...of US Foreign Policy: An Overview Hang Thi Thuy Nguyen1 1 The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Australia Correspondence: Hang Thi Thuy Nguyen, School of Global, Urban and Social Science, The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Australia. E-mail: thuyhang032003@gmail.com Received: July 27, 2013 doi:10.5430/wjss.v1n1p20 Accepted: August 12, 2013 Online Published: August 13, 2013 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wjss.v1n1p20 Abstract This article reviews major theoretical perspectives to US foreign policy as well as on how these theoretical perspectives explain foreign policy decision making and conducting of the US. First, the paper will discuss the process of making foreign policy to sustain US core values and interests which are determined by five major categories of sources (i) the external environment, (ii) the societal environment of the nation, (iii) the governmental setting, (iv) the roles of foreign policymakers, and (v) the individual personalities of foreign policy-making elites (Wittkopf et al 2008, p. 15). Then, the paper will examine the defensive and offensive realism, liberalism, marxism, neoclassical realism, constructivism which can be based on to understand US foreign policy behaviour. It will be concluded that no single theory has the capacity to describe, explain and predict US foreign policy behaviour. A mixture of such theoretical approaches seems to be necessary to obtain a comprehensive picture of US foreign policy...
Words: 4904 - Pages: 20
...US Foreign Policy The officially stated aims of the foreign policy of the United States, as declared by the United States Department of State and United States Agency for International Department is “to create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.” Moreover, the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs states as some of its jurisdictional goals: "export controls, including nonproliferation of nuclear technology and nuclear hardware; measures to foster commercial intercourse with foreign nations and to safeguard American business abroad; International commodity agreements; international education; and protection of American citizens abroad and expatriation." So through all this, what Americans are trying to say is that they want to make the world a better place but not without putting their interests first. Therefore, I believe that this policy is far from being great as they want it to be. One of the main issues is that the presidency is overburdened and more than that has too much authority. Presidents have not only foreign policy responsibilities, but sizeable domestic duties too. In addition, the presidency is the head of a political party. As a result, it is tough for one person to manage disparate tasks and more than that, it gives him the opportunity and the advantage of imposing his own views in a subtle way. As well as that, presidents may lack experience. Since...
Words: 816 - Pages: 4
...twentieth century, United States foreign policy would begin to take a decisive turn, which would ultimately catapult and establish the country as one of the great world powers, in addition to setting a standard of future international engagement throughout the twentieth century. Prior to 1896, the United States had a largely none interventionist and insular approach when it came to foreign policy and international relations. While there were moments of engagement up to this time, coupled with watershed foreign policy directives (such as the Monroe Doctrine and its subsequent application), the United States had a tendency to mind its own business and only get involved in global politics when events threatened to directly affect the country's security. All this, though, would change by the late 1890's. When William McKinley took the office of president in 1897, a gradual change in the mindset of the United States populace, which had been fermenting since the end of the Civil War, was about to reach it's realization. While there were still many voices which supported inward looking policy and a non-involvement stance when it came to the international arena, the pendulum had swung toward a populace which viewed itself and it's country with a great sense of pride and self-importance, which would soon be exercised. When rebellion against Spanish rule again flared up in Cuba in 1895 (largely due to the detrimental economic effects of US tariff policies concerning imported Cuban sugar)...
Words: 317 - Pages: 2
...The impact of domestic determinants on foreign policy has long been a widely debated topic in the field of international relations, and foreign policy analysis in particular. Some scholars argue that domestic politics and foreign policy are two independent arenas of issues. Others believe that the two respective issues do not stop at the water’s edge. Foreign policy and domestic politics are interdependent and could spill over into each other. While both schools of scholars make some convincing arguments about their respective cases, it’s probably reasonable to expect that the degree of influence between domestic and international determinants of foreign policy is contingent on different foreign policy contexts. In some cases, international factors play a more important role, whereas in other cases, domestic reasons are more important. In this presentation, I put forth a conglomeration and an intellectual web analysis in examining the domestic determinants of national foreign policy. Prior to reaching this goal a definition offered by Webber and smith in 2000 on foreign policy is stipulated. The interpretation of domestic determinants as illustrated by Sulliban is furthermore encapsulated. According to Webber and Smith, A country's foreign policy, also called the international relations policy, is a set of goals outlining how the country will interact with other countries economically, politically, socially and militarily, and to a lesser extent, how the country will...
Words: 3397 - Pages: 14
...Term Paper Spring 2012 The neoconservative model for foreign policy has always been based on a desire to spread the gift of democracy to other nations so that they too may enjoy the fruits that democracy and free markets bear. Going a step further, Robert Kagan presents the neoconservative belief that ‘the great spread of democracy, the prosperity, and the prolonged great power peace- have depended directly and indirectly on power and influence exercised by the United States.’ To ensure that this is the case, the Bush doctrine was created to preemptively strike countries in order to prevent a conflict further down the road. While it may be true that the developing world has directly and indirectly been affected by United States influence, the United States isn’t the sole arbiter of prosperity around the globe and its purpose for influence shouldn’t be mistaken for ‘spreading democracy’ but rather the neoconservative desire to leverage influence for economic and political gain. While much of this had previously been achieved through unofficial intervention and covert operations, the Bush doctrine represented a significant departure in that it used preemptive strike as a forerunning option in preventing potential future wars. While Robert Kagan's quote reflects the ideal interpretation of the neoconservative model in that it ‘spreads democracy,’ history has shown its intent to much more in the self interest of the United States relative to that of the host country in question...
Words: 1683 - Pages: 7
...Proposed Presidential Foreign Policy Doctrine Template 2015-2016 The presidents administration’s primary foreign policy goal, that I am bestowing as the, Obama Super Ultra Conservative Selective Policy; (OSUCSP), will focus on four key areas. Considering the current administrations policy is based on preserving ideals from a “liberal internationals approach” (McCormick 213) “The Obama-Biden foreign policy will end the war in Iraq responsibly, finish the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, secure nuclear weapons and loose nuclear materials from terrorists, and renew American diplomacy to support strong alliances and to seek a lasting peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” (The Obama-Biden Plan) The foreign policy...
Words: 930 - Pages: 4
...Foreign policy is the nation’s structured plan on how to interact with other outside nations. Foreign policy has molded civilian culture and American History. When the United States developed, they arranged their own foreign policy that went towards Spain, Britain, and France. In Federalist Papers, John Jay argued that America should be under one main federal government instead of being divided into separate confederacies. Jay observed that the New World was a connected country rather than an isolated country. Jay wanted a bigger, united nation so it could defend itself from foreign invaders, such as the Spanish and the French. New England was surrounded by the French and the Spanish so having more power unit by a well-connected society was...
Words: 576 - Pages: 3
...Do you agree with the view that Henry VIII foreign policy should be seen as a costly failure? It can be agreed that Henry VIII and Wolsey’s foreign policy was an expensive failure to a large extent, but there is some evidence from the sources showing otherwise and demonstrating some success. Sources 1, 2 and 3 all support the source to a certain extent, some more than others, however Sources 1 and 3 also disagree with the question and show some successes to Henry and Wolsey’s policy. Despite this, the idea of their policy being expensive is consistent throughout the sources for costing over a years income for Henry. Henry VIII and Wolsey’s foreign policy can be seen as an expensive failure as shown in all three of the sources. Sources 1, 2 and 3 all refer to the king’s expenses in one way and having not gained much from it. In source 2, it refers to the King as receiving ‘no more land in France’ on top of what his father had already gained, whilst costing the King an ‘infinite sum of money’ demonstrating that Henry had not had much success in his reign but had still spending extreme figures. Using this source, along with our own knowledge we know that Henry failed in securing the French crown for himself as well as the partition of France to himself, Charles and Bourbon, after the Battle of Pavia in 1525. Alongside this, the failures of Henry’s campaign during the war with France including the evaporation of Wolsey and Henry’s passing enthusiasm for another intervention...
Words: 495 - Pages: 2
...The success of a 15th or 16th century monarch can often be broken down and assessed by their actions regarding foreign policy. A judgement has to be made by the interpretation of the word “effective” in context. Foreign policy is arguably the key to stability or the making of an unsuccessful king. This coupled with the amount of foreign enemies, unsuccessful battles, and level of profit accumulated in relation to the cost of battle among others are some of the factors that resulted in a kings reputation being formulated. Henry VII as a monarch has a reputation of rebuild and restructure in regards to foreign policy and kingship, but the extent to which foreign policy is the key to stability can be assessed. Known as the ‘auld alliance’, reputation with France had shaped the support among the population of monarchs for years upon years. Henry VII was seen to be in a legacy of debt to the French king after he has supported Henry Tudors claim to the throne. In previous years control of France had made the reputation of the king but this time it could be seen as the ultimate controlling factor. Immediately this was seen to act as a stabilising factor, this left the English king in a position of comfort knowing that a positive relationship with France has already been achieved and did not have to be forced. However, in 1482 Henry was seen to send troops to support Anne, the Duchess of Brittany against France. Although this action was not one of aggression, and certainly didn’t compromise...
Words: 2276 - Pages: 10
...Foreign Policy Module Summative Assessment Question 1: Foreign policy must be formulated in accordance with the national interest’. Evaluate this claim which is attributable to realist thinking on foreign policy. * * According to realist thinking on foreign policy, international relations and politics are formulated in accordance with national interest. This presupposes that the key actors in International Relations are sovereign states that behave similarly regardless of their type of government. As well, a state of anarchy is at the fundamental core of this argument and national interests of egoistic states as the main outward presence in international realm. Classic Realism, originally emerged from the European concert of aristocratic diplomacy. By evaluating this claim, this essay will reassert the position and importance of Offensive and Defensive Realism in our contemporary post 9/11 world. These are respectively neoclassical realism and neorealism. Firstly, a detailed account of realism will be produced highlighting the emergence of national interest as the fundamental feature or goal of sovereign states. This is done either through the maintenance of a status quo or aspiration of accumulating influence. It will be concluded that Defensive Realism or neorealism is the principal theoretical sub-school in according this claim any legitimacy. Secondly, a general evaluation of neorealism in post 9/11 world will be provided; and a comparison, and ultimately an...
Words: 4135 - Pages: 17
...Uses of force as it relates to Foreign Policy decision-making describes a critical tool a president, diplomat, or military leader has at his or her disposal to persuade a country or person to align with certain policy goals or ideas. Each force can have either a positive or negative end result if not used and communicated properly. For example the appropriate use of force for a country seeking weapons on the grey market to supply radicalized militia groups will be different than the force used to deal with a nation infringing on another’s sovereignty. Sometimes the way a certain force is chosen and applied is based on how we may perceive that countries reaction to it. In some cases it is necessary for Force to be applied inclremently in order to avoid unwanted conflicts. Most nations’ states seek to resolve matters diplomatically before using the force of:”Aggression” or “Armed Power” in order to resolve matters at the lowest possible denominator. If this cannot be done then measures are taken in order to assess the risk of an unwanted outcome and use the best possible course of action one has at his or her disposal. Nations may also chose to use force in concert with each other in order to have a more effective impact. For years we have used the forces of Armed Power, with Economic and Diplomatic means to engage Iran and its allies. While this is adequate and necessary for Iran given the circumstances, we will not use this specific force to engage china freed trade agreements...
Words: 497 - Pages: 2
... English successes in foreign policy outweighed the failures? I agree with the view that English successes in foreign policy outweighed the failures in the years 1511-27 to a certain extent. England managed to successfully pursue a policy of peace making in the years 1514-21 and wolsey was flexible in his diplomacy. However, it could also be argued that Henry’s chief aim, the invasion of France, was unpopular with people at the time and that Henry’s foreign policy was too costly given how little of long term value it brought to England. His allies also often let him down and put their own aims before those of England. In this essay I will be looking at three sources and weighing up the two sides of the argument. A point in support of this view is that that England managed to successfully pursue a policy of peace making in the years 1514-21. This is shown in source 4, where MD Palmer tells us that Wolsey successfully brought about peace between England and France in 1514 and that he engineered the universal peace of London in 1518. He also planned the Field of the Cloth of Gold of 1520 and negotiated peace between the Empire and France at Calais in 1521. Wolsey’s peaceful approach also benefitted England in that it reduced costs at a time when the country could not afford another war, and successfully made England a major ‘player’ in Europe, which was a desire of Henry’s. Another point in support of the view that the successes in foreign policy outweighed the failures...
Words: 710 - Pages: 3
...United We Stand; Divided We Fall Why Appropriate U.S. Intervention in Foreign Policy is a Necessity for Global Peace In recent times it has become clear that trust of the United States’ ability to foster and produce peace is at an all-time low. In fact, it has recently been reported by The New York Post that a Gallup poll which analyzed data collected from 66,000 people polled in 65 countries that the U.S. is considered to be more threatening to peace efforts than Pakistan, Iran, and China combined, “Of the 66,000 people polled, just under a quarter named Uncle Sam as the greatest threat to world peace,” (New York Post, 2014). While this data sheds a frightening light upon the global opinion of the U.S.’s ability to act as successful peacekeepers, and due to many of the blunders experienced during Bush’s presidency, it is understandable as to why faith in the U.S. has diminished. However, both recent and historical data points towards the contrary, and instead has shown the importance of U.S. intervention in maintaining peace and showing the world that violations of human rights will not be tolerated. Therefore appropriate U.S. intervention within certain foreign policies is a necessity for global peace. Due to the U.S. maintaining one of the world’s largest militia in non-war times it is imperative that the United States’ military be involved in global efforts to foster and maintain peace when necessary. Many countries do not have the capability to defend themselves...
Words: 1971 - Pages: 8
...How far did Mussolini achieve his aims in Foreign Policy? One of the first things that Benito Mussolini wanted to do was to expand Italy and give it and empire to rule over like France and Great Britain. He wanted Italy to be recognized as one of the dominant forces in Europe. The first of his conquests was Abyssinia. This he begun on the 40th Anniversary of the humiliating defeat Italy suffered at Adowa under the Liberals: Mussolini wanted to complete a fete that the Liberals couldn’t. As a means of propaganda to show that Italy was more powerful and united under Fascism than it had been under the Liberals. Mussolini gloried and reveled in the creation of an East African Empire. Britain and France, who Italy were allying with secretly allowed for and gave concession to his Abyssinian war. However, because they were both democracy’s, under internal condemnation and pressure, they had to publicly criticize Mussolini and Italy’s actions. This really infuriated Mussolini at the sheer hypocrisy shown by the 2 countries, as they both had large empires. This was also done because the public saw this as a brutal violation of another League of Nations country. Furthermore, in private Britain and France tried to mediate a deal, the Laval Pact. But this didn’t help the situation, because they had to side with the League of Nations, who enforced sanctions on Italy. However, this made Mussolini immensely popular at home, what one might call his finest hour. The sanctions didn’t include...
Words: 368 - Pages: 2
...vDid Wolsey and Henry have an effective foreign policy during the years 1515 – 1525? In some respects it can be said that Henry and Wolsey had an effective foreign policy in the years 1515 – 1525. Henry and Wolsey were responsible for the Treaty of London and were also sought after as a useful ally by other more important European powers. However some would argue that their policies were not effective due to the amount of money that was spent on international events and warfare and the fact that nothing was really achieved. Firstly it could be argued that his policies were effective due to the fact that Henry and Wolsey were responsible for the Treaty of London, the signatories were France, England, Holy Roman Empire, the Papacy, Spain, Burgundy and the Netherlands, all of whom agreed not to attack one another and to come to the aid of any that were under attack. This was a great achievement for Henry and Wolsey as England managed to aucestrate a treaty that was way above its size and importance, this therefore brought England to the table of European politics this means that Henry and Wolsey had an effective foreign policies. In addition source L supports this because Henry is large and this implies that he was considered important and this implies that his policies must have been successful as he was considered godlike. However the painting might have been painted to demonstrate Henrys power and wealth. There is also a dragon in the painting implicating that it is not...
Words: 582 - Pages: 3
