U.S. foreign policy: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
(Moved timelines to history of U.S. foreign policy, which needs much work)
Line 103: Line 103:
   | url = http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf}}</ref>
   | url = http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf}}</ref>


Sometimes informally called the "COINdanistas", this is an influential school of thought that blends political, social and military strategies. The [[Center for a New American Strategy]], a COIN think tank, has many of its principals in the Obama Administration. Petraeus, now the U.S. commander for the Middle East, has used advisers including  [[David Kilcullen]] and [[H.R. McMaster]],  known for open criticism of policies, even while advising. <ref name=WP2007-02-05>{{citation
Sometimes informally called the "COINdanistas", this is an influential school of thought that blends political, social and military strategies. The [[Center for a New American Security]], a strategic think tank, has many of its principals in the Obama Administration. Petraeus, now the U.S. commander for the Middle East, has used advisers including  [[David Kilcullen]] and [[H.R. McMaster]],  known for open criticism of policies, even while advising. <ref name=WP2007-02-05>{{citation
  | title = Officers With PhDs Advising War Effort
  | title = Officers With PhDs Advising War Effort
  | first = [[Thomas Ricks]]
  | first = [[Thomas Ricks]]
Line 117: Line 117:
  | title = Obama's Limits: An Interview With Andrew Bacevich | journal = [[The Nation (magazine)]]
  | title = Obama's Limits: An Interview With Andrew Bacevich | journal = [[The Nation (magazine)]]
  | author = Jon Wiener | date = 28 August 2008}}</ref> Colonel [[Gian Gentile]] is concerned with a decline in conventional military forces, although Gentile recognizes the conventional enemy is not the mass of the Soviet Union.
  | author = Jon Wiener | date = 28 August 2008}}</ref> Colonel [[Gian Gentile]] is concerned with a decline in conventional military forces, although Gentile recognizes the conventional enemy is not the mass of the Soviet Union.
==Time periods==
===A new nation===
===19th Century===
===First World War and interwar===
===Second World War===
===Cold War===
====Initial containment====
{{main|Containment policy}}
Based on concepts from diplomat [[George Kennan]], the U.S. began, in the [[Harry S. Truman|Truman Administration]], a "containment policy", which affected U.S. policy throughout the Cold War. Kennan's basic hypothesis was that the Soviet ideology convinced them that their cause was historically preordained to win, so, while they might seem bellicose, they were actually risk-averse and would eventually pull back in confrontations. As a result, it was U.S. policy to strengthen the rest of the world against Communism, with military bases on the borders and in threatened areas, and economic, psychological and political support to nations threatened by Communism.
The [[Marshall Plan]] was the largest economic effort.  Arguably, the [[Berlin Blockade]] was the first, limited military confrontation, where American logistical and industrial power could prevail.
====Interventionism====
=====Strategic deterrence=====
=====Proxy wars=====
====Detente====
====Middle East====
===Change to a multilateral world===
===Revolutionary forces===
====9-11 Attacks====
====Neoconservatism====
====Multilateralism====
A multilateralist foreign policy was a strong plank in the campaign platform of [[Barack Obama]]. Many have argued the very early award of the [[Nobel Peace Prize]] was less for any specific action than being "not-Bush", especially in the view of Europeans.
Several conservatives, associated and not associated with neoconservatism, rejected it. [[Francis Fukuyama]] broke away from neoconservatism with his book ''[[America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy]]'',<ref name=AAC>{{citation
| title = America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy
| author = [[Francis Fukuyama]]
| publisher = Yale University Press | year = 2006
| isbn = 0300113994}}</ref>
[[Andrew Bacevich]], who is hard to categorize but closer to [[paleoconservatism]], in discussing Fukuyama 's  thoughts on [[America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy#neoconservatism and successor doctrines|"neoconservatism and successor doctrines"]] found trends, at least before Obama, based in [[Wilsonianism|Wilsonian]] ambition and Wilsonian certainty, but with a "pronounced affinity for the sword." He regards [[Ronald Reagan]] as Wilson's truest disciple, as one who meant to put America on the right side of history, and that [[Bill Clinton]] there was a continuation of the idea that there was no alternative to democracy. Even George W. Bush was a product of a Wilsonian revival.  The difference was that mainstream politicians treat American military supremacy as an unmitigated good and an evidence of [[American exceptionalism]].<ref name=Bac2005>{{citation
| author = Andrew Bacevich
| title = The New American Militarism: How Americans are Seduced by War
| publisher = Oxford University Press | year = 2005
| isbn = 0195173384}}, pp. 9-17</ref> Where there were six major military actions abroad between 1945 and 1986, they became almost annual after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
[[Zbigniew Brzezinski]] counseled a policy of self-restraint and not pressing every advantage, and listening to other nations.<blockquote>Technology has made global "have-nots" painfully conscious of their relative deprivation. It has also given them the tools to punish those they see as blocking their aspirations. If the United States is to avoid becoming the target of their resentment, its foreign policy must be seen as serving their interests as well as its own. That means exercising self-restraint rather than pressing every advantage that comes to a superpower; it means listening to others and not just working to preserve our own peace and prosperity but helping others to build their own.<ref name=WaPo2007-03-25>{{cite news
|author = James M. Lindsay (book reviewer)
|title = The Superpower Blues: Zbigniew Brzezinski says we have one last shot at getting the post-9/11 world right. book review of "Second Chance" by Zbigniew Brzezinski
|publisher = [[Washington Post]]
|date = March 25, 2007
|url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032201652.html
|accessdate = 2009-12-21
}}</ref></blockquote>
Others have described technology as both a strength and liability. In [[The Pentagon's New Map]], [[Thomas P.M. Barnett]] saw "connecting to the core" as essential in reducing conflict in poor nations.
There had been considerable sympathy, after 9/11, for the [[Afghanistan War (2001-)]], but the [[Iraq War]] was largely seen as U.S. unilateralism.
=====Role of allies=====
{{seealso|Sudan}}
{{seealso|Somalia}}
{{seealso|Uganda}}
Just as the U.S. had some unsavory allies that were vehemently anticommunist, role of allies in counterinsurgency and counterterrorism is complex. Some potential allies are undemocratic, or are, such as [[Salah Gosh]] of [[Sudan]], involved in active domestic [[human rights]] abuses while simultaneously opposed to threats to the U.S. [[Ethiopia]], with U.S. backing, invaded [[Somalia]] in December 2006 to oust the Islamic movement, which the United States accused of having ties to al-Qaeda. Ethiopia then installed, in Somalia, a U.S.-backed transitional government headed by Abdullahi Yusuf, who analysts say has used the fight against terrorism as an excuse to attack his political and business enemies.<ref name=WaPo2008-02-22>{{cite news
|author = Stephanie McCrummen
|title = U.S. Policy in Africa Faulted on Priorities: Security Is Stressed Over Democracy
|publisher = [[Washington Post]]
|date = February 22, 2008
|url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022102959.html
|accessdate = 2009-12-22
}}</ref>
Ethiopian troops came back to Ethiopia, and  Yusuf subsequently resigned.<ref name=CSM2009-06-22>{{citation
| title = Ethiopian troops return to Somalia
| journal = Christian Science Monitor
| author = Scott Baldauf
| date = 22 June 2009
| url = http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2009/0622/p06s01-woaf.html
}}</ref>  Somalia remains a [[failed state]], not helped by instability in Ethiopia and [[Kenya]].
In the 2010 ''Quadrennial Defense Review'', a basic strategic planning document, [[Anthony Cordesman]] saw a balance being formed. <blockquote>Ultimately, the review seeks to answer the question of whether the US should posture its forces and focus its acquisitions on dealing with conventional threats from rising peer competitors or more asymmetric threats emanating from weak and failing states. Secretary Gates’ terms of reference emphasized “balance” between these two competing priorities, stressing the need to institutionalize capabilities such as counterinsurgency while maintaining the existing US conventional technological edge against other countries.<ref name=CSIS2009-09-08>{{cite news
|author = [[Anthony Cordesman]], Erin K. Fitzgerald
|title = The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review
|publisher = [[Center for Strategic and International Studies]]
|date = Sep 8, 2009
|url = http://csis.org/publication/2010-quadrennial-defense-review
|accessdate = 2009-12-22
}}</ref></blockquote>
Regional and domestic constituencies can become involved in non-obvious ways. In many respects, [[Uganda]] is an economic success story for Africa, but it still has trouble moving toward democracy under President [[Yoweri Museveni]]. As U.S. ambassador, [[James Kolker]] was critical of Museveni's government, but his successor was less vocal when Uganda sent 1,500 troops as part of an African Union force, short of manpower.
"Museveni has very cleverly played the U.S. like a violin," said [[Joel Barkan]], of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.<ref name=WaPo2008-02-22 />  Recently, possibly with pressure from U.S. social conservatives, it has moved to make homosexuality a capital crime.
==References==
==References==
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}

Revision as of 10:46, 8 March 2010

This article is developed but not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Timelines [?]
 
https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=U.S._foreign_policy&printable=yes
This editable, developed Main Article is subject to a disclaimer.
See also: History of U.S. foreign policy

Ultimate responsibility for United States foreign policy rests with the President of the United States. For the ratification of formal treaties, he or she must obtain the advice and consent of the Senate.

In the modern practice of foreign policy, formally, the senior foreign policy official below the President is the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. In practice, the critical decisionmakers are the members of the National Security Council, which includes the Secretary of State. Other major influencers are in the National Security Council staff, headed by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, James Jones. The U.S. Department of Defense, under Secretary Robert Gates, obviously has a major effect, as does the United States intelligence community, coordinated by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair.

Foreign policy formulation and execution is structured on regional and functional areas. Over recent years, there has been an attempt to reconcile the regional definitions of the various departments and agencies, so a country is not under one bureau of the State Department but under a different Unified Combatant Command in the military. This is not completely successful; the countries of the Mediterranean littoral as well as the Levant are under one Assistant Secretary of State, but the United States European Command is responsible for the former but the United States Central Command for the latter.

Foreign policy also needs to be considered in relation to the U.S. and world situation of the time.

Regional

Africa

U.S African policy is principally focused on the Subsaharan part of the continent. For reasons of colonial sensitivity, the United States Africa Command is considered a unified subcommand of United States European Command.

Europe and Eurasia

East Asia and Pacific

North Korea is the hot spot, and the U.S. regional priority is to insist on the Six-Party Talks, which also recognize China as a key broker.

Near East

For more information, see: U.S. policy towards the Middle East.

More than in most areas in the world, policies twist and turn and involve multiple countries. Nevertheless, there are some basic principles both for the region and for countries.

Egypt

While the U.S. continues to provide major economic support to Egypt, there is increasing concern about succession, with President Hosni Mubarrak reported to be in poor health.

Iran

For more information, see: U.S. policy towards Iran.

The Obama administration avoids the military threats implied by the previous administration, by the U.S. or others. While it is giving moral encouragement to the domestic protesters following the 2009 election, it is taking time, establishing a moral position, and waiting on events. It does appear to be holding back on direct engagement at any high level.

It is quite serious about pressuring Iran to stop what is seen as a nuclear weapons program, b as the best means to accomplish this goal. Instead, a consensus is growing, with allies, to use economic warfare, targeted at Iran's lack of internal petroleum refining capacity, and thus, while ironically an oil producer, a gasoline importer. [1]

Iraq

For more information, see: U.S. policy towards Iraq.
See also: Iraq War

Israel

Lebanon

Syria

South and Central Asia

Afghanistan and Pakistan

For more information, see: U.S. policy towards Afghanistan.
For more information, see: U.S. policy towards Pakistan.

In many respects, it sees this as one problem; the political geography of the area also supports the argument that the Durand Line border between the two may have been convenient for the British, but does not reflect the boundaries of the Pashtun people.

Western Hemisphere Affairs

Functional

A number of these areas will definitely involve more agencies than the Department of State.

  • International Organization Affairs (IO)

Security

Economic

Democracy promotion and information

Cultural

  • Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA)

Law enforcement, including drug trade

Human Rights

  • Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM)
  • Global Women's Issues (S/GWI)

Science

Doctrines

Nuclear deterrence

Counterinsurgency

See also: Vietnam, war, and the United States

While the U.S. had dealt with insurgencies well before World War II, the situation increased significantly in the Cold War. The 1940 U.S. Marine Corps Manual for Small Wars remains a reference based on experience in Latin America and elsewhere.

In Vietnam, which combined both insurgency and proxy war, the U.S. struggled to find an effective counterinsurgency strategy, eventually refocused on conventional military action, and left the country, which was overthrown by a conventional invasion.

Counterinsurgency (COIN) is alive and well in Afghanistan and Iraq, and there is a distinct split among soldier-statemen as to the correct balance among counterterrorism, "conventional" military forces, and counterinsurgency to include nation-building. Among the best-known counterinsurgents are General David Petraeus. Petraeus' doctoral dissertation dealt with U.S. policy toward Vietnam, [2] a far more active role, than traditional for generals, in developing the Army doctrinal manual on counterinsurgency. [3]

Sometimes informally called the "COINdanistas", this is an influential school of thought that blends political, social and military strategies. The Center for a New American Security, a strategic think tank, has many of its principals in the Obama Administration. Petraeus, now the U.S. commander for the Middle East, has used advisers including David Kilcullen and H.R. McMaster, known for open criticism of policies, even while advising. [4]

Andrew Bacevich is a critic of what he regards as an overemphasis on counterinsurgency in the U.S. military, which he sees as a revisionist belief that the Vietnam War could have been won with the right long-term approach, which he terms that of the "Crusaders" for the new view. He sees a more appropriate lesson as the "Conservative" one from the Weinberger-Powell Doctrine. [5] He favors a "defensive strategy" of "containment." [6] Colonel Gian Gentile is concerned with a decline in conventional military forces, although Gentile recognizes the conventional enemy is not the mass of the Soviet Union.

References

  1. ↑ "Obama considers Iran gas cut-off", United Press International, 3 August 2009
  2. ↑ The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam: A study of military influence and the use of force in the post-Vietnam era, doctoral dissertation, Princeton University, 1987
  3. ↑ John Nagl, David Petraeus, James Amos, Sarah Sewall (December 2006), Field Manual 3-24: Counterinsurgency, US Department of the Army
  4. ↑ "Officers With PhDs Advising War Effort", Washington Post, February 5, 2007
  5. ↑ Andrew Bacevich (October 2008), "The Petraeus Doctrine: Iraq-style counterinsurgency is fast becoming the U.S. Army’s organizing principle. Is our military preparing to fight the next war, or the last one?", Atlantic
  6. ↑ Jon Wiener (28 August 2008), "Obama's Limits: An Interview With Andrew Bacevich", The Nation (magazine)
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=U.S._foreign_policy&oldid=474317"