Dudziak opens with an illustrative incident from history. In 1958, an African American named Jimmy Wilson was sentenced to death in Alabama for stealing an amount of money less than $2. This provoked a worldwide outcry. The Jimmy Wilson case was also seen as having a possible negative impact on US foreign relations. The international pressure led to Governor Folsom of Alabama pardoning Jimmy Wilson. Dudziak explains this case is just “one example of the international impact of American race discrimination during the Cold War” (6).

Next, Dudziak briefly describes the history of the United States’ racism against African Americans and its connection to foreign relations. In the 19th century, Black activists like Frederick Douglass appealed to public opinion in Great Britain. After World War I, W. E. B. DuBois hoped the League of Nations would put pressure on the United States to ease discrimination against African Americans. The real turning point was World War II, which exposed the tensions between professed American ideals of equality and the reality of racial discrimination, as it was “a war against a racist regime [Nazi Germany] carried on by a nation with segregated military forces” (7). The battle against fascist regimes in Germany and Italy and the involvement of African Americans in the armed forces highlighted this “American dilemma” (8).

With the start of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union (See: Background), civil rights groups had to assure those in authority that they did not seek to overthrow the established order. Criticizing the United States before an international organization like the United Nations could be seen as a lack of loyalty or patriotism. At the same time, however, racism in the United States “tarnished […] the image of American democracy” (12) that the government sought to promote to nations across Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Anti-Black racism also became a cornerstone of anti-US propaganda in the Soviet Union. To counter such messages, the United States promoted a “story of race” (13) that American democracy eventually, if very slowly, led to the triumph over evils such as racism. The United States government deliberately acted on civil rights as “an aspect of Cold War policymaking” (15).

In July 1946, an African American veteran of World War II named George Dorsey was killed in Georgia, along with his wife and two Black friends: “Its pattern was familiar: African American man detained by police, then released, then killed with companions by a white mob” (19). The murders were among a growing number of violent incidents in the US South against African American veterans. They ignited a national outcry, with the US Attorney General Tom Clark denouncing them as “an affront to decent Americanism” (20). One group, the National Association of Colored Women, protested in front of the White House.

The public pressure was felt by President Harry S. Truman, who held racist views in private but was also determined to do more about civil rights. He established the Fair Employment Practices Commission (FEPC), in order to protect religious and racial minorities working for the federal government or its contractors from discrimination, although Congress would do little to financially support it. Truman was caught between attracting the African American vote and not wanting to alienate the South. Just the threat of Truman pursuing civil rights reform caused Southern politicians to form a States’ Rights Party. Still, Truman won the 1948 presidential election, possibly thanks to African American voters.

At the same time, the growing tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States motivated Truman to pay attention to civil rights. Pro-segregation politicians accused civil rights activists of being Communist agitators, while the NAACP argued that segregation and other racist practices were “un-American” (29). Racism also undermined the image of the United States among the media in Asian nations like Ceylon (modern-day Sri Lanka) and Fiji. A Chinese newspaper called attention to an incident where a vice presidential candidate, Henry A. Wallace, was arrested for using the Black people’s entrance to a church in Birmingham, Alabama. A newspaper in the Philippines praised a California court for striking down the state’s law against interracial marriage.

Criticism of US race relations also came out of India and Europe, although US officials sometimes blamed such criticism on pro-Communist writers. However, in cases where the criticisms came from conservative writers, like the Greek journalist Helen Vlachos, US officials had to admit the criticisms were not “anti-American” but a “frank reaction” (37).

Some of the harshest criticisms still did come from the Soviet Union: “Soviet propaganda exploited [US] racial problems, arguing that American professions of liberty and equality under democracy were a sham” (37). Such propaganda was not just limited to the Soviet public. Much to the dismay of US politicians, Soviet criticism of American racism spread to Latin America, Germany, and southeast Asia, “where the Cold War is raging most fiercely” (39). Another problem was that dignitaries from other countries were subjected to racist treatment. For example, Mohandas Ghandi’s physician was prevented from going inside a US restaurant and Haiti’s secretary of agriculture was subjected to segregation while attempting to attend a conference.

In the United States itself, civil rights organizations found “American vulnerability on the race issue […] a very effective pressure point to use in advocating for civil rights reform” (43). The establishment of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in February 1946 provided one way for activists in the United States to call international attention to the United States’ civil rights record. Organizations like the National Negro Congress and the NAACP addressed petitions to the United Nations. Even Eleanor Roosevelt, who was a member of the NAACP board, declined to support the NAACP petition being submitted to the United Nations “out of concern that it would harm the international reputation of the United States” (45). US ambassadors felt that the debates over US racism that were being raised harmed the United States’ image while helping the Soviet cause, a concern shared even by officials in countries allied to the United States, such as the Netherlands.

A US official, Frederick C. Jochem, wrote an article for a newspaper in Burma (modern-day Myanmar) titled “Negro Problem.” It argued that reports of racism in the United States had been exaggerated. The essay argued that over 50 Black people were now professors at US universities. While he admitted that racism still persisted in the South, in both the South and the North efforts were being made to end legalized racism, such as segregation laws. This article was put out as an attempt by the US State Department and American embassies to address international criticism of US racial discrimination.

Another work was the pamphlet The Negro in American Life from 1950 or 1951, which was produced by the United States Intelligence Service (USIS). It argued that the United States had progressed greatly from the age of slavery when it came to race relations. Since more African Americans were becoming educated, the pamphlet argued, there was hope for further progress in the future: “Education, therefore, made ‘the Negro’ more worthy of equal treatment, and made him more likely to insist on his rights” (52). However, in making its argument, the pamphlet presented readers with the mistaken idea that segregation in public schools had already been struck down by the Supreme Court (53). Especially in Africa and southeast Asia, where European colonialism had until recently dominated, US officials realized that race was a more compelling issue than the conflict with Communism.

The US State Department and embassies sought to enlist African Americans in speaking about race relations in the United States internationally. These included Max Yergan in Nigeria and Jay Saunders Redding in India. Redding found that Indians thought the United States’ treatment of African Americans helped prove the US was “imperialistic” (58) and that it would support the oppression of non-white peoples around the world. In response, there was a push to employ more African Americans in US embassies in places like India and to sponsor trips by Indians to the United States. However, “[e]fforts at cultural exchange could backfire when foreign persons of color experienced American-style race discrimination” (60). This was a common experience for international students in the US, both in the North and the South.

Some African American activists critical of the US government and its civil rights policies, like W. E. B. DuBois and Paul Robeson, had their ability to travel abroad restricted. Robeson was especially targeted for speaking out against the Korean War. William Patterson and the Civil Rights Congress drafted a petition to the United States, arguing that the US treatment of African Americans met the United Nations’ definition of genocide. Eventually, Patterson’s passport was confiscated by the State Department. He was guilty of associating with members of the Communist Party and “had aired the nation’s dirty laundry overseas” (66). The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) started investigating Louis Armstrong when, following a fight over the desegregation of an Arkansas high school, he cancelled a trip to the Soviet Union where he was to defend the US and angrily denounced the US government.

African American expatriates were also targeted. The FBI kept tabs on James Baldwin and Richard Wright, who both lived in France. On the other hand, the international activist Walter White had the support of the government because he also criticized Communism. The singer Josephine Baker, who came from the US and lived in Paris, got notice for her harsh criticisms of the United States while traveling in nations like Argentina. The USIS took an interest in countering her claims. Also, by interfering with her ability to acquire visas, US embassies interfered with her ability to perform and make public appearances in other countries, especially Cuba and Haiti. She was also denied entry into the United States.

Dudziak argues the attempt to silence critics like Baker can “be seen as part of a broader effort to safeguard the image of America, and maintain control over the narrative of race and democracy” (77). Still, some observers, like US Ambassador to India Chester Bowles, expressed in a 1952 speech at Yale University that “American society ultimately had to change” (77).