Chapter Five: State, Society, And Foreign Policy

As discussed in Chapter 10, public opinion is vital to the progress of any democracy. Noted by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, “a just government must get its power fro, the consent of the governed.” This quote highlights the reality that without understanding the publics opinion, a democratic government will fail. This same theme is echoed in the beginning of America’s constitution. Starting with the phrase “we the people,” the importance of the opinions of the common man is made a priority. In this Chapter 10 summary, I will discuss both the importance and of public opinion and analyze whether public opinion is skewed based on certain factors.

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

-The public holds the president accountable because he needs approval ratings and support, especially during elections.  Public can constrain freedom of action (if the public hates something, the president isn’t going to do it), and the public generally supports war when it is a security issue.  It opposes casualties though, and in the case of the Vietnam War, the public urged the U.S. to back down.

As Kelly Anderson’s Foreign Policy Analyst, the following memo will address three areas of the United States’ foreign policy. The U.S. has gone through may transition when it comes to its foreign policy. The United States has been an isolationist, neutralist, and internationalist country from the year it was founded to now. The executive branch and the president apply their power to influence and change the nation’s foreign policy. There are specific departments within the Executive Office of the President (EOP) created to assist the president in his or her process. Political context and historical events have occurred to prove why intervening with another country’s issues does not benefit the national interest and why isolationism is a better system for this country. Hopefully, the memo will accomplish informing what the foreign policy is, was, and should be.

During the1890s, the United States showed little interest in foreign affairs. The U.S. relied on previous foreign policies which resulted in inconsistent international trade in the years leading up to the twentieth century. However, following the rise of the industrial revolution in the United States American business began to recognize the vast potential of the international market place. The U.S. sought out to expand its territory globally to increase trade and protect its assets more effectively. The United States, at this point in the late 1890s, also began to listen to Alfred Thayer Mahan, an admiral and naval strategist. Mahan had previously called for a strengthening of the U.S. navy and an expansion of U.S. markets globally. Mahan also had great influence over his friend and current assistant secretary of the navy Teddy Roosevelt. In 1898 the U.S. was able to exploit a huge mistake made by the Spanish empire in Havana Harbor. The American ship U.S.S. Maine mysteriously exploded on February 15, 1898, killing 266 American sailors. The American public was outraged and they called for war to overthrow the “Spanish Murders” in Cuba. At this time, Spain was an imperial power with land possessions in the Caribbean as well as the pacific. They controlled Cuba and Puerto Rico in the Caribbean and the Philippines and Guam in the pacific. American politicians, including Secretary of State John Hay and President William McKinley, now began discussing the idea on going to war

America believed that it was isolated from the rest of the world, and its foreign policy reflected these ideas and beliefs. The United States was on its way to becoming a world power and advancing its own interest in the world, especially in the North and South America. Isolationism caused the United States to avoid being involved in other countries politics and for the U.S. to remain neutral in foreign policy

The United States is the biggest democratic country. In this democratic state the public votes from everything from new state laws to the person who will run the country, the president of the United States. When electing their representatives, the public chooses the candidate that has similar beliefs as their own. Once the representatives are in office, the public expect them to fight for they believe in but most of the time they do the complete opposite. The mass public does matter when it comes to local or state issues, but when it comes to foreign policy the government only cares about what policy is beneficial for them, not what is beneficial for the mass public. If the government actually considered the mass public during their foreign policy, all these events that are occurring would have a different endpoint.

The notion that we do not need foreign policy, or that it is an antiquated concept is greatly misleading. In fact, we need a strong foreign policy now more than ever. We are living at a time when the world’s geographical divides are shrinking due to ever increasing advancements in communication, technology, trade, and a strong global economic interdependence. Even though the notion that we are somehow economically dependent upon other countries is not something new for the US, we still see a strong indifference to foreign policy. In order to understand the problems, let us take a step back and examine the history of US foreign policy.

The foreign policy of the United States has changed over time reflecting the change in its national interest. As a new nation after the Revolutionary War, America’s prime national interest was to maintain its independence from the European countries. Through the 19th century,

Foreign Policy, is government’s strategy in dealing with other nations, designed to achieve national objectives. America’s Foreign Policy is determined how America, conducts relations with other nations around the world. It is designed to achieve certain goals. It shows the power to protect and project America’s national interests around the world in political, economic, military, and ideological areas. America’s Foreign Policy today covers a wide range of functions and issues. It includes establishing and maintaining diplomatic relations with other countries and international organizations, peacekeeping functions, such as working with allies to assure regional and international security, furthermore, it covers a range of international economic

Third and finally, Bremmer’s preferable approach, the Independent America approach, focuses on America’s errors with an imperialistic style of foreign policy. Bremmer states that the United States should let those boiling points in Europe and the Middle East be handled by their own countries. This idea focuses on the betterment of the United States economy and social problems. Pointing to the recent events in Ukraine the Independent approach makes the point of the fact that the American people do not want to continue the involvement in the Baltic States and would much rather focus on issues within the homeland. However, the United States government has already put in too many lives and economic expenditures to just pull out, at this point it would simply be a waste. While the involvement in the first place was the wrong choice it cannot be helped at this point. Bremmer’s action of pointing to the Vietnam War stands to be an unfair representation of current foreign policy as the war itself was more than forty years ago. As it stands now the United States foreign policy is a well-built system, sure there are some things that require changing but there is always going to be a flaw in it as with time the world changes. Bremmer states that the United States should not force its ideals onto countries that do not want change, saying that trying to force them will cause dispute that they are more willing to win. While this is true it is for a good cause, democracy is needed within

Foreign Policies are influenced and created by two branches, executive and legislative. The U.S. Constitution put this delegation of power into place. Foreign Policy determines how the U.S. will network with other countries and has been a large factor in our history since implemented. The process of the policy is not always the simplest; it has caused tensions and angst between Congress and the President through the years. A discrepancy between the two branches was and is not uncommon, yet the relationship between the two is indefinite. Each division has responsibilities and its own appointed power over the making of policies and bills. There are checks and balances to the process, where the President can veto a proposal by legislation

The idea that democracies do not fight each other can be traced back to the writings of Immanuel Kant over two hundred years ago in essay ‘On Perpetual Peace’, however, only in the early 1980s and with the writings of Michael Doyle was the idea consolidated. According to Doyle and other advocates of the democratic peace theory, liberal democratic states have been able to maintain peaceful relations amongst themselves, but are prone to wage war against non-democratic regimes. In order to prove this theory, vast databases have been constructed of historical dyadic relationships between states as well as detailed breakdowns of incidents of inter-state war. The conclusions reached are best shown in the work of Bruce Russett who has argued that

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.

According to Lars-Erik Cederman, “While the democratic-peace hypothesis has been accepted by most scholars, there is still controversy concerning the possibility that democratization processes may well trigger political violence.” From the case of Myanmar