This article offers a contribution to the sociology of social science knowledge practices and expertise through the empirical lens of US nation building policies. Drawing on archival materials, including the State Department's Freedom of Information Act documents, and interviews with key policymakers we offer a comparative historical sociology of the US State Department as a site of nation building knowledge and expertise. In examining the evolving character of nation building expertise in three key moments across the twentieth century, we find that as nation building expertise and its attendant knowledge practices were redefined and institutionally relocated, the essential character of the expertise and data collection practices that were valorized shifted from social scientism in the 1910s to geopolitical empiricism in the 1940s to liberal legalism in the 1990s. This changing character of nation building knowledge practices at the State Department had an effect on the substance of US nation building policy.
Records of the Council on Foreign Relations, Princeton University, Princeton NJ
6.
General Records of the Department of State (RG 59), Records of Harley A Notter, NARA
7.
General Records of the Department of State (RG 59), Records of Leo Pasvolsky (RG 59. 3. 1), NARA
8.
United States Department of State Freedom of Information Act Declassified/Released Document Collections: Bosnia, http://foia.state.gov/SearchColls/ (Retrieved: 30 April, 2011), Department of State Electronic Reading Room
9.
Interviews Cited
10.
CholletDerek, Office of the Historian, Department of State, 1 September, 2010
11.
DaalderIvo, Director for European Affairs, National Security Council (1995-1997), 20 July, 2010
12.
GoldgeierJames, Foreign Affairs Officer, Office on the New Independent States, Department of State (1995-1996), 26 April, 2010
13.
ShattuckJohn, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Department of State (1993-1998), 6 August, 2010
14.
MillerLaurel, assistant legal advisor to Roberts Owen, 1 September, 2010
15.
NysteunGro, legal advisor to EU Special Envoy to the Former Yugoslavia Carl Bildt, 14 June, 2010
16.
OwenRoberts, the lead legal advisor at Dayton and a former State Department Legal Adviser, 5 November, 2010
17.
O'BrienJames, lead lawyer and drafter of Dayton's ‘General Framework Agreement’, Department of State, 28 April, 2010
18.
PardewJames, Director of Balkan Task Force, Department of Defense, 3 September, 2010
19.
Primary (diaries) and Secondary works
20.
AbbottA. (1999) Department and discipline, Chicago Sociology at one hundred. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
AbbottA. (2005) ‘Linked ecologies’, Sociological Theory, 23 (3) p. 245–74.
22.
AbelaA. (2009) Soldiers of reason: The RAND Corporation and the rise of the American empire. New York: Mariner.
23.
AdcockR. (2003) ‘The emergence of political science as a discipline: history and the study of politics in America, 1875-1910’, History of Political Thought, 24 (3) p. 481–508.
24.
AmadaeS. M. (2003) Rationalizing capitalist democracy: the Cold War origins of rational choice liberalism. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
25.
AtanasoskiN. (2006) ‘Race toward freedom: post-Cold War US multiculturalism and the reconstruction of Eastern Europe’, Journal of American Culture, 29 (2) p. 213–226.
26.
BassG. J. (2002) Stay the hand of vengeance: the politics of war crimes tribunals. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
27.
BellC. (2006) ‘Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status’, American Journal of International Law, 100 (2) p. 373–412.
28.
BowmanI. (1942) ‘Geography vs. geopolitics’, The Geographical Review, 32 (4) p. 646–658.
29.
BowmanI. (1946) ‘The strategy of territorial decisions’, Foreign Affairs, 24 (2) p. 177–194.
30.
BuckC. D. (1916) ‘Language and the sentiment of nationality’, American Political Science Review10 p. 44–69.
31.
CamicC., GrossN., & LamontM. (2011) Social knowledge in the making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32.
CamicC. & XieY. (1994) ‘The statistical turn in American social science: Columbia University, 1890 to 1915’, American Sociological Review59 p. 773–805.
33.
CholletD. (2005) The road to the Dayton Accords: a study of American statecraft. Houndmills: Palgrave.
34.
CholletD. & GoldgeierJ. (2008) America between the wars. New York: Public Affairs.
35.
ClubbJ. M. & AllenH. W. (1977) ‘Collective biography and the Progressive Movement: the “Status Revolution” revisited’, Social Science History, 1 (4) p. 518–534.
36.
DaalderI. (2000) Getting to Dayton: the making of America's Bosnia Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings.
37.
DebenedettiC. (1974) ‘James T. Shotwell and the science of international politics’, Political Science Quarterly, 89 (2) p. 379–395.
38.
FinkC (2004) Defending the rights of others: the Great Powers, the Jews, and International Minority Protection, 1878-1938. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
FoxR. W. (1993) ‘The culture of liberal protestant progressivism’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, XXIII (3) p. 639–660.
40.
FourcadeM. (2009) Economists and societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
41.
GelfandL. (1963) The Inquiry: American preparations for peace, 1917-1919. Yale: Yale University Press.
42.
GilmanN. (2004) Mandarins of the future: modernization theory in Cold War America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
43.
GlazerN. (1997) We are all multiculturalists now. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
44.
GoldsteinJ. & KeohaneR. (Eds.) (1993) Ideas and foreign policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
45.
GroseP. (2006) Continuing the Inquiry: the Council on Foreign Relations From 1921 to 1996. New York: CFR.
46.
HaganJ. (2003) Justice in the Balkans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47.
HallJ. A. & LindholmC. (1999) Is America breaking apart?Princeton: Princeton University Press.
48.
HaskinsC. & LordR. (1920) Some problems of the Peace Conference. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
49.
HenkinL. (1979) ‘Rights: American and human’, Columbia Law Review, 79 (3) p. 405–425.
50.
HofstadterR. (1955) The age of reform. New York: Knopf.
51.
IgnatieffM. (Ed.) (2005) American exceptionalism and human rights. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
52.
KingD. (2000) Making Americans: immigration, race and the origins of diverse democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
53.
KlugH. (2000) ‘Model and Anti-Model: the United States Constitution and the “Rise” of World Constitutionalism’, Wisconsin Law Review, 2000 (3) p. 597–616.
54.
KohH. H. (2003) ‘On American exceptionalism’, Stanford Law Review, 55 (5) p. 1479–1527.
55.
KuklickB. (2006) Blind oracles: intellectuals and war from Kennan to Kissinger. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
56.
LansingR. (1921) The Peace Negotiations: a personal narrative. New York: Houghton.
57.
LightJ. (2005) From warfare to welfare: defense intellectuals and urban problems in Cold War America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
58.
LinkA. S. (1959) ‘What happened to the Progressive Movement in the 1920s?’, American Historical Review, 64 (4) p. 833–851.
59.
MahoneyJ. & RueschemeyerD. (Eds.) (2003) Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
60.
MallardG. & LakoffA. (2011) ‘How claims to know the future are used to understand the present: techniques of prospection in the field of national security’, in CamicC., GrossN., and LamontM. (Eds.), Social knowledge in the making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61.
MannheimK. (1936) Ideology and utopia. London: Routledge.
62.
MazowerM. (2004) ‘The strange triumph of human rights, 1933-1950’, The Historical Journal, 47 (2) p. 379–398.
63.
McgerrM. (2003) A fierce discontent: the rise and fall of the Progressive Movement in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64.
MedvetzT. (2008) ‘Think Tanks as an Emergent Field’, New York: Social Science Research Council.
65.
MedvetzT. (2009) ‘Les think tanks aux États-Unis: L’émergence d'un sous-espace de production des saviors’, Actes de la Recherché en Sciences Sociales, 174 p. 4–13.
66.
MedvetzT. (2010) ‘“Public Policy is Like Having a Vaudeville Act”: languages of duty and difference among think tank-affiliated policy experts’, Qualitative Sociology, 33 p. 549–562.
67.
MedvetzT. (2012) Think tanks in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
68.
MertonR. K. (1945) ‘Role of public intellectuals in public bureaucracy’, Social Forces, 23 (4) p. 405–415.
69.
MitomaG. T. (2008) ‘Civil Society and International Human Rights: The Commission to Study the Organization of Peace and the Origins of the UN Human Rights Regime’, Human Rights Quarterly, 30 (3) p. 607–630.
70.
NgaiM. (2004) Impossible subjects: illegal aliens and the making of modern America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
71.
NicholsonH. (1933) Peacemaking, 1919. New York: Grosset & Dunlap.
72.
NystuenG. (2005) Achieving peace or protecting human rights? Conflicts between norms regarding ethnic discrimination in the Dayton Peace Agreement. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
73.
O'brienJ. (2010) ‘The Dayton Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina’, in MillerL. E. (Ed.), Framing the state in times of transition. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.
74.
O'connorA. (2001) Poverty knowledge: social science, social policy and the poor in twentieth century US history. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
75.
O'sullivanC. D. (2008) Sumner Wells, postwar planning, and the quest for a new world order. New York: Columbia University Press.
76.
ParmarI. (1999) ‘“Mobilizing America for an internationalist foreign policy”: the role of the Council on Foreign Relations’, Studies in American Political Development, 13 p. 337–373.
77.
ParmarI. (2004) Think tanks and power in foreign policy. London: Palgrave.
78.
PerlmannJ. (2001) ‘“Race or People”: Federal Race Classifications for Europeans in America, 1898-1913’, Jerome Levy Economics Institute Working Paper, No. 320 p. 1–54.
79.
RichA. (2004) Think tanks, public policy and the politics of expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
80.
RossD. (1991) The origins of American social science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
81.
SchefferD. (2012) All the missing souls: a personal history of the War Crimes Tribunals. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
82.
SchultenS. (2001) The geographical imagination in America, 1880-1950. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
83.
SeymourC. (1951) Geography, justice, and politics at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. New York: American Geographical Society.
84.
SeymourC. (1965) Letters from the Paris Peace Conference. New Haven: Yale University Press.
85.
ShattuckJ. (2003) Freedom on fire: human rights wars and America's response. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
86.
ShklarJ. (1986) Legalism: law, morals, and political trials. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
87.
SkocpolT. & RueschemeyerD. (Eds.) (1996) States, social knowledge, and the origins of modern social policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
88.
SkorownekS. (1982) Building a new American state: the expansion of national administrative capacities, 1877-1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
89.
SmithJ. A. (1991) The idea brokers: think tanks and the rise of the new policy elite. New York: The Free Press.
90.
SmithN. (2003) American empire: Roosevelt's geographer and the prelude to globalization. Berkeley: University of California Press.
91.
ThelenD. P. (1969) ‘Social tensions and the origins of progressivism’, Journal of American History, 56 (2) p. 323–341.
92.
WeberM. (1978) in RothG. and WittichC. (Eds.), Economy and society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
93.
ZeidelR. (2004) Immigrants, progressives, and exclusion politics: The Dillingham Commission, 1900-1927. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press.
94.
ZolbergA. (2006) A nation by design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
