Dissenting Visions - the Executive, Parliament and the Problematic Anglo-American Atomic

425 Pages·2015·2.34 MB·English

by  Roitto, Matti

J Y V Ä S K Y L Ä S T U D I E S I N H U M A N I T I E S
268
Matti Roitto
Dissenting Visions
The Executive, Parliament and the
Problematic Anglo-American Atomic
Collaboration in the Changes of British
Atomic Foreign Policy 1945-6
JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN hUmaNITIES 268
matti Roitto
Dissenting Visions
The Executive, Parliament and the
Problematic anglo-american atomic
Collaboration in the Changes of British
atomic Foreign Policy 1945-6
Esitetään Jyväskylän yliopiston humanistisen tiedekunnan suostumuksella
julkisesti tarkastettavaksi yliopiston agora-rakennuksen auditoriossa 2
marraskuun 28. päivänä 2015 kello 12.
academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by permission of
the Faculty of humanities of the University of Jyväskylä,
in building agora, auditorium 2, on November 28, 2015 at 12 o’clock noon.
UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ
JYVÄSKYLÄ 2015
Dissenting Visions
The Executive, Parliament and the
Problematic anglo-american atomic
Collaboration in the Changes of British
atomic Foreign Policy 1945-6
JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN hUmaNITIES 268
matti Roitto
Dissenting Visions
The Executive, Parliament and the
Problematic anglo-american atomic
Collaboration in the Changes of British
atomic Foreign Policy 1945-6
UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ
JYVÄSKYLÄ 2015
Editors
Satu matikainen
Department of history and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä
Pekka Olsbo, Ville Korkiakangas
Publishing Unit, University Library of Jyväskylä
Jyväskylä Studies in humanities
Editorial Board
Editor in Chief heikki hanka, Department of art and Culture Studies, University of Jyväskylä
Petri Karonen, Department of history and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä
Paula Kalaja, Department of Languages, University of Jyväskylä
Petri Toiviainen, Department of music, University of Jyväskylä
Tarja Nikula, Centre for applied Language Studies, University of Jyväskylä
Epp Lauk, Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä
Cover picture by Simo Viitanen.
URN:ISBN:978-951-39-6384-2
ISBN 978-951-39-6384-2 (PDF)
ISSN 1459-4331
ISBN 978-951-39-6383-5 (nid.)
ISSN 1459-4323
Copyright © 2015, by University of Jyväskylä
Jyväskylä University Printing house, Jyväskylä 2015
(cid:3)

ABSTRACT
Roitto, Matti
Dissenting Visions - the Executive, Parliament and the Problematic Anglo-American
Atomic Collaboration in the Changes of British Atomic Foreign Policy 1945-6
Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 2015, 423 p.
(Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities
ISSN 1459-4323; 268 (nid.) ISSN 1459-4331; 268 (PDF))
ISBN 978-951-39-6383-5 (nid.)
ISBN 978-951-39-6384-2 (PDF)

The atomic bomb shaped the post-war world and the relations between Britain and the
United States. Previous research has presented limited views on British early atomic
proliferation in the contexts of domestic policy and Anglo-American relations. The
problems of Anglo-American relationship have often been downplayed. Margaret
Gowing has claimed that Parliament did not have a say or interest in atomic matters
and that everything was ran by the government or the Cabinet or the inner circle of the
Cabinet. This view has been repeated without any critical evaluation by other
historians ever since. The notion of Parliament’s narrow role in foreign and defence
policy has also been suggested in most research relating to parliamentary history. The
goal of this study is to illustrate the factors which, within one year, led to a change
from public, proactive and internationalist policy to a secret, reactive and realist
approach. Moreover, these changes and their causes contributed to the partial failure of
the Anglo-American atomic collaboration in 1946. This empirical study uses formerly
secret archival sources of the government, diplomatic correspondence, and Hansard
Parliamentary debates, supplemented with press material. During 1945-46 Parliament
referred to atomic energy in 150 instances, in contrast to claims of mute and
uninterested Parliament. These findings show the interdependence of the government,
Parliament and officials in the atomic matters. Both the Anglo-American “special
relationship” and atomic collaboration were more complex issues than has been
presented in previous research. I claim that 1) in 1945-1946 there were five turning
points when the British policy changed quite drastically back and forth. This was
because 2) the role of British officials and, thus, path dependency on previous decisions
was greater than has been considered. They informed Clement Attlee’s government so
that the regime changed its views and pursued secret atomic co-operation for gaining
the atomic bomb. 3) This did not entirely succeed due to the British parliament’s
supervision. Due to the urgent and important nature of atomic matters, Parliament
managed to gain access to them. Procedures like parliamentary questions and
adjournment debates enhanced Parliament’s capability to supervise the government,
which limited government’s options. 4) This led to problems in implementing policy 5)
The Americans were reluctant to continue the atomic co-operation and seem to have
applied “atomic diplomacy” against the British in order to enhance their own position
in the post-war world. All of these contradicting paradigms affected the British
government’s possibilities of conducting atomic foreign policy. The “atomic question”
also contributed to a gradual change in the British political culture, affecting in part to
parliamentarisation of atomic and foreign affairs.

Keywords: atomic bomb, atom, Great Britain, parliament, foreign policy, 1945, 1946,
United States, Anglo-American relations
(cid:3)

Author’s address Matti Roitto
Department of History and Ethnology
University of Jyväskylä P.O. Box 35 40014 (FI)
Jyväskylä, Finland
[email protected]

Supervisors Dr. Satu Matikainen
Department of History and Ethnology
University of Jyväskylä

PhD Antero Holmila
Department of History and Ethnology
University of Jyväskylä

Reviewers Professor Jussi Hanhimäki
Graduate Institute of International
and Development Studies
Geneve

Dr. Rhiannon Vickers
Department of Politics
University of Sheffield

Opponents Professor Jussi Hanhimäki
(cid:3)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This dissertation has been in the making for quite a while. It has been, as most
of the dissertations tend to be, a learning experience, but it has also been more
than challenging to complete. Therefore all the help and support at work and
outside the office has been more than welcome and a number of persons de-
serve the highest of thanks. I would like to warmly thank professor Jussi
Hanhimäki for his insightful comments and dedicated work, both as my oppo-
nent and as one of the two reviewers of this dissertation; while Dr. Rhiannon
Vickers’(cid:3)meticulous and expert work on reviewing my manuscript was both
heartening and encouraging. When I started this process years ago, it looked
very daunting and it was hard to imagine ever getting to the end, let alone that
my research would be reviewed by such specialists.
During these years at the Department of History and Ethnology I have
had the privilege of working with the best possible colleagues, who have
spared no effort to lend me their knowledge and expertise. There is not enough
of space in here to thank each and every one of you individually, and therefore
I would like to express my gratitude to the whole department, and to Professor
Jari Ojala, the head of our department. Thank you for giving me the privilege of
learning more each and every day from each and every one of you.
I would also like the thank the Chair of General History, Professor Pasi
Ihalainen, and the discipline of General History for their support. Pasi’s high
standards have not always been easy to meet, but the effort has been more than
worthwhile, ever since the first course I took at the University of Jyväskylä.
Work associated with Pasi’s various research projects, such as the “Parliamen-
tary Means of Conflict Resolution”, and his extended networks have taken me
to conferences around Europe to discuss and present my research with some
very prominent scholars. I am also thankful to the Faculty of Humanities, and
the University of Jyväskylä, for the chance to research, learn, and also teach in
the best possible surroundings. The Faculty of Social Sciences, and Political Sci-
ence in particular, have also been very accommodating with my various inter-
disciplinary research interests ever since I started my bachelor’s and master’s
studies (thanks especially Pekka Korhonen and Kari Palonen). And the third
element that has helped me grasp my topic within a wider framework, has been
to study International Relations at the University of Tampere.
I am also grateful to the research project, “Driving Forces of Democracy”,
which I am currently involved in, and the head of its Jyväskylä branch, profes-
sor Petri Karonen, for giving me the chance to embark on a new course of re-
search while still finishing this dissertation, and for his patience and support
during this time.
My supervisor has also been my greatest mentor. Dr. Satu Matikainen had
already supervised my bachelor’s & master’s theses, and has basically been the
best possible supervisor ever. Satu has the rare skill of being able to balance su-
pervision and support with very stern demands, and she has taught me more
than anyone else about becoming an independent researcher, and about finding
(cid:3)

out how to constantly improve my work. It has been a pleasure working under
her supervision and then alongside her. The guidance provided by PhD Antero
Holmila, my second supervisor, has also been helpful. Above all, Antero’s
knowledge about using press material as a source, and the research related with
this, helped me greatly in that context.
Besides all these thanks there are some other colleagues whose support
has been beyond all expectations. The four of us, who started our doctoral dis-
sertations at the same time, have enjoyed mutual support within and outside
the office, and it has been good to know that I was not alone in trying to navi-
gate the occasionally rough waters of academia. Thank you for all your help,
and especially for all the bad jokes Tiina Hemminki, Laura-Mari Manninen, and
Henna-Riikka Pennanen. With regard to other colleagues: Dr. Pasi Saarimäki’s
great efforts and noble achievement of finally finishing his dissertation taught
me a lot at the point I was starting my own. Dr. Aapo Jumppanen also showed
me the ropes of academia before I even got here. Since our school days I have
studied together with Aapo at the University of Jyväskylä, and not only have I
enjoyed discussing our mutual interests and his own work with him, but his
friendship has always inspired me in my scholarly efforts.
In recent years I have also enjoyed more and more of the insights, witti-
cisms and all-round support of some senior colleagues too. Besides the scientific
advice and interesting projects, I have enjoyed many forms of kindness, ranging
from occasional debriefing drinks, to shopping sprees, to finding places to live.
The sheer amount of laughter, especially during breaks, but also in various oth-
er locations, particularly in places where it was not always perhaps most suita-
ble, has been bottomless. In this respect, I want to thank Professor Outi Finger-
roos, Dr. Heli Valtonen and Dr. Jari Eilola for all that they have done. Professor
Pertti Ahonen deserves my gratitude, too, for acting as my custos. In addition,
my relatively and thankfully few struggles with bureaucracy have been made
easier with the support of Heli Niskanen. Alex Reed has done a superb job in
proof reading and helping me tighten the English in this work. His efficiency,
tact, candour and flexibility under rather challenging circumstances were essen-
tial in getting this research done in time.
No research can be just all fun and laughter, of course, not even with the
best colleagues one could ask for. Therefore it has been crucial to have a num-
ber of close friends with whom I can do everything but work…(cid:3)and yet, occa-
sionally, still also work. I have had great luck with my friends here; especially
those who have stayed on here since our carefree years in Kuusankoski, and
there have been more great friends both inside and around academia during
these years. I do promise, particularly to those who work outside academia that,
now this dissertation is finished, I will try to stay in touch a bit more!
The Emil Aaltonen Foundation, the National Doctoral School of History,
the Faculty of Humanities, and the Department of History and Ethnology have
financed this research, for which I am very grateful. All of this hard work and
my research would also not have been possible without valuable help from the
(cid:3)

British National Archives, the University of Jyväskylä Library, and the Library
of the Finnish Parliament.
In addition to all this, I have always been able to rely on my family. At
home I was taught about the importance of reading, learning and knowledge,
and about the ways of finding out more. This, and all other support they have
provided over the years has meant a great deal to me, and I am forever in their
debt. My final special thanks go to Dr. Helena Hirvonen. Her help, support and
companionship have been invaluable, and her academic work has set me an
example to follow each and every day.

Jyväskylä, 27 October 2015.
Matti Roitto