The contemporary foreign policy of the United States represents an evolving continuum of principles, conceptions and strategies that in part, derived from the particularistic American Cold War experience. As such, United States foreign policy is neither a static entity, nor is its intentions or direction uncontested. This essay will examine the underlying issues of identity and how, beginning with the Truman Doctrine, a distinct articulation of the national interest was evinced that has defined America’s role in the world. In doing so, focus will be given to the development of alliance policy, containment and its effect on transforming the US posture in the post-Cold War international order.
Firstly, it is pertinent to reconsider the traditional narratives that underpin American identity. Inherent in this is Manifest Destiny, which asserts that Anglo-Saxon American’s are God’s chosen people, with a superior culture and who are pre-ordained to spread civilisation to inferior peoples (Hollander 2009, 169). This tradition offers instructive themes for the formulation of American exceptionalism and its manifestation into a missionary foreign policy (Hoffmann 1968, 369). It also raises to the forefront the Manichean character of American policy, its solipsism and tendency to justify geopolitical objectives in moralistic terms (Lepgold 1995, 372). Thus, US foreign policy is a discourse for reproducing American identity, containing threats to its core principles and legitimating global actions (Campbell 1998, 70).
The Cold War era ended America’s historic vacillation between isolationism and internationalism. The Truman Doctrine committed, in part to “support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or...
... middle of paper ...
...In a rapidly evolving international system, the US is at the forefront and yet is most threatened by the emerging multipolar order (Zakaria 2009, 43).
The contemporary foreign policy of the US reflects an evolution of the policies pursued during the Cold War. Using a combination of ideology, alliances and containment, the US cultivated a global order that defeated the Soviet Union. Having achieved pre-eminence, the signatures of these same philosophies remains embedded in US policy and strategic thinking. Perhaps the best indication of this is the designation of a new ideological enemy in terrorism and its resulting revalidation of Cold War dogma into a modern raison d'État. Most critically, the US is utilising this new calling to consolidate its alliances and contain adversaries in light of the emergence of an increasingly decentralised, multipolar global order.
Steven Hook and John Spanier's 2012 book titled “American foreign policy since WWII" serves as one of the most important texts that can be used in understanding the underlying complexities on American foreign policies. Like the first readings that are analyzed in class (American Diplomacy by George Kennan and Surprise, Security, and the American Experience by John Lewis Gaddis), this text also brings history into a more understandable context. Aside from being informative and concise in its historical approach, Hook and Spanier also critiques the several flaws and perspectives that occurred in the American foreign policy history since World War II.
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
In conclusion, this extensive review of American foreign policy is just very broad. This topic is his shortened summary of a broad topic in a narrative arrangement, if they contributed anything to the historical understanding of this book. Ambrose and Brinkley made the topic very fascinating and easier to comprehend than a plain textbook. By writing Rise to Globalism and narrating stories without including unnecessary truths and statistics. Thanks to this book, I gained a more thorough understanding of the struggles in the Middle East after Vietnam and a new perception on where American presently stands in the world.
It is the intention of this essay to explain the United States foreign policy behind specific doctrines. In order to realize current objectives, this paper will proceed as follows: Part 1 will define the Monroe Doctrine, Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 will concurrently explicate the Roosevelt Corollary, Good Neighbor Policy, and the Nixon Doctrine, discuss how each policy resulted in U.S. involvement in Latin American countries, describe how it was justified by the U.S. government, respectively, and finally, will bring this paper to a summation and conclusion.
Supporting the view that Truman was responsible for the Cold War, Arnold Offner argues that Truman’s parochialism and nationalism caused him to make contrary foreign policy decisions without regard to other nations, which caused the intense standoff be...
Falk, Richard A. The Declining World Order: America's Imperial Geopolitics. New York: Routledge, 2004. Print.
Now that the idea of a global war has been established, it is important to establish the role of the United States (USA). One of the most important documents in establishing this was the ‘Truman Doctrine’. President Harry S. Truman (1945-53) outlined what would become the basis of US foreign policy for the duration of the Cold War. This was the policy of containment – trying to keep communism from spreading to the rest of the world. His speech to Congress in March 19...
On March 12, 1947, President Harry S. Truman defined United States foreign policy in the context of its new role as a world superpower. Many historians consider his speech to Congress as the words that officially started the Cold War. The Truman Doctrine was a major break from U.S. historical trends of isolationist foreign policy. His speech led to the Cold War policy of containment. Moreover, it served as a precedent for future U.S. policy of interventionism. According to Stephen Ambrose, an important quote from Truman’s speech, "I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free people who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures," stands as "all encompassing" and would "define American policy for the next generation and beyond."1 Faced with strong opposition, Truman was still able to achieve a consensus in Congress aimed at quelling the communist threat through active foreign policy and involvement. The Truman Doctrine not only demonstrated the new foreign policy of the U.S., but also helps to explain American foreign policy since the Doctrine’s inception.
In no field other than politics does the justification for action often come from a noteworthy event and the true cause stays hidden behind the headlines. The United States’ transformation from a new state to a global superpower has been a methodical journey molded by international conditions (the global terrain for statecraft), the role of institutions and their programmed actions, and ultimately, the interests of actors (the protection of participants in making policy’s items and i...
The American attack against Afghanistan that was triggered by the September 11th tragedy once again raised the question of US role in the world. The current military intervention also touched the issue of the major factors, defining the course of US international policy. In the globalized world today the ratio of “soft power” (the ability to attract through cultural and ideological appeal) to “hard power” (a country’s economic and military ability to buy and coerce) used in solving international conflicts is constantly increasing (Nye 2). However, military campaigns still provide a way out of deepening international crises. Should America, then, engage in indiscriminate humanitarian interventions, advancing its ideas of democracy, human rights and liberty, or should it be militarily concerned only with international affairs that have a direct bearing on US vital national interests?
As we approach the next Presidential election the topic of American foreign policy is once again in the spotlight. In this paper, I will examine four major objectives of U.S. foreign policy that have persisted throughout the twentieth century and will discuss the effect of each on our nation’s recent history, with particular focus on key leaders who espoused each objective at various times. In addition, I will relate the effects of American foreign policy objectives, with special attention to their impact on the American middle class. Most importantly, this paper will discuss America’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to the anticipated fulfillment of these objectives—democracy, manifest destiny, humanitarianism, and economic expansion.
Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, challenges conventional wisdom and argues that the United States should not seek to remain the indispensable nation in the international system in “Delusions of Indispensability”. Carpenter depicts the concept of the U.S seeking to remain the indispensable nation as “dubious” and a “blueprint for strategic overextension” of resources leading to a “failed paradigm” (Pg.19). Carpenter frames his argument against the indispensable nation thesis around the following topics: unilateralism versus multilateralism, U.S. engagement as binary light switch, the failure to acknowledge that U.S. engagement can take different
Hestedt, G. (2004). Manifest destiny. Encyclopedia of American foreign policy. Retrieved August 14, 2008, from Facts on File: American History Online database.
The first issue which Cox raises is that of a lack of understanding of and study into the concept of empire by current research in the field of international relations (Cox 2004, p230). This element would appear to be sound, but only in so far as it relates to Cox’s other assertion that the orthodoxy of American society and academia are opposed to labelling America an empire. Within liberal dominated mediums, ‘empire’ continues to be a “dirty word” (Dowd 2009), linked as it is by the American people with the histories of German and Japanese imperial ambitions (Townsend 2009). Cox asserts that self identification with this term is avoided by even more erudite members of society, but that this reality is plainly obvious to outsiders (2004, p230).
The book A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy, by Joyce Kaufman, and the essay, American Foreign Policy Legacy by Walter Mead both acknowledge the history, and the importance of American foreign policy. The two argue that American foreign policy has always been an essential aspect of the prosperity and health of the United States. After reading these writings myself, I can agree that American foreign policy in the U.S. has always been detrimental to the success of this nation. Throughout history most Americans have had very little interest in foreign affairs, nor understood the importance. This essay will address the importance of foreign policy, why Americans have little interest in foreign affairs, and what the repercussions