Foreign Policy Chapter
Chapter Summary
Foreign Policy, is a government’s plan in which they make choices about relations with the rest of the world. In the United States, the president is the chief of foreign policy and therefore implements the choices. This chapter explores the different kinds of foreign policy and also the process of how these policies are implemented throughout the world.
I. Foreign Policy and the Choices
i. In foreign policy, many questions arise each time it is brought up in conversation, “Are the president’s powers really that great in foreign policy, and how important are interest and public groups?” In the U.S., declaring war has its disadvantages in foreign policy. There are times in history where its implementation
…show more content…
How the President Ties in with Foreign Policy
i. The president, as commander in chief, his powers are tied with negotiating treaties, the military, appointing ambassadors. But what is kept in text in the Constitution is so that the president doesn’t get out of hand with the power; Congress approves of the money for the military, authorizing ambassadors, ratifying treaties, yet the president still has the right to send troops abroad for war purposes. In the end, it’s a very well connected foreign policy. ii. On the other hand, the president tends to achieve congressional approval in foreign matters rather than domestic matters, even though Congress has certain checks on the president. A few examples of Presidents with great use of foreign policy; Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy. These presidents, sent troops in times of wars, kept other nations safe, choices which related to rest of the world.
III. Foreign Policy Before the 21st Century
i. The Secretary of State would handle most foreign policy affairs but after World War II, the president designed a large number of agencies to make the roles easier. Such departments exist like the Department of Defense, CIA, Commerce, Labor, imagine all these just for one person, that’s simply too big. The president hired them as a staff called the Cabinet, which would then give him details on every foreign affair having to deal with the rest of the
…show more content…
Before the World Wars the majority disliked the United States being involved in many of the other nation’s problems. Afterwards, many wars sparked much needed involvement in many nations across the globe and this made people more enthusiastic about foreign policy affairs.
V. Foreign Policy Elite
i. The political elite is made of people with positions of foreign policy, mainly members and staff of the President’s cabinet. These elites make worldviews, major issues out in the world that give them opinions later on to address to the President. The worldviews can be seen as the World Wars, isolationism, the Cold War.
VI. How Foreign Policy Has Been Shaped
i. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. reacted on many threats which came from the Cabinet elite and made foreign policy stronger, even in today’s age. Others said the United States are the “world’s policeman” saying that the U.S. was the only power to prevent any dangerous actions on other nations. ii. The United Nations played a very big role in settling many disputes with member nations. Now, people want to continue with the United Nations, but while others agree there are others saying the U.S. foreign policy should not be controlled by other nations. In ideological contrast, conservatives are in working without the United Nations authority, and Liberals are in favor of the use of its
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...
Woodrow Wilson was the 28th President of the United States and held the office from 1913-1921. He became known as “the Crusader” due to his foreign policy theory that America should be a beacon of liberty and aggressively pursue the spread of democracy throughout the world. His policy would enable America to prosper economically and develop an international security community through the promotion of democracy in other nations. While former Secretary of State Kissinger writes in his book Diplomacy that 20th century American foreign policy has been driven by Wilsonian idealism, an analysis of 21st century US foreign policy reveals that, in fact, US foreign policy has been influenced by ideals that can be characterized as Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and Jacksonian as well.
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.
After the Second World War, America came out of the war with the responsibility of being the “superpower” of the world. In the past America would never get involved in foreign affairs however after World War Two things had changed. Since America was considered the most powerful natio...
Though the United States was the military power of the world prior to World War II, its foreign policy was one of detachment. The government was determined not to get involved in other countries affairs barring unusual circumstances. A World War provided big enough means to become involved, as many Americans became enraged with the military ambitions of Japan and Germany.
When the constitution of the United States was formed, the framers specifically designed the American Government structure to have checks and balances and democracy. To avoid autocracy the President was give power to preside over the executive branch of the government and as commander –in –chief, in which a clause was put into place to give the president the power to appeal any sudden attacks against America, without waiting for a vote from congress. While the president presides over the executive branch there has been ongoing debate over the role of the president in regards to foreign policy. Should foreign policy issues be an executive function by the president or should congress play a much greater role? With the sluggishness of our democracy, foreign policy issues most times need quicker response compared to how domestic policy is decided in the United States. Many believe to maintain openness and democracy both the president and congress need to agree on how the United States handles issue abroad. Although the president has been given much power, his or her power and decisions are sometimes limited based on decisions by congress and challenged and shaped by various bureaucracies throughout the government system. I shall discuss the Presidents role and the role of governmental bureaucracies (Department of Defense, Department of State and the National Security Council) that work together and sometimes not together to shape and implement American foreign Policy.
One cannot rely solely on the bureaucratic level of analysis, the domestic, the international environment, or even on a combination of the three as adequate. What one might interpret as a clash of bureaucratic interests and stands yielding incoherent and conflicting policies, could in reality be a “clash among values that are widely held in both society and the decision-makers’ own minds” (Jervis 28). Similarly, if domestic situations were the medium upon which politicians base their decisions then changes in leadership would not necessarily produce significant changes in foreign policy; however, the consistency of foreign policy is difficult to measure. For example, some might contend that the Cold War would not have occurred had President Franklin Delano Roosevelt not died; they suggest that his death altered American policy in the sense that President Truman and his anti-Soviet position came to dominate political decision-making. Others contest that FDR would have acted similarly to Truman, as he too was coming to an anti-Soviet stance prior to his death. If the former is seen as accurate the domestic level of analysis is insufficient and not applicable, but in the latter instance it could be viewed as a valid basis for judging decision-making.
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.
Ranking by Domestic Policy Rank President Explanation 1. Lyndon B. Johnson During Johnson’s presidency, the federal government significantly extended its domestic responsibilities in an attempt to transform the nation into what Johnson called the “Great Society,” in which poverty and racial intolerance ceased to exist. A previously unsurpassed amount of legislation was passed during this time; numerous laws were passed to protect the environment, keep consumers safe, reduce unfairness in education, improve housing in urban areas, provide more assistance to the elderly with health care, and other policies to improve welfare. Johnson called for a “War on Poverty,” and directed more funds to help the poor; government spending towards the poor increased from six billion dollars in 1964 to twenty-four and a half billion dollars in 1968. Not only did Johnson improve the American economy and greatly reduce poverty, but he also advocated for racial equality; he managed to get Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, making segregation illegal in public accommodations/institutions.
The Presidency’s role in war, national security, and policy both foreign and domestic has only increased ever since the founding of the nation. Presidents have deliberately sparked war, seeking congressional approval only later, as when James Polk ordered Zachary Taylor to move against Mexican forces on the Texas border in 1848, an act that made the United States the dominant power in North America. Harry Truman sent U.S. troops to fight in Korea. Bill Clinton launched a unilateral air war in Kosovo. George W. Bush terminated the ABM treaty and withdrew from the International Criminal Court. Congress never approved any of these exercises of presidential power. All these actions were based on legal precedents dating back to Abraham Lincoln, who himself, in the Civil War, ordered the detention of enemy combatants without criminal charges or access to civilian court. These legal precedents have been followed time and again by Presidents regardless of
Howell defies unilateral powers as “…instruments by which the presidents set all sorts of consequential domestic and foreign policy (Paige 1977)” (Howell 242). To explain, Howell argues unilateral actions allow for presidents to bypass Congress in attempt to create domestic and foreign policy. Howell also brings to light “The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly recognize any of these policy vehicles (executive agreements, executive orders, executive memoranda, proclamations, etc.)”, but the president uses them as justifications for his actions. Howell provides his audience historical examples of such unilateral actions.
What is Foreign Policy? Foreign Policy is a nations’ attitude, actions (ie economic sanctions, peacekeeping, military activity) as well as our dealings with other countries (ie trade, immigration, aid, defence) and anything that is directed towards preserving and furthering certain national interests. Foreign Policy seeks to maintain national security, promote economic and trade interests, expand regional and global links, and promote the nation as a good global citizen.
Countless countries in this world have foreign policies that dictate how that country will interact with another. However, foreign policies can change due to war, trading, and more. Whenever the United States usually goes to another country to solve a problem, they usually create more problems for themselves. But, as the United States polices another country, there will always be people who criticize them for what they do. Even if the U.S does the right thing, it might cause worse consequences than good. Every decision related to foreign policy has a good and a bad result. It is up to the president to decide which is the right thing to do. The president faces many difficult challenges ranging from dealing with illegal Mexican immigrant to dealing
Domestic policies are issues that concern only our nation and are discussed by and taken care of by our nation. Foreign policy is the way in which our nation deals with other countries; including planning and carrying out the plans. During the Clinton administration, many foreign policies have been thought of and carried out; the main focus to show our involvement with foreign policy is our relationship with Cuba.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was determined to protect the national security of the United States. At first, Roosevelt felt that it was in the best interest of the United States to avoid involvement in the war. However, he knew “sooner or later, the threat to the European balance of power would have forced the United States to intervene in order to stop Germany’s drive for world domination” (Kissinger 369-370). But this was not Roosevelt’s main problem; Roosevelt had to prove to the American people that unlike World War I, US involvement was necessary. He had to “[transform] the nation’s concept of national interest and [lead] ‘a staunchly isolationist people’ into yet another global war” (handout).