debates. as we've seen again and again in and the many crises that have beset are still young century, in times of trouble, people rightly look to the example of winston churchill. now we have a strong country of leadership from a new generation of churchillians led by randolph churchill come who i am delighted to announce his final today accepted the role of resident of ics. [applause] -- president of ics. it was not an easy task to get him to say yes, but he's the only one we want. this continent of young leaders known simply as the other club are pushing us forward with fresh energy, dynamism and vitality. they make us financially, intellectually and generationally self-sustaining.

and i stand in bewildered all of all that they do, will do in will bring to our organization. fundraising, that dirty word, is a permanent fact of life and growth organizations such as ours. although we have raised millions thus far from many generous and supportive donors, we constantly need to be reaching further a field for more funds to support those specific and general programs. your help, connections, ideas, and yes, of course your donations are always much-needed and truly appreciated. now you may ask what are our aims? they are of course victory. victory at all costs. and this is what our victory will look like. we will establish the nclc and

ics as the authority on the life, lessons, legacy and relevancy of winston churchill. we will make the nclc and the ics the place to go for research into leadership, statesmanship, strategy and resolution of conflict, national and international purpose, and the protection of democracy and freedom. and, finally, we will carry out the mandate given to us by churchill's daughter all those years ago, our late patron, and that the memory of sir winston churchill will be kept green and the record of his achieving factor. i know, i should and come with an appropriate churchill quote. however, i want to share with you the last lines from the robert frost poem that is always remind me not only of the importance of our task, but what still lies ahead in our venture.

the woods are lovely, dark and deep. but i have promises to keep. and miles to go before i sleep. and miles to go before i sleep. thank you very much. [applause] >> if i am tearing up you will forgive me because i was just thinking of mary winston and martin just now, and i wish they would've in your. forgive me. before i relinquish the podium, i want to thank lee pollock, who's been my hard-working partner, has been nation's with my moods, my noise, my crises,

and has never been overwhelmed. he's a partner in this crusade these last half-dozen years. and together we weathered the storms that threatens us all. he has the gratitude and appreciated us all. he and his wonderful ever forbearing wife jill have decided it's time to retire from the daily toil of the churchill vendors and my outbursts. and they were saying a short as an active advisory member of the board more poorly he has developed -- speaker on church on hope he continues that. lee is passing the torch to another member of the other club. after a long and thorough search g. dubya address of selected in the widefield a wonderful candidates, a man who takes all the boxes and is taken on the dual challenge of serving both as the first director of the national church library and center and succeeding lee as

executive director of ics. michael bishop is a longtime member of the churchill center at ics and comes with some strategic investment group. it's an asset management company in arlington, virginia, where he ihas served or had served as chief of communications, a california native, michael was educated at university of california, berkeley, g. dubya itself and georgetown universi university. he has extensive political experience. having served on capitol hill during the clinton years and later in the white house during the administration of gw bush. is also executive director of the abraham lincoln on centennial commission and served as a consultant to the steven spielberg film about the 16th president. his reviews and articles on churchill, the great wall, lincoln and other subjects regularly appear in "the wall street journal," the "washington

post" and the national review, and elsewhere. michael, will you come up and introduce yourself to a truly magnificent and daunting audience of churchillians. all of them i don't join in wishing every success as together we all continue our grand adventure into a bright and exciting future. [applause] >> thank you, laurence. thank you very much. thank you very much for the kind introduction. all of us owe you an enormous debt of gratitude for your leadership, and your efforts to keep the churchill flame alive. we have another round of applause for our distinguished chairman, please. [applause] >> and thanks to lee pollock for helping to make this moment the reality.

he has been churchill's legacy of great service, and a pleased to call him a friend. think you, lee. [applause] it is a tremendous honor to be appointed the first director of the national church library and center at the george washington university, and executive director at the international churchill society. i'm grateful to the board of ics and the leadership of the gw libraries for selecting me. though i've only been in my post since monday, my new colleagues at the university have already made me feel at home. and as a 1994 recipient of a masters degree of history from gw, for me it is a sort of homecoming. soon you will see for yourselves the fruits of our efforts. after years of toil and struggle, the nclc is our reality. within the sleek, silvery space, students and visitors will have

access to hundreds of volumes on churchill from classic works to much of the most recent scholarship, and interactive touchscreen video exhibition will allow patrons to see the colorful and vivid detail, countless photographs and documents that bring the great man to life. and the incomparable holders of the churchill archive center, churchill college, cambridge, will be available to visitors online. thanks to a generous a gift from the ics, the nclc can also boast a remarkable collection of churchill's second world war engagement diary cards. never before available to the public or to scholars. in addition, and by the way, these cards form a fascinating contemporary record of the prime ministers meetings and movements during the second world war.

in addition to the originals, high resolution digital scans are available online and a remarkably successful crowd sourcing project has yielded details -- detailed transcription. i'm pleased to announce you can read more about this historical treasure trove and the nclc in the "washington post" today. but the value of the nclc is not to be found in books, papers or pixels alone. the walls of the library will soon bring with the sounds of discussions and debates. as we host lectures by prominent historians, political figures, businesspeople and others, and explore the countless issues that touch upon the churchill's story. among them, questions of war and peace, the future of the european union, and the continuing challenges in the middle east.

to study the life and career of winston churchill is in many ways a welcome respite from a seemingly tawdry and a global presence. the churchill studies are now mere exercise in nostalgia but rather a blueprint for leadership. indeed, leadership will be chief among the themes we will explore at the nclc. as the great man's example provide inspiration and instruction two leaders and aspiring leaders in many different fields of endeavor. ..

all the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word. freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope. thanks for all you have done to preserve the legacy of winston churchill. i trust we can count on your support in the future and together we may move forward into broad sunlit up once. thank you very much.

[applause] >> thank you michael, ladies and gentlemen, we will have a quick turnaround and go to our first panel. i invite our panelists up and i will turn over the microphone to professor dane kennedy who will be the moderator for our panel on churchill and the presidents.

>> it's nice to see so many interested people here today and it's an honor for me to be part of this gathering. my name is dane kennedy and i teach british history at george washington university and it's a real honor to have this opening up on our campus. my role today is to introduce our speakers for the first session. i will introduce them as they come up and speak. they each have 25 minutes and there will be time for questions and discussion "after words". our first beaker is nigel hamilton who will be speaking on franklin roosevelt. he is a senior fellow at the john w maccormack graduate

school at the university of massachusetts, boston pt. he trained as a historian at cambridge university and he has researched and taught at history departments in six universities in britain and the united states. he has published 27 works of history and biography. these included the history of the last 12 u.s. presidents called american caesar's, and multi- volume biographies of president jfk. his work on world war ii is extensive including a prize-winning multi- volume biography of montgomery and most recently he is currently finishing the final volume of his trilogy fdr at war, the first was long listed for the national book prize in the second volume was published in june as commander-in-chief. nigel. [applause]

>> thank you very much dane. it's wonderful to be here. i counted a great owner honor to be invited to speak this morning about undoubtedly the two greatest men of the 20th century. winston churchill and franklin delano roosevelt. in doing so, i think we should bear in mind something that winston churchill wrote many years ago. to do justice to a great man, discriminating criticism is always necessary.

i will repeat that. to do justice to a great man, discriminating criticism is always necessary. i have addressed this wonderful society on a number of vocations over recent years. i live in boston but i winter in new orleans. largely thanks to christopher, i was invited to speak in canada on the west coast, in edmonton,

vancouver british columbia, california and san francisco. i've always been very impressed with not only be abiding interest in history and leadership that have shown many of these various chapters of the international society, but the continuing attempt to involved younger people. perhaps the nicest woman in my travels in canada was in edmond when i gave a prize to the winning high school debating team. i think that would've warmed churchill's heart as a parliamentarian who loved, not only discussion, but debate. as dane said, i am writing the final volume of my fdr at work

trilogy. i am particularly pleased to be able to talk today during this awful presidential election campaign and although each panelist only has very short time to speak, and there are so many, the most wonderful thing about winston churchill is there are so many aspects of his life, and lessons of his life to look at. in this short time period, i will address two specific topics from the relationship between franklin roosevelt and winston

churchill. our panel is here to talk about the three presidents that winston churchill had close relationships. president truman, franklin roosevelt and dwight eisenhower. we missed out john f. kennedy. he is my particular hero. i think it's best in this brief moment that we have together to address just to aspects of that churchill fdr relationship, or friendship. the first is the actual nature of that friendship between fdr and churchill. the relationship which, as you know, ended rather badly. winston declined to attend the

funeral of his great friend here in the united states. the second thing i thought we might address is what was really going on between the two men in what professor david reynolds, head of the history department at my old university, cambridge university in england, has called the missing weeks of october 1943. when the grand alliance came very close to breaking apart and could only be rested by its great leaders at the summit at tehran. now, about the nature of the fdr

churchill relationship, very briefly, there are two wonderful books about that relationship. the first is a book by john leach him, franklin and winston, i'm sure many of you know it. it was published in 2002. and the marching gilberts, equally excellent book, churchill and america which was published in 2005. i knew martin gilbert, i admired him greatly and we last saw each other actually, in high court, not as adversaries but attending the great holocaust trial.

i think we should probably use as our low lone star in understanding the friendship and relationship of fdr and churchill, using wonderful pieces in martin gilberts book where he writes, no world leader had such a long, constructive, intimate, frustrating and affectionate relationship as winston churchill and franklin roosevelt. now that relationship began unhappily in london almost a century ago. on july the 29th, 1918, at a

banquet for the allied ministers of war in great museum hall when a according to sir martin's account, churchill acted like a stinker. one of the few men in public life, that fdr complained, who was rude to me. churchill claimed not even to be able to recall the episode. did it affect their relationship? perhaps. they like in the second world war relationship of the two men to that of lovers, bartering for each other's attention, but one in which one lover, as in all

relationships, is the suitor and the other is sought after. how could it have been otherwise in august 1941 when they finally met for a second time aboard their respected warships. you have to forgive my. [inaudible] i will indicate what is courtship material. i have wooed president roosevelt as a man might woo his made like churchill once remarked. in another quote, no lover ever studied every whim of his mistress as i have done of president roosevelt.

it certainly paid off after hitler declared war on the united states for days after pearl harbor later that year. a reward that went way beyond the basis of the mid-atlantic charter itself, namely a military coalition between the two countries to defeat the power. by the end of 1942, winston could openly say his speech after the invasion of morocco and algeria, that he had been and was now the presidents active. [inaudible] it's what happened after that

was the next challenge in relating fdr's career as commander-in-chief which was the title i gave my second volume, commander-in-chief. as the western allies proceeded with methodically to crush forces in north africa, taking a quarter million prisoners from west and east, the allies, as i related in commander-in-chief then have to decide what how to change this unconditional surrender which president roosevelt had demanded in january.

that boiled to a strategic choice, a soft under belly mediterranean military strategy or a second front cross channel invasion of france. fdr's battle as two men clashed over that main question, which strategy should be adopted. the second body ends with the american british and asian in southern italy.

my dilemma in writing volume three is although he had agreed at québec in august that priority would be given to the d-day invasion, the cross channel invasion, and invasion to be placed under an american commander, everything went wrong in the fall of that year. the invasion of southern italy proved a disappointment. churchill's unilateral attempt to seize the islands was a disaster. as the end of the year approached, churchill warns the president that the allies had come to an impasse. one that could have dire

consequences for their alliance unless the president changed course and postponed the plan to be mounted in the spring. they wanted to pour more trips into italy, cajole turkey into abandoning neutrality, force them, open the crimea and reinforce the guerrillas with paratroops. why in the fall of 1943, why did winston do it? that is my question as i work on this opening section of my final

book. why, having agreed of québec, to follow the strategy for winning the war against hitler, did winston deliberately risk the very alliance that he had moved the president to create at the critical moment of the war when even hitler acknowledged that the invasion would be the deciding battle for world war ii churchill had backed off his objections already twice that year. first here in washington in may and once again in hyde park in august.

we have to ask, what would have been the course what would have been the course of the world, what would have been the course of the western alliance? what would've been the relationship between the western allies and russians if churchill had simply and loyally kept his still considerable british and him.

forces to that québec commitment so that together with the russian offensive from the east in the spring of 1944, the allies crush between them just like they had done in north africa. what, in other words, would, would have been the case if churchill had remained the presidents active and hardened left hand as he had been. would this not have strength in the western alliance in 1943, in the fall of 1943, politically as well as militarily, making it all the stronger in negotiating the endgame with russia and the postwar security system that the president was determined to set up a system that would be more

effective than the league of nations. i don't know, at this point. i value your opinions. churchill himself muddied the waters which by leaving out several weeks of closing his account of the second world war. as the professor wrote in his wonderful book, from churchill's memoirs, in command of memories, his fifth volume was a willfully inaccurate account full of distortion and strategic manipulation that the former prime minister deliberately

painted over in his deceitful record, an account that was guilty of the most blatant pieces of distortion in his volumes of memoirs. these are harsh criticisms by a distinguished english professor of history. what are we to make of them? in some respects the story is even worse than professor reynolds was able to detail. not only did churchill, without telling president roosevelt, send. [inaudible] in order to prepare the russians, this time in 1945,

they called dirty baseball and the president himself, roosevelt, when he found out about it thought beneath the honor of a gentleman. winston even threatened to resign as prime minister of great britain if he didn't get his way. in fact, he declared if the americans didn't like his strategy should switch their forces to the pacific and just leave a number of men in england in case hitler emboldened and did decide to invade the uk. as i said, we can't, in this short session go into much detail, but i do think the subject of this crisis is worthy

discussion and i truly value your insight and opinion. what strikes me as someone who is old enough to have studied them when i was a student, who has written extensively of churchill and world war ii and who is now trying to make sense of fdr's military and strategic role in the most violent of wars in human history. what strikes me is churchill's rebellion, whatever you want to call it, in the late fall of 1943 was much deeper than a strategic difference of military opinion.

the battle between the two men was symbolic. the inevitable coalition of two empires, the one rising, the other falling. in his diary he originally called his strategy maddening, but he too went along with the prime minister in october of 1943. as did the south african prime minister and the british. if it was madness it was not only churchill's madness, it became a kind of british imperial madness.

as he failed to meet churchill in november 1943 to try and resolve the crisis, that had to play a very, very careful and. aboard the uss iowa, he asked his chiefs of staff to produce for him estes statistical comparison between the united states. the invasion in 1944, he recognized was critical to the defeat. the war could well be lost or

failed to be one against hitler if churchill refused to participate in it and had his way. yet, as president, franklin roosevelt could not afford to lose patience with him, who was probably reflecting his government fears not only of world war i style casualties but fear of american dominance in the war and postwar. arriving by plane, in late november 1943, fdr was not aware he would have to somehow try to get churchill back on board. without overlord, they would not surrender and without british

overlord could not be mounted. that was the crisis the western allies faced in the final months of 1943 with enormous consequences. fortunately, some some days later, the crisis was resolved and they were forced to use stalin as his supporter, not winston churchill. churchill back down. let me finish by saying, that

climate of the 1943 struggle between the royal of britain and america was never fully resolved it went too deep with too much a mirror for the two powers, the united states and great britain. it may, in its way, help us to understand better winston churchill's refusal to attend the funeral of fdr shortly before he was voted out of office as prime minister. a recognition that all his pride in british history and imperial greatness, but that chapter was

coming to an end and a whole new world, whether he liked it or not was approaching in which britain's imperial voice would be quiet. thank you very much. [applause] >> our next speaker is a distinguished professor emeritus at ohio university. he specializes in 20th century u.s. history and is the author of a number of books including beyond the new deal, harry truman and american liberalism, man of the people, harry truman, the life of harry truman, the survival of democracy, franklin roosevelt, a world of crisis in

the 1930s and most recently, man of destiny, fdr. he will be talking about truman and churchill. [applause] >> thank you very much. i'd like to talk today about harry winston. let's begin with the circumstances of their birth that exemplified their differences. churchill father was lord

churchill. truman was born ten years after churchill in a small area. his father john truman was a farmer and life speculator. in england he might've been a tenant on the property of the duke. the trumans relocated to the town of independence missouri, just outside kansas city, in large part to provide better education for their son. young harry was a strong student in high school. his family could not afford to send him even to a public university.

instead, he worked as a railroad timekeeper and a bank clerk with no clear plan for advancement. whatever opportunities the city may have offered him seem canceled when his father called him back to the country to help with the management of a farm that was owned by harry's grandmother. john to the military experience, young harry was turned down by an army recruiter because of his myopic eyesight which required thick corrective glasses. instead he joined a national local guard unit, maintained his membership there after leaving kansas city.

by 1914, he was a well-liked local farmer, active in his masonic lodge and making frequent trips back to independence to see a young lady named betsy wallace which he had known since his primary school days. the onset of war in europe would change his life. it changes his life even more dramatically with then it changed winston churchill's life with the american entry into the war in 1917, his national guard unit, the 35th division was called to active duty. after intensive training, he bank came commander of an

artillery unit and was promoted to captain. in france, his battery participated in the final defensive. he demonstrated, perhaps most importantly to himself that he could be an effective and popular leader of men. after the war, there was a silver cup engraved with their respect and affection. he returned in 1919 determine to leave the army behind. he married and in partnership with his army comrades, he opened a shop in downtown kansas

city, a wonderful term, a shop that specialized in men's shirts and ties. he also spent a lot of time in civic endeavors and networking activities in the hope of establishing himself as a civic leader. in the temporary flush of prosperity, the plan seemed reasonable enough that the economic postwar boom would collapse, as followed by a sharp procession and the store which was pretty financially leveraged became unattainable.

they tried to avoid this at all cost and as it turned out, he spent nearly two decades making periodic payments to creditors. his home with betsy wallace became an upstairs bedroom and her mother's house. politics became trumans primary profession. 1922, he ran for a two-year position as eastern district judge of the county court as it

was called in missouri in those days. it was actually a county commission with some limited judicial authority. [inaudible] it was aligned with the kansas city powerful political machine, well run. trumans victory was the beginning of a tumultuous career in rough-and-tumble local politics. it involves confrontations with the local ku klux klan. he and many of the people in his machine were irish catholic.

defeated for reelection in 1924, truman ran two years later for a four-year post of the presiding judge of the county court. he ran again in 1930 once reelected. in that position he pursued an energetic road system for jackson county. just remember, this is a time where the automobile age was maturing and flourishing in america and modern highways were a big part of the development. that machine control the market for roadbuilding materials.

in 1934 he declared for the u.s. senate. he won a hard-fought primary in 1934, halfway into franklin roosevelt's first term, truman was easily elected. as a democrat, he took his new office very seriously and displayed an attitude of humility, willingness to learn and established himself pretty quickly as an important senator interested in the problems of the american railroads and did an investigation of the management in the late 30s. in 1940s, when he faced a hard challenge for renomination from

missouri governor roy stark. campaigned tirelessly and narrowly won the primary and was easily elected to a second senate term. by the time he began that second term, 1931, the united states was proceeding to involvement in world war ii. he supported franklin roosevelt's moves in that direction. still, the army reservist, he also thought seriously about active duty as a trainer of artillery. he even took his case to the army chief of staff george marshall who told him with a broad smile, after asking him how old he was, 56, senator,

you're too damn old. you can do is much more good in congress. he got the establishment of the senate committee to investigate waste and inefficiency in the world. the truman committee, as it soon became known, walked a fine line, carefully avoiding criticism of roosevelt while going after civilian and military bureaucrats. when truman sought to investigate huge sums being allocated for on specified work, specifically in washington, oak ridge tennessee and in new mexico, he backed off after being assured that the money was

being spent on a supersecret project that would win the war. no doubt, as you all guess, by this point, that was the atomic bomb. even truman was not told exactly what it was and he simply took denson's word word for it. one of his letters, he does write to someone that apparently it was for the development of some kind of super weapon. along with the much praised hard work of his investigative committee, he brought an easy capacity with friendship that made him the most popular member

of the senate. by 1944, roosevelt was in shaky health. besides president henry a wallace who was widely unpopular on capitol hill, and especially unpopular amongst democratic regulars, truman was the logical candidate for vice president and roosevelt himself was in no mood. truman, however he felt about the prospect of the vice presidency, let politics take its course. there are indications he understood roosevelt might not

survive a fourth term, as did many people who saw him face to face in the last months of 1944. on april 12, 1945, less than three months into his vice presidency, truman was called to the white house and informed of roosevelt's death. winston churchill, who had formed a close and at times contentious relationship with roosevelt, now face the challenge of advancing american interests with the new president of one nation on which britain was dependent. he was anxious to establish a personal bond with truman, but opted against going to the

united states for fdr's funeral. truman, at his own and, had been excluded from foreign relations. he had to play catch-up in briefing books and documents. he was in no shape to receive. [inaudible] churchill expressed concern and indignation over the rolling soviets aversion of homeland independence. this was the first step in establishing a relationship with the new president, and likely confirmed truman's own distinction. their first face-to-face meeting came at the boston conference.

it was less than fortunate. churchill came fully prepared and provided erratic leadership. midway through the meeting he returned to london to receive the postwar election results and found himself voted out of office. as the cold war emerged over the next year, the role of. [inaudible] he had nonetheless proved the fortunate one. at the beginning of 1946, truman received an invitation forwarded to him by truman to deliver an address at westminster college in missouri. the president offered to accompany and introduce it. truman provided the transportation in the fabled presidential train car which he

had inherited from roosevelt. during the 18 hour journey, the two men forged a relationship over a long running poker session. churchill, at least as the truman side told that, did not seem to be an expert at that game. he said i think i will risk a shilling on a couple. on another occasion, he repeatedly asked, what does a sequence count. he seems to have been a big loser, even after his american hosts began to bury winning hands in order to avoid embarrassment. of course, he thought he was a winner, both as the greatest

dignitary ever to visit the small school and as the formulator of the most important rhetorical shot of the emerging cold war. the accused them of bringing an iron curtain down across europe and. the speech generated backlash from some observers who had not given up on the u.s. soviet relationship. most notably from walter lipman who had also thrown out a perspective already in the process of adoption by america's most formidable diplomats. most importantly, it spoke to and reinforced truman's own

instincts. the labor foreign secretary -- the cold war emerged and it was given clarity and immediacy. it set the stage for truman's decision a year later to destroy a throw a lifeline to greece and turkey as they faced soviet pressure. he became the emblematic phrase of the cold war. truman's final meeting as president with churchill was in 1951.

they let two men do most of the work and enjoyed his company. he later described the occasion as a welcome reunion with an old friend. on january 5, after dinner on the presidential yachtchurchill recalled to truman, their initial meeting and admitted an initial dismay in seeing fdr's successor. i must confess sir, i held you in very low regard. i love that you are taking the advice of franklin roosevelt. i misjudged you badly. since then, you, more more than

any other man have saved western civilization. one of truman's aides who was president recalled a big truman grin. churchill, perhaps privately reflected that he was sometimes difficult. [inaudible] this estimate of truman was valid and made with the authority of a world historical figure. his own achievements were justified. [applause] >> our third speaker is william hitchcock.

he has written widely on transatlantic relations during the second world war and the cold war including the struggle for europe, a struggle, and his latest book, examines the human experience of liberation in europe in 1944 and 45. it was a finalist for the pulitzer prize. he will be speaking about churchill and dwight eisenhower. [applause] >> good morning. it's lovely to see you and thank you all very much for asking me to come to this distinguished conference with such an extraordinary group of panelists and so many astonishingly accomplished and influential gas

my name is will hitchcock. i teach at the university of virginia. i will be speaking about churchill and eisenhower. i have just spent six years finishing a book on the age of eisenhower and i hope that it will find a place under your christmas tree in december 2017. imagine, if you will, a twice reelected, and anonymously popular, fiscally conservative, socially humane, republican. [applause] the time is right to like ike. it's fair to say dwight eisenhower new winston churchill better than did franklin d roosevelt. he spent more time with churchill.

these two men were joined in a common cause against hitler and the soviet union. they formed a close bond and a deep affection toward one another. they disagreed often and had different ideas of grand strategy both in the war and the cold war, they consistently consistently saw, in one another, the characteristics of greatness. in 1945, just after the war, churchill praised eisenhower's capacity for making great nations march together more truly united than they have ever been before. >> ike, for his part wrote to a friend, a wonderful sentence for

all of us to save her. he comes near us in fulfilling the requirements of greatness in any individual that i have met in my lifetime. now this is from a man who worked very closely with franklin roosevelt and george marshall and many other distinguished people. i just think that's a wonderful tribute. what makes the ike churchill relationship so important is that it was a global balance that was occurring. he was still the senior partner in the war, with more men and ships than the americans had yet thrown into the cause. during the war that relationship , that power balance shifted and by 1944 the u.s. had become the senior partner. by the time they came together again in 1953, leaders of their respective nation, the pal nation, the power balance had shifted completely.

they had gone through a profound economic crisis triggered by the war. it could no longer project local power. and it lost key pieces of its empire. by contrast, the united states was an extraordinary, unrivaled around the world. it led the nato alliance and had bases around the world, and during the korean war, it had rearmed massively and increased its spending. by the time eisenhower became president in 1953, the united states could launch over 1000 long-range bombers, each capable of carrying atomic bombs 6000 miles. just days before he took office, the united states detonated the first hydrogen bomb. at that time, the largest explosive device ever created by mankind.

there could be no doubt at all. when eisenhower became president at the start of the 1953, the year of 1953, which nation and which leader dominated the special relationship. even though, even so through the difficulty of managing the cold war, they they maintain great respect and mutual admiration. it's remarkable that they became such close friends at all. i just want to remind you of their extraordinary, and quite striking contrast between the two personal stories of these men :

a church was raised by a nanny come with a school at age 70 live in the work of extraordinary privilege. eisenhower the at home until he was 20. he shared not just a bedroom but a bad with one of his brothers for his entire childhood. he was educated at abilene high school. he sold homegrown vegetables from a card in the summer to raise a few extra pennies for his heart stricken family. winston revered his father as a great statesman and wrote a biography about it. i is now referred to his father who live became a jehovah's witness as quote the lord high executioner. [laughter] not the warmest memories. and when his father died,

eisenhower by his own account, in one of his memoirs, board for exactly 30 minutes. he said he closed the door of his office, thought about his dad for 30 minutes and then he continued running the war. wednesday like to smoke and drink. ike quick drinking and in later life his diet consisted principally of vegetable soup, yogurt and dry toast. of course, he had terrific intestinal problems. but perhaps those important difference between these two men is that eisenhower was admitted to stand politics for much of his adult life, who thought politics was a dirty business. whereas when winston churchill for politics as a patriotic duty, a dignified profession and, of course, a great deal of fun. i would suggest these differences pale in comparison to the many similarities come and there are some important ones. just consider both of these young men pursued military careers in their youth.

as a way of getting away from home, seeing the world and leaving the boredom of school behind. they were both intelligent but they just didn't like school agreed to appear as a young officers both men served overseas. churchill in overseas. churchill ned, egypt and south africa. eisenhower in panama and the philippines. they had seen much of it. they had a curiosity about it. oldman more athletic. ike an all-star football player, baseball baseball. churchill are renowned polo player. many of my students at virginia thing of eisenhower, he must've been the oldest man who ever lived. he probably was 500 years old when he was elected but we forget that we eisenhower was in his prime he was thought of as one of those charismatic physically imposing and powerful men in any room. it great personal charisma. a great personality and i think of something do with his great interest in sports when he was a young man. both men married up.

many came from a well-off family, more sophisticated really than the rather eisenhower in abilene. and, of course, clementine was a lucky catch and she came from account of wealth and distinction. and both young comes complete eisenhower's and the churchill's, suffered a tragic loss of a young child. miracle torture, the fourth child died in august 1921, nokia three years old. in the very same year 1921 eisenhower and mamie lost their first son. he died of scarlet fever at the age of three. but more than circumstantial similarities balance these two men together, ladies and gentlemen. eisenhower and churchill shared a common commitment to the idea of individual human freedom. they nourished a profound hatred of the smothering brutality of all totalitarian governments entity they both came to score even the idea of the large

welfare state. they both openly embraced the idea of fighting and dying for a great cause was a far better fate than meekly submitting to barbarism. eisenhower perfectly captured this shared set of beliefs in his wonderful guildhall address in june of 1945 was ordered by london imports in the churchill we've your ike declared to preserve this freedom of worship, just equality before the la law, his liberty to speak and act as he sees fit, the londoner will fight, and so will the citizen of abilene. these humane and liberal 18th century liberal characteristics that were the real foundation of their mutual admiration and affection. and it' it's a good thing they e is to fall back upon. it does in 1953-1955 the u.s. uk

relationship was at a rather low and and they found themselves on opposite sides of quite a lot of policy disagreements. sometimes sharply worded disagreement. what if i could just mention three of those disagreements and then we will go into a discussion with some questions. those three points of disagreement, and i'll just tell you what they are so you can follow me as i go along, the russians, the bomb, in vietnam. they had very different views on each of those three topics. the russians first. march 5, 1953, stalin died. good. [laughter] well done. [laughter] for some time nobody knew that even in the criminal what form of leadership would succeed this odious tyrant. in and around stalin of course was so terrified about being

seen as planning succession plans they never talked about it because it gave been caught discussing what do we do after stalin? it would be curtains for them. in the spring of 53 there's a model in moscow, who's going to follow? a leadership emerged and the principal leader was a man named molotov. winston churchill blade this moment of fluidity offers a great opportunity to end the cold war right now. let's reach out to the russians, grasp the hand at peace, make a real effort to try to morph out a new relationship with the russians industry of fluidity. and row two eisner. he said they would be called to account if attempts were made to turn over a new leaf. we ought to lose no chance to find out how far the regime are prepared to go in piecing things all around he wrote. it would be a pity if a sudden frost nipped spring in the bud.

churchill of course longed for a great meeting. a great meeting summer to those days the war years were under cloud of smoke and the vapors of brandy, a few great naked shape world affairs with the stroke of a pen. eisenhower reviewed all such efforts to set up a hasty post-stalin meeting with great suspicion. why? ladies and gentlemen, recall the context. eisenhower was elected i and lae in 1952 at a time when the mccarthy era is still blowing quite hot the americans were dashed the anti-communist anxiety. ike's vice president was richard nixon the known principally for success in unmasking alger hiss and pursuing other communists. his secretary of state what john foster dulles from a very flexible anti-communist or politically speaking there was no desire in washington to make friends with the russians in 1953. eisenhower threw cold water on

churchill repeated requests for a summit meeting with the russians. he said reach out to be perceived as being too eager would be a sign of weakness. churchill didn't give up. if only he could be eisenhower personally and could use his wild and his wits to produce eminently to get ike to a great to a summit meeting. churchill worked hard to pull the soft and the two leaders planned to meet in bermuda at bt the meeting was interrupted by churchill's unfortunate stroke. but by december of 1953 to two men got together in bermuda, luxurious setting, white sand, the son and churchill determined to manipulate eisenhower into getting something done on the cold war. it was here at bermuda we begin to see the beginning of the second conflict, the second point of crisis, the second argument. what to do about nuclear weapons. how should we use or not use the bomb? churchill hoped he could get ike

to agree to this project, yet churchill found eisenhower in no mood for compromise. very interesting. the smiling consensus builder, eisenhower. the gentleman, the almost eager to find a middle to find a middle ground as he did during the war. eisenhower was gone when eisenhower in his first year or two in the presidency. he found, georgia for eisenhower very much an anti-russian nude. indeed, the opening session for a real effort to strike a deal with the new leaders of the soviet union, eisenhower delivered a vulgar tirade in front of all the diplomats of the first delegation. the french were there as well. church of private secretary recorded the scene. eisenhower said as regards to the prime minister believed it was a new look in soviet policy, russia he said was a woman of the streets, and whether address

was new or just the old one patched, it was certainly the same or underneath. [laughter] america inc. and the driver alone into the back streets. that's what colville writes that eisenhower said in front of british and french delegation. really pretty shocking stuff. indeed, colville noted, pain looks all around. [laughter] i bet. but eisenhower went further than this. he said since the russians couldn't be trusted, united states plan to rely heavily on nuclear weapons as a means to deter the communist from doing anything bad in the world. they president in an exchange the leftist partisan obama declared, a, weapons we come to be regarded as the proper part of conventional armament. and if north koreans and chinese did anything bad in indochina or anywhere else, the united states plan to use nuclear weapons against them. this is what eisenhower is

telling churchill. this triggered an outpouring, very mournful sentiments from the prime minister. and what he said was, he began to speak in response to these quite astonishing assertions by eisenhower. quesadillas of the comic weapons would lead to the destruction of all we hold dear. ourselves from our families our treasures and even if some of us temporarily survived, in some deep cellar under mountains of funny and contaminated rubble, there will be nothing to do but to take a pill to end it all. not a good conference. [laughter] he noted eisenhower's announcement of his intention use nuclear weapons in the case of war was news quote which far outstrips anything else at conference. so did he are two old friends who know each other intimately very well, really admire and, indeed, i think deeply love each

other but are on completely opposite sides of this question of how do you use nuclear weapons in the cold war? how did you use it to deter or to threaten or even perhaps really to bomb the other side they were on office side of that debate. the third area of debate that i would point to is on indochina entities such really disagreed strongly on this one. in the spring of 1954 the french were fighting there last sad tragic battle in vietnam. eisenhower was anxious about this. he worried that if france lost the battle and withdrew from vietnam altogether, that the communist chinese would come pouring in from the north and take over all of indochina. he was very anxious about this. in the spring of 19 could for eisenhower began to put together a plan for a grand coalition of allies. from all across the world. who would draw a red line and they would say if france should withdraw from indochina, we will

oppose any chinese intervention in vietnam at any time. and we will threaten you with war if you should cross that red line. so eisenhower wanted a united front, a united coalition to stand together shoulder to shoulder and say not one foot more, to the red chinese. a powerful deterrent. if you would want to go to war? not clear. historians still debate that he wanted to look like he was prepared to go to war if the chinese should come into vietnam and take over from the french. and he wrote to churchill a powerful letter pleading for british support in this endeavor. april 4, 1954, an extraordinary telegram. he wrote to his old comrade, and five at the old the well-known romantic streak april 90 could for as a moment of world historical importance, akin to the early days of the war against hitler. i'm not quite sure reach that level but that's what eisenhower's move. and he ended his plea for help for british support in this

united effort by invoking the dark days of 1938-1939. we failed to stop human ego, mussolini and hitler by not acting immunity and in time, eisenhower wrote. may it not be thought that our nations have learned something from that lesson. to lecture winston churchill whose country fought hitler for two years before the united states entered the second world war on the appropriate lessons of history was come in my view, a shocking act of bad taste. indicates churchill did not agree that china was the real threats to stability in asia. he had begun to see america as the problem. dulles and go to london and begs with churchill, help us, join with us. the cabinet feared the america's might trigger a war in asia and if they did as eisenhower said, it would likely become a nuclear war with the chinese or the russian. russians. something the british were dead

set against. and so in a very significant moment, churchill refused to support eisenhower's plan in indochina. in the american military intervention in vietnam he believed would be ineffective and would trigger a war, a much wider war and perhaps a nuclear war. churchill argued partitioned vietnam, get half a loaf and get out. the americans were not quite ready to accept that advice. the british block of the american plan for a coalition in indochina. psalmist believe this stage often military intervention by the united states in vietnam in 1954. these three disputes between eisenhower and churchill did not by any means lessened the infection and respect between the two leaders. but they do reflect, ladies and element the deeper differences between the two nations at midcentury -- ladies and gentlemen. america was just entering an era

of global power and hegemony. britain's day of global influence had ended and he was struggling to adapt to a different role. churchill and eisenhower met at the crossroads in early 1950, the early 1950s. when america's anti-communist sentiment was at its most intense, winston gently tried to constrain, to buffer american hubris. with little success. the united states would have to learn for itself the painful lessons of in the real overstretch. and those lessons would not register for many years after both ike and churchill had passed from the scene. thank you. [applause] >> okay. so we now have almost 15 minutes for questions and comments.

so the floor is open for anyone who wants to speak. yes, sir. [inaudible] >> can a case be made that president roosevelt was an anti-imperialist, and that by staying out of the war britain would be weakened and in a postwar world the british empire would be weakened because of that? or am i being too cynical? >> the question is -- [inaudible] >> in keeping the united states

out of joining the war, would president roosevelt pursue an evil design to end the british colonial -- [inaudible] >> precisely. [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] >> the united states was in a completely isolationist mode. and you should remember -- when president roosevelt -- [inaudible] winston was really hoping that the pressure would commit the united states even two years later, one or two years, to enter the war, and it's quite clear to a historians looking at that episode that the united states was in no position to help anybody.

it was still the 17th most powerful, the 17th powerful, most powerful nation in the world militarily. and, therefore, even at that point there was nothing the united states could actually do to change the situation beyond moral help and, of course, the various agreements they made. the most important of all -- [inaudible] i think it's a question of timing. i don't think although the president is on record, particularly speaking to his son, elliott, as being very, very negative about the british, not about the british empire per se, which he admired and respected, but the fact that the

british were doing so little to prepare these countries for independence and they had taken the league of nations decisions over dusty ships, basically as assumption of sovereignty. the british and the french and other countries at versailles. and, finally, we should remember that while they were meeting in august of 1941, at that very moment congress was asked to extend the american selective service bill or draft and it only passed by one vote. >> yeah, if i might speak to that also. it does seem to me that roosevelt was convinced at some

point rather early on in the war that the british empire was not going to survive the war in the shape that it had gone into it. the war itself is going to leave britain much too weak to maintain an empire. i think he thought in general this was a good thing, but as far as actively taking steps to undermine the empire, i think that would be taking things a bit far. >> yes, sir? [inaudible] >> a psychiatrist in washington, d.c. has observed fdr was so mentally infirm that he was without giving up to the

giddy with stalin, and ignoring of churchill. so my question is, what's your assessment as to whether this is a most appropriate assessment of fdr's essential capability at yalta and the subsequent development of the cold war? >> let me just repeat the question in case people didn't hear, which is the question is, was fdr to infirm at yalta effectively to stand up to the challenges? yes. >> he was not in good health at yalta to be sure, and the long trip to yalta and back, although it was made under conditions it would be as relaxing as possible to him, was certainly not good for his health. on the other hand, it is hard to point out anything in yalta that

would've made a difference whether roosevelt was in good health or not. the fact is that what was determined -- determining the shape of postwar europe by the time of the yalta conference was the position of armed forces that was already well-established. i believe roosevelt certainly expected the russians have some sort of hegemonic position in eastern europe. it was hardly avoidable. but if he had been in splendid health, it's hard to see what difference that would have made. >> can i just add to that, which i think is very true. he was in terrible health, weeks away really from death. everybody noticed it.

when he went out to even, i interviewed the last surviving member of the white house map room while researching my book, and he said that he'd seen the president before he went out to see macarthur and nimitz in the pacific at hawaii in the summer of 1944. and he said when he came back, he was a completely changed figure from the one this gentleman had served in the white house map room sense april of 1942. completely changed person. and macarthur is on record as having said he only has six months to live. but as the professor said it's difficult to see whether that would've changed anything that happened at yalta.

basically it was a cover-up. the russians had 400 divisions in the field both in the east and facing towards japan. and there was very little the united states, even with its great air force, could have done to change position, as you say, in eastern europe. and i quote in my new book, the commander-in-chief, a very interesting visit by cardinal spellman to the white house to see president roosevelt and i think september of 1943. so years before yalta in which the president was quite straightforward about division of europe at the end of war or basically there's nothing they can do to change the balance of

military power that will exist in terms of land forces. and so yes, it was a cover-up to try and maintain some kind of dignity and world peace. and above all am fdr's sort of last -- were being put into the creation of a united nations. we can all be critical of the united nations but it was created. it has existed. it is an incredible work and it is the sole creation of franklin delano roosevelt. >> one point, he thought that it might actually be its first secretary-general spent i think you get the last word. >> naturally. that's what my wife always says. [laughter] i'll just say this but we had a wonderful introduction this morning and our chairman said that history matters. is one of importan of the impors we all agree about and i

absolutely love that. i want that on my license plate, history matters. a historians disagree that what makes history is interesting is that we fight desperately over the interpretation. and nothing is more controversial and continues to provoke debate as yalta. i did want to highlight for you that yalta became political not because of the choice but because the documents of what had transpired in yalta were released in 1955 i the state department. and from that moment on when people begin to argue about what really happened, would be condemned the documentary record, a very interesting book published by the state department, foreign relations of the united states series. from that moment he became a political hot potato. look what roosevelt given away, how awful it was. republicans beat up on the democrats for appeasing stalin. this is at the height of the cold war. so it became a major point of dispute and we've never really gotten past our visit was about

yalta because its prisons which would often see partisan politics in the united states. that's the wonderful thing about history is that we constantly infused with new debates, new perspectives and i think that's what makes yalta especially so electric even these many years later. spin nicely put. nice way to bring an end to this. so please join me in thanking our panelists. [applause] >> thank you. i want to thank the professors for making the program chairman look so brilliant. to invite them all to speak this morning as the first panel of this conference. we've heard about churchill the present. shortly we'll hear from sir david cannadine about churchill and the monarchs but first some housekeeping. we have our bookstore set up in the chinese room which is immediately adjacent to the

grand ballroom. books, the most current books by each of our speakers is on sale and we have a book signing session scheduled for them this afternoon from four to five. we will now take our first break of the morning, and we will resume the program probably at 11:15. thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> a brief break at our table and of the winston churchill conference. in about 15 minutes attendees will return t to hear discussion of winston churchill in relationship with monarchs. princeton history professor sir david cannadine will lead a discussion. while we would wish on remarks from earlier today in this conference hosted by the churchill centre in washington, d.c. [applause] >> good morning. writing in his memoirs, churchill observed his american people their national psychology is such that the bigger the idea, the more wholeheartedly and obstinately that they put

themselves into making it a success. nearly 50 years ago a small group of enthusiasts came together -- postage stamps bearing churchill's likeness. only a few months before he died, sir winston's son randolph gave his blessing to this newly formed organization. thus, the international churchill society was born. today as we gather for our 33rd international conference, we count more than 3000 members and two dozen, over two dozen chapters worldwide. our journals finest hour has been published continuously since 1981. we have hosted royalty, leading politicians, journalists, authors, captains of industry and renowned scholars.

many of whom have not only spoken at our events but also contributed to our journals. above all, we earned our reputation as the go to organization for anyone, be it i'll amateur or faint academic. anyone with an interest in the life and legacy of churchill. our website is visited by more than 1.5 million people annually. and we are bringing other church websites into our fold as we work towards our goal of at least 4 million sessions annually. and while our online monthly bulletin has today more than 30,000 subscribers, our ambitious target of 100,000 subscribers is well within our reach. daily, we connect with thousands more throughout continues a strengthening social media

platforms. even more importantly, we've made it possible for high school students around the world to have free access to the churchill archives online and to use the related and constantly updated spokes learning modules. already some 1000 schools have signed up in the u.s. and uk, canada, australia and new zealand. and we are only just beginning. we have our next step a 5000 schools as our goal. concurrently with continue to promote the teaching of churchill's legacy in schools, both locally organized seminars free to teachers and students, and by making attendance at our conferences free to these same eager minds. we have improved as an institution. we have professional staff. we are able to pay for quality contributions to our journals and our conferences. our milestone merger with the

american fund for the churchill museum at the ballrooms in london solidified this growing professional identity and broaden our base and firm up our finances. in 2013 we donated a bust of sir winston to program displays in the halls of the united states capitol building. and organize an unveiling ceremony at which the secretary of state and all four congressional leaders, republicans and democrats in a bipartisan effort, publicly affirmed their admiration for who the man was clearly the most important person of the 20th century. yet despite these achievements, these many achievements, we were at a disadvantage. the uk is blessed with a plethora of physical aspects -- acids that help keep the memory of churchill a life in the churchill war room museums and art of london, the archives at

churchill college cambridge. all of the splendid facilities protect churchill's legacy in the uk for each new generation to discover. however, within the u.s., the only physical asset as the national churchill museum located on the campus of westminster college in fulton, missouri, the site of churchill's 1946 iron curtain speech. this museum was part of a separate organization, and needed much more support to expand its reach and attract more visitors. we knew without a significant platform here in washington to educate succeeding generations and inject the lessons of churchill's example into the mic is of power, interest in churchill would wane. aging would take its inevitable toll on us and we would simply fade into unpalatable obscurity.

our duty to churchill unfulfilled. so ended up of the global economic crisis that began in 2008 i developed a plan for the future to be accomplished by 2015, the 50th anniversary of the churchill's death. i presented this rather overambitious but much-needed plan to our patron the wonderful and wise to nine and to her nephew, the always uplifting instant churchill's namesake grandson -- mary soames district whose believe in the need for a permanent home in washington to preserve his grandfather's legacy never wavered for one moment. both gave complete and unconditional support, pragmatic advice, and endless encouragement. although i privately thought they believed i was barking mad. their deaths, winston in 2010, and mary in 2014, were

devastating blows to edit made it clear that time was not on our side. early last year we endured yet another heavy loss with the death of the dean of all churchill scholars, sir martin, a passionate supporter of this bold plan which he called our lifeblood. as churchillians we know that inspiration can always be found in the words of our hero, never give in, never give in. never, never, never. i will admit, however, that those three deaths, the economic downturns which affected our financial situation, and the daunting challenge we set ourselves met them at times when i had to fight mightily to keep churchill's infamous black dog at bay. but used another churchillian expression, i kept bothering on.

of the members of the churchill family provided their own support, help and encouragement. the always uplifting and her sister, the wonderful artist, and, of course, the irrepressible a continuously generous randolph churchill. will never be able to repay the debt of gratitude we owe and will '02 that incredibly hard-working supported the churchill family who, despite having their own busy lives and large families, always graciously give so much of themselves to our organization. it's a testament to what we're achieving today that so many more hard-working family members are committed to our cause, including mary soames' eldest son, sir nicholas, and randolph three siblings, janie, marina and jack. all three of them have accepted roles within our new

organization. and so we push forward and that was now we can see the sunlit uplands. we have, in fact, achieved much more than the original plan envisioned. we've made it more certain than ever that the legacy of churchill continued to be widely known and appreciated throughout the world. now thanks also to the hard work, creativity and persistence of both jean-paul and dr. benjamin, as well as the support of ed weiner and those two wonderful churchillian, monroe and dick, we are a last, at long last but by fully merging of the national churchill museum of the united states at westminster college. our combined strengths are truly a classic case of two plus two equaling at least six.

we have come a long way and we reached an important milestone. to mark this type of change we're making some name changes as well. from this moment we shall once again be known as the international churchill society. [applause] >> to increase our name identification with nonmembers, but bolton will be renamed the churchill bulletin, beginning with the next issue. we have a new logo, emblematic of a fresh tomorrow. and tomorrow, after decades of wishful thinking, we will officially open our national churchill library and the center on the campus of the globally respected george washington university. [applause]

>> this long-awaited event could not have happened without the support of two successive gw presidents who are far both great friends the ics. first, the inspiring stephen, and then particularly steve knapp, whose wisdom, endless patience with me, perseverance and spirit will make him for ever and much revered churchillian. ics will both intellectually and financially support, advice and coordinate the work of two u.s. the churchill institutions. the national churchill library and said at the national churchill museum. it will ensure that these two sister institutions not only cooperate as allies, but promote the memory of winston churchill in north america. importantly, they will flourish together far better that each could do on their own. ics will also be based at this

newly purpose built facility, the nclc, to introduce a new acronym in a city full of alphabet acronyms. they are we will welcome readers, writers, researchers, scholars and the just plain curious to explore the life and legacy of churchill. using a growing and unique archive of documents, books and electronic media. the collection will expand. exhibitions and high profile events will be organized. from hear our flourishing journals will continue to be published. the nclc will make meaningful and original contributions to churchill studies. symposia and the lectures and debates will always be handling. links to our sister institutions in britain and fulton will provide amazing opportunities for sharing exhibitions and events.

in short, nclc will be the epicenter for all churchill related activities in the united states they're finally churchillians throughout north america will have their permanent home. not only won the link to the historical venue of fulton, but situated in the very heart of the most important of the world's capitals. this new home, our home, adjacent to foggy bottom state department is only a few minutes walk from the white house, where i am happy to say much of my bust of churchill continues to stand as it has now for the last 50 years in the private quarters of the first family. this is not the end. it's not even the beginning of the end. but it is perhaps after a nearly 50 year start the end of the

beginning. at long last we now have the tools to do the job. and must look to the future. our plan sets out one of those big ideas that churchill understood could completely captivate the minds of the american people, and bring out their creative and energetic powers. here in washington we are surrounded by venerable's and venerated institutions of study including for example, only that woodrow wilson international center for scholars, the brookings institution, the heritage foundation, and the american enterprise institute. we are dedicated and passionate in our commitment that within five years of the nclc will stand tall among these institutions, and the globally recognized and respected as a facility that supports and encourages research, discussion

and new thinking in methods of leadership, global citizenry, statesmanship and resolution of conflict. with the example of the last century supreme statesmen as our guide, for those of nclc will have a growing and influential impact in these fields policymakers will come to nclc for guidance and advice and will promote healthy exchange of ideas, even hosting within eight years presidential debates. as we've seen again and again in the many crises that have beset are still young century, in times of trouble, people rightly look to the example of winston churchill. now we have a strong cadre of leadership from a new generation of churchillians led by randolph churchill, who i'm delighted to

announce has finally -- >> professor sir david cannadine. in may 2013, i sat in the library after dinner with an article called an imperial childhood by david cannadine. the next morning i would have my last class at harvard and reading this article from across on the british empire was my last assignment. with the closing of this chapter in my life i was in a contemplative as i began to read his article. in it he described his childhood realization that he was growing up in an era of finding being, that this was a generation that held by its fingers on the coattails of the british empire. these poignant words about the sense of an ending resonated deeply that night as i reflected on the end of my journey at harvard. and more overly on the last step across the bridge from childhood to adulthood. and there in the library i begin to cry. to this day reading and improve childhood remains the most moving moment of my student

life. i finally met him in person last you at the churchill center's leadership awards dinner in new york. since then has come to rescue me on to particularly frustrating spreadsheet days at the office with tea and churchillian conversation which i am most grateful. i am fortunate to know him not only as a world-class scholar and historian but also as a tremendous listener, advisor and classic was and. sir david cannadine is the dodge professoprofesso r of history at princeton university, having previously taught at cambridge, columbia and london universities. as the author of 15 books and the editor of 13, the professors press one a few individuals who could rival churchill's prolific as he. in addition to his writing, teaching and research, professor cannadine is as a chairman of the trustees of the national portrait gallery in london as the general editor of the oxford dictionary of national

biography, and is a fellow of the british academy, the royal historical society, the royal society for literature, among numerous other accomplishments. in 2000 it was knighted in the queens birthday honors force vast services to scholarship. it is now my pleasure introduce our speaker, perhaps the only person who could tackle the colossal subject of winston churchill and the monarch, professor sir david cannadine. [applause] >> thank you. thank you so much for the exceptionally kind and generous introduction. since i spent part of my time earning my living by speaking as well as by writing, i have become an unrivaled connoisseur of introductions to myself. [laughter] on one occasion i was lecturing them on the road with my biographer andrew mellon, and i was