Talk:William Dodd (ambassador)

Nazi Primer Commentary
I added some information drawn from Dodd's commentary to the 1938 translation of the Nazi Primer. I own an original version of the text which has no ISBN. I attempted to check online for the ISBN, but noted only modern translations and am unsure whether they contain his commentary. If anyone knows if they do, please add the ISBN Franklin Moore 03:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Children's espionage
The extensive coverage of his adult children's possible involvement in espionage would be better in a separate article rather than intheir father's bio, since it seems to have little to do with events in the father's life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robcat2075 (talk • contribs) 07:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Kent Clizbe, April 9, 2012: The children's espionage does not have anything to do with their father's life?? They were members of his diplomatic household while he served in Berlin. They had easy access to the father/ambassador's office, notes, papers, cables, private discussions, and other secret and confidential information regarding the father/ambassador's job and the security and plans and intentions of the United States government. The daughter, Martha's access to her father/ambassador's office and official American secrets was exploited by communist/KGB espionage officers. She was developed and recruited by KGB case officers. She used her access to her father/ambassador's secrets to provide high-level intelligence to the Soviet espionage service. Marth Dodd's espionage was enabled by, and was only of value because of, her close access to her father/ambassador's official office, papers, communications, and information. This is of utmost importance to the father's biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.222.202.202 (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Here is the text in case any of it needs to be ported to an article for the son (daughter has her own article already):
 * Upon the Ambo's arrival to Berlin, his daughter Martha began a romantic relationship with a Soviet diplomat/intel officer named Boris Vinogradov stationed in Berlin. In March 1934 NKVD Center wrote to their Berlin Station the following:


 * "Let Boris Vinogradov know that we want to use him for the realization of an affair we are interested in.....According to our data, the mood of his aquaintance (Martha Dodd) is quite ripe for finally drawing her into our work."


 * NKVD Center soon became dissatisfied with Vinogradov's developmental handling of Martha. He was subsequently recalled to Moscow and eventually murdered during the Soviet military/intel purges of the 1930's; of course news of his demise was kept from Martha.  NKVD center then put in place a new officer (operating under jounalist cover, Izvestia) tasked with handling Martha.  This new officer, Bukhartsev, successfully ran Martha until 1937, with her responding directly to NKVD tasking.  She reported on secret US Embassy and State Dept business, reporting in detail on her fathers's reports to President Roosevelt.  Upon conclusion of her father's tour in 1938, she was picked up by the Soviet Station in New York city, then being handled by NKVD Illegals Officer Itzhak Akhmerov.


 * In the summer of 1938 Martha married New York millionaire Alfred Stern. Stern was at that time keen on becoming an American Ambassador and curried favor with the Democratic party (Martha made comments to her then handler that Stern was prepared to offer the Democratic party $50,000 to secure an Ambassador's posting, though he never received an appointment).  In a 5 February 1942 letter to her Soviet contacts, Martha explained that she thought it would be a significant mistake to not bring on board her husband.  By 1941, under Martha's tutelage her husband had become an active member of the Communist Party and several Communist-front organizations.  At that time Stern reportedly had no idea of his wife's collusion with Soviet intelligence (then the NKGB).  By March of that year Martha received Soviet permission to approach her husband on this matter.  She soon reported that her husband responded with enthusiasm, stating, "he wanted to do something immediately. He felt he had many contacts that could be valuable in this sort of work."  Most notably, Stern's primary contribution to the Soviet effort was his role in organizing a music publishing house which served as a cover employer for Soviet illegals (similar to NOCs) operating in the U.S.  Stern's partners in this effort were the New York NKGB Station chief Vassily Zarubin and low-level Hollywood producer and NKGB asset Boris Morros (who was eventually recuited by the FBI and later actually testified in an FBI investigation of Martha and her husband after they had fled to Czechoslovakia).


 * William E. Dodd, Jr. had served as an NKVD asset in Berlin during his father's diplomatic tour, passing along bits of intelligence and scuttlebutt. Upon return to the U.S. in 1938, Dodd Jr. decided to run for U.S. Congress as a Democrat.   Upon learning of his plan, the NKVD had Martha formally recruit her brother prior to the elections.  The NKVD provided unsolicited funds for Dodd Jr's campaign, though ultimately he was unsuccesful in his bid for Congress.  Soon thereafter Dodd Jr. decided to puchase a relatively small Virginia newspaper, The Blue Ridge Herald.  Lacking sufficient funds, the NKVD eventually contributed USD 3,500 for this effort.  Ultimately, according to NKVD records, Dodd Jr remained a disappointment to his handlers.  In 1943 Dodd Jr. was investigated by the FBI for suspicion of espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union.  His Russian handlers withdrew completely from running him, though by 1945 Dodd Jr. had taken a post within the Soviet Union's TASS newsagency's New York offices (overseen by New York NKGB Station chief).  Most interesting is that according to her NKGB file, Martha later complained to her NKGB handlers that due to her brother's elevated pofile (FBI attention), her and Alfred Stern (husband) were having difficulty pusuing their covert activity.  Thus, Dodd Jr. was fired from the TASS offices, never to have further contact with Soviet intelligence.


 * Martha and Stern eventually attempted to flee to the Soviet Union during the Khrusshchev era, though the Soviets preferred the Sterns live in Czechoslovakia. A KGB document dated October 1975 noted that the Sterns spent 1963-1970 in Cuba. Life behind the iron curtain eventually proved to not measure up to the Stern's communist idealism, and in the 1970's an American attorney (under close KGB scrutiny) began attempts to negotiate a return to the US for the Sterns.  These efforts proved unsuccessful.


 * —Bellhalla 17:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

This claim that his children were Soviet spies, supported only by a reference to some Soviet file numbers (which are totally unverifiable to any normal human being) is a blatant violation of Wikipedia's standards. His children are presumably living, and this is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. No such evidence is presented here, and I have removed the claim accordingly.--WaldoJ (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's nice to have a long discussion wheter his kids were spies or not. But right now the article doesn't even mention that he had any kids, neither that he was married ... I'll try to fix that. Minkus (talk) 23:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Books
I'm not sure about the ISBN of his published diary because I just own an old german translation of the book. It's titled Diplomat auf heißem Boden, subtitle Tagebuch des USA-Botschafters in Berlin 1933-1938. There isn't any ISBN given, but the original title, publisher and copyright (Martha Dodd, 1941). Minkus (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Erik Larson's 2011 book "In The Garden Of Beasts" updates dates of childrens' deaths. lp1064@sbcglobal.net68.88.201.48 (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Recent additions
The user user:Betempte has just added a large amount of text, rewritten from In the Garden of Beasts. While I appreciate the enthusiasm and well-written prose, it seems like the content is not exactly right for Wikipedia. That is, the content is about one very specific moment in Dodd's life--his appointment as ambassador--and talks about a few very specific events related to that: some otherwise historically unimportant people he met in the days before he left for Berlin. That level of info is fine for an entire book, but rather too specific for one Wikipedia page and not I think notable enough for the Wikipedia page for Dodd. The info is more relevant to setting up the zeitgeist for 1933 than for talking about Dodd's accomplishments and actions. I don't want to delete it without discussion since I don't want to unilaterally dismiss the writer's efforts.QuizzicalBee (talk) 05:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I take issue with user QuizzicalBee. The documented information I provided is vital to an understanding of Dodd’s record as American Ambassador to Germany during the critical Nazi period. The individuals mentioned are NOT “historically unimportant people,” in Dodd’s biography. They were highly placed officials in the State Dept, close, trusted presidential advisors or those whose connections made them important sources of government affairs and mindset at that period of time. That he met with these people prior to his departure for Berlin is significant as it informed his philosophy and therefore his actions once he arrived in Germany. However the legacy of Dodd’s tenure as ambassador may be judged, it is critical to know and understand the forces, (“zeitgeist”) that shaped his performance. Betempte (talk) 19:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree that Betempte's edits take the focus off of Dodd (and are wordy IMHO). It's as much a question of writing as content. The details need to be integrated into the text so that we keep the focus on Dodd. And there's just too much irrelevant detail. For example, for a biography, we really don't need the names of 2 U.S. banks that held German debt.

The Larson book is next on my reading list. I'll do more work when I get to it. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, it looks like it might just be Betempte, me, and Bmclaughlin9 who are active on this page (surprising given the popularity of In the Garden of Beasts). I'm not going to delete anything Betempte has written, because there are too few people for a consensus. But can I recommend to you, Betempte, that you keep in mind the comments I and Bmclaughlin9 have made about your additions? I am guessing you are planning to make many more additions, and if so, just please remember that this page is about Dodd and he should be the focus. You're right that I did overstate my case when I said "historically unimportant people". Really, only Charles Richard Crane was historically unimportant, so the kind of detail that includes him is, I think, excessive, IF you have also included anecdotes of a similar nature about others, so your point is made even without him. It's an interesting anecdote and was appropriate for a book, but too detailed for Wikipedia. So while you are forbidden from doing any original research, I do believe you can summarize some of the observations made by Erik Larson in a way that is shorter than what is there now. Otherwise, if you treat the rest of Dodd's life with the same detail, it will be an extremely long entry.QuizzicalBee (talk) 23:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think you need to be so uber-respectful of others' edits. You should make changes/additions you believe appropriate and describe them in the edit field or, if suitable, here. If all changes had to wait for consensus nothing would ever get done and whoever wrote first would rule. Case in point, I removed the material that said others refused the Berlin appointment because it was unattractive. Larson doesn't say that. He describes the post's difficulties, tells us several people declined it citing personal reasons, and then tells us that few people expected Hitler to last long in any case. I suspect Larson wouldn't be troubled if someone interpreted him as saying that people declined the post because of its difficulties, and we may all think that's a reasonable interpretation, but he's careful not to say that because he lacks the evidence.

In any case, I now find there is a lot more of interest in Larson, but I'd like to get well into it before making changes. And there are other sources that will take some time to track down. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 18:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I see that there has been substantial rephrasing and revisions made in sections relating to Dodd's term as Ambassador to Germany. The salient points surrounding his appointment and the intensive preliminary "coaching" he received at meetings with State Dept. officials and influential government "insiders" has been alluded to. However, I feel the focus of the mission to which he was officially indoctrinated has been relegated to a procedural indoctrination commonly endured by ambassadorial appointees. In Dodd's case it was much more that that. The seats of Washington power knew he was a man eminently unsuited to such a sensitive position both by temperament and inclination An unsophisticated academician, he was "a fish out of water" in Berlin, and was initially seduced by the Nazi hierarchy who smelled a yokel in their midst. At best, it can be said that Dodd’s tenure as American Ambassador to Germany at this critical period in world history did no harm, but his lack of diplomatic skill certainly did no good. He was a bureaucratic pencil pusher, self-appointed steward of office supplies, vigilant monitor of office costs, and keen overseer of Jewish embassy employees. Those who read Larson’s book will read the sad story of a man whose naivety left a legacy of impotence in times that called for guts and savvy. Betempte (talk) 23:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Missing Source - Tansill
Several notes, e.g. 22 and 66, refer to Tansill and page, but no source with an author by that name is provided. Does "Tansill" refer to Back Door to War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941, by Charles Callan Tansill?99.156.167.246 (talk) 22:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes. Added to sources now. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 18:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

more work needed
Having listened to an audio version of Eric Larson's cited book, I did some out-of-library cleanup of this article. I believe Dodd was one of the founders of the Southern Historical Society and may have been the first editor of its Journal of Southern History. However, I'm writing in a fast food restaurant on Sunday morning and even the correct version of the organization's web page does not describe its history. I don't know when or if I'll be able to consult the cited Bailey and Stephenson articles.Jweaver28 (talk) 13:15, 7 July 2019 (UTC)