The art of America’s revolutionary diplomacy

September 3 marks the 235th anniversary of the Peace Treaty ending the American War for Independence. It’s noteworthy because the negotiations offer lessons for today’s debates about diplomacy.

Benjamin West’s unfinished portrait, the “Signing of the Treaty of Paris,” can prompt our thinking about the epic endeavors of American diplomats — amateurs at the time. It was those efforts which were truly the masterpiece, which the painting only dimly reflects. The portrait reveals several important stories, including that of one founder whose contributions too often go unnoticed.

{mosads}Often, our eyes are drawn to those figures who seem most recognizable. In front we pick up Benjamin Franklin. Franklin, without a doubt, helped to charm French society and then its government into supporting the American cause.

Perhaps we see John Adams, also in the front. Adams, serious New Englander that he was, possessed less “bonhomie” than did Franklin. When his initial foray into French diplomacy failed, he had worked for the revolution in the Netherlands. He then returned to Paris to work on peace negotiations.

Other elements in the painting also deserve our attention. Notably, the right side of the canvas is blank. The British negotiators — especially Richard Oswald — refused to sit for the painting. Although both sides convening for an historical record of a peace treaty was standard, Oswald and the British were so mortified by American independence that they declined to participate altogether.

And what of the other Americans?

Seated in the front, with his long white hair is William Temple Franklin, Ben’s grandson, who had been working as a secretary for the American ambassadors.

In the center we find Henry Laurens. Laurens, a South Carolina planter, had been captured by the British while crossing the Atlantic and held as a prisoner in the Tower of London for over a year. He had been released only at the end of the diplomatic process to join his fellow negotiators. This Laurens was also the father of John Laurens, made famous for his role in Lin-Manuel Miranda’s “Hamilton” musical. John, an aide-de-camp to Washington, had advocated for forming American companies with slaves, who would earn their freedom through military service. Sadly, he died in the waning months of the war.

But the figure who too often gets overlooked is John Jay. A prominent New York patriot, Jay had previously served as ambassador to Spain. Frustrated by Spanish intransigence, Jay was delighted when Congress reassigned him to the peace talks.

In Paris, Jay immediately recognized several of the problems confronting the American diplomats. One of the largest impediments were their French allies. The French foreign minister, Vergennes, wanted the American war to continue until French war aims were satisfied. Further, he hoped for a weak United States, one limited the Appalachian Mountains on the west, a North American satellite that would remain dependent on France for its support.

In the face of these threats, Jay and the other ambassadors considered their best course of action. They acknowledged the American commitment to the French alliance and even knew of the instructions from Congress that they follow the French lead. Still, in serious deliberation they considered what their nation needed most. They were willing to use diplomatic initiative to take advantage of British willingness to negotiate. They pursued the goal they believed would be most in line with justice and with American national interest, balancing these competing demands.

Jay took the lead in their strategies, sending an American agent, William Vaughan, secretly to London to indicate American willingness to negotiate in a different key. The end result was their quick negotiation of a peace with Great Britain, separate from French desires. As a result of the treaty, the diplomats secured American interests, as well as a border all the way to the Mississippi River.

In addition to celebrating the peace, Jay’s response was two-fold. First, he reiterated his gratitude to God. He declared his intention to ascribe Peace and “every of other of our blessings to the Supreme Author of all that ever was and ever will be in the world.” Then, he turned his attention to American responsibilities. Peace was just a first step to securing the liberty for which they had been fighting. Much more effort would be required in the public realm — one major concern was developing what Jay called “a national spirit in our Country.” To these matters Jay turned his attention immediately upon his return to the States.  

The efforts of all the commissioners thus came together to create a peace treaty most favorable to American interests. As we remember the 235th anniversary of the peace treaty, we do well to consider the diplomacy pursued by these American amateurs. Their mixture of concerns helps us balance competing demands for thinking about America’s place in the world. They were realistic about national power, but they were not Realists who thought national power was the only thing.

They were nationalists who sought American ends, but they did so with deep regard for the justice of their cause and how their actions would affect other nations — a complicated commitment that should inform policy makers in the present. These founding diplomats offer Americans the reminder that foreign policy has to balance many goals simultaneously, if it is to be a work of art.

Jonathan Den Hartog, a professor of history at the University of Northwestern-St. Paul, is a scholar adviser for the Faith and Liberty Discovery Center in Philadelphia. He is the author of Patriotism and Piety: Federalist Politics and Religious Struggle in the New American Nation.