American Foreign Policy

Prior to World War I, the United States generally chose to follow Washington’s farewell address and stay out of “foreign entanglements”. The United States foreign policy from 1918 to 1953 shifted from isolationism or independent internationalism to a more involved internationalism and containment of communism due to various international events, economic conditions, and US public opinion.

Throughout the mid to late twentieth century the United States was extremely concerned with their foreign policy due to mishaps that surfaced as a result of lazy administration when dealing with communism. As an example, one mishap was how the Truman Administration dealt with China after the KMT surfaced following WWII. Instead of immediately defending the People’s Republic of China, the United States stayed mostly secluded and independent and let China slip into the favor of the KMT. This was an example of the United States’ being too moderate in their foreign policy. However, on the other hand, there were examples where the United States was too aggressive in their foreign policy. An example of this was how the US chose to dealt with North

America wanted to expand their foreign policy to help boost their economy. They felt threatened because not only did they have to compete with countries like Germany and Japan to secure access to Chinese markets. The first foreign policy the U.S. had was the Monroe Doctrine, which closed the Western Hemisphere to further colonization from European countries. This secured the U.S. foreign trade with Central America. The American foreign policy warned European nations to stay away from the Western Hemisphere while the U.S. also competed for trade in the Eastern Hemisphere.

Foreign policy is how one nation deals with many other nations. The book talks about Ronald Regan trying to create foreign policy and then here you have congress like a bunch of ants floating on a log down river each ant thinking there in charge. Foreign policy from the way “How Congress Works’” says is set up by the president and not really. Having congress get involved makes foreign policy way more complicated then needed. Harry Truman was one man who was asked a question. A random person wanted to know who created foreign policy? His answer was that he did. Now this leads to a important example of foreign policy. This leads to John F. Kennedy and we all know what major foreign policy deal he had to deal with. It was the Cuban missile crisis.

The U.S. foreign policy has always been linked to the domestic policy since the U.S. never feared of expanding its national interests over the national boarders. Isolation for the U.S. usually implied slow economic growth and the large number of destructive conflicts within, while impudent foreign policy always guaranteed an abrupt economic growth for the U.S. economy. After the U.S. intervened in the WWI and the WWII, the U.S. economy witnessed a tremendous economic growth, nearly elimination of the unemployment, rapid urbanization and overall growth of the standards of living across the country. Decisive foreign policy has always been providing the U.S. economy with the sustainable and rapid economic growth, unlike the policy aimed at isolation of the U.S.

As was laid out in the previous section, the United-States always had a ‘hegemonic presumption’, the conception that Latin America was inferior, a supposition that gave the right to Washington to intervene in the region’s political and economic affairs (LeoGrande, 2007:384). This second chapter will explore how the U.S. intervened in Latin America, more specifically after the World War II. Indeed, the U.S. benefitted greatly from the aftermath of the war. A subsection will be dedicated to the Pink Tide in Latin America, with a focus on the U.S. foreign policy under President GW Bush and President Obama. The overthrown Presidents of Honduras and Paraguay were part of this movement and their outset signals a reversal in the region.

NATO and US troops were sent to Bosnia to solidify the fragile peace in Bosnia. Conflicts in Bosnia are largely responsible for the unstable Europe and this can alter the Security of the US as well. In addition to all these factors US planned to intervention in to the Bosnia conflict and suppress the conflicts (Carpenter, 1996). American hopes for a continental solution on Bosnia Problem proved unrealistic. The European Community-soon to become the European Union-could not reach a consensus on the appropriate course of action over Bosnia (70-97-1, 2013). With the American government's decision to become more involved in the peace process and to support the Vance-Owen plan, there was hope once again that a turning point in the Bosnian conflict had been reached (Rigby, 1994). Nations attached to the boundaries of the Bosnia are also in threat because the situation and the intervening countries can trigger war in all European nations.

Over the course of the history of the United States, specific foreign policies have affected the methods in which the U.S. involves itself around the globe. Specifically, certain policies have affected U.S. involvement in Latin America.

The Bosnian, Srebrenica, and Herzegovina land was involved in an ethical war where ethnic cleansing was seen as a way to solidify the breaks in that region (“Bosnian Genocide”). The trigger of this ethnic war was the break-up of Yugoslavia from one country to three (Bosnia, Srebrenica, and Herzegovina) in 1990 (“Bosnian Genocide”). This rupture of Yugoslavia resulted in the massive dispute between Muslims, Serbs, and Croatians (Bennett). Not long after the war began, the Serbs began executing the Bosnian Muslims through ethnic cleansing, in order to fill the fissure that was created in 1990. The mass execution lasted three years and nine months, and did not end until the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) intervened in 1995 (Bennett); by that time, an unforgettable 70,000 Bosnian citizens were executed by the Serbs (Perl 71). If NATO had intervened sooner, perhaps thousands of lives could have been saved and this haunting genocide may have had less of an impact on the world.

Between 1918 and 1953 there was a major change regarding the foreign policy of the United States. At the end of the First World War, we practiced a foreign policy that was first established by George Washington in his Farewell Address back in 1796, which set a precedent of isolationism that was adopted until the beginning of World War II. Following Washington 's Neutrality Proclamation, the US did not engage in many global affairs such as the French Revolution and remained neutral through all foreign affairs. At the end of World War I, we continued to practice isolationism by not engaging in foreign affairs and limiting military spending believing that by pursuing this policy we could maintain peace and avoid war. Unfortunately, this

During the 1920s and 1930s, the U.S. remained neutral because the country was back to isolationism after President Warren G. Harding promised to “return to normalcy” in 1921. Americans favored the idea of being an isolated country and staying out of war, however this changed once Japan had attacked China and President Roosevelt knew they would be in danger of being attacked as well. After the attack policies were added so that Roosevelt was able to help out the democratic governments that were at war. I believe the point where the U.S. was no longer neutral was when Roosevelt wanted to help China using the Cash and Carry policy to aid them with supplies. The 1st Neutrality Act prevented Americans from selling weapons or lending money to warring nations and I believe this was a good idea since America wanted to stay an isolated country and it kept them from intervening in the war.

We still do not know how World War I started; that is the basis the book Sleepwalkers by Christopher Clark. In it he dispels rumors, raises new questions, and paints this as a sequence of unfortunate events no one country is to be blamed for. Right from the first few sentences Clark builds up the tension. He begins the book in 1903 with the murder of Alexander I that foreshadows the later assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Christopher Clark’s book Sleepwalker’s is a thought provoking piece of literature for anyone interested in the events leading up to the “Great War”.

The preface begins with the author recalling an unfortunate event relating to genocide. In 1995, Bosnian Serbs annihilated Sarajevo by volumes of shells and other bombardments. As a result, the United States and NATO demanded an end to this atrocity; the Serbs, fearful of the contesters ceased. In a state of liberty, children began to spend most of their time outside playing. Months later, the Clinton administration decided to withdraw support from the situation, hoping that the situation would end itself.

In their book American Foreign Policy since World War 2, Steven W. Hook, and John Spanier take a historical look at American foreign policy. Since its independence, all through to the start of the 20th century, the United States had a policy of detachment. This was rooted in the believe that Europe, the only other meaningful powerful in the world in the 18th and 19th century, had intrinsic issues related to feudism that kept the continent in a constant state of war (Hook & Spanier, 2015). The U.S on its part was far away from Europe and had a unique chance to chart a different course, one free from the troubles of Europe. As a democracy free from the class systems of Europe and hence maintain peace and stability (Hook & Spanier, 2015). To maintain this peace and stability, it was in the United States interests to maintain detachment from Europe. In fact, Monroe wrote that Europe and its flawed system was evil and America should strive as much as possible to stay away from it (Hook & Spanier, 2015). However, in the 20th century, this policy of detachment was put to the test when the United States was drawn into the first and second world wars by external factors. This led the United States to get more engaged in global affairs. The idea behind engagement was to promote the ideals of democracy which, the U.S believed were the pillars of peace, as well as to protect itself from aggressors like Japan in the Second World War. After the

The USA exercises its foreign policy through financial aid. For example, scarcity relief in North Korea provides not only humanitarian aid but also a base for the development of democratic ideals and bodies.