Beginning with the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 and lasting up to the current Obama doctrine, presidential doctrines have dominated American foreign policy. A presidential doctrine highlights the key goals and positions for United States foreign affairs outlined by a president. Many of the country’s major foreign policy successes or disasters can be explained by tracing the doctrines of sitting or previous presidents and analyzing their evolution and eventual impact on world events. After a presidential doctrine has been established it achieves a life of its own. This can be explained by the military resources and human capital involved in carrying out these doctrines. Future presidents often feel compelled to abide by it, or find the reality of changing the doctrine can only be done with incremental changes over a period of years. For this reason, presidential doctrines outlive their creators and some will affect American foreign policy for centuries to come.
This essay will focus on the Reagan Administration which spanned from January 1981 to January 1989. When Reagan became President, he had only one well-defined foreign policy goal: containing the Soviet Union, or the “evil empire” as he once referred to it. He primarily wanted to stop the USSR from growing larger and to keep other non-Communist countries from becoming Communist. In the past, American presidents had used a theory called the “Domino Theory” to justify the need for intervention around the world. The theory speculated that if one state in a region came under the influence of communism, then the surrounding countries would follow in a domino effect. Prior to the Reagan Administration, the United States had already made several attempts to fight the spread of C...
... middle of paper ...
...idual states, effectively ending the Cold War. Reagan’s leadership and the relationship he forged with Gorbachev set the stage for a peaceful resolution of the Cold War. Through his foreign policy, Reagan sought to achieve the transformative goal of “peace through strength”. But while Reagan’s expansion of the military budget and warrior-like rhetoric were significant, his vision would not have come to pass without an atrophying Soviet economy and the rise to power of Gorbachev in 1985.
Works Cited
http://www.nsspress.com/braunwarth_reader/sec20.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Doctrine http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/us-aid-anticommunist-rebels-reagan-doctrine-its-pitfalls http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/joncayzer/2011/02/16/ronald-reagan-at-100-the-legacy/ http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/workingpaper_16_ruggie.pdf
One of the biggest fears of the American people is that the concept of communism contrasts drastically from the concept of capitalism, which the United States was essentially founded upon. The United States, as the public believed, was not a land of perfect communal equality, but rather a land of equal opportunity. However, what made communism so dangerous can be succinctly described by Eisenhower who compared the spread of communism as the domino effect. As his secretary of state, Dulles, put it, the propagation of communism “would constitute a threat to the sovereignty and independence” of America (Doc B). In addition, the Cold War also planted the seeds of rational fear of a global nuclear war. As Russia caught up to the United States in terms of technological advancements, they successfully developed the atomic bomb as well as the hydrogen bomb, which caused Americans to believe that the USSR would use these weapons of mass destruction to forcefully extend their ideologies to the USA. In fact, Americans were so frantic about a potential nuclear disaster that it...
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...
As we move into the reelection year, the authors accuse Nancy of ensuring that Reagan hasn’t campaigned for eight months, following a “Rose Garden strategy.” But Reagan has no credible opponent for the 1984 nomination, and Walter Mondale, who will be his Democratic opponent in the general election, has not yet been nominated. So there is no need for a strategy, Rose Garden or otherwise. Of course we get the full chapter and verse on Reagan’s poor performance in his first debate with Mondale; at least we also get the report on the second debate. From there the narrative jumps to the Iran-Contra affair. A few high points — like the Berlin Wall speech in 1987 — are indeed included, but without any perspective on Reagan’s strategy, perseverance with the Soviets on arms control, or success in revitalizing the U.S. economy. Nothing is said about Reagan’s four second-term summits with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Except for a few comments that Reagan deplored Communism, this is a policy-free book, and a book
The Roosevelt Corollary greatly affected American foreign policy. It was in sharp contrast to the Monroe Doctrine, put in place to stop foreign intervention with the American continents. In 1823 President Monroe implemented US policy that stated European powers were not allowed to colonize or interfere with the newly budding United States or the Americas. In 1904 President Roosevelt expanded upon this policy in response to European intervention with Latin America. This policy became known as the Roosevelt Corollary. The document echoed the style of leadership President Roosevelt became synonymous with. This more aggressive form of policy became known as Big Stick Diplomacy. Foreign policy in the United States would forever be changed by President Roosevelt’s reinterpretation of the Monroe Document. The Roosevelt Corollary would later go on to affect decisions the United States made in regards to the Cold War, Cuba, The Middle East and many more. To understand the impact of this, we must look back to the Monroe Doctrine.
On June 12, 1987, former President Ronald Reagan gave one of his famous speeches, “Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate.” On a superficial level, Reagan uses the speech to petition to the Soviet Union for peace, nuclear and chemical arms reduction, and the demolition of the Berlin Wall. He also highlights the progress and prosperity that have arisen in the western world since the division between communism and democracy was established. Beyond the surface, Reagan subtly disparages communism while simultaneously building up democracy. He emphasizes the importance of freedom, liberty, free trade, and other democratic ideals and the positive effects the western world has experienced because of them.
The major factor that led to the true end of the Cold War was the ongoing personal and diplomatic relationship between Presidents George H. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev. This resulted in the reduction of the Russian military and favorable arms agreements. Key indicators of the substance behind this relationship were the Soviet troop withdrawals from Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, and Hungary (lifting the Hungarian/Austrian “Iron Curtain” along the border). Subsequently the opening of the Berl...
Reagan rose into power after years of turmoil and the American pride was dipping. About a decade before he became president, the war in Viet-Nam was winding down and the troops were returning home to negative demonstrations towards their duty. Then, during the Carter years, America transitioned into a détente policy, which meant that the United States would try to ease the tensions with the Soviet Union by not expanding the military, but not doing anything to acting ease the tension. The idea behind this became known as MAD, mutually assured destruction, (Hannaford) which meant that both the United States and Soviet Union would maintain and even number of nuclear weapons so that if one would fire, the other would be able to fire back equally. Reagan completely disagreed with this philosophy and created a whole new policy when he became president. The foreign policy he established was to create the Reagan Doctrine. According to a speech by Peter Hannaford, the Reagan Doctrine was that America would support democratic movements in any Communist country until that country could enjoy the fruits of freedom (Hannaford). This meant that the United States would help any country who wanted to leave the influence of the Soviet Union and create their own democracy. Also, to counter the Soviet Union and end the Cold War, a race between the United State and Soviet Union to create the best technology and become the world powerhouse, Reagan increased military spending. Ronald Reagan knew that the Soviet Union was unable to keep up the United States in military spending and still having enough funds to fund their own economy to keep it stable. Reagan used this knowledge to convince Congress to increase military budget to build up technology, causing the Soviets decide on what to do. The United States had the funds to continue, but the Soviet Union could not keep up. The breaking point
The Monroe Doctrine reflected the concerns and ambitions of a fledgling nation that was brave enough to declare its sovereignty on the world stage. The Doctrine, in stating that European powers ought not to intervene in America’s affairs, established the US as a world power, although one that had inadequate, hemispheric aspirations. However, these aspirations would extend, and in future years the Doctrine would substantiate its usefulness for interventionists, as well as protectionists. Being conceivably the most distinguishable and the most revered as regards principles of diplomacy, the doctrine’s influence on the popular imagination was so great that it described the limits of standard decisions on policy, in turn influencing the choice of preferences that US Presidents had for most of the last two centuries.
ending of the cold war. It has been said that President Ronald Reagan ended the
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.
Ronald Reagan came to the Presidency without any major political qualifications, but his victory in the Cold War was no lucky outcome. Dinesh D'Souza’s new book, Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader, just published by the Free Press, looks at how Reagan helped end the Cold War. Ten years ago Ronald Reagan stood at the Brandenburg Gate and said, “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and East...
Reagan’s ethos was created throughout his two terms but solidified in his second and final one. Reagan presents his ethos throughout his rhetoric by stating facts with authority and also in a way that made him credible to the audience. One of the parts in his speech is headlined with a cold and awakening fact directed at the Soviet Union. In a 1956 speech given by Soviet Union leader Nikita Khrushchev, the statement “We will bury you,” was aimed at Western ambassadors who stood for freedom. In Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg Gate, he specifically calls out the previously stated notion that the Soviets would essentially, “bury the free world.” Reagan profoundly proclaims this: “In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.” The great appeal this presented to the
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.
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.
The leadership styles, experience, personality, and temperament of Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John Kennedy played a role in deepening the U.S. involvement and commitment to Vietnam. Both presidents vowed to stop the spread of communism, which was viewed as a direct assault to democracy, human rights, and capitalism. (Tucker, 1999) Both presidents also subscribed to the domino theory, or the belief that if one key country should fall to communism, then it would have a cascading effect on other countries turning to communism. (Divine, 1981) This theory was used by many presidents as the reason for ongoing support to the effort in Indochina.