The whole point of setting the border between Mexico and the United States at the deepest channel of the Rio Grande was that the river was not supposed to move. That was the thinking in 1848, when, following Mexico’s defeat by the United States and surrender of its vast northern lands, boundary surveyors from the two countries were tasked with reinventing the border.
Articles and Opinion
In the second of his weekly column series for the Daily Texan, Jeremi Suri, professor in the LBJ School of Public Affairs and the University of Texas at Austin department of history, writes about how the US should respond to ISIS/ISIL.
Previously, in his inagural column, forget about the world beyond our borders," Suri argued that "ambitious undergraduates" should "Study hard and have fun on campus, but make some time to think about foreign policy,"
After the Fall of the Berlin Wall, what, precisely, did Russia and the West agree on regarding the future of NATO. Mary Elise Sarotte examines the resulting dispute that "refuses to go away" in the September/October issue of Foreign Affairs. Was there a "Broken Promise"?
As SHAFR members note in separate op-eds, recent events in Ferguson, Missouri carry international as well as domestic implications.
Mary Dudziak, author of Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy, writes in Foreign Affairs, "Ferguson from Afar," that
It was 1935, and the Guantánamo naval base had to go. So declared an American commission stocked with foreign-policy experts: the United States was pursuing less antagonistic relations with its southern neighbors, and an American base on Cuban soil, anchored by a lease without an end date, looked increasingly like an “anomaly.” Weren’t there enough defensible harbors on the United States’ own Gulf Coast, or on Puerto Rico? The commission wrote that the U.S.
The Richard Nixon Presidential Library has not had a full-time director since I left the position in November 2011. This has disturbing implications both for how public history is approached at federal museums and for how public access is granted to crucial historical information.
"TODAY the effort to preserve the planet’s biodiversity is often seen as a campaign to save the whales for their own sake, or to give polar bears a few more winters on the Arctic ice. But in the 1950s, when the concept was first discussed, it was understood that far more was at stake. The “conservation of variety,” as it was called during the early years of the cold war, was no less than a strategy of human survival.” Read more at The New York Times