ipl-logo

Annotated Bibliography: US Foreign Policy

1459 Words6 Pages

Complete Annotated Bibliography

Cox, Michael, and Doug Stokes. 2008. US Foreign Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cox and Stokes (2008) define liberal internationalism” as the framework in which U.S. foreign policy has been dictated throughout the 20th, and well into the 21st century. The “Wilsonian” doctrine of international cooperation is defined as being the framework for liberalism through the development of the League of Nations and the United Nations, which has been a longstanding tradition through the development of the United Nations under the leadership of the United States. This form of “liberal internationalism” assumes that the interests of the United States and its democratic allies have a right to defend their interests …show more content…

President Obama’s foreign policy often appears to provide a more diplomatic solutions to international conflicts in his opposition of the Iraq War of 20034, but he invariably repeated the same policies of the Bush Doctrine by invading Libya. Dueck (2015) defines Obama 's foreign policy of “regime change” in Libya, which is was not unlike Bush’s illegal invasion and bombing of Iraq. In this manner, Obama appears to be a “democratic” president, yet he is enacting a realist theoretical mindset that utilizes massive military interventions to resolve global conflicts between states. Dueck (2015) relies on Walt’s theory of "defensive realism” to validate this “hybrid” of Obama’s cooperative diplomacy as a “balance” to the harsh military measures that he has wielded against Libya. Naturally, Dueck (2015) exposes the hypocrisy of a "defensive” posturing by the Obama Administration, especially when it has invaded and destroyed a sovereign nation, such as Libya, in the expansion of the realist tenets of Bush Doctrine. This is an important course that will be added to the research paper to show the extension of realist theory across multiple presidencies to define the continued unilateralism of U.S. militarism around the world. …show more content…

The ideological premise of democracy and capitalist ideals define the fact that democracies do not go to war against each other. This argument defines the important aspects of liberalism that illustrate the cooperative nature of democracies that forge diplomacy, economic agreements, and other factors of international foreign relations in a largely democratic framework. Therefore, Goldsmith (2016) is arguing that Obama’s foreign policies are largely liberal practices that rely on cooperative nation states that agree on the principles of democracy and capitalistic ideology.

Show More
Related
1267 Words | 6 Pages

This meant that the United States should try to develop and maintain world order in a world which was bipolar military wise and multipolar political wise. States that acted out of their traditional interest would be punished by other states to demonstrate that violation of the “norms of international conduct” would not be tolerated(106). Stabilizing international

Read More
1235 Words | 5 Pages

Almost as soon as the First World War ended the US retreated into isolationism just like George Washington wanted the country to do when he spoke about it in his farewell address. Many people were content with being an isolationist country because they did not want their country to get caught in another huge European war; this is the reason the US ultimately decided not to join the League of Nations which the US proposed to Europe. Despite the US becoming isolationist again there were quite a few people who saw what was going on in Europe and felt like the US needed to help their allies and stop Adolf Hitler. As the war continued and more people began to see the brutality of the war and the concentration camps, the US’s foreign policy began

Read More
2308 Words | 10 Pages

Motivations Behind U.S. Global Policy From 1880-1973 Throughout the late 19th century and throughout the 20th century, the United States became a stable, powerful nation globally, and has maintained a relatively high geopolitical standing. This is a product of many of the global affairs and events that America has become involved in, namely the Spanish-American War, World War II, and the Cold War. Motivations for this involvement often varied between idealism, improving and supporting the world as a whole, and self-interest, protecting the stability of the country before all else.

Read More
1667 Words | 7 Pages

The serious lack of foreign policy debate in Washington has resulted in the over commitment of American resources and troops, the negative global perception of American leadership, and an ill-informed electorate. In order to effectively articulate the alternatives that they have long hinted at, Democrats must first challenge the grand strategy of the U.S. foreign policy. Democrats must believe that current reality should shape foreign policy instead of the antiquated assumptions and personal interests of the foreign policy establishment. In retuning to a stance of realism, Democrats can effectively offer a protocol that allows for intervention if and only if the actions are multilateral and take in to consideration the reality of America’s economic capabilities. To further multilateralism, Democrats must work to reform and modernize international organizations so that they can become a reliable tool for national security.

Read More
715 Words | 3 Pages

Defense, known as resisting attack, combined with foreign, a country other than its own country, equals out to be the defense for your own country for its good against opposing foreign countries. During the time period of 1789 through 1825, the United States extended foreign policy as a method of defense and protection from perceived or actual threats of the almighty Europe. During the late 1700’s while Washington was President, he ordered for a foreign policy of Neutrality; neutrality meaning maintaining unharmful relations with both France and Britain. As the idea of protection and defense of America was continued to be kept in mind by our federal government, by the early 1800’s the Monroe Doctrine was eventually formed to avoid any interferences by Europe and their contagious conflicts, preventing our land to ever

Read More
413 Words | 2 Pages

Today, numerous aspects of Progressive philosophy have vanished from American foreign policy thought, particularly the conviction that historical development legitimizes supremacist imperialism. Americans stay uncertain whether advancing our own security and interests for their own purpose is ethically adequate or by one means or another despicable. Almost every President since Wilson, paying little heed to political groups, has felt constrained to legitimize American action abroad, both to our own citizens and to remains of the world, with confirmations that we are acting out of sympathy toward our interests, as well as for the welfare of other groups and the worldwide community in general.1 In every recent example of significant military

Read More
1544 Words | 7 Pages

American Foreign Policy 1914-1941: Originally, the United States took a more isolationist stance to foreign policy and tried not to intervene in World Affairs outside of North America in accordance with the Roosevelt Corollary. This changed after the Zimmerman Telegram and the sinking of the Lusitania, which thrusted the United States onto the world stage for World War I. After the conclusion of World War I, the United States returned to isolationist foreign policy during the Roaring Twenties to focus on improving the country from within. This held true throughout the Great Depression as the Untitled States faced economic struggles. Once World War II began, the United States began to once again focus on being an international force.

Read More
1079 Words | 5 Pages

American foreign policy has been characterized by both elements of continuity and change since 1877, reflecting the evolving geopolitical landscape and changing priorities of successive US

Read More
1896 Words | 8 Pages

These included notions of political liberty, economic freedom, pragmatism and American exceptionalism. He was aggressive only in his proactive defence against threats, this realist approach enabled him to maintain an appreciation for power and its limits. Reagan’s foreign policy endorsed a “ringing idealism” (Lowry, 2005), discriminately applied with the specific purpose of eroding and defeating a hostile world empire, the Soviet Union. Reagan pleased the neo-conservatives in his ‘anti-Sovietism’ stance. The applied use of the heavy weight of U.S. power was needed to bankrupt the USSR, through a substantial arms build-up, this belligerent yet pragmatic approach was “prudent and necessary”

Read More
728 Words | 3 Pages

We have all felt suspense at many points in our lives. Some more than others. Suspense is a great feeling in my opinion. Suspense can lead you to endless minutes, hours, months of overthinking. And over thinking itself is a suspense.

Read More
1738 Words | 7 Pages

There are many important aspects to understanding contemporary U.S. foreign policy. However, there are some ideas that are crucial to the development of U.S. foreign policy. The main points to understand include the schools of thought that influence today’s decision making, the concept of whether democratic means formulate better foreign policy, and whether the U.S. has a moral obligation to be a primary leader in the world. There are two parts to U.S. foreign policy: the process and formulation of policy, and that ideologies that fuel the policies. First, it is important to analyze U.S. foreign policy as a cyclical manner.

Read More
206 Words | 1 Pages

The source presented provided a perspective opposed to isolationism and governments who implement the policy in their nations. Furthermore, the source implements that no nation can be a democratic state if it puts into effect the isolationism policy. However, this source should not be embraced at all. First, for a nation to be considered a democratic state it must posses a government that derives its power from the citizens and is accountable to them for its use. Furthermore isolationism is a policy of non-involvement in international affairs, which does not infringe on the rights of citizens provided that the nation desires it.

Read More
1226 Words | 5 Pages

Brian C. Schmidt’s (2002) chapter, “The History an Historiography of International Relations”, covers detailed aspects of the field of International Relations regarding its history and problems it has faced over its evolution. This essay will argue that Schmidt is able to effectively identify and address difficult issues posed in the International Relations field of work. This essay begins with a brief summary of Schmidt’s work and ideas. Next, the essay will discuss Schmidt’s views on the specific evolutionary issues of lack of coherency and identity behind the history of International Relations. Leading on from here, the essay will display Schmidt’s ideas on presentism and its impact on International Relations.

Read More
1938 Words | 8 Pages

The current work is meant to explain the differences and similarities between the most dominant theories in international relations, Realism and Liberalism, both theories have some similarities and differences but much more important and interesting is to discuss and explain what differs and makes similar both theories. Conflicts and wars, Similarities and differences between Realism and Liberalism: Both Liberalism and Realism believes that there is no world government that can prevent countries to go to war on one another. For both theories military power is important and both Realism and Liberalism can understand that countries can use military power to get what they need or want. Also, both theories are conscious that without military

Read More
1381 Words | 6 Pages

The international relations schools of thought known as Realism and Idealism identify specific and similar characteristics of actors in the conceptual development of their theories. While many of these characteristics can be generalized as being synonymous with the two theories, both theories make a separate distinction in what specifically constitutes an actor. In Realism, the term “actor” refers directly and solely to the state: a combination of government, leaders, decision-makers, etc, that act as a unitary entity to promote the interests of the state. Idealists, however, expand on what constitutes an actor to include both the state and people. Not only do the principles of Idealism assert that the state and people should be considered actors, in fact, both they must be viewed as actors.

Read More

More about Annotated Bibliography: US Foreign Policy

Related Topics

Open Document