Institute of Pacific Relations
The Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) was established to study affairs in the Far East and played a significant role in academic and policy discussions related to the Pacific region. Funded by various corporations and foundations, it published a quarterly journal called *Pacific Affairs*. Among its notable members was Owen Lattimore, an influential figure who later faced accusations of espionage during the Red Scare, notably from Senator Joseph R. McCarthy.
In the early 1950s, the IPR became embroiled in controversy as it was investigated for alleged communist infiltration and subversion, culminating in extensive hearings led by the Senate’s McClellan Committee. The committee claimed that the IPR had ties to Soviet agents and was disseminating communist propaganda. Despite the institute's efforts to defend its reputation, the negative public perception and sustained political scrutiny led to its disbandment in 1952. The IPR's history reflects broader tensions during the Cold War era, highlighting the intersection of academic inquiry and political ideology in the context of U.S. foreign policy in Asia.
On this Page
Institute of Pacific Relations
Identification Research organization created to study Asian affairs
Date Founded in 1925
Founded by officials of the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) to study Far East affairs, the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) found itself a key target in the anticommunist hysteria that swept America during the 1950’s.
The purpose of the institute was to study Far East affairs. It was supported by funds from a number of corporations and major foundations, and it published Pacific Affairs, a quarterly journal. One of its most prominent members was Owen Lattimore , who served as the editor of Pacific Affairs and whom Republican senator Joseph R. McCarthy identified in 1950 as the “top Russian espionage agent.”
In the spring of 1950, when McCarthy first attacked Lattimore, the IPR was investigated by U.S. Army Intelligence. Retired Brigadier General Elliott R. Thorpe testified before a Senate subcommittee that the IPR “contains within its membership highly respectable citizens interested in the Pacific basin and the furthering of peace in that part of the world.” The institute thought that was the end of the controversy until a schoolteacher discovered some discarded institute files. Although there was nothing sinister about the files—the FBI reviewed them—the schoolteacher believed he had uncovered evidence of subversion and telephoned McCarthy’s Washington, D.C., office, which then passed the files to the Internal Security Subcommittee for further hearings.
Impact
In July, 1951, the Senate’s McClellan Committee, which investigated issues related to the Internal Security Act, began hearings on the communist infiltration of the IPR and its seven semiautonomous regional centers. The hearings ended in June of 1952 and were released in fifteen parts, with considerable material on the Chinese Communist Party. The IPR was accused by the McClellan Committee of being filled with Soviet agents and of placing communist propaganda in textbooks, among other charges, and it was questioned about its ties with the China lobby.
The institute’s use as a propaganda front to influence U.S. policy in Asia was confirmed by the subcommittee’s report (Senate Report 2050) issued later in 1952. The IPR was unable to survive the relentless barrage of congressional criticism, and the institute, discredited in the public view, was disbanded.
Bibliography
Akami, Tokomo. Internationalizing the Pacific. London: Routledge, 2001. Although focused primarily on the era before the 1950’s, gives good background material to understand the importance of the IPR.
Thomas, John. Institute of Pacific Relations: Asian Scholars and American Politics. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1974. Describes the struggles of the institute during the 1950’s.