Foreign Policy and Leadership Disagreements in The Elizabethan Era Imagine the world's two biggest countries ready to destroy each other at any given moment. Given the present day, one might think of the quarrels between the United States and Russia. However, in the Elizabethan era, (From 1558-1603) the two powerful countries were Spain and England. The two countries were at one point allied against France, however, their bond began to deteriorate due to differences in foreign policy and leadership. The relation between Spain and England began to deteriorate due to differences in foreign policy and leadership. As for foreign policy, one could argue that foreign policy brought the two together. However this is not the case in the long run. …show more content…
The small country was under spanish control, and under King Philip II, they were not happy. This is because they believed in a protestant church. However, the rebellion in the Netherlands is something that Queen Elizabeth could get behind. She began to send money and resources to them. “This had angered Philip immensely, especially as the stolen treasure was used to help fund those people rebelling against his rule in the Netherlands.” (“Queen Elizabeth” page 1) Spain and England also had quarrels within their foreign policy through piracy. “Elizabeth herself had encouraged the activities of the English pirates, who plundered Philip's ships as they made their way from the New World, seizing their treasures.”(“Queen Elizabeth” Page 1). As England was the weaker of the two countries, Elizabeth I was paranoid about an attack from Spain. “Queen Elizabeth had heard mutterings of the intended invasion of England by Spain for some time.”(“Queen Elizabeth” Page 1) Because of these rumors, Elizabeth decided to tell English vessels to raid Spanish ships on …show more content…
Before England and Spain were considered enemies, they were allied against France. This tightened relations between the two countries immensely, not only between countries but between leaders. Relations became so tight between the two leaders of the countries (Elizabeth I and Philip II) that at one point King Philip II had proposed to Elizabeth. Spain (ruled by Philip II) and England (ruled by Elizabeth I) initially got on well. “Philip II was keen to marry Elizabeth. There was friendship between the two countries. However this friendship very quickly turned to tension and rivalry.” (“Spanish Armada” Page 2). Eventually, Philip II became annoyed by being shut down by his constant
The Americans now had control over half the territory they wanted, but this did not satisfy them, this only made them more eager to gain control of East Florida. Almost two years after this event peace concluded, Spain still had possession of East Florida. This time, Spain only had two solutions to avoid a shameful political breakdown in this region. One was to gain support of a European ally, and the second was to get some form of honor in this event by winning some of the best land in North America. The first plan fell through, with Britain and other European nations refusing to help Spain.
This was successful as it made another ally and it meant that contenders and rebels could use Spain either. However, due to the ties with France and the hatred between Spain and France and the fact that England had marriage connections with England, this may have been an unsuccessful move as France could have broken away.
In The Once and Future King T.H. White conveys his personal thoughts on leadership through the help of Merlin, and Wart's transformations. Through each transformation Wart experiences different forms of power, each being a part of a whole idea on how a leader should act. He must piece together these ideas for the definitive way he should rule as king. In order to teach Wart, Merlin transforms him into several different forms, a fish, hawk, ant, goose and a badger.
Slide 3- once Queen Isabel died in 1504 and Ferdinand died in1516 there was a power struggle between the families. Charles V and queen Isabel of Portugal took over and immediately had to make political alliances as soon as possible. What better way then conquering new land and people?
The Treaty of London (1604) ended the war between England and Spain and secured Spain’s position as a leading power in the world. Although the war was over, there were still plenty of tensions between the two countries. There is no hiding the fact, that the rivalry between England and Spain in the 1500s and 1600s assisted in spurring the colonization of the New World in completion of new land, wealth and power. Military bases for warring against Spain could also be created in the New World and encouraged England’s colonization as well. Without doubt, the war with Spain and the rivalry created afterwards, was a major stimulation in building new colonies in
Beginning in the 1600s, one of the main concepts for England, France, and Spain at the time was mercantilism. These were the three most powerful and blooming countries at the time. Starting from the earliest years as the late 1500s, and continuing on, all three countries were soon to battle for claim of the new land. Only one country could triumph. Despite success, even the strongest can become the weakest.
In the story “Antigone”, Sophocles shows that Creon’s attitude is very angry, making everyone sees him as a tyrant more than as a king. His regard for the laws of the town causes him to abandon most viewpoints, like the laws of the gods, or the rights of the people. He believes that his subjects should obey the laws he has set in place, even if moral or religious beliefs contradict his laws and beliefs. Creon’s idea of a good leader is one who maintains order through violence and fear. More over his arrogant, power-seeking personality prevented him from seeking out advice or listening to his own people.
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.
Maine. “Yellow Journalism” played a huge role in the start of the Spanish-American War because the exaggerated Newspaper articles enraged Americans. American sentiment was high towards Cuban independence. Imperialism played a big role in the start of the Spanish-American war as well. Spain was depleted of resources from all of the wars they had in the 19th century, so it was very difficult to sustain territories in the Americas.
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.
flame of the revolution, France and Spain agreed to be allies and this was the turning
The United States would declare war with Spain on April 25, 1898. This act of war would throw the entire Western part of the world into conflict. The Spanish-American war would start because of a attack on the Battleship Maine in Havana harbor in February of 1898. The ship would sink taking American lives with it. As a direct result of this war, Spain would lose its influence in what remained of its empire in the west. War would come to a halt following the Treaty of Paris which was signed on December 10, 1898. In this essay we will explore the days leading to the war, key battles, key leaders, and what would happen to Spain’s overseas empire following the Treaty of Paris agreement.
The first reason for the Spanish American War was public opinion. In 1895, American citizens took notice of a Cuban revolt against their corrupt Spanish oppressor. The Cuban insurgents reasoned that if they did enough damage , the US might move in and help the Cubans win their independence. Not only did Americans sympathize with the Cubans upon seeing tragic reports in the newspaper, but they also empathized in that the US once fought for their own independence from Britain. If France didn’t intervene, the Americans probably would not have won their freedom. As if this did not rally enough hate for the Spanish among the American Public, fuel was added to the flame by the Spanish General (“Butcher”) Weyler. He attempted to crush the rebellion by herding Cubans into barbed-wire concentration camps. In turn, the American public was outraged.
In Henry V, the actions of King Henry portray him as an appalling leader. Among Henry's many negative traits, he allows himself to be influenced by people who have anterior motives. This is problematic because the decisions might not be the best decisions for the country, or neighboring countries. The bishops convinced Henry to take over France because they would be able to save land for the Church. Henry doesn't have the ability to accept responsibility for his actions, placing the blame on others. Before Henry begins to take over a French village, he tells the governor to surrender or risk having English troops terrorize civilians. This way, if the governor declines, it would be the governor's fault for the atrocities that would occur. Henry has gotten his troops to go along with the take over by manipulating them. He tells the soldiers that what they're doing is noble, and that they should be proud. In fact, they're attacking another country in order to conquer it. Henry's character comes off as coldhearted and careless. Henry shows ruthlessness towards civilians, threatening them with atrocities. He's careless with his soldiers, thoughtlessly allowing their executions, or playing hurtful games with them.
What is leadership, and how do we attain the best and most effective leaders? These are questions that are as old as civilization itself. Bass (1974) wrote that, “from its infancy, the study of history has been the study of leaders” (as cited in Wren, 1995, p. 50). Since the study of history in the West is commonly held to begin with Herodotus of ancient Athens, it is not surprising that we should examine the historical views of leadership through the eyes of two titans of Greek thought: Plato and Aristotle.