Churchill, Eisenhower, and the Making of the Modern World

by Christopher Catherwood Narrated by Antony Ferguson

Overview

It is often said that the special bond between Britain and the United States was forged in war between President Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. But the closer link in many ways was that between Churchill and Dwight Eisenhower, since it existed both in wartime from 1941 to 1945 but also again in very different circumstances.

Between 1951 and 1955, Churchill was prime minister and Eisenhower was briefly the first supreme allied commander of NATO, before going back to the United States to win the 1952 presidential race. This overlapped in the White House with Churchill's peacetime premiership from 1953 to 1955. And from 1945 to 1951, Churchill by his speeches and Eisenhower by his tenure as first-ever supreme allied commander Europe were continuing to create the new and stable global world order that held until now.

In other words, theirs was a much longer relationship than that between President Roosevelt and Churchill and spanning peace as well as war. And it was the Eisenhower and Churchill relationship that essentially created the world order that lasted down until current times.

Churchill and Eisenhower can also be seen as a passing of the baton, from Britain as the fading superpower to the dynamic new world of the United States. Churchill's relationship with Eisenhower spans this transition perfectly and is the ideal prism through which to witness this change, in terms of how the balance between the United Kingdom and the United States altered both as countries and in personal terms between the two men themselves.

Editorial Reviews

The Guardian

Catherwood is an excellent guide at cutting through the mythology that surrounds this subject.”

From the Publisher

Praise for Churchill’s Folly: “This compelling volume raises eerie echoes of present-day Iraq. In the aftermath of WWI, France and Britain competed for the Mideastern leftovers of the Ottoman Empire… Catherwood… sees contemporary parallels in the unlearned lessons of ‘imperial overreach.’ Unwanted paternalistic protectorates have a way of imploding, Catherwood notes. Churchill conceded wryly that Britain was spending millions ‘for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano out of which we are in no circumstances to get anything worth having.’ In a readable historical essay stretched into a short book, Catherwood demonstrates yet again that one generation's pragmatism can be a later generation's tragedy.”— Publishers Weekly “How did things get so messy in Mesopotamia? In part, because of Iraq's founding at the hands Winston Churchill, ‘undoubtedly brilliant but utterly lacking in any kind of judgment.’ An impressive study on the making of modern Iraq, with all its crises and catastrophes.”— Kirkus Reviews “Catherwood is an excellent guide at cutting through the mythology that surrounds this subject.”—The Guardian

NetGalley Review: 5 stars Last updated on 03 Sep 2022 " I found this a very interesting and enjoyable book to read. Of course, everyone in the English- speaking world for sure knows Winston Churchill and his major role in the middle of the 20th Century. Less is known about David Eisenhower and his relationship with Churchill that goes back to 1941 and the planning for the invasion of Europe. This is a book not only about these two gentlemen but also the evolving relationship between the US and the UK. As Mr. Catherwood clearly points out the concept of a “Special Relationship” if it existed at all changed from 1941 when the UK was on top to 1943 when already the US was the leader. This gap grew with the war as well as afterwards. But there were still times when Britain acted as a break on US adventures to the good of both countries. As an example, Eisenhower wanted a coalition to fight in Vietnam in 1954 but the British refused and this was at least for a while a benefit to the West. There are many stories that illustrate the give and take between the two leaders and countries that were new to me. As an example, the US were keen to advance on Germany across the Channel in 1943 but the British prevailed and instead the Allied forces went into N. Africa and Italy delaying the advance into Germany until the actual D-Day in 1944. Did this matter? Mr. Catherwood makes a very clear timeline of the difference of one year. Would the Allies have been all the way to Poland meaning much of Central Europe would not have been under Soviet rule for 40 years. Was it wise to have let The Soviets take Berlin? They suffered over 340,000 casualties taken Berlin which was far greater than the US and the UK suffered in the entire war. The Cold War era and the H-Bomb also were major issues. Churchill was desperate to find a way for himself and the UK to be relevant in bringing peace to Europe especially after Stalin’s death. Eisenhower, correctly felt this was not the time and suggested Churchill could enhance his legacy if he focused on ending Colonialism. Shockingly at least to me we see bigotry and backwardness of Churchill who still saw the colonies as jungles and filled with Hottentots ! Mr. Catherwood is English but his wife was an American which gave him I believe a more fair and balanced view of these two leaders. I have read enough about Churchill but from this book I now need to read more about David Eisenhower. I highly recommend this book."—Mike Hassel Shearer, consumer reviewer

NetGalley Review: 5 stars Last updated on 25 Sep 2022 "I was so happy that I had the opportunity to read this book. I am a devoted anglophile who has visited the United Kingdom over ten times and traveled extensively through England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Always visiting battlegrounds, museums, both war and airplane, generally soaking up the sense of history that can not be found in the U.S. But the National WWII Museum in New Orleans is great(As a woman my husband is very happy that I enjoy tank museums, Dover's secret tunnels, Imperial War Museum to name a few)Mr. Catherwood immediately stirs my intellectual curiosity about a period of history I hadn't had the opportunity to delve into, yet. With the precision of a scalpel, this book that does not simply quote facts and minutiae but tells a story about two men and their relationship over a period of years. Having been born in 1953, I only know about this period through books. I would definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in history and the US/UK relationship. Now my curiosity is piqued and I have to read more about Churchill and Eisenhower. Thank you NetGalley and Mr. Catherwood."—Sandra Berryman, consumer reviewer

Library Journal

10/01/2022

Catherwood (history, Cambridge; His Finest Hour) explores the changing power relationship between Churchill and Eisenhower from 1942 to 1955. In 1942, the unreadiness of American expeditionary forces gave Churchill the deciding voice on war plans. But a year later, at Yalta, a more realistic balance of powers set the stage for the postwar world, and the "Big Three"—the U.S., USSR, and a much reduced UK—became smaller. Elected PM again in 1951, Churchill's Iron Curtain speech defined the new world of warring power blocs, but when he met with the new American president in 1953, Winston argued that Europe didn't matter: only the two white empires counted. He refused Ike's plea for European unity. Britain wouldn't join the European Community until 1973 (and now it's out again). Efforts to renew Churchill's and Eisenhower's special relationship ultimately foundered on the realities of power, culminating, post-Churchill, in Britain's humiliating defeat over the Suez Canal in 1956. Catherwood doesn't mince words in contradicting his peers. He accuses Churchill's biographer Andrew Roberts of misreading the past and, against Kevin Ruane, asserts that Churchill was never incapable of denying Eisenhower anything. VERDICT For history enthusiasts only.—David Keymer

Product Details

BN ID:	2940174864863
Publisher:	Blackstone Audio, Inc.
Publication date:	11/01/2022
Edition description:	Unabridged

Videos