The Historical Evolution of United States Foreign Policy

Foreign policies are tactics used by a government in its interactions with foreign countries. Treaties between governments, commercial agreements, and declarations of war are all examples of foreign policies. Foreign policies establish the terms of the relationships between various countries and enable peaceful cohabitation. When deciding on their foreign policy, countries consider their own interests as well as how their choices may influence the other countries on whom they rely. As the globe has changed and presented new difficulties, American foreign policy has been forced into metamorphosis. The ever-changing global politics from the United States and the Soviet Union being the superpowers dominated by military tensions, to European nations concentrating more in economic integration and emergence of new powers like China have presented newer challenges to U.S foreign policy makers (Ryan Beasley, 2012). The United States foreign policy has been under scrutiny for varied reasons from their stake to remain as a powerful nation, to emergence of newer problems like international terrorism and economic crisis, which has been proved they are not immune to, to transition between leaders like the controversial Bush to the more liberal Obama (Michael Cox, 2012).

Hypothesis

Americans triumphed over fascism and managed to curb communism infiltration and staked a claim in being "the city on the hill," one to be admired and respected. The rise of international terrorism, weapon proliferation, though, has turned people into skeptics about Americas claim that what it has been doing has been for the sake of international good and not their own interest.

Methodology

This research is a secondary research. The research is an analysis of the literature on the subject. The sources of information are select journal articles from reputable databases of information on US foreign policy, books that offer different perspectives from different authors on the US foreign policy. The journals are from historical days right to the present day America depicting clearly the evolution of the American foreign policy over the years. The books too have experts’ opinions on the American foreign policy.

Literature review

The major books of reference have been US foreign policy (Cox M & D Stokes,2012), that has brought out the transformation in in US foreign policy and comparative perspective of foreign policy (Beasley et al., 2012)

Historical evolution of US foreign policy

Since the foundation of the United States, they have had a belief in their exceptionalism. The belief stems from their unique revolutionary history. It gives them a sense of superiority. The United States feel very influential and superior among other nations backed by their socio-economic power.

In the early years before World War 1, the United States set itself as an isolationist portrayed by Washington’s farewell address and Jefferson’s inaugural address. The rule was to extend commercial and honest friendly ties with other nations while maintaining minimal political affiliations with them ( LaFeber, 2012). Political affairs of other nations would be given a nonpartisan approach. They would not meddle. The isolationist notion didn't last for long. They deviated from the ideals they claimed to profess. The United States were actively involved in international politics through diplomacy, treaties, and conflicts like the 1845 American-Mexican war. All these were done to protect their economic interest. There was an inclination towards ditching the isolationist ideals for expansionism which involved both territorial and economic expansion.

In the duration of World War 1, the United States was looking for avenues of inserting their growing dominance and to defend it. There passivity in European affairs was evolving to become a threat to their newfound status as a major economic power. They joined the allied powers in defeating the central powers. In the post-world war one era the United States a major stakeholder in the rebuilding of Europe through the Washington conference. This support was to assert their status as the big brother to the rest of the word. Their foreign policy had shifted to hegemony where other nations would subordinate to the US not by force but by virtue of helping them rise to their feet.

The United States remained neutral in world war two despite German gains. The war was an eye opener that there was a possibility of gain by engagement in the war. There was a rising belief of controlling the post-war nations that had been crippled in the process. Hegemony had officially taken over, and the aim was to dominate the world. The nations affected by war would take long to get back to their feet, and with the United States help, they would owe their success to the United States. This would back their dominance in the international community as a fatherly figure to the other nations and also expand the economic strength through international capitalism.

A communism infiltration was quickly rising backed by the Soviet Union. The rise was proving to be an obstacle to the international capitalism that the United States was in favor of. The standoff between the two nations that had risen as the superpowers after World War 2 in a show of their might led to the cold war. The United States backed Israel and Turkey in the Middle East that showed more military promise compared to the surrounding Arab countries (Drake Laura, 2002). Though the Arab countries had resource, they were deemed of little importance in military significance. The United States preferred capitalism where people capable would provide services for a profit. In capitalism, high levels of economic growth would be achieved and widely distributed wealth. It allowed accumulation of property inspired by the availability of cheap rich agricultural land in the United States. The Soviet Union faced a decline after that, and the US had emerged successful in proving a major power in the world.

Factors influencing US foreign policy

Factors that shape the United States foreign policy can be grouped into both external and internal factors. External factors are related to the existence of a state as part of an international system. Among the external factors are anarchy on the international scene and the lack of an international police and no governing rules. Anarchy leads to everyone fighting for their interest which the US did. Fighting for interest led to the development of competition, conflict, and distrust. Realism came as a result of this. The United States, therefore, had to improve its power necessary to secure itself. The security was ensured by technological and military advancement to try and stay ahead of the rest of the world known as defensive realism.

Liberalism which refers to the interdependence between different states is the second. This influences the formulation of policies that do not cause direct harm or threat to other states due to the mutual benefit and understanding with each other. An example is the arms control treaties that nations signed after world wars.

Constructivism is another where the United States has learned from its previous experiences in World Wars. Norms to them represent shared expectation about appropriate behavior derived from a combination of beliefs and decision-making procedures (Beasley et al., 2012)

Internal factors refer to issues within the state, of which they are in control. These factors include public opinion. That is the opinion, culture, and identity of a nation. The United States is traditionally known for upholding the rule of law and therefore makes policies that stay in line with their moral conviction and for what they stand. Links and interest groups is also a factor. They stand for a nation’s ideals and ensure they are followed through activism and other means. They keep the governments in check. Democracies also influence foreign policies because the chosen leaders are responsible for representing the voters’ interest and are held accountable at the end of it. Leaders and personalities like President Bush perception of Saddam Hussein influenced his decision to go to war with Iraq in 2003. Different leaders will have different personalities and reactions. Obama presidency tried to prove the US was still a force for good even in unstable, dangerous times.

Newer challenges and influence on US foreign policy

Terrorism and extremism have provided a new challenge to the United States. The United States proved not to have ready answers for everything. In dealing with terrorism, a state needs to improve internal security, capture the terrorist and bring them to book. Post 9/11 the United States through the bush doctrine sanction use of all necessary and appropriate force against the perpetrators. A poorly conducted but legitimate war against Osama and Islamic radicalism turned into an uncalled for illegitimate war against Iraq, 2003. They were involved in racial profiling. They went to the extreme with intimidation threats and force which went beyond the rule of law. The handling proved to the world the US after all cared only about its selfish interest and not the good of the world like it claimed. The emergence of stronger nations in the Middle East has also caused ripples within the US. Iran had nuclear prospects which caused mixed reactions. Obama sought to wind up Middle East American involvement unless the core was threatened. Donald Trump seeks to return to the original Israel ties, to keep Iran in check and deal with ISIS. The current foreign policies haven’t addressed the newer challenges but instead heightened tension.

Theories of US foreign policy

International distribution of power and the relative power the US possesses has had a great influence on their foreign policy (Fared Zakaria, 1992). Systemic theories include defensive realism and offensive realism. In defensive realism, the United States becomes its own security maximize to ensure its survival. In offensive realism, the state attacks threats to ensure its survival like in the Iraq war. Domestic theories include Liberalism and Marxism theories. Liberalism demands foreign policy remains in line with their liberal views. In Marxism, the US serves the interest of their capitalist class and large corporations they own. In neoclassical realism theory power matters but has to consider domestic politics. That is domestic factors determine foreign policy. Constructivism theory doesn’t emphasize material factors but ideas and identity. Neoconservatism unlike realism focuses state but differ over its role. Realists disagree with using state power to impose democracy. Neoconservatism and liberalism share focus on democracy but differ on international organizations. Neocons disregard international law and launch unilateral military strikes.

Limitations

Most of the views presented are personal opinions from different authors arguing from different perspectives and may be biased.

Recommendations

The United States grand strategy should involve the following

Liberal internationalism involving maintaining the state among the best but not necessarily top. It gives room for multilateralism or acceptance of a multipolar world (national security strategy of engagement and enlargement, 1995).

Offshore balancing with aspects on neoisolation accepts a multipolar world but attempts to oppose hegemony by any nation through a coalition with the rest of the nations to sabotage that nation.

Conclusion

The United States policy, therefore, continues changing, but in all the changes their interest remains at the forefront. The notion that their actions have been for the good of the world has been eroded. Their foreign policies in all instances look out for their interests. They have regressed to Bismarck’s approach of isolation prioritizing demonstration of their military might as a strategy to intimidate (Dominique Mossi, 2003). The newer challenges have exposed them in the way they dealt with them. They are struggling to maintain “the state to be admired and copied tag” as they claimed before.









Works cited



Moisi, Dominique. "Reinventing the West." Foreign Aff. 82 (2003): 67.

Cox, Michael, and Doug Stokes. US foreign policy. Oxford University Press, 2012.

Beasley, Ryan K. Foreign policy in comparative perspective: domestic and international influences on state behavior. Cq Press, 2012.

Drake, Laura. "Continuity and Change in Israeli Foreign Policy." Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective: Domestic and International Influences on State Behavior (2002).

Pape, Robert A. "The strategic logic of suicide terrorism." American political science review 97.03 (2003)

Lake, David A. "Rational extremism: Understanding terrorism in the twenty-first century." Dialogue IO 1.01 (2002)

Neack, Laura, Jeanne AK Hey, and Patrick Jude Haney, eds. Foreign policy analysis: continuity and change in its second generation. Prentice Hall, 1995.

Pillar, Paul R. Terrorism, and US foreign policy. Brookings Institution Press, 2004.

Entman, Robert M. Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy. University of Chicago Press, 2004.



Wittkopf, Eugene R., Christopher M. Jones, and Charles W. Kegley Jr. American foreign policy: pattern and process. Nelson Education, 2007.