Current Events And U.s. Diplomacy

In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln spoke the timeless words ??government of the people, by the people, for the people?. He might not have known they were the undercurrent of a war that was fought eighty-two years prior in 1781; a war fought one hundred and forty-eight years in the future in 2011. I truly believe that the government floats by the ebbs and flows of its citizens will and opinion. Their will can drive us to war or their will melts away not remembering why we went to war in the first place. The peoples will is the rudder steering the Diplomatic, Information, Military and Economic ?DIME? spectrum maneuvering its way across the governmental swamp. The peoples will to vote and protest shape our diplomatic outcomes. The peoples

Beginning with the creation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, up to the current Obama doctrine, presidential doctrines have dominated United States foreign policy. A presidential doctrine highlights the goals and positions for United States foreign affairs outlined by the sitting president. Many of the country’s major foreign policy successes or disasters can be explained by tracing the doctrines of sitting or previous presidents and analyzing their evolution and eventual impact on world events. After established, a presidential doctrine often takes on a life of its own. This can be explained by the military resources and human capital involved in carrying out these doctrines. Future presidents often feel compelled to abide by previous doctrines, or find the reality of change can only be done with incremental changes over a period of years. For this reason, presidential doctrines often outlive their creators and consequently effect American foreign policy for years to come.

In recent years, America has faced a major problem revolving around the transnational war in Syria. The conflict in Syria and turned into a major power contest in the post-Cold War history. In an article written by Dostal (2016), “the main factor in Syria that points back to the Eisenhower Doctrine, is the effort to defend the Country’s position as major, and ideally only, external balancer in the Middle East” (214). If there were ever a triple alliance between Syria, Iraq, and Iran, it would become very difficult to control the vacuum of power within the Middle East. This would overall make it very difficult to maintain the policies that were brought up in the Eisenhower Doctrine. The overall difference in the wars that take place in the Middle East are a bit different than they were back when Eisenhower was president. However, the fact that his doctrine is still used and cited today, proves how essential it was to his presidency and one of the reasons why his presidency was so important to the United States national security not only in his years but the years to

Ronald Reagan was president during the Cold War era. During this era, communism was becoming a major threat in the world, and the Soviet Union was a major communist power. Reagan did not like the Soviet Union, calling them an “evil empire”, and he believed that the US not only had a foreign-policy duty to oppose but a moral duty to compete with the USSR as well. Reagan knew that if the USSR could be weakened, that it could bring an end to the Cold war, therefore, he developed the Reagan Doctrine. The Reagan Doctrine was

After winning his second term as president, Ronald Reagan established what is now known as “The Reagan Doctrine,” which provided support, both financially and militarily, for anti-communist fighters throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America (CITE).  The policy’s goal was to eliminate tyrannical governments and promote individual liberties, freedom, and democracy. The Reagan doctrine became the centerpiece of the Reagan administration by successfully stopping the Soviet Union from spreading its communist control over specific regions of the world.

It was on March 12, 1947, the beginnings of the Cold War between major world powers, the democratic US and the communist USSR, when President Harry S. Truman announced his famous Truman Doctrine before a joint session of congress. In his doctrine, Truman states the importance it is for the United Sates to become involved in assisting other countries with political, military, and economic aid to all “democratic” nations under any kind of communist threat. He also states that the reason countries become communist is because they had the “totalitarian regimes forced upon them against their will” (Truman, Harry S.); therefore, in order for that not to happen, the US would restore hope into those who are “resisting attempted subjugation by armed

A presidential doctrine is basically defined as an ideological framework that a president uses to advance a policy towards a region or country to achieve foreign policy goals. An example of such doctrine is the Truman Doctrine that was issued by President Harry S. Truman in March 1947. The doctrine was primarily an outline the America would use against the Soviet Union and Communism through

The purpose of the Reagan Doctrine was to “sponsor anticommunist guerrillas who are trying to overthrow pro-Soviet regimes” (Roskin, 2010). It was implemented in the mid-1980’s by President Reagan within his 1985 State of the Union Address and lasted less than a decade around the end of the Cold War in 1991. In this assignment, I will discuss the doctrine that President Reagan followed for his doctrine and what situation that caused the need for the doctrine. What were the effects of this diplomatic effort for the United States and countries it might have effected.

President Reagan’s foreign policy took a sharp turn from his predecessors’ tactics of easing tensions and instead chose to escalate the cold war conflict, arguing the moral superiority of the U.S.’s governmental system and framing the Cold War as a fight between the good and free capitalist United States versus the evil communist regime. (“Reagan Doctrine" at U.S. Department of State) This direct confrontal approach later became known as the “Reagan Doctrine”. In his pursuit of the USSR he implemented a new policy through the National Security Decisions Directive to diminish the resources of the Soviet

The presidency, even though loose in definition, upholds high standards for this country and are often the face of emotion and strength for America. The presidency is much more than just an institution or title, it is the focus for the most intense and persistent emotions in the American polity. The president is a symbolic leader, the one figure who draws together the people’s hopes and fears for the political future. He or she strives to help people make sense of politics. The support he or she has from the public and interest groups, the party balance in COngress, the thrust of the Supreme COurt opinion together set the basic power situation he must deal with. The president should be a “master politician” who is above all politics. Each President defines a unique leadership role that is strategic choice to enhance political

Did not submit or incompletely described the effects of these diplomatic efforts for the U.S. and other countries.

American foreign policy has gradually changed since the birth of our nation. On July 4, 1891, John Quincy Adams addressed the Senate and House of Representatives during a powerful Independence Day speech designed to prevent an alliance with the Greeks against the Ottoman Empire. Although sympathetic to their cause, he warned against involving America in other states’ affairs, stating,” America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to Freedom and independence of all”. This paper seeks to evaluate the implications of John Quincy Adams’ statement, examine the trends of foreign policy and national security from the late nineteenth century to the present, and address current policy issues regarding

U.S. involvement in Africa in general, Ghana in particular, has shown ebbs and flows according to a broad range of factors including, most notably, political stability, economic growth and safety measures. Probably, Obama 's much-hyped visit to Ghana in 2009 is an indication of U.S.-Africa 's dynamic relation that has historically been centered on aid. Ghana, a West African country, has witnessed a steady economic growth over recent years, and by virtue of her political stability achieved via fair and free elections, has managed to be home for a growing number of U.S. businesses. Departing from an aid-centered model of U.S.-Africa relations, Ghana is redefining her educational, economic and social relationships with U.S. True, U.S. remains a source of significant aid to Ghana. However, U.S. aid investments in Ghana are helping convert Ghana into an economy of increasing growing force not only regionally but also in the whole African continent. To better understand U.S.-Ghana relations, more specifically U.S. growing influence in Ghana, in areas of education, agriculture and immigration, the present brief offers an overview of U.S. influence on Ghana.

Kegley and Raymond stated: “The shape of the world’s future will be determined not only by changes in the objective conditions of world politics, but also by the meanings people ascribe to these conditions.” Terrorism is presently a major factor in international relations and has impacted the world to change in many significant ways. Terrorism is a political ideology that has been problematic in defining definitely because of its various interpretations around the world, as well as the fact that it is constantly evolving. Since the terrorist events of 9/11, the lives of many have been changed forever. A small group of individuals, which are a mere fraction of the population of the world, have managed to impact and shape the way international and domestic relations are looked at and handled. People question how secure and safe they feel due to uncertainty of public safety because of events such as 9/11. The war on terrorism in the 21st century has certainly and inevitably changed the landscape for global politics. However, the relationship between terrorism and global politics is troublesome and in ways problematic to describe accurately. Both terrorism and global politics individually are complicated phenomenon. It is erroneous to propose that one is responsible for the other or vice versa, but they are inextricably and inevitably linked. In the study of international relations, there are multiple theories and theoretical perspectives. In this essay, realism and liberalism

The United States of America does not have diplomatic relations with the Iran. To summarize the events that led to the current situation, The Islamic Republic of Iran established diplomatic relations with the United States of America in 1883, then known as Persia (Martin 19). Through the influence of the USA, the country came to establish a limited constitutional monarchy to help replace the dictatorial monarchy in 1906. In 1953, following the oppressive rule, there was a coup that overthrew the democratically elected prime minister, which was supported by the USA and its other ally United Kingdom. The coup was meant to establish a bilateral relationship between the two countries that could expand their economic and democratic relations.