0
US Foreign Policy
The US foreign policy is the policy through which the US interacts with other nations. The overall goal of this policy is to secure democracy for the benefit of both the American and international communities.
883 Questions
The US is the world's only superpower. It is the strongest country in the world, both on a military stance as well as an economic stance. It is also perhaps the most influential country in the world. If you're asking why the US is so important to Israel, is because the US is Israel's greatest ally.
How might Europe have responded to the Monroe Doctrine if the US was not friends with Great Britain?
Definition of Monroe Doctrine
Just to be clear, the Monroe Doctrine was a statement made by US President James Monroe in 1823 that effectively stated several things: (1) that new attempts by European nations to create new colonies or re-colonize newly independent states in the New World would be viewed negatively by the US, (2) that the US would intervene in any such conflict, and (3) that the European nations were free to maintain current colonies and internal affairs without the US meddling with those.
Most European countries laughed at the US for proposing this because the US had no means of effectively fighting against them. It was Britain's support for the Monroe Doctrine that made the Doctrine more-or-less followed.
Concerning Friendship
The cordial relations between the US and UK in 1823 had no bearing on Europe's response to the Monroe Doctrine. The US and UK would only truly become "friends" in the later 19th century after the US Civil War. However, the Monroe Doctrine is often see as a precursor to the "US-UK Special-Relationship" which was well-established in the 20th and 21st centuries.
Since "friendship" did not really exist between the US and UK in 1823, the presence or lack of friendship was IRRELEVANT in determining Europe's leaders' responses to the Monroe Doctrine.
Actual Reason for Success
What Britain did that made the Monroe Doctrine successful was their Foreign Secretary George Canning's statements that the British Navy would enforce and defend the Americas from European intervention along the lines stated in the Monroe Doctrine. Because Britain was the most powerful country in the world, as opposed to the US, which was relatively weak, the British approval was critical and lead to the Europeans acquiescing to the terms of the Monroe Doctrine.
If Britain had not supported the Monroe Doctrine (or actively opposed it), it would have been a worthless speech. European Powers that had recently lost colonies in the New World, like Spain and Portugal, would likely have attempted to reclaim those territories. Other European Powers would try to conquer recently independent countries, like France actually did when Napoleon III decided to invade Mexico in 1861 because the US Civil War prevented direct US intervention to protect Mexico. Others would want to extend their current colonies, such as Russia had tried in the Ukase in 1821.
When and why did the US stop pursuing a largely isolationist foreign policy?
The US stopped pursuing an isolationist foreign policy after it was dragged into World War 2 and found itself a major power.
What is the world's view on America's Foreign Policy?
Negative Views:
Americas foreign policy fits the profile of a self-interested pragmatist, rather than an idealistic benefactor: in that the USA will set the rules for the situation (based on its own greatest gain) and it will enforce those rules with military power, or "soft" power (economic pressure, direct diplomatic pressure, or clandestine methods):
- The CIA (the US Spy organization) admits to aiding in the military overthrow of Democratically elected South American Governments and installing (ruthless) dictators with American sympathies. (several sources) They also admit to planning 9/11 type attacks to support an invasion of Cuba (Operation Northwood 1960's). They also admit to installing spy networks, sponsoring and funding anti-government terrorist groups in Europe (and later South America) after the second world war (Operation Stay Behind), secreting out assets of the Nazis owned by European Nations (operation Paperclip), and carrying out terrorist bombings of civilian assets (Several sources, Contra Hearings).
- Invasions of sovereign nations based on false pretenses: Bush administration dismisses United Nations reports on Iraq, makes up false information on weapons of mass destruction, and then ignores second reports of the US government and United Nations inspectors that no such weapons existed.
- The USA has and does violate international treaties it has signed (Mendez VS Texas, US Supreme court validates the violation of international treaties, and states that the USA is not bound by any international treaty & other cases).
- War Crimes - torture of inmates with oversight approval in Guantanamo (Bush administration) and compounds the crime by issuing a blanket pardon (Obama administration) - the act and pardon are in violation of international laws (sponsored by the United States, when it prosecuted the Nazi's).
- The USA refuses to submit itself or its people to the international court of justice (which can try them for these crimes) even though the United States founded the International Court of Justice (Nazi War Crimes trials).
- Tendency to behave in a self-righteous manner in terms of external criticisms; that is, often willing to make significant negative pronouncements about other nations actions without accepting external criticism.
- CIA backing of the Islamic revolution in Afghanistan to resist Soviet influence.
- Another would be the suppression of the Democratic government in Iran in 1953, which led to the installation of the Shah's pro-American regime, which in turn led to the Islamic Revolution backlash.
- US intervention in Vietnam which led to a protracted war there and millions of deaths.
Note that all of the above are examples of a nation very much aware of the practical nature of self-interest, rather than one fundamentally interested in spreading a beneficent philosophy.
Also, note that most (if not all) of the above are behaviors fairly common in the current (and past) international community, sadly enough. This does not excuse said behavior, though to castigate the U.S. as somehow an egregarious miscreant ignores reality.
Positive Views:
World citizenry still looks to the United States to lead in most situations - often times, the U.S. receives criticism for not being involved in a situation, despite many "international norms" which would seem to indicate that the U.S. should not be involved. For better or worse, the general international viewpoint still is that the U.S. is the country of last resort that problems should be taken to - that is, the international opinion is generally that if there is a problem (political, military, or otherwise) that no other country seems willing to want to take on, then it should fall to the U.S. to attempt a solution.
As a corollary, while the sometimes insensitive use of the US military force is feared, it is also highly respected and counted on. Many governments intrinsically count on the U.S. to remain the de facto World Police force, and show significant distress when the U.S. does not always show enthusiasm for filling this role.
Many nations count on the U.S. as a counterweight to local regional rival's machinations, in particular count on being able to align themselves with certain U.S. foreign policy goals and be rewarded for it. Such rewards are often of very significant value to the local government, sometimes meaning the difference between the government's success and failure.
Additionally, many nations find the general push of the U.S. towards free trade and increased globalization beneficial to them. Certainly, there are downsides to globalization, but most nations seem to look to the U.S. as the primary champion of more open world trade, which is usually of general benefit to a country. It is far easier for a country to have success in opening other countries' markets to its goods if it rides on the U.S. coattails at international trade discussions.
Finally, while there is considerable resentment of the sometimes priviledged position that the U.S. attempts to provide itself, the general promotion of at least reasonably functioning international governmental organizations (World Court, International War Crimes Tribunal, WTO, etc.) has no stronger proponent that the U.S. Most nations are criticially aware of how much it benefits them that such international organizations have a strong supporter.
Is Russia a threat to the United States interests?
yes i think it is a threat. general yuri baluyevsky said they had nuclear weapons and are not affraid to use them. also they trade weapons with iran. threat i think so. one more thing look at the blackk market.
Isolationism is a recurring theme in us foreign policy?
From a historical standpoint, American foreign policy was one of constant change, starting from one of neutrality, changing to one of isolationism, retreating back to neutrality and then finally engaging in a complete interventionist approach in the aftermath of World War II. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the U.S. solidified its place in the world as the world's sole superpower. Consequently, interventionism became a central and dominant theme in America's foreign policy.
from this short historical background, one can safely conclude that the statement about isolationism being a recurring theme in the American foreign policy is not particularly accurate.
What US foreign policy placed a temporary hold on the growing power of the presidency?
The idea of the US presidency being the dominant force in the US regained momentum after World War Two and the Cold War. It became clear as FDR and then Truman was entrusted with almost sole authority on foreign policy. All this went down in flames with President Johnson and the Vietnam War.
Why would the US want to defend their right to Israelis' homeland?
The United States does not have a right to the Israelis' homeland. There is nothing to defend.
What was the isolationist policy of US in 1942?
The United States went through a period of isolationism between 1937 and 1945. During this time, the isolationists tried to keep the country out of the war in Europe. They wanted the country to focus on itself not the world.
What was the primary focus of the us foreign policy in the decade after world war 1?
To reduce U.S commitments to other nations
Old factors: Manifest Destiny and Monroe Doctrine.
New factors : Imperialism and Social Darwinism.
The are interrelated that they all establish that America is superior and must expand to "help" other countries live the right way, the American way.
U.S.A also wanted to have markets in the countries it colonized and to have Naval Bases on the pacific.
What are the US foreign policy goals in the Middle East?
Te stated United States policy goals for the Middle East are as follows in order of importance: 1) Provide an uninterrupted flow of oil 2) Survival and security of the State of Israel 3) The security and stability of friendly Arab states 4) Preventing the spread of terrorism 5) Preventing the devolopment and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction Source: Council of Foreign Relations contained in the report titled Middle East Policy and the Peace Process
Contrary to President George W. Bush's announcement "They hate us for our freedom", this is certainly NOT the reason for Anti-American sentiment.
Any person who has been to a foreign country can tell you exactly why Americans are disliked in most countries. Our foreign policy is very problematic in a lot of places. These acts cause resentment. There are some places in the world that would stop hating the USA if the policy were reversed and there are others for whom the damage is already done and the USA would be unable to recover. Major grievances against the USA include:
Economic Imperialism: The United States has an incredible amount of power to shape the economies of other countries. For example, the United States has completely destroyed the endemic Jamaican chicken market by dumping all of its surplus dark meat on Jamaica for prices far cheaper than any Jamaican could produce it. Although such activities are illegal according to the World Trade Organization, the US power in this organization effectively prevents the raising of this claim. Jamaica is not the only recipient of this unequal treatment as the United States engages in over 200 dumping activities annually.
Additionally, as the largest stakeholder in the International Monetary Fund, the United States has an important role in designing the loans that the IMF gives out to developing countries. In many cases, the IMF pushes for an end to trade barriers, which prevents industries from developing in-country and makes those countries import-dependent. Also, many domestic interests cannot be funded such as education and medicare, forcing the country to remain in the same position perpetually. Many African countries have been directly affected by the strings attached to IMF loans.
Support for Certain Countries: There are two parts to this. Firstly, the United States helps to prop of states that other countries vehemently oppose. Some such countries include: Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, East Timor, Turkey, Georgia, etc. Arab hatred of Israel, Chinese hatred of Taiwan, North Korean hatred of South Korea, Armenian hatred of Turkey, and Russian hatred of Georgia, lead to the citizens of those countries disliking American policy. Of course, this is not to say that the American action is illegitimate or incorrect, but the USA has chosen a side and naturally the opposition will feel anger.
Secondly, the United States has supported numerous brutal dictators in various countries, especially in Latin America, like Pinochet (Chile), Noriega (Panama), Batista (Cuba), the Samozas (Nicaragua). About Samoza, FDR famously said, "Somoza may be a son of a b****, but he's our son of a b****." However, the citizens of those countries were less than pleased that mass-murderers were in power over them with the guarantee of US protection, effectively preventing the viability of any resistance. In the Middle East, the United States supported Hosni Mubarak and continues to Mohammed Morsi, two individuals who have consistently attacked and demonized the citizens of Egypt.
CIA Activities and Coups d'Etat: The United States did not just protect governments that were sadistic to their own citizens. In several instances, they helped install them as well. In the case of Pinochet in Chile (in 1974) and the Shah of Iran (in 1953), the CIA actively caused revolts in the country, toppling legitimate governments to put violent dictators in power (Allende in Chile and Mossadegh in Iran). The idea that the USA can replace leaders around the world with impunity is very angering to many individuals.
Cold War Activities: During the Cold War, the United States engaged in numerous proxy wars with the Soviets with many third-world countries as the battlegrounds. Angola was in civil war from 1975-1992 because of the US-Soviet proxy war. The Arab-Israeli Conflict was similarly based as was the Korean War, the Velvet Revolution in Hungary, the Cuban Revolution and the Cuban Missile Crisis, and of course the Vietnam War and the Afghanistan War of 1979-1989. These proxy wars resulted in millions of dead civilians around the world.
Military Bases All Over the World: The United States maintains military bases in over 100 different countries. If this is not a projection of military might, there is nothing that would be.
Unilateralism: The United States consistently avoids working within the bounds of the international community. The USA typically only negotiates with other countries when it suits them. They are more than willing to "go it alone" when everyone disagrees with them. The clearest example of this was the Invasion of Iraq. When US Secretary of State Colin Powell presented the cause to go to war to the United Nations, the other nations refused to go along with the United States. Therefore, instead of backing down and clarifying their research, the Americans invaded Iraq. Callously disregarding someone else's view will certainly anger them.
Aloofness: Many American citizens know almost nothing about other countries and have no desire to learn. They believe that their culture and way of life are so clearly superior to everyone else's that everyone should just aspire to be American. This sentiment is not well-received abroad.
How is the Bush Doctrine of preemption a radical change in US foreign policy?
the United States will go to war if necessary in order to preserve the freedom of the seas and to protect neutral shipping from attacks.
What do people in America know about Palestine?
It depends on the American, but most Americans know very little about Palestine and you would be lucky if they could identify the major cities, ethnicities, or the conflicts in anything more than a superficial way.
What is the US foreign policy towards Cuba?
The policy has eased in the past years. Americans are still not allowed to travel to Cuba, but Americans who have immediate family in Cuba are allowed to visit. most of the reason that the us government hates Cuba is because they are a communist nation, and they have a dictator, which America highly disapproves of. Hope this helps :)
Should the US help other countries resist outside forces from attempting to control them?
This is a very divisive question in US foreign policy and you are likely to receive different answers from different people with very polarized opinions.
It is my belief that part of the identity of the United States is a universalizing democratizing mission. The history of the United States was forged on account of people having the right to self-determination and the guarantee of freedom for its inhabitants. As a result, if the United States sees people in a foreign country trying to do the same thing, trying desperately to achieve self-determination and freedom for its inhabitants, this is a mission that the United States should seriously consider investing in. Of course, the United States has to balance this moral mission with the serious matter-of-fact considerations for (1) US Strategic Interests, (2) regional stability, and (3) whether or not the mission of the rebels or country-under-siege actually meets the criteria of a fight for democracy. That these considerations mean that the United States will not and should not intervene in every instance, they do give significant leeway for the United States to intervene in numerous instances to help secure human rights for people around the globe.
What was the purpose of the Bricker Amendment?
The main theme or purpose of the Bricker Amendment was to ensure that treaties and executive agreements should have no domestic standing without internal legislation. This was a hot topic in the 1950's.
isolationism
Why did US President Woodrow Wilson ignore the US Senate while he was negotiating at Versailles?
At the time, US President Wilson believed he had the executive power to handle treaties. Nevertheless, he was certain that the US Senate would not have the two thirds majority to override a veto. He was wrong, and the US preferred to remain in an isolationist mode after World War One.
What 3 countries helped the US in the iraq war?
A large number of countries assisted the United States in the Iraq War. The four most prominent were: the United Kingdom, Australia, Poland, and Georgia.
YES. The Neutrality Acts reflected the US popular support of isolationism.
What event turned Americans against Iran?
Americans turned against Iran when Iranian rebels held 54 US Embassy officials hostage for over 400 days.
