Foreign Policy - Best Essay Writing Service Reviews Reviews | Get Coupon Or Discount 2016
Free Essays All Companies All Writing Services

Foreign Policy

In international relations, both threats and use of force have been used legally and politically to protect the interests of certain nations. This use of force has aimed at promoting limitless rights for these nations (Hermann and Charles, 1998). Both Russia and United States regard the use of force as a normal instrument of policy when it comes to resolving international disputes. Discussion The United States values its sovereignty and national independence. It is the US desire to preserve its flexibility and independence that has contributed to its use of force in resolving international disputes.

The US use of force against certain nations has had devastating effects on the people, environment, and the infrastructure of the affected nations (Ira, 2006). In order to address the use of force by nations against others, formation of the charter of the United Nations which advocate for peaceful means of resolving international dispute other than the use of force has been witnessed. The United States is in record for use of force against Iraq administration (Richard, 2004). According to the US government, the US attack on Iraq aimed at bringing about positive change in the Saddam Hussein’s regime.

In addition, the US intended to have the suspected stores or plants of chemical, nuclear, biological and other weapons of mass destruction destroyed. The US government acted based on the argument that it had a responsibility to protect its citizens and the sovereignty of its nation against any possible or real threat. The attack was considered as a response in self defense against an attack on the US (September 11, 2001 attacks). The US government also justified the attack by claiming that it was carrying out a pre-emptive attack as a strategy for self defense.

The violation of the UN Security Council requirements by failing to cooperate with the UN weapons Inspectors Program by Iraq made the use of force by the US appropriate, besides being accused of harboring and supporting terrorists as well as enabling a possible access of the suspected terrorists to nuclear weapons. The US use of force has been to some extent supported by the United Nations Charter, where US is a member. The Article 1 of this charter advocates against the use of force by nations against others when resolving disputes (Linda, 2003).

Though the charters’ two fundamental principles have made it an obligation for all member states to refrain from using force in a manner that goes against the United Nations’ purposes, the charter authorizes in Chapter VII and Article 42 nations to use force if peaceful means fail to succeed. The US has continued to use force in resolving international disputes for self defense. As a superpower, the US has experienced attacks from other nations or military groups. Under the customary international law (Article 51 of the charter), the US can lawfully use force.

In addition, the US use force as a way of pursuing a UN Security Council resolution. The American foreign policy since 1945 has supported the use of force as a way of accumulating and preserving the capacity to act in an autonomous manner. This is evident in the 1950, April 7th National Security Council (NSC-68) document of President Truman to win the cold war and the President Bush National Security Strategy of 2002 September 17th that was meant to give victory against terrorism. The US was involved in the Kosovo conflict and used its military power to support the Kosovo Liberation Army.

The US is said to have used its military doctrines and equipment during the conflict. In self defense after the September 11 terrorism attacks, the US initiated military attacks in Afghanistan as part of ‘war on terrorism”. After the enactment of the FY 2008 Supplemental and FY 2009 Bridge Fund on June 30, 2008, the US Congress approved an estimated $864 billion for use towards military efforts of resolving international disputes. This would support Operation Iraq freedom (OIF), Operation Noble Eagle (ONE) and Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) and other terror military operations.

The US has been alleged to use NATO in order to achieve its policy objectives of using force where necessary by supporting its allies in case of conflicts. For example, the US President Bill Clinton is accused of having supported the Muslim side during the Bosnia conflict by supplying them with arms. Both the US and Russia were also involved in the Vietnam War which occurred from 1959 to 1975. While the US supported the government of South Vietnam, Russia supported the communist North Vietnam and its allies. On the other hand Russia has been involved in the use of force against other nations.

The NATO alliance has prevented Russia (Soviet Union) from using force against NATO members. Russia has been involved in several conflicts aimed at solving some international disputes. One example is the Chechnya conflict where the Grozny residents were being urged by Russia to leave the city in what Russia called “counter-terrorism operation”. The Russian operation aimed at having the remaining Chechnya resistance forces defeated (Tishkov, 2004). Another incidence where Russia has used force is during the recent Georgia conflict.

According to President Dmitri Medvedev, Russia was involved in the conflict in order to protect the lives and the dignity of its citizens. The recent use of force by Russia against Georgia was condemned by many nations as being excessive, the US included. The Russian government considers itself to have the responsibility to protect the nations’ interests in the world arena even if it requires it to use force where necessary. Furthermore, the Russian government aims at assisting nations that cannot protect their territories.

The US and Russia are two very powerful nations. They have in the past been involved in conflicts that have led to destruction and death of so many people. Although they are required to use force as the last strategy when it comes to international disputes, they both continue to use force even when they have not explored peaceful ways of solving the disputes. PART II 1. Truman Doctrine The Truman Doctrine refers to a set of principles in the United States foreign policy launched in 1947, 12th March and made into law on 22nd May that year.

The principles were declared by President Harry S. Truman as he addressed the Congress in 12th March 1947 as he requested aid to Turkey, Greece and other countries in Europe (Spalding, 2006). The act was enacted into law in May 22 that year, with a grant of $300 to Greece (military and economic) and $100 to Turkey. President Truman argued that if Greece and Turkey became weak economically and in their military power, they wee likely to fall under the Soviet Union control. Therefore, the US was required to offer aid to Turkey and Greece to prevent this.

During this address, President Truman requested that American military and economic advisers be sent to work with Greece and Turkey. The United States used both military and economic reasons for granting this help to Turkey and Greece. Politically the US was stopping the advancement of Communism and since the two nations were important in case of another world war, preventing the Soviet Union from prospering in Turkey and Greece was vital. The Truman Doctrine would ensure that America and other nations did not loose their sovereignty and freedom by resisting outside pressure and attempted subjugation by communist enemies.

The Doctrine aimed at fighting Soviet Unions’ Communism from prospering in Greece, Turkey and Europe, and to get military advantage over the Soviet Union. Furthermore, the Doctrine would stop Soviet Union from becoming strong in a manner that could enable it cut off allied assistance and supplies in case of a war. 2. Marshall Plan The Marshall plan was the United States primary plan that aimed at rebuilding as well as creating a strong foundation for western European nations (Schain, 2001).

Also referred to as the European Recovery Program, the plan was instituted in a conference in Paris, France (July 1947) and it borrowed its name from the name of US Secretary of State George C. Marshall. This program was officially made possible in April 1948 when President Truman signed it into law . This then created the Economic Cooperation Administration (ECA) that could administer the program. The plan was also meant to repel communism after the Second World War. The plan was created with great contribution of George F. Kennan and William L. Clayton who were State Department Officials.

A meeting of European states developed a reconstruction plan that was established on July 12th, 1947. Under the plan, the US had to supply aid to European countries so that they could recover from the devastating effects of post World War II. The plan which began in July 1947 had America provide technical and financial aid worth $13 billion to European nations that had joined the Organization of European Economic Cooperation and Development. The plan led to the economic growth of the nations that participated in the plan. This was followed by prosperity and unprecedented growth of Western European over.

The Marshall plan was very vital for promoting trade since it removed tariff trade barriers and ensured that the economy was coordinated on a continental level. The plan supported European recovery and reconstruction, and it confirmed the US commitment and preparedness to contribute to Europe’s recovery from war. Because economic stability would promote political stability in Europe, the US was determined to offer its support. 3. Charles de Gaulle Charles de Gaulle was a French statesman and general who during the World War II led the Free French Forces to war (Debray, 1994).

Gaulle was born on November 22nd 1890 and was known for his “Gaullism” political ideology which is respected to date. He was the President and founder of both the French Fourth Republic in 1944 after liberating France from Germans while in exile and the Fifth Republic in 1958. Gaulle exhorted the French people to resist the Nazi Germany in June 1940 when he refused a France truce with Germany which had defeated France. He went into exile in London. The May 1958 crisis had Gaulle return to power under military support.

He was elected as the President of France after leading the writing of a new constitution upon which the Fifth Republic was founded. Gaulle was able to end political violence and chaos during his rule. He was very instrumental in ending the unpopular and expensive war between Algeria and the French rule by granting Algeria its independence. President de Gaulle promoted the development of atomic weapons and supported a Pan-European foreign policy. The policy was meant to diminish the influence Britain and the US had. This he did by recognizing the Communist China, and objecting Britain’s entry into European Community.

President Gaulle is also well known for disapproving the US involvement in the Vietnam War. Gaulle called upon the US to withdraw itself from the Vietnam War, terming it as the only effective way of promoting peace. Charles de Gaulle was viewed as a dominant political leader in France and therefore Frances’ figurehead. He did not have easy relations with the British government and is also known to be hostile to the French communists whom he saw as having loyalty to Moscow directives. 4. John Foster Dulles John Foster Dulles was the US Secretary of State from 1953 to 1959 where he served under the President Dwight D.

Eisenhower. Dulles was a very important personality in the early Cold War period, due to his aggressive and strong opposition against Communism in the world (Ronald, 1982). Dulles supported the French in the war against Indochina’s Viet Minh. Dulles strong opposition to Communism is alleged to have made him refuse to shake hand with Zhou Enlai in 1954 during the Geneva conference. Zhou was a supporter of communism. During the 1954 Operation Ajax whereby Iran’s Mossadegh government was overthrown, Dulles is said to have played an important role in the CIA operations that planned to overthrow the government.

Another operation that Dulles was considered to have participated in is the Operation PBSUCESS, which involved the overthrowing of the Arbenz government of Guatemala (1954). Dulles is known for his criticism about Truman’s foreign policy of containment. According to him, the policy was supposed to be replaced by “liberation”. Dulles was involved in efforts to control Soviet expansion by taking part in the building of NATO. He offered threats that in an event of war, he would retaliate massively. He was accused of damaging relations with states that supported Communism and he is even blamed as a contributor to the cold war.

Dulles advocated for collective action against aggression when he participated in the developing the Southeast Asia treaty Organization (SEATO) in 1954. The signatories to the treaty were Philippines, Thailand, United States, France, Australia, New Zealand, and Pakistan. Dulles in his speech spoke strongly against Communism by stating that Communism is unimaginative, reactionary, and oppressive. Dulles condemned and opposed imperialism and was convinced that the US should liberate captive nations. 5. Deng Xiaoping Deng Xiaoping was a prominent reformer in China.

He was a politician, pragmatist, and a revolutionary and was once a leader of the Communist Party of China. Between 1978 to early 1990s, Xiaoping served as a leader of the peoples’ Republic of China. Deng is acknowledged for his role in introducing a new way of working at Socialist thinking, and is seen as a leader who changed Chinese leadership (Spence, 1999). He developed “Socialism with Chinese characteristics” whereby the state owns a large fraction of the Chinese economy. The economy allows all entities to participate in the market.

Deng played an important role in reforming the Chinese economy and had China opened to the global market. He is recognized for advancing China to become one of the most successful economies in the world. Deng is also recognized for improving the living standards of the Chinese people. According to the analysts, Deng initiated the change of market policies in relation to economic reforms. This led to the revision of policies that previously existed well referred to as Communism. Deng was very instrumental in leading China towards socialist modernization.

He was a very patriotic and therefore worked very hard to bring national unity in China. The people of China acknowledge Deng for his role in social reforms and his support for democratic governments at a certain level. Due to Deng’s influence in the agricultural and industrial sectors, China was able to experience increased industrial and agricultural production. He supported the liberation of Tibet and encouraged the Chinese people to embrace open policy. Due to his determination in advocating for reforms, Deng served in important positions in the government.The relations between China and the western nations are considered to have improved under Deng’s leadership.

References

Debray, R. 1994. Charles de Gaulle: Futurist of the Nation translated by John Howe, Verso, New York Hermann, M. , and Charles, K. 1998. “The U. S. Use of Military Intervention to Promote Democracy: Evaluating the Record”. International Interactions 24 (2): 91–114. Ira C. 2006. Monsters to Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers Linda, F. 2003. An Insider’s Guide to the United Nations. Yale University Press Richard C. 2004.

Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror, Free Press Ronald, P. 1982. John Foster Dulles: The Road to Power. Free Press Publishers Schain, M. 2001. The Marshall Plan: Fifty Years After. New York: Palgrave Soames, J. 2005. A History of the World, Routledge Publishers Spalding, E. 2006. The First Cold Warrior: Harry Truman, Containment, and the Remaking of Liberal Internationalism. The University Press of Kentucky Spence, J. 1999. “A Road is made. ” In The Search for Modern China. 310. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company Tishkov, V. 2004. Chechnya: Life in a War-Torn Society. Berkeley: University of California Press

Sample Essay of AssignmentExpert.com