Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
diplomacY foreign policy
diplomacY foreign policy
us foreign policy dbq
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: diplomacY foreign policy
The conflicts of the last few centuries have been dominated by the West. The two world wars and the subsequent Cold War were dominated by Western states and ideals. It is posited that as the USSR collapsed and the Cold War ceased, the conflict of the West subsided and allowed conflicts of other nations and factions have come to the fore. As the bipolar world system became unipolar, other issues emerged or gained prevalence, the economy seeped back into world economy, technology has advanced at a rapid rate completely changing the way wars are fought and America pursued its goal of democratisation.
America became the dominant superpower in 1989, as the world moved into a unipolar system; thus changing the country’s foreign policy. Instead of fighting the ‘evil empire’ (Reagan: 1983) the foreign policy changed to protecting international stability and leading a worldwide movement for democracy. This policy has portrayed figures, arguably rightly, as modern-day Hitler’s. Saddam Hussein, Colonel Gadaffi and Hosni Mubarak have seen this treatment, until the pretence of forming a ‘new world order’ (Carpenter: 1991: 24) The US has been seen to have become the world police. This has created anger amongst many Arab states as the US attempts to force democracy on countries with mixed results; Grenada and Panama were successful whilst Lebanon and Iraq proved costly, in terms of money and human lives, and the failure to establish an effective democracy. Lebanon saw 250 American casualties whereas Iraq has seen 4483. (iCasualties.org:2011) This change in conflict has been brought on by nearly global acceptance of democracy and the lack of a significant opponent to challenge the US. China may be where the world is looking to rival the US but ...
... middle of paper ...
...Order (2002)
7. B Gokay and R B J Walker (eds), 11 September 2001: War, Terror and Judgement (2002)
8. Ronald Reagan, ‘Evil Empire Speech’, March 9th 1983. http://www.nationalcenter.org/ReaganEvilEmpire1983.html
9. Icasulties details the casualties occurred during the Iraq war. http://icasualties.org/iraq/index.aspx, 07.12.2011
10. Geohive, a website, 2011, that gives estimated world population numbers. http://www.geohive.com/
11. Google public date explorer, 2011, gives information about various economic statistics about world states http://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=china+gdp#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:CHN:USA:GBR&ifdim=country&hl=en&dl=en
12. M. Van Creveld (1991) On Future War. London: Brassey’s.
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.
Dr. Robinson, Mathew. “9/11: Other Warnings to the U.S. Government Prior to the Attacks of September 11th, 2001”. Appalachian State University. Web. 01 Aug 2011.
As the war of the worlds collide between the more democratic Allies and the orthodox Central powers, there were numerous causes to the war in which they can be summed up into the –isms of modern analysis. In the 19th, 20th, and even the 21st century, almost all of the conflicts can be categorized in either one or a combination of those –isms.
James Bamford wrote the book “A Pretext for War”, in 2004. The topic of this book is that it explains the systematic weakness that led to the ignorance or misinterpreted evidence of the pending terrorist attack on 9/11. The authors thesis is clearly stated on the title of the book “9/11, Iraq, and The Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies.” After reading this book, Bamford does explain everything he said in his thesis. I will talk about how the author organized his book, the style of his book, and about the author himself.
American foreign policy is usually associated with the prevailing analogy of the United States serving as the world police. When gross human rights violations occur it is often expected that America speaks out and condemn the actions and perpetrators. Its people based republic and democracy is revered and has been suggested and implemented in places where harsh dictatorships and autocracies had previously prevailed. However, in truth, US involvement and its need to push the “only working democracy” in places where countries that are deemed in need of help by the US actually cultivate their own working government's separate from the pressing ideology of the US that are actually successful predating their involvement. And when these differing
Emerson, Steven (2004) “Third public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Retrieved September 17, 2011 http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing3/witness_emerson.htm
Throughout the 20th Century, the world was engulfed in global conflicts, engaging in one war after the next. When looking at these different conflicts, interconnected themes and issues seemed to lead to the later conflicts. The first of the conflicts to affect the globe was the Great War. Since the Great War, numerous conflicts have followed including World War II, The Cold War, and eventually the War on Terror. These wars share similar goals and themes of gaining power and prestige, seeking revenge, and fighting ideologies. Each of these conflicts results in events that eventually lead to the next conflict, creating near constant warfare around the globe. The effects and fears created by these conflicts can still be seen today as we fight
In a Boston Phoenix article published on September 6th, 2002, and entitled “A Lot To Learn,” David Brudnoy discusses the aftermath of 9/11. Brudnoy claims that Americans believed the impact of that disastrous day would bring even greater prosperity. He belittles the people of America as too desperate and too easily consoled by the government officials in New York and Washington D.C. after 9/11. Brudnoy believes that the phrase “war on terrorism” was not an accurate definition to use and that in fact our government should have taken action against all Muslims, not just Osama bin Laden and his minions. He further argues that Americans have taken for granted the changes since 9/11 and have tried to forget about the attacks. He opines that people have become too weak in the aftermath, living in constant fear of another terrorist
Since the 15th century the world has been through three major power shifting, as Fareed Zakaria describe in his book “The Post-American World”. Zakaria analyze that the first power shifting began in the 15th century and took place in most of European countries, this was the era of the development of modern science and technology, it is also produced such a long history of political dominance of the nations of the west. . The second shift was the rise of the United States in end of 19th century, right after it industrialized the United States emerged as the most developed and strongest country in the world, and for the last century the United States has dominated the global economics, politics, sciences and cultures. What we are facing right
Templeton, Tom. "9/11 in Numbers." The Observer. Guardian News and Media, 17 Aug. 2002. Web. 21 Mar. 2014.
With the shock of two destructive world wars and then the creation of the United Nations, whose aim is to preserve peace, it is unconceivable for these two nations to fight directly in order to promote their own ideology. But the US and the USSR end up to be in competition in numerous ways, particularly in technological and industrial fields. In the same time they start to spread their influence over their former allies. This phenomenon have led to the creation of a bipolar world, divided in two powerful blocs surrounded by buffer zones, and to the beginning of what we call the Cold War because of the absence of direct conflicts between the two nations.
The face of American democracy is deceptive; from missionary trips to military tours, America has established a presence in the Middle East, and has always projected itself to be the perfect image of a democratic and free nation where everyone is equal. While America tries to up hold their motto of being the land of the free, American media has presented Arabs as unintelligent and violent people. Because of the way America presents itself to the rest of the world, one would be surprised if they traveled to America only to find violence and ignorance amongst its government and citizens. While Western civilization believes itself to be on a higher level than Eastern civilization, this orientalist view blinds America from seeing the similarities
Political uprisings in the Middle East, especially in Muslim nation states have placed Arabian politics back on the focus point of international politics. Political events in certain Arab countries had an excessive impact on the political development of other neighboring states. Resistances and anxieties within different Arab countries triggered unpredictable actions, sometimes sorely to observe and believe. The authoritarian governments of Arabian countries led from various dictators have created a precarious situation for their people, especially in providing national security and maintaining peace in the region. Jack Goldstone argues that the degree of a sultan’s weakness has been often only visible in retrospect; due in part to the nature of the military-security complex common across Middle East states (Goldstone 1). In addition, the existence of various statesmen with political affiliation is concerned in faithfulness of its armed forces. Usually, the armed national forces of several states, mainly those in Arab countries are loyal and closely affiliated to their leaders, which have a major role in state regimes. Arab uprisings in their early spreading appeared legally responsible and with concrete demands from representatives’ peoples, calling for a more open democratic system and reasonable governance. Even though, the system in which popular frustration with government imposes alters considerably from one state to another. These public revolts against different authoritative governments didn’t halt just in Arab states, but they sustained also in the Far East and in the Eastern Europe. Can we say that the popular uprisings in Arab countries could be attributed to the term of globalization? In fact, globalization is a multi...
8) ?After the Attack?The War on Terrorism? (2001). Online at: <http://www.monthlyreview.org/1101edit.htm>, consulted on March 29th, 2004.
Abstract: Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been the world’s only unquestioned superpower. How the United States evaluates its position as global hegemon has important consequences for American foreign policy, particularly with regards to the potential for future policy constraints. Thus, this paper seeks to consider the question: How durable is American hegemony? The paper first defines the state of American hegemony and then considers the primary challengers: Europe, Russia, China, Japan and imperial overstretch. It will conclude that in the long-term, East Asian geopolitical instability poses the greatest threat to American hegemony, but that in the short-term, the hegemony will prove to be quite durable as long as the United States can counteract the phenomenon of imperial overstretch. In order to diffuse both internal and international threats to hegemony, American leaders should work to pursue national interests within a framework of consensus and legitimacy as much as possible.