, hires an Italian woman, Lucia,
to care for the house and child. Although the woman is pleasant, Mrs.
MacDonald resents her. When Lucia finishes her daily work at the MacDonalds house, she takes Bobby home with her so that he can play with
her son, Tonio. The boys develop a close friendship. At one point, Bobby
Young Ambassadors
203
and used commonly. Furthermore, they were fundamental to good relations with residents of occupied and host nations. Lelah Berry attributed
her childrens ease with speaking German to an absence of self-consciousness.16 These mothers observations attest to the idea that children understood other languages, and, by extension, other peoples better than American adults did, through an innate connection to others through the supposed universality of childhood.
Many former service children confirm that they, and other children
they knew, acquired varying degrees of fluency in foreign languages while
stationed abroad. Some say that they learned only basic phrases such as
greetings, expressions of courtesy, and those necessary for shopping, ordering in restaurants, or traveling. Jo Wilson Emerson, the daughter of an
Army officer, said that she and the Japanese she encountered used a combination of Japanese and English to communicate. A former service teenager whose family lived in France described herself as semi-fluent in the
language. She recounted that her father asked her to translate to help him
sort out an incident involving a GI who had taken a sixteen-year-old
French girl to Germany. Joyace Katz, whose family lived in Spain, spoke
Spanish well and said that her younger sister at age four spoke German,
French, and Spanish. John Walker, the son of an Army officer who learned
German while living in Stuttgart between 1956 and 1959, stated in 1999
that German is certainly a second language for me. Walker learned German by studying it for two years at Stuttgart-Ludwigsburg American
High School and practicing it in daily contacts with Germans. Upon returning to the United States, Walker enrolled in a college German class.
The effect of the language on him has endured over the decades; he says
that he still sometimes thinks and frequently dreams in German.17
Former military children recalled a wide range of contacts with residents of occupied and host nations. The variety of contacts suggests that
children possibly encountered local peoples as much as, if not more than,
military wives did. Sons and daughters in military families, especially
those who lived off base, had frequent contacts with non-Americansin
shops and churches, with maids and neighbors, at school, in Girl Scout
and Boy Scout activities, on public transportation, and on camping trips
and other excursions. Many teenagers attended parties and dances with
occupied and host national teenagers. Elizabeth Thomas, the daughter of
an Army noncommissioned officer stationed in Wrzburg between 1950
and 1954, said that she encountered Germans every day during her four
years in Germany: they worked in her home as housekeepers; at Nrnberg American High School as teachers, secretaries, and cafeteria employees; and everywhere on base. Thomas also socialized with Germans in
Young Ambassadors
205
her Teen Club. Service children who initially lived off base (usually while
their families awaited on-base housing) said that their contacts with local
peoples decreased after they moved to the base, although they still encountered them on base, in their homes, and on occasional excursions off
base.18
Relations with domestic employees in occupied and host nations were
among the most common steady contacts between service children (who
lived on or off base) and local peoples, and could provide opportunities
for friendly, even intimate relations amid political tensions. Service wives
and children often characterized such relations as affectionate, even in the
context of occupation. Army wife Bernadine Lee wrote that before arriving in Tokyo to join her husband in 1946, I had . . . vowed that no Japanese girl would lay hands on my own baby. The competence of a Japanese woman hired to care for her son, and his affection for her, changed
Lees mind.19
The son of an Army officer whose family was among the first to arrive
in occupied Germany in 1946 said that he and his brother (both teenagers) enjoyed a warm relationship with the familys housekeeper and
cook. For his seventeenth birthday, the maid gave him a book awarded to
her brother, a 1936 Olympic gold medalist killed in the war. Children
often grew close to domestic employees and learned to converse with
them in their language more easily than did the parents. Caretakers of
American children could be casual and playful with their charges; yet the
caretaker role also allowed them to behave as adults in their relations
with American children, perhaps more so than with the American parents.20 Forest Ramsey, the son of an airman stationed in Okinawa between 1961 and 1963, remembered relations between the U.S. military
community and Okinawans as tense, yet said that he and his brothers
were very close with the familys housekeeper, Yoshiko. Ramsey described
the familys elderly gardener as polite but aloof, in contrast to Yoshiko, a
big sister to the three boys in our household and a pal to my mother.21
Though Americans often described relations between service children
and domestic employees as affectionate, they worried that they could accentuate power imbalances between the military and occupied or host
nations. Mothers and military literature expressed concerns that reliance
on domestic employees might spoil children. They feared not only the cultivation of bad habits in children, but also that spoiled children would undermine American intentions to project equality and democracy abroad.
In a discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of hiring household help
overseas, Navy wife Cora Cheney noted that Since ours is a society
based on servantless houses, it is especially important that we not lose
Young Ambassadors
207
Overseas Schools
Americans associated with the military believed that the formal education
of service children abroad could provide opportunities to learn about occupied and host nations, interact with local peoples, and foster good will
that strengthened alliances between the United States and the nations
housing its bases. Funding schools for American military children proved
challenging from the beginning, however. The War Department, reportedly responding to postwar public pressure to minimize military expenses,
declined to directly fund the first schools established overseas during the
19461947 academic year. Overseas military community planners, parents, and educators devised strategies to fund and staff schools for American children. In the European Theater, sales of wines and spirits generated profits for funding the schools, and parents paid tuition on a sliding
scale. The lowest three grades of enlisted personnel paid no tuition for
their children, the next four grades of enlisted personnel paid $36 per
child annually, and officers and civilians paid $72 per child. Spouses and
Young Ambassadors
209
eign languages would encourage childrens involvement outside the American community. Language education for service children arose from a
growing sense on the part of Americans since the late 1930s of the need
for their nations greater global involvement to prevent and solve international conflicts. Service childrens participation outside U.S. military communities was considered beneficial to current international relations and
to the future of the United States. An Army report on dependents schools
in Europe bespoke the assumption that service children should be a part
of occupied communities. According to the report, service children were
Young Ambassadors
211
lies attended local schools, though they composed only about five percent
of all service children abroad.37 And at some stations, for instance, in
Turkey in the 1960s, no American children attended local schools.38
Service children regularly encountered local nationals in the American
schools, which employed citizens of occupied and host nations to fill faculty and staff positions to compensate for inadequate numbers of American personnel for these jobs and satisfy demands that the U.S. military
offer employment to host nation citizens. Citizens of occupied and host
nations worked in American schools as teachers, librarians, secretaries,
janitors, and cafeteria employees. When the 1952 1953 school year
began at Heidelberg American Elementary School, roughly one teacher
out of four was a German. The Army assessed the hiring of local nationals
as more economical than recruiting and paying for the travel expenses of
faculty from the United States. The French government negotiated with
the U.S. Army to ensure the hiring of French faculty and staff. The Army
complied, though it required French educators to speak fluent English.
Young Ambassadors
213
In the official view, occupied and host nation educators in Europe who
taught American students about the countries in which they were stationed served as the necessary link between the Americans and the German and French communities, familiarizing children with local songs,
dances, arts, crafts, and customs.39
American teachers worked with non-American educators on lessons to
develop students understanding of France and Germany, and sought to
establish friendly work relationships in informal gatherings with their colleagues. Wilma Ecker, who taught at American elementary schools in Okinawa, said that Okinawan teachers were frequent guests in her home.
Teachers from German and American schools met with one another and
inspected each others school buildings and educational styles. American
teachers at Molesworth Air Force base and British teachers from an English school in Peterborough observed one anothers teaching styles and
then exchanged teaching positions for two weeks.40
In addition to offering language instruction, educators tried to foster
cultural understanding by teaching students about the culture and customs of the nations in which they were living. Dependents schools in
Germany expanded language courses in 1947 to include the study of
German literature, history, geography, social studies, art, and music.
Teacher Gladys Zabilka compiled lessons to teach her students Japanese
history and Okinawan history, folklore, customs, crafts, and music. In
Japan, American elementary school children learned traditional songs and
dances, which Ed Dooley said his sisters performed, in Japanese dress, for
guests who visited the family. Florence Dmytryk, a fifth-grade teacher at
the Army Overseas Dependents School in Paris during the 19531954
school year, provided a detailed account of the lessons and activities she
and other teachers employed to help students better understand the
French people. Her students studied French culture, customs, history,
and geography. They read European literature (in English) for children; a
few advanced students read Les Miserables and The Hunchback of Notre
Dame. In addition, students learned music appreciation by singing European folk songs and discussing musicals they had attended (probably with
their parents). They compared American and French holidays, celebrated
the national holidays of France, studied the food habits of the French,
and prepared a multicourse French meal. In anticipation that students
would socialize with the French, they learned about their social mannerisms so that they would feel at home with their French friends. The
goal of promoting understanding for host nations in overseas schools
survived into the early 1960s, as evidenced in a report by a committee of
educators appointed by the U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Education Division, to evaluate overseas dependents schools, which rec214 Young Ambassadors
ommended that opportunities should be sought in all curricula to increase understanding of and appreciation of the host nation.41
To teach what she termed successful international living, Florence
Dmytryk incorporated into her curriculum activities that familiarized
children with off-base communities and facilitated their social relations
with local peoples. For the section on arithmetic, the children learned to
change francs into dollars and dollars into francs, convert metric into
English units and vice versa, and tell time in the European style (the
twenty-four-hour mode). To give students practice in using French money,
Dmytryk and a host national teacher took them on a Christmas shopping
trip in French department stores. Because her students often took excursions with their families, Dmytryk created exercises to improve their understanding of the places they visited. Children who missed classes to take
vacations with parents (a frequent occurrence) were expected to connect
their vacation activities with the goals of the class. Dmytryk required vacationing children to keep a journal, send postcards to the class, and research in the encyclopedia the places they visited. When Dmytryks class
received a postcard, the students researched the historical and cultural
sites visited by their classmate.42
To cultivate to the fullest childrens appreciation of host nations and to
demonstrate Americans interest in foreign countries, teachers took students on excursions into local communities. Sometimes the outings were
simple, such as taking the Army Overseas Dependents School children in
Paris out for recreation in the Bois de Boulogne on temperate days for
forty-five minutes after lunch. Students also took many field trips, which,
according to the job description for elementary school teachers at overseas schools, were among educators major duties. Fifth- and sixthgraders at the Army school in Paris took approximately two field trips a
month. High school students made excursions to nearby countries that
lasted for several days. The French encouraged cultural outings by allowing American children to enter museums and galleries without paying admission (a privilege also enjoyed by French children). On one field trip,
the students were given an opportunity to join the ranks of artists in
Paris and spent a happy hour painting on the Left Bank.43 Students from
Heidelberg American Elementary School visited a variety of German sites:
the zoo, the Geological Institute, a chicken hatchery, a newspaper printing
plant, an observatory at the university, a weather station, and a textile
mill.44 Teacher Marie Espinoza took her fourth-grade students at the General Hoyt S. Vandenberg School to see the bust of Nefertiti on exhibit at a
museum in Wiesbaden, Germany; brought a small group of students to
the Joan of Arc pageant in Orleans, France, where they waved at Premier
Georges Pompidou in the parade; and escorted her sixth-grade class to the
Young Ambassadors
215
home of the French author George Sand. Gerard Akkerhuis, a teacher for
schools at Air Force bases in North Africa and Europe in the late 1950s
and early 1960s, recalled study trips to Peterborough Cathedral in England and Leptis Magna Roman Ruins in Libya.45 Pupils at Army schools
in Europe joined local students for visits to historical landmarks, museums, and art galleries.46
On excursions, students identification of historical connections between the United States and host nations was intended to instill a sense of
the interdependence of . . . nations and encourage the youngsters to
maintain alliances through future international friendship and cooperation. Students who visited Versailles learned that our Benjamin Franklin
had also been there during the Revolutionary War to ask Louis XVI to aid
the Americans. Students also visited the room where the Treaty of Versailles was signed after World War I, and the hotel where General Dwight
Eisenhower made his headquarters during World War II.47 All these historical sites recalled U.S.-France alliances in wars that for Americans were
largely about the protection of their national values. Visits to these sites
perhaps imparted to children a sense of the historical significance of their
own presence in France, as family members of military personnel stationed in NATO countries during the early years of the Cold War.
To try to realize the ideal of international cooperation advocated in dependents schools, American and host nation educators created numerous
opportunities for students to interact with local children and adults. The
armed forces helped to coordinate school-community projects to bolster German-American and French-American relations. These projects included parties, dances, student and teacher exchanges, joint participation
in observances of American and host nation holidays, festivals, fairs, charitable activities, and excursions to historical and cultural sites, musical
activities, and athletic events. An Army report noted that in 1950 approximately 500 German teachers visited American dependents schools,
and estimated that between 1946 and 1956 contacts between American
and European teachers and students numbered well into the thousands. During the 19551956 school year, more than 100 foreign students paid tuition to attend Army dependents schools in Germany and
France.48 German and American students frequently attended classes at
one anothers schools, played together at recesses, gave presentations for
their visitors, and exchanged addresses. Bill Phillips remembered his
Heidelberg High School class visiting a Latin class at a nearby German
school. We were surprised to see that they were cheating on a test and
acting very much like us, he wrote. They seemed to enjoy our presence.49 In April 1953, students at the Bad Godesberg American School
presented a program, entirely in German, for sixty German student visi216 Young Ambassadors
tors from the Plittersdorf school. During World Friendship Week, students brought German friends to class with them.50
Service children, like their mothers, were pulled by divergent demands.
Although the children were to appreciate local cultures and customs
and respect host nationals, they also were to [uphold] American ideals
and project the superiority of American ways.51 According to Florence
Dmytryk, most aspects of the Army educational program were intended
to achieve successful, cooperative living among the people of France and
careful preservation of the childs American heritage and democratic viewpoints. American teachers conferred frequently with their French colleagues about American styles of conducting classes. Dmytryk thought
that French teaching styles were too strict and placed too much emphasis
on learning by rote, in contrast to what she considered the more relaxed American classroom atmosphere. The American teachers urged the
French faculty members to consider each student as an individual, invite
class participation, and use encouragement rather than the threat of failure or punishment to motivate students. American teachers regularly tried
to persuade the French teachers to assign less homework. Dmytryks determination that her students respect the French yet retain their American
identity, characterized by individuality and independence, manifested itself in her policy on students behavior on field trips. She did not want the
students to upset French onlookers they encountered on excursions, yet
she also believed that the children should behave as they normally would
in public in the United States. She said that she allowed her students to
question the guides, to walk along in groups or alone, and to carry on
soft discussions with their friends, in great contrast to the hushed
rows of French children encountered on outings. Although it was felt
that the French public might misinterpret the controlled freedom of the
American children as laxity on the part of the teacher, wrote Dmytryk,
it was also felt that our philosophies should not be sacrificed for the sake
of appearance.52
Educators believed that service parents own attitudes about relations
with occupied and host nationals could help or hinder good relations
between the military and local communities. Some service mothers supported American schools efforts to teach languages and establish good
rapport with local peoples. For instance, service parents in the Heidelberg
Parent-Teacher Association voted to accept a German language program
for the Heidelberg Elementary School for the 19531954 school year.
American mothers also worked in classrooms with German teachers. But
educators worried that parents who disliked living in foreign countries
discouraged their children from appreciating local cultures and ways of
life.53
Young Ambassadors
217
they built replicas of United Nations buildings. She insisted that her kindergartner gained a vast world of geography, history, and education, in
addition to self-assurance and the priceless experience of living, playing
and attending school with children who speak another language. Carroll
proudly declared that the childhood world of my sons lies far beyond a
picket fence. Air Force wife Marilyn Wright wrote a letter to the editors
of U.S. Lady expressing her appreciation for service life, which she credited for help[ing] me to grow, to look further than my nose and also for
benefiting her children: My children will be better adjusted, take more
interest in government and different countries. Liz Reeves, the daughter
of an Army colonel, wrote that service life offered education in lifes experiences, social graces and tolerance for my fellow men. Dr. Thomas
Staton, a child psychologist whose articles appeared in U.S. Lady magazine, named a liberal education in [a childs] knowledge of people,
places, and customs and the richness and variety of environments
as the benefits of service life for children.55 Advocates of children as unofficial ambassadors considered exposure to other ways of life a means to
acquire cosmopolitan sophistication that benefited the United States, as
well as the children themselves, and believed that children who were at
ease abroad could most effectively strengthen present and future Cold
War alliances.56
A short story titled Reorientation illustrates military families hopes
that living in a foreign country could prove an asset to teenagers, even
those who did not yet appreciate it, and also encourage young Americans
contributions to understanding between nations. After living in Tokyo
for three years, Patty and her family moved to a Midwestern American
town. Patty did not fit into the cliques at her new high school. Unlike her
younger brothers, Patty had not enjoyed life in Japan. But she discovers
that Im the only one in class that has actually been in a foreign country
and finds that her classmates are interested in what it was like to live in
Japan. As she describes Japanese culture to her new friends, displays pictures and souvenirs, and tells about her participation in a Japanese tea
ceremony, Patty becomes more lively and socially engaged with her peers.
Her mother, the narrator of the story, states that I was amazed at how
much culture she had absorbed in spite of herself. Patty creates an exhibit on Japan for her high schools United Nations Day fair, and wears
her kimono as part of the display. Her main competition is an exhibit by a
girl whose pilot father had brought her presents from his trips around the
world, but Pattys mother considers it just an assortment of souvenirs to
our seasoned eyes, unlike Pattys focused presentation on Japanese culture. Patty wins first place because her exhibit most clearly demonstrates
the kind of understanding between nations that the U.N. strives for. She
Young Ambassadors
219
is pleased by the prize, and by the attention of an attractive boy who now
considers her more sophisticated than any other girl he had known.57
Pattys absorption of Japanese culture is presented in this story as a phenomenon that occurred naturally and unconsciously, and did not manifest
itself until sometime after her return to the United States. Thus, the story
presents childreneven blas teenagersas natural liaisons between the
United States and other nations, and the experience of living abroad as the
crucible for creating new cosmopolitan Americansthe kind of citizens
needed for a country extensively engaged in international relations.
Although some educators, like service parents, worried that residing in
foreign countries might weaken childrens sense of American identity, living overseas was also regarded as an opportunity for Americans from diverse regions and backgrounds to come together under the aegis of the
military. Some children traveled so much that they did not remember living in the United States. In June 1953, twenty-six students finished the
eighth grade at the Army Overseas Dependents Schools in Paris. All had
attended at least six different schools on two continents; six had attended
twelve schools on three continents, and two had attended sixteen schools
on four continents. Some of the children had no familiarity with American
money because they had known only military scrip or French francs. Yet
educators, and the Army, judged that classrooms were not only venues for
teaching about the world outside the United States, but also for strengthening childrens knowledge of their own country. According to a 1958
Army report, schools for dependents created an environment in which
American children and teachers from different regions in the United States
became more familiar with one another: Both staff and student body
were composed of persons from all 48 states, and the territories, as well.
People from all walks of life, all races and creeds, and representing the
full range of sectional backgrounds and interests, met in the classrooms,
bringing with them the uniqueness that was theirs and taking away, certainly, a fuller knowledge and deeper understanding of the totality that
is the American people. This report thus extolled the overseas classroom
as a vehicle for reinforcing the solidarity of Americans from all states,
a unity believed essential for winning the Cold War. Ed Dooley recalled
that his classmates at the Air Force high school in Japan hailed from all
regions of the United States, although the students were not racially diverse.58
Besides reasoning that overseas life cultivated childrens understanding
of other nations, service wives deployed the argument that living abroad
strengthened rather than weakened childrens commitment to the United
States and appreciation of their country in relation to other nations. Cora
Cheney stated that Our job [as mothers] is to keep a perspective that
220 Young Ambassadors
221
223
Conclusion
Americans affiliated with the armed forces regarded service children as
natural internationalists whose supposed artlessness and openness to nonAmerican cultures and peoples promised to persuade residents of occupied and host nations of American good will and alliance, first in the occupations of Germany and Japan, then in the Cold War. Because children
wielded the least social power of all Americans, they were presumed to be
less intimidating to occupied and host nationals than servicemen and service wives. But children were also less amenable than adults to the disciplining of their actions. American military childrens presumed lack of
guile, which military officials, parents, and educators considered an asset
in foreign relations, also could prove a liability. Some young people, like
some adults, found it difficult to balance the ambassadorial ideal of respect for other peoples with the patriotic ideal of national superiority.
Less adept than adults at smoothing over ideological contradictions, children occasionally let fall the mask of international equality to reveal the
power imbalances which lurked below the surface. Like those of their
mothers and fathers, service childrens encounters with local peoples were
fraught with possibilities. Contacts with residents of occupied and host
nations contained the potential for improving American international relations but were always beset by difficulties and contradictions inherent in
American Cold War ideology.
Young Ambassadors
225
Conclusion
As a familys tour of duty drew to a close, the household prepared for the journey to the next station. On rare occasions, family members left for the United States before the sponsors tour of duty ended, for
instance, when a child finished high school and wished to return to the
United States to attend college, a medical condition necessitated the return
of a spouse, or a marriage ended in divorce.1 The U.S. military evacuated
families from foreign posts during international crises: the outbreak of the
Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the beginning of the Vietnam
War. On June 26, 1950, Dorothy House Vieman wrote to her family that
on the previous day North Korean airplanes strafed the U.S. military
housing compound where she lived outside Seoul, and that she and another wife and their two dogs waited with their houseboys in a trench dug
by the domestic servants for the orders to evacuate. The American wives
left almost everything behind, including furniture and pets. Vieman left
South Korea and its people with a heavy heart. This war isnt the North
Koreans against the South Koreans. This war is Communism against
Americanism, and the pitiful Koreans are pawns in a war which happened
to fall within their borders, she wrote, and defended the U.S. participation in it as a moral obligation to defend the South Korean people
against the attempted communist takeover.2 The week before the crisis
began over nuclear missiles in Cuba in October 1962, U.S. News and
World Report reported that although life appeared to go on as usual for
American military families at Guantanamo Bay, wives had packed suitcases and studied evacuation plans. On October 22, President Kennedy
informed the nation that he had ordered the evacuation of American families from the base.3
Early returns occurred infrequently, though, and most families remained at their posts for the duration of the sponsors assignment. As the
time to leave approached, they packed their household goods and souvenirs, made arrangements to ship pets to their next home, and said goodbye to their American friends as well as the local people whom they had
come to know. Marian Merritt described the weeks preceding her familys
226
local support for U.S. military bases and diplomatic objectives. For good
or ill, the presence of thousands of families abroad helped shape how
people around the world viewed U.S. Cold War policies and American
culture and society. Imagining families in military communities abroad as
living in hermetic little Americas or golden ghettoes denies the impact, whether positive or negative, of their presence in host countries.
Even supposedly self-contained military communities were not sealed off
from local peoples: American family members encountered host nationals
on and off base; gave impressions of American home life, gender relations,
and race relations, even in seemingly superficial contacts; used local resources; and ultimately functioned to maintain U.S. ascendancy abroad.
The study of military family members activities and writings expands
our understanding of early Cold War military history, foreign relations,
and the history of American families, women, children, gender roles, and
race relations in the two decades following the end of World War II. Ordinary women, children, and men were considered participants in the ideological war against the spread of communism, not only in the United
States but also internationally. In assuming the role of unofficial ambassadors for the United States, American military wives were multidimensional domestic, political, and international figures. Whether or not they
thought of themselves as young ambassadors, American children and
teenagers also played a role in the international story, in their attitudes,
their comportment, and their interactions with occupied and host nation
peoples. In their domestic roles, American servicemen such as Joseph
Boyle in Germany and Robert Merritt in Okinawa displayed a softer, less
militaristic side of American masculinity. Americans abroad also brought
with them racial attitudes, revealed in their interactions with fellow Americans and with occupied and host nation peoples. Assumptions about
commonalities among white peoples, as in West Germany, and the inferiority of Asians, as in Okinawa, shaped not only interpersonal but also international relations and, to Americans, helped to justify the presence of
their military.
The 1950s and early 1960s represented the heyday of the unofficial
ambassador ideal, which lost much of its symbolic potency during the
1960s. As U.S. military involvement in Vietnam escalated in early 1965,
National Security Council staff officer Chester Cooper noted in a secret
memorandum that the evacuation of U.S. dependents can signal determination or weakness, and thought that it would be better to withdraw
American families from the country because We have more use for MPs
[military policemen] than to ride school buses; the presence of so many
women and children is an inhibition, conscious or subconscious, on action.6 Thus, as the conflict between the communists and anti-commu228 Conclusion
pay outside the home and pursue personal ambitions rather than perform
unpaid service to the military. According to Brown, these women recognized the gendered script for service spouses and did not accept it as part
of their identities as women.15 As was the case for women in the civilian
population, military wives increasingly entered the paid labor force in the
1970s.16 Paid employment outside the home would have reduced the time
that otherwise might have been spent on volunteer work and womens
club activities. Despite the substantial changes of the 1960s and 1970s,
however, contacts between Americans and local peoples never disappeared, and whether superficial or involved, one must not dismiss such
interactions as insignificant and unworthy of study.
Since the 1940s, those who advocated maintaining service families
abroad had defended their position against critics who bemoaned the expense to American taxpayers, the perceived dangers to American women
and children in foreign countries, and the alleged drag on military readiness. In 2004, well over a decade after the end of the Cold War and
the subsequent closure of numerous overseas bases, just over 200,000
spouses, children, and other relatives of servicemen and servicewomen
resided abroad.17 Each year between 1989 and 1993, the U.S. Congress
approved joint resolutions to designate a National Military Families
Recognition Day which stated the benefits to the armed forces, and the
nation as a whole, of maintaining military families abroad. Assumptions
that the emotional and mental readiness of the United States military
personnel around the world is tied to the well-being and satisfaction of
their families, and that military families have supported the role of the
United States as the military leader and protector of the Free World, had
influenced official decisions to continue maintaining families abroad in
the first decades of the Cold War.18 In August 2004, however, President
George W. Bush announced in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars
preliminary plans for a new global posture that would reduce the number of military personnel stationed abroad by up to 70,000, and family
members and civilian employees by approximately 100,000. Besides creating a more agile and flexible force, Bush said, the realignment would
result in savings to taxpayers, and also greater stability for military
families because service personnel would spend more time in the United
States and family members would move and change jobs less frequently.19
In promoting the new policy as beneficial to military families, the Bush
administration assumed that maintaining them in the United States was
preferable to life abroad, in contrast to early Cold War era military wives
arguments that living overseas enhanced their childrens upbringing and
also offered unparalleled opportunities for Americans as family members
to strengthen relations between the United States and the peoples of other
Conclusion 231
more likely to treat Okinawans as inferior others. West Germans proximity to Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe no doubt made them acutely
aware of the possibility of communist expansion, and therefore at least
somewhat appreciative of the U.S. military presence on guard to prevent
that. Okinawans, on the other hand, seemed less concerned about communist encroachment, and felt betrayed by mainland Japan and exploited
and maltreated by the U.S. government which looked upon Okinawa as
first and foremost a strategic Cold War island. Still, even Junko Isa, the
Okinawan woman we met in chapter 5 who opposed the U.S. military
presence, said that Its hard to be 100 percent for or against anything
here. Maybe thats difficult for outsiders to understand, but thats the reality in Okinawa.22
In our attentiveness to the complexity of responses to U.S. military
bases and families, we should neither unquestioningly accept American
accounts that portray relations with local peoples in an overwhelmingly
positive light; nor should we go to the other extreme and assume that all
residents of occupied and host nations resented and even despised the U.S.
military presence, including its American families. In any case, interpersonal encounters were always conditioned by geopolitical contexts which
created fundamental power imbalances between Americans and nonAmericans. Such encounters could bolster or mitigate U.S. dominance, but
could never exist apart from it.
Conclusion 233
Notes
235
69. US Army, EUCOM, Historical Division, Morale and Discipline, 6; also see Petra Goedde,
GIs and Germans: Culture, Gender, and Foreign Relations,
19451949 (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2003), 8485.
70. Arnold G. Fisch, Jr., Military Government in the Ryukyu
Islands, 19451950 (Washington, D.C.: US Army Center of
Military History, 1988), 82.
71. Okinawa Junk Heap,
Life, 19 Dec 1949, 23.
72. M. D. [Morton] Morris,
Okinawa: A Tiger by the Tail
(New York: Hawthorn Books,
1968), 60.
73. Postwar same-sex relations
between service personnel and
residents of foreign countries
surely existed, though I have
found no mention of this in the
primary sources used here. Allan
Berube discusses same-sex encounters between American servicemen overseas and locals during World War II in various cities
(Manila, Cairo, Algiers, Naples,
Paris, and London), in Coming
Out Under Fire: The History of
Gay Men and Women in World
War Two (New York: The Free
Press, 1990), 192.
74. US Army, 320th Hq. Intelligence Detachment Hqs. 9th Inf.
Div. Consolidated Intelligence
Report, 23 November 1945,
General Survey: General Attitude of Civilians toward US
Troops and Occupation Forces
(4 December 1945), 3, Miscellaneous Files, Germany-Occupation, USAMHI.
75. Zink, The United States in
Germany, 143.
76. US Army, Military Intelligence Report, Team No. 395,
Kreises Muehldorf & Altoetting,
21 November 1945, General
Survey, 5, USAMHI.
77. Goedde, GIs and Germans, 91.
78. US Army, EUCOM, Historical Division, Morale and Discipline, 7879.
79. Dower, Embracing Defeat,
123130.
80. Morris, Okinawa, 102.
81. Morris, Okinawa, 6061;
Dower, Embracing Defeat, 130;
US Army, EUCOM, Historical
Division, Morale and Discipline,
7678. According to Franklin
dents, 6 March 1946; 200 Refrigerators Delivered at Yokohama from Philippines, 1 June
1946; Baby Foods to Be
Brought Here for Army Families, 17 June 1946.
97. US Army Forces, Pacific,
SCAP General Headquarters to
Applicants for Dependent Housing in Tokyo Area, memorandum, subject Information Regarding Movement of Dependents to the Tokyo Area, 6 April
1946, RG 331, SCAP Civil Historical Section, Administrative,
box 3277, NACP; EUCOM, Domestic Economy, 6971; US
Army Europe [USAEUR], Headquarters, Historical Division, The
Dependents School Program of
the US Army, Europe (1958), 4
5, RG 407, Adjutant Generals
Office, NACP.
98. Transportation Section,
Headquarters Military District of
Washington, What Is Your Destination? (Washington, D.C., ca.
1946); Movement of Dependents to Tokyo; US Army
Forces, Pacific, General Headquarters, Headquarters and Service Group, Memorandum No.
8, 3 July 1946, RG 331, SCAP
Economic and Scientific Section,
Industry Division, box 7306,
folder Movement of Dependents
and Dependent Housing, 1945
1950, NACP.
99. War Department Circular
No. 98; Transportation Section,
What Is Your Destination? 1,
1532.
100. Mrs. Cecil B. [Bernadine]
Lee, Army Wife in Japan, 12,
RG 331, SCAP, Allied Council
for Japan, Public Information
Section, box 24, folder Dependents 1946, NACP. A published
version of this document, with
photographs, appeared in Army
Information Digest, December
1946.
101. Neil Sheehan, A Bright
Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and
America in Vietnam (New York:
Vintage Books, 1988), 437; C.
DeForest to J. DeForest, 14 July
1946, DeForest Papers.
102. Davis, Come as a Conqueror, 193; EUCOM, Domestic
Economy, 7981.
103. The following documents
are in RG 331, SCAP, Allied
Council for Japan, Public Infor-
the Federal Republic of Germany, American Historical Review 101, no. 4 (October 1996):
1030.
56. Suzanne Shea, Frohliche
Weihnachten, Merry Christmas,
U.S. Lady, December 1955, 20
22, 79.
57. Maria Hhn, GIs,
Veronikas, and Lucky Strikes:
German Reactions to the American Military Presence in the
Rhineland-Palatinate during the
1950s (Ph.D. diss., University of
Pennsylvania, 1995), 93; also see
Hhn, GIs and Fruleins, 78.
58. Bowman, Post of the
Month: Heidelberg, Germany,
24.
59. Reinhold Wagnleitner,
Coca-Colonization and the Cold
War: The Cultural Mission of the
United States in Austria after the
Second World War, trans. Diana
M. Wolf (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press,
1994), 44, 295.
60. Shea, Frohliche Weihnachten, 22.
61. Norstad, Voluntary Actions; Hamlett, Post of the
Month: Berlin, 23; Bowman,
Post of the Month: Heidelberg,
Germany, 24.
62. Dorothy Carlson Easely,
2021; Wagnleitner, Coca-Colonization and the Cold War, 52.
63. US Department of the Air
Force, Dependents Information
on Germany (Washington, D.C.:
US GPO, 1955), 2; Joe C.
Adams, Christmas at Sea, U.S.
Lady, December 1962, 89.
64. US Department of Defense,
Office of Armed Forces Information and Education, A Pocket
Guide to Germany (Washington,
D.C.: US GPO, 1956), 33.
65. Hhn, GIs and Fruleins,
78.
66. Dorothy Carlson Easely,
43.
67. Barbara J. Griffith, English Lesson, U.S. Lady, MidSummer 1956, 9, 51.
68. US Department of the
Army, Ambassadors All (Washington, D.C.: US GPO, 1952),
15; US Department of the Army,
Headquarters, Information for
Dependents Traveling to Oversea
Areas (Washington, D.C.: US
GPO, 1959), 40; USAFE, USAFE
Dependents, 205, 224, 226, 229;
US Department of Commerce,
Bureau of the Census, US Census
of Population: 1960, Selected
Area Reports, Americans Overseas, X, & 56, Table 9, Social
Characteristics of Dependents of
the Armed Forces Abroad, by
Age and Sex, by Area, 1960
Europe and U.S.S.R. The census
did not ask whether children
under fourteen years could speak
the local language, although
anecdotal evidence suggests that
many of them did, and that perhaps young children were more
likely than parents to learn foreign languages while living
abroad. See chapter 6 (this volume).
69. Gene Donner, Army Wife
in Berlin, U.S. Lady, February
1962, 1417; Department of the
Air Force, Dependents Information, 2.
70. Hhn, GIs and Fruleins,
7578, 84; Nelson, Defenders or
Intruders?, 59.
71. Harold Zink, The United
States in Germany, 19441955
(Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1957), 140144.
72. Hickman, The United
States Army in Europe, 222;
Frederiksen, American Military
Occupation, 166; Bowman,
Post of the Month: Heidelberg,
Germany, 23.
73. US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, US
Census of Population: 1960, Selected Area Reports, Americans
Overseas, 56, Table 9.
74. Joe Adams, Are You
Naked and Dont Know It? U.S.
Lady, September 1961, 12.
75. Elizabeth Dallmeier
LaMantia (as told to Mary Drahos), My Country Tis of
Thee, US Lady, March 1960,
14; Reporting for Duty, US Lady,
March 1960, 47. One may speculate that LaMantia was a member of Germanys affluent and
prominent Dallmeier family, but I
have not substantiated this.
76. Hhn, GIs, Veronikas, and
Lucky Strikes, 119. According to
Hhn, these rumors were most
likely unfounded.
77. David Lodge, Out of the
Shelter, revised edition with an
introduction by the author (New
York: Penguin Books, 1970,
1985), vii-x.
notes to chapter 5
1. Marian Merritt, Is Like Typhoon: Okinawa and the Far
East (Tokyo: The World News
and Publishing Co., ca. 1955
1956), 159. The account does
not give the exact dates of the
Merritts stay in Okinawa. Also,
the book does not provide a publication date. A U.S. Lady article
states that the Merritts arrived in
Okinawa (for Robert Merritts
second assignment there) in 1952
and stayed for twenty-eight
months, which means they probably left sometime between 1954
and 1955. The magazine article,
published in the April 1956 issue,
gives the date of the books publication as last March. It also reports that the 5,000 copies of the
first edition of Is Like Typhoon
had already sold out . . . on
American newsstands in the Far
East. U.S. Lady-of-the-Month:
Mrs. Robert Merritt, U.S. Lady,
April 1956, 53.
2. Shannon McCune, The
Ryukyu Islands (Harrisburg, Pa.:
Stackpole Books, 1975), 59.
3. The Cornerstone of
Peace, <http://www.pref
.okinawa.jp/97/ishiji/ishiji.html>
(17 January 2006); John Dower,
War without Mercy: Race &
Power in the Pacific War (New
York: Pantheon Books, 1986),
298; see also Okinawa, Keystone
of the Pacific (no author given,
but this is clearly a military pamphlet). Masahide Ota states that
Okinawas population was less
than 500,000 as of December
1944. Re-Examining the History of the Battle of Okinawa,
in Okinawa: Cold War Island,
ed. Chalmers Johnson (Cardiff,
Calif.: Japan Policy Research Institute, 1999), 19.
4. Merritt, Is Like Typhoon,
19.
5. For example, see Andrew J.
Rotters very informative and absorbing analysis in Comrades at
Odds: The United States and
India, 19471964 (Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Press, 2000).
6. Okinawa, Keystone of the
Pacific, 19; US Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands
[USCAR], Programs and Statistics Section, The Ryukyu Islands
at a Glance (1953), 16; M. D.
Country as of 30 September
1968, available at <http://
www.dior.whs.mil/mmid/
military/history/309hist.htm>
(11 January 2006). The populations of American military family members and personnel
shrank in Europe and other areas
in this period, but increased in
Asia.
14. Mary Edwards Wertsch,
Military Brats: Legacies of Childhood Inside the Fortress (New
York: Fawcett Columbine, 1991),
323327, 383385.
15. Elizabeth I. Brown, Bye,
Bye Miss American Pie: Wives of
American Servicemen in Southeast Asia, 19611975 (Ph.D.
diss., University of Colorado,
2005), 233245.
16. Allyson Sherman Grossman, The Employment Situation for Military Wives,
Bibliography
abbreviations
261
262 Bibliography
Bibliography
263
264 Bibliography
Bibliography
265
266 Bibliography
Bibliography
267
268 Bibliography
Bibliography
269
270 Bibliography
Bibliography
271
Index
273
274 Index
Clay, Lucius DuBignon: evacuation of service families during Berlin blockade, 72,
139140, 226; on food for postwar
Germany, 41; German Youth Activities,
48; in Germany, 29; wife, 101; on
womens charitable work, 71
Clay, Marjorie, 101
Cochran, Jacqueline, 107
The Cocktail Party (Oshiro), 193196
Cold War: acceptance of militarization as
dominant foreign policy paradigm, 126
127; adoptions by service families,
246n68; aid to Greece, 43; aid to
Turkey, 43; aircraft industry war
boom, 44; anti-communism, 2, 6, 39,
46, 80; belief in superiority of American
Way of Life, 128; complexity of international power relations, 130; conflicting
demands placed on overseas dependents,
9, 11, 102, 128129, 188, 199, 217,
225; containment of communism, 42
43, 46, 61, 65; cultural internationalism,
55, 56; democratization (see Democratization); deployment of military power
abroad, 57, 116; development of, 42
44; development of hydrogen bomb, 45;
funding increases for national security,
45; glorification of the nuclear family,
6061, 80; good-versus-evil conflict between communists and anti-communists,
229; idealized version of domesticity,
3637, 6061; Jim Crow, 5; masculinity
and femininity during, 4; NATO membership, 4344; necessity for overseas
bases and operations, 3; NSC-68 report,
45; offset payments arrangement with
West Germany, 163; onset of, 16; overseas bases (see Overseas bases); postwar
international involvement, 4042; racism and, 120123; recognition of cultural diversity, 128; relations with the
Soviet Union, 4243; remilitarization,
4446; service families participation in,
23, 4, 13, 6061, 208209, 246n68;
significance of overseas bases, 45; Soviet
atomic bomb, 45; spread of liberal capitalism, 43; women during, 4
Colliers (magazine), 125126, 172
Comfort, Clarence, Jr., 2425
Comfort facilities, 28
Contacts/interaction/relations with locals,
102118; 1960s and 1970s, 231; attending religious services with locals,
110111, 147148, 189; casual/infor-
Index 275
276 Index
Index 277
278 Index
ipino alliance during, 53; funding increases for national security, 45; number
of overseas bases following, 46; outbreak, 44, 226; Ryukyu Islands in, 169
Koshiro, Yukiko, 122
Kyoto, Japan, 111
Kyushu, Japan, 49
Lachaussee, Anne, 152153, 160161
Lachaussee, Bob, 152153
Ladies Home Journal (magazine), 61
LaMantia, Elizabeth Dallmeier, 99100,
156
Land, Elizabeth, 98
Lardner, Fred, 162163
Laux, Patsy, 200
League of Nations, 41, 55
Lederer, William, The Ugly American (with
Burdick), 91, 179180
Lee, Bernadine: domestic servants employed
by, 108; friendships with Japanese people, 115; Japanese women, 206; overseas
travel to Japan, 3133; son, 207
Lee, Cecil, 31
Leiser, Ernest, 125126
Lepis, Cabrini, 165166
Lewis, Jack, 5758
Life (magazine): children of occupation
personnel on cover, 211; on housing for
service families, 33; on military presence
in Okinawa, 27; on Okinawa, 174175;
seizure of farmland in Okinawa, 170
Lodge, David, Out of the Shelter, 156157
Luszki, Walter, 7273
MacArthur, Douglas: call to reduce personnel in Japan, 1718; on democratic
ideals, 193; on Okinawans, 174; wife,
218
MacArthur, Jean, 218
Mannheim, Germany, 145
Mao Zedong, 44
Marburg, Germany: complaints about
womens club in, 136; confiscation of
family dog in, 138
Marine Corps. See United States Marine
Corps
Marriage: equality in American marriages,
118119; interracial marriages, 59, 60,
122, 242n68; in Japan, 118; marriage
rate during World War II, 18; percent
active-duty married men in armed
forces, 62, 120; percent married servicemen overseas, 73; of servicemen and
Index 279
280 Index
Index 281
282 Index
the Cold War, 208209; postwar concerns about, 1920; prescriptions for behavior, 199201; relations with domestic employees, 206; relocations and interruptions in education and friendships,
218, 220; school-community projects,
216; schools, off-base, 212213; schools
for dependents (see Department of Defense Dependents Schools); in Scotland,
212, 213, 224; sense of American identity, 220221; soft power, 4; in Turkey,
222; Vietnam War, 230231; in West
Germany, 202203, 223, 224
Service families (overseas): 2001 terrorist
attacks, 232; acceptance of American
military presence by locals, 73, 75, 142,
147, 168, 171, 196, 232233; adoptions
by (see Adoptions by service families); as
advocates of American military and foreign relations goals, 7, 6162, 182,
227228; American tourists compared
to, 164; Americas commitment to defend Western Europe, 5; anti-communism, 2, 6, 39; appreciation of nonAmerican cultures/customs, 9; awareness
of expansion in U.S. global involvement,
39; belief in superiority of the American
Way of Life, 6, 9; Berlin blockade and
airlift (1948-1949), 159165; children
of (see Service children (overseas)); conflicting demands placed on, 9, 225; contacts/interaction/relations with locals (see
Contacts/interaction/relations with locals); countering criticisms of Americans/American society, 76; decision to
send, 89, 15, 2125; decline in number
of, 230; demonstrations of American
good will, 4849, 7071, 232; demonstrations of American sensitivity to foreigners, 2, 51, 53, 75; departures from
overseas locations, 226227; domestic
servants, 78, 102, 107110, 131; during/after World War II, 1820; in Europe, 249n22; evacuation of, 72, 139
140, 161, 226, 228229; exclusion of
African Americans from certain areas
abroad, 85; expectations placed on, 3,
3940, 46, 50, 60, 63, 74, 7778; expense of maintaining, 124125, 141,
163, 231; first families sent to occupied
Japan, 32; focus on, 11; in France (see
Service families in France); friendships
with local people, 114116, 152153,
158, 203, 232; gender relations and, 83
Index 283
284 Index
Stars and Stripes (newspaper): calls for return home of soldiers following World
War II, 21; on charitable work, 49; families ambassadorial duties, 201; on families joining servicemen overseas, 30;
rank in sending families overseas,
239n93; on uncertainty about the length
of occupation of Germany, 17
Staton, Thomas, 219
Stimson, Henry, 24
Stuttgart, Germany: Phillips in, 201; requisitioning of homes in, 138; StuttgartLudwigsburg American High School,
205
Sundberg, Grudy, 100
Taira, Koji, 176
Taylor, Maxwell, D., 6465, 72
Teachers, service wives as: in Department
of Defense Dependents Schools, 72; in
local schools, 105106, 218, 255n76;
reliance of armed forces upon womens
work, 72; volunteer (unpaid) work, 105
The Teahouse of the August Moon (Sneider): enactment of U.S. postwar goals,
5456; evolutionary model of social
progress, 55; Morris on, 242n60; Okinawans as natives, 177; Okinawans
shortness, 172; play based on, 253n21;
soft power in, 56
Thomas, Charles, 62, 63
Thomas, Elizabeth, 205206
Time (magazine), 171, 174
Tito (originally Josip Broz), 163
Townswomens Guild, 78
Truman, Harry S.: aid for Greece, 43; on
calls for return home of soldiers following World War II, 14, 20, 25; on demobilization, 26; desegregation of the
armed forces, 121, 158; development of
hydrogen bomb, 45; MacArthurs call to
reduce personnel in Japan, 17; remilitarization of the United States, 44; termination of pregnant women in the military, 84; U.S. occupation of foreign
lands, 36; Vaughan and, 24
Truman administration, 4244, 126, 142
Truman Doctrine, 43
Turkey: charitable work in, 111; foreign
aid to, 43; Garrison Community about,
5; housing for service families, 118; international womens club in, 113; Izmir,
111, 113; off-base excursions in, 111;
service children in, 213, 222
Index 285
286 Index
interactions with locals, 90, 101; adoptions reported in, 106, 123; advice about
appropriate feminine dress and conduct,
100; advice and examples in, 97; advice
literature by service wives, 90, 99100,
128; Andrews in, 97, 98; Au Revoir,
Mike (short story), 106107; audience
for, 58; Berlin blockade and airlift, 162
163; Burke in, 63; cartoons in, 127, 155;
charitable work in Germany, 135136;
child psychologist in, 219; Christmas at
Sea (short story), 150151; comparison of East Berliners and West Germans,
159160; Dear Lady advertisements,
6670, 67, 68, 69; depictions of antiAmericanism, 108; Domani (short
story), 203204; domestic violence in
service families, 120; editors, 81, 94; on
family-centered armed forces, 6570;
founder, 94; How to Be Perfectly Miserable Overseas (article), 9899; illustrations in, 9798; informal contacts
with locals, 155156; Kennedy and,
127; ladies vs. wives in military
communities, 96; on locals impression
of American women, 119; marriages of
servicemen and local women, 5960;
May Day (short story), 108109;
Merritt and, 181, 188; on Mrs. United
States Navy contestants, 64; official
status, 94; outlook of, 95; profitability,
94; publication period, 7, 59; on race relations, 123; Reorientation (short
story), 219220; Rockwell (George Lincoln) and, 9495; service children in
Japanese parochial kindergartens, 212;
service wives as helpmates in husbands
military career, 96; service wives as soft
power resources, 96; servicemen as foster fathers, 58; servicemens fraternization with German women, 9798; U.S.
Ladies-of-the-Month, 9596, 106, 145,
181; U.S. Ladies-of-the-Month Selection
Board, 95; U.S. Ladies-of-the-Year
feature, 106; A U.S. Ladys World (article), 97, 98; When Mrs. Biddle
Poured (article), 135136; white officers wives as model, 96
United States Marine Corps: 1st Marine Air
Wing, 5758; active duty personnel
(1939), 45; first families sent to occupied
Japan, 32; percent African American enlistees, 244n14; percent African American officers, 84
Index 287
288 Index
nuclear weapons storage, 143144; occupation of, 6, 10, 1617, 3940, 41,
47, 129, 131132, 133139, 142; offset payments arrangement with, 163;
People-to-People project in, 144; postwar reforms, 2; prostitution in, 28; race
in reinforcing German-American alliance, 5, 10; rearmament of, 143; relations with United States, 132, 139144,
147, 152, 163, 165166, 196; requisitioning of homes in, 138139; return of
residences to German owners, 137139,
154; Rhineland-Palatinate (see Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany); service families in (see Service families in West Germany); sovereignty of, 236n17; Stuttgart
(see Stuttgart, Germany); venereal disease rates of servicemen, 28; Vietnam
War, 229; Wiesbaden (see Wiesbaden,
Germany)
Westmoreland, William, daughter of, 229
When Mrs. Biddle Poured (article in U.S.
Lady), 135136
Wiesbaden, Germany: charitable work in,
49; churches in, 147; German-American
Club, 152; Officers Wives Club, 144;
school excursion to, 215
Wilby, Routh Trowbridge, 96, 104105,
108
Wilson, Charles, 178
Wilson, Woodrow, 41
Wine, James, 164
Wives Club of the Industrial College of the
Armed Forces, 208
Wives Club of the Sixth Infantry (West
Berlin), 145
Wolf, Charlotte, Garrison Community, 5
Wolf, Dick, 127, 155
Womens Army Corps (WACs), 49
Womens Institute, 78, 115116
Womens Voluntary Service, 78, 136
World citizenship, embodiment of, 198,
210212
World War II: American plans for occupation enemy nations, 16; calls for return
home of soldiers following, 89, 14,
2022, 25, 29, 3637; casualties, 15;
demobilization following, 21, 26, 45
46; effect on family formation, 18; effect
on family life, 18; employment of
women, 18, 1920; ending of, 15; idealized version of domesticity, 20, 3637,
6061; marriage and birth rates, 18;
number of servicemen, 15; number of
women serving in the military, 84; percentage of fathers inducted, 18; percentage servicemen serving overseas, 19; tolerance of family separation and domestic
hardships, 20; womens responsibilities
during, 1920
Wright, Frank Lloyd, 33
Wright, Marilyn, 219
Index 289
291