480 J.-A. PEMBERTON
in the United States.^171 Fox’s inclination was to reduce international
relations to international politics and it was this inclination that caused
him to insist, albeit without discounting the possibility that interna-
tional relations had ‘“arrived” as a separate social science discipline,’
that political scientists had an important contribution to make to inter-
national relations analysis and to ensuring that the study of interna-
tional relations be ‘taken seriously in the 1950s’.^172
A sociAl or A PoliticAl science?
Manning was well aware of the dismissals of interwar international
studies as ‘just a line in League of Nations propaganda’ or as a plea for
disarmament or peace in general.^173 Yet Manning thought that inter-
national studies had made great strides in the direction of becoming a
social science since the time when the first chairs in international rela-
tions were endowed in the immediate aftermath of the First World War
by certain ‘public-spirited’ individuals with a view to furthering the cause
of peace.^174 Indeed, invoking Vernant, he maintained in the context of
the Windsor meeting that he assumed, as the ISC ‘never hesitated to
assume,’ that international relations is a ‘subject whose existence it is
“really not possible to deny.”’^175
(^172) Fox, ‘Interwar International Relations Research: The American Experience,’ 67, 79.
(^173) Manning, ‘Out to Grass—And a Lingering Look Behind,’ 357.
(^174) Manning, The University Teaching of Social Sciences: International Relations, 51–2.
(^175) Manning, ‘International Relations: An Academic Discipline,’ 14.
(^171) Fox, ‘Interwar International Relations Research: The American Experience,’ 78–79.
Harold Sprout noted the following: ‘Before 1914, the teaching of international subjects
seems to have been oriented chiefly towards the general cultural development of the stu-
dent. As a result of World War I, the orientation shifted radically towards a search for ways
and means of consolidating peace. That motivation has persisted down to the present.
Since 1945 it has taken on a strong “national security” coloration.’ Harold Sprout, quoted
in C. A. W. Manning, The University Teaching of Social Sciences: International Relations
(Paris: UNESCO, 1954), 53. The University Teaching of Social Sciences: International
Relations was a report prepared by Manning on behalf of the ISC. In The University
Teaching of Social Sciences, Manning noted that his report drew almost wholly on ‘eight
national contributions from the following national rapporteurs: M. A. Yehia (Egypt),
J. J. Chevallier (France), A. Appadorai (India), G. Casanova (Mexico), K. E. Birnham
(Sweden), G. L. Goodwin (United Kingdom), H. Sprout (United States of America), and
J. Djordjević (Yugoslavia)’ (ibid., 9).