Journal Article - The Journal of Strategic Studies
The Eagle and the Lion: Reassessing Anglo-American Strategic Planning and the Foundations of U.S. Grand Strategy for World War II
Abstract
Many accounts of the formation of American and British grand strategy during World War II between the fall of France and the Pearl Harbor attacks stress the differences between the two sides’ strategic thinking. These accounts argue that while the Americans favored a 'direct' Germany-first approach to defeating the Axis powers, the British preferred the 'indirect' or 'peripheral' method. However, a review of Anglo-American strategic planning in this period shows that before official U.S. wartime entry, both sides largely agreed the British 'peripheral' approach was the wisest grand strategy for winning the war.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via Journal of Strategic Studies.
For more information on this publication:
Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation:
Golub, Grant. "The Eagle and the Lion: Reassessing Anglo-American Strategic Planning and the Foundations of U.S. Grand Strategy for World War II." The Journal of Strategic Studies, (2022).
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Newspaper Article
- Harvard Crimson
Belfer Center Fellow Discusses Political Influence of U.S. War Department
Journal Article
- Cooperation and Conflict
Re-conceptualizing Triangular Coercion in International Relations
Analysis & Opinions
- The National Interest
A Global America Can't Pivot to Asia
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Ideal Qualities of a Successful Diplomat
Journal Article
- Research Policy
The Relationship Between Science and Technology
Analysis & Opinions
- Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation
50 Years Later, The Legacy of The Paris Peace Accords Isn't One of Peace
Abstract
Many accounts of the formation of American and British grand strategy during World War II between the fall of France and the Pearl Harbor attacks stress the differences between the two sides’ strategic thinking. These accounts argue that while the Americans favored a 'direct' Germany-first approach to defeating the Axis powers, the British preferred the 'indirect' or 'peripheral' method. However, a review of Anglo-American strategic planning in this period shows that before official U.S. wartime entry, both sides largely agreed the British 'peripheral' approach was the wisest grand strategy for winning the war.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via Journal of Strategic Studies.Golub, Grant. "The Eagle and the Lion: Reassessing Anglo-American Strategic Planning and the Foundations of U.S. Grand Strategy for World War II." The Journal of Strategic Studies, (2022).
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Newspaper Article - Harvard Crimson
Belfer Center Fellow Discusses Political Influence of U.S. War Department
Journal Article - Cooperation and Conflict
Re-conceptualizing Triangular Coercion in International Relations
Analysis & Opinions - The National Interest
A Global America Can't Pivot to Asia
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Ideal Qualities of a Successful Diplomat
Journal Article - Research Policy
The Relationship Between Science and Technology
Analysis & Opinions - Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation
50 Years Later, The Legacy of The Paris Peace Accords Isn't One of Peace