The works of William Appleman Williams and George F. Kennan have contributed to understanding of American diplomatic history during the period of 1900-1950. Kennan's book, American Diplomacy, offers a sharp critique with its focus on American "mistakes", specifically examining the absence of direction in American foreign policy and with the end result of American strength and insecurity at the start of the Cold War. Williams, in his book The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, pursues a different but still critical perspective by asserting that American policy was largely motivated by the "Open Door" policy, which led to the eventual alienation of countries to the United States and ultimately created the Cold War. By analyzing these two works, contrasts in the authors' perceptions becomes clear regarding their treatment of the Spanish-American War, the Open Door Policy, and the origins of World War II. A greater understanding of these perceptions and their distinctions can shed light on the origins of the Cold War.
George F. Kennan starts his discussion on the Spanish-American War by examining the origins of the conflict. Short-term public opinion pressured the American government into a conflict with Spain. This conflict was not for national safety or seen as an enforcement action of the Monroe Doctrine, but was the result of subjective and emotional reasoning. Compounding this mistake was the acquisition of the Philippines, which served to encourage Americans to exploit economic opportunities in China resulting in Secretary of State John Hay's Open Door Policy.
In contrast, William Appleman Williams, states that the need for economic expansion led to the Spanish-American War. Imperialist impulses sought the acquisiti...
... middle of paper ...
...he basic concepts that should be the foundations of foreign policy. America's position in the world evolved from being a world power that was unconcerned about international security in 1900 to 1950 when America was still a world power, but Americans had to contend with the fear of annihilation by the Soviet Union. Williams states that the ultimate "tragedy of American diplomacy" was the failure of the Open Door Policy. This failure, according to the author, resulted not from its misapplication or inherent weaknesses, but rather its successes. This culminated into the Cold War, as Truman demanded resumption of the Open Door Policy without providing economic assistance to the Soviet Union. These perspectives have relevance in the contemporary international environment and could be utilized in an examination of American involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Economic self-interest was more effective in driving American foreign policy because the U.S wanted to protect their property. As described in War and other Essays The U.S needed to choose not to be rulers and to let Filipinos and Spanish Americans live their own lives without ...
The alliance formed between the US and USSR during the second world war was not strong enough to overcome the decades of uneasiness which existed between the two ideologically polar opposite countries. With their German enemy defeated, the two emerging nuclear superpowers no longer had any common ground on which to base a political, economical, or any other type of relationship. Tensions ran high as the USSR sought to expand Soviet influence throughout Europe while the US and other Western European nations made their opposition to such actions well known. The Eastern countries already under Soviet rule yearned for their independence, while the Western countries were willing to go to great lengths to limit Soviet expansion. "Containment of 'world revolution' became the watchword of American foreign policy throughout the 1950s a...
In the book, America’s Great War: World War I and the American Experience, Robert H. Zieger discusses the events between 1914 through 1920 forever defined the United States in the Twentieth Century. When conflict broke out in Europe in 1914, the President, Woodrow Wilson, along with the American people wished to remain neutral. In the beginning of the Twentieth Century United States politics was still based on the “isolationism” ideals of the previous century. The United States did not wish to be involved in European politics or world matters. The U.S. goal was to expand trade and commerce throughout the world and protect the borders of North America.
The Spanish American war had a complex beginning. By the 1890’s, Cuba had unsuccessfully battled Spain for its independence for many years. Due to the US’s economic interests in Cuba, the US government sought to stabilize the situation. The United States and Cuba negotiated an agreement that Cuba would become self-governing on January 1, 1898. But
“Was Truman Responsible for the Cold War”, well, according to author Arnold A. Offner, his simplistic answer is an obvious “yes.” “Taking Sides” is a controversial aspect of the author’s interpretation for justifying his position and perception of “Truman’s” actions. This political approach is situated around the “Cold War” era in which the author scrutinizes, delineates, and ridicules his opponents by claiming “I have an ace in the hole and one showing” (SoRelle 313). Both authors provide the readers with intuitive perceptions for their argumentative approaches in justifying whether or not “Truman” contributed to the onset of the “Cold War.” Thus far, it would be hard-pressed to blame one single individual, President or not, for the “Cold War” initiation/s. Information presented shows the implications centered on the issues leading up to the Cold War”, presents different ideologies of two Presidents involving policy making, and a national relationship strained by uncooperative governments.
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.
The Soviet Union began to view the United States as a threat to communism, and the United States began to view the Soviet Union as a threat to democracy. On March 12, 1947, Truman gave a speech in which he argued that the United States should support nations trying to resist Soviet imperialism. Truman and his advisors created a foreign policy that consisted of giving reconstruction aid to Europe, and preventing Russian expansionism. These foreign policy decisions, as well as his involvement in the usage of the atomic bomb, raise the question of whether or not the Cold War can be blamed on Truman. 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 between the Soviet Union and America that became the Cold War (Offner 291)....
Iryie, Akira. The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations: The Globalizing of America, 1913-1945. Volume 3. New York: Cambridge University Press 1993
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.
Economics becomes a large factor in the American imperialism; but more specifically that expansion in foreign markets is a vital part in the growth of America. As historian Charles Beard puts it, “[it] is indispensable to the prosperity of American business. Modern diplomacy is commercial. Its chief concern is with the promotion of economic interests abroad” (Kinzer 81). Williams provides that the people of United States wanted this change to culminate in the business. “A great many farm businessmen were in trouble, and if they voted together they could control national policy. There was, in truth, a crisis before the Cri...
Actions taken in Cuba and the Philippines could not and did not give equal weight as a motive to commercialism, nationalism, humanitarianism, and racism. Trade and business in the United States motivated the war. The US also wanted to emerge as an imperialistic power and saw a great opportunity to take over other lands. In analyzing all of the facts, it is clear that nationalism, the desire to be a world wide power, and advance commercial interests were the primary factors that led to the declaration of war on Spain.
(1993), The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Volume Four, America in the Age of Soviet Power, 1945 – 1991, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press · Froman, M.B. (1991) The Development of the Détente, Coming to Terms, London, Macmillan Academic and Professional LTD · Kent, J. and Young, J.W. (2004) International Relations Since 1945, Oxford, Oxford University Press · www.oed.com (Oxford English Dictionary online)
For 113 days during the summer of 1898, the United States was at war with Spain. Neither the president of the United States, nor his cabinet, nor the the queen of Spain, nor her ministers wanted the war wanted the war. It happened eventhough they made their best efforts to prevent it. It happened because of ambition, miscalculation, and stupidity; and it happened because of kindness, wit, and resourcefulness. It also happened because some were indifferent to the suffering of the world’s wretched and others were not (O’Toole 17). By winning the war the United States proved the the rest of the world and to itself that it could and would fight against foreign nations. For many years, world power had been concentrated in the countries in Europe. Nations such as Great Britain, France, Germany, and Spain had the most influence in global affairs. But a shift in power was gradually taking place as the United States matured. The young nation gained wealth and strength. Its population grew immensely, and many people believed it would become a major world power (Bachrach, 11) Spain was one of the many European countries that had territory in the United States. Spain controlled mostly some islands off the coast of Central America. The most important of these were Cuba and Puerto Rico. The United States was led to believe that the Spanish mosgoverned and abused the people of these islands. In fact, Spain did overtax and mistreat the Cubans, who rebelled in 1868 and again in 1895. Thus, the American people felt sympathetic toward the Cuban independence movement. In addition, Spain had frequently interfered with trade between its colonies and the United States. Even though the United States had been a trading partner with Cuba since the seventeenth century, Spain sometimes tried to completely stop their trade with Cuba. In Spain doing so, this sometimes caused damage to U.S. commercial interests. The United States highly disagreed with Spain’s right to interfere with this trade relationship. (Bachrach, 12) The United States was also concerned that other trading and commercial interests were threatened by the number of ships and soldiers Spain kept in the area. If the United States had to fight a war with Canada or Mexico, these Spanish forces could quickly mobilize against the United States.
War.” Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies after the Cold War. Eds. Ethan B. Kapstein and Michael Mastanduno. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. 1-27.
As shown, America’s rapid change as the 19th century came to a close was supported by a variety of imperialistic beliefs, motives, and incidents that almost jumpstarted the U.S. onto the world stage. Many of these incidents, such as the public’s thirst for expansion, the annexation of several faraway lands, and the build-up of U.S. military forces, would not have been possible without the Spanish American War. Moreover, the Spanish American war would not have been possible without the American people. Imperialism was a consequence of the American Democratic experiment, giving the people what they want. . Works Cited http://www.course-notes.org/us_history/notes/the_american_pageant_14th_edition_textbook_notes/chapter_27_empire_and_expansion_18