Unilateralism and Multilateralism in World Politics Unilateralism is defined as a tendency of nations to conduct their foreign affairs individualistically, characterized by minimal consultation and involvement with other nations, even their allies. Multilateralism is defined as involving more than two nations or parties. In a well written article in "Imprimus" magazine, Charles Krauthammer writes about whether modern day America should use unilateralism or multilateralism. Krauthammer comes up with the conclusion that modern day America should use unilateralism. I agree that the United States should conduct their foreign affairs without involving other countries. The U.S. should use unilateralism simply because it is able to use unilateralism. As the author states, the U.S. displayed just how powerful it actually is when it rebounded from the September 11th attacks, and destroyed the fanatical regime in Afghanistan. This displays the fact that the U.S. does not need to appease other countries, because other countries can't pose a threat to our country. However, this does not mean that America should try to use imperialism to take over the world. It merely means that the United States should be able to pursue it's own interests without having to answer to any other country. Any country should pursue it's own interests. The fact that the U.S. has more power than any other country just adds more reason that America should do what is best for itself without worrying about the reactions of other countries. On top of that, since our country is a superpower, just by asserting a position, others will follow. The U.S. should oppose multilateralism because multilaterlism is a cover for inaction. During the Clinton administration, when the country was at rest with foreign affairs, numerous, useless treaties were made to prevent future wars from occuring. Currently, our country is not in a state of action. There is a war on terror between terrorists and the United States. The United States can't sit around and try to make every other country happy while terrorists plan more attacks on our nation.
As stronger nations exercise their control over weaker ones, the United States try to prove their authority, power and control over weaker nations seeing them as unable to handle their own issues thereby, imposing their ideology on them. And if any of these weaker nations try to resist, then the wrath of the United States will come upon them. In overthrow the author Stephen Kinzer tells how Americans used different means to overthrow foreign government. He explains that the campaign & ideology of anti- communism made Americans believe that it was their right and historical obligation to lead forces of good against those of iniquity. They also overthrew foreign government, when economic interest coincided with their ideological ones (kinzer.215). These factors were the reasons behind America’s intervention in Iran, Guatemala, South Vietnam and Chile to control and protect multinational companies as well as the campaign against communism with little or no knowledge about these countries.
Throughout the course of history, nations have invested time and manpower into the colonizing and modernizing of more rural governments. Imperialism has spread across the globe, from the British East India Company to France’s occupation of Northern Africa. After their founding in 1776, the United States of America largely stayed out of this trend until The Spanish-American War of 1898. Following the war, the annexation and colonization of Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines ultimately set a precedent for a foreign policy of U.S. imperialism.
...hat involve the situation but also the people of the country they are dealing with, because they might cut off aid to a country because the leader of the country might be a dictator the people would have to live in poverty. (14) I think this would be the best position because everyone would benefit from the situation. (15)In the Geneva Conference the U.S should have stayed out of Indochina’s business. The Chilean Revolution they United States should have never cut off aid to Chile for the reason being that the citizens of Chile would live in poverty. In the Panama Canal the United States did the right thing because they built it and owned it for several years and then in the year 2000 it passed it to the government of Panama.(16)in conclusion the United States should keep working on being the leading country of the world and not bring anymore problems upon themselves.
According to Wright, this decline in the unipolar concert “marks the return of geopolitical competition and presents a significant challenge for U.S. strategy” (Wright, 8). Many believe that these country were not too concerned with global power until it saw the U.S. weak
“Until early in [the twentieth] century, the isolationist tendency prevailed in American foreign policy. Then, two factors projected America into world affairs: its rapidly expanding power, and the gradual collapse of the international system centered on Europe” . President Woodrow Wilson was the leader who would initiate the ideologies of American diplomacy in the twentieth century. Up until his Presidency, American foreign policy was simply to fulfill the course of manifest destiny, and to remain free of entanglements overseas. Although he could not convince his fellow politicians on Capitol Hill of the probable success of his ideas, he did persuade the fellow writers of the Treaty of Versailles to use his Fourteen Points. America’s role as a political global superpower was established during his Presidency, as well as the modern policy that peace depends on the spread of democracy, and that national interest consists of adhering to a global system of law.
World War I caused a lot of damage to different countries and the Treaty of Versailles punished Germany harshly for starting the war. In the years following the war, Hitler and the Nazi Party rose to power and gained control of Germany and its government. Also, the League of Nations was set up to help keep peace between countries.
In the aftermath of World War 2, the United Nations, a byproduct of an international attempt to form a peaceful foreground, immediately laid down peaceful treaties and procedures to unite great nations together. Two years into the United Nations' inception, the major superpowers in the world, the United States and the Soviet Union, already formed climactic tensions and began an arms race of military, technological, and economical advancements. Cold, defined because of the lack of large-scale fighting between the Eastern Bloc, Soviet Union and the Western Bloc, the United States. Already disappointing its foundations and policies, the initial decades of development for the United Nations were stagnating. The Cold War had brought the world at risk of potential outbreak of a nuclear war, and destroyed any confirmations of a globally peaceful society. What would ultimately result in branching wars, such as the Korean War between South and North Korean governmental dictatorship, and the Vietnam War, the Cold War began numerous conflicts in the globe. Including the Space Race, Bay of Pigs Invasion, Cuban Missile Crisis, the Berlin Crisis, and Suez Crisis, the United Nations was often an unsuccessful organization, failing to meet its founding principles in the context of the Cold War. However, with the development of Peacekeeping in 1950, the symbolic “Blue Helmets” went into action during the 1956 Suez Crisis. In addition, the UN mediated the Berlin Crisis through negotiations between the USA and Soviet union, in 1949, ending the blockade that caused the crisis. While the United Nations aided in the prevention of a massive nuclear war, however, by 1993, 2 years after the War's negotiated end, the UN witnessed major relief of the passing...
The period following the September 11, 2001 attacks is often accepted as the beginning of the current era. Politics, society and countries saw a stark and rapid change following the attacks. Security at the expense of privacy is regarded as the defining characteristic that often differentiates policies and habits before and after 9/11. Increased international communication furthered globalization and raised a generation that is accustomed to being aware of international affairs. Current discourse suggests that 2016 may be the beginning of the next era. An era that is characterized by a retaliation against globalization and the domination of political elites. Growing resentments to globalism and elitism manifested in the form of the Occupy Wall
In order for countries to cohesively overcome international barriers, frameworks of ideal political standards must be established. Two of these frameworks constantly discussed in international relations are the theories of Neo-realism and Liberalism; two theories with their own outlook at the way politicians should govern their country as well as how they should deal with others. Neo-realism lies on the structural level, emphasizing on anarchy and the balance of power as a dominant factor in order to maintain hierarchy in international affairs. In contrast, Liberalism's beliefs are more permissive, focusing on the establishments of international organizations, democracy, and trade as links to strengthen the chain of peace amongst countries. Liberalism provides a theory that predominantly explains how states can collaborate in order to promote global peace; however, as wars have been analyzed, for example World War II, the causes of them are better explained by Neo-realist beliefs on the balance of power and states acting as unitary actors. Thus, looking out for their own self interest and security.
200 years ago when the United States were weak, and practiced the strategies of indirection, now that the United States are powerful, they behave as powerful nations do and European countries see the world through the eyes of weaker powers.
The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power would be the UN’s ability to influence the actions of states within the UN but the state itself has the power to determine how they act. Morgenthau goes on to his next level of analysis in which he explains the difference in force and power in the international realm. Force is physical violence, the use of military power but power is so much more than that. A powerful state can control the actions of another state with the threat of force but not actually need to physical force. He believed that the ability to have power over another state simply with the threat of force was likely to be the most important element in analysis the power of as state (Kleinberg 2010, 33-34).
Smith, T. General Liberalism and Social Change in a Post-WWII America, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00287217#close, November 30th 1999
In modern history, our world system has been controlled by states, actors, and organizations which theoretically exist in an anarchical system. Today we use fundamental international relations theories such as realism, liberalism, and constructivism to help us explain the international system. Realism, which in many was popularized by Thucydides in his The Melian Dialogue argues that states are the most important actors in the international system [1]. Realism also explains that states relentlessly seek to maximize their power (usually in the form of the military) to guarantee their security (since states exist in an anarchical self-help system). By using the theory of realism and the timeline produced for this final assessment one can draw conclusions about long cycle theory as it related to ancient Greek history. Fundamentally, ancient Greek history is a story told by the rise and fall of city-states and the interactions between them.
“The process of globalization and the increasing role of non-state actors in global governance are undermining the role of the state as the principal actor in global policymaking.”
Many of you might have heard of international organizations on the news. However, have you ever heard of an international organization that deceased in about 20 year? The organization that you might have never heard of before taking World History is the League of Nations. The League of Nations is the first permanent international security organization, which was formed in the reaction of WWI and the Paris Peace Conference and was established under Part 1 of Treaty of Versailles on 10 January 1920. The headquarters of League of Nation was located in Geneva, Switzerland. It was chosen to be in Switzerland because during the WWI, Switzerland was the country where it stayed neutral and did not fight in the WWI. Other countries did not go against