US Foreign and Defence Policies
Within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists - a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values… I reject this choice.
President Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Prize Remarks, 10 December 2009
Since the end of the Cold War, U.S. grand strategy has revolved around maintaining this country's overwhelming military, economic, and political preponderance. However America is changing, President Barack Obama is shifting American foreign policy from its historical norms based on exceptionalism, isolation, and bipartisanship. President Obama has asserted; that the United States will us its economic and military power as a stabilizing influence; that America will multilaterally engage other world partners to solve security, economic, financial, and environmental problems; and he will become a post partisan President bridging the party divide in foreign policy ideology. Thus, President Obama has reconceptualised US foreign policy resulting in a grand redefinition, an ideological shift, which will realign America role in the world.
When we examine Obama’s foreign policy from a perspective of exceptionalism, we see a departure from the US historical understanding of its role. The United States of American has a long believed that is a unique nation, a nation that was created and developed differently, a nation unlike any other in the world, a nation that is blessed by God, a nation that is exceptional. The US has firmly held to exceptional view that they are the dominant defenders of democracy, liberty, freedom, equality, and capitalism. Traditionally because of its mi...
... middle of paper ...
...07): 71-83.
DeConde, Alexander. Isolation and security: ideas and interests in twentieth-century American foreign policy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1957.
McCormick, John. "American Exceptionalism: The Implications for Europe." Journal of Transatlantic Studies Vol 3, no. 2 (Autumn 2005): 200-205, 213-214.
Obama, Barack. "President Barack Obama's Inaugural Address." The Whitehouse. January 20, 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-barack-obamas-inaugural-address (accessed Novemeber 16, 2010).
—. "Remarks by the President at the Acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize." The Whitehouse. December 10, 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-acceptance-nobel-peace-prize (accessed November 16, 2010).
Schwarz, Benjamin, and Christopher Layne. "A New Grand Strategy." Atlantic Monthly 289, no. 1 (January 2002): 36-42.
Throughout the 20th century, successive presidents pursued foreign policy in different ways but with one objective and that is to make America the most powerful nation on earth. Despite the challenges of each administration during this century, presidents found a way to put American at the frontline as the undisputed super power. President Taft pursued an aggressive foreign policy by introducing dollar diplomacy which was meant to encourage U.S. investments in the Latin America and the Caribbean. He used government officials to promote this policy in hope that it will create markets for American products in the region. President Wilson made a promise to the American people that he will focus on domestic policy agenda and rarely will his administration
During the "Roaring Twenties" people were living up to the modern standards of society. Then the Great Depression began and the joy and excitement disappeared and tension manifested. In the time period of 1920-1941 America experienced major global events that occurred in extremely short rapid intervals of time. From the end of World War I in 1918 to the Roaring Twenties, straight to the Great Depression in 1929, into the beginning of World War II in 1939, and all the way to the horror of the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, America faced these occurrences with difficulty and confusion. But with the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, quick and immediate responses were made to stabilize America. Among his responses
Between 1895 and 1920, the years in which William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, and Woodrow Wilson reigned in the presidents, the United States struggled for not only justice at home but abroad as well. During this period policies such as Roosevelt’s Big Stick diplomacy, William Taft’s Dollar diplomacy, and Woodrow Wilson’s Moral diplomacy were all used in foreign affairs in hopes of benefit for all involved. However, it would be appropriate to say that self-interest was the most important driving factor for American policy and can be exemplified through economic, social, and political relations.
Without understanding the importance of foreign relations the American people’s way of life could be at stake. Not only could the economic strength of the U.S. diminish, but the military might of the U.S. could also be compromised. Mead argues that without the centrality of foreign policy being evident in American politics the happiness of the world is at risk. “Since the United States has become the central power in a worldwide system of finance, communications, and trade, it is not only the American people whose happiness and security will be greatly affected by the quality of American foreign policy in coming years (Mead 176). I contend that without a strong emphasis on foreign policy, we could begin to see the end of American
In a tradition dating back to George Washington, every newly-elected president gives an inaugural address at the time of his swearing into office. Many of these inaugural speeches have been given during times of war. Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address was given on March 4, 1865, near the end of the American Civil War, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Fourth Inaugural Address was given on January 20, 1945, in the last year of World War Two, and John F. Kennedy’s Inaugural Address was given on January 20, 1961, during the darkest years of the Cold War. Each in their own way, in their respective inaugural addresses, spoke words of reassurance and encouragement to a nation’s people troubled by war and anxious about peace.
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.
George Washington, the first president of the United States, had written a very important historical speech and document towards the end of his time in office. He had written the Farewell address which focused on helping America understand the importance of preserving unity, acknowledging the rise of political parties forming, strengthening religion and morality, and he stated his position on American foreign policy. He addressed these ideas with strong tone and used incredible amount of dictions that strengthens his tone as well as representing his appeal to ethos to a strong degree. However, today’s society seemed to forget Washington’s position on foreign policy and has created a new form of the policy. But nonetheless as time grew, change occurs. In today’s society Washington’s foreign policy would include many positive and negative manifestations, but it is still a speech and document that will always apply to America.
This threat to “American democratic values and way of life” prompted Bush’s preemptive National Security Strategy as the security environment is changing and terrorist groups and rogue sponsor states ability to use weapons such as weapons of mass destruction are becoming an increasing threat to the American people, American interests, and the allies of the Unites States. Finally, Bush’s National Security Strategy and preemptive doctrine are based on American values and national interests and its objectives are spreading political and economic freedoms, peaceful relations with other states, and respect for human dignity.
The Web. 22 Apr. 2014. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-acceptance.html>. The "Inaugural Address by President Barack Obama.
Hawley, C. (2003). U.S. foreign policy. Encyclopedia of American history: Expansion and reform, 1813-1855, 4, Retrieved August 14, 2008, from Facts on File: American History Online database.
In no field other than politics does the justification for action often come from a noteworthy event and the true cause stays hidden behind the headlines. The United States’ transformation from a new state to a global superpower has been a methodical journey molded by international conditions (the global terrain for statecraft), the role of institutions and their programmed actions, and ultimately, the interests of actors (the protection of participants in making policy’s items and i...
John F. Kennedy: Inaugural Address. U.S. Inaugural Addresses. 1989. (n.d.). John F. Kennedy: Inaugural Address. U.S. Inaugural Addresses. 1989. Retrieved February 1, 2014, from http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres56.html
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
Paradise and Power paints a picture of America and Europe, living in two separate worlds with regards to foreign policy. America is depicted as an ardent supporter of hard politics'. They consider world power and politics to be defined in militaristic terms. They have little patience for diplomacy, and resort to force to resolve International Disputes quickly. They also have a very black and white view of the world' in that they see elements as good or bad'; friend or enemy'. . It is therefore said that America is living in a Hobbesian state of Anarchy, where freedom can only be protected using brute force and strength (Kagan 2003 p. 4). This has been clearly represented in America's war with Iraq and the Axis of Evil' that has been dominating American Foreign Policy discourse since 9/11.
This essay will describe the characteristics of the modern nation-state, explain how the United States fits the criteria of and functions as a modern nation-state, discuss the European Union as a transnational entity, analyze how nation-states and transnational entities engage on foreign policy to achieve their interests, and the consequences of this interaction for international politics.