ODP History pd. 3 by Noëlle Barr

Republicans continue to hammer Biden for Afghan exit

kha2601_ — 2024-04-10 23:44:50 UTC

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/19/milley-afghanistan-biden-republicans/
[The Washington Post]

Who: Retried Military Generals, Mark A. Milley and Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie, testified to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the investigation of the pounding out of Afghanistan.
What: The hearing explained the oversight of President biden had on the situation in Afghanistan as warning were ignored of the risk of leaving at the time. The testifiers argued the consequences of the actions by President Biden and had titled it to be a failed plan as the capitol was taken by the Taliban in 10 days.
When: The war in Afghanistan had occurred in reaction to the 9/11 attacks and had gone on for a long period of time until 2021with Biden’s military decision on pulling troops out.
Where: Afghanistan was where the war took place and the evacuation occured. The testimony took place on March 19, 2024.
Why: Biden Had pulled out of the country because he did not see any threat being posed by the Taliban as he viewed it as highly unlikely. Another reason was the use of money. The testimony was made because of the oversights he made and the inconsideration for the action.

US in Israel-Hamas War

nsb26011 — 2024-04-10 23:50:06 UTC

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/29/us-weapons-israel-gaza-war/

who and what: The US is currently supplying weapons such as bombs and artillery to Israel.
when, where and why: The Israel-Hamas War was started when Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel in October 2023 in conflict of Hamas doesn’t believe Israel has a right to exist as a country and therefore wants to destroy it.
short term effects: An immediate impact of U.S. support in the war was that Israel could defend itself against the sudden attack.
long term effects: The wider effects include that U.S. aid has been used by Israel without respect or attention to civilian life, resulting in mass civilian causalities. In the US, its wider impacts include rising national debt because of Biden’s extreme funding, conversation in legislature over the importance of foreign policy vs. respect for the meaning of domestic and international laws, a lack of updates from Biden of the donations because of a 2008 case that passed through congress, leaving many citizens and even officials in the dark about the war.

Without More Aid, Ukraine Could Lose the War, U.S. General Says

kha2601_ — 2024-04-10 23:58:50 UTC

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/10/us/politics/us-aid-ukraine-war.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
[The Washington Post]

Who: General Christopher G. Cavoli, the head of the Pentagon’s European Command argues the dire situation Ukraine is in

What: The general warns the US the possible fate of Ukraine losing to Russia if the US does not send supplies to aid the war. Decisions on money have been constantly pushed back and sending resources has also been halted.

When: Recently on April 4th was the time of discussion of this topic.

Where: Ukraine

Why: Congress is hesitant to use money to aid Ukraine because of the huge threat it may have on the US for aiding against the powerful forces of Russia. The policy of intervention is most recently revealed as the US is more hesitant to aid in a war against another powerful country. Sending support puts America in a difficult position and may make the US a target as it is known that Russia and China are in cooperation. But again, Ukraine being taken over also makes Russia a larger power.

Biden Aims to Project United Front Against China at White House Summit

kha2601_ — 2024-04-12 18:42:22 UTC

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/11/us/politics/biden-japan-philippines-summit.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
[New York Times]

Who: President Biden, Japan Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. of the Philippines all discusses future plans of alliance.
What: The three leaders spoke on the risk of China to the Indo-Pacific with their trade and naval power. Chinese aggression threatens the neighboring countries which resulted in a discussion of multiple alliances and naval drills planned to expand the web of security and economic alliances against Chinese aggression. The actions taken would be characterized as a way to push back against China’s activities in trade, technology and military aggression.
When: Thursday, April 11, 2024 is when the meetings started, though China has been a long known threat to many countries, especially the US
Where: White House Summit. The events of aggression which include naval attacks against the Philippines occurred int eh Ind- Pacific region which neighbors China.
Why: The reason for the meetings to protect the democracies and unity of other alliance countries against the dangerous and strategic power of China. China is one of the leading nations who is regarded as the world’s largest trading nation.

US in Syria

nsb26011 — 2024-04-12 18:43:40 UTC

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/14/opinion/us-troops-syria-iraq-withdraw.html
who: The US and the Syrian Democratic Forces are working together in conflict against ISIS
what: The Syrian Civil War started in 2011 with large scale protests and pro-democracy rallies followed by an increase in government security and the creation of rebel groups. Mid-2012, the civil war was in full swing.
when: 2011-present (U.S. joining in September 2014)
where: Syria
why: conflicts in the Middle East with ISIS and different countries’ citizens have escalated and a result is the Syrian Civil War.
short term effects: The US entered the War using ‘Operation Inherent Resolve’ with the goal of defeating ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Congress authorized an overt program under the Department of Defense to counter terrorism and the ‘Assad-regime’.
long term effects: The Trump administration escalated the conflict by conducting a missile strike in 2017, marking the increasingly confrontational position of the US in regards to the war/ISIS. Questions also arose when fighting began around a ‘deconfliction zone’. People began to wonder if taking Syrian territory that Assad wants is lawful and if so, what are the limits on what the U.S. gov can do fighting against pro-regime forces (theory of self defense?). The Biden administration has said that its goals are to reduce violence, maintain pressure on ISIS with a military presence in Syria, address the humanitarian crisis and support Israel’s right to defend itself.

US in Niger

nsb26011 — 2024-04-12 19:05:13 UTC

https://apnews.com/article/niger-junta-us-military-base-b70bfba835a567d5f3439a32c9c82836
who, what, and where: the US has been involved in Niger/Africa’s Sahel region working with the Expeditionary Force of Niger (EFON, the country’s strongest anti-terrorism group) in conflict with al-Qaeda and other Islamic State extremist groups.
when: US troops have been in the region from 2002-present (in 2002: equipping and training the country’s military and in 2011/12: expand operations when terrorists gained control of northern Mali, creating a sense of urgency for the US and European countries to increase their counterterrorism efforts.
why: al-Quadra perceived threat to regional stability is used to justify the US’s large military presence in Africa.
short-term conditions: Early on in the intervention, the US simply trained and equipped the country’s military, justifying help fight terrorism as a ‘back-seat driver’.
long-term conditions: In 2011/12, the US stepped out of the dark and has become increasingly pressed to strengthen their military presence to counter terrorism while also facing many protests against the interaction in foreign affairs domestically. In February 2016, Niger regions were attacked and put under a state of emergency in March. US soldiers were in the region on a ‘low-risk’ patrol when they were suddenly ambushed until French help arrived. This instance brings the question up as to why the Pentagon/military commanders would deem any mission in the attack-prone zone as ‘low-risk’ and should troops stay in the country.

US in Cuba

nsb26011 — 2024-04-14 01:50:31 UTC

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/us-cuba-cultural-exchanges-engagement-signal-modest-shift-policy-rcna73654
who: the Biden Administration and the Cuban government
what, when, where: It was Barack who visited Cuba as the first U.S. president to visit the island since 1928 which started the warming of relations and his relaxing of travel restrictions. However Trump reversed some of these policies, withdrew most embassy personnel leaving the relationship to deteriorate. Biden is re-staffing the embassy and developing public diplomacy programming to nurture a relationship with the Cuban people. In 2021, the Cuban government responded to mass anti-government protests following Biden’s inauguration with harsh crackdowns and arrests, and the Biden responded calling Cuba a ‘failed communist regime’ and the administration said in early 2021, that its foreign policy is ‘centered on the defense of democracy and the protection of human rights’. Biden re-staffed the embassy (after Trump withdrew most embassy) and is working to develop public diplomacy programming to nurture a relationship with the Cuban people. In January, migration talks between the countries resumed as U.S. delegation visited the island and in May 2022, the US reviewed its Cuban policy and expanded US flights beyond Havana, relaxed limits on remittances and restarted the family reunification program.
why: biden administration is more willing to lessen tensions than the Trump administration that preceded him
short-term effects: Cuban officials are looking for the US to take it off the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism (which included countries such as Iran, North Korea, and Syria). Democratic congressmen and delegation traveled to Cuba in December 2022 and January 2023 and met with the Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel seeking ways to strengthen trade with the island. Cuban Ministry of Science, Technology, and Environment signed an agreement with the U.S. nongovernmental org. Ocean Foundation, proving the progress the countries have made to become in closer contact.
long-term effects:
Because of how the U.S. is currently involved in various foreign affairs at the moment, from Ukraine, to China, to the Middle East, if Cuba is going fight to get the U.S. government’s attention to improve the relationship with the U.S. Cuba is speculating that by possible releasing political prisoners, Biden could take steps to further improving relations.

Rejecting ‘Love Letters’ to North Korea, Biden Offers Carrots and Sticks Instead

kha2601_ — 2024-04-15 19:26:57 UTC

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/21/world/asia/biden-south-korea-yoon.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
[New York Times]

Who: President Biden, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un

What: Biden plans to increase South Korea’s military exercises which were lowered during Trump’s presidency. Biden has become more cautious with North Korea and has strengthened the alliance with South Korea in preparation against the North’s threat. Trump’s approach to the relationship with the North was more friendly which included “love letter” being sent back and forward between the two leaders and the military in the south being scaled back. Biden’s approach is much different with expanding the military in Seoul.

When: May 21, 2022

Where: Seoul, South Korea, North Korea, and the United States [discussions]

Why: Biden prepares to take preemptive measures against the North Korean threat by reversing the previous actions made by Trump which was shrinking military exercises in South Korea. The importance of this action shows the change of ideals from Trump’s time in Presidency and Biden’s current actions in his period. This different approach may change the trajectory of relations with North Korea and a possible future conflict. This again will create a divide with different ideas.

Jamestown

nsb26011 — 2024-04-16 01:32:48 UTC

https://americanhistory-abc-clio-com.ez.iolani.org/Topics/Display/290567?sid=290567&cid=41
Settlers in Jamestown maintained a strong economic relationship with England. The Virginia Company invested in the town to find gold and expand industries in America for British profit. Relations with the Native American nations, specifically the Algonquian tribe, were bad as there was almost constant warfare. England, when Jamestown was struggling in the winter of 1609-1610, helped supply the colony with labor to save it from disease, starvation and warfare. Colonists exported tobacco to England with the help of John Rolfe. The Powhatan tribe helped Jamestown by supplying it with food and knowledge of the land. However these times of peace were often interrupted by Jamestown colonists fighting for land as well as taking Powhatan food supplies during ‘starving times’. In 1624, Jamestown ceased to be a company’s investment and became a colony under Britain’s royal control.

US in the French Revolution (1789-1799)

nsb26011 — 2024-04-16 23:32:30 UTC

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1784-1800/french-rev

The French Revolution forced the US to clearly state a policy of neutrality to avoid being forced to enter European wars (which were common at the time). This neutrality caused mixed emotions in the US as some Americans were scared of the calls for radical social change in France, some were pro-French and some were pro-British. Thomas Jefferson, as the Secretary of State, became the pro-French Democratic-Republican Party which celebrated the republican ideals of the French Revolution. Alexander Hamilton, as Secretary of Treasury, led the Federalist Party which was skeptical of the Revolution and wished to preserve commercial ties with Great Britain. After the decapitation of Louis XVI and the therefore escalation in the war between France, Great Britain, and Spain, neutrality on the U.S.’ part was made more difficult. British harassed American merchant ships and the French government harassed the US government. Post-Revolution, some French social activists continued to fight for their radical political stances, breaking down diplomatic relations between the US and France resulting in the Federalist-controlled Congress to pass the Alien and Sedition Acts to ‘curb’ political dissent and limit immigrants’ political participation in the US. Voters in the election of 1800 were taken aback and in opposition to the Act, supported Thomas Jefferson and the Democratic-Republican Party and John Adams’ own Federalist anti-revolution party sought peace with France.

US in 1866-1898: expansion of interests

nsb26011 — 2024-04-17 00:00:33 UTC

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/foreword

In 1866, the US established a telegraph office to help international diplomacy. In 1867, the US bought Alaska from Russia and gained access to the Pacific northern rim. In 1868, Secretary of State William Seward wanted to trade in Asia, spread Christianity in Asia, convince the Chinese to adopt a more Western system of diplomacy and governance resulting in the success of the Burlingame-Seward Treaty between the US and China. The Treaty eased immigration restrictions, reinforced trade interests, let China have the right to begin new construction without the influence of the US/US representatives, and allowed for the protection and education of Chinese citizens in the US. Secretary James Blaine, with the 1901 Hay-Pauncefote treaty with Great Britian, achieved US control over any canal to be built in the Central American isthmus and kept Hawai’i in the ‘American System’ (but not as a state). A Pan American Congress convened in 1889 in Washington which was followed by the successful promotion of closer political and commercial relations between the US and Latin America. The Spanish-American War, which claimed to be for the freedom of Cuba under Spanish rule, led to the US owning Cuba instead.

Isolationism in the 1930’s

nsb26011 — 2024-04-18 08:28:38 UTC

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/american-isolationism

Isolationists advocated for non-involvement in European, Asian, and international affairs/conflicts/politics. However, America continued to expand in Latin America for economic benefits. In WWI, President Wilson advocated for U.S. intervention in the war to maintain a peaceful world order. Post-WWI, Congress rejected U.S. membership in the League of Nations in fear of being roped into European conflicts. However, by using the Stimson Doctrine, the U.S. didn’t recognize Japan’s invasion of Manchuria as a territory, therefore being able to express itself surrounding the aggressive seize while not intervening. The same system was used in the Italian invasion of Ethiopia and the Spanish Civil War. Neutrality Acts prevented US ships and citizens from being roped into surrounding conflicts as Hitler rose to power even though Roosevelt supported the right to consult with other nations to pressure the aggressors internationally. Even in 1939 as tensions in Europe spilled over resulting in full blown warfare, American society was still unwilling to risk their lives and way of life for international peace (until Pearl Harbor).

Foreign Policy in America’s rise as an international superpower

nsb26011 — 2024-04-18 13:52:12 UTC

https://research-ebsco-com.ez.iolani.org/linkprocessor/plink?id=7bbd5d0b-d3be-3062-8b70-39a881f43ff4

A Samoan Hurricane led the U.S. to improve their naval fleet as the U.S. had foreign interests after their confrontation with Germany in Samoa. Even after getting 4 battleships, tensions between the U.S. and Germany were high and therefore U.S. motivation to get out of the possible war were also high. The U.S. participated in the Berlin Conference of 1889 to enter an alliance with Britain and Germany and save Samoa from more war. America and Britain under the Berlin General Act created a joint mock-government for the island and protected and recognize its independence. Foreign policy under McKinley was in the interest of the US’s safety during the Spanish-American War, proving military interests were guided to ensure success in foreign policy objectives. As the U.S. and other countries started to expand their interests more globally, conflicts often overlapped, changing U.S. foreign policy as well as military and naval policies.

Foreign Policy in globalization

nsb26011 — 2024-04-18 14:22:04 UTC

https://login.ez.iolani.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1897277&site=ehost-live&scope=site&ebv=EB&ppid=pp_Front_Cover

From 1945-1991, U.S. Foreign Policy prioritized containment of the Soviet Union’s communism because of the ongoing Cold War between the two. However, U.S. foreign policy is to achieve national security to ensure Americans achieve happiness and to help the rest of the world achieve the same because with globalization came the idea of global well-being. But as the global economy turned away from Asia to the Western World and Europe, policy had to change to accomadate the US’s new economic and military successes on the global stage.

1754 - The French and Indian War

2024-04-19 07:21:58 UTC

The French and Indian War takes place between France and Britain over territory control. British are successful in the war which pushed out French control over the colonies, ending the war with the Treaty of Paris in 1763, which granted the British more territory and ultimately more control over the colonies.

Through King William’s War, Queen Anne’s War and King George’s War, neither Britain or France had gained any colonial control in the Americas. When Virginian colonists were permitted the ‘right’ to the Ohio Valley through the Iroquois Confederacy, French settlers had already made forts in the area. This lead to the breaking out of the 1754 French and Indian War between France and their Indian allies vs. Britain and the colonists in America. War until 1757 was bad for the British but as new British leadership took over in 1757, relations with colonists and therefore troop commitment grew leading to British victory in the war. This expanded the colonists holdings far into North America and eliminated the French threat to colonial settlement. With this more expansive area, British control over the colonies tightened through tariffs such as the Sugar Act, Currency Act, Stamp Act, and Quartering Act leading colonists to violently respond to British government. Foreign policy, the respect between the colonies and Britain for both of their benefits was no more and instead the colonies chose to focus on domestic rights instead of international economy and politics.

1776 - Declaration of independence

2024-04-19 07:22:44 UTC

After Britain’s long control over the colonies’ trade and freedoms, Thomas Paine's pamphlet is published on January 9. Common Sense calls for independence from Britain and becomes influential in gaining support for the idea. On July 4, the Declaration of Independence is formally approved by the Second Continental Congress. This would completely remove European power from the Americas allowing America to settle their own ideals and relations. This opens the door for more opportunities for the newly independent colonies.

1793 - Proclamation of Neutrality

2024-04-19 07:24:40 UTC

President George Washington issues a proclamation of neutrality, seeking to keep the United States out of European conflicts. This marks the first agreement of neutrality and peace with a foreign nation between the new nation of colonies. The nation did not have any foreign policies put in place and the declaring of neutrality is one of the first steps towards forming a policy.

1787 Writing the Constitution

2024-04-19 07:25:23 UTC

The Constitution was written at Philadelphia in 1787 and had offered a vague outline for devising American foreign policy. It was up to the ﬁrst president, George Washington, to establish the basic precedents that would guide the nation’s foreign affairs. America had the freedom to handle their own relations and become connected with the rest of the world.

1803 - Louisiana Purchase

2024-04-19 07:26:08 UTC

The Louisiana Purchase doubled the size of the United States. Purchased from France for $15 million, the territory included Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and parts of Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming, and Louisiana. The purchase facilitated westward expansion, secured control of the Mississippi River and New Orleans, and removed a potential threat to American interests posed by French control of the region. Ignoring the constitutionality of the purchase, Jefferson prioritized expansionism which helped the US become a stronger world power.

1823 - Monroe Doctorine

2024-04-19 07:26:43 UTC

President James Monroe issues the Monroe Doctrine, declaring that the Western Hemisphere is closed to further colonization by European powers and that any attempt by European nations to interfere in the affairs of the Americas would be seen as a threat to US interests. The doctrine becomes a cornerstone of US foreign policy and shows American dominance in the Western Hemisphere. The Doctrine helped speed up American expansionism. For example, President Polk cited the doctrine in 1845 as a warning to European nations to not intervene in the Mexican-American War and President Cleaveland cited the doctrine in 1895 to force Great Britain to accept defeat/peace-making in Venezuela. Theodore Roosevelt, talking about the doctrine, stated the US would be within its rights to act as ‘an international police power’. The doctrine was used until WWII, until thereafter its was undeniable that the US was a world power beyond the Western Hemisphere.

1846-1848 - Mexican-American War

2024-04-19 07:27:29 UTC

Conflict erupts between the United States and Mexico over territorial disputes in Texas and the American Southwest. The conflict, the Mexican-American war, ended with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, in which Mexico gave territory to the United States, including California, Arizona, New Mexico, and parts of Colorado, Nevada, and Utah. To acquire California, President Polk was willing to push the nation into its first aggressive war for the territorial gain.

Hamilton and National Debt following the American Revolution

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 07:27:31 UTC

Foreign debts were repaid as it was seen as necessary (via the time’s foreign policy) to pay off the debt in order to continue to secure credit via international banks. Interests with Britain were strained but remained friendly in caution of a trade war. Foreign policy at the time was respectful of other nations, their interests and their money, understanding that to remain a stable nation, America must peacefully involve itself in foreign affairs.

War of 1812

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 07:28:02 UTC

The US entered the War of 1812, which was originally between Britain and France, because Britain seized American cargo ships and ‘impressed’/kidnapped sailors. Madison and Jefferson worked to ease the conflict via peaceful action such as stopping trade with Britain which after 2 years were effective and Britain recognized US neutrality. However, Madison only found out about this after he had declared war . . . Some Americans were pro-war because they hoped the war would further US expansionism because they believed British were helping to arm local Native American tribes and Canada was British-controlled. If Britain were forced out of America/Canada, the US would no longer have to worry about violence with surrounding Native Americans or with British troops in Canada, meaning more land could be secured more easily. Others were pro-war for the sake of honor in reaction to British impressment of US sailors. Southerners were pro-war because war with Britain would justify expansion into Florida. Some Americans were anti-war because the British impressment and harassments prior to US entry in the war had little to no effect on their businesses and rather continue trade with Britain. Jefferson’s and later Madison’s trade restrictions greatly impacted Americans merchants but for the sake of respecting foreign policy, remained true to the restrictions regardless of the economic reprocusions.

1867 - Alaska Purchase

2024-04-19 07:28:40 UTC

The Alaska Purchase was a purchase of Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million. At the time, many viewed the purchase skeptically, questioning the value of the vast and remote territory. This would remove any threat of Russia creating conflict over territory in the US and would also give the opportunity for trade with Asia. The treaty signed for the purchasing of land would also improve relations with Russia.

Manifest Destiny

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 07:29:29 UTC

Manifest Destiny was the embodiment of the mid-19th century US foreign policy in that she represented the right to expantionalism. Rationales for the right varied from Puritan ideas of divine right, to economic interests involving different/new trade routes in the East that would increase profits, to political interest to expand civilization, freedom and democracy to other groups.

1898

2024-04-19 07:30:08 UTC

The Spanish American war was started to, at first, remove Spain's colonial empire and help the Phillipines regain their independence. The war would end in 1902 with the Treaty of Paris which ceded Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Phillipins form Spanish rule. This would feed into the foreign policy of American expansionism which would create conflict over the constitutionality of control.

1900 - Open Door Policy

2024-04-19 07:36:11 UTC

The United States announces the Open Door Policy, advocating for equal access to trade and investment in China and opposing the partitioning of China by European powers. The policy reflects American interests in maintaining access to Chinese markets and resources. The policy also shows America's involvement in a global economy as a nation and has become aware of other powerful nations.

Homestead Act of 1863

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 07:37:38 UTC

The Homestead Act of 1863 granted free land to qualified Americans in an effort to expand westwards and increase national wealth. American ‘homesteaders’(colonists) believed the Great Plains, although inhabited by Native Americans, were not necessarily Native American land and they were therefore entitled to settle on the land. The government cleared out the plains by moving Native Americans off of their land and into reservations using military officers who would trick/force Native Americans into signing treaties to give up their land. The Act allowed citizens or immigrants with intentions of gaining citizenship to make a claim for land.

1917 - WWI

2024-04-19 07:39:28 UTC

The US would join WWI in response to submarine attacks on merchant ships and the vast European expansion overseas. This would support the opposition of European expansionism with Germany and Russia and would result in intervention. After the war, the US would end up winning alongside the allies and would become a large world power that would continue America's involvement in the world.

1939 - WWII

2024-04-19 07:40:19 UTC

The US would intervene in WWII after the bombing of Pearl Harbor by Japan, who was part of the Axis powers consisting of Italy and Germany. Japan’s attempts of stretegic expansion and Hitler’s European expansion would influence America’s entering of the war. The previous sentiment of the US was to maintain neutrality, but the attempts of the Axis powers removing America as a nation changed their mind on not intervening in foreign conflicts.

1950 - Korean War

2024-04-19 07:41:07 UTC

North korea threatened to invade South Korea which would continue the spread of communism. America would intervene and support the South to contain communism. The war would end up being a military stalemate and borders wold remain the same as before. The result of the War ending with no gains would lead to the question of the effectiveness of intervention.

1960 - Vietnam War

2024-04-19 07:41:38 UTC

Similar to the Korean War, North Vietnam would attempt to expand to the South to spread communism. America would back the South to continue the policy of containing the spread of communism. The Vietnam War would create a lot of internal conflict within the US as many opposed continuing the war effort with the immense demand on resources and lives. Again the US would fail with their intervention in foreign affairs as the communist North would seize the South. This again leads into the questioning of American foreign policy of intervention and its effectiveness.

1990 - Gulf War

2024-04-19 07:41:59 UTC

After a long grace period, the Gulf War had started because of Saddam Hussain’s attempts to take over a large portion of oil reserves. This would result in the US intervening to prevent Hussain’s hoarding of oil. The US would be successful in pushing the Iraqis out of Kuwait, but the war would make the government question the current foreign policy.

2001 - War on Terror

2024-04-19 07:42:36 UTC

Terrorists would attack the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, being named the 9/11 attacks. This attack can be traced back to the Al Qaeda terrorist group led by Osama Bin Ladin. Because an attack was brought into the US, the people wanted to take action and fight back. Bush would take action almost immediately and begin sending troops overseas. This would be known as the War on Terror which would last until 2021 in Afghanistan. The policy of intervention had shifted once more after a lot of questioning of the policy. Bush would take action almost immediately and begin sending troops overseas.

The Committee of Public Information

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 07:52:08 UTC

The CPI was established in 1917 to garner public support for the US in WWI, using pro-war propaganda to boost war morale. George Creel ‘guided’ US perceptions of war in the ‘right direction’ to support patriotism and pro-democracy. Foreign policy at the time was therefore a policy of interjection into foreign affairs to implement democracy and American values of freedom.

1919 - League of Nations

2024-04-19 08:20:58 UTC

The League of Nations was a global defense organization that would bring one single vision over many democratic nations rather than self-interests. The League of Nations was proposed by President Woodrow Wilson as part of his Fourteen Points plan for peace after World War I. However, despite Wilson's efforts, the United States ultimately did not join the League due to opposition from the US Senate.

This organization was created as a result of WWI and the League would be a major part of the Treaty of Versailles, a treaty that required Germany to pay financial reparations, disarm, lose territory, and give up all of its overseas colonies. The United States would end up ultimately rejecting the League of Nations because it would commit the United States to an expensive organization that would reduce the United States' ability to defend its own interests. The treaty was rejected because it went against America's policies of foreign affairs as joining the league would force America into foreign conflicts and prevent them from starting their own wars. During the interwar period, a time between WWI and WWII, the U.S. Government repeatedly chose non-entanglement over participation or intervention as the appropriate response to international questions.

1979 - Iran Hostage Crisis

2024-04-19 08:36:37 UTC

On November 4, 1979, when a group called the “Students Following the Line of the Imam” took possession of the US embassy in Tehran. The students, who were supporters of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, took sixty-six Americans hostage, fifty-two of whom were held in captivity for 444 days. The hostage crisis strengthened the group in Iran, sent Jimmy Carter's presidency straight into action, and damaged the official US-Iran relationship. This affected the foreign policy with Iran as it changed the approaches towards Iran and the middle East. This would also effect the reliance on oil from the middle east.

foreign policy prioritization international>domestic

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 08:59:22 UTC

A theme we noticed is that in numerous occasions, US foreign policy has valued international success above domestic affairs. Examples of this are the committee of public information, the korean war, vietnam war, ukraine war, afghanistan war, israel-hamas war, military in south korea, us in syria and the us in niger

the influence of powers on the global stage on US foreign policy

nsb26011 — 2024-04-19 09:19:49 UTC

Pre-1900, Asia was one of the larger global superpowers and because of this, the US looked to expand westward to find trade with Asia and was reluctant to enter European affairs because of the lack of benefits. We see this in how quick Hamilton was to repay his debts following the American Revolution and to respect Europe but stay at a safe distance from their affairs, George Washington’s Proclaimation of Neutrality to avoid involvement in European conflicts, the Louisiana Purchase to expand Westwards towards Asia, and Manifest Destiny which symbolized expansionism West. However, as the US became more influential on the global stage, it began to look towards expansionism for political and economic benefits (yet this time not revolved around Asia). We see this through the Mexican-American War, the purchasing of Alaska, and the Spanish-American War. As Asia begins to fall as an economic superpower and the stage turns towards Europe, so does foreign policy/American interests. We see this post-1900s as the US partakes in WWI to defend America internationally and the creation of the Committee of Public Interests which downplayed the rights of citizens to true press and instead valued a more focused approach to international affairs. As Europe settled into disrepair following WWI, the US became less willing to participate in European affairs because they could no longer help the US economically or politically. We see this when the US refuses to join the League of Nations and enters a period of isolationism during the 1930’s. US foreign policy was no longer involved in European affairs but turned to value the spread of democracy and freedom. We see this with the U.S.’ eagerness in the Cold War to spread democracy as well as participation in WWII to help contain communism. Following wars such as the Vietnam War and the War on Terror were in the interest of spreading democracy as are the contemporary conflicts we see today. Those include the Israel-Hamas War, the war in Ukraine, the war in Afghanistan, the US in Cuba, and tensions with North Korea.