Bretton Woods and Dumbarton Oaks: American post war planning in the summer of 1944

The dissertation analyzes American political and economic postwar preparations in the summer of 1944 by comparing the Treasury and State Departments' conduct of the conferences of Bretton Woods (July 1944) and Dumbarton Oaks (August through October 1944). It reveals that each department pursued a different goal in its attempt to create a new postwar organization.; Preparations for new economic and political postwar organizations began immediately after the American entry into the war. In the Treasury Department, Harry Dexter White, director of monetary research, drafted postwar monetary stabilization plans that reflected the economic experiences of the 1930s. During that decade, European states had depreciated their currencies to gain economic advantages over international competitors. The international economy suffered from the resulting unpredictable exchange rates. White's goal was to create a monetary structure that would grant states financial incentives in exchange for their cooperation in maintaining stable currency exchange rates. At the Bretton Woods conference, 44 states agreed to create such a working structure. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) would provide loans to states to support their currencies. An International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) would grant long term loans.; At the State Department, political postwar preparations also drew on historical experiences. Postwar planners in that department wanted to prevent a return to isolationism in the United States after the war. They advocated the creation of a new international security organization, the United Nations Organization, as a crisis management institution that would have to include the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union. The State Department devised a UNO structure that would be acceptable to isolationists in the United States, to the British Parliament, and to Joseph Stalin. The resulting structure placed only limited constraints on member state's freedom of action.; The State and Treasury Department planners, therefore, differed in their approaches to a postwar economic and political organization. The Treasury insisted that only states willing to adhere to the IMF's strict monetary rules could be admitted to the institution. The State Department imposed as few regulations as possible on the freedom of action of its members states to gain a wide membership.