HIST 381: Digital History

Aaron Elfering

History 381

10/5/2012

The Dawn of Nuclear Threat

Sixty years ago the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Japanese government surrendered to the United States and its allies. The nuclear age had begun with a literal ‘bang’ as the first military use of atomic weapons was demonstrated. With the material that follows, the National Security Archive has released the most comprehensive collection to date of declassified U.S. government documents on the atomic bomb and the end of World War II in the Pacific. Besides material from the files of the Manhattan Project, this compilation includes formerly top secret summaries and translations of Japanese communication intercepted under military programs. In addition, the collection includes translations from Japanese high level meetings and discussions in Tokyo, including the conferences when Emperor Hirohito gave the final decision to surrender to allied forces. The decision made by the U.S. to display its military superiority via the Atom bomb is painted with controversy, however, given the extensive intelligence that the U.S. Government had gathered about Japan at the time, following through with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the correct choice.

• Description of weapon capability as well as potential drawbacks as discussed by President Truman and high ranking military officers.

A. Memorandum discussed with the President, April 25, 1945
Source: Henry Stimson Diary, Manuscripts and Archives, Yale University Library, Henry Lewis Stimson Papers (microfilm at Library of Congress).

President Truman learns about the Manhattan project and is brought up to speed by scientists and military strategists about its capabilities for ending conflict with Japan.

B.Untitled memorandum by General L.R. Groves, April 25, 1945
Source: Record Group 200, Papers of General Leslie R. Groves, Correspondence 1941-1970, box 3, “F”.

It is determined that President Truman favors the project and has become very intrigued by its possibility. Trusting the men in charge of the project, Truman gives the Manhattan Project his approval.

• As it quickly became clear that Japan would be the established target, these documents, meeting minutes and briefings detail proposed delivery targets, delivery methods, command and other logistics (potential aftereffects are detailed as well).

 

 A. Notes on Initial Meeting of Target Committee, May 2, 1945, Top Secret
Source: RG 77, MED Records, Top Secret Documents, File no. 5d (copy from microfilm).

Military officers and nuclear scientists had met to discuss bombing techniques, selection of targets , and mission requirements.  The discussion of available targets included Hiroshima, the “largest untouched targets not on the 21^st Bomber Command priority list.”

 

B. Memorandum from J. R. Oppenheimer to Brigadier General Farrell, May 11, 1945
Source: RG 77, MED Records, Top Secret Documents, File no. 5g (copy from microfilm)

Discussing the radiological dangers of a nuclear detonation, Oppenheimer explained the need for precaution to U.S. Generals.

C. Memorandum from Major J. A. Derry and Dr. N.F. Ramsey to General L.R. Groves, “Summary of Target Committee Meetings on 10 and 11 May 1945,” May 12, 1945, Top Secret
Source: RG 77, MED Records, Top Secret Documents, File no. 5d (copy from microfilm).

Scientists and officers held further breifings of mission requirements, detailing height of detonation, weather, possibilities for aborting the mission, target selection, including priority cities (“a large urban area of more than three miles diameter”) and psychological effect.

D.“Notes of the Interim Committee Meeting Thursday, 31 May 1945, 10:00 A.M. to 1:15 P.M. – 2:15 P.M. to 4:15 P.M.,” n.d., Top Secret
Source: RG 77, MED Records, H-B files, folder no. 100 (copy from microfilm) .

Discussion of several key Manhattan Project issues ranging from stages of development,  problems of secrecy, cooperation with “like-minded” powers, to the military impact of the bomb on Japan.  Interested in producing the “greatest possible psychological effect,” panel members agreed that the “most desirable target would be a vital war plant employing a large number of workers and closely surrounded by workers’ houses.”  Arguments are made  “that this target choice represented an uneasy endorsement of “terror bombing”–the target was not exclusively military or civilian; nevertheless, workers’ housing would include noncombatant men, women, and children”.

• Alternative methods of resolution; Russia had poised itself to begin the invasion of Japan and the U.S. had managed to establish themselves in the south pacific to prepare for occupation. The United States had found themselves ready to use the bomb but unsure of how to go about first demonstrations after many members involved put forth their fears of creating a nuclear arms race. Ultimately deciding that using this new technology for the first time would have a resounding psychological effect on the rest of the world including the Russian government, with whom relations had grown more and more tense. By this time Japanese authority had still not shown any interest in peacemaking and only methods which would provide the quickest end to the conflict were being considered.

A. Memorandum from Arthur B. Compton to the Secretary of War, enclosing “Memorandum on ‘Political and Social Problems,’ from Members of the ‘Metallurgical Laboratory’ of the University of Chicago,” June 12, 1945, Secret
Source: RG 77, MED Records, H-B files, folder no. 76 (copy from microfilm).

Concerned with the long-run implications of the bomb, physicists had produced a report rejecting a surprise attack on Japan and recommended instead a demonstration of the bomb on the “desert or a barren island.”  Claiming that a nuclear arms race “will be on in earnest not later than the morning after our first demonstration of the existence of nuclear weapons,” the group saw international control as the alternative.  Ultimately it was decided that “atomic attack against Japan would ‘shock’ the Russians”, an effect that was becoming more and more desireable.

B. Memorandum from Acting Secretary of State Joseph Grew to the President, “Analysis of Memorandum Presented by Mr. Hoover,” June 13, 1945
Source: Record Group 107, Office of the Secretary of War, Formerly Top Secret Correspondence of Secretary of War Stimson (“Safe File”), July 1940-September 1945, box 8, Japan (After December 7/41).

An ambassador to Japan weighed in on the conditions of possible Japanese surrender, he stressed that it was extremely important that the United States declare its intention to preserve the current form of government headed by the emperor.  As he argued to President Truman, “failure on our part to clarify our intentions on the status of the emperor will insure prolongation of the war and cost a large number of human lives.”

C. Memorandum from Chief of Staff Marshall to the Secretary of War, 15 June 1945, enclosing “Memorandum of Comments on ‘Ending the Japanese War,'” June 14, 1945
Source: Record Group 107, Office of the Secretary of War, Formerly Top Secret Correspondence of Secretary of War Stimson (“Safe File”), July 1940-September 1945, box 8, Japan (After December 7/41)

The goals of ending the conflict are discussed, possible outcomes of alternative solutions and face-saving proposals for Japan, and the nature of the proposed declaration to the Japanese government, including the problem of defining terms of surrender. The author argued against “modifying the concept of unconditional surrender: if it is “phrased so as to invite negotiation” he saw risks of prolonging the war or a “compromise peace.””

D. Memorandum, “Timing of Proposed Demand for Japanese Surrender,” June 29, 1945, Top Secret
Source: Record Group 107, Office of the Secretary of War, Formerly Top Secret Correspondence of Secretary of War Stimson (“Safe File”), July 1940-September 1945, box 8, Japan (After December 7/41).

The decision to commit to the airstrike is now in effect providing the Japanese continue to refuse surrender. The weight of the impending Russian invasion is being felt by Japanese government.

• The first nuclear strike and the beginning of the end to World War II. Detailings of the Atomic strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as some of the immediate aftermath felt in both cities. Japan’s course of action and ultimate surrender under the pressure of the threat of Soviet Invasion as well as the devastating effects delivered by the nuclear strikes.

A. Memorandum from General L. R. Groves to the Chief of Staff, August 6, 1945, Top Secret
Source: RG 77, MED Records, Top Secret Documents, File no. 5b (copy from microfilm).

The day after the world’s first nuclear strike had been made, effects of the bomb are being measured and felt around the world. Early casualty counts report over 70,000 killed in the initial blast with aftermath numbers unknown. The desired psychological shock among other nations has been achieved. Still the weight of potential Soviet attack is brought to light.

B. Translation of intercepted Japanese messages, circa 10 August 10, 1945, Top Secret Ultra
Source: Record Group 457, Records of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, “Magic” Diplomatic Summaries 1942-1945, box 18.

Five days and one more Atom bomb later, “the first Japanese surrender offer was intercepted shortly before Tokyo broadcast it.” Previous terms of surrender were agreed to with previously refuted terms involving the resignation of the Japanese emperor now no longer an issue.

Ultimately, the U.S. was able to avoid a full scale invasion of Japan which would have resulted in massive casualties. Despite powerful allies, top notch intelligence and military superiority, taking Japan would have proved virtually impossible. Time and time again attempts to negotiate peace with the Japanese empire proved futile ultimately leaving the U.S. with few options. In the end, the United States would demonstrate its technological power through one of the most aggressive and devastating attacks in world history, a regrettable but necessary action.

Reflection

            After what seems like more reading than I’ve done in my entire life, I will admit, I’m very glad to have come to the end of this assignment; however, in retrospect I realize that was part of the point. The study of history on any level can be a daunting task and certainly not one for the book shy. Fortunately, I had the luxury of the internet at my fingertips for this project, as digging through the library of congress for declassified documents and excerpts from President Truman’s Journal was in no way an option for me. Ultimately I have the digital humanities field to thank for these digitized records, without the thankless, tedious work of some poor, bespectacled individual transcribing all of these notes and documents, this knowledge would be shamefully limited. Pouring through resources and attempting to find documentation about events that I knew had occurred/existed proved to be much more difficult than I had ever thought it would be despite concerning one of the best documented regiments in the world, the U.S. Government.

While the tremendous amounts of information available regarding WWII is helpful, I can’t help but feel that at the same time, the sheer volume of information is the biggest hurdle when researching topics like this. Big data can be a historian’s best friend or their worst enemy; I consider myself fairly adept at being able to find information that I need, especially when I know it exists, but in a library of congress situation where this information  can literally surround a person where does one start? Organization of big data is no small task and in a project such as this it becomes almost entirely necessary to find a few sources where this tremendous amount of information has been consolidated for you.

Relying on primary sources becomes a major issue at times, even when researching a relatively modern topic in history such as WWII. The further back in history and the more obscure the topic, the more difficult it is to dig up a firsthand account or documentation from official meetings. The allure of jumping to an article or website covering a topic as a secondary source is almost too sweet at times. Fortunately I had picked a tremendously well documented topic that was tied to a tremendously well documented organization. Without much of the digitization done by/of the Library of Congress/National Security Archive, it’s safe to say I wouldn’t know where to start with my research for this topic.

Introduction:
Fifty years ago, south of our nation’s boarder a conflict had occurred. A United States’ U-2 spy plane was traveling miles above the earth’s western hemisphere only to come across a frightening discovery; a Soviet nuclear warhead. For 13 days, President Kennedy and Premier Khrushchev exchanged a multitude of face-to-face and more informal conferences about the situation and the potential dangers that came along with this move. A nuclear missile during that timeframe could cripple the American country and kill over an estimated 100 million Americans. What was discussed in these conferences and why would anyone want to move nuclear warheads around the world in a strategic manner? There is no need to move weapons around the world to embrace in the thought of Armageddon.
1. Soviet Union-United States Original Conflicts and facts
i. Reported in October 40 launchers and 80 missiles found
ii. Air strikes were possible but unsure about if all the missiles and launchers would be destroyed
iii. CIA reported that about a dozen missiles were operational at that time
iv. Attorney general didn’t agree with attack
1. Pearl Harbor effect
2. Lead to unpredictable military responses from the Soviets (McNamara, 1962)
a. Possibly nuclear
v. Missiles designed specifically in Moscow for incoming ICBM as a defensive system
vi. Other launchers and missiles designed against aircraft
vii. Radars found on the island
1. Unaware of their dependability
viii. Hundreds of missiles detected moved into cuba in September
1. Not all thermonuclear (Helms, 1993)
ix. Aug 22 CIA game infomratino concerning the number of Soviet and Chinese personael who had entered Cuba (Central Intelligence Agency, 1962)
x. 38 ships arrived since Aug 5
1. 5 were personnel
a. 4000 to 6000 Soviet personel (Central Intelligence Agency, 1962)
xi. President Kennedy asked for further information and analysis on situation from others before taking any further action
2. The Soviet Union-United States Military threats
i. Soviet Union had moved numerous amounts of long and short range missiles to Cuba
1. 22 IL-28 jet bombers
2. 29 MIG-21 jet fighters
3. 24 SA-2 sites
4. 3 cruise missile sites for coastal defense
5. 12 cruise missile patrol boats
ii. Purpose of Soviet military buildup was “to demonstrate that the world balance of forces has shifted so far in their favor that the US can no longer prevent the advance of Soviet offensive power into its own hemisphere (Centeral Intelligence Agency, 1962).”
iii. 16 MRBMs
1. Short range missiles reaching 1100 nm
2. Considered operational at time of notice
iv. 2 IRBMs
1. Long range missiles reaching nm
2. “Able to reach Washington DC and Mountain Home AFB, Idaho (Regis, 2010)”
v. U-2 spy plane shot down
 

Bibliography
Centeral Intelligence Agency. (1962, Ooctober 20). Major Consequences of Certain US Courses of Action on Cuba. Retrieved from The National Security Archive: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/19621020cia.pdf
Central Intelligence Agency. (1962, October). Cuban Missile Crisis. Retrieved from CIA Documents on the Cuban Missile Crisis: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/Cuban%20Missile%20Crisis1962.pdf
Helms, R. (1993, September 22). Intelligence in American Society. Retrieved from Central Intelligence Agency: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol11no3/html/v11i3a01p_0001.htm
McNamara, R. S. (1962, October 21). Notes on Meeting with the President. Retrieved from Cuban Missile Crisis Key Documents: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/19621021mcnam.pdf
Regis, M. D. (2010). Retired Air Force Speical Ops. (R. Regis, Interviewer)

Eric Schooley
Digital History (HIST-381)
Dr. Leslie Madsen-Brooks

8 October, 2012

Cities of the Forgotten:
Japanese-American Resistance in WWII Internment Camps
A Research Project Plan

During World War Two, America committed one of the most heinous acts in our history: the practice of our government interring Japanese-American citizens at relocation camps for the duration of the war. While many of the internees in these camps volunteered for military service or accepted their fates, several did not, and maintained a vocal resistance during their incarceration.

1: The newsletters printed by the internees were a critical connection to a sense of community that is necessary for any type of resistance to be effective. Social gatherings, sporting activities, religious services played major roles in developing this sense of belonging, and the grassroots newsletters produced by the internees were the only available sources of news in the camps.

The Tule Lake Bulletin is a prime example of the types of stories published by these newsletters. I’ve included a later issue, in total, as an example. Here we will explore the same things we can see in newspapers from small communities across America: local sports, church meeting times, honorable mention for students, and police reports involving residents. Citation: Tule Lake Bulletin, March 2, 1944. http:/archive.densho.org (accessed September 21, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshopd-i65-00437

A classified ad from an early edition of The Manzanar Free Press advertising lessons in the traditional Japanese instrument: Shakuhachi. This shows a desire to maintain cultural traditions. Citation “Shakuhachi Lessons,” Manzanar Free Press, June 20, 1942, page 4, http:/archive.densho.org (accessed October 6, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshopd-i125-00025

An article written by an administrator of the Gila Flats Camp urging internees to do their part to beautify the “city.” Although this article is not written by an internee, it gives a good sense of the attempts made at community building. Citation: Fryer, “Residents Urged to Beautify City.” Gila News-Courier Vol. 1 No. 4, September 23, 1942, page 1. http:/archive.densho.org, (accessed September 23, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshopd-i141-00004

2: There was an underground rumor-mill that, while not always accurate, was incredibly active.

Interview with Mr. Kenge Kobayashi, in which he relates the proclivity of rumors in his particular camp. Citation: Kenge Kobayashi interview by Alice Ito, July 4, 1998, http:/archive.densho.org, (accessed October 1, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-kkenge-01-0010

Interview with Mr. Jim Akutsu, where he relates a story of himself and three other internees petitioning camp administration for better food and living conditions. Citation: Jim Akutsu interview by Art Hansen, June 9 & 12, 1997, http:/archive.densho.org, (accessed October 1, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-ajim-01-0034

Interview with Mr. Cedrick Shimo, a Nisei soldier, recalling an “angry bull-session” among soldiers about the plight of their interred families. Citation: Cedrick Shimo interview by Tom Ikeda & Martha Nakagawa, September 22, 2009, http:/archive.densho.org, (accessed September 22, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-scedrick-01-0017

3. Resistance, in fact, took many creative forms. Including, refusal to sign the infamous “Loyalty Questionnaire,” draft resistance, and hunger strikes.
Interview with Mr. Jim Tanimoto, in which he relates his interviews regarding his refusal to sign the “Loyalty Questionnaire” and the consequences. Citation: Jim Tanimoto interview by Tom Ikeda & Barbara Takei, December 10, 2009, http:/archive.densho.org (accessed October 6, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-tjim-01-0022

Another interview with Mr. Jim Akutsu about the beginnings of unrest concerning the draft laws of 1944.Citation: Jim Akutsu interview by Art Hansen, June 9 & 12, 1997, http:/archive.densho.org, (accessed October 1, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-ajim-01-0025

Interview with Mr. Gene Akutsu, brother of Jim, describes his arrest and time in jail for resisting the draft. Citation: Gene Akutsu interview by Tom Ikeda, April 17, 2008, http:/archive.densho.org, (accessed October 1, 2012). http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-agene-03-0009

Interview with Mr. Fred Tadashi Shingu where he tells a story of a hunger strike at the Tule Lake facility in 1943. Citation: Fred Tadashi Shingu interview by Tom Ikeda & Martha Nakagawa, July 29, 2010, http:/archive.densho.org (accessed September 23, 2010).
http://archive.densho.org/Core/ArchiveItem.aspx?i=denshovh-sfred_2-01-0020

Concluding Paragraph:
The experiences of Japanese-American inmates at these internment camps was unfair, unjust and completely deplorable. However, the people in these camps insisted on maintaining their dignity and their identities. Through grassroots organization, they not only kept alive cultural practices, they invented new communities and support networks in some of the worst conditions. It would be a mistake to imagine these people, these American citizens, going quietly into these horrible camps, they fought their internment every step of the way, sacrificing their reputations, their health, and even their lives to improve conditions and get free of the camps.
Annotated Bibliography of Secondary Sources:
1. “A More Perfect Union, Japanese Americans & The U.S. Constitution,” The Smithsonian Institute, accessed September, 2012, http:/American history.si.edu/perfect union/experience/index.html
This interactive website designed by the Smithsonian Institute is a very good overview of the entire debacle. This source would mainly serve my project by helping me to establish an emotional connection to these events for my readers.
2. Daniels, Roger. Prisoners Without Trial: Japanese Americans in World War II. New York: Hill and Wang, 1993.
This book examines the internment of Japanese Americans in several camps and is incredibly useful for basic background information on topics including: the “Loyalty Questionnaire,” group identification through ethnicity, age and gender, and the treatment of long-term internees.
Reflection:
Like all research projects, the hardest problem to surmount with this project was simply choosing a topic to study. Unlike any other project I have worked on, this problem was multiplied tenfold. When one goes to research any topic in a more traditional, analog method, one’s choices are limited by the materials at hand, or the money/time budgeted for research. With the advent of digitization, these restrictions have effectively been lifted. This leaves us with an interesting problem: in the past, our fields would have been winnowed to a more manageable level before we were ever involved, but now that process is left undone and we are responsible for sifting through many more sources, and therefore many more researchable topics, than ever before. This means more time is required to research and choose a topic in the digital world than in the analog world. Of course, once I found a researchable topic, and then threw it and the next five out in favor of the final topic, I was faced with new problems.
An unforeseen obstacle I encountered was my unfamiliarity with the organization systems in various databases. At first, I thought my skills were lacking and I might need some remedial help, but after perusing several sites and databases, I realized the problem wasn’t my perceived misunderstanding of organizational structure, but more likely the fact that no two databases seem to work the same way. Get one figured out pretty well, and be ready to start the learning curve all over for the next.
Another interesting fact I found, I’d hesitate top call it a problem, is this: anyone who’s gone to the trouble of digitizing all the sources will have necessarily spent some time analyzing them. This means that in order to find an original, high-quality research topic, I had to dig deeper than I had planned to. Why even write a paper if there’s nothing new to say on a topic? There seems to be a fine line in digital research. If a topic is largely digitized, it follows that there will be a good deal written on it. The inverse of this is: if there is still a good deal to be said on a topic, there is probably not much in the way of digitized sources. Similarly, it seems that if you were interested in a particular topic, there might not be a large variety of organizations that have digitized their content. So, as seen in my project plan, many sources can come from one organization. While this might make research simpler, it certainly does not make for an attractive bibliography.
The project I exclusively worked with is the Densho Online Archive. These wonderful humanists have collected hundreds of hours of interviews, miles of documents, and official government papers concerning the Japanese-American experience, specifically focusing on the internment of citizens of Asian descent by our own government during World War Two. This collection of primary sources has remarkably little in the way of interpretation. That’s where I come into it. The archive is divided by topic, or camp, or time period, but all paths lead to the same sources. This allows for a historian to see connections the previous researchers have made, but more importantly, it leaves pathways for new intellectual connections to emerge.
In the end, I suppose it might be foolish to say, “the digital revolution is making it easier than ever to do research.” While the sheer amount of sources online can be beneficial, the tools used don’t really change the job to be done. There will always be a line between “research” and “good research.”

On September 27th the Prime Minister of Israel gave a poignant speech to the UN General Assembly regarding the history of Iran and its recent pursuit of nuclear technology. Benjamin Netanyahu – the PM of Israel – asked some rhetorical questions that shed light into the Israeli lens of foreign policy. Netanyahu enquires: “so I ask you: given this record of Iranian aggression without nuclear weapons, just imagine Iranian aggression with nuclear weapons. Imagine their long ranged missiles tipped with nuclear warheads, their terror networks armed with atomic bonds. Who among you with feel safe in the Middle East? Who would be safe in Europe? Who would be safe in America?” (Netanyahu, Sept 27 2012). These questions articulate that the pursuits of Iranian nuclear technology have major geopolitical consequences that individuals should be cognizant about. Thus, given such an intimate insight with Israeli political calculus and foreign policy one can ask the question: does the historical experience of Israel regarding nuclear technology in the Middle East determine future action? In this paper I will survey the local, regional, and global historical experiences regarding the foreign policy of the state of Israel and argue that the future of Israeli action can be understood best by a background of its history. More specifically, the precarious position the state of Israel is in, can be understood best by first, examining the birth of the nation, second, historical regional relationships, and lastly, looking at the global institutions the state of Israel depends upon.

KEY: Motivational Link

            Research Question

            Argument

Preview

Section 1. Local [Israel was born into a foreign policy emergency room which has made it hypersensitive and a realist]

BIRTH

• UNGA Resolution 181 opened up the international political space for the state of Israel. This international accord required Britain to evacuate the area we now know as Israel. Additionally, this required the formation of two states – Jewish and Arab. The commission formed by the resolution was to be used to create these two states as quickly as possible. The Israeli state was the quickest to petition for statehood. The US also recognized the state of Israel under the premises of the UNGA Resolution 181. Due to the lack of an Arab state and the quick formation of the state of Israel, this resolution became an international political hot potato. Which caused the state of Israel to reflect on its birth.

à Knesset, “UN General Assembly Resolution 181.” Last modified 1947. Accessed October 6, 2012. http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/un181_eng.htm.

• Israel starts an army. This picture shows a man joining the conscripted Israeli military. Two main arguments would be made from this artifact. First, an acknowledgement that the previous Israeli military was fractured into insurgent groups. Second, that the nation of Israel now has one of the most powerful and capable militaries in the region. First, the previous military the Israelis had was made up of different insurgent groups from various geographical regions. Because the state of Israel did not exists, paramilitary organizations formed with common characteristics – Jewish, under threat, and the Hebrew Language. After the formulation of the state, the forces united. Second, the Israeli military is now one of the most capable. It has mandatory conscription – which means all citizens are eligible for military service. It poses a threat to other regional militaries which has had major effects on the history of Israel.

à Ilani, Efrayim. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “In the regular army of Israel now.” Last modified 1948. Accessed October 5, 2012. http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.09155 .

• Formation of the state of Israel was problematic. This primary source comes from Iran’s president’s words on December 8, 2005. This quotation would be made sense of by Slavoj Zizek’s book Violence. The argument I would make is: the formation of the state of Israel can be examined from multiple viewpoints. Many of those opposed to the nation of Israel regard its formulation as illegal. That the UNGA resolution 181 was not followed. Additionally, the idea that because the holocaust happened the state of Israel was justified. The guilt of European policymakers made the formation of this state that much easier. This argument would be used to reaffirm the idea that the Israel was born into a foreign policy emergency room from the eyes of onlookers.

à Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud. Anti-Defamation League, “Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in his Own Words.” Last modified 2005. Accessed October 4, 2012. http://www.adl.org/main_International_Affairs/ahmadinejad_words.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_9

• Arab-Israeli War. These four pictures would be used to tease out the link between a foreign policy emergency room and hypersensitivity and realism. The war occurred after Arab allies – Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria – united against the state of Israel. The Israeli government viewed the conflict as imminent and struck first… preemptively. This conflict has tainted relationships in the region. Israel has repeatedly pre-emptively struck its Arab neighbors provoking escalation in conflict. Moreover, the Jordanian artillery shelling Jerusalem has changed Israel’s views of defense to this day. For example, the three occupied territories – Golan Heights, West Bank, and Gaza Strip – have been occupied to thwart the ability to shell artillery into Jerusalem.

à Wikipedia, “Egyptian Plane TA 1948.” Last modified 1948. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Egyptian_Plane_TA_1948.jpg

à Wikipedia, “1948-Jordanian artillery shelling Jerusalem.” Last modified 1948. Accessed October 3, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1948-Jordanian_artillery_shelling_Jerusalem.jpg

à Wikipedia, “Ramla prisoners of war, July 12-13, 1948.” Last modified 1948. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ramla_prisoners_of_war,_July_12-13,_1948.png

à The State of Israel Government Press Office, . Encyclopedia Britannica, “Six-Day War .” Last modified June 10, 1967. Accessed October 2, 2012. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/99868/Israeli-tanks-advancing-on-the-Golan-Heights-during-the-Six

 

PALESTINE

• Israel builds homes for immigrants in Palestine lands. As noted earlier regarding the UNGA Resolution 181 the specifics of an Arab and Jewish state never occurred. In being such, the Israelis have begun colonizing settlements in private and Palestinian land. This has been a very controversial decision for Israeli politics especially when juxtaposing the policy against Arab attitudes. For example, the nation of Iran is supposedly investing and financing terrorist organization such as Hamas, and Hezbollah against the state of Israel. Hamas which can be literally translated into the “Islamic Resistance Movement” governs the politics of the Gaza strip. This controversial settlement policy into Palestinian land has had major negative repercussions about the perceived legitimacy of the state of Israel.

à Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “Israel builds homes for immigrants.” Last modified [195-?]. Accessed October 5, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/91783888/

• Israel terrorizes refugee camps. This artifact, a poster, declaring a stop to Israeli terror against Palestine would be used to further my argument regarding settlements and the international attitudes of observers. Many outside nations have seen belligerence and militancy by Israel against the Palestinian refugee camps. This has caused countries to call Israel human rights abusers. These claims and the documented belligerence against the Palestinian refugee camps would be used to argue that Israel is not popular internationally now, and has very few allies.

à Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “Stop Israeli terror against our refugee camps and villages.” Last modified [between 1967 and 1980]. Accessed October 6, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/yan1996003026/PP/

• CIA and Israeli government know of illegal settlement or construction build on private lands. This document from Wikileaks, show that Israeli and American governments acknowledge the illegality of the settlements yet still no action has been taken to stop the illegality. The document shows Harut and Adora settlements being illegal. The infrastructure from the settlements being on private land. This document shows the incriminating history of Israel in the region of Palestine. This acknowledge illegality has shown that Israel is a realist, and that the state is a state of hypersensitivity.

à Wikileaks, “CIA OSC: Secret Israeli database shows full extent of illegal settlements.” Last modified 2009. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CIA_OSC:_Secret_Israeli_database_shows_full_extent_of_illegal_settlements,_Apr_2009

 

Section 2. Regional [Israel history with regional threats has been marked by preemption and US led mediation]

6 days war – 1967 conflict

• Israel occupied territories after 1967 skirmish. In 1967 the surrounding Arab states unified against Israel. These states gave authority of their militaries to Egypt who then moved armored columns into the Sinai Peninsula. This conflict would be made sense of by the secondary source Just and Unjust Wars by Michael Walzer. The conflict resulted in a unilateral preemptive strike against these Arab states. This preemptive strike resulted in a successful military campaign and a defeat of the Arab neighbors. However, by winning this conflict the Israeli’s occupied three disputed regions – denoted by the map. The Golan Heights, West Bank, and Gaza Strip would become a source of contention even up to present day.

à Central Intelligence Agency, . Library of Congress Geography and Maps Division, “Israel..” Last modified 2001. Accessed October 4, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/resource/g7500.ct002039/

• Egypt and Israel resolve problems. The US led mediation of Israel and her enemies would be carried out by the Americans. The US realized that Israel is America’s best ally in the region. After the 6 day war, the US has supported Israel with military expenditures, financing, and diplomacy. This conflict solidified the relationship between these two states. Moreover, this also led to the US becoming the sole mediator for the state of Israel. The 6 day war ended with Arab states angry at the existence of the state of Israel, and now shared anger on the US for maintaining Israel’s legitimacy.

à Warren, Leffler. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “Egypt Israel peace treaty.” Last modified 1979. Accessed October 4, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2003673991/

Iran

• US military fears a unilateral strike on Iran from Israel. Due to the historical significance of the Israel preemptively striking targets the US is afraid of the future of Iran. Additionally I would draw upon the secondary source The Global Future to examine two other preemptive strikes. One carried out against Iraq in the late 1980’s preemptively striking a nuclear enrichment facility. The second carried out against Syria in the early 1990’s. The Israeli use of preemptive strike is known to the whole world. When looking to this document I would make the argument that US knows and fears the use of a preemptive strike against Iran. On page 70, we list Israel as a potential wildcard.

à Marine Corps Intelligence Activity, . Wikileaks, “US Marines Midrange Threat Estimate 2005-2015.” Last modified 2005. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://wikileaks.org/wiki/US_Marines_Midrange_Threat_Estimate_2005-2015

• US Aid to Iran. This film was rather intriguing to me. It shows the US giving aid to the Shah. We instituted the Shah and helped to bolster the regime. I would make the argument here that the US has mollified the chance of an Israeli first strike by providing aide to Israeli enemies/aggressors. For example, the bolstering of the Mubarak regime by the US was done to check back regional strife from Egypt against Israel. We maintained the same policy in Iran where we pumped aid into the nation hoping for its support. However, after the Iranian revolution the anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment leaked out. This leaking has put Israel in a troublesome place because now its greatest ally – the US – is almost hated and perceived as illegitimate as the Israeli state.

à Department of Defense. Department of the Army. Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations. U.S. Army Audiovisual Center.. “US aid to Iran.” Motion Picture Films from the Army Library Copy Collection. Recorded 1960?. 05 15 1984. Web, http://research.archives.gov/description/28507

• Israel has nukes. This argument is a necessary one to make in order to understand the attitudes of regional states. Israel gained nuclear weapons to check back conflicts in the region. However, just like nuclear proliferation trends historically, when one neighbor gets a nuclear weapon it increases the intention of other competing nations to acquire a nuclear weapon. And this is exactly what has happened. Iran – as Netanyahu explained – is attempting to gain a nuclear weapon. But, the way in which Iran is attempting to gain a nuclear weapon and sell its ability to gain a nuclear weapon to the international community parallels the way Israel went about it. Iran says it has access to nuclear technology because it signed the NPT or Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. Moreover, it also says it wants a reciprocal right to nuclear technology because Israel has a nuclear weapon but denies it. This primary source comes directly from Israeli intellectuals, politicians, civil society members, and educators arguing that Israel possesses nuclear technology.

à Xrmagedon, “About us.” Accessed October 4, 2012. http://www.armagedon.org.il/about_us_english.htm

 

Section 3. Global [Israel has long been a US ally but recent events have changed the relationship between Israel and the US making predictions of Israeli activity difficult]

US

• American Legislation. The United States Congress. I found these four pieces of legislation that are all strongly worded for Israel and against Iran. These legislators and the legislation they produce embolden the nation of Israel. In analyzing these four pieces of legislation I would hope to make the argument that the relationship between our congress and Israeli foreign policy are intertwined. Additionally, these House Resolutions – such as the Gohmert Resolution – affirm Israel’s use of force against the Republic of Iran. These affirmations coming from a foreign congress from a world superpower send mixed signals to that nation of Israel.

à Gohmert, Louie. Library of Congress Bill Summary & Status, “Bill Summary & Status – 111th Congress (2009-2010) H.RES.1553.” Last modified 2010. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.Res1553:.

à Garrett, Scott. Library of Congress Bill Summary & Status, “Bill Summary & Status – 109th Congress (2005-2006) H.RES.707.” Last modified 2006. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:H.Res707:

à Hyde, Henry. Library of Congress Bill Summary & Status, “Bill Summary & Status – 109th Congress (2005-2006) H.RES.523.” Last modified 2005. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:H.Res523:

à Cole, Tom. Library of Congress Bill Summary & Status, “Bill Summary & Status – 109th Congress (2005-2006) H.RES.601.” Last modified 2005. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:H.Res601:

• Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama and Henry Kissinger. American presidential leadership has had a special relationship with Israel for quite some time. The five sources here are four American presidents, former Secretary of State, and one presidential candidate. The argument I would make is that historically the US has always had a good relationship with the leadership of Israel. Carter, Ford, Nixon, even Clinton extended and furthered are relationship with Israel. However, Barak Obama has been percieved as soft. Even Mitt Romney has been endorsed by Netanyahu – showing the perceived ‘softness’ of Obama. Lastly, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has had a major impact on the relationship with the nation of Israel. Kissinger has persuaded/been persuaded with tenets of Israeli realism.

à Marion, Trikosko. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “President Jimmy Carter and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin at the White House, Washington, D.C..” Last modified 1977. Accessed October 3, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2005696406/

à Thomas, O’Halloran. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “President Gerald Ford (center) sitting in chair in front of fireplace, with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin (left) and others including Henry Kissinger (right), at the White House.” Last modified 1976. Accessed October 6, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2012646607/

à Marion, Trikosko. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, “Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir standing with president Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, outside the White House.” Last modified 1973. Accessed October 2, 2012. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2012645921/

à White House Photograph Office, . Flickr, “Photograph of President William J. Clinton and Prime Minister of Israel Yitzhak Rabin Walking Along the Colonnade of the White House, 11/12/1993.” Last modified 1993. Accessed October 5, 2012. http://www.flickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/6175659631/

à Ohayun, Avi. Flickr, “PM Netanyahu meets President Obama at the White House, 20.5.11.” Last modified 2011. Accessed October 8, 2012. http://www.flickr.com/photos/israelipm/5744982879/

à McZyrba, . Flickr, “romney looking longingly at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” Last modified 2012. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://www.flickr.com/photos/30054567@N08/7665843140/in/photostream/

UN

• UNSC Resolution 242. This resolution put Israel in a precarious position. This resolution has been a thorny issue for Israeli foreign policy. It calls for certain actions from multiple states in the region, none of which has occurred. The first clause of the resolution expresses “concern with the grave situation in the Middle East”. This resolution calls for withdrawal of “Israeli armed forced from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. These territories are the three occupied territories mentioned prior – Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, West Bank. It lastly “affirms further the necessity” of “navigation through international waterways in the areas”, and “ just settlement of the refugee problem”. These two issues have not and likely will not be solved in the near future. This makes Israel look like a international relations agitator.

à Knesset,. “U.N. Security Council Resolution 242.” Last modified November 22, 1967. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/un242_eng.htm

à Knesset, “The Camp David Accords.” Last modified 1978. Accessed October 7, 2012. http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/camp_david_eng.htm

 

In conclusion, foreign policy experts have articulated a definition of rational choice. A rational choice is the decision making procedures guided by careful definition of problems, specification of goals, weighing the costs, risks, and benefits of all alternatives, and selection of the optimal alternative. Israeli leaders must navigate in the near future the costs and benefits of acting against the nation of Iran. The  implications of such unilateral action is suspended against a historical background of previous action. Today we examined the hypersensitive and realist state Israel has been in since its conception. We examined the regional conflicts and the anti-American/anti-Israeli sentiments plaguing the region that make decision making even more difficult. Lastly, we looked at the historical relationship between the U.S. and Israel and noted the recent changes between Netanyahu and Obama. One can only hope, that world leaders choose a path that prefers peace in the region and removes the threat of preemptive military strikes and nuclear war.

• Kegley, Charles, and Gregory Raymond. The Global Future: A Brief Introduction to World Politics. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010.

à This secondary source is my International Relations textbook. I use it in two ways. First, it is where I get my definition for rational choice. I acquired this on page 59. This is a term used by foreign policy experts to articulate the difficult choices nation-states pursue when it comes to international relations. I also use the textbooks look at the Israeli preemptive strikes on Iraq and Syria.

• Netanyahu, Benjamin. “Netanyahu Full UN 2012 Speech.” Posted Sept 27 2012. Russia Today. Sept 27 2012. Web, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsu2jI1WdUE&feature=related.

à  This is I believe a primary source I used in my introduction. I use the part starting at around 26:00 minutes. This is a primary source because it comes directly from Israeli foreign policy leadership. This source and the Nina Paley source inspired me to pursue this topic.

• Paley, Nina. ” This Land Is Mine.” Nina Paley (blog), Oct 1, 2012. http://blog.ninapaley.com/2012/10/01/this-land-is-mine/ (accessed October 1, 2012).

à I found this on the Internet when looking for a topic. I’m not sure if this qualifies as a source. I don’t use it specifically in my project plan, though it is the inspiration and helps illuminate the problem. I really enjoyed this cartoon/clip. It shows the history of these disputed lands, in the context of who has or is claiming ownership of them. Some would say its probably distasteful, but I think it does a great job noting the problem.

• Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books, 2006.

à  This is another secondary source I read for a class. Michael Walzer’s book is great for this research project plan. The first great reason, is its use of historical illustrations to tackle difficult international relations topics – such as preemptive military strikes. It also was used to help make sense of the 6 day war and Arab-Israel War. As many parallels run through both conflicts. I also used this source to discuss the relationship between Israel and the U.S.

• Zizek, Slavoj. Violence: six sideways reflections. New York: Picador, 2008.

à I used this secondary source for two reasons. One I enjoy reading  Zizek. Two, Zizek – on Pg. 111 – looks at the conception of the state of Israel from the view of the Ahmadinejad. Zizek notes first the disgusting idea of holocaust denial. Then notes the problem with European hypocrisy, by viewing the conception of the state from a different viewpoint.

 

 

The first thing I would like to reflect on is the difficulty of doing primary source research in another language. One topic I was interested in is the Senkaku/Diayou island disputes. A lot of the primary source research I found I could not read. Or, if I found the location to do primary source research, I could not navigate the website due to the language barrier. Even the topic I settled on – Israel – had a lot of information in Hebrew. One of the primary sources I used in this essay was the Armageddon group. It originally was in Hebrew until I found the English translation link. Doing primary resource research in another language is troublesome. A question that I thought of regarding primary sources in another language is: does a translated primary source qualify as a primary source? This question may seem superficial, but I wonder if a translation still qualifies as a primary source. Especially with all of the troubles of translation disputes and words not translating directly to English.

Another thing I found intriguing about this assignment was the number of primary sources that have been digitized. I found it difficult to settle on a topic I could feel comfortable about finding enough primary sources. I was surprised at all of the information digitized on archives.gov and the Library of Congress. For example, most of the Grateful Dead’s performances are online, old foreign policy cables, and pictures from multiple world organizations. The problem I found was navigating the research. The Library of Congress would explain they have “x amount of articles in their digital collections”. When first seeing the size of the digital archives I felt I could find anything. However, once I began searching for information I either found it to be non-existent or of poor quality. Some pictures, photographs, and posters I stumbled upon were of poor quality. I also was not certain of which words to use to search for primary sources. If I should only rely on key word searches or if I should pursue a collection. Nonetheless, this was a great activity to get accustomed to primary sources online.

I also found this assignment nerve-racking. I have never annotated a bibliography let alone a whole research paper. I was not sure of the best way to start this project because I could not conceive of its end result. I’m still nervous finishing this and turning it in. A reason I found this assignment difficult was trying to implicate an argument from historical artifacts. I found this troublesome or unauthentic. I wasn’t sure of the best way to construct an argument from the outside and force/lay it upon real historical experience. I also found this difficult because I could not envision what I assumed the end goal ought look like. The lack of a finished project to use as a reference was nerve-racking. Although, if anything the freedom and lack of a concrete “this is what you’ll turn in” opened up a space to be creative and attempt to meet the requirements of the assignment in a different ways. The last reason I found this difficult is my exposure to Chicago citations. Citations were nuisance for two reasons. First, Chicago style lacked specific citation guides for unique sources. MLA for example, has a specific way to cite diverse sources. Whereas, Chicago seemed to only have five ways to source things. Which becomes difficult and open to interpretation when you only have a few options to select from. I source cited a lot of my information as nonprint – web page or other online posting.

The last thing I would like to reflect on is the idea of a thesis for different types of research essays. A good thesis for a philosophy or political science paper is not necessarily a good thesis for a history paper. This may seem obvious, but in thinking about it and writing down my thoughts, it was not as obvious as I thought. I assumed that because philosophy, political science, and history seem intertwined and inter-sectional that the content and thesis are also interchangeable. This is not true. The purpose or intention of the paper are different and thus the intricacies like a thesis and content are different. However, I noticed how engaging and rich a political science or philosophy essay would be with primary sources. It seems like examining the historical background via primary sources would give a philosophy or political science paper an authentic background from which to build an argument.

 

 

Jim Duran

In the harsh semi-arid desert landscape of the American West, or Arid West as John Wesley Powell described it, farming is a constant struggle between floods and droughts. From Central California to Colorado, settling the sagebrush country required massive irrigation projects to guarantee water for the farmers. The cold winters and hot summers made only the toughest crops acceptable to grow. As settlements grew, and the cities and states expanded their agricultural reaches, politicians promised more and more water for prospective farmers and cattle ranchers. The promise of water has been a theme of Arid West history. In the Arid West, the promise of water was synonymous with progress; politicians often used water rights and water projects as bargaining chips for growth. By surveying various campaign literature, and water project correspondence between politicians, this paper will show the nature of water and politics in the Arid West.

Outline
Introduction (See Above)
Historiography
Statement 1: Politicians associate water projects with progress, often claiming they (the politician) is the only person who will bring progress to their area, and guarantee safety and security for the voter’s children.
Source (1a): Jim Sperry and Steve Thorson Campaign Advertisement, Aberdeen American News url: http://digitalcollections.northern.edu/u?/hmwrc,174

In this advertisement Sperry and Steve imply that a vote for them is a vote for water projects. At the bottom of the document, the author explicitly states the voter’s children’s future is at stake.
(Source 1b): Mike McHugh advertisement, Aberdeen American News. url: http://digitalcollections.northern.edu/u?/hmwrc,102

McHugh argued he can get projects passed the gridlock of bureaucracy. McHugh implied farmers cannot last another drought, and water projects MUST be approved or else the community faces dire consequences, and he is the person to get things done.

Statement 2: The major rivalry for water projects is almost always environmental conservation. Those arguing against irrigation projects often point to the irreparable change (or damage) to the landscape, while those arguing for the projects typically argue that the economic gains outweigh any value in an untouched wilderness.

(Source 2a): Envirotech Publications: “The Water Report – A critical habitat, bull trout and politics.” April 15, 2005. URL:http://digitallib.oit.edu/cdm/ref/collection/kwl/id/3697
This environmental report argues against water projects that do not consider the impact of dams on the population of bull trout. The author indicates those who oppose fish protection are not thinking scientifically:
“The political currents are strong with the decisions clouded by factors other than science and the law.” (p. 18)

(Source 2b): D.G. Lorenzi. “Protest Emergency Water Ordinance 247” Las Vegas Review-Journal. July 26, 1939. URL: http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/hln,563

This author is concerned that conservationists warning of water shortages in Las Vegas will ultimately harm property values and impede new growth to the city. Lorenzi believes the water conservation ordinance is unwarranted and should be ignored by Las Vegas citizens.

Statement 3: As a counter to statement 2, sometimes the conservation advocates will also use an economic argument against water projects. Typically, these arguments include a calculation of taxes raised versus perceived value added.

(Source 3a): Letter from Las Vegas Land and Water Co. General Manager to C. W. Shelley (Las Vegas), July 7, 1950. http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/hln,497
This letter documents efforts taken by the Las Vegas officials enforcing the water conservation law. As a counter to Lorenzi, in source 2b, this author claims water conservation will save the tax payers money.

Statement 4: Claiming ownership of water is an important part of negotiating the creation and support of water projects. Politicians might use an argument of water ownership. Either water rightfully belongs to his or her party, or it is wasted or squandered by undeserving outsiders, to sway an audience that their plan for the water is best.

(Source 4a): Letter from Ernie W. Cragin (Las Vegas) to George F. Ashby (Omaha), October 8, 1948. http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/hln,721

Craigin was concerned that Las Vegas water might be sold or taken out of city limits. Craigin also mentions that water could be drawn from lake Mead, without any mention of ownership of that water.

(Source 4b)John Sieh Campaign Advertisement November 1978. http://digitalcollections.northern.edu/u?/hmwrc,186

John Sieh believed he knew what the people of Oahe Conservancy subdistrict wanted, and it was not another big water project. In this advertisement, Sieh argues for smaller water projects to divert the Missouri River to his constituents. “The Oahe Sub-district holds a permit right now for 80,000 acre feet of Missouri River water…”

Conclusion
As with most ideas associated with Manifest Destiny, coast-to-coast farmland was a pipedream. The Arid West was, and in most places still is, not suitable for sustainable farming. The history of civil development in states like Utah, Idaho, and Nevada often is attributed to the determination and work ethic of the pioneer men and women. These legends of conquering nature are prominent in early 20th century history books. This simplified view of the past overlooks the conflict between the modern pioneers – especially with irrigation. These dry states look the way they do today because of tenacious men and women who fought for their view of proper water distribution. The people had to fight each other as much as they fought nature to control the limited water supply.
Annotated Bibliography
Brooks, Karl Boyd. 2006. Public Power Private Dams, The Hell’s Canyon High Dam Controversy. Washington: University of Washington Press.
Brooks documents the social and political agents involved with the choice of a public or private hydropower system on the Snake River. Brooks successfully picks up on the anti-federal sentiment in local political struggles, which contributes to my argument about ownership of water, and its role in arguments for water projects.
Lovin, Hugh T. (Spring 1981) “’Duty of Water’ in Idaho: A ‘New West’ Irrigation Controversy 1890-1920.” Arizona and the West, Vole 23, No. 1. pp. 5-28. accessed 10/7/2012. url: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40169105

Lovin argues Idaho politicians forced farmers to use less water in order to irrigate more land. In this article, Lovin documents failed promises of a bountiful New West, and the controversial actions of lawmakers to compensate for actual water yields compared to promised ones.

Lovin, Hugh T. (Fall 1998) “The Fight for an Irrigation Empire in the Yellowstone River Valley” The Pacific Northwest Quarterly , Vol. 89, No. 4, pp. 188-201. Published by: University of Washington. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40492429

Lovin critiques the various groups fighting for and against an irrigation project near the Yellowstone National Park. Lovin assigns agency to political prowess by demonstrating how relative power between farmers, city and state officials, and federal agents contributed to the outcome of irrigation projects.
Reisner, Marc. 1993. Cadillac desert: the American West and its disappearing water. New York, N.Y., U.S.A.: Penguin Books.
Reisner argues the Arid West is not suitable for the type of settlements that have developed in the past 150 years. He documents the major water construction projects of the past several decades and how they are not sustainable and will ultimately fail to provide long-term solutions for the communities between the Mojave Desert and the Rockies.

Solomon, Steven. 2010. Water: the epic struggle for wealth, power, and civilization. New York: Harper.
This popular history title expands on the importance of water to civilization. While Solomon lacks consistency in this book, his argument about the role of water in the political sphere is valid.
Smithsonian Institution Libraries, Drummond, Willis, jr, Dutton, Clarence E. (Clarence Edward), Geographical and Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region (U.S.), Gilbert, Grove Karl, Powell, John Wesley, and Thompson, A. H.. 1879. Report on the lands of the arid region of the United States, with a more detailed account of the lands of Utah. With maps. By J. W. Powell. Washington, Govt. Print. Off.,1879. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/47193.
This document describes the difficulties of agrarian economics in the Arid West.
Stacy, Susan M. 1993. When the river rises: flood control on the Boise River, 1943-1985. Boulder, Colo: Boise, Idaho.
In this book, Stacy argues that politics impacted water projects on the Boise River, just as much as environmental concerns. This book shows how projects are built when politicians and constituents agree on fixing a perceived problem.

Reflection
It may seem easy to just look online for historic primary sources, but this exercise showed the limits of only using digital objects. Digitized resources can be easy to select from an online repository, and viewing each item side-by-side can help the research come to some conclusions. There is, however, a problem with quantity, and quality of online resources. If a researcher never visits an archive or library, they might miss out on lots of paper-only resources. In this way, the argument made by only citing online resources will always have the caveat of not being entirely researched. For the time being, a historian should always consult some analog resources before coming to any conclusion.
As more and more historical documents appear online, the researcher becomes less reliant on the local library and archive – even if the only way to access these online resources is through a library subscription. For this project, I used the Western Waters Digital Library (WWDL), westernwater.org. This consortium of digital collections focuses on issues relating to hydro-power and agricultural irrigation. It seemed like an obvious choice, since my historical emphasis is the history of irrigation and water projects. This was the first time I actually tried researching the WWDL, all other visits were simply for browsing photos. With the WWDL I was able to quickly find a multitude of newspaper clippings, reports, and finding aids relating to water and politics. The WWDL did not, however, contain as much campaign literature as I had hoped for – most of the items I found were not substantial in content. I had seen several interesting two-fold pamphlets on water projects in Idaho at the Boise Public Library, and I hoped to see some other examples online.
Exclusively using online resources creates a challenge of selection. A researcher only has a small amount of time to find evidence for their argument. With an online search, whether using Google or a small niche digital collection, it is often difficult to create a query that both limits the results to a manageable size and includes items that will help with the argument. Often the search results will include thousands of items, or if it’s only a small selection, few are useful to the researcher. When looking in a physical location for historical documents, it is easier to sense what is useful, and the appropriate amount of time required attaining valuable resources. It is easier to manually shuffle through papers to gain a sense of what is available.
A researcher is also completely reliant upon the repository for selection of historical items. The researcher only sees what the presenter has chosen to display. Therefore, the researcher must not only consider their own biases, but also the bias of the digital repository. State and federal institutions, like universities and government departments, are often the owners of the digital repositories used by historians. These institutions may not have as many subjective motivations as other sources for historical documents (like a corporate archives for example), but the institutions still have agendas when creating a digital repository. This bias could be as innocent as the selector not choosing visually appealing resources, like a folder of meeting minutes of a water district conference. Decisions like this are made all the time. There is simply too much paper, and not enough time and money to scan everything. It is up to the archivist or curator to choose which documents are available online. For a researcher wanting to know the whole truth, the archivist’s selection could throw the researcher off track.
For these reasons, it is still a good idea to visit a physical location for additional research. As more and more institutions make their collections available online, the researcher may not need to actually visit a library, but perhaps a historical site, or surviving witness. The key to writing good history is uncovering new evidence that few have ever seen or heard. It is difficult to do so with the limited primary source paper items available online – at least for the near future.